Health Care Bill

chaxanmom · Mar 22, 2010

The bill summary can be found here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR03590:@@@D&summ2=m&

airborneinf82, BSN · Mar 23, 2010

As a Canadian the HCR doesn't impact me but this paragraph made me laugh - I have no idea where you get your misinformation that you proclaim here...
1. "please explain why they all come HERE to receive care"

Ummm - we don't. In actual fact less than 0.5% of Canadians obtain health care services in the US and of those only a quarter (.11%) state they went to the US for the sole purpose of health care. (Katz) Not sure how .11% of the population can be generalized as all.

Alright, well you obviously took "they all" too literal. I should have said, so many people around the world from countries with socialized medicine. Or at least those that have the ability to. By all, I meant every other country.

Case in point just last month:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5h0QC7bditrEb3wYz_6_b-gsGGDxA

2. "if their systems are so good, why go elsewhere?"

Remember, Canada has one tenth the population of the US. The USA has over 815,000 licensed physicians, Canada has about 70,000. There is no possible way we can have the same breadth of specialization with 1/10th the population. That doesn't mean the level of expertise or the quality of the expertise in Canada is any less - just the quantity is reduced. Therefore if someone needs a very specialized treatment that isn't available in Canada, they may take advantage of the expertise in the US. - Which as per #1 - happens rarely.

Well with 1/10th the population your number of physicians and specialists should be 1/10th that of the United States. Coincidentally, you should also have 1/10th the need. This just makes the point of availability of service. But I guess heart surgery is so specialized that Canada doesn't have the population to sustain training physicians in this skill right?

Secondly some of our politicians and famous people travel to the US for treatment for privacy reasons. We only have a few major cities and high level of expertise and confidentiality and privacy for public figures can be difficult. Again this happens rarely, although each time it does it receives a great deal of publicity.

Hahha, for privacy? They go to another country, where it will be made even more of a deal, for privacy? Do you see how illogical this sounds?

Thirdly many (elderly) Canadians live in the US for the winters and receive health care there - they count in the .5% who receive services in the US.

Since you provide no source for your numbers, I have no way to validate your claim, and therefore am unable to respond. Either way, this is all dealing with your misinterpretation of my "all" so it really is irrelevant. I don't believe every Canadian comes to the US for health care. That is ridiculous.

3. "also, what major medical advancments and drug developments have come from these countries?

For its population size, Canada has contributed a great deal to medicine and medical research. http://www.canadianmedicinenews.com/2007/11/canadas-greatest-medical-research.html I think even you might agree that the discovery of insulin by Dr. Banting was a major medical advance!
Comments:
I have a chronic health condition, and am on a large discussion board related to this health condition that is made up of primarily US folks. In the past year I have seen my GP monthly, had multiple medication changes, get bloodwork monthly, and have seen an endocrinologist, internist, immunologist, allergist and neurologist. The longest I have waited for an appointment with any of the specialist is two months and given that I am triaged as a non-urgent case, I consider this a reasonable wait time. I waited 5 weeks for a non urgent MRI. None of this has cost me a penny out of pocket, except I pay the pharmacy filling fee for the meds. My mother and sister both recently had more urgent health issues and were both seen by specialists in less than a week.
The members on the discussion board are for the most part extremely jealous of those us of in Canada as they are often limited in the number of appointments they can schedule, in how often they can have bloodwork and what blood work they can have ordered. Also they can only see certain specialists, and in the case of endocrinologists, more often than not they seem to be very disappointed in the quality of the care they receive, and are limited in who they can go to for second opinions. They often pay out of pocket to get bloodwork done, or for extra visits and there is constant stress for them about co-pays, HMO's, insurance premiums due to chronic conditions, fear of unemployment due to health and losing health care benefits etc.. From the postings they make there is a constant anxiety and worrying about accessing health care and the financial aspect. Also different people on the board get very different services depending on how good their health benefits/ insurance policy is. None of these things are issues in Canada

Well, to the insulin point, you didn't have full socialized healthcare until 1961, so that's irrelevant to my point. I never said there were no medical advancements from other countries, but on par with the US, no one stands a chance in comparison. Besides, a lot of what I read from you link was performing operations using some type of technology or method that was developed in the United States. There is no argument that the amount of money spent in the US due to privatization on medical research is far greater than any other country.

