Canadian health care myths: Every myth is exposed and proven to be false

Debunking Canadian health care myths
By Rhonda Hackett
Denver Post
June 7, 2009


As a Canadian living in the United States for the past 17 years, I am frequently asked by Americans and Canadians alike to declare one health care system as the better one.

Often I'll avoid answering, regardless of the questioner's nationality. To choose one or the other system usually translates into a heated discussion of each one's merits, pitfalls, and an intense recitation of commonly cited statistical comparisons of the two systems.

Because if the only way we compared the two systems was with statistics, there is a clear victor. It is becoming increasingly more difficult to dispute the fact that Canada spends less money on health care to get better outcomes.

Yet, the debate rages on. Indeed, it has reached a fever pitch since President Barack Obama took office, with Americans either dreading or hoping for the dawn of a single-payer health care system. Opponents of such a system cite Canada as the best example of what not to do, while proponents laud that very same Canadian system as the answer to all of America's health care problems. Frankly, both sides often get things wrong when trotting out Canada to further their respective arguments.

As America comes to grips with the reality that changes are desperately needed within its health care infrastructure, it might prove useful to first debunk some myths about the Canadian system.

To read the detailed debunking of the following myths please click on:

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_12523427

Myth: Taxes in Canada are extremely high, mostly because of national health care.

Myth: Canada's health care system is a cumbersome bureaucracy.

Myth: The Canadian system is significantly more expensive than that of the U.S.

Myth: Canada's government decides who gets health care and when they get it.

Myth: There are long waits for care, which compromise access to care.

Myth: Canadians are paying out of pocket to come to the U.S. for medical care

Myth: Canada is a socialized health care system in which the government runs hospitals and where doctors work for the government.

Myth: There aren't enough doctors in Canada.

"It is not necessary to spend a huge amount of money to decide who gets care and who doesn't when everybody is covered."

:thumbsup: I hope everyone reads it so they can debunk these tired excuses to run down universal single payer healthcare.

i say its a pretty good system. I have never taken the opportunity to use any benefits like walk into a clinic for a checkup or to fix a cut or anything ever in my life and i can say that i would fight tooth and nail to keep the system even if i have to pay a little more in taxes to keep it so that everyone can benefit. I would even pay more to have a better system like what France or UK has too.

"There are long waits for care, which compromise access to care" is no myth. If it were, my father wouldn't have moved us to the States. He couldn't get the care he needed, and it was NOT elective surgery.

Canadians often do pay out of pocket for care in the States, too - even Belinda Stronach did.

And what province was it and what year?

Multiple tumors at age 49. If you want more specifics, I'll need a bit of time to write it up and would prefer to do it via PM.

Broke my heart, too. I much preferred living up there (we lived in Laval), even though my French sucks and I took a lot of shit for that. My father had a summer cabin in upstate NY on one of the Finger Lakes (he's Canadian citizen, my mother is a U.S. citizen), and that had to become our permanent home when he had no chance of being treated up there on time.

He follows the Canada health care issue as if it were the only issue facing North America today, and if you ask him he will tell you two things right off the bat: even today he wouldn't have been able to get timely care for what he had anywhere except for Ontario, and if he had lived in Alberta in 1990 he would have been dead by 1991. According to him, among developed countries Canada is next to last in number of MRI machines per 100,000 residents and the waiting period for an MRI is still amazingly long in "most provinces" (I'd have to ask him for more specifics on that, I never question him on this stuff because he gets very angry just thinking about it).

He also puts up a fair number of Canadians who come down to the States for treatment, friends, acquaintances, and friends of friends. My parents live in Brighton, NY now. According to my mom, at least half the people who stay with them are down here for hip replacements.

I knew that Quebec was having problems, but I didn't think it was that bad. I know that we're in far better shape on the Ontario side.

Did he have no way to appeal to the Quebec government? No Ombudsman or anything like that?

Maybe you could PM me about this.

