Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

In light of the discussion regarding health care, Congress, etc. I found this commentary interesting.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi- ... 3948.story

Could actress Natasha Richardson's tragic death have been prevented if her skiing accident had occurred in America rather than Canada?

This is a legitimate question because of how Canadian and American medical care differ. Canadian health care de-emphasizes widespread dissemination of technology like CT scanners and quick access to specialists like neurosurgeons. While all the facts of Richardson's medical care haven't been released, enough is known to pose questions with profound implications for both countries.
...
American medicine is often criticized for being too specialty oriented with hospitals duplicating too many services like CT scanners. This argument has merit but those criticisms ignore cases where it is better to have resources and not need them than to need resources and not have them. One high-profile case rarely provides the impetus to re-evaluate provision of services (although Quebec is now reassessing the need for air transport in medical emergencies). But as information becomes available, policymakers should carefully examine the circumstances surrounding this case.

For those advocating Canadian style healthcare, how do we get the positives without the negatives?

UNI88 wrote: For those advocating Canadian style healthcare, how do we get the positives without the negatives?

By not following their model...

I'm not saying our system doesn't need fixing...I just know from everything I've read, the Canadian model is good for those who rarely get sick...and those who don't have conditions that may need immediate attention...crap, that's when you need out system, with it's expensive overkill (no pun intended)...

There are ways we could improve our system...but American's don't like being told what they can and can't do, so for everyone who would sign up for one system, there's one who will reject it because it takes away their freedom to move around , pick and chose, and manage their own care plan...The more "social" system favored by some folks could reduce costs...but will reduce care...

The current wide open system favored by others is expensive, and getting more expensive...great if you have a good plan or can afford to pay out-of-pocket expensives...but it sucks for the working poor...

Col Hogan wrote:

UNI88 wrote: For those advocating Canadian style healthcare, how do we get the positives without the negatives?

By not following their model...

I'm not saying our system doesn't need fixing...I just know from everything I've read, the Canadian model is good for those who rarely get sick...and those who don't have conditions that may need immediate attention...crap, that's when you need out system, with it's expensive overkill (no pun intended)...

There are ways we could improve our system...but American's don't like being told what they can and can't do, so for everyone who would sign up for one system, there's one who will reject it because it takes away their freedom to move around , pick and chose, and manage their own care plan...The more "social" system favored by some folks could reduce costs...but will reduce care...

The current wide open system favored by others is expensive, and getting more expensive...great if you have a good plan or can afford to pay out-of-pocket expensives...but it sucks for the working poor...

Good post Col Hogan. At this point it seems that the only thing that most people can agree on is that our current system is inadequate.

We also need to keep in mind that she may not have survived bleeding on the brain in the United States either. As soon as I heard some of the details, that she seemed fine at first and her condition deteriorated rapidly later, I was reminded of boxing injuries that lead to death. A fighter leaves the ring under his own power, collapses in the locker room later and ultimately dies. This happening with medical personnel at the site itself and hospitals nearby.

having a home in Cassino and seeing how the Italian system works and how the American system works it is clear to see which is better. Seeing family members have to take a 3 hour train ride to the doctors to then wait hours to hopefully get whatever is wrong fixed is horrible. I hope that if we "socialize" our system it is not run like a public school system or any other municipality run organization.

As stated there are things that can be fixed and it is important, but to completely overhaul the system for something that has just as many flaws does not make the most sense.

I think both Canada and the USA have some of the greatest healthcare in the world available to their citizens. It's how to pay for healthcare that is the problem IMO. Canada, has too much beaucracy in their system, hoping people can stay alive until they can get treatment. While the USA has people that can't afford insurance, and die because they can't afford treatment. I liked Obama's original idea of helping people that can't afford healthcare, get healthcare. The rest of the people would continue with their current plans. I haven't heard much about this version since the election.

Col Hogan wrote:

UNI88 wrote: For those advocating Canadian style healthcare, how do we get the positives without the negatives?

By not following their model...

