Michael Moore’s Sicko: Is America’s Health Care System Sick?

I’m a fan of Micheal Moore’s work as well. Although some don’t like his “in your face” style of investigative reporting, at least he’s out there trying to get answers for the American public on important and sometimes controversial topics. I bet if each one of us demanded answers and demanding change or reform from the people that run this country, we’d be in a lot better shape. After all our government is supposed to work FOR US, not against us. Or not for the highest bidder. Somewhere along the way we lost sight of our values and what we stand for in this country, and now its going to take a lot of hard work and dedication to bring this country back to something we can all be proud of. We could all learn a lesson or two from Mr Moore and his way of confronting the tough issues and confronting the people that are in charge of said issues. We’ve let our government and big business run this country into the ground and something needs to be done about it.

I look forward to seeing this film, as I’ve enjoyed all of his previous documentaries. People either love em or hate em, but one thing is true, he’s not afraid to stand up for what he believes and for that alone, I have alot of respect for the man. We all know this countries healthcare system is in a state of crisis. Now what are we going to do to change it? What CAN we do?

Not to mention the utter absurdity of how most insurance will not cover birth control but will cover vasectomies.

Does he address the millions of people who receive medicaid benefits? I’m just wondering where that fits into his “socialized medicine” proposal. I agree, insurance companies and drug companies are in it for the almighty dollar and end up making some ridiculous choices; I don’t know what the answer is, however, because medicaid and medicare don’t seem to be the answer, either.

No problem Joe. I wasn’t offended in any way! Its just nice to see this issue being discussed again.
Thanks for posting the link though, that was nice.

Thank God we live in America and we are all entitled to our opinions. Everyone has an opinion, and here is mine on Michael Moore…

What a friggin’ hack. He has not produced anything on film or print that wasn’t ripped apart for being biased, manipulating garbage. The fact that he has “fans” absolutely baffles me – probably the same people that buy (or support) carbon credits.

That’s my opinion.

I will not argue with the fact that health care in the United States is flawed and needs fixing, but to believe Moore’s spin on things is pure idiocy. Is Socialism really the answer? Moore has produced books and movies to convince us that the government is bad, and now he wants us to adopt a government operated health care system and believe that it will work better than the system we have now?

Go do some research – look in to how long you have to wait for medical treatment in the UK, Canada, or France. How many of them are moving towards privatization? How about the cost of universal health care? It sure as hell ain’t free.

http://blogs.nypost.com/movies/archives/2007/06/kyle_smith_on_m.html

No doubt there are dozens of conflicting reviews of “Sicko” out there. Moore does seem to have a fan base for reasons I cannot understand. Maybe someone in this thread can enlighten me. But not with praise for his “’in your face’ style of investigative reporting.” I laughed so hard when I read that part that I nearly wet myself.

I think everybody in America is not happy with the current state of health care (except the fat cat insurance companies raking in billions). However, having Michael Moore be the mouthpiece for the argument for reform is like asking Al Sharpton to be the voice of healing to bring all of us together.

I think that we have too much regulatory oversight of health care in this country and the costs get passed onto us. For example, it can take hundreds of millions to test medications before market. It doesn’t cost that much in Britain, Australia, or Canada? Are people dying over there due to meds being put out for sale before they were safe. Nope.

Doctors come out of medical school owing huge sums of money….they also have to take out malpractice insurance which is nearly prohibitive to practice. There was a good discussion on tort reform and caping awards. This has helped to a certain degree by keeping malpractice insurance premiums from skyrocketing and putting doctors out of business. However, I think that we could and should set up programs to subsidize medical training for young doctor candidates. They can work it off in the communities/states that supported them and keep reasonable fees. The more competition we can create in the health care arena, the more that prices can be kept lower. There is a doctor in IF (can’t remember his name) that actually does house calls and has very little staff….he doesn’t charge as much…but I don’t think he takes insurance either (thus, he doesn’t need as much staff….which drives up his overhead and forces prices up). This is a novel approach. If more of us supported doctors that took this approach we could drive these other turkeys and insurance carriers out of business.

Point well made Guest.
Obviously unclestinky doesn’t like Micheal Moore and his style of reporting and that’s fine. Everyone has a right to their opinion. But you can’t deny the fact that he talks about the issues that are important to this country. At least he’s out there doing something instead of just complaining about it.
And obviously he’s doing something right if so many people agree with him and his point of view.

Universal healthcare has worked for all the other industrialized countries, so why not give it a shot here? Or at least some form of it?
Sure there are long wait times, but he explained why that was. I guess you missed that part. There are different types of medical needs obviously. If you have an emergency that needs immediate attention, you go to the head of the line, if you’re having an elective surgery or one that isn’t an emergency, then of course you’re going to wait. What’s wrong with that? It makes perfect sense to put the guy that needs open heart surgery ahead of the one that needs his tonsils taken out.
As far as your standard Dr.s visit for say the flu, or the chicken pox, etc. there aren’t long waits like people think. Most waiting periods have to do with surgeries, and it’s only fair that their performed by order of importance.

Sure we’ve got some of the best Doctors in the world, but at what cost to the public? There are people going bankrupt and losing their life savings, their houses, etc because the insurance companies won’t cover them. And hospitals won’t admit them without the proper coverage.

Tell me please, what are your suggestions to fixing our “flawed” healthcare system?

I found an interesting article on The Heritage Foundation website:

State-Based Health Reform: A Comparison of Health Insurance Exchanges and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program
by Robert E. Moffit, Ph.D.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm1515.cfm

The article addresses another option for health-care, Moore isn’t the only one trying to address this issue, he just gets more media coverage for his films, which is a very different topic, Moore claims to provide a ‘documentary’ which actually insults those who really do make documentaries.

Joe, when you say Americans have the worst health care system in the civilized world, what do you mean? Is it the technology, medical practicioners ability, medicines, or the way individuals take care of themselves?

Also, what about the attorney’s who chase ambulances, or encourage people to sue so they don’t have to take personal responsibility for their own health actions? What part do these type of attorney’s and individuals who blame and play victim play in this health care system?

Ask anyone old enough to qualify for Medicare if they think that system works. If you want an example of low administration costs vs. number of people covered, Medicare sure looks like the way to go.

I know that my mother was well taken care of during her struggle with cancer, by Medicare. I don’t know how our family would have handled her illness if she had not be old enough to be covered by “socialized medicine.”

Then, my brother became too ill to be taken care of at home anymore. His MS, diabetes, & bouts with cancer took their toll. He wasn’t old enough to qualify for Medicare. His veteran’s benefits & private insurance didn’t even come close to covering the costs of nursing care. His wife finally had to divorce him (on paper) & take all of their family’s assets in order for him to qualify for Medicaid. Once Medicaid kicked in, they never had any more financial problems taking care of his needs.

So, just from my personal experience, I see where “socialized” or universal health care works. I’m still not entirely convinced that’s our answer, but it looks better & better to me all the time.

I guess the alternative is to regulate the heck out of the private insurance industry. Limits on profits, better arbitration on disputed claims, guaranteed coverage for citizens regardless of employment or health status, those types of things. Once you start considering the consequences, government provided health insurance starts looking pretty good.

We’re a society run by big corporations and the politicians that are beholden to them.

This movie is stunning, I haven’t cried like that in years.

I am no Michael Moore fan, Bowling for Columbine was retarded and embarrasing. I was somewhat reluctant to see Sicko, but the subject has been on my mind a lot.

Regardless of your convictions, please see this film and take as many to see it as possible. Moore has never been this lucid or well-documented.

Even CNN gave him thumbs up on his research, and I think that says a lot. I have yet to see anybody write or say anything intelligent in criticizing this effort that has actually seen the film. Even if you do find good points to lambaste, disregarding the overall message here is akin to Holocaust Revisionism based on the argument of total fabrication of events, in my humble opinion. Please don’t shoot the messenger, not this time.

I loved the surprising treatment that Hillary Clinton recieves in the film, although I was really squirming at first. Nixon and Bush also end up making Hitler look like a long-lost cousin.

It’s so refreshing to see that Moore maintains no loyalty to rich investors, and instead secretly rescues his greatest detractor from personal oblivion.

Sicko is probably the best single statement on the state of modern American consciousness that is currently widely available, particularly given Moore’s dedication of so much time in this film comparing the lifestyles of citizens of our closest neighbors.

You cannot rationally dismiss this expose’ of America’s threatening collapse without completely avoiding to watch the film.

Too bad it’s too late to be “cautionary”.

Time for me to step in an set some facts straight. Just to be clear, I’m not a fan of Michael Moore’s previous work, but can’t wait to see this film. My #1 reason, from what I’ve read, is he really shows the INSURANCE companies for what they are.

Now to address what has been written and is not the most current or correct information.

1. Mike from post 15 wrote, “Doctors come out of medical school owing huge sums of money…they alo have to take out malpractice insurance which is nearly prohibitive to practice.” Others added similar comments.

Mike, Meso, Joe, CR67 and others, I appreciate your idea, but do you know it’s been in place, at least in ID, for probbaly 30-40 years? I don’t believe we need ANOTHER program, we just need the current
3R program, just a better utilization and understanding of 3R. Not familiar with 3R, it’s how Idaho is able to recruit many physician to underserved areas.

Look it up, and here’s a hint, along with underserved medical care, the 3Rs stand for: Rural, Recruitment and Rentention. READ what physician (U.S. or Foreign trained can get if they will work in a 3R setting).

And it’s not just 3R, many hospitals will grant Visa or J1 waiver to physicians agreeing to practice at their small facilities for the required 3+ years, depending on the program.

Maybe there need to be bigger discussions about 3R and other incentives, but I can guarantee you that on physician employment websites, it is very clear whether the recruiting hospital/practice etc. will help offset or pay for the training incurred by a primary care or subspecialty physician.

EIRMC estimates it takes $1,000,000 to recruit a physician. Think about it – with a guaranteed income for at least 1-2 years, plus paying off certain medical student loans and sometimes fellowship stipdents, that $1,000,000.00 gets consumed quite fast. Another area hospital, who was so desperate for certain physicians, paid everything they could of educational expenses and other perks for physicians.

As expensive as medical education is, and up front it looks overwhelming, be sure the hospitals are aware of the costs. Even 5-10 years ago hospitals weren’t nearly as flexible about how to compensate a new primary care physician or specialist. Now, many possibilities that didn’t use to be possible are.

Also, the military and US Indian Health Service have always been available to medical students as ways of paying part or all of their costs of their medical education. The costs is years of their lives in military bases treating military families.
Before anyone trashes the military here, better check with your own doctors as you might be surprised how many dozens of local doctors who didn’t come from backgrounds able to pay “cash for tuition” have used the military for their education and paid it back with anywhere from 2-10 years of service.

I can think of at least 3 local physicians who did it the entirely hard way, going to the military medical school in D.C.(which is automatically a 10 year pay back, but no costs of tuition etc. for medical school).

Their years paid back start in their Internship and Residency years. But, most are through their training by 5-7 years after medical school graduation, so that gives the military 0-5 years more of attending physicians to train other residents.

If you don’t think our military does anything well, by all means, call ahead of time and make sure none of your doctors did any National Guard deferrals/training/benefits, 2-3 years Practicing on a Indian Reservation or in other locales. No a military trained physician doesn’t get to chose where s/he practices. But, it’s been my experience those physicians don’t tend to complain about as many things as some who paid low cost tuition and went into residency and then practice seem to complain about endlessly.

3. Babs – in your answer #7, I don’t agree with your statement, ” I agree, insurance companies and drug companies are in it for the almighty dollar and end up making some ridiculous choices.” Don’t get me wrong, I’m defending NO INSURANCE company. However, if people want better, safer drugs, do you have any idea how much it takes to develop them and all the stages involved?

Some think they understand about drug development as they may have participated or had a family member/friend who was part of a drug trial. Good for all of you. Do you have a clue of how much the lab draws, to test previously undetermined levels of new drugs cost to run? Do you even have a clue how much the samples cost to ship to reference labs, especially now with IATA ensureing ever site has at least one person IATA-certified?

I made an error one day filling out a FedEx Shipping Document and by “error” didn’t put the 3rd party payors information in. So in about a month, I got a bill from FedEx for the box, under 5 lbs. that cost $97.00 to ship to the reference lab. That’s the day I started thinking about the costs of other lab tests and procedures for clinical trials.

And the clinical trials can only occur after the trials on laboratory animals. PETA lovers – here I am – I support research using rodents and other larger animals that have certain systems that work similar to humans. But, once again, does anyone here know how much it costs to buy a specific breed of mice/rats that have been genetically altered to have the medical conditions in research?

Where do you think pharmaceutical companies get an idea of how much of a dose is the right dose? I know this is the ONLY good reason mice/rats are on the earth. And after their trials, then often come other animals.

Only after all the various animal models have been worked out will Phase I trials start. And ONLY HEALTHY (USUALLY MALES, due to unknown reproductive issues) are allowed to enroll in these trials. They are hospitalized during their trial period. Phase I trials occur in few locations.

Even Phase II trials, which go to locations throughout the U.S., can only go to practitioners experienced enough with both the disease and the pharmacology to understand the PK dynamics and not botch these very expensive, timed lab tests. The results of Phase II trials set up the parameters for Phase III and later Phase IV.

I can’t remember who wrote it, but whomever wrote that Europe and Canda (essentially) can get new drugs out cheaper and faster than the U.S., um could you give me your sources? And since when did U.S. companies not work with those pharmaceutical companies.

I’m particularly interested in the process in Canada, as someone appears to know. Tell me what you know and then I’ll admit to what I do or don’t know, having a regulatory agency, to whom I must answer, now located in Victoria, B.C.

I strongly recommend until you see the direct prices involved with clinical development of a drug, you don’t trash pharmaceutical companies too far.

3. This ties in to my last point and that is the failure of protection of pharmaceutical companies in developing vaccinations or other drugs.

It’s not by chance most immunizations are now made overseas. Maybe Babs or others can tell us how that stops the horrific lawsuits that forced this step a few decades ago.

As others have pointed out, malpractice attorneys help drive up costs in some areas, given how aggressive they are. As a nation, we pay for it when malpractice goes unchecked in Las Vegas, NV and other locations. So it is not just what goes on with ID that matters. ID is where we have the most control, but this is a bigger issue.

Babs, in the Tort Reform thread, mentioned any presentation could be slanted. Babs is right and that is why there is both an attorney for the defendant and the plaintiff in malpractice cases. That’s also why certain physicians and others REFUSE to take medical cases, given what the attorneys want for free. On a different day I’ll post about that back on Tort Reform.

My goal is not to beat up attorneys, Babs. I’m glad you formally announced on this site that you have been a practicing attorney.

My goal is to make sure much more of the truth is told (just like Babs did when she mentioned WHO pays the cost for expert witnesses and filing costs etc.) in malpractice cases. Most people simply don’t know the ramifications malpractice suits can have, to other patients, in dealing with attorneys etc.

