This is a little old as it was published last Thursday, but MTV's Kurt Loder (pictured at right) did a yeoman's job in dissecting Michael Moore's paean to socialized health care, in a movie review on MTV.com entitled, "'Sicko': Heavily Doctored."
While Loder conceded that Moore's handpicked stories of bureaucratic madness are "horrifying, and then infuriating" and praises scrutiny of HMO manager Kaiser Permanente, the MTV personality quickly turned to slamming Moore for a one-sided propaganda film that failed to present viewers with a command of the complexities of providing health care to a nation of some 300 million people. Portions below in bold are my emphasis:
Unfortunately, Moore is also a con man of a very brazen sort, and never more so than in this film. His cherry-picked facts, manipulative interviews (with lingering close-ups of distraught people breaking down in tears) and blithe assertions (how does he know 18,000* people will die this year because they have no health insurance?) are so stacked that you can feel his whole argument sliding sideways as the picture unspools. The American health-care system is in urgent need of reform, no question. Some 47 million people are uninsured (although many are only temporarily so, being either in-between jobs or young enough not to feel a pressing need to buy health insurance). There are a number of proposals as to what might be done to correct this situation. Moore has no use for any of them, save one.
As a proud socialist, the director appears to feel that there are few problems in life that can't be solved by government regulation (that would be the same government that's already given us the U.S. Postal Service and the Department of Motor Vehicles). In the case of health care, though, Americans have never been keen on socialized medicine.Story Continues Below Ad ↓
Loder went on to smack around Moore for presenting Canadian health care as a shining model of quality and efficiency, pointing to a documentary from a few years ago that highlighted long wait times in Canadian health care:
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 up 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.
Loder's review/reality check on Moore's film continued by poking holes in Moore's presentation on France as a health care Shangri-la... :
In 2004, French Health Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy told a government commission, "Our health system has gone mad. Profound reforms are urgent." Agence France-Presse recently reported that the French health-care system is running a deficit of $2.7 billion. And in the French presidential election in May, voters in surprising numbers rejected the Socialist candidate, Ségolène Royal, who had promised actually to raise some health benefits, and elected instead the center-right politician Nicolas Sarkozy, who, according to Agence France-Presse again, "plans to move fast to overhaul the economy, with the deficit-ridden health care system a primary target." Possibly Sarkozy should first consult with Michael Moore. After all, the tax-stoked French health care system may be expensive, but at least it's "free."
...and perhaps Moore's most brazen example of dishonest filmmaking, his brazen collaboration with Cuban officials in a Potemkin-village rendering of Cuban socialized medicine (again, emphasis mine):
.Photo of Loder via the Web site for Premiere Speakers BureauFidel Castro's island dictatorship, now in its 40th year of being listed as a human-rights violator by Amnesty International, is here depicted as a balmy paradise not unlike the Iraq of Saddam Hussein that Moore showed us in his earlier film, "Fahrenheit 9/11." He and his charges make their way — their pre-arranged way, if it need be said — to a state-of-the-art hospital where they receive a picturesquely warm welcome. In a voiceover, Moore, shown beaming at his little band of visitors, says he told the Cuban doctors to "give them the same care they'd give Cuban citizens." Then he adds, dramatically: "And they did."
If Moore really believes this, he may be a greater fool than even his most feverish detractors claim him to be. Nevertheless, medical care is provided to the visiting Americans, and it is indeed excellent. Cuba is in fact the site of some world-class medical facilities (surprising in a country that, as Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar noted in the Los Angeles Times last month, "imprisoned a doctor in the late 1990s for speaking out against government failure to respond to an epidemic of a mosquito-borne virus"). What Moore doesn't mention is the flourishing Cuban industry of "health tourism" — a system in which foreigners (including self-admitted multimillionaire film directors and, of course, government bigwigs) who are willing to pay cash for anything from brain-surgery to dental work can purchase a level of treatment that's unavailable to the majority of Cubans with no hard currency at their disposal. The Cuban American National Foundation (admittedly a group with no love for the Castro regime) calls this "medical apartheid." And in a 2004 article in Canada's National Post, writer Isabel Vincent quoted a dissident Cuban neurosurgeon, Doctor Hilda Molina, as saying, "Cubans should be treated the same as foreigners. Cubans have less rights in their own country than foreigners who visit here."
Update: Mary Katharine Ham of Townhall.com also blogged about this today. She quips that if MTV is exhibiting fairness and insight, "Spring break will never be the same again"
Update #2: Jim Rose also picked up this item. He has an excellent blog, check it out when you get the chance.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters















Comments Policy
Liberals eating their own. Ho
July 2, 2007 - 08:56 ET by Hero SquadLiberals eating their own. Honestly, is there anything sweeter?
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
I'm not sure if Loder is li
July 2, 2007 - 09:04 ET by Ken ShepherdI'm not sure if Loder is liberal or P.J. O'Rourke (who, like Loder, has written for Rolling Stone magazine)-style libertarian. I'd have to do research into previous writings. I'm suspecting that Loder has had some personal experiences with European socialized medicine.
