"Sicko" by Michael Moore

[Elgama]

3We are dealing with the high gas prices right now. Health care might have to take a back seat. After all what good is good health care when you can't afford the gas to go see the Doctor?

in a nationalised system at least in ours it covers transport its inconvenient unless you are an emergency but we don't need to pay for petrol to go and see the Dr and if you are below a certain income you can get traveling expenses visiting the hospital

-Charley

[VoluntaryPrison]

I'm sorry, but you can put me in the category of one who doesn't want the government to do it. I believe that health care should be available to anyone who wants to pay for it, but forcing people to participate and forcing them to pay for it by garnishing wages or taxing is just plain wrong.

The problem with this kind of logic is that our current system in what you want, and it is spiraling out of control. The two major contributors to the problems associated with health care are uninsured individuals and frivolous malpractice suits.

The law prohibits refusal of necessary medical treatment due to lack of payment. So when an uninsured person receives a procedure, it has to be paid for by someone, and the bill is being passed onto the insured (much like the auto insurance industry). The result is that insurance premiums go up, and then more people can't afford insurance, so they stop buying it. Now we have even more uninsured people and fewer insured people to pay their bills. So the premiums have to go up again, etc etc.

Malpractice suits have contributed to the problem by encouraging doctors to proscribe tests that may not be necessary. But a missed/incorrect diagnosis can cost millions of dollars to a practice and effectively destroy a physician's career. So physicians now don't take their chances, and order every conceivable test that might have anything to do with the suspected problem. When you add these up over millions of individuals, you get a huge bill. The only way to combat this problem is to offer physicians more protection from lawsuits. People are going to have to accept that medicine really isn't a very good science. It's mostly guess work on the part of the physician. They're usually extremely good guesses, but the human body is so complex with so many interdependencies that the 'text book' case is almost never seen.

Now I do agree with the earlier comment about government adding bureaucracy. I wouldn't trust the US government to run a full health care plan. The US government has too much of a history of too many levels of bureaucracy and trying to cut costs. In health care, that means cutting benefits, which is exactly what we don't need. That's why I stated earlier that what's really needed is government health plan that guarantees basic/preventative health care to all Americans.

Think of the benefits of something like this. If every American can have regular check ups, most of the health problems that the currently uninsured have will be detected early enough for prevention, and so the mega-expensive procedures/treatments can be avoided, driving down the cost of insurance.

I would also advise against a socialist model where every person is assigned a physician. People need to be able to choose their own doctors, and the government insurance plan will pay the money to the practice, still allowing capitalism to prevail. In fact, you'll see more practices open, and they should thrive, because now you have an even larger population receiving regular visits. Because such a model should prevent more severe problems, you might see specialties suffer a little.

Such basic coverage could cover things like annual check-ups (including gynecological exams for women), basic dental care (cleanings and perhaps fillings), and emergency care. It could also cover basic maternity (midwives, dulas (spelling) and child birth classes wouldn't be covered). But I'd draw the line there. Prescription plans, vision plans, advanced dental care, and elective procedures would be covered by private insurance plans that individuals could buy into if they chose.

In addition, the government basic care would also require deductibles to help defray costs of surgeries (tonsilitis, appendicitis, etc).

I do understand that the plan I've outlined (with 5 minutes of thought) isn't perfect. But I think it's where the discussion should be. Some kind of mix of the private with the public health care is probably the solution that will reach the most people effectively.

As a side note, two other causes of inflated health care:

1) Longer life span. The human body begins deteriorating when people are in their 30's, and we try to push them into surviving into 80 and 90 years. I've heard physicians state that the body wasn't really built to live past 50-60 years. Health care would be a lot cheaper if we let people dies in their late 60's and 70's instead of obcessively trying to push them to live beyond that.

2) The life of an innovation in health care is nothing like the life of an innovation in consumer products. Consumer products, like the VCR, DVD, telephone, etc have an average life span of 30 years. There's a period in the beginning where it's really expensive because it's new and technology hasn't been refined to make it economically feasible yet, so only the super devoted buy it. Then there's a phase where the technology is refined and it becomes affordable for the majority of the population. In it's last phase, the product will usually be dirt cheap, used mostly by nostalgia, but eventually be tossed aside as obsolete (vinyl records anyone?). In health care, we don't see this. A new innovation is created and patients demand its use before the technology is refined enough to make it affordable. If we'd patiently (no pun intended) wait for the technology to be refined, the devices/techniques would become more affordable, and health care costs would fall.

[Misshalfway]

I think one thing that bothers me a bit is our lack of concern about one another. It is "your" problem. Why should I have to pay for it? But we pay anyway and we pay more than we would if we were involved in a universal system. I guess I am thinking about the law of consecration or the united order. Isn't there some kind of principle from those higher laws that could benefit us here and now?

In the movie Sicko, I was impressed by one Dr. that was profiled. He was still living a very comfortable lifestyle but because the costs were covered in a general system, he could focus on truly helping the patient without having to cover his fanny at the same time. I also liked how his pay was increased with the health of his patients. --more focus on preventative care and less self-interested decisions -- like what kudos he would get if he promotes this drug!

