Sicko online - might as well watch.

[TheEschaton]

divx quality Sicko (http://www7.alluc.org/alluc/movies.html?action=getviewcategory&category_uid=14177)

Might as well watch it for free, see what you think.

It is much less political, I suppose, but is strongly socialized medicine (if you consider that a political issue). But it even bashes Hillary. ;)

-TheE-

[Back]

Awesome. Thanks, E.

[Back]

Wow.

“If you have enough money to kill people, you have enough money to help people.”

[TheEschaton]

I enjoyed it too.

-TheE-

[Jahira]

Uggg. I had to stop watching it.

Yes, I agree a lot of aspects of our health system suck, but it does have some upsides which he seems to forget about.

In Canada, sure maintence checkups and emergency visits are covered and are done quickly. I can't claim to know much of anything about the Canadian healthcare system, but I did pick up quickly on the downfalls. The 1 minute or so of CNN type clips stating doctors can only perform so many operations, and are very limited in the equipment they recieve and the waiting lists for Cancers and MRIs...etc. Way to just skip over that one Mike. Maybe he should do a documentary on how many people in Canada die or get screwed because they have to wait. I had to stop watching in the middle just because I really felt like the whole story wasn't being presented in the film.

I feel like Michael Moore could make a documentary on the terribleness of the "Make A Wish Foundation" because so many kids are rejected because their disease state isn't aweful enough so they die before they see their dreams. Bad example because of it being such a great cause, but I am trying to show how you could look at the downfalls of any organization and make it look bad if that is all you focus on.

[Blazing247]

Michael Moore, nuff said. Not even worth the time. He bastardizes the term "documentary". March of the Penguins, that's a documentary. Michael Moore makes propaganda films.

[TheEschaton]

Errrr, I believe his point of the CNN clips were that those were propoganda of people who supported privitized medicine. If you had watched further, you would have seen how someone who got all five of his fingers chopped off got them all sewn on for free (in comparison to the guy who had to pick his ring finger for 12 grand, or his middle finger for 60), in a 24 hour surgery, with 4 surgeons, two anestheseologists, dozens of scrub nurses, and how it's simply blatantly false that surgeons are restricted in how many surgeries they do.

The whole point is that you WATCH IT ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
Frankly, I have Canadian cousins who have been saying the same things for years (my cousin has some pretty severe chronic conditions) but I never really paid much attention to it because the idea that everything we've heard about socialized medicine is false is disconcerting at best.

-TheE-

[CrystalTears]

I'm glad I read the thread before watching it. I don't watch Michael Moore anything anymore.

[CrystalTears]

Not interested, but thanks anyway.

[Parkbandit]

Yea, he's pretty damned accurate.. from his skewed viewpoint.

Thanks.. but seeing that fat fuck on film would probably make me lose my appetite.

"Oh, it's not political, unless you call socialism political"

LOL

[Skeeter]

I'm sure Canada would welcome that fat fuck with open arms. I refuse to watch any of his bullshit.

[Gan]

Yeah, well..just coming from someone who works in a health insurance company and sees how they do many things to make sure things aren't paid..he's not far off. Angela

If the company you work for represents what you abhor with the industry, why do you still work for it? I mean seriously...

[Jahira]

Eschaton-

I did watch up to that point. Yes the man with cut off fingers did get great healthcare service, but that was emergency surgery. There aren't thousands of people with cut off fingers trying to get them reattached. You go in with a gunshot wound to the head, and they are going to do everything to save your life.

I believe the problem with the system is their waiting lists. Have a condition that requires scan after scan and surgery after surgery, and you have to wait because everyone who has it and was seen before you....is before you. I am also under the impression that if it is a complicated and expensive surgery, the government is only giving so much money which limits them to how many a surgeon can do (while still getting paid). Do a simple google search and the complaints as well as the upside is there. One of my first hits is a supreme court decision on people who were trying to buy private insurance so they could try to get off of the lists.

So again, yes there is some f'ed up problems with our healthcare, but the other systems he seems to glorify have their downsides he convienlently forgets to include.

[Alfster]

Our health care system is seriously messed up in this country. If it takes Michael Moore to expose some of the stupidity of the system, so be it.



Hahahahahahahahaha, dumbfucks like you still listen to him?@!??@?@?@?

[Gan]

I struggle with that all the time, Ganalon. Nothing I haven't thought of myself.

I've thought of going out of the company and working as a patient advocate, but then I'd also take 20k hit in salary, and it's far too difficult to support the house on as much as they get paid. (my mother is disabled and I support the house). Angela

I'm wondering that the reason why insurance companies behave the way they do (deny so many claims as you state) is so they can afford to pay you the extra 20K you make a year (as well as others) in order to employ the workforce necessary to remain in business...

But hey, if you can sleep at night with that thought, more power to you. ;)

[Skeeter]

I hate the industry but I love that $$$$

Hypocrite

[Skeeter]

nor would we come on here and post about how we hate the industry we took all that schooling to join.

[Alfster]

I'm hardly part of the issue, in my position.



rofl, keep telling yourself that.

[DeV]

we hate the industry we took all that schooling to join.People do all the time for one reason or another.

[Skeeter]

Nah, I went to school for other things, but I have to support my house and there are lots of health care jobs out there.

My mother and keeping her in her house is 10 times more important to me at this moment.

If that is not acceptable to some of you, I don't really care.

Angela

doesn't have anything to do with if it's acceptable to me. You're the one bitching about how awful the industry is and how mean they are to work to keep from paying claims. While at the same time you're at work turning down some cancer patient's chemo.

[Blazing247]

Thank you for smoking!

[CrystalTears]

I'm sure there are good jobs out there that pay well and don't have to eat at your soul everyday for being there. I'd definitely take a pay cut in order to not work some place that goes against my principles.

[Blazing247]

Guys, this PETA video is really good. It highlights the torture that animals go through on a daily basis. I am appalled by the treatment of these animals. What kind of people could possibly do this?

signed, John, President of John's Slaughterhouse.

[Gan]

You guys are pathetic, seriously.

(not you Dev)

Yes, and while I work on finding something different, I will work here and take care of things.

Plenty of people have done things they don't like to take care of the people they love.

I'm not thrilled all the time with my job, and I would venture most people aren't.

So anyway, this isn't about my job and why I choose to work here..it's about the health care documentary Sicko.

I know I would have made a change if I were doing something that went contrary to what I stood for. In fact, I recently did just that after figuring out the mortgage industry was NOT what I wanted to be part of. Lots of money to be made, but the price to who and what I am was too high. Predatory lending sucks. Its the used car sales of the banking industry.

However, advancing the viewpoints of those who think the healthcare industry sucks, as well as your own views of it, and yet living off of the rewards of that very system just reeks of hypocrisy.

Hopefully you dont expect anyone here on the PC to take you seriously from now on when you preach about socialized healthcare or against big business. :yes:

[CrystalTears]

Yes, and while I work on finding something different, I will work here and take care of things.
O rly?

Are you comfortable in your job / is there security? I'm comfortable here, probably too comfortable. I don't ever see there not being a need for the kind of work that we do, because the health insurance business is always busy, and there is always tons of paperwork to be done. I really like working with doctors and nurses though, so I will probably continue to do this work for a long time.
http://forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=596652&postcount=50

I'm not thrilled all the time with my job, and I would venture most people aren't. Refer to your quote above. Amazing how fast your opinion of your job changes eh?


So anyway, this isn't about my job and why I choose to work here..it's about the health care documentary Sicko. If you weren't standing so high on that healthcare platform, this wouldn't even be discussed now.

[Alfster]

rofl, pwnt

[Gan]

This thread turned to 5 stars all of a sudden.

:lol:

[Sean]

While this thread isn't particularly about you or what job you choose or why, it is in part .. about your actual job. And as such it makes people wonder if you'd be so quick to bite the hand that feeds you if your job wasn't so secure. But what makes it even more amazing is that you work getting doctors credentialed with your insurance company.. you know one of those companies that push certain drugs/procedures, don't cover certain ops, etc. but then wash your hands of any responsibility in the food chain when it comes to Michael Moore's attack on the system.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Ilvane

Plenty of people have done things they don't like to take care of the people they love.

Leave strippers and hookers out of this. They are just trying to work their way through school.

[Gan]

Leave strippers and hookers out of this. They are just trying to work their way through school.

Amen

[Gan]

I think what I said about my job is true, it's secure. It's safe where I am supporting an entire household on my salary, and damn straight that is 10 times more important to me right now.

I could take a job doing what I like to do, yes. It would pay a lot less and my mother would lose her house.

Hardly the outcome necessary.

My company is not a bad company, and as I said in my posts before, I have more problems with the VA's and government programs than I do regular insurance companies.

I disagree with things ALOT around here. Maybe I make more of a difference being here than I would working someplace else? I don't know. However, this still isn't about me, it's about the documentary.

Why I bother even coming to this place makes me wonder sometimes.

Then perhaps you should have stated that in your OP. Rather than what you initially said.


Our health care system is seriously messed up in this country. If it takes Michael Moore to expose some of the stupidity of the system, so be it.

Watch the whole thing, it's going to be worth it.

Angela

Nice try though.

[Skeeter]

http://www.bulgarianchild.org/hyland%20trip%20spring%2006/image/diggingthehole.JPG

[CrystalTears]

I disagree with things ALOT around here. Maybe I make more of a difference being here than I would working someplace else? I don't know. However, this still isn't about me, it's about the documentary.

Why I bother even coming to this place makes me wonder sometimes.


This isn't like Farenheit 9/11 CT.

I work in healthcare, and he's pretty damned accurate in portraying how things work in a health insurance business..heh.

Angela
You made it about something you're involved in.

[Skeeter]

P.S. I know it's easy to attack someone from behind a computer screen from the comfort of your desks, so I understand why it happens. It's just pathetic.

You have yet to be attacked. Unless you consider having your inconsistencies, lies, and hypocricy pointed out as an attack.

[CrystalTears]

Nice try, whatever. I haven't seen this much backpeddling since the World Bike Tour.

[Skeeter]

Our health care system, Ganalon is the medicare, medicaid system.

Nice try.

hmm I'm pretty sure I have health care and I'm not on medicaid / medicare.

Nice try though.

[Ilvane]

I'm removing all my posts from this thread, enjoy your debate.

[CrystalTears]

Way to pull a Voldermort. Thank God we quoted most of it. You just hit an official low. You know how well that response works around here. Good luck.

[Skeeter]

I'm removing all my posts from this thread, enjoy your debate.


R O F L

[Ilvane]

I don't really give two shits about how it looks.

See ya.

[Skeeter]

http://www.posterpalace.com/images/ak/crybaby02os.jpg

[Sean]

I think we need a trainwreck smiley.

[CrystalTears]

http://www.ezthemes.com/previews/s/southparkcartman.jpg

[Gan]

:lol:
:lol2:
:lolwave:
:bye:

[Warriorbird]

If you're part of the problem...you're part of the problem.

[Parkbandit]

I don't really give two shits about how it looks.

See ya.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e6/belike53/AIlvane.jpg

Too funny.

[Blazing247]

Whiskey tango foxtrot. Conviction? Who needs it!

[Hulkein]

Hysterical thread.

[Alfster]

I don't really give two shits about how it looks.

See ya.

I bet your mommie will give you a hug

[TheEschaton]

Wow guys. Just watch the movie. Then judge for yourself.

Hell, I read Ann Coulter's books all the way through, just so I can cite her own work when I laugh at her idiocy.

-TheE-

[Apathy]

I'm more interested in seeing how Moore reacts to this than the movie itself.

