The government said it is the initial phase of a plan that would expand to become a publicly funded national programme.

Canada’s parliament has passed a bill that that will cover the full cost of contraception and diabetes drugs for Canadians.

The Liberal government said it is the initial phase of a plan that would expand to become a publicly funded national pharmacare programme.

But two provinces - Alberta and Quebec - have indicated they may opt-out of the programme, accusing Ottawa of interfering in provincial matters.

Opposition Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, whose party is ahead in national polls by a wide margin, does not support the legislation.

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    24·
    8 hours ago

    Now, what about smokers, drinkers, recreational drug users, people who eat too much, people who drive too fast, people who use recreational motor vehicles, the list goes on forever.

    Again, lifestyle related illnesses should be treated through patient education, not prolonged with taxpayer funded “treatment”.

    Everyone should have access to doctors, but we’re not talking about unlimited resources, and some patients should be sent home with a “reverse your disease in 60 days” guide, rather than “here’s a prescription to continue your curable disease for the next 40 years.”

    Actually reversing someone’s disease, rather than prolonged management, would save our healthcare system billions a year.

    Wouldn’t we all be better off with common sense healthcare, rather than kneejerk sickcare?

    • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
      3·
      7 hours ago

      So, have you been to a doctor? When you walk in with high blood pressure, do you think they don’t mention reducing your weight, sodium, and cholesterol? Some people follow that advice, some don’t. Some don’t know how to achieve that.

      A lot of the things you talk about already happen, at the most superficial level. It isn’t working. But, much like drug addiction, people would rather vilify those who are so weak as to succumb to addiction (or overeating) rather than providing the resources to help them beyond a handy little pamphlet telling them everything they already know.

      But that isn’t what you started with advocating. Rather than advocating better resources to help people deal with the causes, you promoted the idea of removing help treating their symptoms if they didn’t meet your criteria of trying enough to fix the underlying causes, of what I imagine are your personal pet peeves.