Controversial Michael Moore Flick 'Sicko' Will Compare U.S. Health Care with Cuba's

[HM2VikingRN]

Health care advances in Cuba

According to the Associated Press as cited in the Post article, "Cuba has made recent advancements in biotechnology and exports its treatments to 40 countries around the world, raking in an estimated $100 million a year. ... In 2004, the U.S. government granted an exception to its economic embargo against Cuba and allowed a California drug company to test three cancer vaccines developed in Havana."

http://alternet.org/envirohealth/50911/?page=1

[teeituptom, BSN, RN]

I agree that the so-called health care "system" in this country is broken and in desperate need of overhaul.

However, I don't believe Michael Moore is the right messenger for this particular crusade. His politics are problematic, for one thing; he's so far to the left of mainstream America that his credibility is questionable at best. And as a Hollywood type, he lacks the gravitas to make the case for universal health care.

In my mind, what's needed to take this fight to the level of attention it deserves is "spokespeople" who are neither celebrities nor political extremists. I doubt MM has a clue about what it's like to have to choose between paying the electric bill and taking a sick child to the doctor, or to file for bankruptcy because your wages are being garnished to pay medical bills incurred in the past. Give me someone who's 'been there, done that'.........and has an idea about how to fix it, rather than just complaining.

Just my two cents' worth.

I believe someone has to be the messenger

They didnt listen to Teddy way back when

They need to listen to Michael

You say his politics are to far to the left, would you rather have what you have and that is a mainstream that is so far to the right that they would deny Americans Health care, based on their socioeconomic status.

[teeituptom, BSN, RN]

"RN's" do not all agree on the problems and solutions - we are not a monolith.

I do know about Ted Kennedy. I disagree with him.

I do not support a universal system of healthcare.

steph

If you dont believe in Universal health care, then you do not believe in a persons right to health care unless they can afford it socioeconomically

[teeituptom, BSN, RN]

Don't forget John Edward's own role in the astronomical cost of health care in this country. I find it a little amusing that he fails to mention tort reform in his plan.

Torts are only a symptom of a problem. The large majority of torts are ted to health care deal with denial of treatment due to socioeconomic factors, and to inadequate treatment for the same reasons. Therefore, give everyone good healthcare and the torts will decrease exponentially.

[Jolie, BSN]

Torts are only a symptom of a problem. The large majority of torts are ted to health care deal with denial of treatment due to socioeconomic factors, and to inadequate treatment for the same reasons. Therefore, give everyone good healthcare and the torts will decrease exponentially.

Please cite statistics to support this claim. Having worked in OB for 11 years, I have seen plenty of liability cases, NONE of which had ANYTHING to do with lack of access to treatment or inadequate treatment due to socioeconomic factors.

OB, anesthesia, and neurosurgery are the 3 areas with the greatest liability in our current healthcare system. The liability cases in these areas are due to lack of satisfaction with treatment (some justified, some not), not lack of access to healthcare.

[Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN]

If you dont believe in Universal health care, then you do not believe in a persons right to health care unless they can afford it socioeconomically

Not true my friend.

steph

[Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN]

Please cite statistics to support this claim. Having worked in OB for 11 years, I have seen plenty of liability cases, NONE of which had ANYTHING to do with lack of access to treatment or inadequate treatment due to socioeconomic factors.

OB, anesthesia, and neurosurgery are the 3 areas with the greatest liability in our current healthcare system. The liability cases in these areas are due to lack of satisfaction with treatment (some justified, some not), not lack of access to healthcare.

I agree.

steph

[VivaLasViejas, ASN, RN]

May I ask how you have supported universal health care for this country?

I have met many people who say they do, yet there are no actions behind their words. May I suggest you e-mail your congress person and say to them that you support universal health care --that would be HR676 (a bill modeled along the same lines as medicare).

Before making assumptions that I don't walk my talk, please consider that maybe I haven't taken action today because I've been communicating about universal health care with state and federal government officials, including four Presidents, since the Reagan era. I've also been involved with a local PAC for fifteen years, written several newspaper articles on the subject, AND volunteered my services at a free clinic for uninsured patients.

Any questions?

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

You've used that chart about progressives on numerous threads - time to let it go.

As to your other question, I'm not sure of the answer. I'm not convinced things are as broken as people think.