I look at it as a chance to prove himself a "journalist" or a "businessman". His move now.

(I use both those terms loosely, muckraker and bloodsucker would probably be better)

[Artha]

I'm more interested in seeing how Moore reacts to this than the movie itself.
Before the leak, he said he wouldn't mind. After the leak, he said the quality was too good, complained, and implied that people who "didn't want the movie to do well" in its opening weekend were to blame.

I don't feel like looking up links but I guess I can if its really necessary.

[Skeeter]

Wow guys. Just watch the movie. Then judge for yourself.

Hell, I read Ann Coulter's books all the way through, just so I can cite her own work when I laugh at her idiocy.

-TheE-

I wouldn't watch his shit just as much as I wouldn't read her shit.

shit is shit.

[Gan]

shit is shit.

...no matter how you cook it up, or how you wrap it.


:yes:

[Parkbandit]

Wow guys. Just watch the movie. Then judge for yourself.

Hell, I read Ann Coulter's books all the way through, just so I can cite her own work when I laugh at her idiocy.

-TheE-

Clearly my time is far more valuable than yours.. as I wouldn't give either dipshit the time of day.

[Back]

I’d be curious to hear from our Canadian and British posters (doubt we have any French) about how accurately their health care systems are portrayed. After watching it you come away from it thinking that their systems are like heaven compared to ours.

Regardless. To me it makes sense to have healthcare for avery American. It could be a source of pride that as prosperous and righteous as we are that we could manage a system that took care of everyone for free. Treating healthcare as an unalienable human right.

[Gan]

To me it makes sense to have healthcare for avery American.
We do to a certain degree.


It could be a source of pride that as prosperous and righteous as we are that we could manage a system that took care of everyone for free.
Blending capitalism and socialism. How do you propose thats done to accomplish your goal? How many people in healthcare would be willing to work for free? How many hospitals would remain open for free? What incentives would there be to ensure quality care is minimally kept as a standard of care? This isnt Star Trek you know, advances in fields such as this cost participants time, educational costs, and money to maintain. How do you propose to establish this for free? Wake the fuck up dude...

Treating healthcare as an unalienable human right.
It is? Are you sure about that? Because I have to disagree.

[Ilvane]

I just can't resist.

Ganalon, why isn't it a right? Don't you think every person should have equal availablity to health care? Or is it only for those who can afford it?

Angela

[Parkbandit]

How do you propose to establish this for free? Wake the fuck up dude...


JUST TAX THE RICH, BECAUSE THEY HAVE ENOUGH MONEY! SPREAD THE WEALTH!

[Gan]

I just can't resist.

Ganalon, why isn't it a right? Don't you think every person should have equal availablity to health care? Or is it only for those who can afford it?

Angela

Why should I even respond when you'll just get mad again and delete all of your posts?

Do us all a favor and STFU. Its clear you cant handle participating in a politics folder. Stick to gemstone threads.

[StrayRogue]

He thinks that way because he can afford it. I am sure he'd think very differently if he couldn't.

I'm a bit perplexed how he thinks you can't have a system that is free. We have a system that is free. So does a variety of EU countries.

[Gan]

He thinks that way because he can afford it. I am sure he'd think very differently if he couldn't. So does a variety of EU countries.
I've been there when I used medicare to pay for my emergent needs (read:college days). I didnt pay a dime then. I pay now though, because I can afford a level of insurance high enough to meet the needs of me and my family.


I'm a bit perplexed how he thinks you can't have a system that is free.
We have a system that is free and that treats those who qualify for indigent/free healthcare. And, every hospital in America must treat emergent cases as they walk through the door regardless of ability to pay. So getting your facts straight when discussing US Healthcare would be the first thing to do in this situation. Where we differ is that in the US, if you're on welfare, you wont qualify to have your tummy tuck, your boobs lifted, or your nose fixed. Thats not considered a valid reason to use tax payer money for healthcare here in the USA.

Indigent healthcare here in the US involves wait times very similar to those for non-emergent cases in Canada and the UK. Because there are facilities and doctors willing to perform such services free of charge or with a small subsidy from the government.

What you need to do is put the primary aspects of healthcare on level fields so you can do an apples to apples comparison. Why? Because thats what I used to do for hospitals here in the US. Only my experience with socialized medicine was with Canadian hospitals.

When comparing the quality of care you need to look at the following:

1. Level of physicians (pretty neutral from what I've seen)
2. Level of nursing care (still pretty neutral until you start looking at advanced practice nursing levels and nurse to patient ratios on non-tertiary care as well as tertiary/acute care areas within the facility)
3. Level of patient facilities (here's where you see the big difference)
3a - private rooms/semi-private rooms vs. wards
3b - wait times for ED patients, outpatient procedures, and non-emergent walk-ins.
3c - length of stay per condition (DRG)
3d - availability of physicians to treat condition(s)
3e - availability of equipment to treat conditions(s) - such as MRI, CT, PET, (overall radiology), cath lab, etc.

The huge difference you'll see starts at 3 on the list above. This is where capitalist dollars fund so much more than government/socialist dollars fund in other healthcare systems.

PS. When you say healthcare in the UK/Canada is free, its really not considering the level of taxation you face to pay for it.

[Ilvane]

Maybe because rather than get into a real debate, they have to resort to personal insults too.;)

Angela

[Alfster]

lolz ur dum

[TheEschaton]

Blending capitalism and socialism. How do you propose thats done to accomplish your goal? How many people in healthcare would be willing to work for free? How many hospitals would remain open for free? What incentives would there be to ensure quality care is minimally kept as a standard of care? This isnt Star Trek you know, advances in fields such as this cost participants time, educational costs, and money to maintain. How do you propose to establish this for free? Wake the fuck up dude...

Had you watched the movie, you would have seen a discussion of the English system, which is socialized, has incentives for doctors, but incentives actually based around improving the HEALTH of their patients (get so many people to quit smoking - get a bonus), still get paid around 85k POUNDS to start as a GP, and so on, so forth.

I do want to hear from our British and Canadian posters, though. In the movie, everyone says they've waited maximum of 45 minutes at the hospital, to be treated.

[Gan]

Maybe because rather than get into a real debate, they have to resort to personal insults too.;)

Angela

No, you got called on being a hypocrite because of your stance against US healthcare and support for Michael Moore's new film when in all actuality your occupation (which you've demonstrated in other threads as being quite happy with) is part of the issue you have with the system. Then you got mad, deleted all of your posts and left the argument, clearly thus demonstrating that you're not capable of handling a heated debate where your actions demonstrate something 180 degrees from your opinion.

If you're going to use your RL experiences to back up your claims, then make sure they fall in line with your beliefs or what you spew on an internet BBS. Otherwise expect to get called on it.

As for now, I'll respond to thsoe who can participate on an adult level. You on the otherhand have clearly stated that you have picked up your toys and left the thread. Do us a favor and remain on the porch while the big dogs play out in the yard. Or find something to moderate since that's your title here.

[Gan]

Had you watched the movie, you would have seen a discussion of the English system, which is socialized, has incentives for doctors, but incentives actually based around improving the HEALTH of their patients (get so many people to quit smoking - get a bonus), still get paid around 85k POUNDS to start as a GP, and so on, so forth.

I do want to hear from our British and Canadian posters, though. In the movie, everyone says they've waited maximum of 45 minutes at the hospital, to be treated.

I find it laughable that you're actually saying that information in a Moore film is credible enough to consider as fact. Find another source please.

[CrystalTears]

Maybe because rather than get into a real debate, they have to resort to personal insults too.;)

Angela
Or get all indignant and then delete all their posts.

[Alfster]

Had you watched the movie, you would have seen a discussion of the English system, which is socialized, has incentives for doctors, but incentives actually based around improving the HEALTH of their patients (get so many people to quit smoking - get a bonus), still get paid around 85k POUNDS to start as a GP, and so on, so forth.



Funny that you say that. Family doctors and such around here (WI) also get paid bonuses for improving the HEALTH of their patients. Problem being, it's gotten to the point where some of the doctors will drop patients simply because they wont take medications that the doctor wants them to take.

My girlfriend who has diabetes won't take one of her medications because it makes her feel sick (but lowers her cholesterol). Her last doctor would lecture/scold her about not taking it even though she doesn't have high cholesterol.

[TheEschaton]

Ganalon - he interviewed a doctor, in his home, from the UK. Why would this person lie? He interviewed a former Member of Parliment (Old Labour). Why would he lie?

-TheE-

[Gan]

http://www.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPage.jsp?cw_page=media_14sep2005_e


Half of All Patients Who Visited Emergency Departments Waited Less Than An Hour To Be Seen By An Emergency Physician

According to records from participating hospitals, half of all emergency department patients were seen by a physician in 51 minutes or less. However, 10% waited 10 minutes or less, and another 10% waited nearly three hours or more. In a 2004 international survey, nearly half of Canadians polled (48%) said they waited two or more hours to see a doctor on their last visit to an emergency department, while only 36% of those surveyed in the UK, 34% in the U.S., 29% in Australia and 27% of those in New Zealand reported having to wait that long.

Time spent waiting to see a physician varied by the severity of the patient’s condition. Those patients considered the most urgent waited the shortest time on average, with half seeing a doctor within five minutes. On the other hand, 10% of the most severely ill patients waited 45 minutes or more. These cases could include conditions such as major trauma, shock or severe respiratory distress, while non-urgent and less-urgent cases could include conditions such as sore throats, diarrhea or chronic back pain.

Patients tended to wait longer to be seen by a doctor in higher-volume emergency departments. For example, in community hospitals with more than 30,000 emergency visits per year, the median wait to see a doctor ranged between 6 and 70 minutes, depending on the severity of the patient’s condition, while in emergency departments with less than 15,000 visits per year, the range in median wait times ranged from 1 to 25 minutes. Median wait times are the point at which half spent less than this amount of time waiting and half spent more.

The study also looked at the length of a patient’s emergency department visit. Nearly half of those who went to an emergency department completed their visit in two hours or less, with 10% of patients finishing in 36 minutes or less, but 10% spending more than six hours in the emergency department. The proportion of patients that spent less than four hours in emergency departments was similar in Canada (76%) and the U.S. (72%). In the UK, however, almost all patients spent less than four hours in the emergency department, following the implementation of a national program intended to shorten emergency department visits.

[Gan]

Ganalon - he interviewed a doctor, in his home, from the UK. Why would this person lie? He interviewed a former Member of Parliment (Old Labour). Why would he lie?

-TheE-

He interviewd one doctor at home. LOL

Why not find more valid sources on what really happens with patients in hospitals rather than the perspective of ONE doctor who's focus is HIS patients?

I seriously cant believe you're citing this as your argument.

:lol:

[Nieninque]

I’d be curious to hear from our Canadian and British posters (doubt we have any French) about how accurately their health care systems are portrayed. After watching it you come away from it thinking that their systems are like heaven compared to ours.

Regardless. To me it makes sense to have healthcare for avery American. It could be a source of pride that as prosperous and righteous as we are that we could manage a system that took care of everyone for free. Treating healthcare as an unalienable human right.

I got about 8 minutes in when I realised it was a 2 hour video.

No thanks.

Healthcare for the rich is a bad idea. The NHS is doing pretty well, considering it is pretty badly underfunded and fucked around.

[Ilvane]

Actually, I deleted my posts because it was evident that you and others were going to attack me personally rather than try to have a real debate. Attacking someone for the profession they are in has nothing to do with the health care debate.

You might actually think that I might know a little about the industry being in it.

