Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Health

Canadians face longest waits for health care on record

Published

4 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Bacchus Barua and Mackenzie Moir

Just when you thought Canadian health care had hit rock bottom, wait times in 2024 have hit an all-time high.

According to the latest version of our annual report published by the Fraser Institute, the median wait from referral by a family doctor to treatment (averaged across 10 provinces and 12 medical specialties including surgeries) is now 30 weeks—the longest wait in the report’s history and more than three times longer than the 9.3-week median wait in 1993.

Of course, wait times vary by province, and some provinces are worse than others. In New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, the median wait is more than one year. And even in Ontario, which reported the shortest wait times in Canada this year, patients faced a 23.6-week wait, the longest in the province’s history.

In fact, compared to last year, wait times grew in every province (except Nova Scotia where patients still faced a median wait just shy of 40 weeks this year).

There’s also considerable variation in wait times depending on the type of care. For example, patients faced the longest waits for orthopedic surgeries (57.5 weeks) and neurosurgery (46.2 weeks) and shorter waits for chemotherapy (4.7 weeks), and radiological cancer treatments (4.5 weeks). In total, the study estimated that Canadian patients were waiting for more than 1.5 million procedures in 2024.

These waits for care are not benign inconveniences. Patients may experience physical pain, psychological distress and worsening physical condition while awaiting care. This year, the 15-week median wait for treatment after seeing a specialist was more than a month and a half longer than what physicians consider a reasonable wait (8.6 weeks). And this doesn’t even include the median 15-week wait to see a specialist in the first place.

Moreover, according to the Commonwealth Fund, a U.S.-based health-care research organization, among nine universal health-care systems worldwide, last year patients in Canada were the second-most likely to report waiting longer than one month for a specialist consultation, and the most likely to report waiting more than two months for surgery. In other words, although long wait times remain a staple of Canadian health care, they are not a necessary trade-off for having universal coverage.

And to be clear, wait times are only one manifestation of the strain on Canada’s health-care system. It’s now also normal to see emergency room closures, health-care worker burnout, and data suggesting millions of Canadians are without access to a regular health-care provider.

What’s the solution to Canada’s crippling health-care wait times?

There are many options for reform. But put simply, if policymakers in Canada want to reduce wait times for patients across the country, they should learn from better-performing universal health-care countries where patients receive more timely care. With wait times this year reaching an all-time high, relief can’t come soon enough.

Bacchus Barua

Director, Health Policy Studies, Fraser Institute

Mackenzie Moir

Senior Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute

 

Alberta

A Christmas wish list for health-care reform

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Nadeem Esmail and Mackenzie Moir

It’s an exciting time in Canadian health-care policy. But even the slew of new reforms in Alberta only go part of the way to using all the policy tools employed by high performing universal health-care systems.

For 2026, for the sake of Canadian patients, let’s hope Alberta stays the path on changes to how hospitals are paid and allowing some private purchases of health care, and that other provinces start to catch up.

While Alberta’s new reforms were welcome news this year, it’s clear Canada’s health-care system continued to struggle. Canadians were reminded by our annual comparison of health care systems that they pay for one of the developed world’s most expensive universal health-care systems, yet have some of the fewest physicians and hospital beds, while waiting in some of the longest queues.

And speaking of queues, wait times across Canada for non-emergency care reached the second-highest level ever measured at 28.6 weeks from general practitioner referral to actual treatment. That’s more than triple the wait of the early 1990s despite decades of government promises and spending commitments. Other work found that at least 23,746 patients died while waiting for care, and nearly 1.3 million Canadians left our overcrowded emergency rooms without being treated.

At least one province has shown a genuine willingness to do something about these problems.

The Smith government in Alberta announced early in the year that it would move towards paying hospitals per-patient treated as opposed to a fixed annual budget, a policy approach that Quebec has been working on for years. Albertans will also soon be able purchase, at least in a limited way, some diagnostic and surgical services for themselves, which is again already possible in Quebec. Alberta has also gone a step further by allowing physicians to work in both public and private settings.

