On health care. Hehe. I'm at work right now at the doctor's office and am finding it the ideal

[Cleita]

venue to educate the patients in the waiting room on single payer universal health care. So far I've shot down every propaganda point that no doubt they have heard on CNN from Dr. Sanjay Gupta about Canada. Those I have talked to so far have been receptive to the idea once they learn the true facts. I have given them website addresses for them to learn for themselves. Hey, here's an opportunity DUers. We can't go on TV or radio to refute every false meme out there but we can do it by word of mouth wherever people are gathered looking for health care. Next time I'm waiting in line at the pharmacy should be another opportunity.

[John Q. Citizen]

1. You need some quick bullet points to hand out with a way for the person to follow up and you

need to get names and contact for people who are interested in making it so.

[AndyTiedye]

2. The Very Fact That You Have To Do This

indicates that nothing is going to change in our health care system any time soon.

[TrogL]

3. What's Gupta saying about Canada?

I haven't noticed any health care problems.

[Cleita]

8. He told a bunch of insurance company propaganda lies about long waits

and inferior care. He dissed Michael Moore's movie "Sicko", which fortunately Michael Moore shot him down about.

[Fire1]

38. Since I live in Michigan I hear this one alot, "Canadians come

HERE for health care!"

[Cleita]

39. Do they?

I have heard that sometimes they come here to get specialized care not available in Canada, but Canadian Medicare pays for it. Also, I have known Canadians who come here and pay for stuff out of pocket because they think they are getting better attention. Methinks that these are hypochondriacs and the Canadian system doesn't waste time with them like ours does because they can pay and it's good for business. I also had a Canadian friend write to me about some frustration that she had with her husband being on dialysis. She said she wished they had our system. It so happens my husband was on dialysis at the same time and it turned out our system's frustrations were actually worse. I wrote her about it and reminded her that not only would she get the same treatment but would have to pay for it as well.

[Fire1]

40. Yes, I hear they pay out of pocket for what they 'say' is better

care rather than depend on their own benefits.

[Cleita]

41. I guess conservatives are stupid on both sides of the border. n/t

[Fire1]

42. That's for sure!

[kath]

9. The rightwingers lie about Canada and the UK all the time,

just like they lie about everything else...

[Riley133]

14. 17.7 weeks to wait for care isn't a problem?

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=3035

[salin]

16. No agenda there...

from the ncpa 'about us' section on their website:
The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research organization, established in 1983. The NCPA's goal is to develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control, solving problems by relying on the strength of the competitive, entrepreneurial private sector. Topics include reforms in health care, retirement, entitlement reform, taxation, economic growth, and energy and the environment.



So where does their data come from? It looks like other conservative thinktanks (like 'heartland'). Bring a bit less bias (suspect?) data source for such info and then we can talk.

[zeos3]

19. Ha! You beat me to it

I must have wasted more time looking at their site. Cheers.

:toast:

[salin]

20. I have to admit

I have learned to go straight to the 'who we are' sections of sites to look for agendas - then look at who is cited in the studies. Sometimes I have found that sources are legit and merit time reading and pondering studies put forward, but not so often there is so much one-sided rw propoganda that the rw peddle (that is citing each other to try to make their arguments seem legit.)

I have grown so cynical (always looking for the agenda first).

Chalk our posts up to the internet version of the old kids game 'jinx' :D :toast:

[zeos3]

18. numbers like this are misleading

Wait times in Canada vary from province to province and by what type of procedure/service is being sought and can also depend on whether or not you want to see a specific doctor.

We have similar issues here: make an appointment with your doctor, get a referral and make an appointment with a specialist, go for a second opinion, wait for approval of the procedure by your health insurance, etc.

Take a look at your source, also. From the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) website: "The NCPA's goal is to develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control, solving problems by relying on the strength of the competitive, entrepreneurial private sector."

If that doesn't say "We love Big Pharma and the for profit health insurers", then I just don't understand english.

[Kber]

22. Well - that's very true re: wait times

If I call my kid's doctor with a suspected ear infection, we see her that day. If I'm scheduling my son's annual pre-camp physical, I usually need to schedule at least 2 months (9 weeks) ahead of time.

My obgyn is usually booked for regualar annuals 3-4 months ahead (15 - 20 weeks). But when I thought I might be pregnant (after serious complications from a previous miscarriage), she met me at her office on a Sunday afternoon 90 minutes after I called her.

My mom is getting her knee replaced and will have to wait 6 months to book her surgery.

Put it into those terms, and we all can wait an average of many weeks / months for care under the current American system. I'm sure Canada and UK have a similar waiting period for some care, and same day service for urgent stuff.

