nypost.com— COULD actress Natasha Richardson's tragic death have been prevented if her skiing accident had occurred in America rather than Canada?
Mar 26, 2009View in Crawl 4
Uh, maybe it was the fall on her head that killed her and deciding NOT to get immediate care. Sonny Bono died in the States.If the tree was in Canada, would have he died worse? I don't hear her family demeaning the Canadian healthcare system. Armchair quaterbacking at it's worst.
I had my penis checked for diseases in Canada and it didn't cost me a thing. It was a very pleasurable experience - an older (NOT old) lady doctor took a look at it. She said it was fine.
My friend of a friend knows your 'friend 'and calls bulls**t. Unless of course your friend is actually 'your period' and that's why so much blood was lost .
Republish: Meant to publish to entire thread not just sneaker:I am sorry that I have not paid attention to this thread. I did not realize just how many people could not interpret what these little things hanging in the air are for " ". It was more Tongue in Cheek for those Canadians who are with out a sense of humor. The first part of my statement was all to telling was it not???? Hello let me quote myself here and this time those things hanging in the air are for a different reason. Let's hope you can tell the difference."There is no question a quick CT Scan would have revealed the problem. That is not a debate here I hope. "To say that Canada has no access period to emergency CT or MRI scans is in and of itself foolish for anyone to think that. Including myself. Unless you live in a third world country and the possibility of the place you are being treated does not own any of those pieces of equipment. I do not think Canada in this position as you are all (collectively) paying for everything remember. Chances are you have the equipment just "not the personal." (Tongue in cheek again) =) this time I will help. As to the signing of the piece of paper. When you go to the Hospital you have to sign yourself out do you not? If an ambulance brought you to the hospital from a auto accident and you refused treatment you would have to sign a paper stating just that. Would you not? They would not just give you a free ride to see the pretty building then say, oh yea mate have a safe day, hope you make it and feel better. No! The same applies when they are called out to see or treat someone in the field that has had an injury. They have paper work to fill out no matter if you like it or not and part of that paper work is the fact that she refused treatment. How do we know she refused treatment? It is now there word against hers and she is dead. This is why all paper work is followed up with you guessed it a signature.If upon her review of release papers she may have to think to herself, is it in my best interest to go against the medical advise of these fine trained people and just take a small ride and get it checked out or do I just sign it. This has little to do with legal unless someone dies and rumors start that she was not treated at all, or that she was told she was fine and it was just a bump, etc then all of a sudden people inquire into why she was not treated for something that was so easily preventable. Then your medical review people can assess if the proper procedures were followed or if they could or would have want to change how they handle certain procedures in the future. Once again, not about legal but improving an already "Awesome" system and making it better for it's people. BTW their are those little hanging things again -).Last, we just had the British Prime Minister on television last night in the US and he was asked about the possibility of the US going to a National Health Care System like the UK and Canada models. His reply was shocking. Has said with out pause that "...it would be the biggest mistake America could make allowing politicians to run something so vital to the American People and the stories we read are not just occasional but daily grievances with a failed system that continues to get worse and fail our people on a daily basis. Do not consider this as even an option" he said. "When they take a drug out of our system that you have in the US for Heart Disease and Stomach Cancer, early detection for colon and breast cancer and the treatment for those diseases we can not sue our NHC system. We have to cue up and go on with our daily lives as this is what we supposedly signed up for after the WWII. The competition you have amongst your medical profession draws the brightest minds in the world right now and if you go to our system or Canada's system it will not only hurt your medical treatment in the US but everyone else around the world that comes to the US for treatment they can not get in their own country."
That was an awfully lengthy post when you could've simply said "There's been a misunderstanding, I was actually parodying the other idiots in this thread!"Really, read some posts above yours, and you'll understand why I responded like I did. People actually do believe this garbage.
once and for all you idiots! Coercing taxpayers at the point of a gun to fund healthcare for parasitic welfare class is not freedom? Nor is it more efficient.Its communism. Thats why we are fighting, thats why they want to KILL us, so that they will have only willing slaves like roger to fuel their New World Order they keep incessantly talking about.
f**king wanker Rupert Murdoch's newspaper -- Of course, his right-wing rag would print a story like this. I have a proposal, how about all right wing assh**es who want to deny health insurance coverage to the poor and uninsured give up their health insurance, voluntarily for say 6 months and see what it would be like to be absolutely terrified of becoming injured or sick, need medical care and not be able to pay for it. It's just like those religious nuts who want to refuse research on embryonic stem cells, but would NOT refuse to utilize any discovery resulting from said research if their or one of their loved one's life depended on it.Keep your religion out of my science, Thank you.
mikeytwitMar 27, 2009
Uh, maybe it was the fall on her head that killed her and deciding NOT to get immediate care. Sonny Bono died in the States.If the tree was in Canada, would have he died worse? I don't hear her family demeaning the Canadian healthcare system. Armchair quaterbacking at it's worst.
