Angry in the Great White North

From the National Post, concerning benchmarks for wait times the provincial governments are supposed to deliver to the federal government before $41 billion in funding is released:

The purpose of benchmarks is to let patients know how long they should expect to wait for specific medical procedures. But some provincial officials - and the federal wait-times advisor, Brian Postl - suggest the evidence on which to base them does not exist.

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.

Now let's see if we can wait 4 months...how many people keel over then? Hmmmm, still it saves us a bundle to help pay for Dingwall's severance package.

[Normand Laberge, a spokesman for the Wait Times Alliance,] 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."

Why the need for these numbers? Because without the numbers, the provinces don't even want to try to reduce wait times. I mean, it might be a waste of money. Who really knows if it's really better to see a doctor promptly to treat cancer?

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.

In the federal-provincial accord of last September, first ministers promised evidence-based benchmarks by this Dec. 31 in five areas: cardiac and cancer surgery; eye operations; joint replacements; and diagnostic scans.

"It is inconceivable that our leaders are backpedalling on this first critical test of political will," said Ruth Collins-Nakai, president of the Canadian Medical Association.

This is what happens in a purely public system. The bureaucrats are doing what they think is right -- guarding the public purse. They don't want to spend our money on something that might not help.

Kudos for them. But then sick people are suffering and dying.

The private providers have a solution. They don't justify shortening wait times on medical efficacy. They justify it because it's good for business. One provider offers faster service at a higher cost. Some people take advantage of it. They pay taxes on the services they've purchased, taxes that could be earmarked for the public system to help it run faster and to help pay for staff to stay in the system. Meanwhile the public system is less loaded since affluent patients have skipped out and paid out of pocket. Less load means faster service for the people who prefer, or are forced, to use the public system.

But without the competition of a private system, the government is forced to compete with itself to try and shorten wait times. That means there's no real rush, since Canadians aren't going anywhere. Unless it's to a funeral home.

And that lightens the load on the public system too.