Sicko': Heavily Doctored
Is Michael Moore's prescription worse than the disease?

By Kurt Loder

http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/artic...58/story.jhtml

Except of the above.

**************************************************

The problem with American health care, Moore argues,
is that people are charged money to avail themselves
of it. In other countries, like Canada, France and Britain,
health systems are far superior - and they're free. He
takes us to these countries to see a few clean, efficient
hospitals, where treatment is quick and caring; and to
meet a few doctors, who are delighted with their
government-regulated salaries; and to listen to patients
express their beaming happiness with a socialized
health system. It sounds great. As one patient in a
British hospital run by the country's National Health
Service says, "No one pays. It's all on the NHS. It's
not America."

That last statement is even truer than you'd know
from watching "Sicko." In the case of Canada -
which Moore, like many other political activists, holds
p as a utopian ideal of benevolent health-care regulation
- a very different picture is conveyed by a short 2005
documentary called "Dead Meat," by Stuart Browning
and Blaine Greenberg. These two filmmakers talked
to a number of Canadians of a kind that Moore's movie
would have you believe don't exist:

A 52-year-old woman in Calgary recalls being in severe
need of joint-replacement surgery after the cartilage in
her knee wore out. She was put on a wait list and wound
up waiting 16 months for the surgery. Her pain was so
excruciating, she says, that she was prescribed large
doses of Oxycontin, and soon became addicted. After
finally getting her operation, she was put on another
wait list - this time for drug rehab.

A man tells about his mother waiting two years for
life-saving cancer surgery - and then twice having
her surgical appointments canceled. She was still
waiting when she died.

A man in critical need of neck surgery plays a voicemail
message from a doctor he'd contacted: "As of today,"
she says, "it's a two-year wait-list to see me for an
initial consultation." Later, when the man and his wife
both needed hip-replacement surgery and grew
exasperated after spending two years on a waiting list,
they finally mortgaged their home and flew to Belgium
to have the operations done there, with no more waiting.

Rick Baker, the owner of a Toronto company called
Timely Medical Alternatives, specializes in transporting
Canadians who don't want to wait for medical care to
Buffalo, New York, two hours away, where they won't
have to. Baker's business is apparently thriving.

And Dr. Brian Day, now the president of the Canadian
Medical Association, muses about the bizarre
distortions created by a law that prohibits Canadians
from paying for even urgently-needed medical
treatments, or from obtaining private health insurance.
"It's legal to buy health insurance for your pets," Day
says, "but illegal to buy health insurance for yourself."
(Even more pointedly, Day was quoted in the Wall
Street Journal this week as saying, "This is a country
in which dogs can get a hip replacement in under a
week and in which humans can wait two to three
years.")

Actually, this aspect of the Canadian health-care
system is changing. In 2005, the Canadian Supreme
Court ruled in favor of a man who had filed suit in
Quebec over being kept on an interminable waiting
list for treatment. In striking down the government
health care monopoly in that province, Chief Justice
Beverley McLachlin said, "Access to a waiting list is
not access to health care." Now a similar suit has
been filed in Ontario.

What's the problem with government health systems?
Moore's movie doesn't ask that question, although it
does unintentionally provide an answer. When
governments attempt to regulate the balance between
a limited supply of health care and an unlimited demand
for it they're inevitably forced to ration treatment.

What's the problem with government health systems?
Moore's movie doesn't ask that question, although it
does unintentionally provide an answer. When
governments attempt to regulate the balance between
a limited supply of health care and an unlimited demand
for it they're inevitably forced to ration treatment.



So...we shouldn't have health care for everyone like in other
countries because it has flaws? Because we can't do it even better
than they can? I have quite a few European friends and all prefer the
health care "over there" to here. In fact, with several having free
care here and overseas, they often opt to fly over for better
treatment. This is not the case for all procedures of course and you
can come up with a zillion horror stories.
I have about the best medical plan and care available since 4 of my
closest family members are doctors/nurses and my wife is a nurse. I
also have access to money that most people don't. And yet I still know
that our medical system is a joke compared to overseas, as do many of
the nurses we know who's come to the USA in recent years.
No WMDs.



RB
35s5
NY

"Bart" wrote in message
oups.com...
Sicko': Heavily Doctored
Is Michael Moore's prescription worse than the disease?

By Kurt Loder

http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/artic...58/story.jhtml

Except of the above.


We're the only "modern" country that doesn't have universal health care.
They all must be wrong.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 18:36:25 -0700, Bart wrote:


What's the problem with government health systems?

