Monday, May 10, 2004
New Fraser Institute study reveals true state of Canadian healthcare
[Joseph Brean, "'Mediocre' care at high price," The National Post, 7 May 2004.]
With Americans lining up to import Canada's socialized drug prices, it is worth noting that the nation does not even stack up well against other welfare state countries. Is this truly the direction we want to head to solve the health care difficulties here in the U.S.?
Canada's universal medicare system achieves only middling success compared to other industrialized nations, despite being tied with Iceland's as the most expensive to run, a new analysis shows.
Sweden, Japan, Australia and France all permit some private involvement in their public health care systems, and all achieve lower mortality rates on a number of separate indicators, according to the report released yesterday by the Fraser Institute.
"For [Canada's] high level of spending, we get mediocre health outcomes, some of the longest waiting times in the world, and terrible access to doctors and technology.... Our performance is just not commensurate with our level of spending. We're not getting the value for money," said Nadeem Esmail, a senior health policy analyst at the conservative think-tank, which sponsored the study. His co-authors were Michael Walker, the institute's executive director, and Sabrina Yeudall, a researcher.
Their study compared public health care systems in 28 nations of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, all of which guarantee universal care, and most of which force patients to share in the costs. It ignored the U.S. and Mexico, which do not guarantee universal care.
"Shackling patients to a government monopoly with no alternative choices results in a more expensive and lower standard of care than would be available otherwise," Mr. Esmail said.
He said his results demonstrate the value of a competitive market environment for hospitals and the need for user fees on public health services.
"Patients are far more responsible with their own money than they are with anyone else's," Mr. Esmail said.
[Joseph Brean, "'Mediocre' care at high price," The National Post, 7 May 2004.]
With Americans lining up to import Canada's socialized drug prices, it is worth noting that the nation does not even stack up well against other welfare state countries. Is this truly the direction we want to head to solve the health care difficulties here in the U.S.?
Canada's universal medicare system achieves only middling success compared to other industrialized nations, despite being tied with Iceland's as the most expensive to run, a new analysis shows.
Sweden, Japan, Australia and France all permit some private involvement in their public health care systems, and all achieve lower mortality rates on a number of separate indicators, according to the report released yesterday by the Fraser Institute.
"For [Canada's] high level of spending, we get mediocre health outcomes, some of the longest waiting times in the world, and terrible access to doctors and technology.... Our performance is just not commensurate with our level of spending. We're not getting the value for money," said Nadeem Esmail, a senior health policy analyst at the conservative think-tank, which sponsored the study. His co-authors were Michael Walker, the institute's executive director, and Sabrina Yeudall, a researcher.
Their study compared public health care systems in 28 nations of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, all of which guarantee universal care, and most of which force patients to share in the costs. It ignored the U.S. and Mexico, which do not guarantee universal care.
"Shackling patients to a government monopoly with no alternative choices results in a more expensive and lower standard of care than would be available otherwise," Mr. Esmail said.
He said his results demonstrate the value of a competitive market environment for hospitals and the need for user fees on public health services.
"Patients are far more responsible with their own money than they are with anyone else's," Mr. Esmail said.
Comments:
Post a Comment