4. "no one EVER answers this question and i doubt i will get one here."
Well, now you have some answers, and perhaps you will choose to be a little better informed about Canadian health care. The Canadian system is not perfect, no system is, and yes our taxes are higher. However trying to make it out to be something it isn't doesn't actually help your cause.

First off, you might want to stay in your lane, considering you over reached in your assumptions of what I was saying, applying it all to Canada. I am quite informed for not having much need to be informed. So thanks for the "help" but I think I have enough idea about what I am talking about. Next time I have a question about the Canadian system, I will surely message you.

And yes.... haha, you DO have higher taxes. But again, that's a WHOLE different discussion!

mc3, ASN, RN · Mar 23, 2010

pelosi made mention of how this bill was on par with social security and medicare. as has been mentioned here, it is obvious that this bill will be just that. another governmnet program that will push our debt and spending beyond the point of sustainability. social security and medicare were already rapidly approaching this point. just this year, social security became insolvent.
everyone talks about the benefits of this bill, but no one seems to care about the implications of the cost. everyone says, its worth the cost. how can that be if the cost exceeds what we can afford? right now we borrow money at an astounding rate and this will only increase that. what happens if we cannot continue to borrow like we do. that day is approaching and we will all find out. this spending and borrowing is unsustainable.
as far as the other countries having such great health care systems, like as mentioned, canada, please explain why they all come here to receive care? if their systems are so good, why go elsewhere? no one ever answers this question and i doubt i will get one here. also, what major medical advancments and drug developments have come from these countries? everyone demonizes insurance companies and drug companies for their profits. but the profit margins in insurance companies are some of the lowest in business. profits in drug companies do 2 things. 1, covers the cost of r&d for failed drugs or ones that dont ever make it to market and 2, provides funding for new r&d to get us the latest and greatest drugs.
things are going to change because of this. it will not be today or tomorrow, but soon we will feel this bill. do yourself a favor and do some research. dont base what you think you know on what the pundits and politicians say. actually look in to stuff yourself and you will be surprised what you find
[b]the healthcare bill will still cost less than the iraq war. if we ended the war (or never went into it in the first place) we wouldn't be in this mess. no one tries to blame bush for making a mistake because he thought iraq had weapons of mass destruction. we paid for it with our wallets and our citizens. now, we have a president that is trying to make insurance companies accountable and give us healthcare and people are marching against it in the streets? [/b]

oh, puhleeeze!!!!!!!!!!!!!!: :banghead: - are you kidding? liberals around the world are blaming bush for everything evil in the world! what does he have to do with topic at hand?.................

mc3 :nurse:

CFitzRN, ADN · Mar 23, 2010

Oh, PUHleeeze!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:- are you kidding? liberals around the world are blaming Bush for everything evil in the world! what does he have to do with topic at hand?.................
mc3

Haha - if there is any conceivable means (or inconceivable, it matters not) of blaming Bush for any problem under the sun, they will do it.

RNandRRT · Mar 23, 2010

Well, apparently Bush and Co. did enough wrong to p i s s off enough Americans to put in a majority Democratic House and Senate, and a Democratic President.

And to have this health care reform passed.

belgarion · Mar 23, 2010

It's pretty common practice for the party in power to bame the previous p.i.p. for everything from the economy to outbreaks of toenail fungus. Carter blamed Ford, Reagan and Bush Sr. blamed Carter, Clinton blamed Bush Sr. and Reagan, Bush Jr. blamed Clinton, Obama blames Bush. One of the oldest games in politics.