I don't have every specific on hand and prefer to ask my mom (she can talk about it without bursting into a two-hour angry rant, Dad can't), but as I recall it wasn't so much of a question as to whether he deserved the care or was eligible, it was whether he could get it on time. There wasn't a chance in hell at the time, and although I'd have to ask I know I've heard him say that any and all appeals processes were very slow in Quebec. I was born in the US, so I never used your system and can't really recall how things went in terms of paperwork and appeals for Dad 19 years ago up there. Hell, I wasn't even put in the loop until the day I was told we'd be moving to Canandaigua for good, so I don't even know how long he was trying. I do, however, remember every nook and cranny of Strong Memorial Hospital in Rochester - but that's another story.

I can tell you this from my father's rants, and I'll try to quote him:

"If you're looking for waiting times to see who's on the top in any given category, it's a good fucking bet that either Quebec or Alberta is on top of it, and whichever of the two isn't on top is in fucking second."

I know and freely admit that Dad lets anger cloud his stance on things, but I also know him well enough to know he's rarely off base even when he's at his most pissed off. If you ask him, he'll tell you that the people who most love Canada's system are those who are young, healthy and don't really need it. He'll also tell you this: if you're Canadian and need health care in the States, you can stay with him and Mom for free even though he doesn't know you. It's like a crusade for him now. Keep that in mind if you ever need care in Upstate NY or anywhere withing a day's drive - Dad will be happy to save you hotel money. Hell, he'll even let you use his car if you need it to drive to an appointment and gas it up when you're done.

Obviously, at this time of night I can't call either Mom or Dad to ask, but I will at the first opportunity and let you know what I find out.

I'll wait for your PM.

The only bad things I have heard about the Canadian Health system are from Quebec or Alberta.

My own experience in British Columbia was excellent. And the myths have confused me, since all my friends in Vancouver and Toronto seem to think it is a wonderful system. But I just recently came to realize it is a Provincially implemented and administered system.

I guess Texas would have an awful system if it were State implemented, even if it were Single Payer.

their system is running out of money, so the list of things the system won't cover is growing faster than in the other provinces. As an example, my best friend's child is autistic, he lives in Coquitlam. A couple years ago, BC just up and announced that it's system will no longer cover autism in kids.

From everything I can tell, the Ontario system is the only one worth modeling, but the question then remains as to whether the US government can handle it. I don't believe it can. It can't even handle health care for its military.

Social Security was supposed ot be a 2% tax on the uber-rich, and when the program was wheeled out there were constant drumbeats to the tune of "that's all you'll ever pay." Twenty-one tax increases and benefit cuts later, we're facing yet another tax increase or benefit cut, largely because the government mismanaged the program and its funds. It just up and blew a huge surplus. Just wait until it has the chance to fuck up health care for over 300 million people.

I would bet that the Texas program would be no worse than what the feds come up with. A rushed, flawed system is coming our way, to the drumbeat of "it's by the end of this year or never."

Having seen what my father went through and knowing that a.) once you go single-payer you never go back, and b.) we won't have a country to turn to like my father did, the thought of single-payer in this country scares the shit out of me.

Otherwise, statements without any backup like that have no weight.

If you want the whole list, find it yourself.

Actually, I don't have to do a fucking thing if I don't want to, and I'm certainly not motivated to go dig up the whole list just for some newbie who storms in and tells me what I HAVE to do. Why don't you try to disprove the claim if you're so anxious to show me something?

When you've been around for a while and get out of your habit of telling people what they have to do, maybe some of us will start giving a fuck what you think. As of now, I certainly don't. If you walk away from this thinking I'm wrong or that I havent proven somethingt to YOUR lofty standards, well, then I'll just be all broken up.

...I remember reading that Quebec either passed a private care option or was voting on it - that in Quebec, unlike in other provinces, if you had the cash you could go outside the system without leaving the country. Is that true, and if so what is it - passed, rejected or still being voted on?

Sorry to ask, but you have no idea how much I hate bringing this stuff up to Dad without a good reason. Sometimes I just don't have the two hours to spare, if you know what I mean. :)

But I don't pay a whole lot of attention to the Québec system. I seem to remember that the PQ government (separtists) neglected health care for a long time. And they were in power back in 1990.

I'll do some research on it and get back to you.

Yes, we're extremely short on MRI machines up here. Not sure why other than they're damned expensive and in high demand.