Angela

[Nieninque]

Ganalon - he interviewed a doctor, in his home, from the UK. Why would this person lie? He interviewed a former Member of Parliment (Old Labour). Why would he lie?

-TheE-

It wouldnt necessarily be a lie if they believed what they said but were incorrect in saying it.

Interviewing two people isnt exactly a comprehensive study.

[Back]

We do to a certain degree.

To what degree? Someone may get care without insurance but they’ll be living in a cardboard box after they get that bill. You’ve seen hospital bills. You know how staggering those bills are. Imagine trying to pay that bill without insurance. What would that do to you and your family’s living standards if you were to have a kid but did not have insurance?


Blending capitalism and socialism. How do you propose thats done to accomplish your goal? How many people in healthcare would be willing to work for free? How many hospitals would remain open for free? What incentives would there be to ensure quality care is minimally kept as a standard of care? This isnt Star Trek you know, advances in fields such as this cost participants time, educational costs, and money to maintain. How do you propose to establish this for free? Wake the fuck up dude...

Everything you just regurgitated is nothing more than what you’ve been told by someone else about why we can’t. What about taking the mindset of we can? Think for yourself for a bit. Really think about what you are being told to think and who is telling you. Universal healthcare exists and it works.

England has a lower infant mortality rate and longer life-spans than America. Do you like America? Do you want to see America improve? There isn’t anything we can’t do and we should always strive to be the best.

Yes, I’m framing this in a patriotic way. Obviously, trying to appeal to humanitarianism isn’t enough in this country.

You’re married with children and you pay for healthcare. What difference would it make if the money you paid to the insurance company went towards universal healthcare? How are you not already paying some of your money towards those who can’t afford it and how is that different than some of your tax money going to fund public schools all across this country?


It is? Are you sure about that? Because I have to disagree.

I’m positive. Everyone enjoys many benefits in this country due to other programs we all pitch in for. The police force, the fire department, the military, public schools, roads and highways, and the postal service to name a few. I think its insane to think healthcare is a privilege.

[Nieninque]

Actually, I deleted my posts because it was evident that you and others were going to attack me personally rather than try to have a real debate. Attacking someone for the profession they are in has nothing to do with the health care debate.

You might actually think that I might know a little about the industry being in it.

Angela

It does make it hard to take your point of view seriously, though, when you spit your dummy out and stomp off home like you did.

It makes it all the more laughable when you can see that all your posts were quoted in replies.

QQ

[Gan]

Actually, I deleted my posts because it was evident that you and others were going to attack me personally rather than try to have a real debate. Attacking someone for the profession they are in has nothing to do with the health care debate.

You might actually think that I might know a little about the industry being in it.

Angela

No, you really dont have anything to contribute to this thread since you deleted all of your previous posts. I find it laughable that you cant stay away from it now.

:lol:

(Thats me laughing AT you)

[CrystalTears]

The only "insulting" that was done was calling you a hypocrite for contibuting to the problem that you are so against. When asked to chose between your morality or your wallet, we know what you chose. So quit being so self righteous because you're in the health insurance industry but your company is above reproach.

Delete the rest of your posts and move onto another thread as you said you would. Thanks.

[Gan]

To what degree? Someone may get care without insurance but they’ll be living in a cardboard box after they get that bill. You’ve seen hospital bills. You know how staggering those bills are. Imagine trying to pay that bill without insurance.
Imagine the lack of technology and treatment available if that money had not funded valuable R&D to go after that particular ailment... Sure it would be cheaper - pine boxes are pretty cheap nowdays for the indigent.


What would that do to you and your family’s living standards if you were to have a kid but did not have insurance? We would make do with what he had and rely upon any available assistance programs that are available. Worse come to worse we would plead our need for assistance to the public (via news story, etc.) and hope that charity money kicked in. Life isnt fair, quit trying to make it so, because its impossible in today's non-Roddenberry'esque world.



Everything you just regurgitated is nothing more than what you’ve been told by someone else about why we can’t. What about taking the mindset of we can? Think for yourself for a bit. Really think about what you are being told to think and who is telling you. Universal healthcare exists and it works.
No its from a pragmatic view of life, our economy, and a very first hand look at our healthcare system from being employed by it and having a wife who is currently an ICU CV Nurse at one of the major hospitals here in Houston.


England has a lower infant mortality rate and longer life-spans than America.
Speaking of regurgitating... Funny you seem to hit on all the major 'talking' points but refuse to look at an actual apples to apples comparison. Furthermore you mention infant mortality rate when you damn well know that has as much to do with socio-economic conditions of the mother to be rather than the technology caring for the infant once its born. Additionally I get a chuckle from pro-choicers (like you for instance) who bring up infant mortality rates as a debate point.


Do you like America? Do you want to see America improve? There isn’t anything we can’t do and we should always strive to be the best.
Of course I like America, what kind of question is that? Do you like America? I want to see America improve but not in a socialistic way like you do. To me thats not improving but moving backwards. I believe there is a middle ground between healthcare and capitalism but I do not believe your idea of a solution is it.


Yes, I’m framing this in a patriotic way. Obviously, trying to appeal to humanitarianism isn’t enough in this country.
Amazing how you can mention patriotic in the same breath as your socialistic ideals. Truly Amazing.


You’re married with children and you pay for healthcare. What difference would it make if the money you paid to the insurance company went towards universal healthcare?
Because I'm dictating first hand how my family is to be treated. If I have the means to afford greater healthcare coverage then I should have the freedom to choose to do so.

How are you not already paying some of your money towards those who can’t afford it and how is that different than some of your tax money going to fund public schools all across this country?
Here's where your ignorance of our healthcare system kicks in. NEWSFLASH: WE ALREADY PAY FOR THE TREATMENT OF HEALTHCARE FOR THE INDIGENT THROUGH TAXES. Taxes support the majority of our county hospitals here in Texas - not insurance. Healthcare is available, just not at the level you might wish it so. I personally draw a line between treatment for serious health risks and out-patient/convenience treatment. Tax money should go for the former, not the later.


I’m positive. Everyone enjoys many benefits in this country due to other programs we all pitch in for. The police force, the fire department, the military, public schools, roads and highways, and the postal service to name a few. I think its insane to think healthcare is a privilege. Again, healthcare is paid for out of the same taxes that the others mentioned above is. Its just the level of healthcare that seems to be your issue. But the more attractive talking point (and inaccurate one at that) is for people like you to say that there is NO free healthcare.

[Nieninque]

Had you watched the movie, you would have seen a discussion of the English system, which is socialized, has incentives for doctors, but incentives actually based around improving the HEALTH of their patients (get so many people to quit smoking - get a bonus), still get paid around 85k POUNDS to start as a GP, and so on, so forth.

And yet those same doctors often allow people to jump NHS waiting lists by seeing them privately and charging through the nose.


I do want to hear from our British and Canadian posters, though. In the movie, everyone says they've waited maximum of 45 minutes at the hospital, to be treated.

They are lucky. I am off sick from work at the moment so regularly have to see my GP or hospital. I often have waits of 45 minutes or more.

In hospitals, their figures are based on the time people first arrive at reception to the time they see the triage nurse. They dont take into account the lengthy waits after seeing triage.

Not that I am complaining, particularly. The staff in NHS services are overstretched. They often have too many people to deal with and limited resources with which to do so. The fact that their waiting times are longer than you would like reflects the fact that they are working with people and they cant stick to a "five minutes per person" regime.

I figure that if my GP is behind, it is because someone needed more attention from her. I would hope that if I needed more attention one day, I may get eh same opportunity.

I hate the way that Governments manipulate stats to show that they are the best thing since sliced bread, even though they begin collecting the stats to look at how to improve. Tory Blair visited my local hospital last year. The pointless cleaning up of the place that occurred prior to his visit was an insane waste of money IMO. Sure, he got to see a sparkly hospital, with no fag ends out where the dirty smokers stand, and no rubber marks on the floor. Cleaners were working overtime for days before his visit and there weren't allowed to be any trolleys out of place. That's bullshit. MPs should just turn up at places if they want to see how they are run. Fuck all this doing it by appointment so they have a chance to clean everything up. If a hospital isnt clean enough for a PM visit, get the fucking sick people out of there.

[Miss X]

To clear up a misconception about the GMS contract/QOF points (that's the system we have here that is based on incentives to improve or promote health.) It's caused a huge amount of problems within the NHS. It was a great idea at the start, giving practices money for taking the blood pressure of everyone at risk of hypertension every 6 months, ensuring everyone at risk gets the flu vac etc. In principal this is great, BUT they didn't put a cap on it. GP's took advantage of it and a lot of NHS money has been drained because the Chief Executive at the time, refused to put a limit on how much money they could get.

I still can't get over the fact that we have to give GP practices money for doing what they should be doing anyway!

In terms of waiting for appointments to see my Family Doctor, my practice is great. My GP has only been running behind once and then I had to wait an extra 15 minutes to see her. Usually I'm in there dead on my slot.

In A&E (ER) at the hospital I worked in, patients with minor problems are triaged right away, majors go straight to the bedded unit or to Resus obviously. There's a 4 hour rule in A&E's across the UK, patients have to be out of A&E and either discharged or admitted onto a ward within 4 hours. I've only known of a few breaches where I worked, but it did put a huge amount of pressure on everyone in the department.

My experience of the healthcare system in the UK has been amazing as a patient however, as a Nurse who works for the NHS I see the other side of it. Our NHS has been surviving on good will for a long time. If nurses worked to rule then there would be some serious problems. Nurses are the biggest group of NHS employees and we really need to work together. I know from my point of view, I won't stay a second over my 7.5hr shift, I won't do any visits late afternoon that might take me over my 4pm finish, I won't do anything that isn't a nursing need. A colleague of mine was recently asked if two of her team of qualified nurses could visit a patient for a "comfort call" as he had been discharged from hospital and couldn't get to the toilet. A year ago, most community nurses would have done it even though that isn't our job. These days its a "no fucking way" response. Nurses have been dumped on by the NHS for too long! /rant.

[Parkbandit]

Ganalon - he interviewed a doctor, in his home, from the UK. Why would this person lie? He interviewed a former Member of Parliment (Old Labour). Why would he lie?

-TheE-

OMG! Moore interviewed a single Doctor, thus making him the expert on the entire healthcare system of the United Kingdom.

Christ.. sorry I even questioned his integrity.

[Parkbandit]

He interviewd one doctor at home. LOL

Why not find more valid sources on what really happens with patients in hospitals rather than the perspective of ONE doctor who's focus is HIS patients?

I seriously cant believe you're citing this as your argument.

:lol:

Fuck you. I guess this will teach me to read the whole thread before making any responses.

I will say, I was mildly disappointed this morning when I thought this thread was dead.. but thankfully, Ilvane, in her infinite stupidity, decided to rear her ugly head once again here.. after being completely embarrassed to the point she had to delete all of her stupid posts yesterday. JUST when you think someone couldn't get dumber... in she comes.

Thanks for the entertainment.

[Nieninque]

I still can't get over the fact that we have to give GP practices money for doing what they should be doing anyway!

QFT


My experience of the healthcare system in the UK has been amazing as a patient however, as a Nurse who works for the NHS I see the other side of it. Our NHS has been surviving on good will for a long time. If nurses worked to rule then there would be some serious problems. Nurses are the biggest group of NHS employees and we really need to work together. I know from my point of view, I won't stay a second over my 7.5hr shift, I won't do any visits late afternoon that might take me over my 4pm finish, I won't do anything that isn't a nursing need. A colleague of mine was recently asked if two of her team of qualified nurses could visit a patient for a "comfort call" as he had been discharged from hospital and couldn't get to the toilet. A year ago, most community nurses would have done it even though that isn't our job. These days its a "no fucking way" response. Nurses have been dumped on by the NHS for too long! /rant.

