CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 27558
PostPosted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:04 pm
 


CMA calls for help with catastrophic drug costs
$1:
Dr. Scott Cameron, the P.E.I. delegate who introduced the resolution, said the program should cover prescription drug costs that exceed three per cent of a family's after-tax income. He noted that in Atlantic Canada 25 per cent of the population doesn't have prescription drug coverage.

"For every individual who fails to treat his or her diabetes, hypertension, coronary artery disease or other chronic illness appropriately due to the punitive nature of the costs of doing so, the social costs to the family, the costs to the economy in terms of productivity, those costs are also not calculated," said Cameron.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2944
PostPosted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:49 pm
 


Makes sense to me. Medicare was originally supposed to be there for you in the event of catastrophic bad health. If you were going to increase spending on one thing this is a good bet. This was Bob Rae's only concret suggestion when he was running for the Liberal leadership.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 27558
PostPosted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:58 pm
 


In the conversation on health the issue of having long term care added to basic coverage was also suggested for the same reasons.

Biggest obstacle to a National Drug Program is lack of standards. There is an entirely different set of protocols for each province and you end up with the CMA saying on one hand only doctors can prescribe and not pharmacist while on the other they are open to privatization. If the professionals can't have a unified policy how is it going to be implemented by the provinces and the fed?


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2944
PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 3:21 pm
 


I don't even know what is included in long term care, although the gist of the arguement is clear.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 27558
Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2944
PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:28 pm
 


Thanks. Any quick opinions?


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 27558
PostPosted: Sun Aug 26, 2007 11:01 pm
 


If our society seems more nihilistic than that of previous eras, perhaps this is simply a sign of our maturity as a sentient species. As our collective consciousness expands beyond a crucial point, we are at last ready to accept life's fundamental truth: that life's only purpose is life itself.

There is mounting political, moral and economic pressure to address the shortcomings of the current system. As we are in a constant state of trying to improve what is recommended may not always be the best path and as always decisions made in the heat of the moment tend to be more harmful than not. It is common knowledge that the last years in ones life also tend to be the most expensive in terms of care and it is also apparent that there is a large demographic that is coming to retirement age. Whatever happens there will have to be some change and it will revert somewhat afterwards but not completely as the generations that follow will be growing in number as well. For the most part the generation that is retiring is also somewhat better off than most generations and with that wealth will be able to mitigate some of the shortcoming of the current system. I surmise that there will be a large push for private industry reforms in order to bypass some of the wait lists as they can afford it being more middle class. That will be expensive and not something sustainable to the majority if that becomes the standard of care so it should be something that is given a temporary reprieve in order to get us through this demographic bottle neck but understand that model itself is not a long term solution. A drug program on a national level has benefits for all and would help combat the spread of epidemics as well as be a force to aid in medical research, its worth should not be over looked. Also, home care is by far more cost effective then having the elderly or mentally infirm tie up a bed at the hospital when a low level of care could be much more effective.

There is some groundwork already in the form of E-DRUG. The objective of E-DRUG is to support the concept of essential drugs by improving and speeding up communications between all health professionals working in the field of essential drugs. This will be the forbearer of a larger drug program.


Offline
Newbie
Newbie
Profile
Posts: 14
PostPosted: Sun Aug 26, 2007 11:43 pm
 


i see the big drug companies, plus the booze and cigerette companies all the same. they use government policy to justify the malicious forethought of addicting our children. it was just on the news and w5 about how the psychology departments were in bed with the schools to target kids for drug therapy , which they said cost about 10 -25 thousand for each child. i personally went to a school and confronted a psychologist with this info before w5 had it on tv. the psychology guy said very little when i asked him to tell me what they planned for the children after they started them on ridalin or some anti depressant or anti psychotic.he said nothing, the school staff was there and tryed to sway me from my persuit for more info.they get about 10 people from the school and psychology department to surround one parent while asking for their signature to justify their drugging children and the ability to bill the government and taxpayers for this. the kids get nothing from them but medication.no therapy or follow up.no counceling for the long term or on how to deal with any problems. just take medication cause it costs alot. school and psychology department bill for lots of money. each child diagnosed is worth alot.a cheap scam that leads to our children running the streets looking for drugs or ways to feel better as they have been taught by their fine leaders. the school, teachers, psychologists, and the government.
i see the government drug programs as a way for the government and those in power to justify giving themselves lots of money at our childrens expence. talk about lots , get a signature, bully parents for a signature, then do very little except cash their checks. canada drug program sucks. how many children and young adults do you see in your city running the streets looking for drugs or medication. go to addac or any recovery group and ask the people there were they got started. most say at home or school, started on medication of some sort . just my experience and opinion.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2944
PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:56 pm
 


Thanks for posting Scape.

Home care makes sense given that people wind up in the hospital for care. It's a synergetic program.

I've never heard davidinedmonton's complaint that theraputic drugs lead to addiction. Stories about tranquillizers and that leading to addiction are common place but not theraputic drugs.

There's a great deal of reliance on "a little white pill that will make you feel a whole lot better". I don't quite buy into it myself.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 27558
PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:09 pm
 


Methadone program

Sometime there are problems too big to overcome with a simple white pill. In which case the only thing that can be done is to mitigate the damage done. A productive and fulfilling life can still be had post addiction much like in the case of any other disability, if treated. The problem of this type of care is that it also has a social stigma that impedes the effective treatment. When the lines between medical and criminal blur so too does the options for rehabilitation but as we can never truly serve two masters we can also never have the two systems as co-equals. By their very nature one MUST dominate the other's jurisdiction. As to how that plays out is usually a matter of politics and not one of health. These and other similar issues will have to be ironed out before home care is to expand to the size that will be required in the coming years or the inevitable impact on our society that results will be far worse than the treatment.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests



cron
 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.