When illness or any type of medical emergency occur everybody wants only the very best medical care. This is only natural, because health is the biggest and most important asset anyone has. Unfortunately, the very best medical care is very expensive. Only the very rich and those with adequate medical insurance can afford it. Fortunately, all is not lost for those that do not have medical insurance. Calgary walk in clinics can provide a wide variety of treatment options.
Facilities that are classified in this manner are not uniform. In fact, the services that they offer differ wildly. Some are managed by supermarkets, others by community health services. Many charities operate medical facilities that offer basic services and often emergency treatment too. These facilities offer their services to all and sundry. Many are free and most of the others charge a modest fee only.
Many people erroneously think that all these facilities offer urgent care services. This is not the case. At many facilities there are only very basic services available. The majority of services do not even have an attending physician. It is therefore advisable to find out just what facilities there are, what services they offer and what they charge. In most areas there are at least one or two facilities within a convenient distance of most of the population.
Clearly, the main benefit of these medical facilities is the fact that their services are either free or at least at a minimal fee. Patients can simply attend. No appointments are necessary and the attending staff normally treat patients on a first arrived first helped basis, but emergencies always enjoy priority, of course. Patients are accepted without having to answer potentially awkward questions on citizenship, for example.
There are drawbacks. Most of these medical facilities deal with large numbers. This means that queues can be long and waiting times can be exhausting. The attending staff does not have a lot of time for each individual patients because they have too many patients to see. Most facilities can only offer limited treatment options and sometimes patients simply cannot be helped.
Critics say that these facilities are inadequate and that they simply prove the fact that adequate health care for all is a fallacy. They also complain that very few of these facilities are equipped with the latest diagnostic tools and that they often carry only a very limited range of medication. In many cases patients are treated by staff that are not properly trained.
Private medical practitioners also often criticise these facilities. They argue that it is impossible to properly treat a patient without a full history of his health. Without such a history it is not possible to diagnose potentially serious diseases on the basis of new symptoms. They say that these clinics, at best, treat symptoms and not the underlying conditions that cause those symptoms.
Nobody will argue the fact that proper health care for all should be a national priority. At present, the poor and needy simply have to make do with what is on offer. Ideally, every citizen should be able to depend upon quality care when they need it. In the meantime, affordable and free medical facilities fulfil a very urgent need.
Facilities that are classified in this manner are not uniform. In fact, the services that they offer differ wildly. Some are managed by supermarkets, others by community health services. Many charities operate medical facilities that offer basic services and often emergency treatment too. These facilities offer their services to all and sundry. Many are free and most of the others charge a modest fee only.
Many people erroneously think that all these facilities offer urgent care services. This is not the case. At many facilities there are only very basic services available. The majority of services do not even have an attending physician. It is therefore advisable to find out just what facilities there are, what services they offer and what they charge. In most areas there are at least one or two facilities within a convenient distance of most of the population.
Clearly, the main benefit of these medical facilities is the fact that their services are either free or at least at a minimal fee. Patients can simply attend. No appointments are necessary and the attending staff normally treat patients on a first arrived first helped basis, but emergencies always enjoy priority, of course. Patients are accepted without having to answer potentially awkward questions on citizenship, for example.
There are drawbacks. Most of these medical facilities deal with large numbers. This means that queues can be long and waiting times can be exhausting. The attending staff does not have a lot of time for each individual patients because they have too many patients to see. Most facilities can only offer limited treatment options and sometimes patients simply cannot be helped.
Critics say that these facilities are inadequate and that they simply prove the fact that adequate health care for all is a fallacy. They also complain that very few of these facilities are equipped with the latest diagnostic tools and that they often carry only a very limited range of medication. In many cases patients are treated by staff that are not properly trained.
Private medical practitioners also often criticise these facilities. They argue that it is impossible to properly treat a patient without a full history of his health. Without such a history it is not possible to diagnose potentially serious diseases on the basis of new symptoms. They say that these clinics, at best, treat symptoms and not the underlying conditions that cause those symptoms.
Nobody will argue the fact that proper health care for all should be a national priority. At present, the poor and needy simply have to make do with what is on offer. Ideally, every citizen should be able to depend upon quality care when they need it. In the meantime, affordable and free medical facilities fulfil a very urgent need.
No comments:
Post a Comment