It's really not that different.

Kber

[Cleita]

29. We have the same waits here in the USA so our system isn't

superior to yours and you cover everyone. We only cover those who can pay, so you'd think our waiting times would be less.

[Kber]

44. I'm in the US too.

and my point is that in our US system, we have the same wait times as Canada and UK, so I think you and I are saying the same thing.

:)

[sandnsea]

32. I have to wait 7 weeks for ear surgery

Now that I have subsidized insurance. I've waited ten years to see a doctor because I had no way to pay for the surgery otherwise.

Yes, the people who fall for the "waiting" propaganda do not think for themselves.

[Cleita]

28. Your source is from a Libertarian think tank and everything they

claimed is not true. The fact is that Canadians get timely care. They may wait longer for tests or MRIs than we do but if there is an urgency they get it. Getting a non emergency appointment with a doctor runs no longer than it does here. The earliest appointment I can get with my GP is three months down the line and I think most Americans have the same waiting period, so we are no different than Canada in that respect and we get to pay for it again in deductibles and co-pays after we pay the premium. So I can't think you think our system is superior.

[avaistheone1]

4. Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed people can change the world:

indeed, it is the only thing that ever has!

- Margaret Meade




Great job! Let's all talk up single-payer universal health care coverage to our friends, family and sphere of influence.

I am going to make a bumpersticker for my car: Ask me about HR 676

[ReadTomPaine]

5. Bravo! As we used to say years ago.. "Each one, teach one"

:thumbsup:

[PurityOfEssence]

6. What's your boss have to say about this?

Just curious.

[Cleita]

7. He likes me to engage the patients in conversation if they are so

inclined so they don't get bored waiting. I suddenly realized that I could control the topic and it's something than anyone seeing a doctor would be interested in. I'm sure he will tell me to cut it out if he gets any complaints. He is a liberal though.

[mnhtnbb]

15. Lucky you. Last MD waiting room I sat in (a specialist) had TV

tuned to Faux News. Strike 1 against the guy. He hit strike 2 and 3 by the time he arrived in exam room. If I need to see specialist again, I won't be going back to him. And if you can believe it,
strike 4 came several weeks after the fact when he had his receptionist call me trying to get me
to schedule a test that had already been done, report filed in chart, and I had to tell her to look for it!

Geeze.

[Cleita]

24. Fortunately we don't have a TV and you can be sure it wouldn't be

tuned to FOX News when I'm there.

[antigop]

10. What I have found in talking with people about universal healthcare

Is that they really don't understand that Medicare is a universal health care system--it just happens to be for people over age 65.

A while back I was standing in line at the post office and an older man in front of me (who was probably old enough to be on Medicare) complained that the line was moving slowly. "And just wait until the government takes over our healthcare system," he said. "This is EXACTLY what it will be like." So I asked him what he thought about Medicare. I asked him if he thought Medicare was a good idea or whether we should get rid of it. "Oh, we should definitely keep it," he said. So I said, "You do realize that one of the proposals for a universal healthcare system is an expansion of Medicare?" He had not heard of that. He agreed that expanding Medicare to all was a pretty good idea.

I think the problem is there has been so much propaganda about that AWFUL system in Canada, that people haven't even looked into what is being proposed and they don't know the truth about the Canadian system.

I have found that starting out the conversation by asking them if they think Medicare should be abandoned is a good way to broach the subject.

[Hawkowl]

11. Kudos to you!

This is the only way to change anything. One on one conversations. Don't underestimate yourself.

[Riley133]

12. And are you educating the sickest ones that they will likely pay more?

In my discussions with health professionals who are following this issue closely, it seems quite likely that due to the fact that the government is downright broke we will go to a tiered single payer system. Those who have serious illnesses will be forced to buy the most expensive tier in order to maintain the type of coverage they are used to through their private insurer, and it could very well be more than the cost per month they pay to have private health care through their employer.

And as far as Canada goes, I read an article not too long ago in that such things as strep screens are now being charged back to the patient because their government is feeling the economic pinch as well. Japan had to have Johns Hopkins come in and build a multi-million dollar facility so that the rich people could come get specialized care while the poor continue to use universal health care because the treatment got so bad.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/05/business/sxclinic.php

I personally wanted to see something more middle of the road. I was a member of some grassroots organizations, but people seemed to want what they have now for free. Personally, I don't think it's possible - utopia just doesn't exist. But maybe that's just me.