If the united states could experience a paradigm shift, I think that would be very helpful. I think the idea of having the government and private sector involved in some kind of hybrid might be a good thing. I am very afraid of government red tape as it tries to regulate everything. I don't think that helps anybody. Like the way our government has handled medicaid. Geez!

I also hate the idea of wages being garnished in a kind of forced compliance. But, car owners are "forced" to purchase basic coverage. So, why not do that for our bodies?? I am not sure how that solves the problems that come with trying to get insurance companies to pay. Mine just denied for a basic physical. ::Shaking head::

[JcDean78]

The govt has no right to put a gun to anybodys head and force them to pay for anyone else. Not only is that immoral but it goes against the very core of a free society. I will die before I allow the Federal Govt to repeal our Constitution and make us slaves.

Besides Moore is kind of like Pinocchio except instead of his nose growing with every lie, he just seems to get fatter and more obnoxious.

[Misshalfway]

Is it a free society when we are shackled with high healthcare costs and being turned away if we can't pay? If we are not shackled to the government, we are certainly caught in the net of the medical industries who take home outrageous profits at our expense. At the end of the day, are we better off? I don't think so.

And I know who Michael Moore is and what he does. But in this case, I find it hard to disagree with him. It is not like Pres. Bush has anything more intelligent to say.

[Moksha]

Besides Moore is kind of like Pinocchio except instead of his nose growing with every lie, he just seems to get fatter and more obnoxious.

So you are saying that he speaks inconvenient truths, eh?

[Misshalfway]

So you are saying that he speaks inconvenient truths, eh?

Good one!

[VoluntaryPrison]

The govt has no right to put a gun to anybodys head and force them to pay for anyone else.

As I already discussed in my last post, this is exactly what is happening. The medical costs of the uninsured are already being paid by those who do have insurance. So if you are insured, JCDean, have insurance, you're already paying for somebody else. Just like your car insurance pays for uninsured drivers.

Government health insurance would actually do what it is you want...make everyone pay for their own health care.

Besides, if you don't want to pay for anyone else, just don't pay taxes, and then you can sit in jail and let somebody else pay for your living.

[bcguy]

I am also in Canada but to say I am satisfied with the health care. I have not been put on a waiting list yet but perhaps some day it may happen. I have full health care here for less then a 100 dollars a month. Cannot ask for anything better in the states

[a-train]

I am just not worried about this meaningless healthcare issue. I want to get universal cowboy hats. It makes me sick to think of all the poor Americans who are deprived or their god-Given right to a cowboy hat.

-a-train

PS Before I married, I had full health insurance for $125 a month. I now have a major medical plan for myself, the wife, and the kid for $165 a month.

[pushka]

I don't really like to get too stuck into these 'state' vs 'privatisation' kinds of debates on here anymore, so I'm just saying that that is the reason that I've thanked a few people in this thread...they are saying what I believe in.

Yes, I'm in the UK. Yes, when I was working I was paying a % of my wage as National Insurance. Now that I am unable to work, due to various disabilities, I am still entitled to the same level of health care that I enjoyed whilst working. I am/have been a 'high maintenance' patient on the resources of the NHS, have undergone major heart surgery twice (am likely to undergo this twice more if I live into my 90's), have had a blood clot removed from behind my eye socket, have had various other illnesses for which more minor surgery was required, and have regular outpatient appts. for various departments of my local hospitals now and since I was born...

The UK National Health Service isn't perfect by any means, my sister and my brother work in the service and have 1st hand knowledge of it's problems, however overall it guarantees a good level of care, and is trying to improve the way it works, focussing more on Preventative care in the future, etc. so I still have hope in it...

The National Health Premium of anyone's wage over here is only little compared to the wages paid, I don't see too many people complaining..and yes, those who wish to get the very best service immediately are able to pay extra for Private care in NHS hospitals.

[Moksha]

I am just not worried about this meaningless health care issue. I want to get universal cowboy hats. It makes me sick to think of all the poor Americans who are deprived or their god-Given right to a cowboy hat.

-a-train

Conservative empathy, eh?

So what is up with those sniveling Americans wanting to get health care when they are ill? Tell 'em to get cowboy hats.

[sixpacktr]

Why don't we just go to the system in Cuber, just as some of our political leaders have suggested? In fact, why don't we just adopt the political system of Cuber too, so that the new healthcare laws can be enforced?

As far as I can remember, the only things that Thomas Jefferson mentioned as 'inalienable rights' when we rebelled against an oppressive gov't were 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'. And as far as I can remember, the Bill of Rights didn't include anything about healthcare, FEMA, or minimum wage.

Maybe we are closer to Cuber's way of doing things than I realized...

[Latter Days Guy]

Whats a Cuber?

[sixpacktr]

Whats a Cuber?

It is the way that JFK used to pronounce 'Cuba'...

[Latter Days Guy]

Aaah! I was thinking it was some kind of rubix cube thing or a new form of cubism!

[a-train]

Universal Rubik's Cubes would do a great deal for both the education and general happiness of children in America. Although we could probably get a Rubik's Cube into every household through a non-profit, private program, I'd rather get the Federal Government to do it so that we can definitely insure the Rubik's people's profits will go into the stratosphere as a reward for their contribution to humanity.

-a-train