Good to hear and totally agree about the surviving on goodwill stuff.

[Parkbandit]

Wasn't there a story recently, telling of thousands of people going across the border to have medical work done in the US? I want to say in Michigan maybe. I'll see if I can pull up that article.

Seems to me, that if the healthcare system in Canada is so far superior to that of the US system, there wouldn't be this need.

[Nieninque]

there are also stories of people here using the health service in France.

It's far from perfect, but the problems lie in underfunding.

[Gan]

Wasn't there a story recently, telling of thousands of people going across the border to have medical work done in the US? I want to say in Michigan maybe. I'll see if I can pull up that article.

Seems to me, that if the healthcare system in Canada is so far superior to that of the US system, there wouldn't be this need.

http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/news/story.html?id=9d079795-7252-48b1-9301-6de794c803f5&k=72901

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Ilvane

Actually, I deleted my posts because it was evident that you and others were going to attack me personally rather than try to have a real debate. Attacking someone for the profession they are in has nothing to do with the health care debate.

You might actually think that I might know a little about the industry being in it.

Angela

Yet you never expanded upon your knowledge of the industry. You fell back on weak rationalizations as to why your company and what you do is good vs everyone else bad without actually telling anyone what makes your company better than others and how your job other than "hoping you make a difference" is a positive to the health care system rather than one of the negatives. It's not even about YOU as an individual it's about your PROFESSION which is very much linked to this debate. You were "attacked" because of your inability to make these points and instead came up with "what i do is okay because i need money and insurance companies make money" well then yes it's going to become about you because thats just stupid logic. Your defense to that point of "I didn't goto school for 6 years to make less money than I make now!" is equally stupid.

Anyway I'm of the belief that if you had an actual reason as to why you don't think you're job is part of the health care system in America, why you're job is a positive asset, or why your company is a better company than others that you would have shared it with us by now.... Or maybe you did and then deleted it in a hissy fit.

[Parkbandit]

Everyone enjoys many benefits in this country due to other programs we all pitch in for. The police force, the fire department, the military, public schools, roads and highways, and the postal service to name a few. I think its insane to think healthcare is a privilege.

Do you believe you have the right for Food? Shelter? Clothing? Transportation? Money?

I believe everyone has these rights.. however, you have no "right" to force others to provide these things for you - All "free" medical care is paid for through taxes.

There are many problems with Universal healthcare.

[Gan]

To clear up a misconception about the GMS contract/QOF points (that's the system we have here that is based on incentives to improve or promote health.) It's caused a huge amount of problems within the NHS. It was a great idea at the start, giving practices money for taking the blood pressure of everyone at risk of hypertension every 6 months, ensuring everyone at risk gets the flu vac etc. In principal this is great, BUT they didn't put a cap on it. GP's took advantage of it and a lot of NHS money has been drained because the Chief Executive at the time, refused to put a limit on how much money they could get.
THOSE GREEDY CAPITALISTS IN SOCIALIST (SHEEP'S) CLOTHING!!! ;)


I still can't get over the fact that we have to give GP practices money for doing what they should be doing anyway!
Agreed, this probably isnt the best incentive for a social based program. It definately would make me nervous to know my GP particpated in this.


In terms of waiting for appointments to see my Family Doctor, my practice is great. My GP has only been running behind once and then I had to wait an extra 15 minutes to see her. Usually I'm in there dead on my slot.
My wait time to see my GP at his office is ~15 minutes as well. The wait is a little longer during the 'flu' season when his office is overstuffed with patients waiting. My GP is in a practice with 4 other GP's along with 3 PA's, they can really run the folks through there when necessary. He keeps trying to talk my wife into getting her FNP so she can work as an additional physician in his office, but she's more at home in an ICU setting. Her favorite type of patients are intubated, sedated, and restrained ;).


In A&E (ER) at the hospital I worked in, patients with minor problems are triaged right away, majors go straight to the bedded unit or to Resus obviously. There's a 4 hour rule in A&E's across the UK, patients have to be out of A&E and either discharged or admitted onto a ward within 4 hours. I've only known of a few breaches where I worked, but it did put a huge amount of pressure on everyone in the department.
Here in the US, patients register and are visually/verbally triaged for evaluation between minor and major emergent medical needs by the RN/LVN working registration. Then they wait for the formal triage where BP is taken along with a formal assessment by a triage nurse. Then they are moved to either a trauma room (private) or semi-private ward type area depending on the malady. Most major hospitals have initiatives in place for patient throughput and reduction in ED wait times. JCAHO is set up some standards that require a maximum wait time in some cases and will fine/fault hospitals who breach it with penalties ranging from steep fines all the way to loss in accredation which means no more federal medicare/medicaid money. Thats a big deal.


My experience of the healthcare system in the UK has been amazing as a patient however, as a Nurse who works for the NHS I see the other side of it. Our NHS has been surviving on good will for a long time. If nurses worked to rule then there would be some serious problems. Nurses are the biggest group of NHS employees and we really need to work together. I know from my point of view, I won't stay a second over my 7.5hr shift, I won't do any visits late afternoon that might take me over my 4pm finish, I won't do anything that isn't a nursing need. A colleague of mine was recently asked if two of her team of qualified nurses could visit a patient for a "comfort call" as he had been discharged from hospital and couldn't get to the toilet. A year ago, most community nurses would have done it even though that isn't our job. These days its a "no fucking way" response. Nurses have been dumped on by the NHS for too long! /rant.
This is probably what I find most interesting. I've studied nursing as a labor force in US hospitals because they impact throughput more than any other factor. They are the largest labor component of hospitals which means they are the largest expense as well as the largest revenue earning area. You'll find that nurses here in the US are dumped on as well, but they can command, depending on their degree of specialty as well as location, higher pay as hospitals are willing to offer for their services.

Do you find that your ability to serve the patient is limited by what funds are available from the government/hospital? What kind of overtime are you allowed to work? How does the 7.5 hour strict adherance to work schedules affect the continuity of patient care over there? I know its a rare day when my wife actually leaves work ontime after putting in her 12 hour shift. (she works 12's instead of 8's). Usually she's either helping other nurses wrap up their paperwork/orders or she's dealing with a crashing patient and wont come home until its either dead or stabilized enough to be handed off to the next nurse on duty.

The impression I'm getting (limited perspective mind you) is that the nursing component in a socialized medical field is akin to a large union that can be found on the east and west coast of the US. Am I thinking anywhere close on the nursing component Chica?

[crazymage]

Wasn't there a story recently, telling of thousands of people going across the border to have medical work done in the US? I want to say in Michigan maybe. I'll see if I can pull up that article.

Seems to me, that if the healthcare system in Canada is so far superior to that of the US system, there wouldn't be this need.

You do understand that although the healthcare system in Canada IS superior, that does not mean the doctors are, because by human nature the best want to be paid like the best and that does not happen in a free system. Therefore people from countries such as Canada when in need of specialists come to the US.

[Gan]

You do understand that although the healthcare system in Canada IS superior, that does not mean the doctors are, because by human nature the best want to be paid like the best and that does not happen in a free system. Therefore people from countries such as Canada when in need of specialists come to the US.

You ought to see all the cash paying customers our medical center receives from south/latin america. One family who owns an agave plantation (80,000 acres) wanted to hire my wife to be the patient's personal nurse (renal failure - has about 3 to 4 years left). If we didnt have a son, and her in school it would have been seriously entertained considering the pay offer was triple plus all costs of living paid for. He even offered me a position within his company (probably picking agaves lol ).

some people....

Edited to add:

I just closed a new home for a physician (GI specialist) who has a gross monthly income of over $40,000. The home and property are over a mil, market value. Surely this person would be willing to give all that up for an annual pay of $150,000. Surely thats just reward for his noteworthyness in his field, all of his years of study, efforts, labor, and research in making him one of the top tier docs in this area for GI. /sarcasm

Yes, instead of going for the golden carrot as motivation you'll just have to be happy with the week old potatoe that everyone else gets.

[Parkbandit]

You do understand that although the healthcare system in Canada IS superior, that does not mean the doctors are, because by human nature the best want to be paid like the best and that does not happen in a free system. Therefore people from countries such as Canada when in need of specialists come to the US.


You just hit the nail on the head as to one of the several problems with socialized healthcare. What is the incentive for Doctors to stay here and provide it? What about drug companies to spend billions on R&D?

And I have yet to see proof where the healthcare system in Canada "IS superior" Both systems have their good points and bad points. And that "FREE" healthcare system comes at a very steep price:


The average tax rate in Canada is higher than in the United States. In Canada total tax and non-tax revenue for every level of government equals about 37% of GDP, [1] compared to the U.S. rate of only 27%

Also to note:


The greatest difference in social programs is in health care. Contrary to popular belief, the U.S. Government spends as much on health care, 7% of GDP, as the Canadian government does, and total healthcare spending is much higher - 14.6% of GDP in the US vs. 10% in Canada. Canadians, however, receive comparable care and most figures such as life expectancy and infant mortality are better in Canada. Another advantage is that the Canadian health care system is also very attractive to employers, as in Canada health care is mostly paid through employee income taxes, while in the United States most companies have to extend health benefits to full-time employees, something they do not have to do in Canada. The main disadvantage of the Canadian system are the long lines and waiting periods that have appeared over the last 15 years, especially for minor and non-life threatening procedures. For this reason, some relatively wealthy Canadians go to the United States, India, or other nations to avoid waiting for medical treatment, joining "medical tourists" from many nations, including the US Despite these problems, Canada's healthcare performance is regularly as good as or better than that of the US system in major comprehensive comparisons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_and_American_economies_compared

[Kranar]

While most organizations who study health care systems find the Canadian system to be superior to the U.S. system, Canada's health care is neither the best in the world or even in the top 10. I think we rank on average at 30 and the U.S. is at 37.

[DeV]

I always thought quality of life and life expectancy to be greater determining factors when it comes to the public healthcare debate and deciding who's the best as opposed to the worse.

[Kranar]

While life expectancy is a factor in assessing public health care, health care (public or not) is a factor when assessing quality of life, not really the other way around.

[Gan]

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America
... more at the link.


Criteria:

Health (Level DALE/Distribution)
Responsiveness (Level/Distribution)
Fairness in financial contribution
Overall Goal Attainment
Healthcare expenditure per capita in International Dollars
Performance (on level of health)

[Back]

Imagine the lack of technology and treatment available if that money had not funded valuable R&D to go after that particular ailment... Sure it would be cheaper - pine boxes are pretty cheap nowdays for the indigent.

This is a moot point as R&D is alive and well in other countries that have universal healthcare.


We would make do with what he had and rely upon any available assistance programs that are available. Worse come to worse we would plead our need for assistance to the public (via news story, etc.) and hope that charity money kicked in. Life isnt fair, quit trying to make it so, because its impossible in today's non-Roddenberry'esque world.

Thats the point. Life isn’t fair but we have the ability to make it more fair. Why would we not hold as a goal the fair treatment and advancement of all Americans if not the entire human race? Humanity has been succeeding incrementally in that struggle from the original cave man tribe. America has been a world leader in that effort and for that I’m damn proud. (except for the past 7 years or so)


No its from a pragmatic view of life, our economy, and a very first hand look at our healthcare system from being employed by it and having a wife who is currently an ICU CV Nurse at one of the major hospitals here in Houston.