4. Mike, I’m not picking on you, but your statement in #24 is laughable. “Right now, with Medicare and Medicaid alot of doctors don’t have to compete for business. ” With all due respect (as I do think you are trying to help here, not mock and detract), what physicians accept Medicare and Medicaid and don’t have to compete for business? HUH?!

Most doctors LIMIT how many Medicaid or Meidcare patients they will take. Do me and others here a favor. Take 15 minutes of your time tomorrow and call as many doctor’s offices as your can (various specialties) and see how soon you can get your “hypothetical Medicaid family member and appt.”.

NO PRACTICE has to take Medicaid or Medicare and many have shut off how many they will take. Where I work, we had to.

Do you have any idea how much extra paperwork both programs involved? And they pay when they want to, not on time.

One can always tell when it’s nearing 1/1, 4/1, 7/1, or 10/1 as Medicaid payments stopp about 6 weeks before their next funding cycle. Medicare payments stop sometimes 2 months before their next funding cycle.

So let’s put this in perspective, for a physician to “get” to treat a Medicaid or Medicare patient, that means s/he will be paid about 35-40% of the cost of the visit, and then wait months or even years for payment (we got a $7,000 back payment last year from one of these two -I won’t identify). They apologize for forgetting to pay us for patients X for about 18 months. Yet, we’re suppose to pay our bills on time.)

Let us know Mike how many practices even accept Medicaid, besides the Urgent Cares and Hospitals. PLEASE, let us know. A few more will accept Medicare both because of the age groups affected and Medicare pays slightly better than Medicaid.

Every physician I know has treated Medicaid/Medicare patients. But where s/he has to draw the line and say no more or NONE so that medical office can stay in business, is different for each practice. Remember, like other things, those doctors who do procedures, such as
deliveries, surgeries and endoscopies etc. are paid better than the doctors who listen to your complaints and try to work them up, but don’t perform surgery or procedures.

4. I love it when people trash U.S. facilities and say they want socialized or universal health care like other countries have. RIGHT. Some people are mad because they waited 2-5 hrs. to have a CT or other test performed and it ruined their day.

In Canada, directly above us, in Alberta, unless there has been a new equipment purchase made of which I am not aware, the City of Idaho Falls has more MRI and CT scanners than the Province of Alberta.

Many speculate that is why Kalispell, certain border cities in WA State and other northern U.S. facilities have so many more doctors than appear necessary. Those with money in Canada, bypassing the WEEKS of waiting for a CT scan, or worse yet, the months for an MRI scan, and go to the U.S. for care.

I was so surprised one day when I was in either Edmonton or Vancouver years ago, to learn that there is a Blue Cross Blue Shield of Canada. I wondered why, if their universal health care was so good would anyone want health insurance?

Canada has two tiers of health care: those who remain in Canada for care and those who cross over to the U.S. and get care.

I do know that companies, such as some pharmaceutical companies some want to condemn, with little to know thorough knowledge of thier costs, make health care insurance available to their Canadian employees too. What?

Why would U.S. companies provide health insurance to Canadian employees? Doesn’t Canada have it all, including one of Microsoft’s major call centers in Nova Scotia?

5. Finally, for now, say whatever you want and believe about the insurance companies. I point to the “big buildings” as my evidence.

How many new or bigger buildings do most health insurance companies buidl or occupy? I wish I could have an office as elegant as most of theirs.

I worked P/T for 8 years for a Fortune 500 Health Insurance Company. I know a lot about how they work, from being a direct employee, from being a provider awaiting payments or having patients not get the services they need and from being a patient and not being able to have my own healthcare insurance pay for things they would have paid for 15 years ago.

I hope Michael Moore’s movie can get more people demanding changes in healthcare coverage and expose where the real problems are. I know a lot of healthcare professionals that are no fans of Michael Moore, but if he can get the focus on where it needs to be, the insurance companies, they all plan on attending his movie.

After all, it only takes seeing a Medicaid patient at $31.00 reimbursement/hour in some specialties, of work to spring for 2 tickets and maybe a soda. Or, just wait for the DVD. Oh shoot, that doesn’t cover any overhead.

Well maybe one of the networks will pick it up soon, or maybe instead of a letter thanking physicians for being patient for not receiving their due payments (as one insurer does) than can send out their $30.00 “interest on what is owed check” along with a DVD copy of Moore’s film.

OK, I know that alot of doctors don’t accept Medicare and Medicaid. For example, Community Care makes no bones about it when the put up a sign “We do not accept Medicaid or Medicare”. My point was that for those physicians that do accept these payments they have a lock on payments coming to them and they bill for the rest, either direct to the patient or to medicare supplement insurance that many people have gotten suckered into purchasing. This just perpetuates the lack of competition that has proven to drive down prices in many industries. Anytime you lack competition and have a lock on providing services and getting paid…you have no incentive to check your prices. The consumer(patients) lose both in terms of the cost and in many cases the quality of care that is afforded to the patient because insurance won’t pay for it (so the doc doesn’t use it). Otherwise, I really enjoyed your post. I thought you brought alot of good information to the table here. Thanks for the information.

OK4Now, here is my attempt to answer some of your questions:

- Yes, there are health insurance policies that Canadians can get here. Most “respectable grown-up” jobs and all colleges & universities will give them to us. They cover only procedures that are done here at home — if I seek treatment or tests in the U.S., I’m paying for those from my own pocket, no matter what insurance plan I may have. They cover things that are not covered by OHIP (ontario hospital insurance plan — unlike the UK’s NHS, we have each province responsible for covering that province’s citizens’ health expenses, with a combo of money from provincial and federal taxes). These things include braces for your kids’ teeth, psychiatric and other mental health therapies (though some therapies are covered) eyeglasses & eye tests after a certain age (eye exams every two years used to be covered by OHIP but aren’t any longer, although they are still free if you are under 21 or over 65), and prescription medications. These don’t cost nearly as much here as they do in the U.S., but they can still be costly (I’ve paid $30+ for a round of antibiotics when I was working at a crummy job after University). OHIP also covers only emergency dental work, so things like teeth cleaning, fillings when you don’t have an abscess, etc., would fall in that category. OHIP also doesn’t cover anything like breast implants or other cosmetic surgeries, though if you have an accident and end up disfigured in some way, they will cover reconstructive surgeries to correct that. I know that Ontario welfare programs do provide free prescriptions and basic dental to our poorest, but unfortunately, if you are working poor, you’re out of luck if your teeth are bad.

One thing that my friend and I discussed about the film, and a complex factor that may affect the way your system has developed, is this: I had an accident last year where my therapist’s dog bit my face (seriously!), and split open my upper lip. I went straight to the ER and waited three hours (!) to be seen. Now, in their defense, it really wasn’t bleeding all over the floor and i was okay to wait, though upset and panicky that i would be deformed (I’m not). They stitched me up, doped me up, and sent me home. I sued the therapist, but because I wasn’t recouping lost medical expenses, I only had precedent to ask for less than $10,000 (which I received). My lawyer had a slam-dunk case and only came away with maybe $2,000. Canadian There was simply no way I could have sued for more money. The culture here is not as litigious as in the U.S. (nobody would sue here for spilling their own coffee on themselves, etc.), but it’s got to be a factor affecting the reluctance to switch to a socialized system.

Doctors do indeed make less money here, though the “less” money is the same as the poverty that NHS doctor was forced to live in in the film — only one Audi, one million-dollar three-story home in central London, one flat screen TV. Poor fellow! Doctors are still quite rich here. Cosmetic surgeons may be able to make quite a pile here but I don’t know how they fare compared to proper OHIP docs.

As for paging/availability, I know that doctors do take turns being on call at hospitals here. The only doctors I know personally are specialists who would likely not be at the hospital at midnight (neurologists, ear/nose/throat surgeons, etc.) who would likely work days on schedules. I know that my family doctor works 8-5.

In terms of getting new drugs, we have a different food and drug administration than the US. Many things that are approved for use there are not approved here (and possibly vice-versa) because of differences in policy and regulations. But as soon as something meets our standards and is distributed, we can get it. We have much different laws (though they are changing) regarding advertising for drugs. Those “ask your doctor” commercials come to us on American cable channels, but Canadian channels may not show them. Same for billboards and some print ads.

Hope I’ve answered some of your questions!

I have to ask…are any of you posting here, even IN the medical profession, or have close family who are? My mouth has fallen open several times in astonishment at some of the things I’ve seen written here like they were Gospel Truths.

I hardly know where to begin…number one, my husband is a surgeon, an MD…I’m my husbands front office manager and medical assistant…my sister is an RN…his father was a pharmacist, so is one of his brothers..I won’t bore you with the other family members who are affiliated with the medical business.

It sounds as though a few of you have had some terrible, or heartbreaking things happen to them while under medical care, or in dealing with insurance companies or on admission to some hospital facilities; I am truly sorry you went thru that…HOWEVER….I must STRONGLY emphasize, this is not the norm for medicine, or doctors.

IT IS the norm when you are dealing with insurance companies. Doctors are not the problem, and please don’t hold up the one doc you know who is a pain in the neck, as representative of ALL doctors.

It would be akin to me saying that all auto mechanics lie to you about what’s really wrong with your car, secretly they tinker with something under the hood, pretend it’s broken and charge you a fortune to fix it.

So how come I read the doctor bashing(or near bashing) when discussing a movie that is about how the INSURANCE companies screw people over? I’m gonna have to see this movie, btw.

For the record, I fight with insurance companies Monday thru Friday. My husband fights with them several times a day, when none of my arguments gets thru to whoever I am dealing with, to get the testing and care we need to take optimal care of our patients.

I could start another whole thread alone on some of the stupid regulations we are forced to abide by, and some of the stupider reasons we are given when denied our requests.

If the movie’s message is to state the insurance companies in America are a mess,and in dire need of an overhaul, I would totally agree.

If it insinuates that the majority of America’s physicians are to blame, I’m going to take offense.

Think about what you’re writing here, those of you who post these thoughts on MD’s and/or socialized medicine. I won’t even bother singling out who wrote what, let me just grab a few statements that have me shaking my head and thinking, “HUH?”

Like this one…. “If you have an emergency that needs immediate attention, you go to the head of the line, if you’re having an elective surgery or one that isn’t an emergency, then of course you’re going to wait. What’s wrong with that? It makes perfect sense to put the guy that needs open heart surgery ahead of the one that needs his tonsils taken out. Most waiting periods have to do with surgeries, and it’s only fair that their performed by order of importance.”

Order of their importance?
Who decides that your emergency appendectomy is less/more crucial than the guy needing his bleeding ulcer repaired?

Who decides that the child with recurring tonsillitis for 2 years and the ensuing problems it brings, can wait till after the child with the club foot gets their surgery? Try and explain THAT to both sets of parents of these kids.

Who makes these decisions, and where is the guarantee that the final choice is the right one?

If you are the parent of the child with tonsillitis, have seen that child sick for years, missed school, seen him/her go thru the accompanying ear infections, throat infections,running a fever, not eating, the list goes on and on (I had a child like this, fyi)…if you are the parent, what do you do, smile and say, okay, move little so and so up the line for surgery, you’re right, my child can wait…

I DON’T think so. Call me ignoble, but I’m not the sort of parent that’s going to agree to keep my child sick/uncared for, while yours gets help. My priority is my child, as any parent’s should be.

Triaging has gone on for years in emergency rooms and on battlefields…whenever you get a lot of sick/injured folks in one place, and have limited medical personnel to attend them, you’re forced to traige. Regular diagnostic/preventative medical care/surgery/etc, shouldn’t have to be triaged.

To have childhood illnesses, elective surgeries, accidents, or even diagnostic testing be put into a waiting line, why?

A queue of medically needful people(in one way or another) with a figurative number in their hand, hoping their number gets called next?

How do you regulate who makes the rules for who gets what number, and the order in which they are called?

I have friends in Canada. Inoculations, medicines, cheaper thru socialized medicine,sure…..but the one came across the border for his arthroscopy, since he couldn’t work due to a torn cartilage, and was facing a wait of 4 months or more, to MAYBE get his surgery….in the meantime, who was going to support him for 4 months, when he could barely walk?

And this one: “Right now, with Medicare and Medicaid alot of doctors don’t have to compete for business. They have a lock on rates. ”

We have a lock on what? We don’t have to compete for business? Huh? May I please ask what are you reading, and where are you getting this information? The only one’s who have a lock on rates are the insurance companies.

This one: “But did you know that doctors are also often tied financially to the pharmaceutical industry? They receive gifts from drug companies, they go to drug company-sponsored “seminars,” and — this is probably the worst part — some of them are paid by the drug companies to conduct their so called drug “trials.” AND then, these well-paid doctors/”researchers” often sign their names to medical journal articles praising the drugs they have “independently” reviewed. These articles, by the way, are very often actually written by drug company PR people. ”

I’m sorry, but that old practice from the drug companies…ie, gifts and trips…hasn’t occurred for awhile, it’s against the law. We get visits from drug reps several times a week in our office. The most we get is free samples in those little blister packs, which we give out to the patients to try ( if it’s something we were going to write a script for initially), so they aren’t out for the cost of a medication that may not work well for them. We don’t get a thing other than their card, and maybe some printouts telling us about the drug itself.

As far as the paid-for-drug-trial thing, I must refer and agree with the words written by Ok4Now…I don’t think most have a clue as to how any drug testing/research or approval is conducted in this country. No physician I know would lie, or fabricate an approval, and put their reputation or license on the line for a buck.

For those of you out there who I am sure will send links my way to those docs who are caught on occasion doing that, or breaking the law; please remember there are idiots and criminals in EVERY PROFESSION, and those jerks are RARE.

This one I just do not agree with….”I think it’s fair to say that rich people in every country “cut the line”, so to speak, whenever they can in all capacities.”

What’s the definition of rich here? Who is cutting into what lines?

We could be construed as being rich, my husband is a surgeon….I didn’t get taken care of any faster when I had my emergency appendectomy. I wasn’t put ahead of the guy in the ER cubicle next to me who was drunk out of his mind, screaming till the ER halls rang and restrained so he didn’t leap off the stretcher.

He got into the CT scanner first ( he’d hurled himself out of a window), while I waited until the tech had finished with him.

We don’t get put first in line for anything, according to our financial standing…neither do our children, who were in and out of ER’s for years growing up. We sat in the waiting room just like anyone else “In any capacity..”? I sure don’t wave my checkbook in the line at the grocery store or the Walmart and expect to be moved up.

We’re not all Paris Hilton, please, this is a most unfair generalization of “rich” people. Sheesh.