I'm not saying our system doesn't need fixing...I just know from everything I've read, the Canadian model is good for those who rarely get sick...and those who don't have conditions that may need immediate attention...crap, that's when you need out system, with it's expensive overkill (no pun intended)...

There are ways we could improve our system...but American's don't like being told what they can and can't do, so for everyone who would sign up for one system, there's one who will reject it because it takes away their freedom to move around , pick and chose, and manage their own care plan...The more "social" system favored by some folks could reduce costs...but will reduce care...

The current wide open system favored by others is expensive, and getting more expensive...great if you have a good plan or can afford to pay out-of-pocket expensives...but it sucks for the working poor...

Two things come to mind...

First, I was listening to some head injury specialist being interviewed after her death, and he commented (to the effect), "...had she just taken an hour to go have a cat scan done immediately after the accident, she'd probably be alive today...". JUST TAKEN AN HOUR!!! Maybe on the planet Zoltair. I've been with a cadillac PPO for the past decade, and EVEN I CAN'T GET A CAT SCAN IN "...an hour...". To my knowledge, if you have an HMO...even if you head the ER...you're talking about 10+ hours after numerous other tests. If you call for an appointment...weeks if you're lucky...months realistically.

Second, one of the closest healthcare systems the U.S. maintains that is comparable to a universal, govt. managed system is (IMHO) the V.A.. About 10 yrs ago...a good friend who was also a Vet and Purple Heart recepient, died from a heart attack while enroute to the hospital...in Redwood City,CA (SF area) from Sacramento (where he lived) about a 110 mi. drive through heavy traffic. When he first had symptoms...he went to a local ER room, who "stabilized" him, then told him to contact the VA for admission into one of their hospitals...so he called the VA and after about an hour they called him back and told him to drive to the VA hospital in Redwood City...still having chest pains, etc...he attempted to drive himself the the VA hospital...before the "big one" apparently hit him while he was driving south on the 680 through Fremont,CA...he just pulled over to the shoulder and died. To say those that knew him were furious is an understatement...how in the hell can ANYONE get away with suggesting a person having a heart attack drive themselves 110 mi. through HEAVY TRAFFIC to receive treatment at a "selected hospital" is mind boggling. This was one of the worst incidents I'm aware of, but several other vet friends and family members (including a decorated nephew) have related similar horror stories. Sorry to say this, but from what I've heard over the years, the VA is DECADES behind both administratively and in quality of treatment.

So, do we really want an unaccountable Federal Govt. managing our HEALTHCARE???

According to reports, Richardson refused initial treatment. That cost her life, regardless of where she lived.

T-man - sorry about your friend, and it was INEXCUSABLE what the first hospital did.

But that experience has no relevance to this - if we went to single payor healthcare, etc, your friend would have been treated at the first hospital (which again, he should have been, regardless).

travelinman67 wrote:
So, do we really want an unaccountable Federal Govt. managing our HEALTHCARE???

Republicans gut and underfund goverment programs to point of ineptitude or total failure. Then use this coerced failure to scare people with their "big government is evil" mantra. Sad really.

The healthcare industry is out of control. I want an accountable government working for me and use it's buying power to increase my ability to afford decent healthcare. Not looking for a handout, just a fair shake.

D1B wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:
So, do we really want an unaccountable Federal Govt. managing our HEALTHCARE???

Republicans gut and underfund goverment programs to point of ineptitude or total failure. Then use this coerced failure to scare people with their "big government is evil" mantra. Sad really.

The healthcare industry is out of control. I want an accountable government working for me and use it's buying power to increase my ability to afford decent healthcare. Not looking for a handout, just a fair shake.

Reppies. Dead on.

Shame, Conks.

D1B wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:
So, do we really want an unaccountable Federal Govt. managing our HEALTHCARE???

Republicans gut and underfund goverment programs to point of ineptitude or total failure. Then use this coerced failure to scare people with their "big government is evil" mantra. Sad really.

.