Thanks for the input. I’d like to hear from more Americans in the healh care field about the idea of universal health care and intend to ask when I get the chance.


Speaking of regurgitating... Funny you seem to hit on all the major 'talking' points but refuse to look at an actual apples to apples comparison. Furthermore you mention infant mortality rate when you damn well know that has as much to do with socio-economic conditions of the mother to be rather than the technology caring for the infant once its born. Additionally I get a chuckle from pro-choicers (like you for instance) who bring up infant mortality rates as a debate point.

You’re not concerned that Columbia, for example, has a lower infant mortality rate than we do? Or that we have a lower life-span than other countries? I see that and I have to wonder why then try to think of how to fix it. You can say those things have nothing to do with our health care system but you’d only be partially correct. Yes socioeconomic conditions play a part, and I would think we would go about trying to fix that as well, but not the entire part. Health care also plays a very large part.


Of course I like America, what kind of question is that? Do you like America? I want to see America improve but not in a socialistic way like you do. To me thats not improving but moving backwards. I believe there is a middle ground between healthcare and capitalism but I do not believe your idea of a solution is it.

Amazing how you can mention patriotic in the same breath as your socialistic ideals. Truly Amazing.

Call it what you want but to get right down to it its about we as a nation pitching in to make this nation the best.


Because I'm dictating first hand how my family is to be treated. If I have the means to afford greater healthcare coverage then I should have the freedom to choose to do so.

No one says you shouldn’t or can’t. A universal healthcare system is not mutually exclusive to private practice. Just like public school is not mutually exclusive to private school.


Here's where your ignorance of our healthcare system kicks in. NEWSFLASH: WE ALREADY PAY FOR THE TREATMENT OF HEALTHCARE FOR THE INDIGENT THROUGH TAXES. Taxes support the majority of our county hospitals here in Texas - not insurance. Healthcare is available, just not at the level you might wish it so. I personally draw a line between treatment for serious health risks and out-patient/convenience treatment. Tax money should go for the former, not the later.

Again, healthcare is paid for out of the same taxes that the others mentioned above is. Its just the level of healthcare that seems to be your issue. But the more attractive talking point (and inaccurate one at that) is for people like you to say that there is NO free healthcare.

You claim that health care in this country is already paid for by taxes. Why then do we pay insurance then on top of that have to pay deductibles and then anything over the limit of what an insurance company will pay? Because its not.

If we can sustain a billion dollar a month war on Iraq, and lower taxes at the same time (although increasing our national debt) we can sure as hell lift the burden of worry and expense of health care from, and provide the best to, our own citizens.

[Back]

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America
... more at the link.


Criteria:

Health (Level DALE/Distribution)
Responsiveness (Level/Distribution)
Fairness in financial contribution
Overall Goal Attainment
Healthcare expenditure per capita in International Dollars
Performance (on level of health)



Also check out...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care

and...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Health.png

Look where we are on the quoted list. Look at the countries at the top of the list and compare our system to their systems. It does not get any more plain than that.

[StrayRogue]

I'm suprised Japan aren't higher.

[Gan]

I'm suprised Japan aren't higher.
isn't
is not

[StrayRogue]

Wow, I'm being schooled in English by "Grade-school Ganalon". Or should I call him Captain Spelling?

[Gan]

This is a moot point as R&D is alive and well in other countries that have universal healthcare.
On the same scale as the US? Show me.




Thats the point. Life isn’t fair but we have the ability to make it more fair. Why would we not hold as a goal the fair treatment and advancement of all Americans if not the entire human race? Humanity has been succeeding incrementally in that struggle from the original cave man tribe. America has been a world leader in that effort and for that I’m damn proud. (except for the past 7 years or so)
You're RIGHT! Its not fair that I dont make over 6 figures in income as an annual salary. :lol: Youre RIGHT! I dont drive a new car when others are, when do I expect my fairness pay raise and new car? You crack me up. Seriously.



Thanks for the input. I’d like to hear from more Americans in the healh care field about the idea of universal health care and intend to ask when I get the chance.
Yes, please get out and ask people who work in the healthcare profession about universal healthcare and the US. Because the knowledge you currently have is very LIMITED.



You’re not concerned that Columbia, for example, has a lower infant mortality rate than we do? Or that we have a lower life-span than other countries?
When Columbian society, per capita income, socio econimic conditions, and availability of technology come on par with the US, then I'll be concerned. When they have to worry about teen drunk driving, children killed on ATV's, etc. When the people of columbia are exposed to the same lifestyle and risks that average Americans are exposed to, yes, then I'll be concerned.


I see that and I have to wonder why then try to think of how to fix it. You can say those things have nothing to do with our health care system but you’d only be partially correct. Yes socioeconomic conditions play a part, and I would think we would go about trying to fix that as well, but not the entire part. Health care also plays a very large part.
Here's a way. Lets ban all vehicles, firearms, shut off the electricity, grow our own food, live in mud huts, and play with wooden toys as kids while working in the fields. That'll help level the playing field. :banghead:



Call it what you want but to get right down to it its about we as a nation pitching in to make this nation the best. What you define as the best and what others define as the best are usually two completely different things. In other words, no thanks to you're style of 'the best'.



No one says you shouldn’t or can’t. A universal healthcare system is not mutually exclusive to private practice. Just like public school is not mutually exclusive to private school.
Sorry, here in America we have the notion that you work for a living, not live off of the labors of others. Basic healthcare is already provided free for the indigent. Nosejobs, boobjobs, and other forms of non-emergent treatment are not and should not be on the list at the burden of other tax payers, especially when the percentage contribution of the indigent to the taxes that goes towards universal healthcare coverage is less than minimal at best, if at all.



You claim that health care in this country is already paid for by taxes. Why then do we pay insurance then on top of that have to pay deductibles and then anything over the limit of what an insurance company will pay? Because its not.
We pay insurance premiums for the ability to choose which physicians, hospitals, and types of treatments we receive rather than having that dictated to us by the government through their medicar/medicaid sponsored programs. I pay a pretty hefty premium for a PPO that allows me to choose which physician/specialist we go see, which hospital we go to, and what treatments we choose to have without the risk of having the claims denied by the provider. If you knew more about how healthcare works, you would know that...


If we can sustain a billion dollar a month war on Iraq, and lower taxes at the same time (although increasing our national debt) we can sure as hell lift the burden of worry and expense of health care from, and provide the best to, our own citizens.
:lol: Do you seriously realize the burden (cost) of a national free healthcare system would be for the US? It would make the Iraq war costs pale in comparison within the first year, much less attempting to fund it for the next century or two. Do you have any idea what the limitations of payments to hospitals, physicians, drug companies, medical technology companies, etc. would have on the advancement of treatments available here in the US (where many seem to come when they cant get that type of treatment in their own country)? Please take an economics class (or two) so you can comprehend the impact that moving something as large as healthcare over from a for-profit system to a tax supported system would do to the market economy, the labor economy, and the healthcare economy.

[Gan]

Wow, I'm being schooled in English by "Grade-school Ganalon". Or should I call him Captain Spelling?

I just go by the drivel you post.


PS.

If you cant recognize the depth of sarcasm or irony in me correcting you (who loves to point out the very thing in others), then you are indeed lost, or you need to lay off the weed because its affecting your memory.

[StrayRogue]

I wish I had a job so meaningless that I could read the internet and post on msg boards all day. Ce la vie.

[Gan]

I wish I had a job so meaningless that I could read the internet and post on msg boards all day. Ce la vie.

:rofl:

Weak rebuttal in totally the wrong direction. Apology accepted.

[TheEschaton]

PB, you compare Canada's GDP at 37% for tax/non-tax government revenues, 27% for the U.S. However, if you add health care gross cost to the 27% of the U.S., I'd like to see what that percentage cost, considering health care is what, a trillion dollar industry?

-TheE-

[Back]

Blah blah blah

Half of your post isn’t worth the effort to respond to because you are continuing your over-exaggerated-work-backward-from-a-dumbass-conclusion-I’m-an-economist-and-work-in-healthcare-my-opinion-is-law attitude. What don’t you do, Gan? Aren’t you also a lawyer?

It all comes down to this. From the very list you posted...

I see the USA at 37, I think it should be higher, I look at those that are higher, and think we can adopt, adapt and improve their systems to raise our status on the list out of the wish to see our country and country people be the best and have the best.

[StrayRogue]

I just go by the drivel you post.


PS.

If you cant recognize the depth of sarcasm or irony in me correcting you (who loves to point out the very thing in others), then you are indeed lost, or you need to lay off the weed because its affecting your memory.

What has memory got to do with reading into person's posts or "recognising the depth of sarcasm" in you? The only "recollection" I have of you Ganalon is that you're an idiot.

I don't even smoke.

And weak rebuttal? Dude, you are the king of weak rebuttal's. Have this thread is filled of them from you.

[Gan]

What has memory got to do with reading into person's posts or "recognising the depth of sarcasm" in you? The only "recollection" I have of you Ganalon is that you're an idiot.

I don't even smoke.

And weak rebuttal? Dude, you are the king of weak rebuttal's. Have this thread is filled of them from you.

Half (and incorrect)

with them


:lol:
Thanks for the laugh, mr. perfect english.

[StrayRogue]

Again, wow. Captain Education is schooling everyone today. What a useful person he is.

[Gan]

Half of your post isn’t worth the effort to respond to because you are continuing your over-exaggerated-work-backward-from-a-dumbass-conclusion-I’m-an-economist-and-work-in-healthcare-my-opinion-is-law attitude. What don’t you do, Gan? Aren’t you also a lawyer?
Not yet. And I've been able to provide real world experience which happens to conform with my views as well as provide logical and pragmatic arguments that counter your bandwagoning, paraphrasing, easel painting regurgitation of how our health system works when you actually only have what others such as Michael Moore tell you. Do us a favor and research, read, investigate, talk to people in the industry, become familiar with more than the talking points on your socialist websites and moveon.org propeganda when you decide to debate about something like this. It will really make a difference in how you sound and how you're viewed. I promise! ;)


It all comes down to this. From the very list you posted...

I see the USA at 37, I think it should be higher, I look at those that are higher, and think we can adopt, adapt and improve their systems to raise our status on the list out of the wish to see our country and country people be the best and have the best.
Not really. I dont happen to agree with the criteria by which this panel judges the quality of healthcare around the globe. Basically its a bunch of guys (accountant types) sitting around figuring out how to measure something. You can either perscribe to it, or you dont have to. I choose the later. (much like the global warming hype)

[Gan]

Again, wow. Captain Education is schooling everyone today. What a useful person he is.

No just you. How does it feel to have a lowly educated Amerikan critiqueing you on grammar? :lol: Come on now, take your time when you type out the response... :rofl: :lol2: :lolwave:

[StrayRogue]

asl propeganda


As.

Propaganda

[Gan]

:clap:

You're catching on!

PS. I never claimed I'm perfect in spelling or grammar, nor do I make fun of others education levels because they reside in a different country. Still, you are not seeing the irony, but thats ok.

[TheEschaton]

So, you just basically told him to research, investigate, etc, etc....then you throw out the study he cited putting the U.S. at 37th because you don't agree with the criteria it ranks on? That's some fucking nerve. :P

Oh, by the way:


And I've been able to provide real world experience which happens to conform with my views as well asl provide logical and pragmatic arguments that counter your bandwagoning, paraphrasing, easel painting regurgitation of how our health system works when you actually only have what others such as Michael Moore tell you.