From his bio:
I do believe Loder is left-le
July 2, 2007 - 09:41 ET by Hero SquadI do believe Loder is left-leaning. P.J. O'Rourke is just plain awesome. I would love to hear his take on Sicko.
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
Loder is a complete moron.
July 2, 2007 - 09:02 ET by LeonLoder is a complete moron. Way to write an article without checking even the most basic facts. He loses all credibility with this line:
"His cherry-picked facts, manipulative interviews (with lingering close-ups of distraught people breaking down in tears) and blithe assertions (how does he know 18,000* people will die this year because they have no health insurance?) are so stacked that you can feel his whole argument sliding sideways as the picture unspools. "
He's joking right? Come on Kurty. You're going to attack a statistic that is not only correct but easy to find? Seems incredibly lazy to me. Kurt's ignorance is so stacked I can his whole argument sliding sideways before we even get to the body of his story.
18,000 is correct you can find it here
The Institute of Medicine has said that 18,000 people "do die each year mainly because they are less likely to receive screening and preventive care for chronic diseases." (Cite)
For an article that has so much presumption and hate, he could have at least done us the service of conducting a minimal level of research. Thanks for wasting our time Kurt.
There is an editorial note
July 2, 2007 - 09:06 ET by Ken ShepherdThere is an editorial note at the bottom of his review noting that:
That doesn't undermine the main argument of his review: there are plenty of political and economic problems with socialized medicine in every country that Moore presented as a virtual paradise contra the United States.
Ken,Yeah, I read the note but
July 2, 2007 - 09:17 ET by LeonKen,
Yeah, I read the note but his argument is still wrong. 18,000 is correct. Are you telling me that his comments surrounding this quote were based on the fact that he thought Moore was claiming 18 million? He wrote the entire article thinking Moore was this far off?
If so that destroys Loder's credibility even more. No fact checking whatsoever.
The numbers that Moore references in his film are all accurate. Say what you will about his representation of other socialized systems but his basic argument is 100% correct. Here's the key stats Moore focuses on, and I'm yet to see anyone challenge them as being inaccurate. For me, these stats alone indicate a need for a change:
1) 43.6 million Americans (15% of the population) were ininusred in 2006 (TRUE)
2) 18,000 people die every year due to lack of insurance (TRUE)
3) US spends more of its GDP on healthcare than any other country at 15% - France spends 11% and Canada spens 10% (TRUE)
4) According to the WHO, France and Canada are ranked as being in the top 10 world's best healthcare systems - US ranks 37 (TRUE)
5) Overhead (profit & administrative costs) on most private health insurance plans is between 10 - 30%. Medicare is only 1% - much more efficient (TRUE)
As far as I'm concerned these issues need to be addressed. Michael Moore did a great job by bringing this to the forefront. Fact is our current system is need of a change. You can't argue against that.
If they died due to "l
July 2, 2007 - 09:21 ET by sarcasmoIf they died due to "lack of insurance," how in the world did American pioneers ever manage to survive an America without a massive insurance bureaucracy. (Of course, I could ask the same question about the income tax or social "security," but let's stick with medicine for now...)
JMR
Sarc,They didn't. I imagine
July 2, 2007 - 09:23 ET by LeonSarc,
They didn't.
I imagine if you were to compare current life expetancy rates and general levels of overall health, they'd be much higher today than back then.
Come on. That's really your argument?
Leon, you seem to have comple
July 2, 2007 - 09:30 ET by futbolisgreat1Leon, you seem to have completly ignored the horror stories that were detailed in the movie, "Dead Meat". What do you say to the people living in countries like France, Germany, Canada, England, etc who have to wait months or years to get any type of medical care?
furthermore, the 15% of the population that you claim is without insurance is not completly accurate since in the 15% is counted people who temporarily lost insurance due to changing jobs or young adults that do not care to pay for medical insurance, who prefer a bigger paycheck. I have been both of these in my life time. I also have friends who have been both of these.
and for all the great health care in Cuba, you also didn't address the fact that Castro didn't chose a Cuban doctor, but a Spanish doctor. Even Castro has no confidence in his own health care system. Care to explain? or are you just going to rant and rave?
I'll give the explanation,
July 2, 2007 - 09:33 ET by sarcasmoI'll give the explanation, but Orwell already gave it first in Animal Farm. "Some pigs are more-equal than others."
JMR
Exactly, Sarcasmo, that is th
July 2, 2007 - 09:42 ET by futbolisgreat1Exactly, Sarcasmo, that is the problem with socialist and communist nations....some pigs are more equals than others.
The fact is that rich people in European, in Cuba, in Canada, etc are better off in government controlled health care systems. Why? because they can afford the few private practices that are allowed to exist. Also, if the government makes you wait for years, the rich can afford to go to countries where they don't have to wait for healthcare.
Leon also doesn't address the fact that in countries where there is government controlled health care, business that "bus" people to received health care in the USA and other nations with a private health care system are thriving.
