Quote:
Originally Posted by jimjamuser
All this stated confusion naturally brings up the question of National Health Insurance. Is the system used by Canada, Australia, and all other 1st world countries (except the US) superior to the US's confused and inefficient system? Answer, yes they get better care at lower cost. Ask the Canadians why they are afraid to get sick while in the US.
|
Better care, no! Had a friend of a friend I met in Canada that worked as a Superintendent for CP rail. He developed a brain tumor, needed an MRI. All of BC had fewer MRIs than we had in Wichita Falls, TX and they couldn't get him in for 6 months, which he probably wouldn't have lived to make. The friend is a radiologist, few him to Texoma, did the MRI, read the MRI and sent him back with everything. Another doctor I knew in MS was trained in England. What both have said is their national health systems do well with acute care, but other than that they're pretty bad. They do have boards that basically ratio care by limiting availability, who gets it, and it is also why wealthier people in Great Britian can still carry private insurance to get care. Health/Death Boards are real.