That is EXACTLY the case - both federally and state wide.

dbackjon wrote:

D1B wrote:
Republicans gut and underfund goverment programs to point of ineptitude or total failure. Then use this coerced failure to scare people with their "big government is evil" mantra. Sad really.

.

That is EXACTLY the case - both federally and state wide.

Those comments mean something only if there is an unlimited pool of money to correct every issue that exists.



Of wait, facts aren't relevant just opinions

The krauts seem to have a pretty good system in place.

http://www.medhunters.com/articles/heal ... rmany.html

OL FU wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
That is EXACTLY the case - both federally and state wide.

Those comments mean something only if there is an unlimited pool of money to correct every issue that exists.



Of wait, facts aren't relevant just opinions

Strawman, yawn.

Healthcare - this shit is important for individuals and business. Got other issues? ... start another fvcking thread.

dbackjon wrote:

D1B wrote:
Republicans gut and underfund goverment programs to point of ineptitude or total failure. Then use this coerced failure to scare people with their "big government is evil" mantra. Sad really.

.

That is EXACTLY the case - both federally and state wide.

And local, J, with school districts, community hospitals, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Conks set the downfall of our country into motion in January of 1981. It is now nearly complete.

Learn Chinese and Russian, people. Learn it fast.

OL FU wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
That is EXACTLY the case - both federally and state wide.

Those comments mean something only if there is an unlimited pool of money to correct every issue that exists.



Of wait, facts aren't relevant just opinions

Not at all, OL FU. At least in Arizona, there are many, many Republicans that border on anarchists - want NO government at all, other than an overbearing police force. They refuse to honor the Arizona-Constitutional mandates for school funding, because they don't believe in Public Education, even though they took an oath to uphold the Constitution.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
That is EXACTLY the case - both federally and state wide.

And local, J, with school districts, community hospitals, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Conks set the downfall of our country into motion in January of 1981. It is now nearly complete.

Learn Chinese and Russian, people. Learn it fast.

Well said.

Fvckin Reagan...

dbackjon wrote:According to reports, Richardson refused initial treatment. That cost her life, regardless of where she lived.
T-man - sorry about your friend, and it was INEXCUSABLE what the first hospital did.

But that experience has no relevance to this - if we went to single payor healthcare, etc, your friend would have been treated at the first hospital (which again, he should have been, regardless).

Not necessarily, from the commentary ...

What would have happened at an American ski resort? It obviously depends on the location and facts, but according to a colleague who has worked at two major Colorado ski resorts, the same distance from Denver as Mt. Tremblant is from Montreal, things would likely have proceeded differently.

Assuming Richardson initially declined medical care here as well, once she did present to caregivers that she was suffering from a possible head trauma, she would've been immediately transported by air, weather permitting, and arrived in Denver in less than an hour. If this weren't possible, in both resorts she would've been seen within 15 minutes at a local facility with CT scanning and someone who could perform temporary drainage until transfer to a neurosurgeon was possible. If she were conscious at 4 p.m., she most likely would have been diagnosed and treated about that time, receiving care unavailable in the local Canadian hospital. She might still have died or suffered brain damage but her chances of surviving would have been much greater in the U.S.

I agree that access to healthcare is a major problem in this country but I'm sceptical of the "Canadian" solution. It might look good from a distance but when you get closer you start to see the warts. Can't we do better?

D1B wrote:

OL FU wrote:
Those comments mean something only if there is an unlimited pool of money to correct every issue that exists.



Of wait, facts aren't relevant just opinions

Strawman, yawn.

Healthcare - this shit is important for individuals and business. Got other issues? ... start another fvcking thread.

Political smack boy, got any ideas other than republicans suck. State 'em

dbackjon wrote:

OL FU wrote:
Those comments mean something only if there is an unlimited pool of money to correct every issue that exists.



Of wait, facts aren't relevant just opinions

Not at all, OL FU. At least in Arizona, there are many, many Republicans that border on anarchists - want NO government at all, other than an overbearing police force. They refuse to honor the Arizona-Constitutional mandates for school funding, because they don't believe in Public Education, even though they took an oath to uphold the Constitution.