Craftygal tore a rotator cuff and her MRI appointment isn't until September. It is NOT, however, interrupting her care as she's already been seen at Emergency (free), X-ray, (free), several doctor's appointments (free), physio (free) and she's on the call-if-there's-a-cancellation list for the (free) MRI.

Our out of pocket so far:

$4.00 - pop at Emerg (yes, it took awhile, damn those pesky car accident victims taking priority)
$19.95 - nice sling to replace the crappy looking one supplied by hospital

For what my father had, telling him to wait 3+ months simply wasn't an option.

In the meantime, she's got to wear a sling for that long? I've torn a rotator cuff myself and it hurts like hell. I feel for her.

of physical therapy and never had the surgery--because of the MANY horror stories I heard from rotator cuff victims, I mean patients.

Surgery, surgery, surgery. If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Same goes for the surgeons. Always.

You got off light. I went through the operation and it still took half a year to recover. I can only hope that my doctor was telling me the truth when he said the tear was too large to make the non-surgery route a viable option, but for all I know he might well have been the sort of surgeon you describe.

So this happened almost 20 years ago. Do you think that just possibly things have improved in the past 19 years?

we just stopped following the issues up there. :eyes:

Read my other posts on how my father still follows this and basically nothing else. The number of Canadians (mostly from Quebec) seeking care in the States whom my father puts up in his home tells me right there that things haven't improved. If you can prove otherwise, do so, but spare me your sarcasm.

The list of things we've been fighting for over 19 years and haven't improved is rather large. Do you think that just possibly Quebec still has major problems, or am I supposed to just take your snide question as unequivocal proof that things have supposedly improved up there?

:eyes:

She basically admits that it can take a long time to get care. 14 months for a knee replacement can be a long time if you truly need it. It's less a "myth" than a "worth while trade off". The flip side of that is, and it is true in other places like England that the predominate problem with "timely" care has mostly to do with distribution. High population centers will have the equipment and unfortunately the potential patients. Low population centers won't have the equipment, so the opportunities will be more rare. Worse, people in the high population centers will occasionally "shop around" for treatment and end up putting a burden on the lower population areas.

There's little that can be done about this other than "excess capacity" which is where part of the cost starts to add up. This a problem in the US, especially in very rural areas. It is often less of a noted problem because ultimately we have a much larger area over which to "shop around" than Canda where their populations are concentrated in a very few areas. It is why they cross the border. And as the article points out, if we'd stop wasting around 30% of our money on administrative costs, we'd have alot left over to provide a bit of "excess capacity".

never. Which is how soon a poor non-insured American would be able to get a new hip! At least with 14 months there is hope.

That's the trade off. But she was discussing a "myth" and then basically confirmed the myth, but said it was a fair trade.

with an endocrinologist, for my diabetic husband... and joint replacements HERE are not "on demand". Paperwork and approvals can take a long time, and may even be denied.

True comparisons have to be made , using real-life/ordinary procedures that most people run across in their lives..stuff like:

mammograms
pap smears
chronic illnesses
maternity care
routine visits for sudden illnesses
good pediatric care
geriatric care

Most people (even here) will NOT have heart surgery, joint replacement, or many other out-of-the ordinary care, but most will have a family member with a broken bone, a sinus infection, ulcers, appendicitis, a pregnancy, kids who injure themselves, bad colds, flu..etc.

and, I believe Canada was the only nation in the study that had longer wait times to see a doctor than the US - so, Germany, France, Italy, etc, all had shorter wait times to see doctors.

It is a hell of a lot better than US private insurance, under insurance, and no insurance.

I do feel for individual personal stories but really it is a trade off. You can either have a system that helps everyone and occasionally leaves a few people hanging, or a profitable system that screw everyone all the way to the bank and leaves at least a quarter of its population with nothing.

whatever reform does not involve single-payer. I don't trust the federal government to handle the responsibility. It can't even provide proper health care for its military. I would see it mismanaging the program the same way it mismanaged Social Security - a blown surplus, over twenty tax hikes and service cuts, and now most poor minorities don't even live to collection age.

I would sooner trust George Bush to solve a Rubik's cube than trust the federal government to handle a responsibility this big. Just wait until we get a rushed, flawed system (remember, we've been told "it's this year or never") and see how many people it leaves hanging.