Edited to add this one too:

You can either perscribe to it, or you dont have to. I choose the later.

Latter.

[CrystalTears]

This debate was more fun when people got mad and deleted their posts.

[Alfster]

no lie

[Gan]

So, you just basically told him to research, investigate, etc, etc....then you throw out the study he cited putting the U.S. at 37th because you don't agree with the criteria it ranks on? That's some fucking nerve. :P
Actually, thats the study I cited originally in response to Kranar's post. Just because I introduced it doesnt mean I agree with it. ;)


Oh, by the way:



Edited to add this one too:


Latter.
:lol:
touche

[Gan]

This debate was more fun when people got mad and deleted their posts.

DAMNIT!! DONT MAKE ME CRY! I'LL GO OFF AND DELETE MY POSTS... AND AND... ASK THE ADMINISTRATOR TO CANCEL MY MEMBERSHIP. (not really, so dont get your hopes up).

[Hulkein]

Again, wow. Captain Education is schooling everyone today. What a useful person he is.

Aren't you a journalist though? You're supposed to have pretty good grammar.

[Gan]

Aren't you a journalist though? You're supposed to have pretty good grammar.

FUCKING A!!! SOMEONE FINALLY GETS teh IRONY!!!

[Blazing247]

Balls.

[Skeeter]

I have heard he writes the occasional article for D&D

[StrayRogue]

Not anymore :(

[Parkbandit]

I wish I had a job so meaningless that I could read the internet and post on msg boards all day. Ce la vie.

Weird:

Posts: 12,913


Guess your life isn't all that meaningful then?

Poor chap.

[Parkbandit]

Aren't you a journalist though? You're supposed to have pretty good grammar.


By journalist.. you mean he writes an occasional D&D article?

[Parkbandit]

I have heard he writes the occasional article for D&D

God damnit. I got served. :(

[Gan]

Weird:

Posts: 12,913


Guess your life isn't all that meaningful then?

Poor chap.

ROFL

I did not even bother to look at a post count comparison. That makes the irony even more humorous.

12,913 > 8,604
(Jul 03 ; Oct 03)
(8.89 ; 6.31) posts per day avg.

:lolwave:

What an idiot.

[Latrinsorm]

The phrase is "c'est la vie" and the plural of rebuttal is rebuttals; no apostrophe. Also, "perscribe" still isn't a word. Good! That's settled.
I see the USA at 37, I think it should be higher, I look at those that are higher, and think we can adopt, adapt and improve their systems to raise our status on the list out of the wish to see our country and country people be the best and have the best.Are you familiar with the popular movements supporting fascism (in the classic sense) in the interwar period? For instance, in Britain?

I guess what I'm saying is arbitrarily defined success by any means necessary isn't always a good idea. Doesn't that sound familiar?

[Warriorbird]

Uh, guys. A post count comparison makes everyone involved look bad.

:chuckles:

[Gan]

In response to a letter Michael Moore wrote about CNN's reporting on his documentary "SiCKO," a CNN spokesperson released the following statement:

"It's ironic that someone who has made a career out of holding powerful interests accountable is so sensitive to having his own work held up to the light by impartial journalists, as we did in our examination of 'SiCKO,' " the spokesperson said.

"In our original report, we made one mistake, which we apologized for and corrected on air and online (http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/blogs/paging.dr.gupta/) six days ago, despite Mr. Moore's claim yesterday in his letter (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?id=216) to us. Further, the e-mail Mr. Moore released in an effort to cast doubt on our reporting does no such thing.

"We appreciate Mr. Moore's attention to the important subject of health care and have featured him on CNN four times to discuss his movie and our reporting on it. While Mr. Moore may want to continue the discussion in order to drive publicity to his movie, we have presented the facts and are comfortable letting the viewers judge for themselves.

"We have zero vested interest in shading the numbers to tell a certain story. Suggesting otherwise, of Dr. Gupta or of CNN, just doesn't hold water," the spokesperson concluded.

CNN has always prided itself on balanced reporting of claims made by special-interest groups. Moore's documentary "SiCKO," which makes an impassioned case for a complete overhaul of the U.S. health care system, was not exempt from that reporting.

Moore has been sharply critical of CNN's reporting on his movie. CNN gave him multiple opportunities to respond, including lengthy segments on "The Situation Room" and "Larry King Live." Portions of those segments were aired in other CNN programs.

Moore recently posted an open letter and two so-called "Truth Squad" statements on his Web site. This document responds to the specific points Moore lays out:

POINT NO. 1:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10017):
Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN: "(Moore says) the United States slipped to number 37 in the world's health care systems. It's true. ... Moore brings a group of patients, including 9/11 workers, to Cuba and marvels at their free treatment and quality of care. But hold on -- that (World Health Organization) list puts Cuba's health care system even lower than the United States, coming in at No. 39."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
"But hold on? 'SiCKO' clearly shows the WHO list with the United States at number No. 37 and Cuba at No. 39. Right up on the screen in big 5-foot letters. It's even in the trailer! CNN should have its reporter see his eye doctor. The movie isn't hiding from this fact. Just the opposite.

CNN RESPONSE:
Moore appears unhappy with Gupta's use of the phrase, "But hold on."
Moore appears to be creating an issue where none exists.

Gupta and Moore agree that the U.S. ranks 37th and Cuba ranks 39th on a WHO report. Gupta in his fact check says this is true.

And Gupta never said Moore didn't convey that Cuba was 39th, even though the verbal emphasis at that point in the movie is a comparison between the United States and Slovenia.

POINT NO. 2:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10017):
CNN: "Moore asserts that the American health care system spends $7,000 per person on health. Cuba spends $25 dollars per person. Not true. But not too far off. The United States spends $6,096 per person, versus $229 per person in Cuba."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
According to our own government -- the Department of Health and Human Services' National Health Expenditures Projections -- the United States will spend $7,092 per capita on health in 2006 and $7,498 in 2007 (Department of Health and Human Services Center for Medicare and Medicaid Expenditures, National Health Expenditures Projections 2006-2016 (http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/proj2006.pdf)).

As for Cuba -- Dr. Gupta and CNN need to watch "SiCKO" first before commenting on it. "SiCKO" says Cuba spends $251 per person on health care, not $25, as Gupta reports. And the BBC reports that Cuba's per capita health expenditure is... $251! (Keeping Cuba Healthy, BBC, August 1 2006 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/5232628.stm)). This is confirmed by the United Nations Human Development Report, 2006 (http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statistics/indicators/52.html). Yup, Cuba spends $251 per person on health care. As Gupta points out, the World Health Organization does calculate Cuba's per capita health expenditure at $229 per person. We chose to use the U.N. numbers, a minor difference - and $229 is a lot closer to $251 than $25.

CNN RESPONSE:
CNN has corrected and apologized for an error in transcription in our report. We did so on television and online.

CNN had said that in the film Moore reported Cuba spends $25 per person for health care when the film actually reported that number to be $251. We regret that mistake.

However, we originally fact checked Moore's reporting because he uses numbers for each country from different reports and he compares a number that describes actual spending to a projection from another source.
He sources his number from Cuba to a BBC report. In that same BBC report, the number cited for U.S. spending is $5,711. Moore doesn't use that number, but instead a higher number found in another report (as cited by Moore above) from the Department of Health and Human Services' National Health Expenditures Projections. That projection is that the United States will spend $7,092 per capita on health in 2006 and $7,498 in 2007 (Department of Health and Human Services Center for Medicare and Medicaid Expenditures, National Health Expenditures Projections 2006-2016). Actual numbers for the years 2006 and 2007 are not yet available, which is why CNN could not use them.

We believe the most accurate comparison of statistics comes from analysis of numbers from the same report and the same year.

CNN used the WHO's World Health Statistics 2007 report for both the Cuban and U.S. data. That report uses the latest information on actual dollars spent, in this case from the year 2005. These summaries of actual expenditures -- not projections -- reported by CNN are: Cuba-$229, U.S.-$6,096.

Both of these numbers come from the same report and provide consistency under statistical analysis.

The only controversy here is within Moore's numbers. Moore uses $251 to describe Cuban health care spending in his movie, but when CNN e-mailed Moore's production company to verify numbers, his own staffer e-mailed back that $229 was the correct number.

As Gupta said, CNN's numbers and Moore's numbers aren't far off, but we believe ours are a fairer comparison.

POINT NO. 3:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10017):
CNN: In fact, Americans live just a little bit longer than Cubans on average.

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
Just the opposite. The 2006 United Nations Human Development Report's human development index states the life expectancy in the United States is 77.5 years. It is 77.6 years in Cuba (Human Development Report 2006, United Nations Development Programme, 2006 at 283 (http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/pdfs/report/HDR06-complete.pdf)).

CNN RESPONSE:
Moore cites the 2006 United Nations Human Development Index, which uses life expectancy data from 2004. CNN relied on the 2007 World Health Organization report, which uses life expectancy data from 2005. That data shows Americans with a life expectancy of 77.9 years and Cubans with a life expectancy of 77.2 years.

The 2005 data is available online at:
http://www.who.int/whosis/database/life_tables/life_tables.cfm (http://www.who.int/whosis/database/life_tables/life_tables.cfm)

POINT NO. 4:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10017):
CNN: The United States ranks highest in patient satisfaction.
"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

True, but even when the WHO took patient satisfaction into account in its comprehensive review of the world's health systems, we still came in at No. 37 ("World Health Organization Assesses The World's Health Systems," Press Release, WHO/44, June 21, 2000 (http://www.who.int/inf-pr-2000/en/pr2000-44.html)).

Patients may be satisfied in America, but not everyone gets to be a patient. Forty-seven million are uninsured and are rarely patients -- until it's too late. In the rest of the Western world, everyone and anyone can be a patient because everyone is covered (And don't face exclusions for pre-existing conditions, co-pays, deductibles and costly monthly premiums).

It's not that other countries are unhappy with their health care -- for example, "70 to 80 percent of Canadians find their waiting times acceptable." ("Access to health care services in Canada, waiting times for specialized services [January to December 2005] (http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/82-575-XIE/82-575-XIE2006002.htm)).

CNN RESPONSE:
Moore does not seem to have an issue with CNN's report on this point. Here's what Gupta actually said on the air:

"SiCKO" Film clip: "The United States slipped to No. 37 in the world's healthcare systems..."

Gupta: "It's true. Thirty-seven is the ranking according to the World Health Organization's latest data on 191 countries. It's based on general health level, patient satisfaction, access and how it's paid for. France tops the list. Italy and Spain make it into the top 10. The United Kingdom is 18."

Again, Moore seems to be creating controversy where none exists.

POINT NO. 5:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10017):
CNN: Americans have shorter wait times than everyone but Germans when seeking non-emergency elective procedures, like hip replacement, cataract surgery, or knee repair.

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
This isn't the whole truth. CNN pulled out a statistic about elective procedures. Of the six countries surveyed in that study -- United States, Canada, New Zealand, UK, Germany, Australia -- only Canada had longer waiting times than America for sick adults waiting to schedule a doctor's appointment for a medical problem. Eighty-one percent of patients in New Zealand got a same or next-day appointment for a non-routine visit, 71 percent in Britain, 69 percent in Germany, 66 percent in Australia, 47 percent in the U.S. and 36 percent in Canada ("The Doc's In, but It'll Be a While," Catherine Arnst, Business Week, June 22, 2007 (http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2007/tc20070621_716260_page_2.htm)).