[salin]

17. A year or so before the current economic situation developed

a relative (doctor) who had been adamently against anyform of universal care since Hillary Clinton headed up the WH task force in the early mid-nineties, turned the opinion around - primarily because his community had been hard hit by layoffs and suddenly paying (that is - insured) patients dropped to only about 60% of patients - and most of the rest were not qualified for medicaid. The one major employer in the area carried one insurer, and they had bargained down reimbursements to just a tiny bit more than medicaid. The reality had already come to the practice - more and more patients were paying out of pocket turning the office into a serious collection agency as those now unemployed patients without health insurance didn't have a whole lot of ability to pay all of their doctor bills.

Suddenly the reimbursement rates and hassles of working with medicaid didn't seem that much different than working with the one and only insurer in the community and was more attractive than the swelling number of uninsured (and even harder to get reimbursement for services) patients.

I haven't asked how the numbers have changed given the current deteriorating economic conditions.

I don't know the answer - especially given the ever constricting federal dollars (eg HUGE debt). I do know that it is increasingly likely to happen when more and more constituencies within the health care industry are starting to look to the federal government for some kind of change since the private sector has only exacerbated rather than 'the market fixing' the problems. It seems that before long the only constituency within the health care industry sectors that will be fighting against any fix will be the insurance industry. I don't think it can single-handedly prevent change from happening.

[zeos3]

21. This is what I don't understand

Why would those with serious illnesses pay more? If you expand the the number of people in the system (by including healthy people who might not otherwise by their own insurance) you spread the risk. Shouldn't this bring DOWN the cost for the sickly? How would it cost more than having insurance through an employer?

With our current system, you're screwed either way.
If you're seriously ill and you lose your job, screwed.
Your employer drops the coverage because it's too expensive for the business, screwed.
You have to pay more for (take your pick; premium, copays, out of pocket expenses) so your employer doesn't drop the group health plan, screwed.
COBRA? (higher premiums and lapses after 18 months), screwed.
Individual coverage? They'll suck you dry with the annual rate increases, screwed.

[Cleita]

27. The insurance and for profit health care parasites don't want people to know

this. It would put them out of business and I say good riddance.

[sandnsea]

34. To reduce the rates for business owners

one of the plans is for the feds to pull the sickest out of insurance and create a federal program to cover all the seriously ill people. You might remember the case in Louisiana where the city worker quit because the health insurance kept going up because of his cancer treatment. If he quit, the city could get a new plan that would be cheaper. That happens to some people and they don't know it. Maybe they've had their policy for ten years. Maybe all the healthy people have shopped around and gotten cheaper plans. So there are less people in that original pool. One person gets cancer and the rates for the entire pool go up up up. If it's a small business, that one cancer patient makes it impossible to get cheaper insurance for the company and employees.

They have this at the state level now, sort of. I'm in the Oregon Medical Insurance Pool. For my husband and me it would be $1000 a month, but we have a subsidy and pay $125. It helps with prescriptions, but we still pay about $200 for those. I have a thyroid disorder and controlled diabetes and do not qualify for any other insurance in the state.

[zeos3]

43. Thanks

That was a good reply. I understand all that you wrote. I was trying to figure out where #12 is coming from. Is #12 in favor of the tiered system, which is crap? You have a better explanation of what I was trying to say further down this thread.

[Cleita]

26. Yes, the government is broke argument and we can't afford it because that

money must go to military spending and war to make the rich richer. This is propaganda. Since the coverage in Canada varies slightly by province, I don't think you are getting good information there. There are always attempts to besmirch the Canadian system in the media usually with misinformation planted by publicists for the insurance industry. I have found every one of the stories to be erroneous so if you could provide a source or a link as to where you got that information, it will be helpful in letting our Canadian DUers verify it or invalidate your claim. I will look at your link about Japan more thoroughly when I get the time, but from first glance, it looks like more astroturf to me. Unsubstantiated claims like the Japanese don't like their system are a clue. It probably will turn out to be an entirely different situation.

Again single payer universal health care is not free. Everyone pays into like you do your insurance according to their means. You see the doctors you want and instead of hundreds of insurance company and HMO plans as well as government forms to process for claims there is one claim to one payer, the government. You really have bought into the insurance company propaganda or you are part of it. Time and more posts from you will tell.

[northernlights]

30. in other words...

"Japan had to have Johns Hopkins come in and build a multi-million dollar facility so that the rich people could come get specialized care while the poor continue to use universal health care because the treatment got so bad."

Rich people didn't want to soil themselves sitting in the same waiting room as the rest of us. Cry me a river.

Rich people in this country are afraid of single payer because then they won't be able to suck up *all* the health care this country has to offer, and leave the rest of us either paying for insurance and getting *no* health care (and losing their homes if they get seriously ill or injured) or just getting no health care if they drop out of the system totally.

