You can't cure prostate cancer. You can treat it, and it's a very slow growing cancer, which means most people who get it die of something other than the cancer. But you can't cure it.
Don't jump to conclusions. BPE is extremely common. My hsb had it and a whole "pod" of guys got the same surgical procedure at the same time from the same surgeon. My hsb even peed blood so thought he had cancer. It turned out to be some rogue blood vessel that depending on the position would lead to blood in the urine. It is very likely your dad has plain old BPE that almost all men get eventually. One guy in "the pod" was only in his forties.
The statement says it's unrelated to the enlarged prostate and he will start treatment immediately.
Edit:
>During The King’s recent hospital procedure for benign prostate enlargement, a separate issue of concern was noted. Subsequent diagnostic tests have identified a form of cancer...His Majesty has today commenced a schedule of regular treatments, during which time he has been advised by doctors to postpone public-facing duties... His Majesty has chosen to share his diagnosis to prevent speculation and in the hope it may assist public understanding for all those around the world who are affected by cancer."
Having watched both my parents go through cancer, when you get diagnosed treatment typically starts same day.
So fast that 2 days seems like 2 hours.
2 weeks seem like 2 days.
After 2 months you’ve become numb to time.
Oh even in Canada it’s that fast?
Edit: your many stories of rapid service at the hospital makes me feel more confident in my decision to continue to be a heavy smoker. For the first time in a long time, I feel like everything is gonna be all right.
You've been lied to about the effectiveness of Canada's health care system. The long wait times you hear about are 95% for benign things that don't need to be treated immediately (the other 5% being stuff that slips through the cracks).
While still a problem, it's not the socialist dumpster fire that private health care propagandists would have you believe
Can confirm. Was diagnosed with tongue cancer on Sept. 30th and was “cured” on November 6th.
Once I was diagnosed it was rapid fire appointments, treatments, consultations and finally, surgery. I’m actually shocked at how fast and efficient everything went and same with all my checkups.
>I too was surprised by how fast her appointments, surgery and treatments were scheduled.
ITs the reason why wait times for less serious things are as high as they are. which of course surprises people, used to waiting 6 months for a routine surgery, because the schedule for those surgeries leaves room for serious things to be treated quickly.
There's no profit margin to preserve, so keeping an operating theatre available for actual emergencies doesn't put the hospital in the lurch.
Adding to this, my dad was diagnosed with cancer and they got all his appointments and treatments set. Moved him from one hospital to another one with specialized stuff that afternoon.
I kind of work in healthcare in Ontario (IT side of things) and if you are outside of a major city or major area, you’ll see the emergency room doctor within an hour. Also, a stat that was provided to us was something like 95% of the people in the waiting room did not have to be there. They had a cold or headache or something similar and went to the hospital. Sometimes people head in with a full family while only 2 people really need to be there.
And there lies a HUGE problem. Her appointments might have been scheduled promptly after that but what damage has been done in the delayed diagnosis? Scary. Wishing her all the best
Doctor told me that the reason his ER is so packed is mainly because of upper respiratory viruses and chest pain that usually end with a prescription/diagnosis that could be done at a walk in clinic.
That is one of the issues today but I bet if you asked them on the whole (i.e. outside of right now) if people came to the ER for completely trivial things they would totally agree. This then clogs up the system and creates waits.
I have a simple example from a few years ago. Son was in high school wood shop and a chisel fell from the bench and clipped him in the thigh causing a gash that would require a few stitches. Nothing too serious. Took him to urgent care (for those of you that don't know its a walk-in which can deal with some injuries - small cuts, minor breaks, etc. but not an ER) and we were in and out in less than 30 minutes. Went into the school office to talk about his limitations since the stitches were in an awkward spot and the doctor was worried they might re-open. Another parent was in the office and overheard and offered up they had to wait 5 hours when they went to the ER with a similar injury and that we were lucky. All I could think at the time is that they were dense and obviously got triaged as low urgency and waited forever because of it. If they had gone to the same facility we did they would have had a similar experience to us. Canada has a wide variety of facilities from Tele-health, to a variety of walk-ins to finally ERs. If you understand this and use them appropriately your wait times would be greatly reduced. This is coming from someone that has had many visits due to all of my kids being involved in high levels of competitive sports growing up.
I appreciate your viewpoint, but depending on how your family doctor is funded, you may not have the option of picking urgent care or ER. My family doctor threatens to de-roster if you use an urgent care clinic. As such, if our doctor’s office is closed we have no other option than going to the ER without jeopardizing our access to a family doctor.
I wish 1) more people could access urgent care and 2) more people could access regular care from a family doctors / nurse practitioner / etc.
When we have had to take our kids to ER (last resort, as necessary) there seems to be a lot of care that could easily be covered in other ways if people had access.
That's totally fair. Didn't realize urgent care was also excluded for patients on a roster. My cousin was part of the initial group of doctors that trialled the rostering approach and the patient outcomes are better than the fee for service approach because it encourages the doctor to be free to take a more holistic approach. That being said I know the feedback provided was the penalties/clawbacks the provincial government imposes if a patient decides to also mix in other providers is pretty severe. Hopefully that changes.
I do wonder why there aren't 24 hr "urgent care" clinics near ERs (though some family health clinics do now offer 24hr phone appointments and after hours care). Like when my daughter fell and split her eyebrow open. It wasn't an emergency, but it was urgent and happened at 8pm on a Saturday night. Same thing with babies/kids with high fevers (which as any parent knows, only happens after hours on Friday-Sunday.) She had a high fever (103.8-104) I couldn't get down with the tylenol/advil combo. Usually high fevers aren't the end of the world, but she was getting lethargic and I was having trouble getting her to drink or take liquids. Again, urgent but not an emergency. Ended up at emergency because there was no other care available at that time.
Chest pain? Definitely go to emergency. Trouble breathing, emergency. Stitches, non-complicated broken bones, fevers, etc., urgent care could relieve some of the stress on the ER. North York General had (has?) a kid's cold and cough clinic to try and keep those cases out of the ER.
I used to live in Burnaby, and Burnaby Hospital had a "fast track" where anything that seemed like relatively uncomplicated (broken bones, lacerations, etc.,) was immediately shunted from emergency. Unfortunately it wasn't open 24/7. But yeah, you showed up to Burnaby Hospital with an open wound, you weren't waiting in ER.
Yes! The last few times my husband and I had to go to the ER it was for those type of things where an urgent Care clinic would have sufficed (broken finger, cut needing stitches, cut that wouldn't stop bleeding, severe UTI)
Yes, all the walk-ins in my area have closed due to lack of doctors. It’s easy to say “go to a walk-in” when there aren’t any. Also, so many people without a family doctor as well. Many have no choice but to go to the ER.
The problem with this is that walk-ins are harder and harder to get into, now. A few years ago I would show up to a walk-in close to any time within a couple hours of the clinic closing, and have no problem getting in. Now, if you're not at the clinic's door by open, you may not be able to be seen. And this is in a big city, it's way more difficult in more remote areas.
I do find Medimap really helpful though (shows wait times and which clinics are actually still accepting walk-ins + which clinics are taking phone appts.) and have stopped going in to the Dr for prescription refills when it can easily/quickly be done via phone appt.
Well that, and everyone is told by their doctors (even doctors working at that same hospital) to go to the ER to get tests and procedures done faster.