There certainly are many republicans that feel that way as there are many democrats that think every dollar generated belongs to the goverment to take care of the ills of society. Both positions are wrong. But anytime you have this discussion it can't be had in the context of a single issue. Lots of priorites lots of issues to take care of. D1B's comment was actually the issue and I suppose I chose you since you agreed. Political smack is like Football smack except that football smack is more entertaining.

OL FU wrote:

D1B wrote:
Strawman, yawn.

Healthcare - this shit is important for individuals and business. Got other issues? ... start another fvcking thread.

Political smack boy, got any ideas other than republicans suck. State 'em

Already stated em, Chachi.

D1B wrote:

OL FU wrote:

Political smack boy, got any ideas other than republicans suck. State 'em

Already stated em, Chachi.

yep, Republicans suck, the sequel

OL FU wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
Not at all, OL FU. At least in Arizona, there are many, many Republicans that border on anarchists - want NO government at all, other than an overbearing police force. They refuse to honor the Arizona-Constitutional mandates for school funding, because they don't believe in Public Education, even though they took an oath to uphold the Constitution.

There certainly are many republicans that feel that way as there are many democrats that think every dollar generated belongs to the goverment to take care of the ills of society. Both positions are wrong. But anytime you have this discussion it can't be had in the context of a single issue. Lots of priorites lots of issues to take care of. D1B's comment was actually the issue and I suppose I chose you since you agreed. Political smack is like Football smack except that football smack is more entertaining.

Hey, Wilford Brimley, sorry bout the sucker punch, but it's true.

So what do we do? Nothing. Healthcare is good place to start as it has profound effects on quality of life and the viabiliy of business and industry especially in a global market.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
That is EXACTLY the case - both federally and state wide.

And local, J, with school districts, community hospitals, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Conks set the downfall of our country into motion in January of 1981. It is now nearly complete.

Learn Chinese and Russian, people. Learn it fast.

I've never said that big government is evil. I do believe that it is relatively inept. The bigger that government gets the more it becomes filled with pencil pushing bureaucrats and the less effective it becomes. Stop by the Thompson Center in Chicago and take a look at some of the glassy eyed drones putting in their 7 hours, collecting their pay and going home. These are not the kind of people that I want to be responsible for my family's health care.

I'm not against government, I just think it should be relatively small and focused: defense, infrastructure, education (because equal access to a quality education is the key to America being the land of opportunity), protecting the environment (because the short-term profit focus of most companies interferes with their understanding the value of preserving the environment for our children), etc. I'm starting to believe that health care should be a part of that but I don't want some massive government bureacracy running it.

And the downfall of this country will be sealed when a bunch of simpletons in Washington ignore hundreds of years of history and economic reality and try to turn the clock back 50 years to a time when a production line worker could get $50/hour, own a 4 bedroom house, 2 cars and a boat. Globalization has happened, those jobs are gone, stop living in the past, get over it, think positively and move forward into tomorrow!

D1B wrote:

OL FU wrote:
There certainly are many republicans that feel that way as there are many democrats that think every dollar generated belongs to the goverment to take care of the ills of society. Both positions are wrong. But anytime you have this discussion it can't be had in the context of a single issue. Lots of priorites lots of issues to take care of. D1B's comment was actually the issue and I suppose I chose you since you agreed. Political smack is like Football smack except that football smack is more entertaining.

Hey, Wilford Brimley, sorry bout the sucker punch, but it's true.

So what do we do? Nothing. Healthcare is good place to start as it has profound effects on quality of life and the viabiliy of business and industry especially in a global market.

I don't disagree that healthcare impacts quality of life and business viability...

What do you not do, that is mandated by the Constitution to be accomplished by the Federal Government, to increase funding for healthcare...because if you just raise taxes, that also will impact quality of life and business viability...

There is very little discressonary funds available within the federal budget without running deficits...