"Gerard Anderson, a Johns Hopkins health policy professor who has spent his career examining the world's health care, said there are delays, but not as many as conservatives state. In Canada, the United Kingdom and France, '3 percent of hospital discharges had delays in treatment,' Anderson told The Miami Herald. 'That's a relatively small number, and they're all elective surgeries, such as hip and knee replacement.' " (John Dorschner, 'SiCKO' film is set to spark debate; Reformers are gearing up for 'SiCKO,' the first major movie to examine America's often-maligned health care system," The Miami Herald, June 29, 2007).

One way America is able to achieve decent waiting times is that it leaves 47 million people out of the health care system entirely, unlike any other Western country. When you remove 47 million people from the line, your wait should be shorter. So why is the U.S. second to last in wait times?
And there are even more Americans who keep themselves out of the system because of cost - in the United States, 24 percent of the population did not get medical care due to cost. That number is 5 percent in Canada and 3 percent in the UK (Inequities in Health Care: A Five-Country Survey. Robert Blendon et al, Health Affairs. Exhibit 5 (http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/21/3/182)).

CNN RESPONSE:
We believe our example of so-called "elective" procedures such as hip replacement and cataract surgery is accurate and is helpful information. More than 400,000 Americans have hip or knee replacements each year in the U.S. (http://www.niams.nih.gov/hi/topics/arthritis/jointrep.htm (http://www.niams.nih.gov/hi/topics/arthritis/jointrep.htm)). By age 80, half of all Americans either suffer from a cataract or have had cataract surgery (http://www.nei.nih.gov/health/cataract/cataract_facts.asp (http://www.nei.nih.gov/health/cataract/cataract_facts.asp)).

POINT NO. 6:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10017):
CNN: (PAUL KECKLEY-Deloitte Health Care Analyst): "The concept that care is free in France, in Canada, in Cuba -- and it's not. Those citizens pay for health services out of taxes. As a proportion of their household income, it's a significant number ... (GUPTA): It's true that the French pay higher taxes, and so does nearly every country ahead of the United States on that list."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
"SiCKO" never claims that health care is provided absolutely for free in other countries without tax contributions from citizens. Former (member of the British Parliament) Tony Benn reads from the NHS founding pamphlet, which explicitly states that "this is not a charity. You are paying for it mainly as taxpayers." "SiCKO" also acknowledges that the French are "drowning in taxes." Comparatively, many Americans are drowning in insurance premiums, deductibles, co-pays and medical debt and the resulting threat of bankruptcy -- half of all bankruptcies in the United States are triggered by medical bills (Medical Bills Make up Half of Bankruptcies, February 2005, MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6895896/)).

CNN RESPONSE:
On Moore's Web site "Prescription for Change" (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/health-care-proposal (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/health-care-proposal)), item one is a call that "Every resident of the United States must have free, universal health care for life."

One of Gupta's overall critiques of the film is that Moore leaves viewers with an impression, as he does on his Web site, that universal health care comes without cost. In fact, substantial taxes are required to pay for such programs around the world.

POINT NO. 7:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10017):
CNN: "But even higher taxes don't guarantee the coverage everyone wants ... (KECKLEY): 15 to 20 percent of the population will purchase services outside the system of care run by the government."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
It's not clear what country Keckley is referring to. In the United Kingdom, only 11.5 percent of the population has supplementary insurance, but it doesn't take the place of NHS insurance. Nobody in France buys insurance that replaces government insurance either, although a substantial amount buys some form of complementary insurance (Private health insurance and access to health care in the European Union. Spring 2004 (http://www.euro.who.int/document/Obs/EuroObserver6_1.pdf)).

CNN RESPONSE:
The very same newsletter cited by Moore points out that complementary insurance "provides cover for services excluded or not fully covered by the state." The rates cited for complementary insurance in that newsletter show 85 percent of the French buys such policies, 9 percent of the Germans, 45 percent of the Irish, and 15.6 percent of the Italians. In Britain, 11.6 percent buy supplementary health insurance, which the newsletter says provides "cover for faster access and increased consumer choice."

POINT NO. 8:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10017):
CNN: "But no matter how much Moore fudged the facts, and he did fudge some facts..."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
This is libel. There is not a single fact that is "fudged" in the film. No one has proven a single fact in the film wrong. We expect CNN to correct their mistakes on the air and to apologize to their viewers.

CNN RESPONSE:
Gupta believes picking and comparing numbers from different places and times to suit an argument is not the best approach to a complicated issue like this one. Again, as pointed out earlier, by mixing types of data and time periods in some of Moore's comparisons, Gupta felt that the film effectively fudged points that could have been made just as compellingly by comparing data from the same source and time period.

POINT NO. 9:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10017):
GUPTA: "Well, I mean, he pulls $251 from this BBC unsourced report ... Where you pulled the $251 number was a BBC report, which, by the way, stated that the per capita spending in the United States was $5,700. You chose not to use the $5,700 from one report and chose to go to a totally different report and you're sort of cherry picking data from different reports ... Well, why didn't you use the $5,700 number from the BBC report?"

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
Actually, the number "SiCKO" cited for per-capita Cuban spending on health care -- $251, a number widely cited by the BBC and other outlets -- comes from the United Nations Human Development Report, helpfully linked on our Web site. Here it is again: http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statistics/indicators/52.html (http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statistics/indicators/52.html).

That U.N. report does list American health care spending as only $5,700, but it's a few years old. Since then, the U.S. government has updated its projections for health care spending, to $7,498 in 2007. So we used that number. It's the most recent, and comes right from the Department of Health and Human Services. If the Cuban government gave a figure on 2007 projected health spending, we'd have used it.

CNN RESPONSE:
To reiterate, we believe numbers should be compared apples to apples, oranges to oranges. Moore himself says the data he's citing from the U.N. Development Programme is dated. Consistency is important in statistical analysis and is not present in Moore's comparison.

POINT NO. 10:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10026):
GUPTA: "Medicare is going to go bankrupt by 2019, and is going to be $28 trillion in debt by 2075 ... Look, I believe the very measure of a great society is in how we take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. But would you say that this is going to be still a working system 20 years from now?"

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
Medicare indeed has enough money to cover all seniors until 2019. At that time, it will simply need more funding. That shouldn't be hard to find in a nation spending trillions of dollars to invade other countries.

Medicare is not in trouble because it is socialized medicine. Medicare faces the same economic problem private health plans do -- health care inflation is out of control, far outpacing inflation for other goods and services. And in fact, Medicare is much more efficient at dealing with this inflation than is private insurance. According to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (Table 13), per beneficiary costs have risen in nominal dollars by 519.5 percent since 1980. By contrast, the cost per enrollee of private insurance has risen by 676.6 percent over this same period. So Gupta should instead be pointing his finger at the inefficiency of private insurance (Social Security and Medicare Myths, Lies, and Realities. Institute for America's Future (http://www.globalaging.org/health/us/myths.pdf) and "Gupta Says Medicare is Going Bankrupt," Dean Baker, Beat the Press) blog (http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press)).

There is a clear way to make our health economy more efficient. We waste $400 billion dollars per year administering our mess of a private, profit-driven system. The answer is switching to a single-payer, Medicare-style system and taking absurd profits and administrative costs out of the equation (Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H., Terry Campbell, M.H.A., and David U. Himmelstein, M.D., Costs of Health Care Administration, N Engl J Med 2003;349:768-75 ).

CNN RESPONSE:
Again, Moore seems to be creating controversy where there is none. Moore agrees with Dr. Gupta's reporting that Medicare solvency is only assured until 2019.

POINT NO. 11:
FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10026):
GUPTA: (On the lone expert shown in the original piece, Paul Keckley). "His only affiliation is with Vanderbilt University. We checked it, Michael. We checked his conflict of interest. We do ask those questions."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):
Keckley left Vanderbilt in October 2006 to become the executive director of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions. The chyron on CNN even notes his new position ("Vandy administrator to head Deloitte research center," Nashville Business Journal. November 1, 2006 (http://nashville.bizjournals.com/nashville/stories/2006/10/30/daily20.html)).

The independent chairman of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions is Tommy Thompson, who was George W. Bush's Health and Human Services Secretary from 2001 to 2005 and is currently running for president as a Republican ("Meet Tommy G. Thompson," Deloitte Center for Health Solutions (http://www.cnn.com/www.deloitte.com/dtt/employee_profile/0,1007,sid=80772&cid=86217,00.html)).

Keckley has made large contributions to Republican candidates and organizations. He gave $1,000 to GOP Senator Bob Corker in 2006, $1,000 to the Tennessee GOP in 2002, along with $1,500 to two GOP congressional candidates and $1,000 to the Tennessee GOP in 2000 (www.fecinfo.com (http://www.fecinfo.com)).

Keckley was also the CEO and Founder of EBM Solutions Inc., of Nashville, Tennessee, which counted among its customers Blue Cross of Tennessee, the drug company Aventis and others. Considering Keckley makes his living in the for-profit health care world -- a world "SiCKO" argues should be abolished -- viewers should have been told exactly where Keckley was coming from.

CNN RESPONSE:
Moore is correct. Paul Keckley left Vanderbilt in late 2006. That is the affiliation Gupta referenced on "Larry King Live." In addition, CNN obtained the following details about Paul Keckley from his current employer, Deloitte Center for Health Solutions:

"The original CNN report accurately described Paul Keckley's role as a Deloitte health care expert. Keckley is executive director of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions. He left Vanderbilt University in October 2006 to take this new position.

"The comments by Keckley in the CNN interview were factual, neutral and descriptive. The accuracy of his balanced comments in the broadcast has not been challenged.

"Neither the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions nor Paul Keckley has a political or ideological agenda. The center's mission is to develop innovative, practical and workable solutions to systemic issues of the U.S. health system. As such, it embraces a diversity of viewpoints that transcend easy labels.

"Keckley as an individual and Deloitte as an organization operate under rigorous rules, government regulations and professional standards designed to ensure his and our independence.

"The center has been an active participant in the national dialogue about the critical challenge America faces to preserve the best that our health care system delivers -- while at the same time seeking ways to provide coverage for the uninsured, promote wellness and prevention, deploy more effective information technology to improve patient outcomes, and reduce soaring health care costs.

"One example of how the Deloitte Center's approach is a report issued in late 2006 titled, 'The Catalyst for Health Care Reform: Providing More Choices and Innovation to Heal the U.S. Health Care Financing System.' In addition to providing a thoughtful and comprehensive overview of the key issues, it presented one possible, innovative approach to solving health care coverage for America's [46] million uninsured citizens. It reflects the serious, thoughtful and independent nature of the Deloitte Center.

'Keckley does not maintain any professional or financial ties to Aventis or Blue Cross. From 1998-2002, Keckley did serve as CEO of EBM Solutions, a private company formed by researchers from Vanderbilt, Duke, Emory, Washington University and Oregon Health Sciences University. EBM developed and licensed evidence-based guidelines to 32 hospitals, medical groups, insurance companies and drug companies during this period. Among those licensing these guidelines were Aventis and Blue Cross of Tennessee.

CONCLUSION
CNN has long been committed to covering health care issues in the United States and around the world. During the same period that Michael Moore has been working on his movie, CNN has aired hours and hours of health care related reporting. Topics included: lack of insurance, under-insurance, quality of care, access to care, problems with drugs and inappropriate ties between drug companies and lawmakers. Just this week, CNN aired a second investigative piece on hospitals that dump homeless patients onto Los Angeles' skid row.

Gupta lives with the painful problems of the health care industry every day. He is a practicing physician, serving as a neurosurgeon for the past five years at a large indigent-care hospital. His experience as a White House fellow gave him a deep understanding of the political issues surrounding health care reform. For the last six years, Gupta has also worked as a journalist whose reporting on health care and health care issues is widely recognized for its objectivity and care.