You would opt for not even giving people the choice between private and single payer options? That basically amounts to only two possible solutions then, corporate wealthfare and/or an essential status quo situation.

Given the tenacity of your position the veracity of your personal story either breaks down a bit or becomes less meaningful to me because you would elect to damn those who could not afford private health insurance to illness and death.

I had a friend that died of complications involving type 1 diabetes because he could not afford to keep up regular health maintenance and was forced to accept the cheapest treatment and on emergency services.

I work in healthcare now for an HMO which, while being a damned sight better than a private insurer, is still a convoluted Byzantine mess of bureaucracy and red tape. Every step in the processes of approval or prior authorization was simply installed to slow, stall, or stop attempts to access benefits or healthcare and ultimately just in existence to save on expense and maximize profit.

So I would as soon you not try to lecture on complexity or mismanagement. With merely adequate research skills you might also be able to discern that the military hospitals in question had a number of their services privatized and in fact that most of the 'mismanagement' of the federal government is the product of interaction with private contracting (which begs the question about the efficacy of a non single-payer/mixed system).


My friend is dead. He cannot tell stories about how long he had to wait for services or how complex the paperwork he had to fill out for a government program that never existed to cover him in the first place.

or at least a gross distortion, that average wait times for some care are much longer in Canada, since those averages are always calculated without factoring in the wait times for people in the US who have no insurance (i.e. forever).

'Never' is a very long time to wait and I don't think people really give that enough attention.

agree that Canadians often pay out of pocket, but I do agree that recently, there's been a trend where Canadians are buying private insurance in America (it's illegal here, unbelievably), just in case something serious happens, and they need something done right away.

The US boasts that it's the greatest nation on the face of the earth and 15% of the population has no health coverage, that is sad.

plus co-pays and still have many issues that are not even covered.

It's a must see: http://www.freedocumentaries.org/index.php

Is our comparable size to Canada the only reason we keep evaluating their health care system? Do we have any information about other countries systems', perhaps those are in the top ten? Me thinks there are better options.

Its still the best, even if I can't access it, right?

Cause Mad Mac Baucus tells me so.

like CANCER! And then have a pre-existing condition and cannot get any more. Yeah, that is a good health care situation here in the US. And most of those 'waits' for knee surgery and the like are for the time between diagnosis and actual need. I had one eye operated on for cataract and the other one was done 10 years later. Was that a 'wait' or just because the other eye moved slower??

In East Tennessee and southwest Virginia http://www.wisecountyissues.com/?p=62 this is what is deemed, defended and supported as 'THE ACCEPTABLE STANDARDS OF HEALTH CARE'. The myth is in comparison to what is advertised and what's on public record ( Greeneville, TN Federal Court, case no. 2:04-cv-375 ) that took the health care system to prove their own advertising is false and misleading.

How far away are you from a major population center? Wouldn't that have an impact on your perception? Or do you have specific per capita stats for both Canada and the US? In remote areas in BOTH countries doctors are simply not going to be as plentiful as they are in major cities.

Ontario is an example of how single-payer can be done wrong.

1. A basically centrist voting population decides they're tired of the current NDP administration, and they want to give conservatism a try.

2. The newly elected right-wing premier makes so many budget cuts, pundits start calling him "Mike the Knife". Education and health care are, as always, right at the top of the hit list.

3. The people eventually wake up to what's going on, and switch over to the Liberal party. People in Ontario love the "Grits", because you get the satisfaction of saying you "voted liberal", without the annoyance of having actual liberals in power.

4. The Liberal premier knows that health care is in a bad way, but he also knows that if he asks for more money, he'll lose support from conservatives. So he follows that greatest tradition of Canadian politics, doing absolute fuck-all and hoping the problem will go away.

5. Your family doctor is now on short hours, the specialist he refers you to is booked into next year (he doesn't know that, and probably won't believe you if you tell him), and you have to wait 3-6 months for an ultrasound. The only places where you can get timely care are walk-in clinics with crowded waiting rooms, and hospital ERs with slightly less crowded waiting rooms.

Now that pain in your abdomen is just like Mike Harris. By the time you realize what you're dealing with, it's probably already killed you.


