Health

Canada has a universal health care system. But does it really?

Published

2 months ago

January 28, 2023

Perhaps one day our universal healthcare system would represent Canadian values, but certainly not anymore. American friends, you may know us for our drinking age and “free health care.” Unfortunately, however, our healthcare system no longer embodies the principles of equality, respect, courtesy, safety and peace that we hold dear.

You may also be familiar with our Prime Minister’s penchant for dressing up and doing shirtless yoga poses. Aside from hockey, poutine, and maple syrup, few things have been more emblematic of Canada than our universal health system.

Universal health coverage means that all medical services are covered for everyone, without discrimination based on race, financial status, or social connections. It also means that no one has to go bankrupt for financial reasons to access or avoid treatment, a problem that is all too common in the United States.

Unfortunately, our system has lost much of its universality today.

Not all healthcare services are covered by the public system, such as B. Dental, visual and long-term care, which are self-paying services.

Not all Canadians have equal access to health services, with some populations, such as First Nations and certain regions, having greater barriers to access.

Not all Canadians have equal access to quality care, with some patients experiencing wide disparities in the quality and outcomes of medical services received.

Not all Canadians have equal access to timely care, with extremely long wait times for doctor appointments or surgery.

Not all Canadians have equal access to healthcare providers due to shortages of doctors, nurses and other professionals across the country.

Not all Canadians have access to innovative treatments and technologies, and some patients do not have access to the latest medical advances.

Not all Canadians have equal access to comprehensive and coordinated care due to a lack of integration and coordination between the different levels of care.

Not all Canadians have equal access to patient-centered and personalized care, with limited attention to individual patient needs and preferences.

Not all Canadians have equal access to health information and education, with limited support for patients to make informed decisions about their treatment.

Not all Canadians have equal access to healthcare services in other countries if they are not available or accessible at home, with limited provisions for cross-border healthcare.

How did it happen?

Poor planning has created a huge imbalance between demand and supply of health services, and poor leadership is to blame. It’s worth asking if voters interact with hospitals at all.

There have been attempts to ration care to reduce spending (fewer medical services provided meant less spending through the payer system), but this obviously resulted in a sicker population requiring more care, not less, and month-long waiting lists even for urgent ones care, endemic staff shortages, and outdated equipment.

In addition, life expectancy has increased from 75 to 81 years in the last forty years, while the number of births per woman has fallen from 1.74 to 1.4. This means that Canada, like most western countries, is dealing with an aging population that is not being replaced.

With five million Canadians turning 65 this decade, the 2020s will be the years when the last boomers will retire. Among them are many physicians, as approximately 20 percent of physicians in Canada are 65 years of age or older. Our country will soon face a brain drain due to retirements alongside the burnout epidemic as well as the demand for health care increases.

Studies also show that younger doctors are not working the same hours or providing the same amount of medical services as their predecessors in the past. As a result, Canada is heading for a perfect storm due to a severe imbalance between supply and demand.

We recognize that the US healthcare system is also failing as it has become unaffordable for too many people who do not have access to healthcare even if they have insurance. Most Americans receive insurance coverage through their employer, which limits choice, and many postpone treatment due to underinsurance, high co-payments and deductibles, and out-of-pocket expenses. People also postpone screening for the same reasons, which will lead to higher medical costs later.

A growing number of our American friends looking for solutions seem to support a depositor system like ours, as suggested by Bernie Sanders. My advice is: don’t look north for inspiration. We messed it up. There are better models, like in Switzerland, that allow private health insurance, but if a person can’t afford it, the state pays the premium for it.

Canadians tend to be grateful they don’t have the American system, but also don’t speak loudly enough to urge improvement. Universal? I do not think so.

Jean Paul Brutus is a hand surgeon.