Closed AccountMar 27, 2009
I had my penis checked for diseases in Canada and it didn't cost me a thing. It was a very pleasurable experience - an older (NOT old) lady doctor took a look at it. She said it was fine.
bdog2g2Mar 27, 2009
My friend of a friend knows your 'friend 'and calls bulls**t. Unless of course your friend is actually 'your period' and that's why so much blood was lost .
gandalffMar 27, 2009
Republish: Meant to publish to entire thread not just sneaker:I am sorry that I have not paid attention to this thread. I did not realize just how many people could not interpret what these little things hanging in the air are for " ". It was more Tongue in Cheek for those Canadians who are with out a sense of humor. The first part of my statement was all to telling was it not???? Hello let me quote myself here and this time those things hanging in the air are for a different reason. Let's hope you can tell the difference."There is no question a quick CT Scan would have revealed the problem. That is not a debate here I hope. "To say that Canada has no access period to emergency CT or MRI scans is in and of itself foolish for anyone to think that. Including myself. Unless you live in a third world country and the possibility of the place you are being treated does not own any of those pieces of equipment. I do not think Canada in this position as you are all (collectively) paying for everything remember. Chances are you have the equipment just "not the personal." (Tongue in cheek again) =) this time I will help. As to the signing of the piece of paper. When you go to the Hospital you have to sign yourself out do you not? If an ambulance brought you to the hospital from a auto accident and you refused treatment you would have to sign a paper stating just that. Would you not? They would not just give you a free ride to see the pretty building then say, oh yea mate have a safe day, hope you make it and feel better. No! The same applies when they are called out to see or treat someone in the field that has had an injury. They have paper work to fill out no matter if you like it or not and part of that paper work is the fact that she refused treatment. How do we know she refused treatment? It is now there word against hers and she is dead. This is why all paper work is followed up with you guessed it a signature.If upon her review of release papers she may have to think to herself, is it in my best interest to go against the medical advise of these fine trained people and just take a small ride and get it checked out or do I just sign it. This has little to do with legal unless someone dies and rumors start that she was not treated at all, or that she was told she was fine and it was just a bump, etc then all of a sudden people inquire into why she was not treated for something that was so easily preventable. Then your medical review people can assess if the proper procedures were followed or if they could or would have want to change how they handle certain procedures in the future. Once again, not about legal but improving an already "Awesome" system and making it better for it's people. BTW their are those little hanging things again -).Last, we just had the British Prime Minister on television last night in the US and he was asked about the possibility of the US going to a National Health Care System like the UK and Canada models. His reply was shocking. Has said with out pause that "...it would be the biggest mistake America could make allowing politicians to run something so vital to the American People and the stories we read are not just occasional but daily grievances with a failed system that continues to get worse and fail our people on a daily basis. Do not consider this as even an option" he said. "When they take a drug out of our system that you have in the US for Heart Disease and Stomach Cancer, early detection for colon and breast cancer and the treatment for those diseases we can not sue our NHC system. We have to cue up and go on with our daily lives as this is what we supposedly signed up for after the WWII. The competition you have amongst your medical profession draws the brightest minds in the world right now and if you go to our system or Canada's system it will not only hurt your medical treatment in the US but everyone else around the world that comes to the US for treatment they can not get in their own country."
sneaker98Mar 27, 2009
That was an awfully lengthy post when you could've simply said "There's been a misunderstanding, I was actually parodying the other idiots in this thread!"Really, read some posts above yours, and you'll understand why I responded like I did. People actually do believe this garbage.
belfast007Mar 27, 2009
once and for all you idiots! Coercing taxpayers at the point of a gun to fund healthcare for parasitic welfare class is not freedom? Nor is it more efficient.Its communism. Thats why we are fighting, thats why they want to KILL us, so that they will have only willing slaves like roger to fuel their New World Order they keep incessantly talking about.
mrenerstatMar 28, 2009
Probably would've died sooner if it happened in U.S. because of the paperwork involved.
midtownerMar 30, 2009
They have trouble, sure... but most rural hospitals in the U.S. are fully staffed -- meaning well more than one doctor on staff.
essumergosumMar 30, 2009
f**king wanker Rupert Murdoch's newspaper -- Of course, his right-wing rag would print a story like this. I have a proposal, how about all right wing assh**es who want to deny health insurance coverage to the poor and uninsured give up their health insurance, voluntarily for say 6 months and see what it would be like to be absolutely terrified of becoming injured or sick, need medical care and not be able to pay for it. It's just like those religious nuts who want to refuse research on embryonic stem cells, but would NOT refuse to utilize any discovery resulting from said research if their or one of their loved one's life depended on it.Keep your religion out of my science, Thank you.