@Ganymede said:
@Shebakoby said:
There's maybe only one thing that the US system, as flawed as it is, has over the Canadian system. Money available for R&D. * * *
Canada still doesn't have this technology.
It's entirely possible that the technology you've suggested isn't commercially viable. While the process may be superior to balloon angioplasty, there may still be a cost-benefit issue. It's more than probable that the reason no province has approved of the procedure is because the benefit is substantially outweighed by the cost. An efficient system does not always use the best available technology.
While his specific example is perhaps poorly formed, the leading statement he made isn't, really. The US health care system has had many, many, many, many, many flaws, but the 'private money' thrown at medical R&D isn't exactly one of them. Sort of. For a very long time the US has been the primary source of new drugs, tech, and procedures, vastly ahead of any competing nation (or continent for that matter, which is a weird comparison that gets made).
Canada, the UK, Japan, nobody has come close to the amount of money and resources the private sector in the US throws at medical R&D. The problem with that being that since they frequently have control over the research and early results, companies can (and have) put a boot on cheaper, more effective drugs, procedures, etc because it might cost them money. Less than people often think, but it happens.
Even with that, though, the investment of private money into medical research in the US has basically advanced and refined medicine and health care globally on a level well beyond any other contributing nations. Supposedly that's starting to change, but it's still true today. Part of it is just how much money the private sector in the US has to throw around, but part of it (which is what I believe he was getting at) is that countries that want to avoid private investment in health care... well, they want to avoid private investment in health care.
A lot of the hype over Canadian doctors 'defecting' to the US to practice is nonsense, but it's marginally more true when you're talking about doctors who want to work on developing new or refining old. Either is very expensive, and you're far more likely to find funding in the US, if you're willing to accept the risks involved (a corporate entity having a stake in your work, and the ability to strangle it if they find it necessary).
Disclaimer: I think the US health care system pre-Obamacare is pretty shit. Even post-Obamacare, for a lot of folks (like me). I am not a knee-jerk MURICA IS THE GREATEST sort, nor hyper critical of the Canadian system (though I have been in the past, when I lived in Alaska, due to RL friends with bad experiences).