Related Topics:Canada Care Health system universal

Up Next

FDA relaxes blood donation restrictions on gay men

Don't Miss

ARCH, General Catalyst launch clinical trial tech company Paradigm

Click to comment

Health

Too Much Time Online Might Raise Kids’ Odds for Mental Health Woes

Published

51 mins ago

March 30, 2023

Ella Valadez

By Dennis Thompson

health day reporter

WEDNESDAY, March 29, 2023 (HealthDay News) — Children’s screen use could alter their developing brains as they enter puberty and increase their risk of mood disorders, a major new study finds.

Children ages 9 and 10 who spend more time on smartphones, tablets, video games and television showed higher levels of depression and anxiety at ages 11 and 12, researchers found.

Additionally, investigators linked some of these mood disorders to actual structural changes in the children’s developing brains, according to the report recently published online Behavioral Addiction Journal.

“There were certain brain mechanisms that contributed in part to this relationship, meaning that statistically, over the two-year period, brain-based changes occurred that mediated the relationship between on-screen media activity in younger children and the internalization of concerns about depression and anxiety two years later,” said lead researcher Dr. Marc Potenza. He is Professor of Psychiatry at the Child Study Center at Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut.

The proportion of mood disorders associated with structural changes in the brain is relatively small, “on the order of 2% to 3%,” Potenza noted.

However, child development experts hailed the study as an important step in fully understanding how excessive screen time affects children.

For the study, Potenza and his colleagues analyzed data from more than 5,100 children participating in the ongoing ABCD (Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development) study. The data included brain scans, psychological assessments and behavioral tracking in these children aged 9 to 10 years.

“This is the first time we’ve had this type of database to study problems of this magnitude, so this is groundbreaking,” said Dr. Cheryl Wills, director of child psychiatry at MetroHealth System in Cleveland. Wills was not involved in the study.

“Basically, this study is the first to begin to examine, or better understand, the processes that may be related to the effects of screen media activity on mental health – how does screen media activity affect brain development and how does it affect the mental health out,” she said.

“Although the results are modest, this is the first structural association with these changes,” added Wills, who is also a board member of the American Psychiatric Association.

Too much screen time?

When researchers looked at the first round of data for 9- and 10-year-olds, they found an association between high screen use and mood disorders, as well as “externalizing” behaviors like aggression and discipline, Potenza said.

They also observed brain structure patterns in these children that were similar to those previously associated with underage drinking, he added.

They then followed the children as they got older to see if the mental health problems persisted and if they correlated with more brain changes.

As 11 and 12-year-olds, the children continued to suffer from depression and anxiety associated with heavy screen use, and their brains had changed in ways that would explain some of these mood disorders.

However, the study did not link the same brain changes to heavy screen use and behavioral problems such as aggression, bullying or defiance.

The observed brain changes affected both the cortical brain regions involved in higher-level processes such as attention or emotional regulation, and subcortical regions related to a person’s drives, Potenza said.

“Given that this pattern of structural variation in the brain has been associated with early engagement in addictive behaviors, it suggests that there may be some elements shared between addictive behaviors in substance use and non-substance use domains – in this one.” Fall screen media activity,” Potenza added.

The ABCD study will continue to track the same children as they age, and future reports should provide even more insight into the effects of screens on brain development, said Mitch Prinstein, chief science officer of the American Psychological Association.

“I don’t think most people realize how important puberty is to brain development,” Prinstein said. “We all know that infant brains develop in really important ways, but we may not remember that brain development from ages 12 to 16 is also an incredibly sensitive time.”

Brain changes associated with addiction

Will agreed.

“This is the first step and we’ll see how it goes, whether or not it’s consistent throughout the developmental process as children mature into adults, or if this stops at a certain age or gets worse at a certain age,” said Wills. “It helps us understand that this can affect mental health and brain development. And only time will tell how sustainable the changes are, whether or not they change over time and what the results are.”

The post-pandemic world has made it more important than ever to understand the impact screen-based media is having on children, Wills said.