Sorry, this reply was cloak
July 2, 2007 - 09:46 ET by sarcasmoSorry, this reply was cloaked. I don't know how you saw it. ;)
JMR
Fut,I didn't address a lot of
July 2, 2007 - 09:47 ET by LeonFut,
I didn't address a lot of facts in my post. Your challenging me about things I didn't even talk about. You're off topic.
My post was merely the base facts around which Moore crafts his movie. What does Castro hiring a Spanish doctor have to do with my post? The word CUBA doesn't even make an appearance in my post.
The only point you made that was pertinent to my post was the challenging of the 15% number. yes, it does include people that are between jobs. How many? We don't know, but I can't imagine it makes up that large of a number especially considering that people between jobs have easy access to COBRA.
As for the rest of you're post you're challenging me on things I wasn't speaking to.
Castro, under Castro's own
July 2, 2007 - 09:54 ET by sarcasmoCastro, under Castro's own "ideal" medical system, hiring a Spanish-not-Cuban doc, obviously has nothing to do with a post celebrating a movie that celebrates Castro's "ideal" medical system without mentioning that inconvenient Animal Farm fact. Sorry we were so off-topic!
JMR
I didn't celebrate Sicko. I
July 2, 2007 - 09:57 ET by LeonI didn't celebrate Sicko. I posted the core statistics that Moore uses and asked if they were wrong.
They aren't. Again, what does Castro have to do with my post? I never said Moore was right in his assessment of Cuba's system and I didn't post any stats about Cuba's system.
Leon, but that is the problem
July 2, 2007 - 10:04 ET by futbolisgreat1Leon,
but that is the problem, the FACTS that you claim Moore has right, are actually quite wrong.
15% is not accurate, as we have discussed.
How can WHO rank France, Germany, England and other countries with socialized health care system as top in the world when their citizens, especially the poor citizens, have to wait years to receive basic health care?
How can WHO rank these nations as being top, when business that "bus" citizens of these nations to the USA to receive health care system, are thriving?
all you are saying Leon is, "I am right, Moore is right, let us not talk about the facts which prove Moore right."
Don't you see?? WHO is fund
July 2, 2007 - 10:07 ET by sarcasmoDon't you see?? WHO is funded by my tax dollars, so they can't possibly be biased in any way. If you want evil and bias, go for something like Exxon giving a piddly $58,000 to this bunch or a similarly piddly sum to the Competive Enterprise Institute. THAT money, due entirely to its source, taints all results. Tax money, however, is pure. See the logic??
JMR
Sarcasmo, isn't amazing how q
July 2, 2007 - 10:17 ET by futbolisgreat1Sarcasmo, isn't amazing how quick Liberals like Leon decry and go after big corporations because of big money. But they blindly believe Liberal millionares. I guess corporate money is dirty, but Liberal millions are not, right? I guess they believe that millionares like Moore can't be corrupted by power and money, but those evil, do no good corporations are easily corruptable.
just like you said about WHO and ExxonMobil. It never ceases to amaze me the "logic" that Liberals use.
AVERAGE AGE OF DEATH
July 2, 2007 - 10:16 ET by PawpawNFor these other countries assailed as having such great care-what is the average age of life expectancy for them, man & woman, compared to the USA?
Some incredibly-poor places
July 2, 2007 - 10:20 ET by sarcasmoSome incredibly-poor places (remember the 100+ year old people from the former Soviet Union in the '80s Dannon Yogurt commercial) have people that live for a long time. It's thought this is largely due to genetics, diet, and work habits, rather than the level of medical care available.
JMR
Answer
July 2, 2007 - 10:27 ET by PawpawNThat really didn't answer the question. What are these places average age of death for men and women? Doesn't matter that some live long time, some dogs live long, some don't-just what is average?
I'm pretty sure "avera
July 2, 2007 - 10:35 ET by sarcasmoI'm pretty sure "average" varies, and there's no answer. Here's something more about the region of old yogurt-eaters, if I recall correctly, but why some people get old and how is a subject of endless debate, not answers.
JMR
Stats
July 2, 2007 - 10:40 ET by PawpawNThere have to be statistics available, but no one ever uses them. Quick, everyone see who can find then 1st!!
2002 Stats
July 2, 2007 - 10:54 ET by PawpawNAccording to MERCK, 2002 stats: CANADA- Men 76 Women 83; FRANCE- Men 75 Women 83; USA- Men 74 Women 80. Could someone find more up-to-date stats?
Does this explain why more me
July 2, 2007 - 11:47 ET by Jack BauerDoes this explain why more men are transgendering into women. Snip. Snip.
Jack -Naw ... That's Global W
July 2, 2007 - 15:50 ET by drillanwrJack -
Naw ... That's Global Warming. The dudes think they're PMSing or pre -menopausal..
Wrong statistics
July 2, 2007 - 12:16 ET by dagdaOne of the problems with these statistics is that you do not take into account the other methods of dying, other than a natural death. Comparing these statistics assume that all countries have like death rates in all other areas. France has not really been involved in a shooting war since Algeria and they wienied out there. In Iraq, Britain took the safest regions to control. We all know how agressive the Canadians are.