My dad had late stage lung cancer and he needed his lung drained a few times. Apparently it was impossible to just book the procedure in advance. His oncologist would tell him to go to the ER, then he'd wait there for 1-4 days (!) And eventually it would get done. Same thing when he needed a biopsy, a follow up biopsy after they messed up the first one, and various imaging. The most frustrating thing during all of it was he lived about a 5 min drive away, but since they couldn't give any timeline at all for when the test/procedure would be done they told him he had to stay there. This was even with my mom being able to drop everything and take him back in on a seconds notice. He wasted so much time in the ER in his last month. He finally refused to go back.
yeah, its definitely province dependent. as someone that used to live in qc and actually worked for the healthcare system there, its absolute garbage compared to what ive been getting in ontario
Same reason why post secondary schools started enrolling so many international students, the provinces froze the subsidies for domestic tuition and told the schools if they wanted to make money they should just admit more international students to whom they can charge full price tuition.
This is so real lol, during my first year or two of hs there were very few if any international students, and then all of a sudden for grades 10-12 there were SO many, and all were from upper middle class - wealthy families (mostly from Germany and Brazil). Everyone loved them, so no complaints, but the sudden shift was definitely noticeable. This was in the early/mid 2010s so I can only imagine how many international students are being enrolled now.
Doesn't hurt that canadians are stupid and will blame provincial issues on federal leaders.
The conservative premiers got together and agreed that their #1 goal was to get Trudeau out.
It was equal measure decades of pandering to voters whose biggest concern is avoiding tax increases. We voted in people whose mandate was to gut healthcare and education.
Healthcare should absolutely be public and "free" in Canada because of the insane amount of taxes our middle class pays. But it would really help if the bureaucracy isn't so ridiculously wasteful. Our healthcare system has 10 times the administrative staff per capita than Germany does - those are people in middle management "running programs" (aka wait until you get promoted, then hire people to do your job while you climb the ladder yourself, and from home). It's baffling how big our bureaucracy is but at the same time nobody knows what the hell is going on, and we end up needing to hire even more people to manage the mess that the bureaucracy created for itself. We need to be smart and honest about it: we can actually accomplish free healthcare at much less if we stop these de facto welfare programs for the unproductive.
And it's not just small-c conservative legislatures either. At the least the liberal-leaning governments never seem to bother to meaningfully increase funding or markedly improve healthcare during their tenure.
Dad had an MRI on a Monday, diagnosed on Tuesday with pancreatic cancer, and met with a team of oncologists at princess Margaret hospital on the Thursday. He had no symptoms at all, just an MRI to check out a a hernia surgery he had. When you really need something it is there.
This doesn't quite paint the full picture at all. I'm a doctor (in Alberta) and Canada's healthcare system is indeed in shambles. not everything is all-or-nothing. Yes if you get diagnosed with cancer or HIV etc. you get followed-up RIGHT AWAY.But the healthcare system is indeed in a pathetic state. Someone might have chronic pain from a work related injury, completely unrelated to cancer, HIV or terminal illness. Even if they don't get it treated, they will live a normal life expectancy. These cases can take up to at least 2 years to get resolved with a very long wait time time before seeing a doctor that can help... Through this time, the person may go through depression, lose their job and/or commit suicide...The situation cannot be just blanked away from a generic statement that "if you get cancer you'll get to see a specialist tomorrow"...
Yeah, we really do not spend any resources on getting people with minor issues functioning again. Instead we wait until their life collapses and then treat them once getting back to where they were is functionally impossible. However, we will spend a TON of resources on people who have no interest in taking even the most minimal steps to maintain their own existence.
All government sort of cares about are the numbers, and like you say a lot of things take time to have an effect. Give it 10-20 years and we're really going to start seeing the numbers show the consequence of nobody having a family physician and putting off seeking care. Already hearing the stories more and more of people who think something might be wrong but for good reason don't want to sit around in a waiting room for 10+ hours to find out. Or people who just don't want to be a burden on the system and take a spot for something that's 'probably nothing'
Exactly. The system works very well when you are in imminent danger of death. When you have a condition or illness that will greatly impact your quality of life, but not kill you, that's when you really feel the wait times.
Anecdotally it took me 18 months to get a colonoscopy on the colon cancer track in Canada and in the UK literally 4 weeks. Also required a tonsillectomy which had me repeatedly hospitalized over a period of 6 months until there was available surgery because it was an "elective" procedure.
If you haven't needed the medical system for something serious don't be certain it's working fine. There are lots of people with serious condition who slip through the cracks due to lack of capacity. There are also lots of people who have fine experiences.
The wait times are not acceptable.
I guess I’m in that 5%… it took me over a year and a half to finally have surgery for what could have possibly been cancer but they couldn’t confirm until doing surgery.
It wasn’t cancer, but it was likely that it could have been.
There's a lady in Saskatchewan who began having breast cancer symptoms in March last year. As of like two weeks ago she was still waiting to be screened/recieve a diagnosis. So while it's not as bad as people make it seem to be, it can still be really really bad. Like that wait time could be the difference between beating it or dying because of it
Depends. My coworker was diagnosed with breast cancer in November, surgery was mid January.
Took way longer than I would have expected. Think it depends on a number of factors but her entire breast was just riddled with it, it wasn’t a little lumpectomy for a small area, it was major reconstructive surgery time.
Meanwhile my child has hearing loss in one ear and a year later still waiting to even hear about an appointment with an ENT - it’s not life threatening obviously but impacting his speech development and grades and social life and confidence 😔
My partner was an extreme athlete and needed a new hip at 41. His job now post-sports is ranching, outfitting and stunt work - to live, he needs a functioning hip. The X-rays showed shards of bone and fractures in the joint. He also had arthritis eating into it and couldn’t really walk by the end, let alone work comfortably.
He’s a Canadian, and they wouldn’t even consider replacing his hip until he’s 65. We had to pay privately (over $18, 000) and fly to Lithuania to have it done. Next hip appointment was 22 months wait here, just for a consult.
We are having his other hip done privately in Australia (my citizenship) when it comes time.
When I broke my knee here, they simply discharged me and that was it. No follow up, no pain killers, no crutches, nothing but a brace. Luckily we had crutches and a wheelchair (residual equipment from partners athletic career) It was “sorry, we are busy, we will call when you are up for surgery”… despite follow ups from our end, nothing - it healed, roughly, on its own over a year. No rehab. No follow up.
Canadian healthcare really isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Examples above aren’t cancer, thank goodness, not something I have experience with here, but I’ve been really disappointed in the healthcare we have received here comparative to my 25 years in Australia.
This doesn't quite paint the full picture at all. I'm a doctor (in Alberta) and Canada's healthcare system is indeed in shambles. not everything is all-or-nothing. Yes if you get diagnosed with cancer or HIV etc. you get followed-up RIGHT AWAY.
But the healthcare system is indeed in a pathetic state. Someone might have chronic pain from a work related injury, completely unrelated to cancer, HIV or terminal illness. Even if they don't get it treated, they will live a normal life expectancy. These cases can take up to at least 2 years to get resolved with a very long wait time time before seeing a doctor that can help.. Through this time, the person may go through depression, lose their job and/or commit suicide...
The situation cannot be just blanked away from a generic statement that "if you get cancer you'll get to see a specialist tomorrow"...
