A True Tale of Canadian Health Care: Why some patients need to go to the U.S. for surgery

Many advocates of health-care reform are admirers of Canada's state-run, no-opt-out, single-payer system. Indeed, in 2003, President Barack Obama voiced enthusiasm for such a health-care program.

Proponents of Canadian-style health care should meet Cheryl Baxter, a Canadian citizen who waited years for hip-replacement surgery, only to be told that her operation would not happen any time soon. Instead of waiting, Baxter did what an increasing number of Canadians are doing: She flew to a clinic in the United States, paid out of pocket, and had a life-altering surgery in a matter of weeks rather than years.

Baxter's experience doesn't just throw damning light on Canadian health care. The sort of clinic she went to in Oklahoma suggests a different way of delivering health care in the United States, too: A simple fee-for-service model in which providers openly advertise their prices, service, and reputation. Rather than a frustrating, complicated mess of intermediaries such as employers and insurance companies, U.S. health-care reformers should think about bringing medicine into line with the same dynamics that help deliver great service at great prices throughout most other parts of the economy.

While Canadian health care is certainly cheaper than its U.S. counterpart (health care spending in Canada is about 10 percent of GDP versus 16 percent in the United States), it is not necessarily better or more equitable. As a recent National Bureau of Economic Research comparison concluded, "Americans are more likely to report that they are fully satisfied with the health services they have received and to rank the quality of care as excellent." Not only do Americans have far greater access to basic diagnostic tools ranging from mammograms to CT scans, the researchers found "the health-income gradient is actually more prominent in Canada than in the U.S." That is, wealthy Canadians receive far better care compared to low-income Canadians than rich Americans versus poor Americans.

"A True Tale of Canadian Health Care" was produced by Dan Hayes and Peter Suderman. Interviews were filmed by Alex Manning and the segment is hosted and scripted by Nick Gillespie. Approximately 5.11 minutes.

Reason.tv would like to thank the Independence Institute for arranging and underwriting travel to Canada for Suderman and Manning.

For downloadable versions of this video, go to http://reason.tv/video/show/a-true-tale-of-canadian-health.

For other Reason.tv videos on health care, go to http://reason.tv

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• health care
• health care reform
• medicine
• canada
• canadian health care
• sicko
• single-payer system
• reason
• reason magazine
• reason foundation
• reason.tv
• dan hayes
• peter suderman
• alex manning
• nick gillespie
• fraser institute
• independence institute

[bmw803]

@LibertyDownUnder That's what Peter Schiff keeps repeating. Anything government touches and gets its nose in, the more messed up it becomes. People think that keeping the status quo a miracle will come and fix it. Oh Yeah!!!! It's the same story that Jesus will return. BUNCH OF SHEEPLE.

[LibertyDownUnder]

@MadHabber93, he doesn't advocate 'no insurance', he want's high deductible insurance only.

If insurance in the US covered extreme cases only, like cancer, chronic illness etc, it would cost a fraction of the current charges. Probably $200-300 / month.

People would pay cash for most procedures, and only use insurance for bills over (say) $5,000.

Those below a certain income would then easily be covered by Medicaid.

[MadHabber93]

@LibertyDownUnder Do you have any clue how much long term, chronic disease cost to treat? So if you get one of them, too bad for you. You can't pay, even in this supposed cheap free market healthcare, too bad??

Stossel advocates no insurance, so its every man for himself. The system in the U.S. is already TOO much like that, and look what its getting. Hundreds of thousands bankrupt every year, Millions forgoing needed treatment due to cost, and how many dying because of it?

[MadHabber93]

@LibertyDownUnder I find it funny that you say we are 'dependant' on healthcare like its a bad thing. Well of course we are...we want good timely access to quality healthcare without the burden of cost... ANY cost getting in the way. Yes, we encourage people to catch disease early, as it costs less. That's what will bring healthcare costs down, not a free market.

So tell me, what mandates are in place that burdens any hospital and doctor to charge $20 grand for giving birth?

[LibertyDownUnder]

@MadHabber93, the point was about bringing down costs.

Giving birth in the US costs about $20,000 if you pay out of pocket.

Do you not think that if private hospitals were freed up from all the regulations mandates, they would be able to bring down that cost?

The US & Canada (and the rest of the world) could easily take care of the needy among them if they stopped encouraging EVERYONE to depend on these centralised systems, and just gave poor people a hand UP when needed.

[MadHabber93]

@LibertyDownUnder That's true. But it still costs as low as a grand for a 30 second procedure (lasik, had it done). But again, Millions can't afford that luxury procedure that has no bearing on one's longetivity. Plastic surgery still costs thousands upon thousands of dollars. You can tell who all the regular, average people are. They are all ugly because they can't afford it. Do you really want a system where only the above average income earners can afford life saving or altering surgery?

[LibertyDownUnder]

@MadHabber93, Lasik & plastic surgery costs have been dropping for years. Without any regulation or subsidies.

How do you explain that?

[MadHabber93]

@LibertyDownUnder I never said it was a total free market. But its still the most free on the planet. What Stossel fails to address that its a theory that prices would drop, which they wouldn't, as U.S. docs already complain about what Medicare pays and that's already less than the private market. And you and Stossel think this free market utopia will drop prices?? Again, even if it did, half or more than half of unaffordable for millions is STILL unaffordable.

[LibertyDownUnder]

@MadHabber93, half of US healthcare spending is by the Government, and almost 100% of spending is regulated by the Government. This doesn't exactly qualify as a free market. That's the whole point of the Stossel video.

The US had an abundence of health services and they were very cheap before all these Government agencies were set up.

Both systems have some serious problems, and both could do with LESS central control to fix them.

[MadHabber93]

@LibertyDownUnder To say they would have a lot less problems just doesn't hold true to real world experience. The U.S. has the most privitisation on the planet, yet have many, many problems.