"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article , Scott
Weiser at
wrote on 2/19/05 3:14 PM:


snippage..


Can you post one verifiable reference to a patient in Canada
who died
waiting? Good luck finding one. But the way you are talking,
you should be
able to find hundreds! You really don't know what you are
talking about, why
not just admit that?
===========
Nice little set-up. You know that hospitals cannot release
patirnt info, like names, especially they won't when the system
would look bad anyway. So you know that your demand for real
names probably will be hard to find. Yet, many groups and
angencies, in Canada, claim that these deaths do occur.
http://www.nupge.ca/news_2000/News%20May/n12my00a.htm
http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-24-04.html
http://www.utoronto.ca/hpme/dhr/pdf/Barer-Lewis.pdf



Places like Canada are the ones that are promoting the
differences between the haves and the have-nots.
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman...oysplight.html

tell me a 2 1/2 year wait if the boy does have cancer won't
effect the outcome of his life, and that if the family HAS the
money, they won't get one privately in Canada or the states.



snip...

in article et, rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 12:32 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article , Scott
Weiser at
wrote on 2/19/05 3:14 PM:


snippage..


Can you post one verifiable reference to a patient in Canada
who died
waiting? Good luck finding one. But the way you are talking,
you should be
able to find hundreds! You really don't know what you are
talking about, why
not just admit that?
===========
Nice little set-up. You know that hospitals cannot release
patirnt info, like names, especially they won't when the system
would look bad anyway. So you know that your demand for real
names probably will be hard to find. Yet, many groups and
angencies, in Canada, claim that these deaths do occur.
http://www.nupge.ca/news_2000/News%20May/n12my00a.htm
http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-24-04.html
http://www.utoronto.ca/hpme/dhr/pdf/Barer-Lewis.pdf

LOL. You think if real people had died in waiting lines the media would not
get the story?

Places like Canada are the ones that are promoting the
differences between the haves and the have-nots.

?

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman...oysplight.html

As many as 100 children in Newfoundland face 30-month waits for the
high-tech scans, said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of diagnostic imaging
at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. While the wait is "less than
ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated and followed by
other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency scan gets one.

You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in isolated or slum
areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their convenience? Get
real.

tell me a 2 1/2 year wait if the boy does have cancer won't
effect the outcome of his life, and that if the family HAS the
money, they won't get one privately in Canada or the states.

snip...

Yes, rich people everywhere can find ways to get things that other people
can't. Canada does not have a ban on rich people.

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
et, rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 12:32 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article , Scott
Weiser at
wrote on 2/19/05 3:14 PM:


snippage..


Can you post one verifiable reference to a patient in Canada
who died
waiting? Good luck finding one. But the way you are talking,
you should be
able to find hundreds! You really don't know what you are
talking about, why
not just admit that?
===========
Nice little set-up. You know that hospitals cannot release
patirnt info, like names, especially they won't when the
system
would look bad anyway. So you know that your demand for real
names probably will be hard to find. Yet, many groups and
angencies, in Canada, claim that these deaths do occur.
http://www.nupge.ca/news_2000/News%20May/n12my00a.htm
http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-24-04.html
http://www.utoronto.ca/hpme/dhr/pdf/Barer-Lewis.pdf

LOL. You think if real people had died in waiting lines the
media would not
get the story?
========================
So, you don't even believe the people that monitor your health
care system now, eh?



Places like Canada are the ones that are promoting the
differences between the haves and the have-nots.

?

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman...oysplight.html

As many as 100 children in Newfoundland face 30-month waits for
the
high-tech scans, said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of
diagnostic imaging
at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. While the wait is
"less than
ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated and
followed by
other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency scan
gets one.
======================
LOL Sure, 2 years into a wait he might really NEED emegency
treatment, eh? At that time he goes right to the top of the
list. Maybe too late, eh? At the least, he has suffered more
than was medically necessary, and at worst is now beyond
treatment, or too weak to survive the treatment.


You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in
isolated or slum
areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their
convenience? Get
real.
====================
Another strawman, I see. We aren't talking about their
'convenience', we're talking about the convenience of the medical
systam. When that 'poor' person arrives at a medical facility in
need, then yes, I'm saying that they will not wait 2 1/2 years
for treatment.

Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs the
US. Being born low weight to a Canadian family is a greater risk
that being born to a African-American family in the US. Where
does that fit in with your ill-concieved ideas that the 'poor' in
the US suffer, while no-one in Canada does?



tell me a 2 1/2 year wait if the boy does have cancer won't
effect the outcome of his life, and that if the family HAS the
money, they won't get one privately in Canada or the states.

snip...