So, YES, by all means, you Americans need to force the Obama administration to give you national health care, but simply having the program exist isn't enough. You need to make sure it gets an adequate budget right from the start, with regular increases as population and costs go up, and NEVER, EVER let Congress decrease that budget by so much as a penny. And let me know how *that* works out for you.

I moved to Ottawa, from the US. I received my OHIP (Ontario Health Insurance Card)
after the three month waiting period, and within two weeks I had myself set up with
a doctor who was taking new patients. When I needed to see my family doctor, I
usually saw him the day that I called his office for an appointment. If they were
closed (like on a Sunday), I would go to a walk in clinic, and be seen that day.

I had to be referred to a neurologist once, and the first appointment available
was five weeks out, but the problem wasn't serious. A bit annoying, but not life
threatening or overly painful. And you know - having to wait those five weeks
was worth it in order to have a system that I knew would be there regardless of
how sick I became, or whether I lost my job. The wait times are primarily caused
by a shortage of specialists (in Canada approximately 50% of doctors are specialists,
in the US it's closer to 66% being specialists). It's not because the goverment
throttles or rations how many people they will pay for. Another reason for wait
times in Canada is that you have a population that is 1/10th the size of the US
unevenly dispersed across a landmass that is slightly wider than the continental
US. When someone in a less populated area needs to see a specialist, he either
has to travel to a larger population center, or if that's inconvenient, he has
to wait for the nearest specialist to have an opening. Most specialists rely
on the doctors who refer patients to them to help them triage the patients who
need their care. Two people could be referred to a specialist on the same
day, and yet if one of them had a more severe problem, that person might be
seen the next day, and other person given an appointment three weeks out.

Plus, I was never told which doctor I could use because virtually all doctors
participate in the provincial health insurance system. There's no such thing
as an out of network doctor, or a deductible, or co-payment. When you're sick,
you go to the doctor's office, the receptionist scans your health card, and then you
see the doctor. When the doctor wants to perform some tests on you, or send you to
a specialist he doesn't ask you if you have coverage that will cover it, because
he knows you do. It's a non-issue there.

my mom, I was able to have her doctor accept me. I'm not saying that our healthcare system is bad, cause it isn't overall. But it's definitely difficult to find a doctor, and has been for the last several years.

Because of the vast difference in the amount of money available, lots of promising young health care professionals are recruited by US hospitals. They just can't resist the larger salaries and, often, the perks.

One of the most striking I've heard of was offered to a friend of ours when she moved from here (Victoria) to Austin TX. The hospital said they'd help her with the paperwork to get a carry permit ASAP.

tell the American people the truth, Insurance companies & the republicans will sink hundreds of millions, even billions of dollars distorting & lying about health care...

We truly need Universal Health Care now - Single payer is the best way to go.....It's our tax dollars!!

my insurance and my family of 4. I would get on a doctor's waiting list (usually 12 weeks) and then something would happen. The doctor would move to another practice that didn't take my insurance or in one case the doctor died while I was on the list. I finally gave up trying to find a local doctor. We now drive over an hour to see a doctor in a major metropolitan area who would take our insurance.

So, how much worse can the Canadian system be? At least you can get a primary care doc to look at your family quicker than 13 months. The American system really, really sucks.

:kick:

I used to travel to the UK a lot due to having a position that involved international sales. I also lived in a neighborhood where there was a substantial Canadian national presence due to North Texas being the U.S. HQ of Nortel.

Since I've had five surgeries in the last six years on an outpatient basis and have seen the economic impact of medical costs when I've had what is considered good insurance--I've always been curious about the other countries systems.

What do people think of them? What is covered? What are the out-of-pockets? Those sort of questions. I've always managed to avoid an argument somehow, by being very neutral and just asking questions without any major bias.

Canadians without exception find the U.S. insurance system a horror. A Canadian couple I know both suffered a very serious injury and it cost them a lot of money. This is money they would have not owed in Canada. In fact, the woman considered returning to Canada to have her second child. However, the lawsuits they each filed against different entities paid off prior to having to make that choice.