I read the British papers and they are always pissing and moaning about the long waits for medical care. The Blair government got caught dropping people on waiting lists after 45 days so it looked like they were getting care. They just took them off the list. The new guy in France got elected on a platform to "fix" France's health care system which is $2 billion dollars in the red. Remember the riots to stop his election because he was going to stop some of the benefits of their bankrupt program? Canadians are also crossing the border to get more timely care in the USA. Arizona, which caters to a lot of Canadians in the winter, takes additional stress on their health care system when the Canadian snowbirds arrive. Illegals coming in from Mexico have caused the closing of the maternity section in a small hospital in southern Arizona. They were overwhelmed by the unpaid medical bills for newborns from illegals. San Diego county in California has a problem with illegals coming into the country for their pre-natal care as well. Even Cuba's system for the elite was not enough for Dictator-for-Life Fidel Castro. He had to go outside the system.
So, Leon, how would you fix the system? Do you want the failed socialistic medicine models of other countries? Do you want to tamper with a thriving capitalistic model that is partially reigned in by insurance companies? What say you, Leon?
Our real problem, then, is not our strength today; it is rather the vital necessity of action today to ensure our strength tomorrow. Dwight Eisenhower
It's thought this is largely
July 2, 2007 - 10:38 ET by Jack BauerBut mainly due to there being no accurate and official records of the person's actual age, except for the anecdotal.
Don't you all remember that
July 2, 2007 - 10:44 ET by sarcasmoDon't you all remember that Dannon yogurt commercial? I agree with you about Soviet era records, but these folks were OLD!!! And I think the FDA eventually objected to the longevity suggestions in the commercial, but now I don't recall.
JMR
sarc -- well, I was only refe
July 2, 2007 - 11:45 ET by Jack Bauersarc -- well, I was only refering to those undocumented third world folks who pop up as news fillers claiming to to 135 and claiming Yak's milk is the reason for their longevity.
You started with "Lode
July 2, 2007 - 10:04 ET by sarcasmoYou started with "Loder is a complete moron," and we've already questioned the very terminology of your stats, or at least I have. Now, will you or won't you answer the question about Castro's doctor??
JMR
Leon, You can't make a pro-ar
July 2, 2007 - 09:56 ET by futbolisgreat1Leon,
You can't make a pro-argument for Michale Moore's movie without addressing ALL of the points that I challenged you on. His arguements for a pro-socialized health care system are based on the things I am challenging you on. You can't say, Moore is right and then refuse to say how he is right when being challenged on the "facts" put out by Moore.
and you hit it on the nail! We don't know how many of the 15% are truly without insurance, or have chosen to be without insurance or are between jobs and chose not to carry COBRA. So, once again the 15% is misleading.
Fut,Again, I didn't make a pr
July 2, 2007 - 10:00 ET by LeonFut,
Again, I didn't make a pro-Moore argument. I took an objective look at the available stats upon which he bases his movie. If anyone has contradictory stats, feel free to share them.
The only pro-Moore statement I made concerned the fact that at the very least he brought a topic to the public discourse that is serious need of conversation. Agree with his movie or not, we all agree that something needs to be done with this system
So, let us get to the point L
July 2, 2007 - 10:11 ET by futbolisgreat1So, let us get to the point Leon. Do you agree with Michael Moore's movie? not the premise of it, but the so called facts he uses to show how terrible the American health care system is.
what do you think is the solution for what you and Moore call a problem in our health care system?
and once again, you don't get it. Moore uses Cuba's health care system to show how terrible the American system is. What Moore doesn't tell the viewers is that the type of medical service received by the Americans he took with him is reserved for the elite in Cuba and the pro-communist tourist, mainly Hollywood and European elites who love kissing Castro's behind. The average citizen in Cuba doesn't even come close to getting the health care service given to the Americans taken by Moore to Cuba. So once again, how can our health care system be so terrible when the average American citizen receives 100% better health care than the average Cuban citizen.
so, once again, it seems that Moore's "facts" and his premise are flawed.
He didn't mention Cuba, so
July 2, 2007 - 10:16 ET by sarcasmoHe didn't mention Cuba, so despite the fact that Moore's movie apparently celebrates Cuba's system, we're not to discuss inconvenient facts about it.
JMR
Sarc, oh I get it now. Acco
July 2, 2007 - 10:21 ET by futbolisgreat1Sarc, oh I get it now. According to Leon we are suppose to believe that the American health care system is in dire need of an overhaul because Michael Moore said so, despite the fact that all the so called facts that Moore used to show this are inacurate. We are also suppose to believe that our health care system is bad because Leon said so and I guess because Hillary Clinton told us so back in 1993, right?
this is so typical of Liberals. "Don't worry about the facts, I am right because I said so. Disregard the fact that the facts don't agree with me. Let us not talk about all the lies I told the America people. The fact is because i said so, things need to be changed."
The thing they don't see in
July 2, 2007 - 10:26 ET by sarcasmoThe thing they don't see in me is that I find their same kind of Exxon-money bias with anything that uses tax-money. But the dangerous thing to remember is that Michael Moore is right. The US health care system DOES need an overhaul. The overhaul needed, though, is more toward capitalism, rather than the rest of the short distance toward full & complete socialism.
