Friday, October 14, 2005

Provinces won't even calculate waiting list times

The Canadian Medical Association is going after the provinces hammer and tongs.
There is consternation in Canada's medical community over claims by some provinces that it's not possible to set evidence-based benchmarks for medical wait times by year-end, as promised in last year's health accord.

If premiers didn't intend to follow through on their commitments in the accord they shouldn't have signed, Normand Laberge, a spokesman for the Wait Times Alliance, said in an interview Thursday. "If I sign a document, that's my word," said Laberge, who is also executive director of the Canadian Association of Radiologists. "If the provinces do not respect that, they do not have any credibility whatsoever."

Now THAT is calling a spade a frickin' shovel.  Long overdue I might add.  Here's the source of the foot-dragging:
Provincial officials say setting benchmarks will require double-blind studies in which some patients are treated promptly and others after a delay, so as to observe the difference in health outcomes.
Which is clearly bullshit and they know it.  Laberge fires on them again:

Laberge says that kind of research would be unethical.

"Can you tell somebody that's got a cardiac problem or a cancer, or somebody that's waiting for an MRI, 'Well, you're going to wait and the other one is going to get access and we'll see in two years who's still alive?' It's a bit ridiculous."

The sight of government seat warmers running for the tall grass while old women and kids wait in vain for life saving procedures sickens me.  These people need a major wakeup call, like maybe a broken hip each.  Then see how long the waiting list stays.

Private medicine now please.  Tax cut now please.  Fire these assholes NOW PLEASE!!!  How much crap are we supposed to swallow?

The Fired Up Phantom


Candace said...

Seriously, this "benchmark" thing is just so much bullshit. Doctors know which of their patients need immediate action and which don't. Cardiac & cancer patients need it now. Knee & hip replacements may have some wiggle room, but we ARE talking quality of life here. Surely to God there are "benchmarks" enough? The article you quote is likely the one I read earlier today, and had some medical "benchmarks." Damn well good enough for me.

The Phantom said...

Yeah, the idea is to avoid the issue by misrepresenting the type of research needed. These clowns are trying to say that double blind studies are needed to discover the maximum safe waiting time for a given procedure.

That's Dr. Mengele-style thinking, nobody is going to do that. Therefore the fact that they even said it indicates they are 100% full of shit, and have no intention of cooperating.

Way to go CMA for shoving it up their noses.

The Phantom said...

By the way, reduced mobility in the elderly is a stone killer. Grandma with the arthritic hip has a pretty small time window after she needs a replacement before her overall condition starts to go south fast.

Bedsores, skin infections from not washing (because she can't get to the friggin' shower), blood clots, pneumonia, you name it all crop up FAST in a sedentary old person. Like two weeks kinda fast.

Plus,these people never have one thing wrong with them. Its always the train wreck scenario where one thing sets off something else, and pretty soon Grandma is in ICU with twelve tubes sticking out of her.

Which royaly pisses me off when they play games like this, I've got to say.