We have laid out the facts, plain and simple.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/15/moore.gupta/index.html

[TheEschaton]

Wow, CNN is having a hissy fit.

I've always disliked Gupta, even though he's my countryman. Have you ever watched his regular segment? All he does is push private pharmaceuticals.

-TheE-

[Parkbandit]

Wow, CNN is having a hissy fit.

I've always disliked Gupta, even though he's my countryman. Have you ever watched his regular segment? All he does is push private pharmaceuticals.

-TheE-

HIS HAND IS IN THE POCKET OF BIG PHARM, SO WE SHOULD NOT PAY ANY ATTENTION TO HIM! MICHAEL MOORE IS A GENIUS!

Can't wait for this to come out from Moore's camp. What more, I can't wait for that fat fuck to get back on stage to accept another Academy Award for this "documentary".. so he can once again show the true issue with our healthcare system... fat fucks like him who eat and eat and eat.. and then run to the doctor complaining of shortness of breath and heart issues. Then, once this is pointed out.. the Liberals can describe him as a victim and somehow make it McDonald's fault that he is 200 pounds overweight.

[Tsa`ah]

HIS HAND IS IN THE POCKET OF BIG PHARM, SO WE SHOULD NOT PAY ANY ATTENTION TO HIM! MICHAEL MOORE IS A GENIUS!

Can't wait for this to come out from Moore's camp. What more, I can't wait for that fat fuck to get back on stage to accept another Academy Award for this "documentary".. so he can once again show the true issue with our healthcare system... fat fucks like him who eat and eat and eat.. and then run to the doctor complaining of shortness of breath and heart issues. Then, once this is pointed out.. the Liberals can describe him as a victim and somehow make it McDonald's fault that he is 200 pounds overweight.

Moore actually acknowledged his obesity and the hypocrisy that could be gleaned from his making this film and has stated he needs to, and has started to, see to his own health.

You seem to be confusing Moore with Spurlock.

Moore puts any publicist or PR firm to shame when it comes to promotion, there's no denying that. For as many people that would like to "dismiss" him as a blow hard ... they certainly snap to and give him what he wants to get his point across ... attention.

So while people play the ostrich game with our healthcare issues .... keep on blasting Moore, you're only doing what's needed ... bringing more light to the actual issue.

[Clove]

I liked Canadian Bacon.... but "Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man"

[TheEschaton]

And if you read those comments, CNN nitpicks on minor details that don't change the message at all. It just makes the numbers slightly less extreme, and still in the favor of socialized medicine.

[Gan]

HAVANA (Reuters) - Three New York rescue workers injured in the September 11 attacks got the best treatment Cuba can offer in Michael Moore's film critique of U.S. health care, the Cuban doctors who attended them said this week.

The 9/11 responders spent 10 days on the 19th floor of Cuba's flagship hospital with a view of the Caribbean sea, a sharp contrast to many Cuban hospitals that are crumbling, badly lit, and which lack equipment and medicines.

They included a fireman and an emergency medical technician, Regina Cervantes, with respiratory problems caused by inhaling dust and fumes in the World Trade Center ruins.

There were given a barrage of tests, including a psychological evaluation, and new dosages of medication. One got a tooth implant for a jaw fractured at Ground Zero.

The main difference with their treatment in the United States: there was no bill.

"We can't say we did miracles in the few days they were here. What we did was give them the highest quality treatment. It was totally free," said Dr. Nelson Gomez, medical director of the Hermanos Almejeiras Hospital.
"They were not here long, but they did improve." he said.

Cervantes, who rushed to Ground Zero on September 11 and had a badly burnt airway after three days of rescue work, said last month that after being treated in Havana she was taken off medication she could hardly afford in the United States.

The movie, "SiCKo", has stirred heated debate in the United States since opening in June.

Moore used Cuba to argue that other countries are providing better health care to its citizens than the United States with far fewer resources, putting the blame on profit-driven U.S. pharmaceutical and medical insurance industries.

Communist Cuba's universal free health system has achieved low child mortality and high longevity rates on a par with rich nations since Fidel Castro's 1959 revolution.

But the hospital where SiCKO's patients were treated is an exception in Cuba, where patients of many other hospitals complain they have to take their own sheets and food.

The building with a majestic high-ceiling lobby was meant to be Cuba's central bank when it was started by U.S.-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista. Completed years after Castro's revolution, it was turned into Cuba's top hospital.

The 750-bed Hermanos Almejeiras is Cuba's main hospital for heart and liver transplants with a staff of 500 doctors and 800 nurses.

Cuban health officials say they have given priority to preventing disease by renovating a network of 498 neighborhood health centers across the island that bring health care closer to people's homes.

The number of children dying before their fifth birthday is seven per 1,000 live births in Cuba, versus eight per 1,000 in the United States, according to the World Health Organization.

At Rampa Polyclinic in Havana, where Moore's group was seen before referral to hospital, Dr. Juan Carlos Castellanos said Cubans do not die of infectious diseases prevalent in Third World countries.

"The main causes of death in Cuba are the same as in rich nations: cardiovascular disease and cancer," he said, sitting under a picture of revolutionary icon and doctor, Che Guevara.

http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN1936307620070719?feedType=RSS&rpc=22&sp=true

[Hulkein]

Wait, Michael Moore showing half-truths? Get outta here.

[Tsa`ah]

Here's the point you obviously fail to get, time and time again ... of all the people in this country these were the people who absolutely should not have been cut out of healthcare.

That they had to go to Cuba for Cuba's "best" is the WHOLE FUCKING POINT. It never should have got to that point. Not with anyone, especially these three and others in the same boat.

The other point you miss, and miss often, is that even if the conditions are dismal, people STILL GET HEALTHCARE.

I didn't watch the movie and say to myself ... "Wow, it's so much better over there." I watched the movie and said to myself ... "Talk about fucked up, there are nations out there that pay about the same in taxes and still manage to see that everyone has access to healthcare."

You can pick and pick and pick at the movie ... but you're not telling anyone anything new. Most people realize that socialized medicine has it's drawbacks, but those drawbacks become attractive to a person who DOESN'T HAVE and CAN'T AFFORD healthcare.

[Nieninque]

There was something in the news here that I half caught (newspapers are a bunch of lying bastards in the main) that said GPs in this country were earning around £250,000 per year.

Makes you wonder why they feel the need to do a private practice on top...greedy fuckers.

[Hulkein]

Here's the point you obviously fail to get, time and time again ... of all the people in this country these were the people who absolutely should not have been cut out of healthcare.

That they had to go to Cuba for Cuba's "best" is the WHOLE FUCKING POINT. It never should have got to that point. Not with anyone, especially these three and others in the same boat.

The other point you miss, and miss often, is that even if the conditions are dismal, people STILL GET HEALTHCARE.

I didn't watch the movie and say to myself ... "Wow, it's so much better over there." I watched the movie and said to myself ... "Talk about fucked up, there are nations out there that pay about the same in taxes and still manage to see that everyone has access to healthcare."

You can pick and pick and pick at the movie ... but you're not telling anyone anything new. Most people realize that socialized medicine has it's drawbacks, but those drawbacks become attractive to a person who DOESN'T HAVE and CAN'T AFFORD healthcare.

None of what you said changes the fact that Moore is a bullshit merchant.

[Tsa`ah]

None of what you said changes the fact that Moore is a bullshit merchant.

In your opinion of course ... and of course your statement doesn't change the points made is in movie.

But if your only means of refuting what has been laid out is that "he's a bullshit merchant", well that's hardly worth more than a literary glance.

[Hulkein]

Obviously in my opinion. It's also the opinion of most people who post here and most people who know Moore's methods.

Are you of the opinion that Moore is an honest documentary maker who does not purposely distort facts to aid his agenda?


But if your only means of refuting what has been laid out is that "he's a bullshit merchant", well that's hardly worth more than a literary glance.

I'm not arguing one way or another for socialized medicine. This thread is about a film made by Michael Moore. It's a legit place to discuss his dishonest practices.

[Gan]

There is no doubt that the US Healthcare system has issues. When you get down to it, EVERY healthcare system in existence has issues.

What everyone here, who has bashed on Moore, has iterated in this thread is that the film lacks presentation from an unbiased perspective, has demonstrated deficiencies within the US healthcare system yet all attempts at comparison to other systems, SUCH AS CUBA, were not demonstrated in a like capacity. Showing the worst of one system and the best of another system is hardly a genuine compare and contrast.

Only those in favor of socialized medicine are lauding this film as a message from God that socialized medicine is THE WAY. Even Moore admits that the film's purpose was to raise awareness. Only Moore couldnt resist extra cinematography in editing the flim to heavily slant his perspective. Evidence of this can be seen in the nature of his subjects, before and after.

As far as making the blanket statement that US Citizens cant get healthcare in the US... its completely inaccurate. I can take any injured indigent individual (bum) and walk him/her down to the county hospital and within a matter of hours have him looked at and have his injury treated without paying a dime. Why? Because he qualifies for indigent healthcare. Try understanding a little about what levels of healthcare IS available here in the US before making a blanket statement that none exists.

As I said in an earlier post. The levels of heathcare are different depending on your ability to pay. But basic primary healthcare is available to anyone who walks through the door of an emergency room or free clinic.

[TheEschaton]

I think it's still a vali comparison. You know why?

ANYONE in Cuba (provided they live in Havana or want to travel there for treatment) can go to that amazing hospital. FREE of charge.

ANYONE.

The vast majority of people in the States can't go to our best facilities, because they can't afford it. The movie simply compares the flagship of what most people can afford in Cuba (ie, the best of the best), versus what most people can afford in the U.S. (Los Angeles County hospital, which dumps patients on the street).

-TheE-

[Gan]

I think it's still a vali comparison. You know why?

ANYONE in Cuba (provided they live in Havana or want to travel there for treatment) can go to that amazing hospital. FREE of charge.

ANYONE.

-TheE-

Somehow I think you are incorrect. Otherwise there would not be the many other run down hospitals that are still open, as mentioned in the above article, that exist in Cuba. Its not like Cuba is so large that its inhabitants cant make it to the AMAZING HOSPITAL FOR FREE!!! Somehow I dont think you're (we're) getting the whole picture about admission criteria or availability to that AMAZING HOSPITAL FOR FREE.

[TheEschaton]

Somehow, I think you're overestimating the average Cuban's ability to be mobile.

[Gan]

http://www.slc.edu/media/health-advocacy/pdf/hap-bulletins/HAP_Bulletin_Summer_2002.pdf

On page 10 starts an excellent article on cuban hospitals, The Paradox of Cuba. There are other interesting pieces I'm going to read later on when I have more time. (pay special attention to the article continuation on pp. 23).

[TheEschaton]

I have to go to work right now, but I'll be sure to read it after.

[Tolwynn]

ANYONE in Cuba (provided they live in Havana or want to travel there for treatment) can go to that amazing hospital. FREE of charge.


Somehow, I think you're overestimating the average Cuban's ability to be mobile.

If they can't get to or in there, it wouldn't help the average Cuban all that much, would it?

[CrystalTears]

Cuba treats visitors and guests better than their own people. So no, not ANYONE in Cuba can get the same treatment.

[Clove]

If they can't get to or in there, it wouldn't help the average Cuban all that much, would it?

Find the nearest busy street corner in Cuba and yell "Castro is a cruel dictator" at the top of your lungs. Transportation to the hospital will be provided.