You have to be kidding saying that the American health system delivers health care more effectively than the Canadian system. It's enough to make you choke on your weetbix.

What else can you expect from american Intellectual Conservatives who promote Conservative and Libertarian Politics and Philosophy.

Where do the people who edit and compile this forum get such people as the writer of this rant?

The Romanow Commission on the Future of Health in Canada in 2003 is the most far reaching and important assessment of the health needs of a nation. It recognises the importance of keeping people well, of a multi-disciplinary primary health care centre as the heart of a health and wellness system. The author is talking rubbish in his references to the US health "system":for a dose of sanity, refer to the Commonwealth Funds 2006 Annual Report just out.

Lies, damn lies and statistics. The PDF you referred to refers to 5 year survival rates, yet you extrapolate these into survival rates.

They are substantially different and it is dishonest of you to use the two interchangably.

Comparing the USA with Europe is also not valid. Is Europe the UK or Poland? Your figures also relate to white americans when compared with black or hispanic rates the USA is well behind even Poland (the worst European country).

Why are people in low socio-economic groups almost twice as likely to die of cancer in the US? I suggest because they cannot afford decent health care.

"For leukemia, the American survival rate is almost 50 per cent; the European rate 35 per cent" What a load of brown smelly stuff.

Given the the vast majority of leukaemia's (note correct spelling) are chronic by nature and the median survival at diagnosis is 10 years how are 5 year survival rates relevant? The vast majority of adult leukeamia's are incurable with a 100% death rate (unless you die of something else)

All in all a dishonest piece of "journalism".

Health Needs A Human Face. There is no equity in Canada nor Australia when it comes to "inclusiveness" community enagement or any other policy intiatives that fly under Alma Ata as Health for ALL or as prevention true mechanisms in Primary Health.

I know people in Canada and Australia entangled in the world of unemployment, disabities and mental health. They are exhausted in their efforts to engage. Many of these people suffer serious isolation, are genuinely dis-connected by social drift.

We need a human face put back into Health. We need the resources to engage productively with those who need assistance the most.

We need a socio-economic - culturally political approach to policys. A Political Will to Act for effectiveness through health intergration and a true linkage between other services.

We do not need more McCarthyism's.

I stand loud against anyone who uses 'socialism' or an 'anti-socialism' slang notation to fog the urgency for action on quality and merits of a human life-quality engagement, or on issues about how we ought to include people better within our society, through practical health policies.

Society is about people and it is time we understood that means dealing people from no matter where they try to engage.

We need a "No Wrong Door" policy (yesterday) to integrate health and other business, government and community services.

We need a whole of governement whole of community approach.

We need to criminalise the distractive SPIN!

.

What a complete load! Even the introduction is idiotic. To assume that compassion comes before profit in a socialist system is rubbish, and anyone that can analyse a situation can come to the same conclusion. Even in a system that isnt trying to make a profit, they still have a finite resource with which to provide that service. If they were trying to squeeze out a profit based on the same funding, then the services provided HAVE to be worse.

To say that waiting lists would be shorter in a capitalist system is probably quite true - a certain percentage of the population would never MAKE the waiting list to start with as they wouldnt be able to pay for the procedure.

The Vancouver Island MRI machine is another silly point. 1 public MRI machine for 600,000. So those that can afford it, get private health cover and go to a private hospital with the access they need, I assume - its certainly what happens in Australia. Much better result to have say even 50% of the population unable to afford to seek assistance privately, and having to wait for the public machine, then not having that public machine there at all.

Absolutely we need more resources to go to our health system. That's why I am so opposed to the tax cuts that we have been getting every Budget day. The money amounts to little in the individual hand, but could help make inroads in many areas of public systems (not just health), that need serious attention.

yes, there a problems with the public system, but better to live with those problems, than die without being able to get private care.