Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

How Many Canadians Come to USA for Healthcare

profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
yes, i know old debate is old; but the House GOP is trying to bump it back to life. To remove my liability from shit-storm let me say keep this to the particular topic at hand

How many Canadians use the US health care system?

Study from peer-reviewed journal Health Affairs on the topic: http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/21/3/19.full

Results:

1) First, they surveyed United States border facilities in Michigan, New York, and Washington. It makes sense that Canadians crossing the border for care would favor sites close by, right? It turns out that about 80% of such facilities saw fewer than one Canadian per month. About 40% saw none in the prior year. And when looking at the reasons for visits, more than 80% were emergencies or urgent visits (eg tourists who had to go to the ER). Only about 19% of those already few visits were for elective purposes.

2) Next, they surveyed “America’s Best Hospitals”, because if Canadians were going to travel for care, they would be more likely to go to the most well-known and highest quality facilities, right? Only one of the surveyed hospitals saw more than 60 Canadians in one year. And, again, that included both emergencies and elective care.

3) Finally, they examined data from the 18,000 Canadians who participated in the National Population Health Survey. In the previous year, only 90 of those 18,000 Canadians had received care in the United States; only 20 of them had done so electively.


Click for larger image

Conclusions:

  • some people with means might come to the United States for care; If I needed a heart/lung transplant, there’s no place I’d rather be.

  • But for the vast, vast majority of people, that’s not happening

  • You shouldn’t use the anecdote to describe things at a population level.


Jan 24 2011 6:33PM
0 0
profile picture
stefC
Posts: 458 - Karma: 846
Why would a Canadian travel to the states to pay for healthcare when they can get it for free in Canada? The only thing I could think of would be shorter waiting time for surgeries but other then that it does not make much sense to me.
Jan 24 2011 6:37PM
0 0
profile picture
SkiThe603
Posts: 5376 - Karma: 498

they do??

Jan 24 2011 6:38PM
0 0
profile picture
Gorilla.Steeze
Posts: 2215 - Karma: 43
Exactly. They already pay for it in taxes so it would be redundant to come to the United States to get surgery where they would be paying more money. I don't see how the OP's chart helps either position other than refuting an uninformed Republican position. I am just against the redistribution of wealth because it is inherently unethical to force someone to give money for another's cause, no matter what the reason.
Jan 24 2011 6:44PM
0 0
profile picture
shocker611
Posts: 2599 - Karma: 423
way better hospitals and surgeons?
Jan 24 2011 6:45PM
0 0
profile picture
TheWakes.
Posts: 685 - Karma: 235
canadians also pay $55 for a 30 bomb of keystone light. they have universal healthcare but everything is taxed to shit.
Jan 24 2011 6:47PM
0 0
profile picture
PJS.
Posts: 11943 - Karma: 895
prove to me this is true. right now. i have over 20 relatives in the medical profession and i can promise you that the care you get is on par with canada. the difference is that people are more inclined to innovate, because innovation makes money. downside of this however, is that lots of money is funneled into new treatments that treat conditions and diseases given lots of spotlight and attention, such as breast cancer, whilst some diseases receive piss poor funding because they aren't as, in the literal sense of the word, popular. its really sad to see, but unfortunately thats the way it is, and the free market system of health care is so ingrained in america it would be a virtually politically suicidal move for a leader, be it the president, a leader of congress or the surgeon general, to suggest universal health care as an option.
Jan 24 2011 6:53PM
0 0
profile picture
shocker611
Posts: 2599 - Karma: 423
http://hospitals.webometrics.info/top100_continent.asp?cont=usa_canada will that work for proof?!
Jan 24 2011 7:06PM
0 0
profile picture
PJS.
Posts: 11943 - Karma: 895
like i said, INNOVATION is the separating factor. also some of the judging points on rankings like this involve how nice the facilities are and the approach the doctors generally take


oh shit im getting sucked into an internet argument

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Jan 24 2011 7:09PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
if you've got the $$$ you can get good care, but that's not the case for the majority of people which is pretty much the point.