Or this one:
“Losing your child or family because you don’t have the right insurance? How can doctors be made to swear the Hippocratic oath and then operate under these conditions? I felt so bad for doctors after seeing the film. They are forced to make these terrible life or death decisions, and they are not monsters, I’m sure they want to help everyone. I can’t imagine being ABLE to save someone’s life, but being prevented from doing so by something as arbitrary as a financial transaction.”

Man, I gotta see this Sicko movie…that first sentence reads to me as though some insurance company took a child for collateral, or something…it sure can’t mean that in a not-for-profit hospital(or any hospital), an ER denied care to a child in need, because EMTALA laws prevent that. EMTALA guarantees that if you walk into an ER in this country, you’re under Federally mandated laws stating that regardless of your ability to pay, you will be given medical treatment the same as insured patients.

Hospitals that are dumb enough to even try and get around EMTALA, can lose their licenses or their ability to get paid for Medicare patients, and if that occurs, they may as well shut the doors, that hospital is folding.

Hospitals are not out to close down by doing something as dumb as that, please believe me. EMTALA also states that if anyone witnesses such a “dumping” effort, they are required to REPORT IT, and have it investigated…please don’t even try to convince me that ALL the ER personnel will be in cahoots to “hide” or “cover-up” someone dim enough to even attempt it…I assume most hospital workers are employed in a hospital they wish to keep working in, and kinda want it to stay open, yes?

I am totally confused by this one—-”I can’t imagine being ABLE to save someone’s life, but being prevented from doing so by something as arbitrary as a financial transaction.”

Are you talking about patients in an ER or where?

Any hospital with an ER, has 24/7 coverage by ER docs, and is mandated by EMTALA to provide support and life sustaining care if the patient requires it, until the patient is stabilized…the ER docs do not consult a price list, nor do they call insurance companies to get permission to run a thing…they order it and do it, period.

So I remain confused, unless you are meaning some other setting. Are you meaning doctors private offices, where most do not HAVE their very own labs, MRI or CT scanners, etc…??

Physicians in an office cannot demand the hospital run a test if the insurance companies will not pay for the test, that is true…but again, this is a decision on the insurance companies part.

My husband, along with other docs I have been witness to, when faced with an uncaring/oblivious insurance company, get on the phone and FIGHT for the test or scan their patient needs…and if that fails, they get on the phone with the hospital admin and go further…I cannot think of one doc in our realm of colleagues that would simply shrug and say, “Ah well….Acme Insurance Company says no MRI for you, so that’s as far as I go..tough luck. Sure hope you don’t HAVE that brain tumor…”

When all else fails, a roundabout way many MD’s have had to resort to is tell the patient, go to the ER….check in with your massive headache/fever of unknown origin/ possible fracture/ or what have you, and then you’re under EMTALA and the TESTS ARE RUN.

My husband is routinely called into the local ER and takes care of many patients who don’t have a dime. He doesn’t let anyone die for lack of finances, and neither does the hospital he works in.

If these dreadful hospitals are out there, someone make a list and publish it, please…any one of us in the medical profession will be more than happy to turn it over to the authorities.

This one is simply incorrect: Re: Medicare and Medicaid from one poster…”My point was that for those physicians that do accept these payments they have a lock on payments coming to them and they bill for the rest, either direct to the patient or to medicare supplement insurance that many people have gotten suckered into purchasing.”

I’m sorry, but this is not true. In order for my husband to bill an insurance company….let’s say, Cigna…he has to first contract with Cigna. As in, apply to bill the Cigna insurance company, and wait until he is credentialled with the company before he can bill them for anything.

IF he is credentialled and approved, they send a contract stating the terms under which they will pay him. Easy example, if he charges $100, they cut it down to a third, he gets about $33. There is no negotiation with 99% of these contracts, you must agree to accept what they will pay you, or you are not permitted to bill their company, period.

You sign a contract stating you will ACCEPT WHAT THE INSURANCE COMPANY PAYS YOU. WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BILL FOR THE BALANCE, it is AGAINST THE CONTRACT, and therefore, illegal. You’ll lose your contract with that company, if you go against the terms of their contract.

If we have a Medicare patient, it means we have contracted with Medicare, signed a CONTRACT with Medicare to accept the rates the COMPANY has set down. We don’t set them down. We don’t have a “rate locked in.”

Same goes for Medicaid patients. We apply, we credential, we get a contract, we have to sign the contract agreeing to accept what Medicaid has decided is fair and reasonable.

YOU CANNOT BALANCE BILL A PATIENT IF YOU HAVE SIGNED A CONTRACT WITH THEIR INSURANCE COMPANY TO ACCEPT THEIR REGULATED FEES.

And if a patient has supplemental insurance, sure we bill that….you’re paying for the insurance, yeah, we bill it, BUT, it’s subject to the SAME RULES as the primary insurance…we can’t bill the supplemental either, unless we go thru all the steps I just outlined above.

I agree that insurance companies have a stranglehold on our lives when we need medical care of any kind. I agree, it needs a massive overhaul and major re-do, but I do NOT agree that it takes socialized medicine to do it.

I won’t EVER agree with what my friends in Canada have to put up with, or the stress it puts them thru. Our insurance companies cause stress too, I do agree, but it is NOWHERE near the srtess you’re going to give yourselves, if you jump on a socialized medicine bandwagon….someone mentioned folks getting impatient being made to wait a few hours in an ER or for a test, and I have to say, YES, I’ve seen that, many times….do you really think you’re going to be LESS stressed waiting for months?

Think about what you’re saying here…inevitably a discussion on insurance companies has these big-bad-greedy-doctor trailers attached to it, or rich-people-getting-better-care-than-me stickers plastered on it somewhere, who knows why it happens, but it does…but again, think of what you’re saying, think of all the things that make you nuts now about the state of healthcare…do you truly think that the system of socialized medicine is going to TAKE CARE OF YOU ANY BETTER???

Do you honestly believe that you’re not going to wait perhaps TEN TIMES as long for care??

You can get sicker….your condition could deteriorate into something even harder to diagnose or care for, than it ever would have been, had you had access to timely care.

Your quality of life is going to be affected; everyone stresses over someone needing medical care that can’t get it..you could even lose your job, as my friend almost did, because of a condition which didn’t qualify as an emergency, but sure left him disabled…then what?

Do you really wish to leap into supporting socialized medicine without researching every possible fact you can about it, and then applying it to your own life, or the life of someone you love?

I agree, the insurance companies can make life maddening for those who are forced to deal with them….but in America, we still have the ability to walk into any ER and get care…..and whatever stats are out there that can be dredged up as negative about health care in America, try considering the success stories you don’t hear about…the majority of people get help, and get better. The bad stuff just makes the news more.

Look at your spouse, your children, or your parents….picture one of them with a possible tumor, a weird infection, a chronic cough, a hip so badly arthritic that walking is impossible…picture them with anything you wish to…and then try to imagine what it would be like to see them put in a medical-need “line”, hoping they’ll be granted care or relief from their pain…..tell me honestly that you’d choose for them to possibly wait months…
MONTHS…..before they got medical care…in the name of socialized medicine.

We may not have a perfect system in America, but I’d choose ANY DAY to have the ability to take my loved one into an ER anytime and get them looked at or tested, other than waiting and hoping they get help…. eventually.

Please, just think about what you’re considering signing yourselves up for in the long run.

Hi, Joe

NO WAY do I support socialized medicine…while the credentialling is a nightmare of paperwork, and it varies from a few weeks to a few months with each company, I still support our way over Canada’s( or whoever else has soc.med) anyday.

“I think part of the problem is “emergency” services only consider enough to keep a person alive…” I respectfully disagree. The hospitals we have ever been associated with, and there have been a dozen or more over the years…I can only say, there’s a bit more involved than that, truly. Alive is always preferable, yes, smiling here as I type it….but alive, stable, secure enough to downgrade from emergency status is what is strived for, always.

Anyone on a ventilator is typically alive, but it doesn’t mean they’re ready to go home…ER docs like people to be able to at least realize where they are, have stable vital signs, be alert and oriented, all that good stuff….the ones who can’t GET to that level, are kept in the hospital, or, in extreme cases, shipped after basic stabilization to a hospital who can better manage their level of trauma/care.

A lot of hospitals are forced to transfer patients after stabilizing them because they simply lack the equipment or the specialized doctors to handle the situation.

As for $72,000( did I read that right?) for the finger reimplantation, where in the world was that? ‘Cuz I know for sure that couldn’t have been the physician fee….and I have to ask if this was a quote of what the insurance company was BILLED, in contrast to what was actually PAID. Did the movie say?

Day and night difference in those two things….what you see on that EOB you get after a hospital stay, is not what everyone got paid…not the doc, not the hospital, no one….usually it’s about a third of what you see “billed”.

You’d be surprised at what hospitals actually write off as losses in a lot of these people with no money…we do it all the time in our office.

Our daughter is in college, has no health insurance at the moment, and had to have am MRI scan in the ER(Baton Rogue)…while she wasn’t covered, of course…she got a bill for $3500 and is paying $10 a month…she’s also applying to have the bill reduced, and a lot of billing departments will do that in hospitals.

She may be paying that $10 for awhile, but it keeps her out of collections and it isn’t breaking her.

Most hospitals have some sort of payment plan, as no one wins if people go broke and pay NONE of the bill.

As far as quality of life, weellllllllll…..my friend in Canada could dispute it, if he knew it were being discussed here…4 months of pain and a knee that gave out without warning, causing him several falls…I don’t think he’d label it as quality…

I have to search for this movie and drag my husband to it, if I can ever get him out of the hospital…is it playing everywhere? Off to do a search, I love controversial flicks.

Its amazing how many people are against socialized medicine. It works for every other country in the world except ours. I wonder why that is.
If it’s good enough for the rest of the world, why isn’t it good enough for us? People are just so afraid of change. They’d rather put up with all the corruption than change the system.
Amazing.

“utterly literally”?? lol
We’re not talking about changing our entire government over to socialism, just our healthcare system. And the reason our healthcare system WON’T change is because all those fat-cats in the insurance and pharmecutical industries will lose billions of dollars each year.

Joe, are you serious? Socialized medicine in America?

Here’s a thought, why not be your own re-enforcing agency, why not find out for yourself what is going on with your insurance, doctor/medical examiner, etc. why place that burden elsewhere? Why not be your own agent who calls the doctor, insurance, and medical whatever, where is your responsibility? Do you really believe we should place all the burden/responsibility on others to get our medical care etc?
There is an old saying, “if you want something done, do it yourself,” cause no one else cares about your personal stuff like your care about your personal stuff, they may say they do and talk big talk, but when it gets down to getting stuff done you got to do it yourself…
Counting on another govt. agency is just insanity.
Ya I know, someone will say something like it is out of their hands etc. and more whining, but is there a law against seeing your own medical coverage through by calling whomever you need or sending letters, or showing up in their offices to get results, I don’t think there is a law against that, so if you want results then go get them.

how much are taxes in countries with socialized medicine? i am curious; i hear in Denmark, taxes eat up more than half your income, to pay for the state medical program…..is this true?

I took the following from the Heritage Foundation Lecture Series #1019. I think it brings up a contrast to the existing debate that limits our options on the table and adds the perspective that we can use the existing system with new incentives built in, as well as tax incentives to allow for purchase of insurance by families, as well as more local control.

Innovative Solutions

So what can we do?

The health care initiative that President Bush offered during his State of the Union address in 2007 could usher in the changes that would continue to make the U.S. the leader in quality health care while addressing the growing problem of the uninsured and middle-class anxiety about high health costs.

The President would give families the opportuni­ty to own health insurance that is portable from job to job, and he would free up some of their tax mon­ey to help them buy the coverage. The White House estimates his plan also would give a tax cut to 100 million working Americans and provide health insurance to up to 9 million more Americans with­out any new long-term costs to the federal treasury. The dynamic changes in the marketplace for health insurance would transform the system to offer health insurance that is more affordable, flexible, and portable.

The centerpiece of Mr. Bush’s plan is a new stan­dard deduction for health insurance. It would be available to any taxpayer who buys qualifying health insurance. Families would get a new $15,000 standard tax deduction, and individuals would get $7,500. You need not itemize and will get the full deduction even if the policy you buy costs less as long as it meets certain minimum requirements for catastrophic coverage. Families earning $50,000 a year could save more than $4,300 in income and payroll taxes and use the tax savings to buy health insurance.

What about the uninsured, especially those with lower incomes? The White House says the proposal would lower the average tax bill of a family without coverage by $3,350. This would mean $3,350 of their pay would be available to buy insurance instead of going to taxes.

But for many of the insured, this still would not be enough, so there is a second part to the Presi­dent’s plan involving the states: Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt (former governor of Utah) is meeting with every governor to find out what his or her state needs to create “Affordable Choices” in health insurance. Secretary Leavitt wants to help states make basic, affordable private health insurance policies available to their citizens. This could include, for example, grants in the form of vouchers or refundable tax credits to help low-income people purchase private health insurance.

The President’s proposal was very innovative and took the policy community by surprise with its boldness. The President described his basic philos­ophy to enthusiastic applause on both sides of the aisle during his State of the Union Address when he said, “in all we do, we must remember that the best healthcare decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors.”

Changing the Conversation

This changes the whole conversation in the health policy debate. No longer are we simply talk­ing about how much or how little to expand govern­ment programs. We now can have a new national debate over how to engage the power of consumers in transforming our health sector to become more efficient, more responsive to their needs, and more affordable. In addressing the core problem of our current dysfunctional tax treatment of health insur­ance, the President has won support from The Wash­ington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and experts from think tanks as traditionally divergent as the Urban Institute and The Heritage Foundation.

Does everyone like this? No, of course not. Con­gressional leaders have said the proposal is dead on arrival. It is such a new and creative idea that it will take time for people to analyze and digest the plan and its implications.

Many are fearful that it will accelerate the decline of employment-based health insurance by giving a tax break to individuals who buy coverage on their own. But job-based coverage already is declining. This will give employers and employees a new negotiating tool to bar­gain for insurance that offers the best value.
Others say it doesn’t do enough for the unin­sured and that tax credits rather than a tax deduction would be better. Using some of the “Affordable Choices” money, states can put new resources on the table to provide state-based tax credits, vouchers, or other new subsidies to the uninsured to supplement the federal tax break.
There are many more details than we can get into here and which will be addressed over time, but what’s the bottom line? The President’s plan is a win/ win/win/win/win:

It is a win for the uninsured because it offers millions more Americans the chance to buy health insurance with the tax savings they will receive from the new standard deduction and likely new state subsidies.
It is a win for states because they will have more flexibility with the new “Affordable Choices” state initiative to direct federal resources to meet the needs of citizens to get affordable health insurance.
It is a win for employees because they now have the opportunity to buy health insurance that they can own and take with them from job to job, and it gives them more control over deci­sions involving their health insurance and health care.
The health sector wins because this eliminates one of the major hidden forces driving up the cost of health insurance and gives the market new incen­tives to make insurance more affordable.
Taxpayers win because 80 percent of them will receive a tax cut when they take the new $15,000 family deduction.
Sharpening the Debate

This idea sharpens the debate between those who believe that the answer to the problems in the health sector lies in much more government involvement through expansion of public programs and those who believe that the free market can and does have much more potential to get health insur­ance costs down and provide people with greater access to coverage and more choices.

