Skip to main content

The Downside to Canadian Health Care

Can it really be called a downside?

According to Joseph M. Connors, MD, Clinical Professor and Director of the BC Cancer Agency’s Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, in an article in the ASCO Post, the downside to Canadian health care is

We [the Canadian health care system] don’t get to give patients treatments unless they have proven benefit, so we have an entire system devoted to examining what evidence justifies which treatments.......

..........I [Dr. Conners] cannot give a drug without evidence-based proof that the drug has efficacy and works better than the less-costly alternatives in the particular disease I’m treating. So the drawback to a centralized system is that it constrains innovative behavior, is resistant to change, and is slow to introduce new approaches. The system waits for adequate evidence before moving ahead.......


Well, I'm not so sure I'd categorize that as a downside, and neither do I believe it constrains innovation.

Just because something is new, and may have shown efficacy in a petri dish, or even in a stage 1 trial, doesn't necessarily mean it will be effective when given to humans. And let's not forget about potential side effects of rushing treatments to market. You only have to look at drugs such as Thalidomide, and more recently Avastin, to recognize the flaw in that thinking.

And besides, isn't that what clinical trials are for? Something else Canadians and Europeans have far greater access to than those in the US, that is unless you

have adequate coverage or can pay out of pocket


[tip]But then again, why would you invest in a costly clinical trial, with an uncertain outcome, if off label use is making you money?[/tip]

I don't know about everyone else, but if that's the only downside to Canadian health care, I'm willing to take my chances!
Labels:

Comments

Kim said…
Just for the record, I'm a little disappointed that I'm not mentioned anywhere here. What's up with that?
1:02 PM
Marc said…
I didn't know I was supposed to. I'll keep that in mind for my next post. :)
12:21 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The results are in

And I am iron deficient, big time. [Which would account for my low hemoglobin] Test Result Ref Range IRON 30 59-158 mcg/dL TOTAL IRON BINDING CAPACITY 231 250-420 mcg/dL IRON SAT 13 20-50 % My Ferritin levels were good, but that could be because Ferritin is also an "acute phase reactant", that is sometimes increased with acute or chronic disease. Folate and B12 levels were also within the normal range. The only problem now is determining what is causing the iron deficiency, which in the case of men, is [very] rare. My oncologist has given me a Globin Fecal test to perform, and has scheduled me for a consultation with a colorectal surgeon to discuss performing a colonoscopy, which could be problematic because of my large spleen. In the mean time, I've decided to start taking an iron supplement, it's only the quantity that is causing me some consternation. I've been told by a very knowledgeable person that to overcome an iron deficiency, I need to be taking 300 mg o...
5 comments
Read more

Stop the stupidity!

Rural medical center (in Georgia) suspended from vaccination program after inoculating school district staff. Give me a break! Trying to get kids back to school, while protecting teachers, bus drivers and other staff, is exactly what school districts should be doing. If they have vaccines, give them out. We should be giving out vaccines to all who want them, whenever available. Trying to adhere to rigid guidelines will only result in fewer people getting vaccines, resulting in the discarding of precious vaccines, and less protection for everyone. Of course we should be giving first priority to healthcare workers, and any other essential public service employees, such as policeman, fireman, etc. first, but when they're not around to receive shots, or refuse shots, then give them to anyone willing to take them. What I would have objected to is the medical center trying to capitalize on the pandemic to make a profit, from giving vaccines to people far down the list of recipients, but ...
Post a Comment
Read more

When is enough, enough?

Today I learned, Lance Armstrong, the most drug tested athlete in the history of sport, is being accused of doping, again . This time by the US Anti Doping Agency (USADA), who claim they have collected blood samples from him in 2009 and 2010 that were “fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions.” Really! What took them so long? The French have been trying to make allegations of drug doping stick for years, ever since he won his first Tour d'France, but to no avail. And now the USADA claims to have evidence to support that claim, and they've waited almost 3 years before releasing this evidence. Needless to say, I am skeptical. Then there's this from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO): Increasing the federal excise tax on cigarettes by 50 cents per pack eventually would increase Medicare and Social Security spending, slightly. Eventually? What is the CBO suggesting here? That we should encourage smoking, because if we don't, in...
11 comments
Read more