can you find information about the comparison of quality of care to $ spent to put this list into perspective?
Jan 24 2011 7:28PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
that's how it helps.
Jan 24 2011 7:29PM
0 0
profile picture
vailsux.com
Posts: 1769 - Karma: 440
So how many Americans go to Canada for healthcare?
Jan 24 2011 7:34PM
0 0
profile picture
Dosh
Posts: 1818 - Karma: 14
the Canadians seem restless lately. what's goin on guys?
Jan 24 2011 7:36PM
0 0
profile picture
bakedpow
Posts: 8770 - Karma: 10,467
I wish i still lived in BC. I miss that place, but i don't think there is really any point for Canadians to come across unless they are in DIRE need of some transfusion, and in that case I am pretty sure the Canadian system would bump them up to the front.
Jan 24 2011 7:39PM
0 0
profile picture
Daydreaming
Posts: 1686 - Karma: 48
[IMG]corbisimages.com/images/572/907CB38C-4FC9-4449-B34A-F1255922967D/42-17005315.jpg[/IMG]

Oh don't mind me.
Jan 24 2011 7:40PM
0 0
profile picture
Daydreaming
Posts: 1686 - Karma: 48
Click for larger image
Jan 24 2011 7:42PM
0 0
profile picture
Dustin.
Posts: 13839 - Karma: 7,704
What? Is that a serious argument for debate? Good lord...
Jan 24 2011 7:53PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
i'll stop you there; it's not.
Jan 24 2011 8:03PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
if it were clear, you'd be right about this. But, you're not so let me make it clear:

point is just to clarify the myth that a lot of canadians come to the USA for health care, they don't.

you suck if you use anecdotal evidence in place of empirical study to make a point about populational need, regardless of your affiliated party.
Jan 24 2011 8:08PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
How about a cross-national comparison of satisfaction with care?

Can any one access full text on JAMA?

http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/266/16/2268.abstract

Ten Western industrialized nations were compared on the basis of three characteristics: the extent of their primary health service, their levels of 12 health indicators (eg, infant mortality, life expectancy, and age-adjusted death rates), and the satisfaction of their populations in relation to overall costs of the systems.

There was general concordance for primary care, the health indicators, and the satisfaction-expense ratio in nine of the 10 countries.

Ratings for the United States were low on all three measures.

West Germany also had low ratings.

In contrast, Canada, Sweden, and the Netherlands had generally high ratings for all three measures.

The lack of concordance in the ratings in the United Kingdom may be a result of relatively low expenditures for other social services and public education in that country.
Jan 24 2011 8:19PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
the House GOP and because they have brought the health care debate back to life.
Jan 24 2011 8:20PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
it wasn't the premise of the thread, but you brought up an argument and i didn't skirt the issue. why are you complaining?

&

Idk, if you're in Uni you've got access to JAMA, let me know. I can only go by the abstract.
Jan 24 2011 8:32PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
This thread is because I heard about Dr.Carrol's chart and the study that disproved the myth about Canadian's usage of US health care.

a segment on Bill Maher's Real Time with a WSJ guy and Rachel Maddow (who said Canadians come to the US for health care) prompted the radio host to mention the chart.

Still, it's a direct response to the belief in the myth. You don't need to couple that with any other agenda. As long as you don't make the argument that Canadians come flocking over the border for health care, that's all I'm after with this thread.

If you're going to try and change the subject, sure I'll respond to your new claims, but that's not my original intent.

So even though you bring up a valid point; it's not sufficient to conclude that because there isn't a lot of canadians that use the US health care system there's is necessarily better than ours.

I wasn't saying that.

Jan 24 2011 8:44PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
My original intent and my overall positions do not have to be mutually exclusive!

I can point out a flawed position held by the opposition without making any claims beyond that.

Jan 24 2011 8:50PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
I asked if it was a sufficient metric to your question, and if anyone had access to JAMA... yes, i need someone else to look at the study and tell us what it says.

I didn't say you were wrong, but provided the conclusions of the study that do seem to contradict your positions.

At least I cited something.
Jan 24 2011 8:55PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
Why are you sitting around in the ER watching Most Americans and judging how sick they are.

can you provide a rough estimate of your sample size?
Jan 24 2011 8:58PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
looks pretty straight forward to me... if you make the argument that canadians are using us health care system en masse you are wrong.

Jan 24 2011 9:02PM
0 0
profile picture
vailsux.com
Posts: 1769 - Karma: 440
A classic P-face vs. woozy shootout.
Jan 24 2011 9:23PM
0 0
profile picture
PJS.
Posts: 11943 - Karma: 895
money on ns...to lose, that is, in this shootout
Jan 24 2011 9:27PM
0 0
profile picture
skiblandford
Posts: 1503 - Karma: 2
also Canda's population is much smaller, which allows for a universal government run health care to be much easier and prevent people from abusing the system and fraud
Jan 24 2011 9:32PM
0 0
profile picture
bryansbryan
Posts: 645 - Karma: 7
so all this has proven is that canadians are smart enough to get healthcare where they've already paid for it? this is retarded.
Jan 24 2011 9:45PM
0 0
profile picture
Campeador
Posts: 7516 - Karma: -1,227
How could they afford to? The ones coming to the US are the ones who need it and also have the resources, which are a relatively small amount of persons.