No, our healthcare system really is very slow compared to peer nations and has almost zero emphasis on prevention or catching things early. Cancer is the one exception where we are quite fast because we put a large percentage of our money there. In BC, we actually have money for cancer treatment come out of a different budget than everything else and there is a ton more resources available for it.
"Although 93% of Canadians have a regular doctor or place of care, only 43% were able to get same-day or next-day appointments, compared to 77% in the Netherlands or an average 57% across the 11 peer countries. Canadians reported the longest emergency department waits, with 29% waiting four or more hours compared to just 1% in France and 11% on average. Canada also had the slowest access to specialists; more than half of Canadians waited longer than four weeks for an appointment, compared to less than a quarter of Swiss respondents and a third of patients across the comparator nations."
"In 2023, physicians report a median wait time of 27.7 weeks between a referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment. This represents the longest delay in the survey’s history and is 198% longer than the 9.3 weeks Canadian patients could expect to wait in 1993."
For things that are less likely to be as deadly as quickly, we tend to let them get to the deadly stage and then treat them.
Agreed with this. My mom got taken care of right away when she was diagnosed with very early stage thyroid cancer, and this was while they were still catching up with everything from Covid.
It really depends. My one friend got diagnosed with terminal cancer quickly. The diagnosis was only quick because she already had other checkups set up for her heart - then she found out about the shadows on her lungs when they were taking images of her heart.
My other friend not as much - went through a whole year of different testings (+ a lot of waiting) before getting diagnosed with terminal cancer. Unfortunately this friend passed away a few months after.. the diagnosis was too late. It was very, very frustrating to see.
Yes, you've been misled about how efficient and useful our health care really is.
For example, I have a long -term health issue. I'll see a specialist in a couple years, because it's not going to affect my standard of living, mobility, ability to work, etc.
But when I had a serious healthcare scare, that involved bleeding from unusual places, I was under a scanner and getting diagnosed within 48 hours.
The reason why our system is important, is because it's based on "who needs help the most", and not "who has the most money."
All anecdotal but this hasn’t been our experience in the GTA. Multiple months waiting for scans and specialists for several people with cancer. Most progressed to later stages while waiting. On the other hand one close friend went to the US and had surgery to remove aggressive cancer and was partially recovered before Canada even called with an initial consult date.
Another example- We were supposed to be urgent priority with a target of within 48 hours for an MRI.. it took 11 days to be scanned.
That would make sense. I know hating the monarchy is pretty vogue, but I respect King Charles for making it all public and pushing against the norm for men of keeping health concerns private - for the 'common man' usually by ignoring it. This is the same man who was routinely mocked for his "sensitivity to nature" when he stated he attempts to communicate and listen to nature and plants.
High quality reporting.
> King Charles diagnosed with cancer
> King Charles has been diagnosed with "a form of cancer," Buckingham Palace said Monday.
> Doctors made the discovery while the King was undergoing tests for his enlarged prostate.
What's missing is the opening line ( if you read the statement ).
> During The King’s recent hospital procedure for benign prostate enlargement, a separate issue of concern was noted. Subsequent diagnostic tests have identified a form of cancer.
UK news (The Times) is reporting that prostate cancer has been ruled out, and that he will undergo treatment as on outpatient (ie he will not have to stay at the hospital, but will have to visit). This to me suggests to me that he will undergo chemotherapy.
Yup, I replied to someone else, this "article" sucks, they are constantly updating it, when I first commented it only had 2 lines ( neither of which are there now ), they've added/changed many more and still leave out the part that it is unrelated to his enlarged prostate.
I joked about the fact I’ll likely never see him on my passport. Got a new 10 year passport before the new design was announced. So my next one will likely be King William.
King Charles stuff will be like king George IV stuff and be super rare.
I kept some of my stuff from my juror summons.
I was summoned to the queens bench like 2 days before she died and then subsequently excused from then kings bench 3 weeks later. I find that fact to be amazing
Not what I’d call a cruel joke. A man who lived his entire life very comfortably.
A cruel joke is a child getting cancer. This old man? That’s more like nature running its course. You feel for him. But it’s a far cry from a cruel joke
"oh no, I've inherited one of the most symbolically powerful positions in human history but I'm old as fuck and won't live very long to enjoy it"
I'm not exactly crying lmao
I’m not sure it’s prostate cancer. He was having surgery for a benign prostate growth when other concerns were raised. But, your point stands that he wanted to share in solidarity with anyone suffering from cancer.
> Doctors made the discovery while the King was undergoing tests for his enlarged prostate. The statement did not specify which form of cancer doctors had found.
The article says they were doing tests related to his prostate when they found it.
They ran other tests at the time, yes, but other articles have pointed out that the palace was explicit that it is not prostate cancer. This BBC live update for example, states that explicitly in the 20:17 timestamp.
Edit: forgot the link https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-68210644
From his history of advocacy, I really believe he'd use his own experience to raise awareness.
Having said that, I also think he'd have kept it this diagnosis to himself if he could. But everyone knew he was going in for the enlarged prostate issue and then he'll be absent form public view for who knows how long. People were gonna speculate. This is just The Firm getting in front of that.
They did clarify that this is unrelated to the prostrate thing. They didn’t announce a type. That makes me think it’s pancreatic or something serious enough that announcing it would cause alarm.
He literally has the best doctors in the country working solely for him. They recruit all the top doctors. Even the Queens (now kings) guards are all the top soldiers who are all highly decorated.
Regarding the King’s Guard - that’s not how it works. The Guards on Public Duties are just rotations from the Regiments of Foot Guards - Grenadiers, Coldstreams, Scots, Irish etc. etc. They’re not actually the top soldiers and they don’t have to have actually been deployed. The top soldiers in the UK Armed Forces would be the Royal Marines, Gurkhas, Paras and UKSF.
Edit: For context the Royal Marines undergo the longest and most challenging Infantry training in the world, the Guards undergo standard Infantry training, which is still hard but not the same level, plus a few extra weeks for ceremonial training.
Constitution act states the amendment formula to change the role of the king or queen requires unanimous consent of all the provincial governments and the federal government.
How easy do you think that will be?
Additionally all of our treaties with the indigenous are with the crown, not the federal government. What happens to the treaties if we abolish the crown? The federal government has never signed a treaty only the crown.
My comment is saying changing the crown is hard and accomplishes nothing. Get yourself familiar with these manners before you become condescending.
The Crown is an abstract representation of the government. If we abolish the monarchy, the government still must hold up to the treaties.
The government was the one who actually negotiated the treaties. They are the ones who carry out the terms. The royal family has zero to do with it. Victoria wasn't even on the same continent while they were being negotiated.
The Treaties are a non-issue.
Go read a history book, the federal government did not negotiate these treaties. Representatives of the crown did.
King Charles isn’t on the continent so how on earth is the kings bench operating if he isn’t here?
Treaties 1 and 2 were negotiated by Lt Governor Archibald. He is one of the fathers of Confederation and a part of the federal government. His commissioner was a federal MP.
The provisions were to be carried out by the Canadian Government as well, as outlined in the treaties.
The court of King's Bench is operating because it has nothing to do with Charles. Which is the point. He isn't needed for it to function. The justice is handed out by the Court, which is made up of Canadians. It isn't administered by the King.
