Canadian Health Care

Thanks mke. Someone on the other site explained it there too.  As I said there, I knew there were three parts  to the legislature there, the third being the President, but somehow  I have lost some details from that US government course that I took in Grade 7 or 8 when we lived in Virginia. The part I forgot is that Congress is not the House where the Congressmen and Congresswomen work - Congress is the sum of the two parts. Who knew that BC would lead to learning more US civics?!

Well strictly speaking the president is not part of the legislature.  The House and Senate are the legislative branch, the Supreme court is the judicial and the president, vice pres, etc are the executive.  Congress can override the president, but the president can't override Congress.

Being an American I did a lot more than grade 7 social studies and I have forgotten almost all of it.  However it was never my best subject, probably goofing off was where I shone.

My we are having civics lessons!!  The Queen is still the Queen of Canada and the head of state, but she appoints a Governor General who acts on her behalf.  It is mostly ceremonial, but not entirely.

Lassie, there's an interesting and informative article written by Matthew Yglesias at www.thedailybeast.com which may help to explain some of the problems Congress will have coming up with an actual reform bill.  Cumbersome indeed!  Not quite like our 1st, 2nd and 3rd readings at all.

Interesting comments which follow it, as well...

In my most humble opinion , a major, major problem is that campaign election reform is badly needed.  Too many Sens and Reps are beholden to corporate interests, not to mention the legalized bribery that is called lobbying.  It seems that all I read about is congressmen/women worrying about how they're going to be re-elected if they vote one way or another.

Linda, who is grateful for our constitutional monarchy (even with all its attendant problems!)

Elizabeth -- what great news!!!  So glad you found an apt (won't have to move in with Mom after all!) and that your family doc is ready to take care of all your health needs.  Hey, just think -- no more co-pays!!!

I'm looking forward to meeting you too -- as well as Pip, lassie, Helen, Barbe, Kerrymac, mke and and all the rest.  Next year in Toronto!

Hugs, Linda

Yay for Elizabeth coming home to Ottawa. Quick, make sure you have a warm winter coat! I'm looking forward to our next gathering.

Linda - thanks for pointing out that article. What a system! I guess that party loyalty is not an expectation there or there wouldn't have been the nonsense about wording on abortion to get the bill through. Our parliamentary system certainly is imperfect - but I'll take it over the US system any day. There is no reason the US couldn't pass some legislation on campaign financing and lobbying - except the lobbyists would announce the sky is falling, democracy is in danger, socialism is coming and all those other threats they are making about health care reform.

Thanks Lassie!  I still have the winter coat I bought in Montreal years ago -- I'm prepared!!!  Wow, coming home is so much fun.  I've really needed this cheering up.  Thanks ladies!

Elizabeth, welcome back home

barbe, hope you are doing well

I went to a workshop at Women's College today - all about recon. OHIP covers everything except - get this ... the final step ... the tatooing....they delisted the tatoo that makes the nipple look real.....that is so demeaning!!!!

hi there, just checking out this thread.

Michele

Anyone else conflicted about the many new threads relating to the recommendations re mammograms from whatever advisory board in the US?

I read the actual recommendations. It doesn't say "never" for women under 50 - just not routine. That is the same as the policy here in Ontario. My inderstanding is that here, anyone who says they would like a mammogram could get one - the only difference being they would have to go through a doctor instead of directly to the Breast Screening Clinic. That certainly does not seem like a ban to me.

The thing on Breast Self Exams says they recommend against teaching it - not doing it. How often do you suppose people found their own lumps, not through a formal BSE but by serendipity? And who would no longer teach BSEs? Who would continue regardless of that advisory board's recommendations?

I'm not clear how the recommendations in the US translate into action - or are they just that, recommendations? I do see that this body has been in existence for decades and routinely makes recommendations on all sorts of health conditions in a medically conservative manner.

What concerns me is that this is being used to argue against a public option or single payer option in their health care reform. "I told you so" was actually posted on one of the threads. What I see is a moral panic even by the moderators of this site who have posted "Lives will be lost . . . " 
Am I alone in my skepticism?

Linda, I agree. I was just reading the thread re: the new guidelines, and it has turned into a political debate. Some feel quite strongly that this is the beginning of gov't run healthcare. I really had to stop myself from jumping in. I, for one, found my cancer at age 40 through BSE, having never had a mamo. However, I wish I had been more informed before if found that lump. My mom died of ovarian cancer, and my gp never told me that that put me at a higher risk for BC. In fact, when I found the lump and went to see him, he told me it wasn't BC, and when I then told him I was worried because of my mom, he told me they were not related. UGH. I try not to think about how much sooner I would have found the cancer if I would have started having mamos at 30, which I now know is recommended when you have a family history.

It just doesn't make sense to me that they say not to teach the BSE -- so many have found lumps that way (i.e., me) and prompted me to get a mammo.  If they're not going to have routine mammos at 40-50 it seems more critical now than ever to teach it!!!  Must be the bottom of the class that came up with that recommendation!!

Kathleen Sibelius made a public statement denouncing the recommended guidelines and it's been posted, but I guess not too many here are paying any attention to it.  She's the Health and Human Services Secretary, for goodness' sake!

The guidelines will never be implemented, IMO, but it's great that this website is such a strong voice for advocacy.

I think the primary docs will request the mammos, somehow work the system, for those who want them and get insurance to pay for them.  It's so strange how apparent experts have different opinions.  A top radiologist and mammo expert from Harvard Med School pointed out on CNN that the age group 40-50 benefits greatly from mammos and it is even stated in the recommendations.  Then you get this Dr Love, a breast expert, who is supporting the recommendations.  Who knows... 

I agree PIP -- a "nice" way to fear-monger...  The timing is just a little to coincidental to sit well with me.  I don't know what to think -- I believe the US is the only country that screens starting at 40.  Is the rest of the world wrong not to screen at 40?  Is it OK and based on scientific evidence?  I just don't know what to believe...

linda, I so agree about the news networks. When watch the US ones, it's hard to believe anything they say, particularly Fox because they are working so clearly with an agenda. On the other hand, it is sometimes intriguing to flip channels and see how the same story gets a completely different spin from Fox to MSNBC to CNN. You never get that much difference between CBC and CTV - and far less yelling on our news channels. I can see how someone who watches Fox all day might get anxious just from hearing the tone of voice of the announcers.