Michael Moore's "SiCKO"

As someone who doesn't have health insurance, I agree with that.

I think that's probably true at least as the sweeping generalisation it admittedly is.

That's a very common misconception held in Europe and probably elsewhere. That you'll be left at the side of the road if you're unable to prove you have 'insurance'.

The thing is, isn't that right an unfunded mandate? And what you don't mention is that you will quite likely be billed afterward, and said bill may of course bankrupt you. I suppose it may be better than death. Probably best to give fake details and flee asap.

It's good that some hospitals operate such a policy but I wonder how typical it is. Do hospitals have 'uninsured' patient cover to recover such costs?

Not for emergency care in the EU, and in most circumstances for EU citizens Emergency treatment is free, or close to it. The old E111 used to provide reciprocal emergency only cover across most of Europe. This has been superceeded by the EHIC. The situation for others is a little more blurry. To refuse life saving treatment would be a breach of Human Rights legislation.

I can't speak with authority about every nation of course, but I would be surprised if many would refuse to provide life saving treatment if it was available. If you have any specific (non isolated) examples to the contrary I'd be interested, so I can avoid them.

Some countries, Estonia for example will provide free emergency cover and fund it from social funds. I don't know enough about Estonia's healthcare system to comment on how reassuring that is.

But I agree given the variability in health care quality, that's not necessarily a comfort.

I'm happy with the health care system here in Ontario. I am self employed.

We have a lot to be happy with, in our family.

During his life my father had hospitalization to treat toxic chlorine gas exposure, spine surgery, stroke recovery/physiotherapy/rehab, urgent major vascular surgery to repair a llfe-threatening abdominal aortic aneurysm, home-care and hospitalization for Amyotropic Lateral Sclerosis (Lou Gherig's disease).

My sister has been successfully treated with mastectomy, chemo and radiation therapy for her highly aggressive breast cancer. She will continue to be at risk for the rest of her life due to the nature of her disease.

My daughter was born at 32 weeks of gestation and was placed in neonatal intensive care for the first twenty days of her life.

The cost has been taxes that are reasonable.

It works.

Americans seem to vilify socialism in any form no matter how mild it may be, as though it is a treasonous form of communism that will rot their society and ruin the nation. Although socialized medicine may have it's weaknesses, as managed in Canada, I say it is worth keeping and funding as it has been for over 40 years. It can be managed much better, too.

Cancer treatment seems to be the most inadequate sector of treatment. Everyone would like to see the response times improve. Rural and remote areas suffer more from lack of resources and facilities than metropolitan areas.

We also have a lot of qualified foreign trained doctors who are not allowed to enter practice here without completely redoing their education. I'm all for qualifications meaning something, but it's shameful how the system is closed to them.

I remember my jaw dropping at that growing death toll. Many deaths were among the elderly but 15,000 deaths is quite incredible. It was hot, abnormally hot certainly. In London it was frequently over 45c on the tube but the failure of the French healthcare system to cope was lamentable.

I agree, though I also think the simple fact that is was abnormally hot was a factor. The lack of A/C facilties (much more taken for granted in the US from what I've seen) undoubtably made things much worse than it may otherwise have been, as did huge numbers of medical staff being on their traditional August break.

Awful, certainly but I don't think it was quite so simple as August is hot, Mon Dieu!

But, before you wax too lyrical remember there's typically 1000 annual heatwave fatalities in the US v 23 in Australia (1966-1995). That's 1/3rd the US rate. Heatwaves were the top weather related killer in the US, I don't know if that's still true.

I think acclimatisation is a factor. Let's see what happens next time, as they will be a next time.

In general terms it seems to me that focussing on France in 2003 to disprove Moore's point seems as simplistic as him trying to use that same system to prove his, when neither is clearly the case. There are major, major problems with the US healthcare system, but there are are in many nations of course. The NHS is in a very poor state for example.

Moore is astonishingly, blatantly partial and will try and convince you black is indeed white. But despite this, anyone denying that far too many people, in the US don't have ready access to health care and that this is not extremely bad is surely little or no less blinkered.

Many other places in the world, yes, but I'm asking specifically about G8 countries, even more specifically about the countries like France, Britain and Canada. Regardless of where a new treatment or piece of equipment is developed, upon demonstration of success they become adopted by other medical facilities. Newest, best and most expensive is going to be a facility by facility and piece by piece assessment. You can't generalize that for a country overall.