JMR
Leon:
July 2, 2007 - 12:57 ET by MauiOriginalNot everyone between jobs has access to COBRA, and not everyone can afford the high rates of COBRA even when they do have access. When my husband switched jobs it was a financial gamble we were willing to make to be without health insurance for 90 days. It paid out for us. Neither we, nor our children, would have gone without medical care if it was needed in that 90 days.
My in-laws chose not to have health care, even though it is available to them at a low premium. They think it's better to have the extra money in their pockets every month. They still see a doctor if they need to. Whether or not it's a wise choice, it's one many make.
Fut,I didn't address a lot of
July 2, 2007 - 09:47 ET by Leondouble
Yep, not at all due to gove
July 2, 2007 - 09:32 ET by sarcasmoYep, not at all due to government except if you count the technological innovations in medicine resulting from war. And yes, the fact that a doctor can't go out from med school these days with a traditional doctor's black bag & just practice medicine undisturbed like docs did in the age of the Model A Ford IS my main argument. You have yet to refute it, and 'come on' does not count as a counterargument.
JMR
Sarc,What is your point? Do
July 2, 2007 - 09:43 ET by LeonSarc,
What is your point? Do you really think that doctors making house calls is practical in a country that will have 308 million people by 2010?
Do you really think that gi
July 2, 2007 - 09:45 ET by sarcasmoDo you really think that giant insurance bureaucracies, or a single giant government bureacracy, is practical instead of individual doctors in a free doctor marketplace -- especially with an internet for us to keep track of 'em all?? What is your point??
JMR
That's the first thing I thou
July 2, 2007 - 09:55 ET by SmartypantsThat's the first thing I thought when I read this comment. The idea that a one payer health care system is somehow going to be more effective and efficient than the free market in a country of 300 + million is laughable, especially when one considers that, due to lax immigration policies, huge groups of these people do not even speak the same language.
The problem is (and I don't
July 2, 2007 - 10:00 ET by sarcasmoThe problem is (and I don't know what's happened with my cloaking device today, but thanks!) that what we're doing right now today doesn't much resemble capitalism. Thus, problems we see that are largely caused by government and/or government-encouraged bureaucracy can be seen as only solvable by even more government involvement. Sigh. It resembles capitalism about like the "deregulation" Enron bought when they bought a bunch of California politicians resembles actual deregulation.
JMR
Leon: Seal the borders, depor
July 2, 2007 - 10:12 ET by Mica the MagnificentLeon:
Seal the borders, deport the illegals, and we won't have 308 million people by 2010. Then, the doctors could make house calls.
Problem solved. What's for lunch?
Baby boomers - - What Islamofascists call their kids
Leon:Can you show me one deat
July 2, 2007 - 13:37 ET by Mica the MagnificentLeon:
Can you show me one death certificate that showed cause of death as "lack of insurance?"
I'm sorry to inform you, your husband is brain-dead. . . . He registered democrat. - - Another death due to re-registration syndrome
Medicare
July 2, 2007 - 09:49 ET by PawpawNMedicare 1percent, come on!! If that's the case, why is it in need of overhaul, according to you Libs! And on this subject, as well as every other subject, we ask, what would you do to fix this? Whatis your plan? You Libs always fuss about everything, yet we never see what your plan would be!!
Leon, I work in the health in
July 2, 2007 - 10:36 ET by BruzillaLeon, I work in the health insurance industry, and there's a reason why Medicare's rates post so low. Most Medicare programs are not administered by Medicare. Medicare only administrates straight Medicare Part A and B, which have by far the smallest enrollment. Most over-65 Medicare members are enrolled in Medicare supplement and Medicare Advantage plans (Part C) and while Medicare oversees the certification of these programs, the health plans administer them. Also, Medicare Part D, the prescription drug plan for seniors, is also administered by the health plans, not Medicare. Medicare is far less efficient than the health insurers, but you don't see that because they shift all their administrative costs over to the insurers.
As for the 18,000 who supposedly die from lack of insurance, that's a number that's very much open to debate. It assumes that all of these 18,000 would have sought out medical attention if they had someone to pay for it. That is not a valid assumption. I have outstanding medical insurance, but my wife still has to about march me at gunpoint to see a doctor when I'm sick, and there are lots of folks just like me out there. It also assumes that all of these 18,000 would have survived by seeking medical attention before it was too late... another fallicy. If I were you, I would think long and hard before hanging my credibility on such a speculative number.
bruzillaI have outstanding me
July 2, 2007 - 10:41 ET by Jack Bauerbruzilla
Mainly doctotphobic men. Which is, of course, one of the main reasons why males have a lower life expectency than females.