I do wish Obama and Co. would stop punishing the entire state of Texas though.

trae55 · Mar 23, 2010

Ha ha. Texas punishes itself. Perry refused to take money the federal government tried to give him and then turned around and asked for money. Doesn't he know if he tried to secede from the union that he can't ask for federal money anymore? GO BILL WHITE!

For anyone who wants me to prove something, please learn how to use google.

Chewie_123 · Mar 23, 2010

At the moment, I am most worried about medicare cuts. Less reimbursement money to my hospital will mean more budget cuts. But those budget cuts won't be made to executives or management, they will be made to floor staff, either by cutting staff, or cutting their wages. I just don't know how that's going to work with all the cuts they've already made... I think this will just drive more RNs and other staff away from the bedside, making the "nursing shortage" at the bedside even worse.

VMSR · Mar 23, 2010

At the moment, I am most worried about medicare cuts. Less reimbursement money to my hospital will mean more budget cuts. But those budget cuts won't be made to executives or management, they will be made to floor staff, either by cutting staff, or cutting their wages. I just don't know how that's going to work with all the cuts they've already made... I think this will just drive more RNs and other staff away from the bedside, making the "nursing shortage" at the bedside even worse.

'Medicare cuts' everybody is talking about are not actually cuts to the healthcare, but streamlining administrative and excessive unnecessary costs. Here's a nice overview from the White House web page.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/medicarefactsheetfinal/

cherrybreeze, ADN, RN · Mar 23, 2010

At the moment, I am most worried about medicare cuts. Less reimbursement money to my hospital will mean more budget cuts. But those budget cuts won't be made to executives or management, they will be made to floor staff, either by cutting staff, or cutting their wages. I just don't know how that's going to work with all the cuts they've already made... I think this will just drive more RNs and other staff away from the bedside, making the "nursing shortage" at the bedside even worse.

I agree, this is a very real, very valid concern. The number I just heard on the news was 450 BILLION dollars in cuts in Medicare reimbursement. We've already had staffing cut/tightened since the last Medicare changes, such as no reimbursements for hospital acquired infections such as pneumonia or UTI's, expenses R/T falls, etc (coincidence? I doubt it). While yes, the facility CAN be at fault for these things happening, they are harder to prevent when you cut staff, so there's no way to win. We already get something like, 42 cents on the dollar for care of Medicare patients? Decreasing every day. We take out all the foleys sooner, to prevent CAUTI's, so that we don't have to pay to treat them. That's perfectly understandable. But when you then take the foley out of a patient that's barely mobile, takes two to transfer to the commode, and gets up every 30 minutes to void 25ml, and THEN take away the CNA we used to have on that shift, it can get extremely difficult. Now, it takes longer to round up that pair of hands to get the patient up, and since they are in a hurry to go, they get up and fall, because you can't do anything to prevent that except put an alarm on them, which you'll hear going off when you're gowned up next door elbow deep in a sterile dressing change. The hospital then also pays the hip fracture instead of the UTI. Why yes, let's cut these reimbursements even further, thanks. That will help the problem immensely.

trae55 · Mar 23, 2010

Ahh the famous words of someone who doesn't know what they are really talking about. You have been exposed as the liar (or maybe you just really believe the lies you've heard on tv) and everyone has seen it.

Seriously? A liar. Like I said, use google. I'm tired of disproving the same old republican rhetoric. You can believe what Fox News says or you can do some critical thinking and look at other sources.

cherrybreeze, ADN, RN · Mar 23, 2010

Ahh the famous words of someone who doesn't know what they are really talking about. You have been exposed as the liar (or maybe you just really believe the lies you've heard on tv) and everyone has seen it.
Seriously? A liar. Like I said, use google. I'm tired of disproving the same old republican rhetoric. You can believe what Fox News says or you can do some critical thinking and look at other sources.

Just because you find a link or info via Google doesn't make it credible. That would be like taking wiki for gospel. People can publish anything they want to on a website, and skew it any way they want to, just like Fox news or any news outlet can (in fact, even more so).