Incentives work, and competition works. What we need to do is engage the power of consumers to transform our health sector to become more effi­cient, more responsive to consumer needs, and more affordable.

Would you want to play any game with me where I pay the judges?

Does anyone think it is plausible that the government could act as referee when the insurance companies get too greedy and are denying too many people recklessly from health care?

Do you see that strategy working with the oil industry?

Threaten them? Does anyone think the health insurance industry feels threatened by our government?

What they are threatened by is the prospect of a single nationalized health care that does the job they should be doing, but does it cheaper and more effectively than they could.

How much money would you guesstimate the health insurance industry spends on employees and resources simply FIGHTING coverage instead of providing coverage?

Here is one answer to a question I posed earlier (good to see a dialogue on this important issue….): at least one person from Denmark complained about being taxed at over 56% !!!!!!!!!!:

“11/11/2003 01:36

Okay Mo, let me try to explain how I feel about Socialistic medicine.
On one hand it surely was nice to be able to go to the doctor whenever we needed to go without having to worry about the bill. (We actually did have a co-pay on all bills, but it was not much.) Equally it was also very nice to know that our doctors are highly educated due to our VERY GENEROUS Socialistic schooling system, but unfortunately a lot leaves the country to gain more money in their choosen profession and unfortunately you can wait many years to have your hip replaced, but yes, it is “free”.
We have “free” school nurses & dentists that takes care of us while we are in school and it is mandatory that each child goes to the nurse and dentist at least once a year while in school, and if you have any health/teeth problems it will be taken care of right away. The system is even set up so that you have “free” dental until you are of the age of 18. Needles to say, Danish children are very well looked after. Once you are 18 years of age, you switch over to small co-pay on all medical and the rest is “free”.
BUT…we all know you do not get anything for free, and of course someone has to foot the bill.
The one whom is paying for all these ‘freebies” are the Entrepreneurs. It is the good men and women who go to work and keep the Danish industry going. Every single Dane has to pay 52% in income taxes and that is taken out before we even see our paycheck. On top of that we pay 26% in sales taxes on ALL groceries. And in addition to that we get slapped with an additional luxury tax when you buy things such as cars, boats, houses, real estate and other luxuries. (I am not quite sure how high that one is, because we never could afford luxury items. How could we when we had such a heavy tax burden placed upon us?)
So when you add up all these taxes, you have just about enough money to pay for your apartments rent, food and public transportation…”

I’m trying to decide how best to approach this from a different persepective.

We can all discuss the pros and cons of American medical insurance versus the Euro way till the cows come home, and remain just as steadfast in our views on it…it could be endless.

Btw, I’m going to stop using the term “socialized medicine”, because that’s not really what the other countries have, and it’s becoming a catch all phrase…plus, it’s misleading.

I’m familiar somewhat with the system in Canada, because I have Canadian friends. I also have friends in the UK, a semi-relative that moved here from the UK, and distant family members still living there.

I mention this because I’d like to know of the good folks discussing this topic so vigorously here, what have you actually learned about the many different systems in Europe besides what you were exposed to in Mr. Moore’s movie?

A lot of these posts read as though ya’ll think there’s one big, glorious, unified medical system outside America’s borders taking wonderful care of everyone, for free.

There isn’t one system, there are many, and they all vary, widely….and btw, none are for free.

There are no free rides, there is no free medicine, there is no free hospital stay or treatment, anywhere. Period.

Somewhere, somehow, somebody…sings, doesn’t it ….SOMEBODY PAYS.

The people pay.

(Not yelling when I cap words, it’s just that I haven’t discovered how to use italics on this forum, and it’s for emphasis.)

Germany’s system is very different than France’s. Ireland, Scotland, Wales, all different than the UK and from each other. Canada is different than all of the above. There is NO one unified health system in Europe.

They all have problems. Some have huge problems and are facing enormous deficits. Waiting lists for care exist in all of them, and many people suffer and are in pain.

THe NHS(National Health Service in the UK) is riddled with problems, do a search and educate yourself. Here’s a little newspaper snippet from the UK:

Jo Revill, health editor
Sunday March 14, 2004
The Observer
At least 10 NHS hospitals, built with private-sector funds, are facing deficits amounting to more than £40 million, says a new report from health campaigners.

This is from an article in October of 2006, speaking of deficits and hospitals facing a crisis in the UK:

Where are the cuts taking place? Which trusts in England are affected? How many jobs have gone? Region by region, find out what’s happening.

National
National Blood Service faces 150 job cuts.

NHS Direct are cutting more than 1,000 jobs and closing 12 call centres, to avert a forecast £15m deficit.

Eastern
East and North Hertfordshire Trust plans to cut ten per cent of its workforce (500 jobs) to get £18m savings. Up to three wards to be closed in the Lister and QEII hospitals by Sept.

Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, currently at the centre of a £115m profit-making refinancing controversy, say up to 450 jobs could be scrapped as part of plans to reduce a £14.8m budget deficit.

The West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust said up to 500 jobs would have to go in the next 12 to 18 months to help tackle debts of £28.6m.

Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Trust will lose 185 jobs and plans to shut an operating theatre to save £2m.

East Midlands
Over 500 jobs to go at United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust in a bid to stop losing £1.5m a month.

Nottingham University Hospitals NHS plans to shed 1,200 jobs to avoid a deficit of £60m – caused partly by a new payment-by-results system introduced last month.

Plans to move some health services, including nightime A&E, from Grantham and Boston to Lincoln hospital

The United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust, which has £17.5m debt, says there will be major job losses.

Greater London
Hammersmith hospitals making 300 job cuts.

The Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust in Woolwich says up to 100 jobs could go to save £10m.

Queen Mary’s, Sidcup, says it will consult over the loss of 190 jobs.

The Royal Free Hospital, announces 480 posts and 100 beds cut to save £25m and reduce a £13m deficit.

Northern
North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust says 74 jobs including 21 specialist specialist nursing jobs are “at risk”.

County Durham and Darlington Acute Hospitals NHS Trust announces up to 700 job cuts over the next three years.

North West
Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust confirms it plans to shed 800 posts to deal with a £21m deficit.

Bolton hospitals are losing 155 jobs.

Mid Cheshire NHS Trust making 250 job cuts.

South East
Southampton hospitals are to lose 540 jobs, with over 100 redundancies and the loss of 140 beds.

At Oxford Radcliffe NHS Trust 600 jobs and 100 beds to go. Four hospitals, including John Radcliffe, are expected to save £33m in ten months.

Royal West Sussex NHS Trust announces 200 job losses. The trust has overspent by a total of £40m and had a £14m deficit last year.

The East Sussex NHS Hospitals Trust, which runs the Conquest Hospital in Hastings and Eastbourne District General, says up to 250 jobs could be axed in a bid to tackle a £5m deficit.

Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust, which manages Crawley Hospital and East Surrey Hospital, announces 400 jobs cuts as it tries to reduce a £2m a month overspend and a total debt of £41.2m.

Up to 160 jobs to go at the Medway Maritime Hospital in Gillingham, Kent, the trust confirms. It needs to save £11m in 2006-07 and claw back a £1m overspend from last year.

Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust announces plans to cut 325 posts to save £10m.

East Kent Hospitals Trust gives warning of possible cuts to claw back a £35m deficit.

Medway Maritime Trust possible 160 job cuts.

Surrey and Sussex Strategic Health Authority says it is expecting an £83m deficit.

South West
The new PFI-built Great Western Hospital in Swindon is cutting up to 200 posts, and closing beds and an operating theatre.

Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust face massive cuts to health services across Gloucestershire. 500 job losses, community hospitals closed and maternity services moved to Gloucester.

Kennet and North Wiltshire Primary Care Trust and the West Wiltshire Trust announce plan which could see the loss of more than 80 management and administration posts.

Some 60 jobs and 56 beds to be lost at Weston General Hospital in Weston-super-Mare after the trust overspent by £6m.

The Royal United Hospital NHS Trust in Bath announces that 300 jobs are to go.

Gloucestershire Health NHS Community confirms plans to close an 86-bed hospital and says jobs may also go.

Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust announces around 200 job cuts to make savings of £22m.

Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust, which is facing an £8.1m shortfall, announces it is set to cut 300 staff.

West Midlands
University Hospital Stoke up to 750 jobs, some compulsory redundancies.

Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust to shed up to 800 jobs at its three Birmingham and Black Country sites. The trust, which runs City, Sandwell and Rowley Regis hospitals, has a deficit of £6m.

The Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust announces 720 losses. It needs to save £30m.

Mid Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust plans to cut more than 150 jobs, to save £10m next year.

About 300 job losses are announced at Shropshire’s two main hospitals, the Princess Royal Hospital and Royal Shrewsbury Hospital.

Health chiefs announce 300 job cuts in Wolverhampton to claw back a £38m deficit.

Up to 1,000 jobs to go at the University Hospital of North Staffordshire NHS Trust, with up to 750 compulsory redundancies.

Yorkshire & Humberside
York Hospital is to cut 200 jobs in a move to save £2.5m. The savings from jobs are part of a wider £7m cost-cutting package.

Selby and York Primary Care Trust announces jobs will have to go as part of a plan to tackle debts of £23.7m.

Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust up to 1,000 job cuts.

Wow.

Add it up. Over 17,000 people lost/are in danger of losing their jobs. Seventeen THOUSAND people; don’t forget the nearly 50 million pounds in losses, and that’s just the UK.

The European countries have problems, just as we do, with their helath systems. They may be different sorts of problems, involving different aspects of medical care….but they are PROBLEMS.

NO ONE…I respectfully repeat…NO ONE ON THE GLOBE HAS A PERFECT HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.

YES, America needs to do better, BUT…and this is a big BUT… a run willy-nilly towards a system in another country that looks or sounds good, is not the answer.

I sometimes read those data/finance reports with neato colored graphs and wiggly lines; all expostulating, LOOK how much America spends per capita/per human, as compared to THIS country over HERE…um…you can’t compare Europe to America.

We ain’t them.

We don’t share their cultures, most of their languages, their currency, their jobs, their economic outlook, or their style of living. We don’t.

Situations/ways of life that Europeans have lived with for a lifetime would be, for many of us, intolerable…just as many aspects of our culture would be intolerable to them….and this includes how they view healthcare.

Please realize that what was set up in these countries for health care, was set up along lines of what each country deemed was needed for their citizens, and what they thought those citizens would accept.

Please realize the ENORMOUS geographical size difference and population of America versus almost any European country.

We’re lots,lots bigger, with lots more people. The only country comparable to us in size is Canada, but their population doesn’t even come close to ours.

We have nearly 296 million people, Canada has about 32 million. The UK and France, about 60 million, Germany about 80 million.

You cannot compare such disparate population statistics when speaking of how they manage their health care, you can’t.

296 million people is a very sizable population; you cannot compare our health requirements/needs/concernswith a country that has about one fifth( or even less, in the case of Canada) of our census.

Even in Canada, their health system isn’t universal, it varies from province to province. What is allowable or available in Alberta, may not translate into the same services in Saskatchewan province.

You can’t rationally have a health system in a country this size and with this population, set up along the lines of a vastly smaller foreign country.

Healthcare needs in our own Western states is already HUGELY different from what’s the norm for the Northeast. What Nevada needs is day and night from what California needs; medical need in Maine is NOT the same as the need in Florida.

Let me grab a quote from above…I have to respectfully ask the poster if they truly have done any research into any other countries.

“Its amazing how many people are against socialized medicine. It works for every other country in the world except ours. I wonder why that is.
If it’s good enough for the rest of the world, why isn’t it good enough for us? People are just so afraid of change. They’d rather put up with all the corruption than change the system.”

Does anyone truly believe that the various health systems in the other countries, are WITHOUT corruption??? That thre are no serious budget concerns, deficits, and outright disasters???

Please read and research, and see how the deficits are piling up…see how some of these countries are actually encouraging the partial use of private sector healthcare again, just to get rid of the incredible backlog of patients and to bail out some of the healthcare debt.

Look…I don’t have a Magic Bullet….wish I did, I could probably retire a whole lot earlier. Experts far more knowledgeable than me have been battling this dilemma for awhile, to no avail.

But I always recall the words of my Father, when faced with a difficult decision or trying to make the right choice when presented with totally unacceptable choices…he always said to me, reverse things…stop trying to think of what you SHOULD do, and realize the things you SHOULDN’T do. Don’t try to make the RIGHT decision when you’re uncertain; use your brain and eliminate the decisions you know are WRONG.

The many health care solutions in Europe,as they stand now, are not going to solve the problems of our health care needs in this country.

It may be that bits and pieces of some programs, tweaked and molded into something new, might…but it will take considerable time and research, and the willingness of 296 million independant-minded American citizens to make it work.

If you wish to see the movie, fine. I intend to see it. But if you really wish to understand what’s going on in these Seemingly Wonderful Foreign Healthcare Programs people hold out as a Miracle….do yourself and your family a big favor and read…read, read, read, and then read some more on what state they are really in, before you decide to just blindly accept what you see in a film as the absolute truth.

This link…. http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/HL711.cfm

has a very succinct summary of the hot topic of health care reform…I’ll post it and let it close for me…

Some Lessons
For Members of Congress and state legislators, there are some valuable lessons from the European experience that should be less surprising.

If you insist on government management of the health care system, do not expect freedom from waste, inefficiency, or inequity in the delivery of care (look at France).

If you want to promise citizens a national or state program of universal insurance coverage, don’t expect that you will be able to deliver universal access to high-quality health care. You won’t and you can’t (look at Britain).

If you want to fix prices for medical services, prescription drugs, or other medical devices, don’t expect demand for these goods and services to be met or investment in research and development to continue apace. It won’t (look anywhere).

If you insist, with a straight face, that in a government-run health care system, all of your fellow citizens will be treated equally–regardless of their class, station in life, or disease condition–you are not merely enthusiastic or well intentioned. You are lying.

Interesting posts, Amazed and Babs.

I agree with a lot of what you say, meso, in post # 68.

Just curious about one thing Joe. Often when people have raised opinions that appear different than your own, you tell them to see the movie and then discuss the issues so we’re on the same plain.
How come?

Maybe some of us have been there for years. And while not Michael Moore, perhaps you have no idea how much some people donate in health care to those in need, let alone facilities.

From reading your posts, Joe, it appears that your family has experienced being on different sides of the health insurance in the last year of so. Should someone tell you that you must watch MOIVE X so you understand something that you’ve probably struggled with daily for the past year or so?