“During the COVID period, much education has shifted to computers and screen media. Although the kids are mostly back in school, teachers are using screens to a greater extent than before,” Wills said. “In the past, you would usually let your child come home and then worry about on-screen media activity, but they are already coming home from school after being exposed at school more than before.”

Many parents try to limit children’s screen activity by using timers to turn off devices when the kids have had enough, Wills said. They also set up other activities, “basically trying to get their kids to focus on things other than the screens.”

In the meantime, Prinstein recommends that parents set a firm 9 p.m. screen time limit.

“We just need that as a rule. We can’t disturb sleep. Sleep is incredibly important for brain development, and the number one reason kids don’t get the recommended amount of sleep is their screens,” Prinstein said.

Parents should also use timers and controls to ensure they limit what kids can do on devices and for how long. “They’re not perfect, but at least it’s a start,” said Prinstein.

Finally, parents need to be open with their children about whether the children themselves feel they are using too much screens.

“We’re seeing a remarkable amount of problematic screen time use,” Prinstein said. “In other words, using screen time looks a bit like an addiction.”

More information

The European Network for Problematic Usage of the Internet looks at the effects of excessive screen use in more detail.

SOURCES: Marc Potenza, MD, PhD, Professor, Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine Children’s Study Center, New Haven, Connecticut; Cheryl Wills, MD, Director of Child Psychiatry, MetroHealth System, Cleveland, Ohio; Mitch Prinstein, PhD, Chief Science Officer, American Psychological Association; Behavioral Addiction JournalMarch 20, 2023 online

Health

Zorro Launches with $11.5M to Revolutionize Employee Health Benefits

Published

53 mins ago

March 30, 2023

Ella Valadez

What you should know:

– ZoroA digital health Company that optimizes the healthcare experience for employees, employers and brokers announced its launch from stealth with an $11.5 million seed funding round co-led by Pitango And 10D.

– The process of providing employee benefits is complicated, opaque and onerous. For employers and agents, offering benefits often results in unpredictable budgets, endless administration, and a distraction from core business. For employees, health benefits are universal and all too often completely out of their control.

– Zorro plans to use the seed funding to further expand R&D efforts and scale customer operations.

How Zoro works

Zorro analyzes employers’ performance targets to create a top-down predictable budget and performance allowances per employee or group of employees. It also offers an end-to-end insurance management solution that offers a single, comprehensive platform that makes managing claims seamless and effective. In addition, Zorro acts as a financial companion, analyzing employees’ health needs, family situation, risk tolerance and other personal characteristics. It then generates a recommended service package consisting of health insurance, supplementary insurance, specialized digital health solutions and other value-added financial services.

Health

Here is where the debate on Social Security and Medicare stands in Congress

Published

2 hours ago

March 30, 2023

Ella Valadez

As lawmakers near an impending debt ceiling deadline, the battle over what to do with entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security continues to be fought across party lines.

Republicans have demanded commitments from Democrats to cut spending in exchange for raising the debt ceiling, but said entitlement programs aren’t on the chopping block.

President Biden and the Democrats have still tried to frame the GOP’s desire for spending cuts as an attack on Medicare and Social Security. At current rates, Medicare funding is expected to hit a deficit in 2028, with Social Security following in 2032.

Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid currently make up nearly half of the entire federal budget, at a total annual cost of $2.7 trillion.

Here is the Capitol debate on the future of the programs.

A scattered Republican embassy

A number of policy options have been proposed by GOP lawmakers in both the House and Senate for what to do with the future of entitlement programs. Options ranged from not touching the programs, to raising age requirements, to having the programs shut down on a regular basis, which would require renewed approval from Congress.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) caused a stir last year when he released his 12-point Rescue America plan, which originally proposed scrapping all federal legislation after five years and prompting Congress to consider whether the Law “worth observing”.

