Talk:Study: Socialized Canadian surgery half the U.S. cost with same results

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Ack. I had to really resist the urge to edit this, as it does seem somewhat POV to me, but pretty much anything I could add would be POV as well, so I'll let it be. I will say this; it makes sense that the cost of medication would be higher in a US system, considering that there is a higher level of taxation in Canada. I'm not exactly sure how they factored in the cost each Canadian pays in taxes for the subsidized plan. Also, the popular rumor, which I have a tendency to believe, is that waiting lists for surgery are longer in Canada. I'm pretty far from an authority on the subject though, so as I said, I'll stand back from editing this. - McCart42 (talk) 02:55, July 14, 2005 (UTC) One thing I do need to mention is that there were two sisters who were wounded recently in the London bombings who are being sent overseas to a Duke University facility to seek treatment. That's the kind of story I hear a lot of - best treatment being available in the United States. But there is the issue of how expensive it is... would you rather have better healthcare available to those that can afford it, or a fairly decent level of healthcare universally available. It's absolutely not an easy choice. - McCart42 (talk) 02:58, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

COMMENTI don't think there is any evidence that better care is even available in the U.S. regardless of one's wealth. After Christopher Reeve died from an infected bed sore, I searched the internet and could not find one case of such a death in Canada. They use air mattresses and special movement schedules to keep bed sores from beginning in Nursing homes and hospitals. The bottom line is Canadians live longer with lower health care costs according to this study; and maybe its got something to do with the fact an aspirin costs 10 times as much in a U.S. hospital ,the U.S. hospital administrative costs are 3 times as much per 100 beds, and anesthesiologists(for example) earn an average of $600,000.(and hit the greens by 2pm) per year below the border and $200,000 per year above the border. But hey, as P.T. Barnum said; "There's a sucker born every minute." so, suck it up and get used to it; because just as with the pollution that's tripled U.S. child asthma over the past 10 years; the U.S. Congress is not going to do a damn thing about any of it; BECAUSE,IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED, 96% of them were reelected last time around and it's not because they do such a good job; it's because our political elective system has become FIXED. We have a choice between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum and THAT'S IT ! And remember, their kids don't fight in Iraq and they live in places like Cape Cod and Crawford where the air is clean; so just say baaaah and get ready for the annual fleecing.65.95.151.27 13:29, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

As a U.S. citizen, my point-of-view is once again we take are hard look at it's medical system... kinda scary when you think about Hillary Clinton running for Prez. -Edbrown05 03:28, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
There are a lot of factors that contribute to Canadians' longevity. I would submit that a lower percentage of obesity is perhaps as responsible for their extra few years as is their healthcare system. Anyways, the study's results are what they are, and I don't have any criticism of their methods. - McCart42 (talk) 15:01, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
In reponse to the statement that "our political elective system has become FIXED", I'd like to say that I think approval voting is a better system than plurality, and something we should look into if we want to have more choice in elections. It's not a cure-all but it could drastically improve the options available to us. - McCart42 (talk) 16:04, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

NPOV notice[edit]

This article does present some interesting facts, but it is written with such a strong point of view it is almost a turnoff. Please revise and remove the NPOV tag. Ajay 24.95.250.249 03:13, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I checked the reporting against the sources and found them accurate before publishing. Are the statistics in dispute? Maybe so. -Edbrown05 03:18, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Without commenting on the article content, I'll point out that (as the dispute tag itself notes), an NPOV objection has to be actionable, i.e. there have to be specific objections to the content. Otherwise the dispute tag can be removed. Saying "This article is POV" is not enough.--Eloquence 03:23, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
NPOV tag removed. Remember that the article is not about the US or Canadian health systems, it is about a study that was done on the US and Canadian health systems. If you think the study was flawed, quote someone who has criticised it. If you have a source that contradicts the study, quote it. If you think the article is POV, be specific about what needs to be changed to make it NPOV. - Borofkin 03:51, 14 July 2005 (UTC)