As to the most qualified and highly trained professionals that tends to go back to the money making aspect of the system. Canada loses a high percentage of our doctors and nurses to the US annually because we can't compete with the salaries offered there.

Much of the talent has been lured from elsewhere much like you see happening in professional sports. It's an odd analogy but I think it's apt.

which many people do. That was part of my point. and even those that don't give us fake names and do get billed often don't pay a penny of the bill. There is a ridiculously high number of patients who never pay for any of the care they receive. The extra cost gets passed on to other patients who actually have insurance.

Less typical at for-profit hospitals than at not-for-profits like Inova... as the for-profits are not under such tight scrutiny. Also the often make less money, ironically enough, because of all the financial breaks not-for-profit organizations in the States get which makes it so that Inova and other similar orgnizations can afford to provide indigent health care, something they are required by law to do anyway.

It is an apt analogy and it's also true and makes my point. There are plenty of talented doctors and good facilities around the world, but still nobody quite competes with the U.S. Of course it varies by region, but in general hospitals here do have the best and most expensive equipment. If not at your local hospital than surely within another larger hospital that you can get flown to (helicopter ride if its not a county helicopter: $6,000). Always springing for the very latest technology costs a pretty penny, and the improvement such equipment can offer in terms of the quality of care patients receive may be marginal over the older, cheaper models. But Americans demand the best, and then expect not to have to pay for any of it because most of them have an enormous sense of entitlement.


I agree insurance companies and the way they are managed are a problem. There are some well-paid people whose only job responsibility is wording medical care in the correct way to tweak out as much money as possible from these companies. Of course if they weren't so stingy that opens up the doors for abuse and fraud.

I don't know if this has been posted before, but I'm just curious what some people think about this new documentary about the healthcare in the United States. It hasn't been released yet so it may be hard to form an opinion, but the whole gist of the documentary is about how expensive American healthcare can be for those who do not have it compared to other countries like Canada and the U.K. who offer universal healthcare.

Has been mentioned.

merged

I watched the first ten minutes or so on Google Video last night. It was compelling. Moore's really good at what he does.

Though a bit of a sensationalist Michael Moore serves his purpose.

This latest has some bipartisan support - After all we all get sick, we all die. Moore doesn't give a shit what anyone thinks of him and goes on his merry way bringing to light the absurdities and inequities of this American culture.

All told that cannot be a bad thing in the long run.

As someone who lives in the US and does not have health insurance, I just hope I don't get sick. Fortunately, when I did become seriously ill 4 years ago, I did have health insurance. If I hadn't, I would have been stuck with a huge bill and probably had to declare bankruptcy.

I am not sure what the answer is to the health care problem, but I think it should be fixed so that people who have low incomes and do not have health insurance can get the health care they need without having to worry that it will bankrupt them afterwards.

I don't think that's erroneous. It's 2D thinking because it lacks depth of thought.

Yup. Capitalism is designed at its core to take from everyone and give to the rich. I suppose that's fine if you're into buying cars, but it's no good if you have to buy health care.

It really doesn't matter what we can do on the operating table if the people who need it the most can't even get on the table in the first place.

Also -- if people are going to dismiss his Cuban excursion as a dog & pony show, then why wouldn't the US do it to make themselves look better?

Having lived in both the US and Australia, I'd generally say Australians get a better deal on Healthcare, but it has taken a long time to stabilise due to it's complex nature and funding structure. It's also taken the system time to recover from idealogically related funding cuts and lack of planning in a system more conservative state governments wanted to dismantle.

Here you have public healthcare (0% - 2.5% of your income depending on how much you earn, also a percentage of GST, depending on how much your state puts into their health department), but you also have the option of private healthcare (private medical insurance counts as a tax deduction, as you'll use less of the service). Generally private healthcare takes care of voluntary surgery, premium healthcare (e.g. option to have your own room even if you don't need it) and auxiliary treatments (e.g. chiropractic).

I have been living without private health cover now for about 3 years, because I'm young and anything that happened to me (emergency wise) would be best covered by the public health system (also, for reasons I won't go into, I would have a higher than usual premium). I'll probably get it again when (and if) I get married as it will cost significantly less.

I should add that the phrase "The health care industry is in crisis" is a Truism in any country. Any industry that has a deathtoll and injury list as a matter of course will have a crisis *somewhere*.

It's something politicians can always say to make/score a point.