Where would you rather be if you had cancer, at a US or a Canadian hospital? I'm sure almost every Canadian would choose the former if it were a viable option, seeing as how cancer mortality is lower in every category in the US.

Since you posted an abstract, here's another one
Jan 24 2011 10:04PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
except mine was a medical issue from a medical journal cited by 199 other sources

yours was a medical issue from an economic journal cited by 8 others.'


but you're spot on about the point that health care is good in the US if you have the $$

still, just logically consider for a moment what is the purpose of insurance...

if it's to spread the risk across the largest population, why wouldn't a national insurance program be best?





btw, if I had access to journals I'd cite full text; if you have access to full text...
Jan 24 2011 11:02PM
0 0
profile picture
Gorilla.Steeze
Posts: 2215 - Karma: 43
^

P-Face, you have already posted in this thread 14 times. Please stop.
Jan 25 2011 12:16AM
0 0
profile picture
skiminnesota
Posts: 9093 - Karma: 429
insurance in this instance needs defining. IMO

part of the problem is that America has a skewed view of what "insurance" is. the insurance people often refer to isnt insurance to provide for a catastrophic medical emergency (cancer etc) they see it has a pre-paid medical account.

what about a more market based alternative where i paid a market determined rate for my basic medical procedures. (a physical, going for a strep test, stuff like that) while having insurance as my safety net should i get cancer, or mangled in a car accident.

think about changing our current view of health insurance (which everyone things is pre paid medical) to a system that resembles what home owners insurance or auto insurance looks like.


/ slight tangent :)

but i think Woozy already opened pandora's box so i dont feel to bad. haha
Jan 25 2011 12:16AM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
i'm open to ideas if they fulfill certain criteria; one such criteria is that we need to encourage the use of preventative care. With the ultimate goal being the prevention of chronic conditions(e.g. diabetes, heart disease).

How would this take on insurance promote individuals to use preventative health care?

Also, do you think that there is an easily defined line between basic medical procedures and when you fall into the "safety net?"
Jan 25 2011 7:37AM
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
GOP = Grand Old Party.

Huh, I never knew that. I assumed it was a similar acronym like GDP but related to your senate.
Jan 25 2011 7:52AM
0 0
profile picture
SaucerSlider
Posts: 59 - Karma: 10
.
Jan 25 2011 8:34AM
0 0
profile picture
dbstar
Posts: 2038 - Karma: 20
This is incorrect because it assumes that people are aware of what actually is best for them. With so few Canadians leaving Canada to receive medicare, and the somewhat significantly higher level of health in Canada, it makes no sense for Canadians to think they should have to travel anywhere. For instance, here in Montreal they are building what will be a world class, multi billion dollar hospital.

And just to point out, yes Canadians pay for healthcare via taxes, however our government doesn't actually tax us much more, with the overall tax rates being adjusted to something like 30% vs. 38%, keeping in mind that Canada taxes higher income people more than the US, leaving the bottom 50% of Canada to pay roughly the same as their American counterparts. Annd, we also post a budget surplus every year, while you guys, well, ya know.
Jan 25 2011 9:17AM
0 0
profile picture
Gorilla.Steeze
Posts: 2215 - Karma: 43
1) Yes, most people ARE aware of whats best for them. Whose more knowledgeable about their own well being than the individual, the government? Certainly not. Any business venture that the government undertakes usually fails miserably because they have no profit motive. Instead of using profits from their "businesses" (postal service, public transportation etc.) their income comes in the form of taxes. These taxes remain steady and consistent which is why the government could care less how much money they are losing.

2) Canadians cannot receive medicare in other countries because they are not citizens in other countries.

3) It makes sense for them not to travel to other countries to receive medical care because they already paid for it in Canada. It's a sunk cost.