I don't have a fear of doctor
July 2, 2007 - 14:26 ET by BruzillaI don't have a fear of doctors as much as I have a distrust of medicine. I believe that the human body is largely able to deal with most health issues all by itself, and that many of the "ailments" that people frequently go see a doctor about are often just the body trying to fix itself. For example, I had bronchitis when I was 15, and again when I was 17. Both times I went to the doc, both times I was put on antibiotics, and both times the condition cleared up quickly after following the antibiotic regimen. I came down with the ailment again when I was 20, but this time I just let the disease run its course and let my body defeat it on its own. It took me three weeks to beat it, but that was 27 years ago and I've never had it since. I have dealt with all manner of common ailments, running from common colds to pnemonia the same way, and with the same results: my kids get sick, then my wife, but I don't.
Recently my knee started hurting unbelieveably bad, and it felt like something had splintered off and was digging into the soft tissue. My wife was going to rush me to the doctor, and I said no, if something is in there that's not supposed to be, my body will have a way to get rid of it. To this day I have no idea what was causing the pain, but within two days it completely cleared up on its own. I just let my body do what it was designed to do, which is why unless something goes really, really, wrong, I let my internal doctor take care of it.
People like you and me (I h
July 2, 2007 - 14:30 ET by sarcasmoPeople like you and me (I haven't seen a doc in years, but I'm in my 40s and not looking forward to my next visit because of what the doctor's going to want to see) might be the reason we don't see 100% drug commercials on TV. Sure seems like 80% some days, though...
JMR
Bruzilla,Thank you for final
July 2, 2007 - 16:26 ET by JohnMBruzilla,
Thank you for finally cutting through to the REAL truth - medicine is just another man-made system that has nudged it's way past the bounds of nature and reason. Our bodies are much more robust than doctors would have us believe, which of course serves THEIR interests before ours. Likewise the drug companies and their commercials.
I wish there was a Medical-Alert bracelet that was imprinted: "If you find me lying in the road bleeding, LEAVE ME THE HELL ALONE!" I trust no doctor.
My health insurance is in getting enough sleep, meditating, and eating well (as in "food combining" -- fruits for breakfast, salad and whole grains for lunch, salad and protein for dinner, lots of water, no fructose-bubble drinks, a beer or three a year, and just enough walking and bicycling to be fun and not be "Exercise"). BTW, how many people each year die BECAUSE OF doctors, health care treatments, and over-doing "Exercise"?
And, did anyone note that 18,000 alleged deaths are far fewer than occur on US highways each year? So why the big to-do over health care deaths, and no fuss over highway deaths? Where's Moore's hissy-fit over that?
And did anyone account for all the religious groups who do not use medicine? (certain American Indian tribes, Christian Scientists, various Asian religions, etc.) How many of them die each year "without health insurance"? As if they ever wanted it?
Bruz, I'm 100% with you on the power and the importance of listening to our "internal doctors"! -- If you can't trust the doctor you were born with, how can you trust one you find through the yellow pages, or through a self-invested, man-made system?
As the great sage noted, &q
July 2, 2007 - 12:25 ET by marvlAs the great sage noted, "there are 3 kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." What exactly do these numbers prove? Nothing.
One thing's for sure: an uneducated, overweight land-whale is likely the last person to get anything right as far as facts and useful insights.
Actually, I do agree with Moo
July 2, 2007 - 12:34 ET by BruzillaActually, I do agree with Moore's premise that we should do away with health insurance companies. It is the concept of "shared risk" that allows providers to charge rediculous fees for their services. If we did away with health insurance, and required people to pay their health costs out-of-pocket, the providers would have to lower their rates to a level where most people could afford them or go out of business.
The model for fixing healthcare isn't in Canada or France, it's right here in the US in the laservision eyecare arena. Hardly any insurer covers this procedure, so doctors have had to compete on price and quality of service, just like everyone else, to maintain business. This is why the cost per eye has gone from $3,000 to about $400, while the quality in service has skyrocketed.
A-men!!! I say "bring
July 2, 2007 - 14:32 ET by sarcasmoA-men!!! I say "bring back the black bag."
JMR
It is an incredibly subjectiv
July 2, 2007 - 09:51 ET by Hero SquadIt is an incredibly subjective statistic. 18,000 people dying because they don't have a health care card assumes that if they all just had a card that they would have sought proper treatment in a timely manner.
Sorry, that contention is so full of holes that it makes it a worthless statistic. Unless, of course, you are going to argue that everyone who does have health care insurance receives proper treatment in a timely manner, and therefore doesn't die.
There are always going to be people like my father-in-law, who have to be barfing up a lung before they'll be dragged kicking and screaming to the doctor.
Many hospitals (including the one where I work) do not refuse medical treatment due to an inability to pay. Some patients are put in contact with agencies who can help them find the coverage or set up a payment plan, but some are simply written off as expenses that will never be covered.
So most of those 18,000 who die probably had a means to receive care in one way or another, but chose to ignore their health for any number of reasons beyond having a card.
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
Great point, Hero. Liberals
July 2, 2007 - 10:00 ET by SmartypantsGreat point, Hero. Liberals like to pretend that their "solutions" are infallible. I've spent a good portion of my career in the health care world, studying lifestyle choices and their impact on overall health. A universal health care system will do little to make people healthier or live longer. In fact, there is sufficient evidence that quite the opposite will occur.
