What if Michael Moore had not made "Sicko"?

[easycruise]

Although you have lost time, other countries have come to universal healthcare late, and are managing quite competently. Belgium and Australia come to mind. .

The Australian system is far from utopian, but nobody ever said it was perfect. Just much better than the US system from both moral and practical perspectives.

Then comes this...

The Australian system is off topic to this thread.

My apologies to Rolfe for derailing the thread. Easycruise, if you'd like to discuss the pros and cons of the Australian system as opposed to the US system please start a new thread and we'll discuss it there.

As Rolfe said, the specifics of the Australian system aren't germane to a discussion of the points made in Sicko.

Gotta love it. Rolfe brings up Australia to bolster his argument, then issues a proclamation that it is now off topic right after he starts losing badly in the debate. With his minion, Kevin right behind him after he too does a hit and run argument. Tu quoque indeed!

 

[easycruise]

Have we decided that it's OK for people to sew up their own wounds, or get by without fingers that were salvageable, if they don't have insurance for some reason? Not life-threatening, so it's OK? And of course they weren't being denied treatment, they just didn't have the money for it and didn't want to take what they couldn't afford and then run off without paying.

Have you in England decided that it is OK for people to pull their own teeth because they can't find a dentist? No wonder there are so many jokes about Britains having bad teeth.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/world/europe/07teeth.html

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Then comes this...

Gotta love it. Rolfe brings up Australia to bolster his argument, then issues a proclamation that it is now off topic right after he starts losing badly in the debate. With his minion, Kevin right behind him after he too does a hit and run argument. Tu quoque indeed!

Rolfe's thread, Rolfe's topic. Start your own thread and I'll be happy to stick to the stated topic of your thread (even if it leads the odd idiot to call me your "minion" because I observe that rule). Australia was barely mentioned in Sicko and as such it's off topic.

Feel free to start that new thread, by the way. We can compare the problems with the Australian system and the problems with the US system and see which ends up looking worse.

 

[Rolfe]

Deleted, because Sicko isn't about dental treatment. Whether or not NHS England covers English people for dental treatment is also off topic, and I'm not going to pursue it.

(I did request a thread split for the Australian healthcare posts, because it does happen that a derail will arise naturally out of an aside reference in a post, but it didn't happen. Might be considered again if someone else makes the request?)

Rolfe.

 

[easycruise]

The NHS was certainly covered in Sicko, with footage showing the normal experience of ordinary British people using the system.

Nah, with all the negative news reports coming out, those were isolated cases in that film. Clearly.

In reality, we have no evidence that the proportion of British people feeling let down by the system is any more than those abandoned by the American system.

Maybe. I'll look. But since the NHS system clearly has a lot of problems, why copy it? Especially with medical outcomes better in the US.

I would just point out one thing. Private health insurance is available in Britain, and there are quite a few companies offering it. It's significantly cheaper than in the USA, because the insurers know that most ordinary GP visits and emergency treatment will be provided by the NHS anyway.

It is cheaper? Please provide evidence for this claim. The cost of a GP visit is so small compared to other costs such as tests and procedures that your argument seems weak.

Maybe you need to look up how many private individuals buy private health insurance for themselves.

You made the assertion, you look it up and get back to us, OK?

The instances you point up involve new, very expensive drugs that have not (or not yet) been approved for use in the NHS. This will always happen to some extent. It happens in the USA too - look at the Tracy Pierce story on Sicko. The situations you describe are drugs that are not considered cost effective. Sounds callous, but would you want your insurance fund to pay $100,000 for a treatment for someone that had only a 10% chance of extending their dying process by a week? No?

No, the British doctors I quoted were talking about drugs that would extend life for 4-5 months. It is indeed callous to deny your fellow citizens the last few months of their lives because the government are a bunch of cheap bastards and won't pay for drugs for a measly 4-5 months.

So where do you draw the line? Your post suggests you think the NHS draws the line too low. You may be right. However, nobody has suggested the USA should do exactly the same.

That's the unintended consequence, whether it is on purpose or not. Millions here in the US say we should copy your system. I say that is a big mistake because our outcomes are better and socialized medicine is deteriorating around the world. IMO, bleeding heart liberals always have blinders on and won't see these unintended consequences. When you take away the profit motive and eliminate competition, standards decline. It's just that simple.

You seem to suggest that universal healthcare is a failure if it can be shown that it doesn't provide absolutely everything to absolutely everybody.

No, don't put words in my mouth. I was pointing out the mountain of evidence that the health care system in England and Australia are having huge problems and therefore, why should we copy such a system? Besides, my opponents are saying that it is absolutely everything to absolutely everybody. So I am debunking that claim.