I understand not wanting to defend Moore’s specific examples, not a problem. But, the issues were there and continue long after Moore’s film is dusty on the shelf.

What are your reasons for thinking socialized health care will work?
They may be very valid, just want to make sure I’m understanding what you are saying of how this would work.

Also, I wanted to ensure you read Roxeanne’s very informative response about how many doctors in Canada finish their day at 5:00 p.m. and aren’t available to their patients, regardles of the emergency, until 8:00 a.m. the next business day.

A doctor who use to practice in Idaho Falls for 5 years (after he did his residency training at a U.S. hospital) decided he didn’t want to deal with the call anymore and went back to Canada.

While Roxeanne used two examples of specialists not really having to come into hospital as needed during the night/weekend etc., I know she’s right given my friend who is a sub-specialist and tired of taking call. He’d pondering going back to Canada, where he once practiced, but moved to the U.S. because he didn’t want to practice exactly what he had done his residency and fellowship in, was tired of patients calling and begging him to “bump them to the head of the line” to get a CT scan, inability to prescribe medications that worked for certain conditions but weren’t on the formulary in Canada and because he has a large family and needed to support them. To the best of my knowledge, there is no subsidy in Canada for families with lots of kids.

My friend also doesn’t leave the U.S. for Canada as he’s not sure what kind of care, he the sub-specialist, will receive for his own medical condition. I don’t feel like I can be any more specific than that, given what was told to me in confidence.

He knows what he prefers about Canada – the 5:00 allowing him to go home instead of being on call for patients throughout the night etc. The consistent paycheck without worry of how his specialty practice did seeing patients compared to Dr. X who may be a Family Doctor etc.

Also, my friend greatly fears being reassigned to an understaffed area where neither his own medical care can be what he needs, and he would provide essentially general medical care for patients, who don’t need his very specialized training.

I’m not sure how the Canadian Gov’t would know medical condition my friend has, unless it was reviewal of prescriptions filled. Then it would be very clear. I don’t know if Canada has laws similar to HIPAA that we have in the U.S.- so who else may know what medication hs takes (if it’s available in Canada) and for what disease?

Do you think my friend doesn’t really understand the issues or differences? He has one brother in Canada and one in the U.S. Parents are in the U.S., as they couldn’t get the health care they needed in Canada.

My friend graduated from College, Medical School, (did his residency in the U.S.), and fellowship in Canada. I believe he knows the two systems quite well. In the U.S. he doesn’t use his fellowship training, just a small portion of it. He’s in a specialty that doesn’t have adequate enough providers in either the U.S. or Canada.

So I get a little confused, Joe, when you have told several people to see the movie so you and they have common ground. It’s Michael Moore’s highlight’s of what Moore wanted to portray. Do you really think you don’t have similar concerns to others here?

Amazed summed it up (much like Babs has added, both with posting linkes or additional facts about Social Medicine). Anyone pre or post Michael Moore’s film can read, read, read and get educated with the what other nations do or don’t as part of their health care.

I don’t see how becoming more educated about health care options in the U.S. or other countires in the world is bad for any of us. And it allows us to go forward with a discussion NOW, instead of meeting artificial criteria of when each of us can see Moore’s film.

Many posters, from what they have wrriten, have indicated to me they are aware of many of the problems right now in the U.S. Healthcare. Moore may have given specific examples and names to problems, but I believe the average poster here has the intelligence to explain his/her views and why, without a movie to support those views.

Uhhhh, I probably do not describe it well enough then. Again, I am reading your comments and can see how your comments would be different if you saw the movie.

The reasons I encourage you to see the movie is so we have a baseline experience to discuss from. Moore presents specific information, you all are bashing it, but you haven’t seen it presented, you’ve only seen my probably poor way of presenting it.

I’m not going to explain why similar baseline experiences are important for commonality. It should be obvious.

I didn’t think that Moore said so much that America’s health care system sucks and anyone else’s would be better.

“if another country makes a better car, we drive it.

if another country makes a better wine, we drink it.

we take good ideas from other countries all the time.”

Is it an American arrogance we have that if we didn’t think of it, the idea cannot be good?

I do not pretend to know how their economies work out, but while they probably pay higher taxes for health care, they seem to live better lives that us.

They take at least 5 weeks vacation every year, by LAW, even if you are part-time. It is not like they sit around wishing they could work, they go on vacation, traveling around Europe.

If they are taxed to death from socialized health care, how can they afford these huge vacations?

I don’t know the answers, but I’m saying there’s something there you are missing. There’s a different equation at play there, and you are doing a disservice to the idea by plucking one or two aspects out and using them as the reason it would fail.

I cannot remember the last time I’ve heard Americans whine so much about how they CANNOT do something.

What has become of our country?

Maybe the problem is just the health insurance companies? Because they have to profit, they have to deny coverage, so they have incentive to fight people over coverage that should be given.

If the private insurance problems could be taken care of, then our system could still work.

What are the ideas on leashing the private insurance companies? Or do you think they are doing a fine job for our overall health care?

“To the person who posted the link to a picture of cockroaches on a Cuban hospital floor, apparently you did not hear about the American Iraq War Veterans health care. Cockroach infestations in their facilities was cited as one of numerous problems.”

I am evvvver so glad someone posted the cockroach infestation pictures…cuz I was discussing the other night with someone via yahoo messenger, that we indeed HAD examples of “so called socialized medicine”, right here in America for all to see….Veteran’s Hospitals.

And if you don’t believe me, go and make an unannounced visit and see it for yourself. I’m sure it’s possible there maaay be a somewhat decent VA hospital somewhere…but I’ve yet to see a patient of ours who HAS gotten treatment in one of these facilities, to have a positive experience.

Husband has been in practice over 20 years, and some of the most poorly run facilities are, unfortunately, Veteran’s Hospitals.

This bit, I gotta comment on:
“I do not pretend to know how their economies work out, but while they probably pay higher taxes for health care, they seem to live better lives that us.

They take at least 5 weeks vacation every year, by LAW, even if you are part-time. It is not like they sit around wishing they could work, they go on vacation, traveling around Europe.

If they are taxed to death from socialized health care, how can they afford these huge vacations?

I don’t know the answers, but I’m saying there’s something there you are missing. There’s a different equation at play there, and you are doing a disservice to the idea by plucking one or two aspects out and using them as the reason it would fail.”

Please, please, please…..do some intense reading on French economy.
Here’s a link to help:
http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_2/147000/147070/1/preview/previewPI_Vol_1.pdf

It won’t let me copy/paste anything here, or I would…France can mandate 5 weeks of paid vacation because THE TAXES FROM FOREIGN INVESTORS ALLOWS THEM TO AFFORD IT.

They are one of the most friendly business climates in Europe for foreign investors…they LOVE foreign investors, because foreign investors CAN BE TAXED A LOT.

FOREIGN firms are responsible for creating 20,000 new jobs, with the USA and UK at the top tier of those creating these jobs.

EMPLOYERS in FRance pay for the health insurance benefits on their employees, as well as contribute to family allowances, via taxation.

This article just made me shake my head and get sad: http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/04/22/news/france.php

I’ll snatch a few pieces from it, before we all go thinking, WOW, 5 week vacations!!!

“A plan by the French government to abolish a holiday in May to raise money for the elderly appeared to be in trouble Friday after unions said that workers were being exploited and called for a day of strikes and protests.

In a law passed last year, the administration of President Jacques Chirac changed Pentecost – which falls on May 16 this year – into a normal working day to produce ?2 billion, or $2.6 billion, for a National Solidarity Fund….(some paragraphs explaining why,read the article if you want them all) But the cash-poor administration has refused to cancel the plan, saying that France needs a “day of solidarity” to generate more tax revenue for health care.

The issue was highlighted when hospitals failed to cope with a heat wave in August 2003 that killed at least 10,000 people, many of them elderly.”

One day. One day to help fund the wonderful health system they have, and these fabulous French workers refused to do it, and yes, I am being facetious…ONE DAY to shore up the debt-ridden system that ISN’T doing what it needs to do, and for crying out loud, for OLD PEOPLE. People like my mom, or yours.

“I do not pretend to know how their economies work out, but while they probably pay higher taxes for health care, they seem to live better lives that us.”

Um….I don’t think the 10,000 dead people would agree they’re having a better life.

So France, even with it’s mandated 5 week vacation, isn’t the answer….they’re funding those 5 weeks vacations off of foreign money, foreign taxes, employer paid taxes, and in hurting their own countrymen….people can expostulate all they want to about how the French government shoulda done something, but you CAN”T PRODUCE MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR.

You produce it by hard work…America isn’t a Superpower because of a French work ethic….we’re a power because WE WORK AT IT.

“I cannot remember the last time I’ve heard Americans whine so much about how they CANNOT do something. ”

Hmmm, last I noticed, there’s a bunch of people in my medical circle all discussing this like crazy(as this is our livelihood), trying to come up with intelligent, viable solutions to this very real problem. I don’t know who is whining, but it sure isn’t us…who did you mean, may I ask, is whining ?

I cannot emphasize this enough, good people. Yes, the movie is generating a lot of attention, but this problem has been going on for years and is nothing new. Yes, attention SHOULD be paid, but the only way to come up with anything that’s feasible, is to research.

Read, read, read and then read some more. Research, question, investigate, and then research AGAIN. Learn as MUCH as you can, make your own lists on the pro’s and con’s..see the evidence for what’s really behind those catch-all phrases that are out there, concerning health care.

I have lived in 3 countries, all with public health care. You live once, and then you die. It is better to live in societies where you never have to worry that the misfortune of poor health with bring the additional misfortune of bankruptcy. That is an alien fear to me and anyone in any community I have ever lived in, but I guess Americans live in that fear. It’s not worth it. If other nations get this kind of good life in bad ways, you Americans should try to get it in better ways, and teach us all about it. Right now your system costs more and delivers less. Yuck!

Do it better. Just because it hasn’t been perfected yet doesn’t mean you can’t do it!!

PS. We all know we pay for it out of taxes. It’s worth it.

#83 Yes but: excellent point!

I figure we’re going to blow a bunch of money on it anyways, we might as well do it in the way that makes most everyone healthy rather than the way that lets so many die.

hi guys I got linked to this as one of you published a link re cutbacks at my hospital in the UK. Was a worst case scenario and as it turned out most of the cuts did not happen and we are expanding again next year.

Anyway, the position seems to be like most things in life you get what you pay for but in healthcare it is cheaper overall if you spread the cost over the entire population.

In the UK we until recently spent a lot less than our European neighbours so got pretty much “free” healthcare but had long waits for elective surgery, in the last 10 years under Blair we have made a decision to spend a lot more on Healthcare in the UK and the services are improving dramatically. There have always been the option to pay either individually or via the workplace into a separate private insurance scheme and some people always have. In any changed system in the US you should obviously allow that as well.

Putting in place a “European system” would mean something like provide Medicare for everyone, and if you wanted to pay extra for a better room or extra for something else then why not.

We pay more in Tax than the US but less than our continental neighbours, who also have generous pensions, childcare etc etc.

What I was amazed at when I went looking was that for an average family we pay LESS tax then you do.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/tax_tot_tax_wed_sin_inc_fam-tax-wedge-single-income-family

The overall Tax take is slightly more but we take it from corporations and (I know you will not want to here it) we Tax gasoline!

I do not have a clue how much of an average family’s income goes on healthcare costs, but I would be bet it is more than any additional costs needed to provide a comprehensive US national Healthcare system.

That’s very interesting input, Dan. It’s good to hear the facts “from the horse’s mouth”, rather than interpretations from folks who may have some contact with citizens from other countries, but no practical experience themselves.

I’d be interested to hear from some of the posters who pointed out the deficiencies of the UK system. How do you incorporate this information into your POV?

ps, before everyone starts slamming me for being elitist, let me say one, I am still paying off student loans, so no “elitism” here,

and, moreover, some of the politicos who are pushing for taxpayer-borne socialist coverage are those who don’t pay income tax; they pay 1099 taxes or capital gains tax, at a much lower rate than us working stiffs….It would be interesting if “dividend” or “interest” taxes were dramatically increased specifically to fund social programs….

In terms of some of the queries,

Yes we do pay a sales Tax of 17% on most things, not food but almost everything else and as I said you would be amazed at what we pay for gas (about $2 a LITRE so $7.60 per US Gallon), but although most of that Tax will go to the NHS that is not why we put Gas prices up. We did it gradually since the 1970’s so people could adapt and thus we are not dependant on imports from Arab countries, and we do not notice when oil prices spike.

In terms of waiting in socialised systems I would give some examples of standards we have to meet as healthcare providers.

In Family Doctor services everyone is entitled to see a healthcare professional (nurse etc.) within 24 hours, and to be able to see a doctor within 48 hours.

On a visit to an ER anyone must be seen, treated and either discharged or admitted within 4 hours.

What we have been bad at is elective surgery, i.e. Hip replacement or Knee replacement surgery, you could previously have waited 2-3 YEARS for surgery. With the extra investment put in by Blair (1% extra on income Tax for everyone) that is now capped as a maximum 18 weeks wait from initial family doctor appointment through MRI scan if necessary through surgical appointment to surgery.

What I would be interested in is what would be considered acceptable state-side, for such elective surgeries.

In terms of comparisons will go check my facts re Nurse Training before I post but in terms of urban v rural I think of myself as supporting a rural county, I am in a large Teaching Hospital in Oxford a small city with a surrounding very rural (to us) area, but a quick Wikepedia search to compare Oxfordshire to Idaho let me know I was making the wrong comparison. You could fit all of England in Idaho and still have 20% of your state left over, in our terms that is very rural!!

I run a Path lab and over here we keep being told by colleagues from US or Australia that we have far too many and we should centralise so at a discussion along that vein last week we did some mapping and we have 12 major tertiary referral centres of 400 beds or more within a 1 hour drive. That is in what we think of as the rural bit between London and Birmingham.

Lots of our debates here are around re-organising services so that what can be done in the Doctors office is done in the doctors office, and what needs to go to hospital goes to a hospital with all the right facilities to enable you to be treated to the highest standard even if your journey takes a little longer, so locally there is a big debate as to whether we should provide 24/7 Paediatrics at 2 sites 25 miles apart or concentrate the expertise at the larger site. I suspect with your distances 25 miles does not seem much of a debate.

Hey Joe,

Did you see the Michael Moore & Sanjay Gupta interview on Larry King. Pretty funny stuff…if it wasn’t so serious.

Check out this link about some of the comments made:

http://www.glennbeck.com/news/07112007c.shtml

I think it is interesting that our good friends in Congress are trying to expand the State run CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Program) that is due to expire 9/30/07. They passed a measure in the House calling for more government involvement in health care. They want to cover more children and even some adults that have too much income to get Medicare but not enough to get health insurance. They approved 40 BILLION (yes BILLION) for this expansion. Pres. Bush only asked for 5 BILLION.