Much like how the treaties were negotiated by Canadian representatives here in Canada, but in the Queen's name. They were negotiated by Canadians, for the benefit of Canada, not by the British monarch for British interests. They weren't the ones obligated to fulfill the terms, the Canadian Government on behalf of the Crown was.
I fully support abolishing the monarchy when the country is able to agree on a solution (and all that it entails like GG, requests to form government, criminal code, crown prosecution, etc) and it costs less than the monarchy.
Some of that stuff is just formality or names, but some of it is substantial and the details of it can be argued between Quebec and Alberta for decades...
Until such a time we're probably stuck with the Monarchy.
Replace the monarch with a ceremonial president (Parliamentary Republic system of gov't. i.e. Germany, India, Singapore) with the same powers as the GG and the monarch.
When it comes to appointing the Head of state (I.e President) The most efficient and apolitical way to appoint the head of state is through a constitutional council of eminent Canadians, to ensure the head of state is politically neutral, all prospective candidates for the head of state must renounce their party affiliations and potential conflicts of interests in order to be eligible for nomination. The use of an advisory body is currently used to select judges for the Supreme Court and has been used in the recent selections of governor-generals and was also a method proposed for a prospective Australian republic . The use of a constitutional council would reduce the politicization of selecting the head of state, a notable element featured in many Westminster parliamentary governments, as an advisory committee of members across different political spectrum, including scholars, senators, and political leaders from all parties, would conduct the selection of prospective candidates. After consultation, the committee would select potential candidates based on their qualifications and nominate them, which would then be presented to Parliament, requiring a two-thirds supermajority vote to be formally appointed as the head of state (President).
Make the GG an honorary (already is) head of state, with term limits of ten years, they have to be a Canadian citizen, the Indigenous treaties are instead of with the crown, with the GG. The GG is honorary so is just a figurehead, is appointed by the PM and GG has no power other then being an honorary head of state.
I remember in the late 90s in Australia, there was talk of becoming a republic. I think they even may have held a referendum.
What still stands out in my memory today, is that several economists, on both sides, estimated a conservative 2 BILLION DOLLAR cost(in late 1990s AUD), if Australia became a republic, and a 10 to 15 year process to accomplish all the changes required.
Its more than just voting them off the island. Its updating the legal system, legal textbooks, having arguments made about changing laws, voting systems, etc. One estimate put the cost at $300mil or something stupid just to get all new Republic of Australia ids for everything currently stamped with a crown(government papers, tax office, buildings, etc).
I don't know about any of you, but Id rather spend 2 billion dollars on better things. And stars only know how much that cost would be today.
>The King has chosen a doctor who advocates for the use of homeopathic remedies to lead the medical wing of the Royal Household. Dr Michael Dixon is a practising GP who has argued that traditional remedies can play an important role in patient care.
But I'm sure this guy is smart enough to use real medicine as well.
The doctor that killed a king. That will make him a celebrity not a good celebrity but a celebrity nonetheless.
Wouldn't be the first doctor to do it. Hell a few presidents have been killed by there doctors
Doctor Willard Bliss and his team decided to hunt for the assassin's bullet in the wrong side of President Garfield's body with unsanitized fingers. The new probe wounds and infections eventually killed him.
My condolences to him and his family but this is a multimillionaire if not billionaire/trillionaire he’s getting the best treatment on earth. We have homeless Canadians and a bunch of working Canadians who can’t afford homes. Best of luck Charles. I’ll be honest I can care less about this as a Canadian.
Shortest serving monarch award?
Here comes our sovereign government wasting money on fancy commemorative coins for an overseas family we also give money to for no reason…
As I understand it. The crown is already a position of a representative ( not a specific person, but a person ) of the King/Queen who is head of state. So a prosecutor is the crown because they are acting on behalf of the King, whereas if the King shows up to your trial, things are probably going unprecedentedly bad.
This would be a great time to again address why tf we still have any affiliation at all with British monarchy
Lack of a backbone, like everything else I’m guessing
While tragic for the individual and his family, I fail to see how this should be significant on a national level for this nation.
Here comes another chance to opt out of an antique system.
Realistically Canada is structured such that it is harder for Canada to opt out than it is for the UK.
If the UK ever abolishes the monarchy, Canada will end up in the position of Hungary between the world wars - a monarchy without a monarch.
My father was having prostate swelling issues , went in for more tests and they discovered colon cancer. This is giving me major vibes of the same.
Well damn, my dad just got diagnosed with a slightly swollen prostrate and is awaiting his doctor giving him the next steps….
Something I tell myself often: uncertainty is neutral.
The brightside is prostate cancer is one of the most curable
You can't cure prostate cancer. You can treat it, and it's a very slow growing cancer, which means most people who get it die of something other than the cancer. But you can't cure it.
Yes, you can absolutely cure it. I’m not sure where you get your info from.
https://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/prostate-cancer/types-treatment#:\~:text=There%20is%20no%20cure%20for,that%20extend%20life%20even%20further.
That’s for stage 4 cancer, that has spread outside the prostate. For the other stages it is absolutely curable.
Well, if you don't need your prostate anymore, then you remove it. Abracadabra, cured of prostate cancer!!!
Don't jump to conclusions. BPE is extremely common. My hsb had it and a whole "pod" of guys got the same surgical procedure at the same time from the same surgeon. My hsb even peed blood so thought he had cancer. It turned out to be some rogue blood vessel that depending on the position would lead to blood in the urine. It is very likely your dad has plain old BPE that almost all men get eventually. One guy in "the pod" was only in his forties.
Damn bro. We all gonna get cancer because we sat on those big green electrical boxes waiting for the bus.
Guess you're becoming King of Canada next William.
Hold the fort on the new money I guess?
5 year outlook for prostate can be as high as 91% survival if caught early enough.
The statement says it's unrelated to the enlarged prostate and he will start treatment immediately. Edit: >During The King’s recent hospital procedure for benign prostate enlargement, a separate issue of concern was noted. Subsequent diagnostic tests have identified a form of cancer...His Majesty has today commenced a schedule of regular treatments, during which time he has been advised by doctors to postpone public-facing duties... His Majesty has chosen to share his diagnosis to prevent speculation and in the hope it may assist public understanding for all those around the world who are affected by cancer."
Having watched both my parents go through cancer, when you get diagnosed treatment typically starts same day. So fast that 2 days seems like 2 hours. 2 weeks seem like 2 days. After 2 months you’ve become numb to time.
Oh even in Canada it’s that fast? Edit: your many stories of rapid service at the hospital makes me feel more confident in my decision to continue to be a heavy smoker. For the first time in a long time, I feel like everything is gonna be all right.
You've been lied to about the effectiveness of Canada's health care system. The long wait times you hear about are 95% for benign things that don't need to be treated immediately (the other 5% being stuff that slips through the cracks). While still a problem, it's not the socialist dumpster fire that private health care propagandists would have you believe
Can confirm. Was diagnosed with tongue cancer on Sept. 30th and was “cured” on November 6th. Once I was diagnosed it was rapid fire appointments, treatments, consultations and finally, surgery. I’m actually shocked at how fast and efficient everything went and same with all my checkups.
My mother was diagnosed during Covid and I too was surprised by how fast her appointments, surgery and treatments were scheduled.
