Robin wrote:
> Kujebaku, what do you think?
I am not Kujebak, but I live in Canada, which is mentioned farther in the
article, so I will point certain differences between the case described
and
reality in Ontario.
>
> This is a tale of pay or die that recurs again and again all over our
> country and only in our country in the entire western world.
>
> Advised by her physician to go to M.D. Anderson for urgent treatment
> of her leukemia, Mrs. Lisa Kelly was told she had to pay $105,000 up
> front before being admitted. The hospital declared her limited
> insurance unacceptable.
You have to present your OHIP card _before_ any medical treatment. That
includes even 5 minute consultation with a physician. No card, no
treatment. Notes to that effect are posted in all medical establishments.
>
> Sitting in the business office with seriously advanced cancer, she
> asked herself – “Are they going to send me home?” “Am I going to
die?”
Recent case from Ontario:
A patient with advancing brain tumor was in the latest stages of still
operable disease. It took 1 year of waiting in various queues to get the
diagnosis. Immediate surgery was scheduled, where "immediate" = 6 months
of additional waiting. If was obvious that the patient will not live to
see the surgery. Patient went to Buffalo, NY, where he received the
surgery in a week or so and is now perfectly healthy. OHIP _refused_ to
pay his medical expenses in Buffalo, NY saying that the surgery there was
not necessary as the same surgery was offered in Ontario. The fact that
to
perform surgery on a carcass makes no sense was completely lost on them.
The patient had to re mortgage his home and is now facing $100k+ in debts.
His OHIP card he payed for his whole life is completely worthless.
>
> Back to the 52 year old, Lisa Kelly. She and her husband returned with
> a check for $45,000. After a blood test and biopsy, the hospital
> oncologist urged admittance quickly. Then the hospital demanded an
> additional $60,000-$45,000 just for the lab tests and $15,000 for part
> of the cost of the treatment.
>
> To shorten the story, she received chemotherapy for over a year. Often
> her appointment was “blocked” until she made another payment.
There are certain forms of chemotherapy that are not covered by OHIP,
mostly because they are more expensive than others and because they work.
If you look at it realistically, what is the financial motivation of OHIP?
Is it to take care of a patient if chronically ill expending large sums
of money in the process, or is it to let patient die by refusing treatment
or introducing lengthy queues that would result in patient's death before
it is his turn for treatment? Which solution is financially more
advantageous for OHIP?
>
> In a particularly grotesque incident, she was hooked up to a
> chemotherapy pump, but the nurses were not allowed to change the chemo
> bag until Mr. Kelly made another payment.
At least she could have made the payment. In Ontario they would refuse
her
treatment outright no matter if she could pay or not. It would be enough
if the treatment was not on the official list of sanctioned treatments.
Many chemotherapy and other pharmacological treatments are not on the
list.
In fact, nothing that was discovered or brought in the medical practice
in the last 20 or so years is on the list. For goodness sake, the blood
prostate test, recommended to all men after 50, is NOT on the list of OHIP
covered procedures. Fortunately you can get it in private labs for $40.
However, you cannot get a chemotherapy in an Ontario hospital if it is not
on the OHIP list. It is ILLEGAL to pay for medical treatment in Canada
and
it is ILLEGAL for a physician to accept a payment from a patient as long
as
the same physician accepts payments from government run "insurance".
> Imagine anything like Mrs. Kelly’s predicament and pressures occurring
> in Canada,
You do not have to imagine. If she were in Canada, she would probably be
dead by now.
> These countries have universal single payer health insurance. No one
> dies because they cannot afford health care.
No. But many die waiting in various queues or because they were refused
life saving treatment because it was not on the list of sanctioned
treatments.
> In the U.S. the drug companies charge their highest prices in the
> world, even though we, the taxpayers, subsidized them in large ways.
> In other countries like Mexico and Canada, they cannot get away with
> such drug price gouging, with a pay or die ultimatum.
This information (regarding Canada) is completely false. It is true that
US prices are higher then Canadian, but the reason is not "drug price
gouging". The reason is very complex system of agreements, patent
policies
and covert subsidies between governments and pharmaceutical industry.
What the pharmaceutical industry does not get through direct pricing, it
gets through various back doors, secretly subsidized by gullible
taxpayers.
The overall income per unit of medication is the same in Canada as it is
in the States. The difference is that in the State a patient actually
sees
what is he paying, in Canada the same patient pays through his taxes.
>
> In the U.S., computerized billing fraud and abuse cost over $200
> billion last year, according to the GAO arm of Congress. In other
> counties, single payer prevents such looting.
I do not know which "counties" has the author in mind. But in countries
like Canada fraud is pervasive. The widely known fact is that while
Ontario has some 10 million citizens including babies, there are some 15
million OHIP cards in circulation. You can buy a valid OHIP card in
Buffalo, NY for some $1k.
> In other western countries, medical outcomes for children and adults
> and paid family leave are far superior to that of the U.S. The World
> Health Organization ranks the US health care system 37th in the world.
What is a "medical outcome"?
I wonder why, if US is in the 37th place in the world, all Canadian
business and political leaders go there for their medical needs?
It is widely known fact that previous Canadian Liberal prime ministers
received their medical care in various famous US clinics.
> When a friend showed the Journal’s article to a Dutch visitor, the
> latter blurted in anger – “you are a nation of sheep.” Not a very
> flattering description of “the land of the free, home of the brave.”
I would not talk about a "nation of sheep" if I were a Dutch. At least US
government does not ban movies and does not curb the freedom of speech
because she is completely terrified of Islamic terrorists.
> Last month after being in remission, Lisa Kelly’s leukemia has come
> back.
As I said, if she were in Canada, she'd be dead by now. Leukemia
definitely would not have the op****tunity to come back.
Cheers
Frank
Homework: Rent a movie called "Barbarian Invasions". Re****t back on
Canadian health care system.
--
<feeb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
|
