行业新闻

原文：
Last month, 60-year-old Danny Williams, premier of the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador, learned he had a leaky heart valve. Doctors said he needed immediate surgery. The surgery he ultimately had at Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami was less invasive, involving incisions in the armpit, Resilient Seated Gate Valves as opposed to more traditional approaches that involve cracking open the sternum. Paying for the surgery was apparently not an issue for Mr. Williams, who donates his premier's salary to charity. Some Canadian surgeons are now arguing the less-invasive procedure could have been performed in Ottawa. They're also arguing that the premier, given the urgency of his condition, would not have had to wait in line more than a week. Several Canadian defenders of the premier have commented that he was in a no-win position, because it would have been "political suicide" had he remained in Canada but been perceived as "jumping the queue" to get his surgery ahead of less-notable citizens. Such commentators seem to rebut the argumentButterfly Valves that an average citizen would not have had to "wait in line" for such surgery in Canada today. All politics aside, we'd like to wish Mr. Williams a speedy recovery. But this doesn't mean we have to ignore the obvious: Canada has a "single-payer" system in which people who are not government bigwigs often have to wait in line for months for the kinds of routine medical testing that -- here in the United States -- saves lives by leading to earlier interventions. Canadians who are not independently wealthy still struggle to raise the cash to avail themselves of superior medical care "south of the border" whenever they consider the problem serious enough. Why is that, if the Canadian system is so good that we should emulate it, as Barack Obama insists? Medical innovation continues in the United States because it's profitable. Medical innovation has stagnated in Canada because Safety Valves it's not, and because the best doctors and researchers have fled to countries where they can still make money at their trade -- most notably, the United States. If the United States adopts a Canadian-style, rationed, inferior medical system in which more people die while waiting in line, where will Americans go in pursuit of better care? Where will Canadians go? And won't that lead to precisely the "two-tiered" system -- better care for those with enough money to hop a plane -- that Democrats claim to oppose? Or will they just refuse to let us leave?
原文来自：http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/a-safety-valve-for-_single-payer_-85462052.html

EDITORIAL: A safety valve for 'single payer' ;是由上海赛泰泵阀有限公司提供的阀门新闻，中文译文仅供参考(上海赛泰泵阀有限公司还生产止回阀安全阀呼吸阀减压阀针型阀及DFD 液气电磁阀，通用电磁阀，200P减压阀，J43W/H法兰针型阀，消防电磁阀，欢迎您的选购。)
以下是参考译文：

译文：安全阀单付款人
上个月，60岁的丹尼威廉姆斯的加拿大纽芬兰省和拉布拉多省省长，了解到他有一个漏水的心脏瓣膜。医生说，他需要立即手术。这次手术，他最终在西奈山医疗中心在迈阿密已经是创伤小，涉及在腋下切口，而不是更多的涉及打击打开胸骨传统方法。付款的手术显然不是一个问题，威廉斯先生，他的总理谁捐赠的工资给慈善机构。一些加拿大外科医生，现在争论较少侵入程序可能已在渥太华进行。他们还声称，总理，鉴于他的病情紧急，就不必再排队了一个多星期。在一些加拿大总理捍卫者评论说，他在没有胜利的立场是，因为这将是“政治自杀”了，他留在加拿大，但被称为“打尖”，让他的手术之前，较少明显的内在公民。这些评论似乎反驳，一个普通公民就不必为“符合在加拿大这种手术”等待今天的论点。所有的政治因素，我们希望，祝愿威廉斯先生早日康复。但是，这并不意味着我们忽视了明显的：加拿大有一个“单支付制”，使人们谁不政要往往要排队用于日常的医疗测试的各种几个月， - 在这里美国 - 节省导致早期干预的生活。加拿大人谁是富人还是没有独立的斗争，提高资金利用自己优越的医疗服务“南部边境”时，他们认为该问题的严重不足。这是为什么，如果加拿大的制度是这般好，我们应该效仿，成为奥巴马坚持？医学创新的继续，因为它是盈利的，在美国。医学创新停滞在加拿大，因为它不是，因为最好的医生和研究人员已逃离他们的国家仍然可以在各自的行业中赚钱 - 最突出的是美国。如果美国采取加拿大式，定量配给，劣质医疗制度，使更多的人死亡，而排队等候去哪里美国人在追求更好的照顾？加拿大人去哪里？并不会导致恰恰是“两级制” - 更好地照顾到有足够的钱跳飞机的 - 民主党人声称反对？

更多新闻

专家浆液式阀门

数字阀控制器

供水地下室内切断阀装置

进一步对阀的发行工作