What's more important, continued support for a private health care system, or American jobs? It seems
to be overlooked that our health care system costs upwards of 15% GDP, while those countries with
universal health care spend @10% GDP. That extra 5% is the reason is the reason our automotive
sector is fleeing north, expanding operations in Canada, while curtailing them here. In a global economy,
5% extra cost puts us at a considerable economic disadvantage. Ignore that at your peril.

That's just job losses. Let's not consider the lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality our health
system provides.

On Jun 30, 6:02 am, thunder wrote:
That extra 5% is the reason is the reason our automotive
sector is fleeing north, expanding operations in Canada, while curtailing them here.


Bull****. Try unions, and massive retirements.

Joe

In a global economy,
5% extra cost puts us at a considerable economic disadvantage. Ignore that at your peril.

That's just job losses. Let's not consider the lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality our health
system provides.

Capt. JG wrote:
"Bart" wrote in message
oups.com...

Sicko': Heavily Doctored
Is Michael Moore's prescription worse than the disease?

By Kurt Loder

http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/artic...58/story.jhtml

Except of the above.



We're the only "modern" country that doesn't have universal health care.
They all must be wrong.


Erroneous thinking...a preponderance of the world is Asian....we must
change our genetics...a preponderance of the world is Muslim...we must
all become Muslims...

OzOne wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 08:40:19 -0400, katy
scribbled thusly:


Capt. JG wrote:

"Bart" wrote in message
egroups.com...


Sicko': Heavily Doctored
Is Michael Moore's prescription worse than the disease?

By Kurt Loder

http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/artic...58/story.jhtml

Except of the above.



We're the only "modern" country that doesn't have universal health care.
They all must be wrong.


Erroneous thinking...a preponderance of the world is Asian....we must
change our genetics...a preponderance of the world is Muslim...we must
all become Muslims...


Your national debt is the worlds largest per capita....you will become
part of Asia.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,
We've been expecting you.

WalMart has been trying to accomplish that for the last 15
years...people here just don't get it...by Jon's way of thinking, then,
the rest of the world should follow suit...

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 04:53:46 -0700, Joe wrote:

On Jun 30, 6:02 am, thunder wrote:
That extra 5% is the reason is the reason our automotive
sector is fleeing north, expanding operations in Canada, while
curtailing them here.


Bull****. Try unions, and massive retirements.

LOL, ever hear of the Canadian Auto Workers? They split with the UAW because they didn't like the give-
backs of their less militant brethren.

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

As I'm sure you wouldn't believe anything that came out of the Washington Post or the New York Times,
I've added a link to a few words GM's CEO Richard Wagoner has said:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/08/bu...y/08view.html?
ex=1183348800&en=da2a056faa75dd28&ei=5070

http://www.thenewsherald.com/stories...40919004.shtml

I love it when folks talk about healthcare and then wrap it all up
with the economic factors. You can really spot the royal asshole that
way.
Bottom line: Every American should have health care because it's the
ethical way. Period. There is simply no answer, no feasable and human
alternative. Our current medical system is a complete horror show for
too many good Americans.
Period.

Bart, go **** yourself. You're such an asshole with no clue about the
poverty in this country. Why should you care? Oh, right. You're a
dick.





RB
35s5
NY

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:02:01 -0000, thunder
wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 18:36:25 -0700, Bart wrote:


What's the problem with government health systems?

What's more important, continued support for a private health care system, or American jobs? It seems
to be overlooked that our health care system costs upwards of 15% GDP, while those countries with
universal health care spend @10% GDP. That extra 5% is the reason is the reason our automotive
sector is fleeing north, expanding operations in Canada, while curtailing them here. In a global economy,
5% extra cost puts us at a considerable economic disadvantage. Ignore that at your peril.

All manufacturing is fleeing, not just automotive, and health care
cost is a major driver. I know, I've been there. But universal
health care is not the answer.

Just recently, at a medical school close to my home, the state
legislature mandated to the board of higher education that the number
of seats be increased. There is a very large supply of eligible
candidates, many don't get in. It is the AMA's very sucessful, long
standing attempt to control the supply side, keeping fee schedules
very high.

That's just job losses. Let's not consider the lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality our health
system provides.

Our health care system doesn't have anything to do with this. It is a
matter of lifestyle choices. Want a lower infant mortality rate? how
about a lower rate of teen mothers on drugs and alcohol. Want a
longer life expectancy? How about everyone get off your buns and get
some exercise and drop the high fat, high sugar diet.

Frank
Who runs 36 miles a week and at 60 has no aging diseases. No
diabetes, no high blood pressure, no cardiovascular issues, no joint,
ligament, or cartilage issues.