Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PLK
I think we'd all be better off admitting, honestly and openly, that both medical systems in Canada and the US are currently experiencing difficultes.

I grew up in Ontario, and am currently living in upper New York state. And from what I've seen in New York State, there are a lot of problems here too.

The city I live recently had to close one of its hospitals due to a lack of funding. One of my cube mates recently spent the better part of a week fighting with his HMO over a bill they said they'd cover, but later reneged on. The local paper recently ran a story about how medical costs are starting to rise again, despite the best efforts of HMO's to contain costs.

And we've all heard the horror stories associated with the HMO's.

Canada's system is also experiencing problems. There are few MRI machines. And as part of a decision to help bring down the deficit, healthcare spending was slashed in Canada during the 1990's.

However, both the US and Canada's problems stem from exactly the same source: an aging population. It is this single factor, more than any other, that is driving up health care costs in Canada and the US. And until both countries come to understand this basic fact, the problems are going to continue.




11 posted on 06/25/2002 6:20:55 AM PDT by altayann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: altayann; Fiona PBMRx
The problem isn't an aging problem ... it is socialism. It is worse in Canada, but creeping socialism has hurt the U.S. medical system.

Drugs - note in the article that Canadians might come to the U.S. to get drugs that are not available in Canada. That is because Canada tells drug companies HOW MUCH THEY CAN CHARGE when the drugs are sold. Canada computes the cost to manufacture the drugs, but doesn't include the development costs. The high cost of NEW drugs is primarily in order to re-coup development costs. After about 17 years after the patent is filed (perhaps as little as 10 - 12 years after the drug has completed testing and has been approved by the FDA), the patent expires and generic (lower cost) drugs will compete, and the price drops significantly.

Drugs are still developed in the U.S. because the development costs are allowed. Why should drug companies be forced to sell drugs below recovery costs? (Remember that only about 10% to 20% of drugs are safe/effective and get approved, so the costs must be higher to recover all the development costs of drugs that don't "pan out".

But what is needed most is "USER PAYS" ... not third party pays. If Medical Savings Accounts were used to cover all but high cost procedures (i.e. - the first $3,000 of medical costs are out of pocket ....), then users become more careful of what procedures they request. They are less likely to go to the emergency room for flu symptoms.

And of course, let us not forget the U.S. government's attempts to bankrupt the medical systems by forcing hospitals to provide free treatment to indigent people, illegal aliens, etc. Those costs aren't reimbursed by the U.S. government (and the taxpayers), but are "shared" by raising the price of medical services to the insured people.

A little free-market policies are required to put a bit of sanity in the health care industry ... or the U.S. will end up with a system little better than Canada or Great Britian.

Mike

13 posted on 06/25/2002 6:46:22 AM PDT by Vineyard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson