cost of dying, by cause in Canada

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/end-of-life/how-much-does-dying-cost-canadians/article2252845/

Almost 70 per cent of people die in the hospital, including some in high-tech intensive-care beds, which cost about $1-million a year to operate. Many patients fail to complete advance directives or communicate preferences to their families, meaning they could be subject to costly, invasive treatments they did not actually want.

...

Prof. Fassbender’s research shows it costs the health-care system about $39,947 to treat a patient with organ failure near the end of life; $36,652 for a terminal illness; and $31,881 for frailty. Sudden death is the least costly at $10,223.

...

Some suggest that by filling out advance directives, it can help ensure that patients receive treatments they want at end of life. The Royal Society of Canada’s report on end-of-life decisions earlier this month pointed out the need for people to express their wishes.

Hugh Walker, adjunct professor of health economics at Queen’s University medical school, who did studies on costs of care for dying cancer patients, knows this issue well, which is why he has an advance directive.

“Lots of people, my wife and I included, have signed ‘do not resuscitate’ or ‘do no heroic intervention’ orders,” said Dr. Walker, who at 73, still works. “… We don’t want to live our lives in a long-term setting and we didn’t want the other one to have a long life of disability.”

And yet, end-of-life wishes and the costs of care associated with it remain taboo topics in Canadian health care.

--------------------

D - clearly, lowering death by cancer and dementia involve long-term policies outside of health care proper. Nutrition for cancer, and fostering a culture of life-long learning for dementia.

http://leas.ca/Toxins-in-Household-Products.htm

Product
Silica Trisodium
nitrilotriacetate Methylene
chloride Naphthelene Ethoxylated
nonyl-phenol 2-butoxyethanol Toluene Xylene

D - yet there are known hazardous chemicals in Canadian households still. The European precautionary principle would seem more wise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle

The precautionary principle or precautionary approach states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking the action.

D - my blog on dementia covers the lifestyle changes required to avoid dying from the 'top 10' ways to die. The key lesson is to realize that nobody wants to die from the slowest, most painful, and most ultimately terminal ways to go - dementia and cancer. Morbid as it sounds, our gov't policy should be to enhance the likelihood of a 'good death' - as compared to those 2 ways. Both the patient and the public purse are in agreement on this.

D - my additional proposal in the short term is this: require signing a check-box of 'living will' options when either a
1) driver license or
2) OHIP (health) card
gets renewed. In this fashion, the citizen and patient is encouraged -enabled - to choose for themselves so that their families do not over-ride their end-of-life treatment choices at great expense.
This policy would have a nearly immediate impact on health care costs, and the results would be visible even in this political term.

Harper still will pay +6% per year until c. 2014. After that the federal transfer will typically decrease, certainly compared to increasing costs to treat ageing Boomers. Ontario is also worse off with the new formula since the rapid rate of exporting raw commodities in the West has raised our currency, gutted our manufacturing sector, and left us with an ageing population.

Ontario faces a credit rating downgrade. EVERY option needs to be on the table. This 1 is a no-brainer, and avoids the 'third rail' issue of euthanasia and assisted suicide. The patients simply chooses for themselves.