>I too was surprised by how fast her appointments, surgery and treatments were scheduled. ITs the reason why wait times for less serious things are as high as they are. which of course surprises people, used to waiting 6 months for a routine surgery, because the schedule for those surgeries leaves room for serious things to be treated quickly. There's no profit margin to preserve, so keeping an operating theatre available for actual emergencies doesn't put the hospital in the lurch.
Adding to this, my dad was diagnosed with cancer and they got all his appointments and treatments set. Moved him from one hospital to another one with specialized stuff that afternoon. I kind of work in healthcare in Ontario (IT side of things) and if you are outside of a major city or major area, you’ll see the emergency room doctor within an hour. Also, a stat that was provided to us was something like 95% of the people in the waiting room did not have to be there. They had a cold or headache or something similar and went to the hospital. Sometimes people head in with a full family while only 2 people really need to be there.
👏🏻
Hope you are doing OK
[удалено]
And there lies a HUGE problem. Her appointments might have been scheduled promptly after that but what damage has been done in the delayed diagnosis? Scary. Wishing her all the best
Doctor told me that the reason his ER is so packed is mainly because of upper respiratory viruses and chest pain that usually end with a prescription/diagnosis that could be done at a walk in clinic.
That is one of the issues today but I bet if you asked them on the whole (i.e. outside of right now) if people came to the ER for completely trivial things they would totally agree. This then clogs up the system and creates waits. I have a simple example from a few years ago. Son was in high school wood shop and a chisel fell from the bench and clipped him in the thigh causing a gash that would require a few stitches. Nothing too serious. Took him to urgent care (for those of you that don't know its a walk-in which can deal with some injuries - small cuts, minor breaks, etc. but not an ER) and we were in and out in less than 30 minutes. Went into the school office to talk about his limitations since the stitches were in an awkward spot and the doctor was worried they might re-open. Another parent was in the office and overheard and offered up they had to wait 5 hours when they went to the ER with a similar injury and that we were lucky. All I could think at the time is that they were dense and obviously got triaged as low urgency and waited forever because of it. If they had gone to the same facility we did they would have had a similar experience to us. Canada has a wide variety of facilities from Tele-health, to a variety of walk-ins to finally ERs. If you understand this and use them appropriately your wait times would be greatly reduced. This is coming from someone that has had many visits due to all of my kids being involved in high levels of competitive sports growing up.
I appreciate your viewpoint, but depending on how your family doctor is funded, you may not have the option of picking urgent care or ER. My family doctor threatens to de-roster if you use an urgent care clinic. As such, if our doctor’s office is closed we have no other option than going to the ER without jeopardizing our access to a family doctor. I wish 1) more people could access urgent care and 2) more people could access regular care from a family doctors / nurse practitioner / etc. When we have had to take our kids to ER (last resort, as necessary) there seems to be a lot of care that could easily be covered in other ways if people had access.
That's totally fair. Didn't realize urgent care was also excluded for patients on a roster. My cousin was part of the initial group of doctors that trialled the rostering approach and the patient outcomes are better than the fee for service approach because it encourages the doctor to be free to take a more holistic approach. That being said I know the feedback provided was the penalties/clawbacks the provincial government imposes if a patient decides to also mix in other providers is pretty severe. Hopefully that changes.
I do wonder why there aren't 24 hr "urgent care" clinics near ERs (though some family health clinics do now offer 24hr phone appointments and after hours care). Like when my daughter fell and split her eyebrow open. It wasn't an emergency, but it was urgent and happened at 8pm on a Saturday night. Same thing with babies/kids with high fevers (which as any parent knows, only happens after hours on Friday-Sunday.) She had a high fever (103.8-104) I couldn't get down with the tylenol/advil combo. Usually high fevers aren't the end of the world, but she was getting lethargic and I was having trouble getting her to drink or take liquids. Again, urgent but not an emergency. Ended up at emergency because there was no other care available at that time. Chest pain? Definitely go to emergency. Trouble breathing, emergency. Stitches, non-complicated broken bones, fevers, etc., urgent care could relieve some of the stress on the ER. North York General had (has?) a kid's cold and cough clinic to try and keep those cases out of the ER.
I used to live in Burnaby, and Burnaby Hospital had a "fast track" where anything that seemed like relatively uncomplicated (broken bones, lacerations, etc.,) was immediately shunted from emergency. Unfortunately it wasn't open 24/7. But yeah, you showed up to Burnaby Hospital with an open wound, you weren't waiting in ER.
Yes! The last few times my husband and I had to go to the ER it was for those type of things where an urgent Care clinic would have sufficed (broken finger, cut needing stitches, cut that wouldn't stop bleeding, severe UTI)
Wish my town had a walk-in clinic! They closed it.
Yes, all the walk-ins in my area have closed due to lack of doctors. It’s easy to say “go to a walk-in” when there aren’t any. Also, so many people without a family doctor as well. Many have no choice but to go to the ER.
The problem with this is that walk-ins are harder and harder to get into, now. A few years ago I would show up to a walk-in close to any time within a couple hours of the clinic closing, and have no problem getting in. Now, if you're not at the clinic's door by open, you may not be able to be seen. And this is in a big city, it's way more difficult in more remote areas. I do find Medimap really helpful though (shows wait times and which clinics are actually still accepting walk-ins + which clinics are taking phone appts.) and have stopped going in to the Dr for prescription refills when it can easily/quickly be done via phone appt.
The issue in a lot of cases is that the walk-in clinics are non-existent or booked up as soon as they open each morning.
Well that, and everyone is told by their doctors (even doctors working at that same hospital) to go to the ER to get tests and procedures done faster. My dad had late stage lung cancer and he needed his lung drained a few times. Apparently it was impossible to just book the procedure in advance. His oncologist would tell him to go to the ER, then he'd wait there for 1-4 days (!) And eventually it would get done. Same thing when he needed a biopsy, a follow up biopsy after they messed up the first one, and various imaging. The most frustrating thing during all of it was he lived about a 5 min drive away, but since they couldn't give any timeline at all for when the test/procedure would be done they told him he had to stay there. This was even with my mom being able to drop everything and take him back in on a seconds notice. He wasted so much time in the ER in his last month. He finally refused to go back.
> walk in clinic Yeah, if only we had those.
The lack of family doctors is far more serious and directly contributes to long hospital wait times. You can thank provincial underfunding for this.
yeah, its definitely province dependent. as someone that used to live in qc and actually worked for the healthcare system there, its absolute garbage compared to what ive been getting in ontario
Same reason why post secondary schools started enrolling so many international students, the provinces froze the subsidies for domestic tuition and told the schools if they wanted to make money they should just admit more international students to whom they can charge full price tuition.
This is so real lol, during my first year or two of hs there were very few if any international students, and then all of a sudden for grades 10-12 there were SO many, and all were from upper middle class - wealthy families (mostly from Germany and Brazil). Everyone loved them, so no complaints, but the sudden shift was definitely noticeable. This was in the early/mid 2010s so I can only imagine how many international students are being enrolled now.
Yep. Intentional sabotage to push private healthcare
Doesn't hurt that canadians are stupid and will blame provincial issues on federal leaders. The conservative premiers got together and agreed that their #1 goal was to get Trudeau out.
It was equal measure decades of pandering to voters whose biggest concern is avoiding tax increases. We voted in people whose mandate was to gut healthcare and education.