A healthcare system is not going to make people eat right, exercise, stop smoking, etc. In fact, as humans know their health care is paid for, there is a tendency to actually let their health go.
Brilliant. It's all about p
July 2, 2007 - 11:25 ET by jpatchBrilliant. It's all about personal responsibility. Work hard and take care of your body. It's called being RESPONSIBLE. A liberal's idea of being responsible is submitting a claim to the appropriate government agency.
"Take it away Leon, take
July 2, 2007 - 18:19 ET by Del Dolemonte"Take it away Leon, take it away!"-Bob Wills, 1936
Leaving aside the 18,000 people thing for a minute, please detail all of the other basic "facts" Kurt got "wrong" in his review.
Update: here's what Loder himself said about "lazy reporting"
LAZY REPORTING
Yeah, sure. I spent time in, like, criminal courts, and covering murder trials for papers.
Well, Rolling Stone was, I think, part of the wave in the '70s, there was something called "the new journalism" which really started the New York magazine and Esquire magazine. And the idea there was that you should get the whole story and really dig into it. But a lot of stories don't really have two sides. Now if you're doing a story on Hitler, "Okay, he killed a lot of people, but he liked his dog" there aren't two sides to that story. This is a bad guy. So in some cases, the evidence you finally get is just so overwhelming you have to say this guy's, like, you know, should be done away with. A lot of stories are like that. It shouldn't be just a matter--a lazy reportorial thing to do is to go to both sides, get a statement, say, well, here they are, who knows who's right? If you really dig in, sometimes you can find out who is right. Maybe you can make some difference in the case.
A reporter has to go out and dig in and stuff. You shouldn't have a preconceived notion, but when the evidence just amounts to a point where you can say, "Well, here's the real story, here's the truth, or as close as we're going to get to it," then you should present it as such. I think the idea of objectivity is good up to a point, but you can't just be lazy and say, "Well, make up your own mind. I'm not gonna do the work." Do the work. You'll have a better story.
Funny, the Moore's sneering d
July 2, 2007 - 09:21 ET by Chris NormanFunny, Moore's sneering disdain for private enterprise doesn't extend to government programs and a thug dictatorship. Oh, yeah, those are two entities one can trust. For all his sneering cynicism, he is remarkably trustful that the federal governmant will suddenly administer a generous and competent health insurance program and that Cuba would never engage in a propoganda stunt. I think this clown knows the truth. He's just intent in causing as much trouble as he can.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Chris Norman, Moore's disdain
July 2, 2007 - 09:37 ET by futbolisgreat1Chris Norman, Moore's disdain for private industry and enterprises doesn't extend to his personal private enterprises and his private ventures.
As a typical Liberal, Moore loves and adores capitalism for himself, but he hates it for the average American.
It never ceases to amaze me, these Liberals who spout the great things about a socialist society. Why do they stay in the USA? why don't they go live in their socialists utopias in Canada, Europe, Cuba, N. Korea, etc? I mean if they are so great, why live in a capitalist nation in which you make millions selling your pro-socialist movies, right?
Loder will be out there champ
July 2, 2007 - 09:43 ET by drillanwrLoder will be out there championing all the Global Warming cultists during this week's carbon emissions overload concerts for awareness of the GW disaster that is about to kill us all anyway. So, who needs health insurance anyway ... private or socialized. Because if humans drop dead the climate will re-adjust itself and all will be right with the world. *grain-of-salt*
What is fun is to watch Hilla
July 2, 2007 - 09:52 ET by buddycWhat is fun is to watch Hillary's puppets in the media. If she is afraid the Moore went to far, she puts the word out and her puppets (kind of prostitutes) provide her message. I have read that Hillary is afraid of Moore's position. Solution is have these scum attack him in the media to make her solution look "middle of the road". She can't afford to have the same position as Moore.
I am sure MTV has entertainment value but as far as providing news or education there is nothing of value in watching anything on MTV. It is intended to manipulate and brainwash.
Sax Man
July 2, 2007 - 09:56 ET by PawpawNGuess Bill will be on playing the Sax again soon. Hillary can probably play the mouth harp, oops, that wasn't Hill was it??
Michael Moore does not have
July 2, 2007 - 10:03 ET by ScottyDogMichael Moore does not have a clue about the Health Care corporate takeover created by our own Congress.
Our Health Care system was just fine until congress passed the HMO act of 1973 and the final nail was when Ted Kennedy introduced the HMO Act in 1978. It caused our Health Care system to go from single payer fee based system to a HMO manged care model.
HMO's make money by denying services and the results of the emphasis on shifting care to HMOs, and away from providing facilities for health care, were dramatic. From 1980 to 2000, over 1,000 hospitals were shutdown in the United States.
The entire HMO system was based upon permitting HMOs to deny treatment to various kinds of people. From the beginning the managed-care companies ``cherry-picked'' those whom they would insure--often enrolling only healthy patients, or, after open enrollment, denying access to needed specialists, tests, or treatment for those chronically ill, mentally or physically disabled. In 1976, Congress actually permitted HMOs to deny enrollment to persons institutionalized with a chronic illness or permanent injury.