But after intense heat from Democrats and some in his own partyScott changed his plan “to make specific exceptions to Social Security, Medicare, national security, veterans’ benefits, and other essential services.”

Other policy options put forward by Republicans include a plan by the Republican Study Committee, which includes more than 75 percent of the House GOP conference, to raise the age for individuals to qualify for Social Security and Medicare.

Other prominent Republicans, including former Vice President Pence, have advocated partial privatization of Social Security. “I think we can replace the New Deal programs with a better deal,” he said in an interview earlier this year.

But the party’s leadership in Congress has revealed relatively little about their plans for the future of Social Security and Medicare.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) have both said the entitlement programs are off the table in the debt ceiling negotiations, but they have avoided details about how they will want to achieve their desired spending cuts.

Democrats position themselves as protectors

Biden has led the charge in Democrats’ efforts to portray themselves as protectors of the entitlement programs in the face of what they characterize as GOP threats.

Democrats and the White House leaned against the frame as strategy ahead of the midterms and warns of what a Republican majority could mean for the 65 million Americans who depend on Social Security and Medicare benefits.

Republicans have insisted their proposals to keep the programs solvent aren’t cuts, but that’s largely what the debate boils down to what makes a cut.

Democrats have claimed they don’t want to touch Social Security or Medicare at all, and Biden has suggested taxing the wealthy to prop up the programs — something that has little chance of gaining traction among Republicans.

The president’s budget proposal aims to increase the Medicare tax rate on earned and unearned income over $400,000 from the current 3.8 percent to 5 percent.

“This modest increase in Medicare contributions for those with the highest incomes will help keep the Medicare program strong for decades to come,” he wrote in a New York Times Commentary.

Biden’s budget proposal doesn’t detail plans to keep Social Security afloat.

Biden leaning towards messaging before 2024

In his State of the Union address last month, Biden drew heckles from Republican lawmakers when he accused some in the GOP of trying to target federal entitlement programs as part of spending cuts.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) shouted “liar” at the President’s remarks.

Playing off the dissent, he joked, “Well folks, it seems we can all agree, Social Security and Medicare are off the books now, right?”

The White House has targeted Scott with his harshest criticism and called the Florida Senator national flagship for Republican attacks on Medicare and Social Security benefits.

Scott hit back after Biden’s SOTU speech, urging the president to resign over “lying about Republicans” trying to cut programs.

The attacks on Republicans over the programs have emerged as part of a broader narrative strategy the GOP as extreme while Biden prepares for a possible re-election run in 2024.

The latest polls have confirmed this again The popularity of Social Security and Medicare, even as many Americans tend to rein in overall government spending.

Biden has also attempted to highlight the House Freedom Caucus, the conservative group that includes Greene and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), to create greater contrast between the parties in their overall vision for the country ahead of 2024.

The White House approved the caucus’ budget proposal “Five Alarm Fire”, and Biden has argued that the plan would cut non-defense spending across the board by 25 percent, though the group has disputed that claim.

Republicans are trying to reverse the script

While the GOP has fended off attacks from Democrats, Republicans have tried to do the same Turn the debate around on their opposition and accused the Democrats of not having their own vision to keep the programs afloat.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) grilled Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen earlier this month over the government’s plan to support Social Security.

“Of the $4.5 trillion in taxes he’s proposed, not a dime will support Social Security,” Cassidy said at a Senate hearing.

Yellen responded that Biden “cares very, very much,” before Cassidy interjected to ask about the president’s plan to extend Social Security solvency.

Yellen said Biden was “ready” to work with Congress on the matter, but Cassidy called the statement a “lie,” adding that he and other senators had tried unsuccessfully to meet with the president on the matter.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) told The Hill earlier this month that Congress needed “the president’s leadership” to secure the programs long-term and said Biden was “doing nothing.”

Biden has fired back that GOP proposals would only undermine programs.

“Only in Washington can people say they’re saving something by destroying it,” he wrote in his Times op-ed.