News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.9K     0 

My mother had this operation done, in/about 2016.

A joint practice of 5 or more ophthalmologists would allow far more billing for the same rent and equipment cost.
Yes, that's why places like the Kensington Eye Institute on College St exist. I had my cataracts 'done' there 2 years ago and each took about 20 minutes - a very efficient process rather like an assembly line where one is wheeled in your chair from station to station. (pre-op, op and post-op).
 
Yes, that's why places like the Kensington Eye Institute on College St exist. I had my cataracts 'done' there 2 years ago and each took about 20 minutes - a very efficient process rather like an assembly line where one is wheeled in your chair from station to station. (pre-op, op and post-op).

They make some serious $$ there too!

Which is fair to a point..........but they are out pacing the earnings of many surgeons in more challenging disciplines, from what I can recall...........so I can't say it would be wrong to dial back the fees some.
 
They make some serious $$ there too!

Which is fair to a point..........but they are out pacing the earnings of many surgeons in more challenging disciplines, from what I can recall...........so I can't say it would be wrong to dial back the fees some.
I had my cataracts done when I was in my 40's. Lenses were still covered by OHIP. I was at my yearly opthamologist check up and overheard they now charge patients for their implants. Not sure what model he needed but they were around 800 dollars of that was for a "pair or single". They now have bifocal implants. Difference a few decades made.
 
I had my cataracts done when I was in my 40's. Lenses were still covered by OHIP. I was at my yearly opthamologist check up and overheard they now charge patients for their implants. Not sure what model he needed but they were around 800 dollars of that was for a "pair or single". They now have bifocal implants. Difference a few decades made.

Last I heard, certainly when my mother had hers done..........OHIP did cover implants; but not all implants........and the ophthalmologists were in the business of pushing the one's you had to pay for...

****

Confirmed - from EPSO - Eye Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario:

1632076132476.png

1632076158344.png
 
Last I heard, certainly when my mother had hers done..........OHIP did cover implants; but not all implants........and the ophthalmologists were in the business of pushing the one's you had to pay for...

****

Confirmed - from EPSO - Eye Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario:

View attachment 350118
View attachment 350119
Any chance they have an answer to the rip-off ads of yesterday?

18ddca03f7d913cd2f24bce6568cd0ae.jpg
From link.
 
They make some serious $$ there too!

Which is fair to a point..........but they are out pacing the earnings of many surgeons in more challenging disciplines, from what I can recall...........so I can't say it would be wrong to dial back the fees some.
Yes, the fees for some procedures are now out of line with the time/expertise needed to do them. Many ophthalmological procedures (in particular) are now able to be done MUCH faster but the fee schedules have not followed. Obviously, ophthalmologists are not complaining - though many other docs do!!
 
It's been about a month since the invoices scandal broke and then sunk, seemingly without a ripple, after a couple of days' worth of blathering in the regular news cycle. Looking back, I have to say this surprised me; I honestly thought that episode had the potential to be hugely damaging to the Ontario Cons in general, and (possibly) to a certain fatass in particular. And right before a federal election, no less. Maybe that explains why it quietly went away, and so quickly. And maybe it was wishful thinking on my part to assume it would be a much bigger deal than it apparently turned out to be...but I dunno.

A major political party using and abusing its own voting base is hardly a new or unusual concept...but I've never heard of one trying to rip off its own supporters in such a blatant, brazen, open fashion before. This may well be a first in modern world history. And the amounts of money the Cons were allegedly trying to extort from their own people weren't exactly peanuts. It would have been bad enough if they'd been trying to snatch comparatively modest sums like, say, 50 bucks per person, but when you get into the $300 and up range? These are some extremely tough times we're living through, and that kind of cash can make all the difference for households that aren't doing that well. Add in the whole "preying-on-the-elderly" angle that comes into play here with the Cons' base, and you have an extra layer of sleaze on top of a grift that was ugly enough to begin with.

And who, ultimately, is to blame? Someone in Ford's office had to give the go-ahead for this nasty little scheme to be set into motion, and it positively reeks of the small-time criminality that's clung to Ford ever since his days as a drug dealer. Ah, well. Maybe there'll be further developments after the election. if the authorities investigating it treat it seriously. And if the Liberals/NDP decide to pursue it...as they certainly should.
 

From Star: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...nst-jeffrey-northrup-is-released-on-bail.html

Man accused of killing Toronto police Const. Jeffrey Northrup is released on bail​


Naturally Doug thought he knew more that the Judge in the case so without any real information and background he tweeted and deleted) -

From CBC News: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/northrup-police-toronto-bail-1.6185473

Premier's tweet deleted and reposted with altered wording
Shortly after the news of Zameer's bail was made public, Ontario Premier Doug Ford tweeted his shock at the accused's release, saying "this is beyond comprehension."

"It's completely unacceptable that the person responsible for this heinous crime is now out on bail. Our justice system needs to get its act together and start putting victims and their families ahead of criminals," the tweet said.


doug-ford-tweet-on-zameer.jpg

Ford's original tweet indicated Zameer was 'responsible for' Northrup's death. (Twitter)

Minutes later, Ford's tweet had been deleted and reposted with slightly different wording. The phrase "the person responsible for this heinous crime" was swapped for "the person charged for this heinous crime."

Even this, though certainly less sure of himself is really unnecessary! Nothing wrong with saying "I will be interested in knowing why the person accused has been released on bail" but that's too nuanced for Mr Ford.
 

Back
Top