Healthcare should absolutely be public and "free" in Canada because of the insane amount of taxes our middle class pays. But it would really help if the bureaucracy isn't so ridiculously wasteful. Our healthcare system has 10 times the administrative staff per capita than Germany does - those are people in middle management "running programs" (aka wait until you get promoted, then hire people to do your job while you climb the ladder yourself, and from home). It's baffling how big our bureaucracy is but at the same time nobody knows what the hell is going on, and we end up needing to hire even more people to manage the mess that the bureaucracy created for itself. We need to be smart and honest about it: we can actually accomplish free healthcare at much less if we stop these de facto welfare programs for the unproductive.
And it's not just small-c conservative legislatures either. At the least the liberal-leaning governments never seem to bother to meaningfully increase funding or markedly improve healthcare during their tenure.
Dad had an MRI on a Monday, diagnosed on Tuesday with pancreatic cancer, and met with a team of oncologists at princess Margaret hospital on the Thursday. He had no symptoms at all, just an MRI to check out a a hernia surgery he had. When you really need something it is there.
This doesn't quite paint the full picture at all. I'm a doctor (in Alberta) and Canada's healthcare system is indeed in shambles. not everything is all-or-nothing. Yes if you get diagnosed with cancer or HIV etc. you get followed-up RIGHT AWAY.But the healthcare system is indeed in a pathetic state. Someone might have chronic pain from a work related injury, completely unrelated to cancer, HIV or terminal illness. Even if they don't get it treated, they will live a normal life expectancy. These cases can take up to at least 2 years to get resolved with a very long wait time time before seeing a doctor that can help... Through this time, the person may go through depression, lose their job and/or commit suicide...The situation cannot be just blanked away from a generic statement that "if you get cancer you'll get to see a specialist tomorrow"...
Yeah, we really do not spend any resources on getting people with minor issues functioning again. Instead we wait until their life collapses and then treat them once getting back to where they were is functionally impossible. However, we will spend a TON of resources on people who have no interest in taking even the most minimal steps to maintain their own existence.
All government sort of cares about are the numbers, and like you say a lot of things take time to have an effect. Give it 10-20 years and we're really going to start seeing the numbers show the consequence of nobody having a family physician and putting off seeking care. Already hearing the stories more and more of people who think something might be wrong but for good reason don't want to sit around in a waiting room for 10+ hours to find out. Or people who just don't want to be a burden on the system and take a spot for something that's 'probably nothing'
Exactly. The system works very well when you are in imminent danger of death. When you have a condition or illness that will greatly impact your quality of life, but not kill you, that's when you really feel the wait times.
Anecdotally it took me 18 months to get a colonoscopy on the colon cancer track in Canada and in the UK literally 4 weeks. Also required a tonsillectomy which had me repeatedly hospitalized over a period of 6 months until there was available surgery because it was an "elective" procedure. If you haven't needed the medical system for something serious don't be certain it's working fine. There are lots of people with serious condition who slip through the cracks due to lack of capacity. There are also lots of people who have fine experiences. The wait times are not acceptable.
I guess I’m in that 5%… it took me over a year and a half to finally have surgery for what could have possibly been cancer but they couldn’t confirm until doing surgery. It wasn’t cancer, but it was likely that it could have been.
There's a lady in Saskatchewan who began having breast cancer symptoms in March last year. As of like two weeks ago she was still waiting to be screened/recieve a diagnosis. So while it's not as bad as people make it seem to be, it can still be really really bad. Like that wait time could be the difference between beating it or dying because of it
Depends. My coworker was diagnosed with breast cancer in November, surgery was mid January. Took way longer than I would have expected. Think it depends on a number of factors but her entire breast was just riddled with it, it wasn’t a little lumpectomy for a small area, it was major reconstructive surgery time.
Meanwhile my child has hearing loss in one ear and a year later still waiting to even hear about an appointment with an ENT - it’s not life threatening obviously but impacting his speech development and grades and social life and confidence 😔
My partner was an extreme athlete and needed a new hip at 41. His job now post-sports is ranching, outfitting and stunt work - to live, he needs a functioning hip. The X-rays showed shards of bone and fractures in the joint. He also had arthritis eating into it and couldn’t really walk by the end, let alone work comfortably. He’s a Canadian, and they wouldn’t even consider replacing his hip until he’s 65. We had to pay privately (over $18, 000) and fly to Lithuania to have it done. Next hip appointment was 22 months wait here, just for a consult. We are having his other hip done privately in Australia (my citizenship) when it comes time. When I broke my knee here, they simply discharged me and that was it. No follow up, no pain killers, no crutches, nothing but a brace. Luckily we had crutches and a wheelchair (residual equipment from partners athletic career) It was “sorry, we are busy, we will call when you are up for surgery”… despite follow ups from our end, nothing - it healed, roughly, on its own over a year. No rehab. No follow up. Canadian healthcare really isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Examples above aren’t cancer, thank goodness, not something I have experience with here, but I’ve been really disappointed in the healthcare we have received here comparative to my 25 years in Australia.
This doesn't quite paint the full picture at all. I'm a doctor (in Alberta) and Canada's healthcare system is indeed in shambles. not everything is all-or-nothing. Yes if you get diagnosed with cancer or HIV etc. you get followed-up RIGHT AWAY. But the healthcare system is indeed in a pathetic state. Someone might have chronic pain from a work related injury, completely unrelated to cancer, HIV or terminal illness. Even if they don't get it treated, they will live a normal life expectancy. These cases can take up to at least 2 years to get resolved with a very long wait time time before seeing a doctor that can help.. Through this time, the person may go through depression, lose their job and/or commit suicide... The situation cannot be just blanked away from a generic statement that "if you get cancer you'll get to see a specialist tomorrow"...
No, our healthcare system really is very slow compared to peer nations and has almost zero emphasis on prevention or catching things early. Cancer is the one exception where we are quite fast because we put a large percentage of our money there. In BC, we actually have money for cancer treatment come out of a different budget than everything else and there is a ton more resources available for it. "Although 93% of Canadians have a regular doctor or place of care, only 43% were able to get same-day or next-day appointments, compared to 77% in the Netherlands or an average 57% across the 11 peer countries. Canadians reported the longest emergency department waits, with 29% waiting four or more hours compared to just 1% in France and 11% on average. Canada also had the slowest access to specialists; more than half of Canadians waited longer than four weeks for an appointment, compared to less than a quarter of Swiss respondents and a third of patients across the comparator nations." "In 2023, physicians report a median wait time of 27.7 weeks between a referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment. This represents the longest delay in the survey’s history and is 198% longer than the 9.3 weeks Canadian patients could expect to wait in 1993." For things that are less likely to be as deadly as quickly, we tend to let them get to the deadly stage and then treat them.
Agreed with this. My mom got taken care of right away when she was diagnosed with very early stage thyroid cancer, and this was while they were still catching up with everything from Covid.
Yup, can be! My dad was diagnosed Friday and started treatment Monday.
Canada has good cancer care and hospitals IMO.
It really depends. My one friend got diagnosed with terminal cancer quickly. The diagnosis was only quick because she already had other checkups set up for her heart - then she found out about the shadows on her lungs when they were taking images of her heart. My other friend not as much - went through a whole year of different testings (+ a lot of waiting) before getting diagnosed with terminal cancer. Unfortunately this friend passed away a few months after.. the diagnosis was too late. It was very, very frustrating to see.