While controversial in Canada, these approaches simply mirror what is being done in all of the developed world’s top-performing universal health-care systems. Australia, the Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland all pay their hospitals per patient treated, and allow patients the opportunity to purchase care privately if they wish. They all also have better and faster universally accessible health care than Canada’s provinces provide, while spending a little more (Switzerland) or less (Australia, Germany, the Netherlands) than we do.

While these reforms are clearly a step in the right direction, there’s more to be done.

Even if we include Alberta’s reforms, these countries still do some very important things differently.

Critically, all of these countries expect patients to pay a small amount for their universally accessible services. The reasoning is straightforward: we all spend our own money more carefully than we spend someone else’s, and patients will make more informed decisions about when and where it’s best to access the health-care system when they have to pay a little out of pocket.

The evidence around this policy is clear—with appropriate safeguards to protect the very ill and exemptions for lower-income and other vulnerable populations, the demand for outpatient healthcare services falls, reducing delays and freeing up resources for others.

Charging patients even small amounts for care would of course violate the Canada Health Act, but it would also emulate the approach of 100 per cent of the developed world’s top-performing health-care systems. In this case, violating outdated federal policy means better universal health care for Canadians.

These top-performing countries also see the private sector and innovative entrepreneurs as partners in delivering universal health care. A relationship that is far different from the limited individual contracts some provinces have with private clinics and surgical centres to provide care in Canada. In these other countries, even full-service hospitals are operated by private providers. Importantly, partnering with innovative private providers, even hospitals, to deliver universal health care does not violate the Canada Health Act.

So, while Alberta has made strides this past year moving towards the well-established higher performance policy approach followed elsewhere, the Smith government remains at least a couple steps short of truly adopting a more Australian or European approach for health care. And other provinces have yet to even get to where Alberta will soon be.

Let’s hope in 2026 that Alberta keeps moving towards a truly world class universal health-care experience for patients, and that the other provinces catch up.

Continue Reading

Health

FDA warns ‘breast binder’ manufacturers to stop marketing to gender-confused girls

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Doug Mainwaring

Dr. Marty Makary took aim at the transgender-medical-industrial complex that has exploded in recent years during a recent press conference.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner Dr. Marty Makary has sternly warned companies manufacturing “breast binders” to cease marketing and supplying their product to gender-confused girls seeking to make their bodies appear masculine.

“Today the FDA is taking action,” said Makary in a press conference. “We are sending warning letters to 12 manufacturers and retailers for illegal marketing of breast binders for children, for the purposes of treating gender dysphoria.”

“Breast binders are a class one medical device with legitimate medical users, such as being used by women after breast cancer surgery,” but “these binders are not benign,” he cautioned. “Long-term usage has been associated with pain, compromised lung function, and even difficulty breast feeding later in life.”

“The warning letters will formally notify the companies of their significant regulatory violations and require prompt corrective action,” said the FDA head.

The warning letter addressed to California manufacturer, GenderBender, notes that the company’s website states that “[c]hest binding is the practice of compressing breast mass into a more masculine shape, often done in the LGBTQ community for gender euphoria.”

“Your firm should take prompt action to address any violations identified in this letter. Failure to adequately address this matter may result in regulatory action being initiated by the FDA without further notice. These actions include, but are not limited to, seizure and injunction,” advised the FDA.

During his presentation, Makary took aim at the transgender-medical-industrial complex that has exploded in recent years. 

“One of the most barbaric features of a society is the genital mutilation of its children,” observed Makary.

“This ideology is a belief system that some teachers, some pediatricians, and others are selling to children without their parents knowing sometimes, or with a deliberate attempt to remove parents from the decision making,” Makary explained.

To witness society “putting kids on a path of chest binders, drugs, castration, mastectomies, and other procedures is a path that now many kids regret,” he lamented, as he pointed to Chloe Cole, who has reverted to her God-given femininity after undergoing so-called “gender-affirming” surgery as a teen.

Cole is a leading voice for young people who have “detransitioned” after having medically, surgically, and socially attempted to “transition” to a member of the opposite sex.

Continue Reading

Trending

X