Now that Nortel has declared bankruptcy the husband is on the cusp of losing his job. They are both very apprehensive about losing all coverage and may have to leave the country. The wife in particular has ongoing problems that will require a lifetime of medical interventions. They have high medical costs here even with insurance. If they ever lose coverage neither one will ever qualify again due to pre-existing conditions. In Canada, due to the emergency nature of their injuries neither would have had to wait for treatment and it would have been free. They also wouldn't have been so driven to sue.

I've also had the opportunity to talk with many of their countrymen during parties. I've always gotten the same answer. The Canadian system is much better especially when looking at U.S. insurance vs. Canadian single payer.

The U.K. anecdote is one that surprised me. I'd talked to many natives of England and I'd gotten generally positive responses as to their satisfaction with their health care system. But I got a lot negative comments on the tax burden. But the U.K tax burden is due to many things not just health care. I have no idea how it measures up to the U.S. tax burden. So, I was talking to a guy that was as right wing as someone from the U.K. gets. This guy was pretty much an uber-capitalist.

He spoke glowingly about the political trend in the U.S. to let market forces take care of things. How competition brought the best out in people. He commented on how much he hated the U.K unemployment system and its supposed disincentive to work. Etcetera, etcetera, etcerera...

I finally asked him what he thought of the U.S. health care system. What did it look like to people from the outside? A look of horror came across his face and what he said completely shocked me, "We think you're insane.". I was stunned. So I asked, "But what about the taxes?" And he replied, "I'll pay some more taxes to not have to worry about losing the wealth that's taken me a lifetime to build up when I grow old." It was that simple.

He was a super capitalist, but think about what he said. And this is really the point. We all grow old. We will all get sick. We may get sick before we grow old. But we will grow old and with old age comes a guarantee of some degree of infirmity.

He wasn't willing to give up that safety net. He was a hard worker and ambitious and he meant to make a lot of money. He didn't want to have to just give it all back when he aged. And he didn't' trust the market because he knows it doesn't work when it comes to health care.

Pretty straight forward, huh.

:kick:

I have a 'really good' health insurance plan from my employer. I pay extra to get the most possible choice, like no need for 'permission' to see a specialist. I live just outside the state capital, where there are five hospitals, and lots of doctors...even lots of high-end testing equipment.

Even so... when a blood test came back with a sky-high rheumatoid factor, I waited more than two years just to get an appointment with a rheumatologist, and then she wanted another round of expensive tests before she would even consider treating me.

This is simply because a gov't plan can deliver better service for lower costs. The right is now in the position of arguing that providing better health care for lower costs should not be done because it is not fair to HMO investors. So much for the free market being beneficial to everyone.

I have had nothing but great experiences with the Health Care here in British Columbia. I have had no waiting for appts. although I have heard of this happening. The other day I was out of town and needed to get stitches removed from my arm. I walked into a shopping center on a SUNDAY that had a walk in clinic. I was in and out of there in 20 minutes and it was free. I also notice that the pharms are way cheaper up here. A prescription that I paid for in the states that cost me $69.00 only costs me $21.00 here.

My experience in the states with medical was a nightmare (I lived there 40 years)To make a very long story short. I was misdiagnosed with a heart condition (faulty test) I could not get medical insurance even though I had two specialists write the insurance company's to let them know the test was not correct. The last 10 years of living down there I had no insurance.

I live on a peninsula that is ferry access only we have plenty of doctors and a good hospital. There are some very remote areas in this country where medical care is an issue but that doesn't make it a bad system.

I need arguments like this to help me make my case when I talk to people about this issue. It is amazing the misinformation in health care providers who are "progressive"! thanks!

Yes I've met Canadians who seek medical treatment in the United States, but not because they can't get the same or better care in Canada. They do it because, if they can afford it, they prefer to spend winter months in Arizona, Florida or some other place that isn't freezing.

When I lived in southern Arizona, I knew more than a few people who went to Mexico (MEXICO!!!) for medical care because they were uninsured or their insurance company wouldn't cover their treatment and it's more affordable there.

Most of the statements are correct.

Myth: Taxes in Canada are extremely high, mostly because of national health care.

As stated, overall, they're not higher. Opponents usually look at the marginal
tax rate (the tax on a person's next dollar of income) and make it appear as if it's
the average tax rate. When I moved to Ontario, my taxes were a wash.
The one tax that I would say is higher is the fact that there's 5% federal Goods and Services
tax on most goods and services, over and above the sales tax collected by the provinces.