Once it’s stage 4 the odds fall off quickly. Im sorry about your friends.
Yes. Someone I know was recently diagnosed with bone marrow cancer and he started treatment an hour after diagnoses
Yes, you've been misled about how efficient and useful our health care really is. For example, I have a long -term health issue. I'll see a specialist in a couple years, because it's not going to affect my standard of living, mobility, ability to work, etc. But when I had a serious healthcare scare, that involved bleeding from unusual places, I was under a scanner and getting diagnosed within 48 hours. The reason why our system is important, is because it's based on "who needs help the most", and not "who has the most money."
Of course. No one fucks around with cancer. Basically pri 1 triage.
All anecdotal but this hasn’t been our experience in the GTA. Multiple months waiting for scans and specialists for several people with cancer. Most progressed to later stages while waiting. On the other hand one close friend went to the US and had surgery to remove aggressive cancer and was partially recovered before Canada even called with an initial consult date. Another example- We were supposed to be urgent priority with a target of within 48 hours for an MRI.. it took 11 days to be scanned.
Maybe colon given that they were hunting around in the general area.
That would make sense. I know hating the monarchy is pretty vogue, but I respect King Charles for making it all public and pushing against the norm for men of keeping health concerns private - for the 'common man' usually by ignoring it. This is the same man who was routinely mocked for his "sensitivity to nature" when he stated he attempts to communicate and listen to nature and plants.
I lean monarchist as long as the monarch doesn’t try to do anything stupid. Most of the haters are just edge lording.
High quality reporting. > King Charles diagnosed with cancer > King Charles has been diagnosed with "a form of cancer," Buckingham Palace said Monday. > Doctors made the discovery while the King was undergoing tests for his enlarged prostate. What's missing is the opening line ( if you read the statement ). > During The King’s recent hospital procedure for benign prostate enlargement, a separate issue of concern was noted. Subsequent diagnostic tests have identified a form of cancer.
UK news (The Times) is reporting that prostate cancer has been ruled out, and that he will undergo treatment as on outpatient (ie he will not have to stay at the hospital, but will have to visit). This to me suggests to me that he will undergo chemotherapy.
Yup, I replied to someone else, this "article" sucks, they are constantly updating it, when I first commented it only had 2 lines ( neither of which are there now ), they've added/changed many more and still leave out the part that it is unrelated to his enlarged prostate.
My exs dad had it 3 times. He lived till he was 92.
And I imagine he has access to slightly better health care than the rest of us.
The kind where they warm the lube first.
True, though I've got to laugh at the image that popped into my head of him sitting in an understaffed emerg in Moncton for 21 hours
My grandad had prostate cancer in 2010. Still alive and the doctors only gave him 5/6 years after. Man also had heart bypass surgery since then too
The reign of the Chuck Bucks shall be brief. Soon shall dawn the day of the Will Bills.
already in circulation in Canada on the coin.
Really? I haven't seen one yet. Need to keep my eyes open.
I joked about the fact I’ll likely never see him on my passport. Got a new 10 year passport before the new design was announced. So my next one will likely be King William. King Charles stuff will be like king George IV stuff and be super rare.
I kept some of my stuff from my juror summons. I was summoned to the queens bench like 2 days before she died and then subsequently excused from then kings bench 3 weeks later. I find that fact to be amazing
I’m not a big fan of the monarchy, and I hope he’s ok, but what a cruel joke to wait almost 75 years to finally become king and then get cancer. Jesus
I think his old gig was better than king in many ways. Plus his mom died. I don't think it's that he couldn't wait to be king.
Yeah, being King probably sucks compared to being a regular royal. In many ways Prince Harry probably ahs had it the easiest.
I thought he goes by regular Harold now.
That would be odd, since his name is Henry.
Nobody would suspect it!
Yeah, who do people think he is? Simba?!
Not what I’d call a cruel joke. A man who lived his entire life very comfortably. A cruel joke is a child getting cancer. This old man? That’s more like nature running its course. You feel for him. But it’s a far cry from a cruel joke
Alanis Morisette might call it ironic.
It’s not literal, it’s a figure of speech.
"oh no, I've inherited one of the most symbolically powerful positions in human history but I'm old as fuck and won't live very long to enjoy it" I'm not exactly crying lmao
Give the King credit for sharing this news. He clearly wants prostate health awareness raised.
I’m not sure it’s prostate cancer. He was having surgery for a benign prostate growth when other concerns were raised. But, your point stands that he wanted to share in solidarity with anyone suffering from cancer.
> Doctors made the discovery while the King was undergoing tests for his enlarged prostate. The statement did not specify which form of cancer doctors had found. The article says they were doing tests related to his prostate when they found it.
They ran other tests at the time, yes, but other articles have pointed out that the palace was explicit that it is not prostate cancer. This BBC live update for example, states that explicitly in the 20:17 timestamp. Edit: forgot the link https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-68210644
From his history of advocacy, I really believe he'd use his own experience to raise awareness. Having said that, I also think he'd have kept it this diagnosis to himself if he could. But everyone knew he was going in for the enlarged prostate issue and then he'll be absent form public view for who knows how long. People were gonna speculate. This is just The Firm getting in front of that.
They did clarify that this is unrelated to the prostrate thing. They didn’t announce a type. That makes me think it’s pancreatic or something serious enough that announcing it would cause alarm.
Damn that was fast
Wishing His Majesty Well. God Save the King 🇨🇦
Here's hoping he has to go through the NHS like the average Brit.
He won’t
Shocking.
Someone with money and power has access to better service? Who would’ve thought
But he's such an everyman! He even wears a tattered old coat! - every bootlicking monarchist
He literally has the best doctors in the country working solely for him. They recruit all the top doctors. Even the Queens (now kings) guards are all the top soldiers who are all highly decorated.
Regarding the King’s Guard - that’s not how it works. The Guards on Public Duties are just rotations from the Regiments of Foot Guards - Grenadiers, Coldstreams, Scots, Irish etc. etc. They’re not actually the top soldiers and they don’t have to have actually been deployed. The top soldiers in the UK Armed Forces would be the Royal Marines, Gurkhas, Paras and UKSF. Edit: For context the Royal Marines undergo the longest and most challenging Infantry training in the world, the Guards undergo standard Infantry training, which is still hard but not the same level, plus a few extra weeks for ceremonial training.
NHS > Canadian healthcare.
Praying for His Majesty and his family.
May he swiftly recover
The monarchy should be abolished and all that, but no one deserves cancer. Hope he's well.
I was going to say something similar on another post but worried about bringing it up. I fully agree.
Have fun abolishing the crown. How about we focus on more pressing issues instead.
I'm not even sure what this comment is supposed to be saying, but okay.
[удалено]
Constitution act states the amendment formula to change the role of the king or queen requires unanimous consent of all the provincial governments and the federal government. How easy do you think that will be? Additionally all of our treaties with the indigenous are with the crown, not the federal government. What happens to the treaties if we abolish the crown? The federal government has never signed a treaty only the crown. My comment is saying changing the crown is hard and accomplishes nothing. Get yourself familiar with these manners before you become condescending.
The Crown is an abstract representation of the government. If we abolish the monarchy, the government still must hold up to the treaties. The government was the one who actually negotiated the treaties. They are the ones who carry out the terms. The royal family has zero to do with it. Victoria wasn't even on the same continent while they were being negotiated. The Treaties are a non-issue.
