[kettal]

I forgot to ask you, couldn't you have gotten a second opinion on the MRI from another doctor in Canada instead of coming to Buffalo? This is something that baffles me about the different health experiences I've heard, you hear one person say they got second opinions and/or complained about the pain and got the MRI done right away within weeks because their doctor made a decision to bump it up, then you have other stories where you were asked to wait 8 months... Like your experience. The Canadian health experience is strongly linked to the fact if you've found a good primary care physician, as they can order things much more quickly if you press them and let them know you are in pain. This is part of why having a primary care physician in Canada is so necessary, and why people expect one.

South of the border you can technically get an MRI if you want to pay for it within a short period of time, but if you don't have health insurance or good health insurance and can't pay for a doctor to review your case then you can't do anything with the MRI you purchase. Or you can't get proper treatment or surgery even if you can afford a basic doctor visit and MRI. Its a bizarre situation, knowing you have torn cartilage (or whatever ailment it may be) and not being able to have a surgery to fix it unless you have enough out of pocket money (few do) or have insurance willing to pay. Not all insurance is willing to pay, especially for small business and individual policies. How ironic...

I think the point is, if you get everybody who is willing to pay $400 to go to a private MRI clinic, that frees up the public MRI machines for everybody who needs them. Everybody wins.

 

[Brandon716]

Plenty of people here in the US that go without an MRI for various reasons, so opening up private clinics does not automatically make a win-win situation. Afterall, if you get the right doctor and express how much pain you're in you won't be waiting 8 months according to other Canadians I've known to get MRI's.

 

[Brandon716]

BTW, I'm not 100% opposed to opening up 3rd party products like imaging techniques (MRI's, CT Scans, etc) to private buyers. Its actually not an essential medical service in many respects, and those who can afford it would buy it while those that can use the public system can actually end up with shorter waits for elective care. But at the same time, don't pretend its the answer to all ills. Its likely that it wouldn't reduce wait times, and its likely it'd just create a worse situation.

BTW, I think $400 is a low estimate. Most Buffalo area MRI clinics have about $600 US prices for basic MRI scans. More complex scans easily surpass $1000 and go much further if you scan a great deal.

http://www.buffalomri.com/screening_fees.html

That was just a link I found, but there are others with similar fees.

And remember, I don't know if it was impossible not to get it quicker in Ontario. Just complain to the doctor you have pain and they usually bump you up in most experiences I've heard.

And just remember, again, in the US system what good is an MRI if you can't do anything with it? Many Americans don't have adequate health insurance, so if you pay $600 and find out you have a problem, what good can it do when you can't get the procedure to fix the problem? That's the bitter irony about US care.

 

[afransen]

As far as I'm concerned, if the private sector can provide a service for the same or lower cost as the public system, let the private sector provide the service. Especially for diagnostics, I see no reason why we should let the public system be a bottleneck. I'm not completely sold on allowing individuals to pay for it directly. My concern is that if the middle class and public sector workers get insurance to pay for diagnostics, there will be no impetus to fix the wait-time issue for everyone else, people who tend not to vote as much, tend not to have much money or political pull.

 

[kettal]

And just remember, again, in the US system what good is an MRI if you can't do anything with it? Many Americans don't have adequate health insurance, so if you pay $600 and find out you have a problem, what good can it do when you can't get the procedure to fix the problem? That's the bitter irony about US care.

That sucks, but it is totally irrelevant.

Every Canadian has health insurance covered by the government, and nobody here wants to change that...

 

[Brandon716]

That sucks, but it is totally irrelevant.

Every Canadian has health insurance covered by the government, and nobody here wants to change that...

Bringing up the problem in the US is entirely relevant because Canada needs to avoid the problem, not create the problems America has by going too-private and too for-profit. Its not good to simplify the issue that "oh, if we privatize this service its a win-win for everyone and it fixes all problems" as that isn't the full story.

 

[kettal]

No, sorry, not seeing it. There's no USA parallel here, because USA never had universal health insurance to begin with.

The proposal is not to privatize anything. Simply the legalization of competition and alternatives. It's not about taking anything away from the public system at all.

It sounds like you are trying to use the "slippery slope" argument which is not rational.

 

[Brandon716]

What I said, my actual words, is that if you privatize a service it doesn't automatically make things work in a win-win situation as you stated. It isn't that simple.

 

[ganjavih]

What does proximity have to do with anything?

I would hate for American HMOs start to set up shop in Canada because of NAFTA or some technicality. Some European-style hybrid system I wouldn't mind so much.