Statistics Show Canadian Healthcare Is Inferior to American System

July 28, 2009 RSS Feed Print

By Peter Roff, Thomas Jefferson Street blog

Those who would have the U.S. government play a larger role in healthcare like to point to Canada as an example the United States should follow. Their argument, in sum, is that healthcare there is of high quality, is readily available and, because of generous government subsidies, much cheaper. In fact, most Americans know little about the inner workings of the Canadian system other than the anecdotal evidence provided by both sides of the debate. A look at the hard data, however, suggests there is more support for the arguments put forward by the critics of the Canadian system than by those who see it as a model for the United States.

Working off data compiled by The Fraser Institute, a Canadian think tank, the GOP staff of the congressional Joint Economic Committee assembled this chart to show in visual terms how long Canadian patients have to wait to receive essential healthcare services:

For example, the median clinically reasonable wait time before receiving neurosurgery is 5.8 weeks. In Canada in 2008 it was 31.7 weeks. For gynecology it's 5.6 weeks v. 16.1 weeks. And for internal medicine is 3.3 weeks v. 12.5 weeks. Fraser's hospital waiting list survey measures median waiting times to document the extent to which waiting times for visits to specialists and for diagnostic and surgical procedures are used to control health care expenditures. The report measures the wait times between seeing a general practitioner and a specialist, the time between seeing the specialist and receiving treatment, and the total wait time.

The good news, if there is any, is that Fraser's 2008 study (and they have been collecting data on wait times for 18 years) indicates the median wait time for those patients seeking surgical or other therapeutic treatment is down by a full week—from 18.3 weeks in 2007 to 17.3 weeks in 2008. Despite the improvement, however, the Fraser data shows many Canadians are still waiting almost four months (121 days) or more before they can receive treatment.

As the JEC chart indicates, the grass may not be greener over the northern U.S. border.

Tags:
Canada,
healthcare,
healthcare reform

Reader Comments Read all comments (80)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

"Despite the improvement, however, the Fraser data shows many Canadians are still waiting almost four months (121 days) or more before they can receive treatment."

As opposed to the US system where, if you don't have health insurance or independent wealth - you'll be waiting forever?

fmacskasy.wordpress.com 8:12PM January 06, 2012

Oh sure, the wait time might be bad. In SOME parts of Canada. Healthcare is managed PER PROVINCE, and each individual city manages their hospitals. Its like me saying posting statistics regarding the obesity rate in texas, and applying it across all of the US.

I broke my collar bone and fractured my skull in a mountain biking accident. I paid $700... for the ambulance ride. Thats it. No deductable, no paying for the painkillers, no bankruptcy because I can't pay the bank back on a massive loan, and admitted without having to sign any forms or people checking if I had insurance or not.

Either way, would you rather wait a couple of extra weeks for FREE surgery, or shell out thousands upon thousands of dollars, for something that you SHOULD be covered for, but your insurance company is going to try to bend you over backwards to nullify your agreement?

John 11:35AM September 15, 2011

in response to the comment that there are 30 million Americans who don't receive healthcare, or access to a doctor...that's simply not true.

everyone has access. if you go to the emergency room, they must give you treatment. the government pays it. it happens all the time.

is it a great system? no. is it better to have waste like this, and have quicker access to surgery and screenings for diseases such as cancer? Yes. there is a reason that our survivor rates on cancer are the highest in the world.

Kevin of MS 5:40PM June 10, 2011

Peter Roff

Peter Roff

Peter Roff is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. A former senior political writer for United Press International, he is currently a senior fellow at the Institute for Liberty and at Let Freedom Ring, a non-partisan public policy organization. His writing has also appeared on Fox News' Fox Forum.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

No White Knight to Save Republicans

The GOP is stuck with Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, or Paul.

Mary Kate Cary

Politics 101 for the GOP

Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and the rest of the GOP pack are not so far apart.

Latest Video

advertisement