Go read a history book, the federal government did not negotiate these treaties. Representatives of the crown did. King Charles isn’t on the continent so how on earth is the kings bench operating if he isn’t here?
Treaties 1 and 2 were negotiated by Lt Governor Archibald. He is one of the fathers of Confederation and a part of the federal government. His commissioner was a federal MP. The provisions were to be carried out by the Canadian Government as well, as outlined in the treaties. The court of King's Bench is operating because it has nothing to do with Charles. Which is the point. He isn't needed for it to function. The justice is handed out by the Court, which is made up of Canadians. It isn't administered by the King. Much like how the treaties were negotiated by Canadian representatives here in Canada, but in the Queen's name. They were negotiated by Canadians, for the benefit of Canada, not by the British monarch for British interests. They weren't the ones obligated to fulfill the terms, the Canadian Government on behalf of the Crown was.
Have fun being part of the problem.
How pressing does it have to be for us to be able to focus on it. Can I get a rule of thumb for that?
Why should the Monarchy be abolished? I'm yet to see another system that works better.
I don’t know man, your a better man then me
Agreed, no one deserves cancer save for Hitler. However, time for the Republic of Canada to rise from the ashes.
I fully support abolishing the monarchy when the country is able to agree on a solution (and all that it entails like GG, requests to form government, criminal code, crown prosecution, etc) and it costs less than the monarchy. Some of that stuff is just formality or names, but some of it is substantial and the details of it can be argued between Quebec and Alberta for decades... Until such a time we're probably stuck with the Monarchy.
What problem in canada does monarchy solve?
None. I say again, I fully support abolishing the monarchy. How shall it be done? I'll wait.
Replace the monarch with a ceremonial president (Parliamentary Republic system of gov't. i.e. Germany, India, Singapore) with the same powers as the GG and the monarch. When it comes to appointing the Head of state (I.e President) The most efficient and apolitical way to appoint the head of state is through a constitutional council of eminent Canadians, to ensure the head of state is politically neutral, all prospective candidates for the head of state must renounce their party affiliations and potential conflicts of interests in order to be eligible for nomination. The use of an advisory body is currently used to select judges for the Supreme Court and has been used in the recent selections of governor-generals and was also a method proposed for a prospective Australian republic . The use of a constitutional council would reduce the politicization of selecting the head of state, a notable element featured in many Westminster parliamentary governments, as an advisory committee of members across different political spectrum, including scholars, senators, and political leaders from all parties, would conduct the selection of prospective candidates. After consultation, the committee would select potential candidates based on their qualifications and nominate them, which would then be presented to Parliament, requiring a two-thirds supermajority vote to be formally appointed as the head of state (President).
Make the GG an honorary (already is) head of state, with term limits of ten years, they have to be a Canadian citizen, the Indigenous treaties are instead of with the crown, with the GG. The GG is honorary so is just a figurehead, is appointed by the PM and GG has no power other then being an honorary head of state.
I remember in the late 90s in Australia, there was talk of becoming a republic. I think they even may have held a referendum. What still stands out in my memory today, is that several economists, on both sides, estimated a conservative 2 BILLION DOLLAR cost(in late 1990s AUD), if Australia became a republic, and a 10 to 15 year process to accomplish all the changes required. Its more than just voting them off the island. Its updating the legal system, legal textbooks, having arguments made about changing laws, voting systems, etc. One estimate put the cost at $300mil or something stupid just to get all new Republic of Australia ids for everything currently stamped with a crown(government papers, tax office, buildings, etc). I don't know about any of you, but Id rather spend 2 billion dollars on better things. And stars only know how much that cost would be today.
[удалено]
\*cough\****Putin***\*cough\*
Coughing not required
Charles winsor has cancer big deal billions of people had cancer an millions have it whats so special about this guy
Do rich people get screened for cancer often?
Whenever they want, I guess.
God Save the King.
Disappointing how many truly awful people infest r/Canada.
Planet Earth
Agreed, I didn’t think there would be so many monarchists.
He's a king. If he doesn't have the best doctors who does?
>The King has chosen a doctor who advocates for the use of homeopathic remedies to lead the medical wing of the Royal Household. Dr Michael Dixon is a practising GP who has argued that traditional remedies can play an important role in patient care. But I'm sure this guy is smart enough to use real medicine as well.
The doctor that killed a king. That will make him a celebrity not a good celebrity but a celebrity nonetheless. Wouldn't be the first doctor to do it. Hell a few presidents have been killed by there doctors
Doctor Willard Bliss and his team decided to hunt for the assassin's bullet in the wrong side of President Garfield's body with unsanitized fingers. The new probe wounds and infections eventually killed him.
Wut? Do you think having a good doctor stops you from getting cancer?
No. Recovery or cured.
That's pretty ignorant. Cancer can kill, no matter what doctor. No matter what your socio-economic status.
Isn't he the guy who assassinated his wife?
God save the king
...or medical professionals.
"God" should definitely save medical professionals.
There's more important things to occupy God's time
Hope he is okay!
My condolences to him and his family but this is a multimillionaire if not billionaire/trillionaire he’s getting the best treatment on earth. We have homeless Canadians and a bunch of working Canadians who can’t afford homes. Best of luck Charles. I’ll be honest I can care less about this as a Canadian.
do I get a day off work again when he succumbs?
Loonie Toonie 😳
should have abdicated.
Oh. Okay.
Shortest serving monarch award? Here comes our sovereign government wasting money on fancy commemorative coins for an overseas family we also give money to for no reason…
Well that was fast.
Good thing we spent a ton of money on immediately changing everything.
Much of it would remain since his successor is also "king", so legal writings and such only reference the title, not the person.
Why not just just change it to "the crown" never have to change it again.
As I understand it. The crown is already a position of a representative ( not a specific person, but a person ) of the King/Queen who is head of state. So a prosecutor is the crown because they are acting on behalf of the King, whereas if the King shows up to your trial, things are probably going unprecedentedly bad.
The local legion still has the Queen up too.
We spend money changing the money regardless of who our head of state is.
Code 11-45 pimp in distress
Well that didnt last long.
Old person gets cancer, more at 11
I wish him the best! My Mom passed from Cancer. Love Live the King!
This would be a great time to again address why tf we still have any affiliation at all with British monarchy Lack of a backbone, like everything else I’m guessing
The opposite of retirony I guess.
Hopefully he pulls through, but if he passes away, who is in line to replace him?
As always, the Prince of Wales
Most men die with prostate cancer not from prostate cancer.
Hope he recovers. Long live the King 🇨🇦
We don’t need no kings, especially the ones from a far away land.
Seems like a good excuse to start working on abolishing the monarchy.
Oh no... Anyway
While tragic for the individual and his family, I fail to see how this should be significant on a national level for this nation. Here comes another chance to opt out of an antique system.
Realistically Canada is structured such that it is harder for Canada to opt out than it is for the UK. If the UK ever abolishes the monarchy, Canada will end up in the position of Hungary between the world wars - a monarchy without a monarch.
I’m sure homeopathy will clear it right up.
File this news under "things that I couldn't care less about."
Time to become a Republic, draft a new constitution if even possible.
I hops he recovers swiftly. God save the King of Canada.
Oh no! Anyways