Loading question...
You are in free guest mode. Timed Practice Revision List Attempt History Progress Tracking Create a free account to unlock these tools
Back to Questions
Prev Next
CELPIP Practice Reading: Reading for Viewpoints ID: #63249 Hard Two Prescriptions Under One Roof

Read the following blog post from a website.

I design logos from a spare room in Kingston, which means I have never had a workplace drug plan. My asthma inhalers cost me about ninety dollars a month, and more than once I have stretched a prescription by skipping puffs I needed. My husband’s biologic for Crohn’s disease, on the other hand, is covered almost entirely by his employer’s plan. So when Ottawa talks about widening national pharmacare, I read every word twice. One of us could gain a lot, and the other could lose something that works.

Meera Kulkarni, a health economist, argues that the public list should be wide, taking in drugs for chronic conditions and a defined group of specialty medicines. In her view, once monthly costs climb past a modest level, people like me start skipping doses. She believes bulk buying by a single public plan would push prices down far enough to cover much of the new cost, provided every listing decision follows open clinical rules. Archibald Merritt, a benefits consultant who advises employers, warns against moving that fast. Many workplace plans already pay for biologics and rare-disease drugs that a new public list is unlikely to include, he says, and pushing those plans aside early could leave the sickest patients waiting. He would have Ottawa take over common essentials now while employers keep paying for specialty drugs.

Josephine Bolduc, Manitoba’s health minister, says the question is really about money between governments. She supports a common national minimum of essential drugs, but provinces need cost-sharing they can predict before they end the rules that require private coverage, because hospitals already pay when patients cannot afford their outpatient drugs. Ivor Lister, a patient advocate, insists that patients must be able to challenge any decision that turns a drug down. He likes Kulkarni’s wide list, but he wants a published timetable, so that patients can tell which card to hand over at the pharmacy.

I keep changing my mind as I reread my notes. The part of me that skips puffs wants Kulkarni’s list tomorrow. The part of me that sat beside my husband through two bad years before his biologic worked is grateful for Merritt’s caution. If I had to choose today, I would start with essentials like my inhalers, leave his coverage alone until the public list can match it, and write Lister’s appeal rights into the law from day one. Tonight, at least, I will fill my prescription and take every puff.

Using the drop-down menu (▾), choose the best option according to the information given on the website.

This blog post is mainly about 1.
.

Who most clearly worries that cutting back private plans too early could leave the sickest patients waiting? 2.
.

Josephine Bolduc’s position would most likely be supported by 3.
.

What outcome does Meera Kulkarni’s condition call for? 4.
.

By the end of the blog post, the blogger’s view is best described as 5.
.

The following is a comment by a visitor to the website page. Complete the comment by choosing the best option to fill in each blank.

My sister works at a pharmacy in Sudbury, and she tells me that some customers leave their prescriptions on the counter once they hear the price. Meera Kulkarni believes bulk buying would lower prices enough to 6.
, and I hope her numbers hold up. Her list would also take in drugs for 7.
, which would change a great deal at my sister’s counter. The Manitoba minister backs 8.
, yet she refuses to move until the money between governments is settled. Ivor Lister wants a timetable that tells patients 9.
, a small thing that would save everyone a lot of confusion. Paying 10.
 every month just to breathe is something nobody in this country should face.

With a free account: Retry and compare every attempt.
Saving...