4) As you said, the bottom 50% of people in both the US and Canada pay about the same in taxes, WHICH IS CLOSE TO NOTHING. What incentives do people in the bottom 50% have to make more money when they know that the higher the tax bracket, the more money they have to give to the government. How about the richest people in the country? If they are taxed to death, what incentives do they have to invest in capital when they are seeing 50%+ of their income going to the government where the bottom 50% of their fellow citizens don't pay a dime in taxes? This is the classic cases of stealing from those who have earned their money to those who have not which is inherently immoral. In conclusion, socialized medicine is nothing more than a statist, authoritarian scheme that punishes the productive and rewards the unproductive.
Jan 25 2011 1:26PM
0 0
profile picture
Bar_Down
Posts: 5896 - Karma: 395
i dont even go to canadian hospitals
Jan 25 2011 1:34PM
0 0
profile picture
dbstar
Posts: 2038 - Karma: 20
1) Actually people are often blind to whats in front of them, and are unaware of what in practical and realistic terms is best for them. This is pretty basic and obvious in modern society, and is seen in a vast number of examples. This kind of thing is basically at the root of bad decisions. Example: Many Americans believe that public health care will lead to them dying and becoming a communist country, in reality, as virtually every other developed first world country knows, this is not the case.
Or, perhaps take a situation for example of domestic abuse where a women is systematically being subject to violence, both physical and verbal, but for whatever complicated reason feels it is in her best interest to remain in that relationship, As an outsider you can see that she is actually unaware of what is best for her.

2) Canadians can receive health care in the United States. Have you even read this thread or what I was responding to?

3) Ya... I know.

4) I am having a hard time understanding why you posted this part. I was demonstrating that we pay fairly close amounts of taxes here in Canada, depending on which province you live in (Quebec has quite high tax rates), and still receive health care.

Also, to say that socialized medicine is an "authoritarian" scheme that "punishes" the productive is a misinformed opinion at BEST. If anything, a private health care system is one that rewards the privileged while punishing the disenfranchised. For public health care to be some sort of authoritarian scheme it would have to actually render the enacting government with some kind of profit, which of course it does not. Its clear that this a regurgitated opinion you have, but if you were to comparatively look at the health care systems present in developed first world countries you would see how stupid of a comment that was and that in fact it is the private health care system that deprives and "punishes" and "rewards" not the other way around.
Jan 25 2011 6:33PM
0 0
profile picture
XtRemE11
Posts: 5680 - Karma: 246
while you have some somewhat valid points, im gonna have to disagree. nobody has a better understanding of what is good for them and what they need but themselves, unless they are 10 years old or retarded. the government is very far from knowing what is best for one individual.
it shouldnt matter anyway, people need to be able to make their own decisions, do whats best for them and be responsible for themselves. the more you run peoples lives for them the more useless they get at running it themselves. the government isnt there to wipe your ass and spoon feed you.
Jan 25 2011 7:02PM
0 0
profile picture
neutralzombie
Posts: 8629 - Karma: 606
the pie doesn't lie.
Jan 25 2011 7:18PM
0 0
profile picture
Bar_Down
Posts: 5896 - Karma: 395
implying pies have mouths
Jan 25 2011 7:19PM
0 0
profile picture
neutralzombie
Posts: 8629 - Karma: 606
implying the pie chart is a factual chart ...and that pies have mouths.
Jan 25 2011 7:20PM
0 0
profile picture
Trollolo
Posts: 793 - Karma: 16
yup
Jan 25 2011 7:21PM
0 0
profile picture
Bar_Down
Posts: 5896 - Karma: 395
wat
Jan 25 2011 7:21PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
which would do a terrible job explaining why so many people continue to eat McDonnald's, smoke cigarettes, and avoid exercise.
Jan 25 2011 7:21PM
0 0
profile picture
deleted5
Posts: 14507 - Karma: 13,507
i could be wrong but dont Canadians have to wait mad long for mri's and things like that where in America you can get them that day.
Jan 25 2011 7:28PM
0 0
profile picture
XtRemE11
Posts: 5680 - Karma: 246
you think they do these things thinking its good for them? its not like they are smoking a pack a day thinking its going to be good for their health. but its 100% their choice and responsibility, if they want to degrade their health by eating shitty or smoking thats fine, who's to say thats wrong? i eat lots of candy, i know its not good for me, but i dont give a shit because im happier eating candy all the time than being slightly healthier but without it.
people make sacrifices to get what they want out of life and/or do what they want with their lives. i dont need the government telling me how much candy i can consume in a week.

This is also why i dont feel like i should have to pay for someone completely unrelated to me's health problems because of their poor decisions. i want to make my own decisions and and im prepared to pay for whatever negative outcomes those decisions may have. i have absolutely no desire to put that responsibility on someone else. in fact the idea of someone else paying for my own mistakes makes me feel shitty, it would give me a very bad feeling to walk into a hospital to get medical care for my unhealthy lifestyle i decided to live, and have it payed for by people who had absolutely nothing to do with my poor decisions.
Jan 25 2011 7:36PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)