Well, basic dental is not covered, however if he had presented early on to the hospital with a tooth that required surgical removal o due to the complexity of the extraction and where there is associated pathology (ie an infection) - then he would have been covered in BC at the least Cite So he could have gotten treatment before it became so bad.
And he probably would have been able to get proper antibiotics in the first place if he’s visited a doctor, instead of scrounging around in friends medicine cabinets for leftovers.
And simply saying “he probably wouldn’t have visited a doctor because of the wait” is not an answer - just a hypothetical maybe.
Yes, and he might have found a miracle doctor who cured him by laying hands on him. Playing the “might have” game is not useful.
Might have, might have, might have. Not useful. What would have have MOST LIKELY done? What does most of the population do? Avoid the doctor when they need one? No.
I’ve been posting cites. I’ve been calling people out for “citing” their opinion.
Uh, obviously that’s not what it means, which is why I didn’t say “every single person in Canada does this.”
The OP is about ONE person, making foolish choices, about HIS own health. If he was in Canada he still might have made the same fooling choices, as evidence by people in Canada currently making fooling choices.
The presence of UHC doesn’t magical remove the presence of foolish choices, ergo the adoption of UHC in the US wouldn’t magically made this situation go away.
That is a possibility. It’s also possible that the hospital would have told him it’s a dental problem and therefor not covered. At that point in his pain he would have been extremely low priority, making the wait time that much longer. In Canada it would not have been covered UNTIL he was serious, up until that point it’s a dental issue.
As another personal anecdote, when I got my wisdom teeth removed, the government of NS paid for 1, my parents paid for the other 3. Only AFTER the teeth become impacted and infected would the government pay for costly removal.
This actually highlights the messy overlap in Canada between health care and dental care, that are in fact related, but not properly covered. So in reality, this guy’s situation would have played out pretty similar, but with added cost to the tax payer of repeated visits to be told, “go see your dentist.”
You don’t know that he would have done that, which is the point. He still might have opted to use left overs because to him that seemed like a good decision to make. And based on what he wrote, there is a good chance he wouldn’t have completed the dose, and then taken what he had leftover from a previous infection. All this adding to the issue of over use when it comes to antibiotics, leading to more problems with disease resistance. There are consequences to all these paths. Look up c. difficile as an example.
That’s right, its a counter hypothetical to the one presented in this thread, and by the very OP himself. UHC would not have fixed the underlying problem of bad decisions, and it’s unlikely to have saved the tax payers any money.
To make things worse, that bottle of 151 and the pack of smokes would have cost this guy a lot more in Canada. But remember he *needs *those to numb the pain and fight off boredom. But in Canada he’d have even less to spend on the dentist and Rx.
Careful there, you’ve done a nice job painting, but you may find yourself closer to a corner than a door.
We have a very good indication of what this OP MIGHT have done in Canada, because of what he told us he DID do in the US (ie misuse RX) and avoid preventative dental care.
When you ask “what does **most **of the population do” you are admitting that SOME of the population might not. Meaning that even with UHC some of the population won’t get preventative care. So how many? 1% 5% 15%? If that number gets too high, you end up with the same or worse than the number of Americans without health insurance (now at 16.3%). So the net result is the same (or worse).
And while I applaud your effort, you’re missing half the set of opinions…(here’s a hint, it rhymes with Roomstick).
I’m not sure where this incredibly persistent idea comes from. I’ve lived in several Canadian cities and I’ve never had to wait 3 weeks to see a regular doctor. For that matter it wouldn’t take me all morning to see a GP for walk-in - provided that i wasn’t going for some stupid reason.
The last time I went to a walk-in clinic I waited maybe ten minutes for a nurse to triage me and another half hour or so for a doctor to diagnose me with pneumonia and write a prescription for antibiotics (that I filled for about $10). I went to see my GP earlier this week - called the office Friday afternoon and had an appointment for Tuesday morning. And that was for a non-urgent matter - if I had called and told them I needed to see someone right away I could have seen the on-call doctor that night.
There are some parts of Canada where people have trouble getting appointments and GPs (the north is notorious for this), but for most of us this isn’t a problem. Long waits for the ER or for specialist appointments is a somewhat more reasonable criticism.
People are right in saying that Canada’s UHC wouldn’t have covered the OP for dental work. The lack of dental coverage is a huge flaw in Canadian UHC, and one that I think should be changed. But pointing out the lack of dental isn’t an argument against American UHC, it’s an argument for overhauling Canadian UHC.
My cite backed up my opinion. that’s how it works. All you’ve done is run your mouth.
I backed up an anecdotal experience my friend had with what was documented in that province of Canada. A heart bypass operation is a very routine procedure in the US.
You gave your opinion and some anecdotal evidence that some individuals in Canada have long wait times.
I gave a link to a list of actual wait times for a variety of hospital procedures in one province of Canada. Other provinces have similar wait time lists on the web.
You gave your opinion that nobody in the United states has to wait for medical procedures.
Others have posted personal experience where they did have to wait. I have yet to see a list of wait times for procedures from the United States. Hint: This is not because wait times do not exist.
What it comes down to is that in the United States we have to fix the system for 50 million people or 1/7 of the population. In Canada the delays apply to 100% of the population. The problem is the same either way.
It wasn’t anecdotal evidence. It was evidence. And It wasn’t for long wait times for medical treatment. It was for NO medical treatment because they died before a routine procedure could be performed.
You know, it did not escape my notice that your “cite” was an opinion piece in a Seattle Newspaper. The hint was the word “OPINION” at the top of the page.
I also noted that this 7 year old newspaper opinion piece used old data from the Fraser Institute - a right wing think tank who would like to see for-profit medicine imported into Canada. Hardly an unbiased source. The article goes on to talk someone who wrote in 1999 about delays in heart operations in Ontario .
In short, your cite was an old opinion piece that relied on outdated data from biased sources.
Not anecdotes. Data. Current data. Available to the public.
Lets see a comparable cite from a US state for wait times. Again be sure to include wait times for everyone, including those with no insurance.
It was an old opinion piece.
And can you assure me that nobody in the United States has died before they could be scheduled for a “routine” procedure?
If you cannot, then your anecdote is invalid, because it does not show a failing that is particular to only the Canadian system.
As has been said- nobody thinks the Canadian system is perfect. It’s just better (less cost, better health outcomes) that the system the United States enjoys currently.
You cannot be denied emergency treatment in the US. again, we only have to fix part of our insurance problem. Once it’s nationalized it’s next to impossible to fix and it directly ties citizens to government budgets. Europe’s economic problems directly affect allsocialprograms.
Canada is an enormous country, many people live in remote areas where access is a challenge. So sometimes people cannot get what they need - right now!
I have never waited to see a Dr, or to get scheduled surgery, for any issues. You know who waits, and doesn’t like it? Old people, who want a new hip or knee, largely because the Dr determines they don’t really need it yet. They make a lot of noise and complain, but largely people get what they need, easily and without cost. It ain’t perfect, but it’s always being upgraded.
Dental care is not covered by UHC, it’s true, but you can to go emerg with dental issues and they will yank it - no cost. You want crowns and root canals, you pay yourself. If it threatens your health, emerg will take care of it.
No system is perfect. But I have to side with one that provides equal access to everyone regardless of the size of their wallets.
And where an accident or illness doesn’t take your retirement, your home, your kids college fund and bankrupt you.
More frightening still, people who don’t seek care, because of the cost, for conditions that are easy to treat initially, but costly once allowed to fester.