HMOs have become a corporate, bureaucratic middleman in the health care system, driving up costs while undeniably degrading the quality of our medical care.
As usual, government intervention in the private market has caused unintended consequences, but Washington blames only the HMOs—not the laws that created them.They have legalized the corporate take over of the Health Care industry by creating HMO's in the first place.
If you want to know where the health care dollars are going, look up any of the HMO insurance companies on the Stock Market and look at their quarterly profit statements. The billions they are making is the result of denying coverage to someone and screwing the doctors. The money they are making used to go for patient care now it is going into CEO's pockets and the bean counters that deny coverage.
Ask most Doctors that practiced before this abomination was legislated and they will tell you why they have quit practicing medicine. Add the ambulance chasers like John Edwards into the mix and you will begin to understand why the best and brightest no longer consider becoming a Doctor a viable choice.
Why is it when people talk about 47 million uninsured, they ignore the fact that almost equals the number of Illegal Aliens that use our Hospitals by Government mandate as their own personal doctors office and do not pay the bill?
Is this Mexico or the USA
Sorry ScottyDog, but you're w
July 2, 2007 - 10:54 ET by BruzillaSorry ScottyDog, but you're way out to lunch on HMOs. Here's the issue with HMOs: People have two distinct views in regards to their healthcare. First, they want to be able to pay the lowest premium rates possible when they are purchasing it, but when they go to seek out medical treatment they always demand the best, and most expensive. So in short, they want to be able to get $10 worth of medical treatment out for every $1 they put in. Now sometimes that works out, but obviously it can't happen for everyone.
What HMOs do is balance how much members are willing to pay, with how much providers are willing to accept. Providers enter into a contract that states how much they will receive for services, and the members enter into a contract that states how much they will have to pay, and the insurer does their best to keep that in balance. Suppose you agreed to buy a car for $25,000, then the dealer decides they want more and demand you pay $35,000. Would you still buy the car? No. You would go somewhere else. But with medical services, you never see that extra $10,000 that a provider demands because your insurance is paying it, and most people have a doctor they prefer and demand to be serviced by. HMOs tell the doctor no, you contracted for $25,000 and that's all you're gonna get. Is that "screwing the doctor"? Is going to different car dealership "screwing the car salesman"? I think both situations reflect consumers wanting a provider of goods or services to honor their agreements.
Managed care ensures that the widest range of medical services are provided to the largest number of members at the lowest cost. The more people pay into the system, the more they can benefit from it... but most people want to pay the minimum, while receiving the maximum, and that can't work in any business. As for stock values, the company I work for is a not-for-profit... like most insurers. When you look at traded insurers like Kaiser-Permanente you have to take into account that they also own and manage hospitals, medical centers, and other care facilities that most insurers do not. It's those side businesses that generate most of their profit, not the insurance side.
BruzillaYou and I will have
July 3, 2007 - 11:06 ET by ScottyDogBruzilla
You and I will have to disagree about HMO's. I worked in Health Care before the HMO act and witnessed what happened when the corporations began to take over the Health Care system in the late 1970's using laws created by Congress.
Maybe the company you work for is honest but that has not been my experience. Most of them are a bunch of crooks that use lawyers and stalling tactics to avoid paying for care that is in their so-called phone book sized contracts. I have worked with most of them and I have yet to see the benefit they have had on our health care system.
My brother was a claims manager for 24 years before he retired so please spare me the altruistic talk about not for profit. It is nothing but an accounting loophole that should have been outlawed a long time ago.
Kaiser Permanente should be closed down as there are nothing more than death merchants. They are the very model that Michael Moore would force us into.
My sister in law died while waiting for the appropriate tests to treat her treatable cancer with Kaiser. Her cancer treatment was covered under their contract for care.
They saved between 300k and 500k by denying, “Stalling”, her coverage and ended up paying almost the exact figure for “wrongful death” settled out of court.
The fact is most HMO companies are run by attorneys and have created a system where they in Concert with our Congress have totally changed the model of health care in this country to the detriment of Americans.
Regarding your statement about managed care;” Managed care ensures that the widest range of medical services are provided to the largest number of members at the lowest cost.”
Correct me if I am wrong, isn’t that the exact premise for Socialism ala Karl Marx.
I have read your other posts and I do agree the solution is returning to competition like your example about eye surgeons. Most people today have no idea how much the “HMO” is paying for the services and that is problem. The patient has been taken out of the loop of normal commerce.
The charade is over before it started
July 2, 2007 - 10:47 ET by c5thenWhen even an MTV reviewer feels the need to poke holes in one of Moore's schlokumentaries, it's clearly an obvious attempt at propaganda. It's not even that hard to do.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
Actually, Loder has had a lon
July 2, 2007 - 18:37 ET by Del DolemonteActually, Loder has had a long journalistic career before his MTV stint, which started when he was in the US Army. He wrote for the late great magazine "Circus" before joining Rolling Stone over 3 decades ago. Back then, Rolling Stone actually had decent non-music writing.
Okay, here's the thing th
July 2, 2007 - 11:50 ET by WhoIsJohnGalt