Myth: Canada's health care system is a cumbersome bureaucracy.

Nope. The government does not control which doctors you go to and whether your doctor can
treat you. All they do is run the insurance system. They don't determine which
doctor you can see or when you'll be seen.

Myth: The Canadian system is significantly more expensive than that of the U.S.

No.

Myth: Canada's government decides who gets health care and when they get it.

No, the doctors do. The reason that people have to wait is usually because of
a shortage of specialists, or because a community is in a rural area.


Myth: There are long waits for care, which compromise access to care.

You sometimes have to wait longer than you would wait in the US. Is it unreasonably
longer? That can be a matter of opinion. The opponents
like to cherry pick the worst cases and make it sound they're the norm. But,
if you asked most Canadians whether they'd like to have a system that
guaranteed shorter wait times, but that it would be a US style system where
there was no guarantee of coverage, they wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot (or should I
say 3 metre) pole.

Myth: Canadians are paying out of pocket to come to the U.S. for medical care

With what? Between all those high taxes that the critics claim Canadians are paying,
and the fact that the Canadian dollar has been traditionally worth less than
the US dollar, where do they think Canadians are getting the money to pay
for treatment in the US? It doesn't mean that some Canadians don't. But not to the
extent that the opponents would make you believe. They make it sound like
thousands are coming across the border every day. 99.9% of all the medical
care that Canadians receive is done in Canada.

Myth: Canada is a socialized health care system in which the government runs
hospitals and where doctors work for the government.

Most doctors in Canada are self employed. The provincial governments run
the health insurance systems, but the doctors do not work for the government
any more than US doctors work for the US insurance companies.

Myth: There aren't enough doctors in Canada.

I think that there's an imbalance of general practitioners to specialists in Canada
with there being a lower percentage of specialists in Canada than in the US.
It's because of this that there are wait times, not because the government
determines who can be treated and when. Very often, the doctors have to
triage their patients because of the shortage of specialists. They need
to take the more serious cases first.

If there were a vote to implement single payer here, I'd vote yes
in a heartbeat.

The wait time for Aunt Betty (last paragraph) was a shock to me. Perhaps as others write, Ontario has a better outcome and not such long waits? My 82 year old father waited 3 weeks for his hip replacement in Toronto. But last summer while visiting friends in same city, we met their friend, Wendy, who hobbled in (mid 50's) with a limp & cane. My friend said she'd had 1 knee replacement and was waiting for her other to be done. She had her first one scheduled after she was required to lose 100 lbs. My guess now was she was at least 200 lb overweight. And she apparently had gained the 100 plus some back. Her doctor orders again were 100 lb loss before the surgery could be done. I too hear about the wait times. But the priority lists are a type of triage too. And people with certain lifestyle choices may have to face a longer wait. I know my father got to the top of by-pass surgery ahead of alcoholics and very overweight smokers. I have no idea what the story is with 'Aunt Betty' but i imagine that there are omissions in the whole story.
We lived with single payer for 20 years before moving to California. We are following this push for single payer or a public option or anything that will offer us a choice from the for-profit corporations whose only motivation is to deny, deny, deny. We attend rally's, send money, donate time - anything that will help this become a reality.

So we need to counter the right-wing by constantly pointing out our lack of free choice under private health insurance.

Canadians are not susceptible to a lot of the diseases and injuries that afflict people.

It would be better to compare the US health care system to another system geared to the treatment of actual humans, instead of an arctic-dwelling species whose origin may not even be of this planet.

why can't the populace chose? For those who don't want a single payer plan, they can pay for their own insurance, allowing the rest of us to have a single payer public option.

As a matter of fact, you know all of those teabaggers? Well, we could let them not pay taxes, well maybe except for security--then set up toll roads--make them pay for everything. If they have a fire, well too bad--if they use the library, they'll have to pay to check out a book. Everyone who pays taxes will have a card--free going through any toll road, free emergency services, they'll have to pay for their children's education, etc. Also, they can hire some private security service to come and patrol their house. They can pay their way, that includes health insurance. I'm more than willing to pay taxes for the public services.