Yes, rich people everywhere can find ways to get things that
other people
can't. Canada does not have a ban on rich people.
=====================
Yet you try to pretend that your have a single health care system
for all, and equal for all. All it manages to do is promote a
have vs have-not conflict.

rick wrote:

Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs the
US. Being born low weight to a Canadian family is a greater risk
that being born to a African-American family in the US. Where
does that fit in with your ill-concieved ideas that the 'poor' in
the US suffer, while no-one in Canada does?

Take a look at the amount of teenage pregnancies, the amount of children
dying at birth, the state of health of the entire population, and you'll
find that despite the huge medical cost to society, it's not up to par
with most western countries with older populations that spend a lot less
on medicine.

Just repeating the "we don't have waiting lists" mantra doesn't prevent
people from dying out on the street, or from going bancrupt because they
can't pay all the high medical bills they were given because they
couldn't afford health care insurance.

Yes, rich people everywhere can find ways to get things that
other people
can't. Canada does not have a ban on rich people.

=====================
Yet you try to pretend that your have a single health care system
for all, and equal for all. All it manages to do is promote a
have vs have-not conflict.

Which is exactly what is usual in the U.S., where you have the haves and
have nots. There is a limit to how low the lowest incomes are, so that
people don't need to resort to crime (even wonder why you have a murder
rate several times higher than that of most western nations?) to
survive. It's not the law of the jungle that makes a nation "civilised"...

Also, there is a limit to how much people need to pay out of their own
pocket (usually through income related health insurance premiums) to get
normal medical attention, and there is a limit to how much people
(ab-)use the system, because they do take personal responsibility for
their own health.

The few rare examples that are continuously brought up here of people
dying while waiting for medical treatment is only true for certain
medical treatments, such as transplants. Since there is a huge demand on
donor organs, that will continue to be the case for a long time to come,
even in the U.S..

Personally I find it disgusting that someone who has willfully abused
his body through for example excessive drinking, eating or smoking but
who has a lot of money can use up several donor organs that would have
helped another less wealthy person last a lot longer. The same can of
course be said for the excessive abuse of energy, pollution and what
more. Just being able to afford something doesn't make it right to
squander it.

--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

"Wilko" wrote in message
...


rick wrote:

Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs the
US. Being born low weight to a Canadian family is a greater
risk that being born to a African-American family in the US.
Where does that fit in with your ill-concieved ideas that the
'poor' in the US suffer, while no-one in Canada does?

Take a look at the amount of teenage pregnancies, the amount of
children dying at birth, the state of health of the entire
population, and you'll find that despite the huge medical cost
to society, it's not up to par with most western countries with
older populations that spend a lot less on medicine.
========================
Nice little strawman you're trying to build there. Too bad that
wasn't the discussion. He made the cooment about 'poor'
people not getting proper care in the US. I mentioned one area
where the percieved ideas he has is false. If the post wasn't
snipped to shreds without annotation, and then replied to as you
want it to be read, make a new post.





Just repeating the "we don't have waiting lists" mantra doesn't
prevent people from dying out on the street, or from going
bancrupt because they can't pay all the high medical bills they
were given because they couldn't afford health care insurance.
=====================
Again, no where have you seen me say that, have you? Again, too
bad all you can do is build these little strawmen by snipping out
whole posts and then replying to things I haven't said.




snip rest of spew...

rick wrote:

Nice little strawman you're trying to build there. Too bad that
wasn't the discussion.

Ah, strawmen talk... now I'm able to place the name again: Rick Etter, eh?

This being usenet, it's the discussion *we* make out of it, you don't
tell anyone what they can talk about. It so happens that this discussion
is mostly about what a few U.S. posters refuse to acknowledge, that
there is a way to get better results abroad. Whether that is about using
violence instead of diplomacy to get what you want, using medical
healthcare that is available to everyone instead of just a portion of
the population or about using a free media displaying the facts instead
of propaganda, religion intermixed with politics and terrorising your
own population to get elected.

He made the cooment about 'poor'
people not getting proper care in the US. I mentioned one area
where the percieved ideas he has is false.

Looks like you overlooked a number of other areas there... Besides, you
failed to come up with numbers backed by facts, so I'm curious to hear
which in Fox news program you heard that little fable.

--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

"Wilko" wrote in message
...
rick wrote:

Nice little strawman you're trying to build there. Too bad
that wasn't the discussion.