If this is passed, Bush has threatened a veto. This program would have the unintended effect of driving more people off private insurance to government run insurance programs. This leaves many of us that pay into private plans in the bad position of having to pay higher premiums because of a reduced number of subscribers. However, alot of us can’t join CHIP because we don’t meet the income thresholds. So, the government in effect, is penalizing us and making us pay more for insurance and we will also pay more in taxes for this appropriation.

I agree with the previous poster too…more personal responsibility in our eating habits, drinking habits, and smoking habits. I also like the idea of receiving tax credits/breaks for purchasing private insurance. Right now the proposal is for $7,500 a year to start…and more based on prorated family size to claim against taxes to offset higher health insurance premiums. The less government interference the better.

I am not disputing a health care problem…nor would I dispute their desire to make a profit. It’s a business like everything else.

My problem is with this “right” being found in the Constitution. My bigger problem is leaving this to the government to help us out. Katrina proves to me that they are terrible at this.

I am glad to see your support of the other initiatives though!

I think we are all looking for responsible ways to handle the lack of affordability and responsiveness of the health care industry. However, when I hear you say:

“I agree the government fails at many things. A disaster response is different than an ongoing domestic paperwork system, though.

Do you trust the government with your mail? Similar concept.”, it makes me wonder if I want government paper pushers adding to the bureaucracy that is already bloated and ineffective. A ‘domestic paperwork system’ is just more of the same paperwork we fill out from private providers only this time we set up a system that is even more unresponsive because they have no incentive to be efficent. At least with private companies there is some efficiency and self-interest in dealing with problems and issues. With the government having a monopoly on power in the health care arena, I fear that efficency and quality will go down hill and what we will be left with is more of the same….and more taxes.

Interestingly, people didn’t trust the US Postal Service with their mail. This is why we have private companies like UPS, Fed Ex, DHL, etc. competing and succeeding in the marketplace. Consumers have benefited and timely delivery has been ensured. The Post Office stays in business only because they get tax dollars. They could not and would not surive on their own merit(s). My concern is much the same here, if government becomes involved and waiting lists are established there are going to be alot of people waiting on the ‘domestic paper shuffle’ to get needed medical procedures. This does nothing but slow the pace and quality of health care delivery. It also does nothing but inflate the cost(s) to all Americans, and does not meaningfully change the system as it currently exists. Medicinal utopia may very well be pipe dream created as an answer to a thorny problem that is not going away by throwing more money at it and/or involving Uncle Sam in our day to day medical affairs. Besides, has anyone ever considered that involving the government in health care gives the government more information on all of us that could be used in a variety of harmful ways to invade our privacy. They won’t need subpoena’s to get records…they will be the record keepers. I don’t George Bush or Hillary Clinton knowing my medical history!
Do you?

Sorry Joe,

I don’t support Moore and I am not going to support his movie. I don’t really need to watch his movie to know there are problems. Moore’s solution to many problems in America has been more government involvement.

Americans want any easy fix that is presented to them. Overweight-take a pill and/or have surgery. Can’t sleep? Pop a pill. The easy fix here is to just let the government take care of you. How far will this go? Is it just me or does it seem like everybody wants to be taken care of and nobody wants to take care of themselves?
Ah well, bottom line is I do not agree with the prescription offered up by Moore or the Democrats. Social Security was served up 4 decades ago to help people out….it is being misused by the government to buoy deficit spending. Many seniors don’t live on Social Security…they subsist. Social Security will be broke in less than 20 years. We need more than subsistence. We want more than subsistence. The current prescription of government run health care is just that subsistence and less care than we are accustomed to at the present.

******************************
Enjoy the following link for a quick read:

http://www.billoreilly.com/newslettercolumn?pid=21601

Mike…I have to say I am pretty much in total agreement with what you are saying but I have to suggest that quoting Bill Orally doesn’t do much for the cause. Perhaps quotes from someone like Milton Friedman or even Thomas Malthus would add more credence to our side than those from that demagogue, Billo.

Friedman must be rolling over in his grave with all this talk of embracing socialized medicine in this country as a cure all for the health care crisis we are experiencing and shame on you, Joe Vandal, for advocating such a disasterous course. You should be out there screaming for less government involvement, not more!

Joe,

If you read the thread I have been advocating my position long before O’Reilly’s column came out today. I don’t need him to tell me how to think. He doesn’t pay my bills, taxes or anything else! I do.
I can think for myself and as I have consistently said, less government in our health care system is preferable.

I do appreciate you providing the links though. I am glad Mr. Moore is so rich that he doesn’t need the money. From what I hear his movie is in the tank as far as attendance. This is a good sign that people are not taking this loud mouth seriously on everything. The sad part is that there are some reforms that he offers that could probably help in some ways but they will get lost in his shrill voice and bullying tone.

Meso, not sorry I used O’Reilly. However, I agree that Milton is probably not happy with the state of things and the fact that the American public is getting sucked into the black hole of an easy fix and more government. But hey, we make fun of Moore, Joe gets to make fun of O’Reilly. It’s all fair! Thanks for the posts!

I agree with Joe. Not all people that have lung cancer got it from smoking. My grandfather never smoked a day in his life and he died from lung cancer.
And if you’d had done any research whatsoever regarding Micheal Moore and HIS health, you would have known he was considered a hipocrite for being so overweight and doing this film. Since he started the Sicko project he’s been on a strict diet and excercise and has lost 30 pounds so far. Enough with all the criticizing, lets work together for a solution.
You have to give Moore credit for at least DOING something about it, by getting people to talk about it and consider other options.

I have worked for the same company for the past 11+ years and for the last 6 of those years they have raised out premiums and/or deductibles. And altogether 8 out of the 11 years, my rates have gone up. Now you tell me what’s wrong here? Sure I’ve got awesome coverage, but I can still hardly afford it. My yearly deductible is insane, let alone how much they take out of my check each month. I’m better off putting that money away in the bank and just letting it earn interest. But Dr’s don’t like people that pay cash. They like insurance companies, so they can nickel and dime them to death and make us pay for it in the long run! Its highway robbery plain and simple and this is what Micheal Moore is trying to point out.

I would suggest to poster Mike that he open his mind just a little bit and at least watch the documentary. Even if you don’t like the guy doing the documentary, give what he has to say a chance.

And don’t even get me started with the farce that is “HMO”! I quit using HMO plans 15 years ago when it took 2-3 visits just to be diagnosed. And not to mention the quality of Dr’s that are associated with HMO’s are drastically worse than with PPO.
HMO’s are in such a state of disarray, you might as well not have insurance at all!
I was more than happy to pay the 40-50% more for PPO for better coverage and more competent Doctors. But over the last 10 years or so, the service associated with PPO’s has slowly decreased as well. So much that its become as bad as HMO’s.
We definately need a new plan!

Okay4Now brought up a point about crack addicted mothers and their enormous cost to the health care system.

How much further ahead would we be to pay…say, $50,000 to meth/crack addicted mothers to be sterilized? It’s going to cost society many times that amount to care for their addicted offspring through health care, prison or any number of social services until/if they are ever able to care for themselves. Fifty grand would go a long way toward getting these addicts back on the right path i.e., education, housing and transportation for work, etc. Or it could all go for more drugs, leading perhaps to a premature death…either way it seems to be a win, win proposal.

Buck vs Bell, a 1927 Supreme Court decision upheld Virginia’s decision to mandate the sterilization of a third generation welfare recipient, Carrie Buck and over 40,000 people were mandatorilly sterilized in this country even as late as the 1960’s.

Mandatory sterilization smacks of Nazi Germany but what, if anything, could society stand to lose by paying meth, crack and heroin addicted mothers not to have babies? Just a thought…

The sixth circuit court of appeals recently reversed a Federal Judge who sentenced a woman to probation for serial child abuse of her 8 kids. The judge ordered a special condition that she be required to have a simple medical procedure implanting a birth control device under her armpit during the term of her probation. The ACLU intervened on her behalf and the 6th circuit agreed that it violated the 8th Amendment to the US Constitution against cruel and unusual punishment. The case was remanded and the judge sent the woman to prison for 6 years instead! So, you can see that times have ‘evolved’ since the Virginia decision in 1972….we are more civilized now and let people procreate and we foot the bill for their irresponsible behavior–and the children suffer!

Mike,

In her case, that would have been fifty grand well spent (years ago)by the time you factor in the liabilities her eight children are bound to be on the system.

Anything unconstitutional about receiving money from taxpayers to be sterilized?

If China and India can mandate the amount of children a couple can have in order to maintain a lid on population numbers…shouldn’t we be pro-active about remedying a situation that puts a child abuser or addict, with eight kids, back on the street to continue procreating (with those children becoming wards of the state)?

With socialized or even for-profit health care, like we now have, it is not hard to imagine a time when the system will be so overloaded with indigents that we will have to triage all patients needing care (especially true when all of our baby boomers start signing up).

Perhaps an airplane ticket to India for “outsourced” care will be cheaper than going through the system here. Competition there has made health care very affordable to overseas customers and highly skilled Indian doctors are hungry for American dollars. Competition, competition, competition, it’s what makes a system viable.

Here is a story for you all to hear. I was in a nasty car wreck I recieved 3 slipped disc pinching some vital nerves. The other driver was drunk and didn’t have insurance. My insurance will only pay 5,000.00 medical and 25,000.00 in damages. My injury requires a $50,000.00 surgery or a shot in my neck for the rest of my life and lots of pain to go with it. I have a million dollar injury. And getting peanuts for it. I know getting a Lawyer will make it worse. My uncle got PCB poisong at the site and was awarded 200,000.00 the check was mailed to his lawyer and the lawyer kept his check and said there was alot of travel time and phone conversations and court cost and sent my uncle another bill for 10,000.00. I do not trust lawyers. My last one sent me bills for things that never happend. he ate 2,000.00 retainer fee in 2 days after learning i still had 800.00 left over. The only ones that get lucky are the insurance companies and doctors and lawyers. The victim gets nothing but the shaft.

Agree with your post #130, Meso.

Unfortuantely, the way I see it, there are only 3 other alternatives to health insurances companies.

1. Do nothing to treat existing medical problems, or preventative check ups.

2. Obtain care in another country and pay for the service yourself.

3. This choice is linked to #1, although maybe hopefully, dozens of years down and the road.

DEATH.

It defeats the purposes of health insurance companies.

Joe,

I saw nothing in the report that compared lifestyles of the nations mentioned. It makes me wonder what role our skyrocketing obesity rate skews the data. There’s a reason our diabetes and blood pressure rates are higher than other nations…we’re a bunch of fat pigs who have grown up in prosperous times. High fructose corn syrup and double bacon cheese burgers have taken their toll.

When was the last time you walked down the aisles at the local store and counted the number of porkers pushing their carts? It’s a pretty sad commentary on our self indulgent, gluttonous life style in this home of the free, land of the brave.

A friend of mine just returned from China, where he took his extended family back to visit the small village where he was born. The guy is not overweight by American standards but his Chinese counterparts over there kidded him about being a rich, fat American. He said he didn’t see one fat person on his trip there, not even anyone approaching what he would consider slightly overweight.

Complacency about our expanding waistlines is manifest in the ever increasing numbers of us at the doctors office for illnesses relating to our obesity.

No, OK4Now, it can’t all be related to our thyroids or pituitaries or whatever…most of us are just fat because we can, and do, eat too much!

I don’t understand why folks don’t believe what they see happening with their own medical coverage. Show of hands here-how many people have had their own coverage decreased, while co-pays & premiums have gone up, over the last 20 years?

*raises hand*

How many people know someone personally who had medically recommended treatments denied by the insurance carrier?

*raises hand*

How did those patients do, after treatment was denied?

*one young 21 yr. old I know died, trying to raise enough money for a lung transplant*

If you can’t see what’s actually happening with health care in the US, you’re not looking hard enough.

Meso wrote, “Complacency about our expanding waistlines is manifest in the ever increasing numbers of us at the doctors office for illnesses relating to our obesity.

No, OK4Now, it can’t all be related to our thyroids or pituitaries or whatever…most of us are just fat because we can, and do, eat too much!”

I agree with you meso. All I’m trying to point out is some people do have medical problems that do not allow them to use traditional means of losing weight, or avoiding lung cancer etc.

I also don’t think those people should be “penalized” for having something wrong with their bodies. Yet, especially in small or medium-sized businesses, health insurance premiums will rise as the probability of future tests, surgeries or other interventions increases.

Joe – what about that theater downtown – I’m blitzing on the name right now, but it’s the one that shows foreign and lesser known films. Is it still showing flicks that aren’t the most popular drawing crowds at somewhere like the Edwards Theaters?

The Center Theater use to have a direc website and I thought the owner said he wanted to know what locals wanted to see. He just wants to cover his costs and make a bit of a profit.

In looking briefly at the Internet it does look like private screenings of various films are being booked there. How do we let the owner know we’d like Moore’s to be shown to the general public?

I am absolutely not afraid of change in health care. I’ll probably make 3-6 times what I currently make. Other professionals may make a 1/2 of their current income. So in the aspect, I would welcome it.

What worries me are the parameters of who will screen, their level of training, and how long we’ll wait for needed tests.

Dan, from England, never got back to me (at least that I saw) of what the definition and licensure of a nurse was. There is a HUGE difference in an RN’s training and a NP’s. Many believe in socialized healthcare an RN would be the first to assess a patient.

I don’t totally understand how that helps patients obtain better and easier access to quality healthcare.

It’s not censorship unless the government does it. Go buy a copy when it is sold and watch it to your heart’s content. Or fly to some city where it is being shown and view it for yourself….or just pirate it on the internet as was suggested. No conspiracy here….oh wait, Bush probably ordered movies to be intercepted and burned. lol

I am not bashing his movie, nor am I denying there is a problem of affordability and coverage.

I choose not to see his movie because I don’t like his politics.

I don’t doubt he has some valid points. I alluded to that fact and stated that it was too bad that parts of his message would get drowned out by his messenger tactics.

I have advocated for tax credits to help families offset health care coverage. I also advocated for subsidizing training programs for doctors and nurses. I think that the government should not limit it’s ability to negotiate with a wide variety of health care providers to get the best prices and services for Medicaid recipients. Presently, they are locked out of doing this.

You can look at posts 15,24, 41, 66 and 67 for ideas I have talked about….but hold up….what you have just accused me of doing you have done as well. The issue is about improving health care….not who offers up the most ideas to fix it. You can call it nay saying if you want…I philisophically believe the government has no business in providing health care and if there is ample evidence to indicate they would screw that up as much as they do some many other things. I do agree that government needs to act more as a referee enforcing laws that protect consumers from getting screwed and coverage denied.

I don’t like the idea of the CHIP program because it creates more government paper pushers to provide nothing more than bureaucracy. Don’t think for a minute that taxes on cigarettes will be the sole funding source for new government bureaucracy.

