[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Zoupa]

I'm very unlikely to be consulting natureopaths on drug prescriptions - or anything else, to be honest. Still, I'd be curious to know a bit more about the new natureopath training in contrast with the one for pharmacists. Mostly because I'm sure I'm going to come across someone who's less sceptical than me and I'd be able to refer to facts in discussion with them.

The training boils down to an algorithm. If x is present, you can prescribe y. 

The problem is that naturopaths are not trained in the basics of physiology, dermatology, pharmacology etc. That means IMO that their clinical judgment is inexistent at best, and wrongfully confident at worst.

There's also going to be, IMO, a lot of cases where the naturopath has no idea what the problem is with the patient but will still recommend some sort of herbal crap instead of referring the patient to a healthcare professional. Meaning potentially delay in real treatment with unknown consequences. It legitimizes practicians of BS science, give them the veneer of respectability, all for the short-term stopgap measure of lessening the burden on GPs and ERs.

It's the wrong solution.

[HVC]

In other news, it appears we'll be getting a national dental program for low and middle income folks - initially starting with children and seniors, but potentially expanding over time.

It'll be interesting to see how that develops.

Ontario already has one for seniors. Under a certain income threshold you get a card and can go to pre-approved dentists. Wonder if the national one will work the same, or if you can go to any dentist.

[Jacob]

Thanks for the breakdown Zoupa. And yes, I tend to agree with your point of view here.

[Jacob]

Also, it looks like the Federal government is about to actually do something on housing: https://globalnews.ca/news/10163033/war-time-housing-program/?utm_source=NewsletterNational&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=2023

Liberals to revive 'war-time housing' blueprints in bid to speed up builds

Nearly 80 years after it was first brought in, Global News has learned the federal government is reviving a Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) program to provide standardized housing blueprints to builders, according to a senior government source.

Housing Minister Sean Fraser will announce Tuesday the Liberal government will hold consultations on how the relaunched program will function. The senior government source tells Global News blueprints of various building types and sizes will be made available by the end of 2024.

Pre-approved housing plans are anticipated to cut down on the building timeline by having projects move through the municipal zoning and permitting process more quickly.

Mike Moffatt, senior director of policy and innovation at the Smart Prosperity Institute, proposed this idea directly to the federal cabinet during meetings in Charlottetown this summer, and believes it could cut as much as 12 months off construction times.

"I think builders and developers would be quite interested in this, particularly if it helps track through the approvals process," Moffatt told Global News.

Moffatt notes that for the program to be effective, it will require a wide catalogue of blueprints.

"They certainly need to have, you know, a fairly extensive catalogue of designs so people aren't sort of forced to choose between, you know, one or two designs or nothing," Moffatt said.

The program is a throwback to the CMHC's work from the 1940s to late 1970s, where hundreds of thousands of homes were built from thousands of plans approved by the federal housing agency.

Many of these homes, dubbed "strawberry box" houses or "victory homes," were built for returning Second World War veterans, and are still standing in many Canadian neighborhoods.

Builders using standardized designs should lead to more favourable terms from lenders and insurance companies, Moffatt believes.

"Imagine if you wanted car insurance and you were trying to go to your insurer on a type of car that they had never seen before, that you'd put together yourself," he said. "They would have a lot of trouble pricing that insurance."

The potential for quicker build times and reduced expenses has companies like Calgary-based 720 Modular excited for the program.

"Currently how we build, every building is a snowflake," 720 Modular project manager Craig Mitchell told Global News.

"If we can move to a standardized framework, all of a sudden now we have a fighting chance to accelerate housing pace because we're not having to redesign every time we go and build a building."

Standardized plans particularly benefit companies like Mitchell's, who build their homes inside a warehouse, and then deliver them in shipping container-sized portions to the location of the home.

That process is known as modular or prefabricated building, which Mitchell describes as faster, cheaper and greener compared to traditional building techniques.

"If the internal guts of the building itself structurally and the layouts are all similar, now we can really move forward and start industrializing construction, by moving some of that work offsite for example," he said.

[HVC]

Guess they're cutting off the conservatives at the knees over the nebulous gatekeeper thing by having an actual plan to reduce red tape. Good.

And as always, Airbnb delenda est

[Grey Fox]

I don't understand how those plans are going to make Cities planners & permits gatekeepers go faster. They have no incentives to do so.

[HVC]

I don't understand how those plans are going to make Cities planners & permits gatekeepers go faster. They have no incentives to do so.

Plans won't have to be approved , so that saves time. Some municipaties are slower then others.

[Grey Fox]

Won't they? You can't trust anyone these days.

[HVC]

Won't they? You can't trust anyone these days.

As i understand it that's the point of the scheme. Pre-approved plans. Skips that step entirely.

[HVC]

You'll still have inspectors, so if you're not to plan that's a whole other issue. But that's the same as it is now.

[crazy canuck]

I did the training less than 2 years ago to get certified in BC as a pharmacist. I read the pdf on the training needed for naturopaths to prescribe in BC.

I'm gonna hazard an educated guess that you did neither of these things.

I do not lecture you on law matters. In this instance, you are wrong and wrote statements with opposite meanings. That is all.

I can tell you I will not be consulting any naturopaths about anything, and I encourage everyone to do the same, in BC, Alberta or elsewhere.

It would be helpful if you could identify what parts of the training for the natural path that has just been put in place is deficient to the point where you do not think they should be prescribing anything.

Simply saying that you will not be going to a naturopath for a prescription is not very descriptive.

I'm glad that you won't lecture me on legal matters. The regulation of natural path is kind of legal matter and is sort of part of what I do.

[crazy canuck]

I did some work for you, and I went to the two federal agencies who are authorized to give the training for the certification under the college bylaws.

It turns out that you cannot access the specific course materials unless you pay the fee which I suppose makes sense. But by the same token, I'm not sure how you can make judgements about the content of these courses without actually knowing what they are.

[crazy canuck]

Looking further the College determines what prescription authority the naturopaths have.  Ie what they can and cannot prescribe.

Are you able to identify an error the College has made?

[Zoupa]

You're right. Thank you for "doing the work for me". There is no way I could possibly have access to training material from other professions in my line of work. I've been working alongside naturopaths for 23 years but it's not enough time compared to your vast and deep knowledge of the subject.

I also apologize for the lost in translation bit. I will strive to improve my english skills to avoid having to ask you stupid questions in the future.

Also please ignore this post where I detailed my objections to the prescribing of medications by naturopaths:

The training boils down to an algorithm. If x is present, you can prescribe y.

The problem is that naturopaths are not trained in the basics of physiology, dermatology, pharmacology etc. That means IMO that their clinical judgment is inexistent at best, and wrongfully confident at worst.

There's also going to be, IMO, a lot of cases where the naturopath has no idea what the problem is with the patient but will still recommend some sort of herbal crap instead of referring the patient to a healthcare professional. Meaning potentially delay in real treatment with unknown consequences. It legitimizes practicians of BS science, give them the veneer of respectability, all for the short-term stopgap measure of lessening the burden on GPs and ERs.

It's the wrong solution.

Since "the regulation of natural path is kind of legal matter and is sort of part of what I do", I will defer to you on this matter.

[crazy canuck]

Since "the regulation of natural path is kind of legal matter and is sort of part of what I do", I will defer to you on this matter.

Fair enough