General Discussion

You are asking questions, I am providing documented answers, as accurately as I can, including anecdotal evidence from a close relative who interacts with the Canadian health care system every day. She is being treated successfully for chronic cancer, her husband has had a tricky and successful surgery for a different form of cancer, as well as a knee replacement. They are both in their 70s, and there has never been an issue getting health care for them or their kids. They simply go to the doctor, they are referred to a specialist if necessary, and they get taken care of. There has never been a problem, there has never been a review of their treatment by any government organization. They get the treatment, the government simply makes sure the bills get paid.

EDITED to add, re: "someone or some group of people that are deciding what will or won’t be covered", the provinces have each decided 'what' is medically necessary (it appears to me that there are minor differences -- there are an awful lot of green check marks on that chart), but the doctors decide 'if' a procedure or treatment is medically necessary. There are no government 'death panels'.

I am not clear why these simple facts are viewed as an argument; the facts are what they are.

Is the issue that the chart I provided did not address your question in a helpful way? I don't know ... I thought it was pretty informative. I did not know any of that stuff. I can't see how providing it can be construed as confrontational.

But one thing does seem clear, that this is not a productive conversation at this point. I hope someone else benefits from the info I've provided, or at least opens a pathway for doing further research.

I will never see this level of health care in what is left of my life ... I hope younger folks fare better.

Take care, all the best ...

.rog.