Why not take the money used to create more government workers….(who incidentally DO NOT provide medical treatment)….and means test the benefits in the form of tax credits for poorer families so that they are encouraged and rewarded for buying their own insurance? Get rid of the middle man. All this does is cause more BS to deal with and grow the problem rather than shrink it. Laws on the books would make it mandatory that coverage be provided so long as it was purchased at affordable rates. This should be a prerequisite to carriers being allowed to do business in the United States.

So, CR67, there are some of my ideas! The nice thing that differentiates us from Michael Moore is that we don’t have 101 political agendas going on behind a drive to fix the health care system. Perhaps more people would take him serious if he wasn’t such a political hack. To be fair, I can say the same about Rush Limbaugh. So, I am not an apologist for conservatives either.

BTW….I don’t know a thing about the Massachusetts law set up by Romney on Insurance coverage. Does anyone know how this is working or not working there?

Mike, you said “it’s not censorship unless the govt. does it”. That surprised me because I thought it was more about an “authority” doing censorship – in other words, someone in the position to do so. “Government” is just an example.

I looked it up in the dictionary and none of the definitions specifically mention government.

Renee, censorship by the government is generally illegal, but censorship by private individuals is less actionable in court. It may look bad, but a theater owner has the right to show whatever movies he/she wants.

Of course, if a theater owner is willing to lose profits just because they don’t like the politics of the movie-maker, that’s just plain dumb.

“If other solutions do not appear, then it seems a more socialized system would be best.”

Hmmm….that doesn’t seem to be a very good selling point. There have been other suggestions here on this thread. To be sure, there have been more concerns pointed at the socialized system. It is interesting that some women and men want “choice” in abortions. Other people want “choice” in education to goto the best schools available. Other people want “choice” in what cars they drive. Others simply want the “choice” to eat, drink, or smoke what they want.

Now, we are presented with socialized medicine and we will lose all “choice” of when and where we get treated and by whom. I know of some really crappy doctors in this town that have terrible bedside manner AND lack expertise on basic conditions patients have. So, under the socialized banner here we will all lose our choices. Does anybody care about that?

For instance, how about being forced to goto the dentist who was convicted of soliciting an undercover officer for sex? How about the other doctor who was nailed for DUI, or the other doctor who was up for tax evasion?
Or the real kicker, how about the doctor who was convicted of hypnotizing patients and sexually assaulting them at office visits?

We talk alot about choice in America and how important it is….are we really ready to hand over the ability to make intelligent choices about our health care to an uncaring bureaucracy? Are we ready to have to visit doctors that we don’t personally care for because they lack the empathy and level of care that we desire?

This is America…right? We should have the same choices available in health care and not be directed to some doctor that couldn’t care less about us. Make no doubt, quality of care will suffer under a socialized system. In my opinion, I do not want to lose the right to choose a doctor that I feel has my best interests at heart. If he/she doesn’t then I will go somewhere else to someone who does.

This entire debate boils down to the central issue of removing the responsiblity and freedom of individuals to choose their best path and handing it over to the government to solve for us. I for one do not want to be led around like a sheep and told who to get my treatment from. Anybody else feel the same or do we just fold and let Uncle Sam handle our livelihood?

Mike … obviously is still quite young and has never had to seek the services of a Doctor and actually go through all the crazy bureaucracy that is our broken healthcare system. Because if he had, like most people, he would agree our system isn’t working. But he refuses to open his eyes and see that socialized medicine works for every other country in the world. So why not ours?

You’re worrying about bankrupting our country?? That’s funny! Last I heard, our national debt was in the Trillions! How much more in debt could we go?? I don’t see all those other countries going bankrupt over it. Better come up with a new plan of attack Mike. Looks like you’re the only one against this type of system.

Good points Ooohchild

I think a lot of the failure or success of Socialized Health Care systems in other countires, tends on whether people are basically healthy, or chronically ill.

For kids born with cardiac or neurological problems, it sucks. Source for Canada is Dr. Peter Canfield – Nova Scotia. (He didn’t say suck, that was me).

Having read the posts in this thread, I honestly believe everyone here wants to improve what we currently have. However, I’m not sure that all are at the same reference point.

I’m not connected to the legal system, eccept by cousins, an uncle and a nephew (who I’ll proudly claim as an attorney). Yet, everyday I have to deal with legal issues that would be nice if I could pick up a phone or e-mail an attorney and ask my questions.

Our current legal system, is cost prohobitive, to the average person or small business, IMO, to have the same access as large corporations and those who have their own attorneys. Thankfully, I’ve never be charged with a crime that would make me either borrow $, mortgage my house etc. to pay an attorney’s fees to defend me. Yet, I know others have had to do that.

Access to health care and access to legal care are not the same. I’m simply trying to make a point that I believe some understand (or have experienced) ability to access legal care more clearly.

What is remotely interesting to me, is under our U.S. Constitution we are guaranteed access to an attorney (not a paralegal only) to represent us in court. Enter Legal Aid and other Legal organizations that represent specialized cases.

It is interesting to think about the fact our founding fathers made sure we could be legally represented, yet they didn’t see the need to have a similar system for health care for all citizens.

I am speculating that those who have had to hire defense attorneys so they could be defended, would have a different reference point than I, since I haven’t had to do that.

Conversely, those who have used Legal Aid or other Legal Agencies to assist with charges against them, or to initiate claims they file (like restraining orders), probably have a totally different perspective than someone borrowing money somehow or someone who hasn’t been in the position.

Then there are the corporations who have anywhere from 3-30 (or more) attorneys on site to address everything. I’m reasonably certain people who are in court with corporate attorneys don’t feel the same way as those waiting to see an attorney at Legal Aid or a Private Attorney.

My point is we are all at different stages of our lives, and because of that we all don’t necessarily see this or any other issue the same.

Some of us have families, some don’t, some have never had a serious illness in their ownself or a family member/loved one, while others have genetic diseases, such as cardiac, psychiatric, cancer etc. and have spent their “vacations” in the hospitals having procedures done.

And some of us, have had an injury or something happen medically that literallly leaves us with hours, if not minutes left to live, withouth lifesaving procedures and/or surgery to intervene. I belong in this group.

Despite working in healthcare daily (and nightly), I still can’t really convey to others the absolute terror and fear I felt at 2:03 p.m. Oct. 10 years ago, when I was told what my latest hematocrit value was. Unless I had emergency surgery to stop the bleedig, I wouldn’t be alive at 3:00 p.m.

I had NO power to MAKE the covering doctor do something to save my life, despite nurses voluntarily, risking loosing their licenses to save my life, using every backdoor channel they could to get in touch with my doctor out-of-state as they knew I was minutes from death.

Ask me if I believe in miracles and the answer is yes! It is neither appropriate or something I wish to share here – a deeply, deeply personal experience not only for me, but my doctor as well. We both changed after that day, as did others.

I’ll only say that my doctor, who was out-of-town that day, leaving me in the care of another competent doctor, walked through the door to my hospital room at 2:07 P.M. and I was in the O.R. by 2:25 – as rapidly as a 2nd then 3 I.V. could be started in me, and an O.R. staff prepped. I was in O.R. #4 before the life-saving blood got there.

Thank you wonderful people who donated blood that I ultimately received!!!!!!!!!!!

It’s not exactly a pleasant memory to hear the anesthesiologist call the blood bank and yell at them, “Where is that G…D..blood I ordered stat?! This patient is dead in less than 10 minutes without blood! and slam the phone down.

His phone call was the last thing I, heard in the O.R. wondering if I would indeed be alive in 10 minutes.

At and around the O.R. table, 2 CRNAs had simultaneously been rapidly injecting I.V. medications to assist my heart and prevent other vital organs from failure, then administering other drugs to start my anesthesia. So I heard nothing else before I was under anesthestic. Needless to say, it was the ONLY time I’ve awaken in a PACU to acute surgical pain and been happy. I knew I had lived.

I was later told by the relative of mine who had to sign the emergency surgery permission form, that my Dr. told my family he didn’t know if he could save me, given how much blood I’d lost, but he would do everything he could, even if it meant removing organs etc.

I don’t share this personal experience lightly, I usually don’t tell people about this day in my life without a very good reason to do so, and unless I know them really, really well.

Nonetheless, I feel a really strong feeling this needs added here. I know what would have happened to me in Socialized Medicine, had the same events taken place. Especially in one of the least populated states in the U.S.

As I written before, professionally I know socialized medicine would increase my income 3-4X what I take home from all the costs of practicing. Probably more than most who have posted, I’d see the direct POSITIVE benefit in my bank account.

I’d like the extra bucks – I could use them. I’m also tired of the long hours, refractory, complex medical patients other practitioners won’t care for (or don’t know how), trying to do my best for patients only to have some sabotage treatment, and an increasingly amount of insurances use denials routinely even at first and second level appeals, when trying to obtain the best treatments for patients in our office.

I’d love to have a socialized legal system that I could just send info to an attorney and have him/her write the endless letters to insurance companies, pleading for what the patients needed, instead of me or one other person in our office do it.

I realize socialized medicine will give me more free time than I probably will know what to do with, and guarantee me a salary so I don’t have to wonder if an insurance company or if Medicaid/Medicare will be paying me anything this month so I don’t have to wonder how much my office will receive this month compared to last or next month. I liked the days when I knew when payday was and how much my check would be. Yet, I still have to pay my bills (professional and personal) as well as employees regularly.

I also realize in Socialized Medicine more patients are going to die, who don’t now. Complex medical patients will not have equal access to the latest scans or procedures equally in the U.S. Or even access to the newest medications, maybe the one that finally makes a big change in their life, that allows 3-5 other drugs to be removed from their daily regime.

I dread thinking about psychiatric patients being forced to use the less expensive drugs with so many side effects most refused their meds and were legally crazy and couldn’t work or function in society. Would more long-term psych units have to open in socialized medicine, or would those who were legally crazy just roam? I don’t know.

I’ve thought about and discussed socialized medicine with dozens of people around the world for years.

What I haven’t read or seen (because I’ve never looked), is which of the countries with socialized medicine have had any other system to compare it to.

Also, as our guest from the U.K. pointed out, all of the U.K. could fit in Idaho, filling only 80% of ID. I’ve not heard the positive reviews or learned the details of how very large countries, such as the U.S., have made socialized medicine equally accessible regardless of where one lived.

In some aspects, after the verification that the U.K. is smaller than the state of ID, I’m asking why do we think what will work in a rural state like ID, will work in NY, CA, FL, or PA and other states who have millions living in one city, and vice versa? We are a very diverse geographical and populated country.

In some ways, it almost seems more realistic to look at Europe and individual countries similar to our states. How Denmark may make something work doesn’t mean that is how any other country administers socialized health care.

I’m very uncomfortable trusting assessment of me or a family member to a RN, who has completed the minimium 2 year RN program and become licensed to practice as an RN, instead of having someone with many more years of training such as a PA, NP, or another licensed mid-level, or physician do that assessment.

Maybe for people like me who believe RNs are a vital member of a healthcare team, but haven’t had enough training to differentiate certain conditions, I’ll have an option of paying $5-10,000/year for a supplmental policy that allows those I insure, to be assessed by someone who has at least a Master’s Level Degree and appropriate licensure, if not a physician. After all, in socialized medicine I’ll make so much more as a practitioner, I certainly won’t notice a difference in my take home income, compared to the monthly premiums I pay now.

Change is coming, I don’t dread it professionally from what I earn. I dread it personally for my own and loved ones care, and for those patients I know who won’t have access to what they did. Nonetheless, change is coming.

I think one of my key questions this last month is becoming should changes be made at a STATE LEVEL or the National Level? Regardless of what the issue, some states never move fast to make anything happen.

Conversely, do you want lawmakers from NYC where many walk to their doctor’s offices, or Houston where about 10-15 blocks are continuous hospitals or Cleveland or Rochester, MN (where The Cleveland Clinic and The Mayo Clinic respectively serve as international centers for patients throughout the world), setting policy for Idaho Falls?

I’m just sharing more personal and factual information so you have another way to think about how access to healthcare may be changed. Maybe a state is far better to determine HOW to change access to healthcare in that state than Congress.

I will never come closer to death than I did that day and remain alive. I would have been dead in most other countries in the world.

Please think about it……what if it were you in that O.R. instead of me?

Thanks for sharing your personal experience. Glad you made it through what sounds like a horrifying experience.

It is examples like yours and others that have experienced with waiting lines and denied access-even on the socialized system-that remind us that the current system while not perfect is pretty darn good in these types of instances.

Once again, the trick is to make it more accessible by affordability to those that otherwise might not partake in the system until a major incident takes place. I still believe that tax credits to purchase health insurance are the way to go here. This places personal responsibility on the family to do the right thing and backs it up with a very generous incentive to do so.

Thanks for the comments OK4Now. I agree with you. We all have different reference points in this debate. Some of us have kids, some don’t…this can make a big difference in whether you want to buy into government run health care or not. Good point and well worth understanding.

I’ve been reading this thread since I found it, and stopped contributing to it some time ago, because all it seemed for awhile was a lot of,

“I’m right, you’re wrong..”

“No, you’re wrong, I’m right..”

To me it’s a little odd to say if you don’t have a solution to the current healthcare problems in the USA, the answer of course must beeeee, do it the way the other guys do it.

I’m going to repeat it again….they (Europe, Canada, whoever) ain’t us.

I say that because of this statement from OK4Now and the response it got from one poster:

“Also, as our guest from the U.K. pointed out, all of the U.K. could fit in Idaho, filling only 80% of ID. I’ve not heard the positive reviews or learned the details of how very large countries, such as the U.S., have made socialized medicine equally accessible regardless of where one lived.

In some aspects, after the verification that the U.K. is smaller than the state of ID, I’m asking why do we think what will work in a rural state like ID, will work in NY, CA, FL, or PA and other states who have millions living in one city, and vice versa? We are a very diverse geographical and populated country.”

Which I think is a good, succinct statement….think I said it last time, only in a slightly different vein…we’re lots bigger and have lots more people.

So when I read this in response to it:

“I don’t know about how socialized medicine balances across rural vs. urban areas, but Canada is more geographically similar to the U.S. than Britain and they manage somehow.”

It made me sit up in my chair and adjust my bifocals to make sure I had read it right…I mean, come on…Canada is geographically similar, and they “manage somehow”?

How? How do they manage? What is it they are managing? To compare the size of Canada with the size of the USA and to think the medical insurance coverage solutions to a country with a population of 32 million can in ANY way compare to a country with a population of 295 million, is just nuts…..I don’t care if Canada matches us mile foot for mile, mountain for mountain or lake for lake…you cannot compare what is in place for Canada, to what’s in place for the USA.