Ah, strawmen talk... now I'm able to place the name again: Rick
Etter, eh?
======================
Yes, and too bad you haven't yet learned how to annotate your
snipping of posts.
Is that from ignorance, or a deliberate attempt at deception?
Your choice...



This being usenet, it's the discussion *we* make out of it, you
don't tell anyone what they can talk about. It so happens that
this discussion is mostly about what a few U.S. posters refuse
to acknowledge, that there is a way to get better results
abroad. Whether that is about using violence instead of
diplomacy to get what you want,
========================
LOL Something that you have failed to use in your posting, eh?



using medical
healthcare that is available to everyone instead of just a
portion of the population or about using a free media
displaying the facts instead of propaganda, religion intermixed
with politics and terrorising your own population to get
elected.
==================
Really? Nice spew, but when was I elected to anything, or even
tried to be?



He made the cooment about 'poor'
people not getting proper care in the US. I mentioned one
area where the percieved ideas he has is false.

Looks like you overlooked a number of other areas there...
Besides, you failed to come up with numbers backed by facts, so
I'm curious to hear which in Fox news program you heard that
little fable.
==========================
Unfortunately for you and the chest thumping kman, I used mostly
Canadian sources, and I can't find a Fox cananda....
As for facts, you have yet to post anything that even resembles
one.




--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o
t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the
limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

rick says:
=============
Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs the US.
================

Rather, take a look at more meaningful statistics, like infant
mortality.

Rank Country Rate
1 Hong Kong 3.2
2 Sweden 3.5
3 Japan 3.6
4 Norway 4.0
5 Finland 4.1
6 Singapore 4.2
7 France 4.6
7 Germany 4.6
9 Denmark 4.7
10 Switzerland 4.8
11 Austria 4.9
12 Australia 5.0
13 Netherlands 5.2
13 Czech Republic 5.2
15 Canada 5.3
15 Italy 5.3
17 Scotland 5.5
17 New Zealand 5.5
19 Belgium 5.6
19 Northern Ireland 5.6
21 England and Wales 5.7
21 Greece 5.7
21 Israel 5.7
21 Spain 5.7
25 Portugal 5.9
26 Ireland 6.2
27 Cuba 7.1
28 UNITED STATES 7.2
29 Slovakia 8.8
30 Kuwait2 9.4

OK, given the wonders of privatized medicine, I'm curious why we don't
find the USA at the top of this list. I don't know about Hong Kong, but
the next 25 nations all have some form of "nationalized" medicine.

What say you, rick?

frtzw906

BCITORGB wrote:

rick says:
=============

Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs the US.

================

Rather, take a look at more meaningful statistics, like infant
mortality.

Rank Country Rate
1 Hong Kong 3.2
2 Sweden 3.5
3 Japan 3.6
4 Norway 4.0
5 Finland 4.1
6 Singapore 4.2
7 France 4.6
7 Germany 4.6
9 Denmark 4.7
10 Switzerland 4.8
11 Austria 4.9
12 Australia 5.0
13 Netherlands 5.2
13 Czech Republic 5.2
15 Canada 5.3
15 Italy 5.3
17 Scotland 5.5
17 New Zealand 5.5
19 Belgium 5.6
19 Northern Ireland 5.6
21 England and Wales 5.7
21 Greece 5.7
21 Israel 5.7
21 Spain 5.7
25 Portugal 5.9
26 Ireland 6.2
27 Cuba 7.1
28 UNITED STATES 7.2
29 Slovakia 8.8
30 Kuwait2 9.4

OK, given the wonders of privatized medicine, I'm curious why we don't
find the USA at the top of this list. I don't know about Hong Kong, but
the next 25 nations all have some form of "nationalized" medicine.

What say you, rick?

I think that he will happily ignore any facts that get in the way of his
rambling... So far I haven't seen anything factual to support his
statements, or anything to support any of the other propaganda-believing
posters.

--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

rick says:
=============
Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs the
US.
================

Again, I prefer to look at more meaningful statistics. Let's look at
life expectancies. Out of 8 countries (USA, UK, Canada, Germany,
Mexico, France, Italy, and Japan) the USA ranks 7th in both men and
women's life expectancies. The USA does fare better than Mexico on this
measure, however. Since you're comparing, Canada ranks 4th among these
nations for women and 2nd place for men.

What in hell is going on here, rick?! This is all wrong! The
conventional wisdom just screams that the USA should be at the top of
the list. Somebody must be ****ing around with the statistics, eh?

frtzw906
==========