Monday, August 10, 2009

The Canadian Health Care System...Myth vs. Fact

During this current debate on health care reform, there are tons of aspersions, tidbits misinformation, and now television ads, both pro and con, being hurled to and fro in the politically-charged atmosphere. Probably the most commonly used comparison with regards to the health care debate is that of the current system in America to that of the Canadian health care system.
Well, finally one of the country’s news outlets—National Public Radio—decided to bypass the sound bites, rhetoric, industry spin, and political dogma to actually travel to Canada to look into the truth surrounding our northern neighbor’s health care system and how it’s administered.
In the search for clarification of how the Canadian system deals with the problems associated with providing health care for all if it’s citizens, NPR interviewed those who would know best…namely Canadian citizens, doctors, and political officials.
Click on the link to listen to the full report (aired: August 10, 2009)

Addendum (08/19/09):
National Public Radio looked into the British Health Care System--often cited as a reason by opponents of health reform in America not to fine-tune it's failing system of covering all its citizens--to explore its pros and cons. In addition, this piece also served to debuk the half-truths and myths put forward by this country's opponents of health care reform:


  1. Sounds like liberal drivel!!

    --Blk Conservative

  2. No, what it sounds like is that someone has presented a series of facts which have upset your ideological apple cart so to speak. But your reaction is typical for someone so aligned with their dogmatic beliefs than to can't defeat the facts, challenge the source. You can't challenge the source, challenge charachter.

  3. Beyond:

    Great article, man I am so tired of thsi debate being done by sound bite and by disinformation.

  4. You know, I always wondered if that Canadian woman in the commercial talking about "I had to wait a long time for life-saving" treatment was telling the truth! From that podcast, it seems her experience was more the exception, not the rule. But even if people were required to go before "death panels" (as Sarah Palin calls them), is it any different than letting insurance companies tell dying people that they cant have some treatment to potentially save their live because it's "experimental," which is what we have now? I think thr problem is that we say what we believe, not think about what we believe.