I think we in the US are wealthy in many material ways compared to other countries. Sometimes I think we are spoiled and can't see the forest for the trees.

I vote - I guess that would be my first answer. And I vote for conservative ideas.

steph

Access to healthcare is neither a conservative or a liberal issue. Its a human rights issue for all. My question about a solution was not disingenous but based on the very real concern that with 15% more or less uninsured in this country that we have a non-system where we will pay for care for those people regardless of their insurance status through cost shifting to the insured.

There are enough correlations out there between poor health status and lack of educational achievement, use of public welfare systems, underemployment, and entrance into the correctional system to say that doing nothing is too expensive for our society. Its not that progressives are trying to achieve absolute equality of results for everyone rather the more accurate goal of progressivism is to reduce barriers to achievement (whether it is educational, health etc.) so that all people in society have the opportunity to achieve to the extent of their individual ability and drive.

There is plenty of economic data out there to show that between 1945 and 1975 there was greater average upward mobility in our society d/t this dedication towards achieving a common good than between 1973-2007. (UCTV just showed a documentary about the assault on the middle class that has ample data to support the progressive critique of the failure of the conservative movement to deliver a broadly shared prosperity. See http://www.uctv.tv/ondemand/ . http://webcast.ucsd.edu:8080/ramgen/UCSD_TV/12620.rm) My question continues to be "How will the conservative movement deliver a broadly shared prosperity AND universally affordable health care?

Who is a progressive?

Founded on the ideals of the progressive movement at the turn of the century, today's progressive movement believes that an open and effective government can improve the lives of everyday Americans by playing an active role in solving social and economic problems.

In other words, a progressive is someone who is idealistic enough to believe that things can be better and pragmatic enough to get it done.

http://www.americanprogress.org/aboutus

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

Good link Darren. It shows that MM is a total and complete liar, who is only interested fabricating facts for the sake of....gees, I don't know why he would do such a thing. My guess is the pocketbook.

But--you and I both know that nobody who believes in MM will even click on the link...

TIME: Do you think people will accuse the movie of inaccuracy?

Michael Moore: I offered $10,000 to anybody who could find a single fact in Fahrenheit 9/11 that was wrong.

TIME: Have you had to pay anything? Michael Moore: No, of course not. Every fact in my films is true. And yet how often do I have to read over and over again about supposed falsehoods? The opinions in the film are mine. They may not be true, but I think they are.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1622178-2,00.html

I think calling someone a liar does nothing to advance the discussion of how to solve a very real problem for all people in America. Posting real data and studies to disprove his point of view is a fair method of criticism. The job of journalists (and documentary filmmakers) is to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.

[CRNI-ICU20]

I think it is kind of interesting and ironic that Michael Moore sent one of his biggest critics a check for $12,000 to help defray the costs of that man's wife's medical costs that were not being covered any longer by her insurance company.......it seems that this man had a website that he devoted all his time and energy to as well as money that was all about blasting Michael Moore....then his wife becomes severely ill, and the insurance company denies their claims.....and they have no money.....so he has to shut down the website....and out of what I think was a fine example of "loving one's enemies", MM sent them a check to help defray their costs....

interesting and ironic.

[cardiacRN2006, ADN, RN]

Who is a progressive?

Founded on the ideals of the progressive movement at the turn of the century, today's progressive movement believes that an open and effective government can improve the lives of everyday Americans by playing an active role in solving social and economic problems.

In other words, a progressive is someone who is idealistic enough to believe that things can be better and pragmatic enough to get it done.

http://www.americanprogress.org/aboutus

This is so repetitive that it is beyond old.

[cardiacRN2006, ADN, RN]

I think it is kind of interesting and ironic that Michael Moore sent one of his biggest critics a check for $12,000 to help defray the costs of that man's wife's medical costs that were not being covered any longer by her insurance company.......it seems that this man had a website that he devoted all his time and energy to as well as money that was all about blasting Michael Moore....then his wife becomes severely ill, and the insurance company denies their claims.....and they have no money.....so he has to shut down the website....and out of what I think was a fine example of "loving one's enemies", MM sent them a check to help defray their costs....

interesting and ironic.

Whoopdy doo. This doens't prove the MM isn't a liar though. That's been proven already.