263 MILLION more people is a lot more people!

Do I have a universal answer for America, no, I sure don’t…I don’t think there is one. I think it’s going to have to end up being a state by state plan, depending on that state’s demographics, needs, and available medical personnel and functional hospitals/clinics.

What may eventually work in Idaho, will be suited to the people of Idaho….doesn’t mean it’s going to float in Rhode Island or Texas. As I have said before, and Ok4Now echoed, we’re too big, we’re too diverse for a one size fits all solution.

To compare a country to ours based on similar square footage, with one skinny sliver of the population we have, and say they manage, implying therefore WE should be able to manage like they do…please. If that’s not what was implied, fine, but that’s sure how I read it.

And OK4Now, my husband and I are in the medical field….you WOULD have been dead if you had been in oh, say….Saskatchewan province? Not slamming any Sask’s here, but I have doctor friends that came from there, and they’d agree with me. I am thankful you made it thru.

Do tell more about the Oregon system. I am also trying to find out more about the Massachusetts insurance system as well.

I’ve been told Minnesota is looking at revising their own health system. I don’t know for sure, but hope to have time to look.

Gov. Mitt Romney did in 2006, along with the MA legislature, pass a law in MA that every resident has access to primary healthcare.

I remember seeing him on some national show talking policy and his point was this: In American, people access healthcare. In MA, we want it to be at a primary care provider’s level, not the much more costly Emergency Room.

A link to the current healthcare program in MA shouldn’t be hard to find.

Thanks for your comments Mike, Babs and Amazed. I’m glad I made it throught that day too!

Babs, my one thought about pharmaceutical companies, is all the various programs available to people to get medications they won’t use. But, I’m not sure of all of your concerns.

Sometimes it is because practitioners aren’t aware and don’t offer to get them connected, it takes time. Sometimes, it’s because some people are too proud and refuse “help,”.

Montel Williams – I wonder if he has a website- has been so successful in his programming partially because he’s making people aware of what is already in place from pharmaceutical companies, for U.S. citizens.

And the U.S. Citizen part might be where some claim they can’t get access that American citizens currently have. (On care programs, they want the person’s SSN).

I’ve completed those forms for so many years, I’m always surprised to find out how many people have never asked or their providers have never asked, if the expensive medicine, that may eliminate the need for 3-4 other drugs, has an assistance program.

One hint, if you complete the forms for an assistance program, don’t lie. The person I’m thinking of refused to submit the required documentation about applying for other state or federal assistance and the status of her own employment. She didn’t want to list that she was working and had insurance because she was divorcing and wanted the father of the kids to pay for their health insurance.

Consequently, probably like many areas in divorce, her daughter got to live the result of parents divorcing who aren’t honest. Her daughter was denied the medication – the ONLY time I’ve ever seen, because of her mother’s refusal to fill in accurate and complete information.

Amazed, you may remember the name of this and I can’t. About 6-8 of the big Pharma joined to pool their meds and assistance programs. It made sense to have one central program determine eligibility etc.

I don’t know if you ever saw the pamphlet – it’s orange. If you know what I’m referencing, would you please write it here? Otherwise, I’ll add it when I am able to find that pamphlet or remember the name.

(Open invitation to anyone, just since Amazed commented on what they do, I thought their medical office may have gotten some of those brochurs too.). Or, if anyone has info about Montel Williams’ access to meds, please post. Thanks.

“60 Minutes” just did a segment on congressmen and women who went to work for pharmeceutical companies after passing legislation that made these companies billions. One guy got two million a year starting salary. I’ll watch for this segment on U-Tube and link to it if it comes up.

Too bad you don’t watch TV, Joe, this was a real eye opener.

That sounds like a superb idea, about Congress not being able to lobby in particular.

I have a little trouble with people, say who were practicing attorneys, school teachers or others who got elected to Congress being forbidden to going back to their previous work. Some may belong to national associations as part of their work.

Lobbying, and especially for the fee meso quoted, is outrageous. I know some from the states that grow tobacco have done the same thing.

I like that idea, Joe, about the 10 year limit before someone can lobby Congress.

You uhhhhhh didn’t watch the video, did you?

He worked 34 years for a steel company. He had to retire due to a disability. He is using braces on the video.

He worked hard for the American dream, and did nothing wrong besides believing the system he worked and paid into would compensate him back. You have no empathy for an honest hardworking American?

So you are saying tough luck, throw him to the trash.

“Hopefully capitalism can make up for that with a thriving economy where replacement jobs go begging for workers.”

There you go, please do explain how our capitalist-driven health care system can help him if he just overcomes that disability and old age to go get a job. The man and his wife need more than your hope. They need healthcare.

Again, the lack of empathy for your fellow Americans is sickening. Our system is broken and socialized medicine is the solution.

I still have not heard any alternative solutions, only gripes from people with a stingy spirit not the can-do American spirit.

I think it’s really crucial that we remember that the health care crisis is a symptom – like so many other symptoms – of core problems in our democracy. I wish Moore would make a movie finally directly dealing with the democracy reforms themselves that are the only hope for curing the symptoms. I talk about this at length in the blog post linked from my name.

Mike, I believe I understand your point and gov’t getting more involved in our lives.

Just as an FYI – one local physician does make housecalls.

Excellent Post OK4Now,

I found the article to be a sobering reminder of what socialized medicine really means–rationed care. Like any socialized system, there is never enough of anything to meet everyone’s needs and many people get shut out.

I found this passage quite interesting:

“The average wait in Canada between a referral from a primary care doctor to treatment by a specialist was around nine weeks in 1993, but now it takes over four months. That’s almost double what doctors consider clinically reasonable.
Indeed, over 800,000 Canadians are currently on waiting lists for surgery and other necessary treatments. Many Canadians can’t even find a doctor – about 10 percent are currently seeking a primary care physician. Canada now ranks 24th out of 28 countries in the number of doctors per thousand people, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. When the government took over the health-care system in the early ’70s, Canada ranked second.
Why the decline? Over the last decade, about 11 percent of physicians trained in Canadian medical schools have moved to America. That’s because doctors’ salaries are paid for by provincial governments and subject to cost-conscious budget analysts. In fact, the average Canadian doctor earns only 42 percent of what his U.S. counterpart earns.
But, it’s not just about money. Doctors feel they can’t practice the type of medicine they’re trained for due to budget restrictions set by bureaucrats.”

This is exactly the point I was trying to make earlier that involving government bureaucrats in the process will, IMO, make it even worse than private bureaucrats now. At least with private bureaucrats there is some influence that can be placed on them by the marketplace and customer service is more operative than for a a government bureaucrat with total job security.

The piece ended with this lovely warning:

“Even if health care is declared a “right” by Moore or others, there’s a limited supply of it. And when that good can’t be allocated by price, it must be delivered by government rationing.
Sure, under Canadian healthcare, everyone is equal – or, at least, equally miserable.”

This is what socialism is all about, sharing the misery equally. Even then, many will tell you that it isn’t even equal in that respect. Ask some of the people in Cuba, Venezuela or hunt down the East German residents and ask them what they think of socialism. Even in socialist countries like Venezuela, you have elites enjoying the spoils of the socialist system at the expense of the people. This is why it is so important to not let the government get involved in another boondoggle. I don’t want the idiots that were supposed to take care of Katrina victims having a say in my healthcare choices and decisions. PRO-CHOICE in healthcare. I don’t want the government messing around with my body (does this sound familiar to anyone out there?).

I can’t say that I believe several responses are based strictly on Michael Moore, as you imply Guest 27. But we are obviously both entitled to our respective opinions.

At least for me, and one other person I know got involved on this thread, our responses would be the same if it were Ron Howard, Speilberg etc. who had made the movie.

And I know that many of us have very open minds. We’ve been searching for answers how to keep medical offices open for years before Moore’s info came out.

What I do believe is fair to say is some have already researched this information long ago and made our decisions.

In the AP article I posted above, which I did NOT search for, but found given certain search guidelines I had, no one in this forum asked those people to respond.

Did you read what one eye wrote about OR? Some U.S. states have already tried similar models.

Maybe it’s just the journals we each read and what some of us stay on top of vs. what you believe is some people having a closed mind.

I sure don’t read mechanics journals and would need all the info I could get about that. But, I am qualified to assess the medical journals (Canadian and U.S.) and what they write.

Search PubMed yourself.

I’ll remind you and others again, socialized healthcare would be great for me professionally. I’d easily make 4-5X what I do now. But, it’s not the best answer for the patients, IMO.

I am happy to hear the movie is finally at a theater though.

I have TWO insurances– private thru my husband’s employer and medicare too. Everytime I go to the doctor, my two insurances fight it out over who pays first, how much, etc. My providers wind up not being paid at all and sending me the bill. What am I supposed to do, pay my doctors out of my own pocket the whole bill? Then what are all the big premiums and co-pays I’m paying going for???? It’s to the point that I dread needing to go and put it off, preferring to forgo medical care to avoid the whole coverage headache. Which is exactly what BOTH my insurances want me to do!

The fact that you have two insurance carriers that jerk you around does not justify higher taxes for all of us to pay our hard worked incomes for free medical care for you.

Nothing is “free” as you put it, unless you stay on Medicare and make the rest of us pay for your medical. That is plain immoral and wrong for people to leech off of others.

Joe, it’s too bad you don’t watch tv, John Stossel, on 20/20 just had a great segment on health care. Michael Moore’s “Sicko” was critiqued and came away bloodied and bruised.

Sign up for a television cable or dish network, Joe, you might learn something new watching the tube.

I don’t understand Posts #197 and #198. It sounds as if they don’t think that Rebecca is entitled to medical benefits under her insurance plans. I don’t know Rebecca’s history, but in my case, I have been in the work force for 40+ years. Every month I paid into Social Security and to my insurance carrier. When I become eligible for Medicare, then a portion of my Social Security will go to pay Medicare. Most of the 40+ years, I never even met my deductible. Are you saying that if I carry a supplemental insurance when I am eligible for Medicare that I shouldn’t get Medicare?

If you think Rebecca is ripping off the system, what about those families that have multiple dependents and pay the same rate and have the same deductible as those of us who have only 1 or 2 dependents? Having multiple dependents usually means reaching your deductible much earlier and becoming a bigger drag on we the taxpayers.

Without knowiing more of Rebeccas’s circumstances, it sounds to me like she has a legitimate beef.

20/20 killed Moore, who came off looking silly in trying to defend his ‘documentary’.

I loved the story of how that Candadian woman came here for life saving surgery that in Canada they considered elective. Or the people that pull their own teeth out with pliers because they don’t qualify for a timely appointment. Really something I think we would all want to see here?

The mortality and rankings by UN of quality and access of care is really interesting considering that they get numbers they use regarding Cuban access and mortality from Castro and not by independent study or varification.

Universal health care is per some of the plans put forward is projected to cost 125 billion dollars a year. That amount of money currently pays for 3 to 6 other departments. Could you imagine creating a new governmental agency that has a budget bigger then a handful of other agencies budgets combined? Does not sound like something that sounds logical.

I don’t want to be looking for gin and pliers if I get an absessed tooth. How about you?

Oh great, so now we are justifying more government spending because of government spending (in Iraq). Don’t bother saving any of your money, just hand it all over to the government. Don’t bother keeping the economy moving by buying things that keeps jobs afloat. Just subsidize one of the biggest expansions of the Welfare State since the 1960s. That worked out well. Social Security started out that way too. The government told us they would just need to take a small fraction out of our wages. Look at the growth now.

It is amazing that people want to blindly hand over their hard earned cash for “free” health care, yet they are skeptical enough to question the war on Islamic fanatics. Can I get a refund and opt out of the mandatory health care system? I doubt it. So, lets all line up and send our money to Washington for more pencil pushers and less doctors.

Newsflash! Our public schools are awful in many parts of the country. For example, less than 30% graduate in Detroit schools. What a success story!

Clinton’s newly announced plan is estimated to cost $110 billion for starters. So, by the time she taxes the heck out of businesses and others that already have insurance to pay into a pool for those that don’t then we have total wealth redistribution. That is what this little scheme is all about. It will not sustain itself. Businesses will fail-especially small businesses. How about those folks that pay self-employment tax already. They won’t be getting free care either. So, to save the patient we will cut off the head.

The state of Wisconsin and city of San Fransisco are going to try this little experiment. You will see a mass exodus out of those areas by businesses. Guess what else, businesses will have to raise prices on top of cutting jobs to make the bottom line add up. So, now we can have more unemployed folks with free health care.

Next, the government will announce that food will be a universal right, clothes, a car, gas, and even free college will be the norm. Only problem, there will be no one left to pay for all this pie in the sky. Be careful what you ask for, you might just get it and then some. How long do we have to put up with this little charade? It is amazing that people on this site, as well as people in general that are so opposed to government run by Bush think that government run by Clinton or Dems will be any better and/or more benevolent. Understand what this really is all about: a power grab and an expansion of welfare as we know it. Big mistakes waiting for us if we roll over and accept this as a ’solution’.

I agree with alot of your post. However, I don’t see the United States position in the world being transformed by the acquisition of federalized health care. In fact, I would argue that federalizing health care would have an even more detrimental effect on business, competitiveness, and productivity personally and professionally by imposing additional taxes on top of existing rates while rationing care based on some governmental bureaucratic formula.

There is no free lunch. What made this country great over the years was the fact that people took personal responsibility and the government got out of the way allowing persons to make their way in the world without confiscating our hard earned dollars.

What are our taxes for? Can honestly say that all of our taxes are being put to good use? I don’t think anyone can tell me that with a straight face. The whole system needs reform and if that can be accomplished, than universal healthcare can come out of our taxes, just like public education does. And it wouldn’t take a huge tax hike either if the government would stop wasting our money, and the healthcare industry & insurance companies would stop robbing us by over charging every little thing! Last year my wife went into the hospital, she thought she broke her arm. Long story short….she didn’t but the bill was outrageous, charging 27 dollars for 2 tylenol. Overcharges like this abound in our current healthcare system. And until we get the government in their to regulate it and stop these insurance & drug companies from robbing us blind, it’s going to continue to get worse until nobody can afford healthcare!

For those of you who support single-payer health care or rather “socialized medicine”, you should do your research. It is not all that it is cracked up to be and I’m sure has just as many negatives as our current health care system. I think I would rather be thousands in dollars in debt with medical bills than be slowy dying of cancer while I’m put on some waiting list to recieve any sort of treatment. There is always to side of a story and the movie Sicko is only showing one.

Good try Babs. The problem is, these two journalists never provided any proof that MM had indeed been granted and actually filmed said interview with the CEO of GM. Nowhere in that link did they offer anything other than their opinion and their actual intent to set out to discredit Moore and his work.
You’re going to have to try a little harder than that.

Aunt Rose? Ooh_child? Loonnnnnnggggg silences…….

It’s amazing how childish some people can be. I thought this was a “discussion” site. Not an “I’m right, your wrong” site.
Lately it’s been the latter.