Here's an idea.
1) cut out the insurance bureacracy altogether. They add to the costs and only cut expenses by denying delivery to those who have paid for it in advance via premiums, and funneling care specifically to the rich and powerful. That's an absolute outrage.

2) There are waiting lists for med school, nursing school, MLT training, etc. FUND the schools to enlarge the programs, and thereby increase the number of providers.

3) eliminate mortgaged-sized loans to get through health care training. It's a desperately needed community service. So instead, give worthy students *grants* so they can get graduate and start their practices or jobs debt free.

4) 2 and 3 combined can create enough actual providers to deliver universal healthcare without rationing and simultaneously reduce their fees. They can focus more on actually delivering healthcare and waste less time, paper and resources filling out insurance forms justifying tests and treatments.

I've been without health insurance most of my adult life. My dentists have always charged me significantly less per visit because I don't carry insurance paperwork.

Same is true with doctors, I'm sure. A significant chunk of their expense is just effing insurance paperwork.

[Cleita]

37. Hear, hear!

:thumbsup:

[sandnsea]

33. If they pull the sickest out of the main pool

and put us into our own pool, yes it will be expensive. Single Payer wouldn't do that. Single Payer wouldn't rate age or sickness or any of the things that currently cause premiums to rise. Single Payer would spread the risk among everybody, and then kick in some assistance for the lowest incomed people.

Some places do use a combination of public/private health care. France does too. In France, there are prviate hospitals for cancer and surgeries and things like that. But the single payer system still pays them. It could be the same here. Do you know that most doctors and dentists have a separate scheduling day for Medicaid patients? They say it's because it's easier to do the paperwork. I've done the paperwork, that's bullshit. We have a multi-tier system in place in this country already. And I haven't even gotten to the tier that has no health care at all, a tier that doesn't exist in any of the rest of developed countries and many third world ones as well.

Our system sucks.

[Cleita]

36. About your article on Japan, although it misstates that Japan is

dissatisfied with its health care, further down the line it clarifies it to say that Japanese millionaires are dissatisfied with it. Well, fine for them. Let them pay extra for that care as long as they still pay their taxes for the national health care system. We could do the same here, once we get everyone covered with basic and necessary, quality health care, let our millionaires spend their money on insurance that covers extras or go to hospitals that cater to millionaires as long as they keep paying into the basic system.

btw We had a DUer activist named Andy Stephenson here a few years back who was prevented from having an operation at John Hopkins that could have saved his life because they had to wait until the check cleared for what I believe was $50,000 plus back then. Andy didn't have any insurance coverage and DUers took up a collection to cover the operation, but because John Hopkins had to have the money first, the operation was performed too late and he died. This is the system we have here. If Andy had been covered with a Medicare card like Canadians are, his operation would have come first and payment later. Here's a link to what happened.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1575432

[eridani]

13. The PNHP site has lots of excellent handouts.

Also flyers for SiCKO DVDs might be useful.

[Cleita]

25. I printed out as many as I could this weekend. Thanks. n/t

[Jennicut]

23. I want something anything that works better then what we have now

I have diabetes and if not for my husband's insurance I would be screwed.

[Cronopio]

31. Well done! Unless they're invested in the problem, single-payer is an easy sell. nt

[LWolf]

35. That's great.

If enough people are talking, things move.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[SoCalDem]

45. Y'know.. Canada is quite close..and MOST of them even speak our language

and yet..how many times have we seem a symposium made up of REAL Canadians...just sitting around telling us how easy it is and how well it works?

There are so many easy parallels that could have been made and should have been made..

How hard would it be to find couples in the US with an HMO and a few kids and then a Canadian couple with the same income/expenses but with their health plan.

It has not been done, because Americans would be OUTRAGED if the knew the real story..

[Cleita]

46. Actually, the for profit health care industry (insurance, HMOs, PhRMA) would

be outraged. I know such things have occurred in the past, but you never get much of a story reported on it in the MSM. This is why they were up in arms about Michael Moore's movie "Sicko" because he was able to reach a broad audience that single payer health care reform activism gets sidelined on all the time. Imagine if Sixty Minutes did something like this. Now I know Bill Moyers and Amy Goodman have done similar things, but unless you make the effort to tune into them you will never know. Instead you will have corporate shills like Dr. Sanjay Gupta spreading the opposite meme coast to coast with repeated spots over a twenty four hour period with no one arguing with him about it except Michael Moore who had to call him a liar to get his point across and yet Michael ended up being the bad guy in this exchange.