How do you justify the exclusion of so many American people from the sort of ordinary, basic care anyone in Britain is guaranteed?

Ahem. Everyone, even illegal aliens can get care at hospital emergency rooms around the country. And I guess, you didn't want to include dental care in your above statement.

 

[easycruise]

Australia was barely mentioned in Sicko and as such it's off topic.

Oh! So it was mentioned in Sicko and it is still off topic? Wow. Convienently after I skewered the Australian system as rife with problems. If it's in the film it's not off topic, come now, your debating skills can't be that weak.

WThere is no shortage of dentists in England. There was for some time a shortage of dentists prepared to do work at NHS rates of pay. If you were willing to pay for dental treatment, you got it. The man described in the article was clearly unwilling or unable to pay.

But wait. I thought it was supposed to be free! Isn't this the free utopian health care system that is heralded around the world? Hah! In the US, if you are also willing to pay for healthcare, you can also get it!

Nevertheless, I moved house in 2006, and promptly found myself needing minor dental treatment. I was taken on as an NHS patient by my local dentist immediately, without any problem. I can get an appointment at 24 hours notice if I need one.

Come now. Purely anecdotal evidence. You can do better than that. Talk about isolated cases. Wow.

I note that the inflammatory article about dental care was published in a US newspaper. I can say that it's describing an extreme situation, and opne very far from the experience of NHS patients in general. Have you ever wondered why the US media like to pubicise these extreme cases, with the false implication that this is the typical experience?

The NY Times is an liberal newspaper, they even admit it themselves. They are on the side of UHC. I don't believe you that your dentistry problems are now fixed and readily available to all citizens. Plaease provide evidence for this claim. Not anecdotal. There have been too many news reports that it is a major problem as witnessed by that article. If the NY Times saw fit to print it, the situation is probably worse and they are going easy on you.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Maybe. I'll look. But since the NHS system clearly has a lot of problems, why copy it? Especially with medical outcomes better in the US.

Better for who, and by what measure? Citation please. I'd be very surprised if the outcomes in the US were better for uninsured people, or those who can't afford the cost of treatment even with insurance, but I'd believe it if I saw the data.

No, the British doctors I quoted were talking about drugs that would extend life for 4-5 months. It is indeed callous to deny your fellow citizens the last few months of their lives because the government are a bunch of cheap bastards and won't pay for drugs for a measly 4-5 months.

The problem here is that there are other things that could be done with that money, that would extend someone else's life for longer. As long as medical resources remain finite there will always be some treatments that aren't worth it.

That's the unintended consequence, whether it is on purpose or not. Millions here in the US say we should copy your system. I say that is a big mistake because our outcomes are better and socialized medicine is deteriorating around the world. IMO, bleeding heart liberals always have blinders on and won't see these unintended consequences. When you take away the profit motive and eliminate competition, standards decline. It's just that simple.

Citation please. Show that "socialized medicine is deteriorating around the world", and don't just link to random anecdotes.

No, don't put words in my mouth. I was pointing out the mountain of evidence that the health care system in England and Australia are having huge problems and therefore, why should we copy such a system? Besides, my opponents are saying that it is absolutely everything to absolutely everybody. So I am debunking that claim.

Your opponents are saying that? Who said that, and where? Citation please.

 

[Rolfe]

But since the NHS system clearly has a lot of problems, why copy it?.

You know what? I don't think anyone is suggesting that you should copy any particular system.

I agree with you that it's unacceptable that someone has to pull his own teeth because he can't afford the £80 or so that would have cost him to have it done properly. Do we know why he couldn't afford that? About $150 or so? Did it say anything about that in the article? Anyway, I agree with you that in England, provision of dental care for the poor is inadequate. Glad I don't live in England, really.... However, the thread is about medical care, not dental care, and provision of medical care to the poor in England does not involve them stitching their own wounds, or being told that their severed fingers will not be reattached.

Now, do you think it's acceptable that people in the USA should have to sew up their own wounds and forego reattachment of body parts because they can't afford it? Two wrongs don't make a right, you know.

I find it very very frustrating (but also interesting) that US posters who oppose universal healthcare cannot discuss the manifest problems of the US system without launching into a frenzied tu quoque attack.

Rolfe.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Oh! So it was mentioned in Sicko and it is still off topic? Wow. Convienently after I skewered the Australian system as rife with problems. If it's in the film it's not off topic, come now, your debating skills can't be that weak.

From memory Australia was mentioned in a list of countries with socialised health care, but at no stage was the system discussed in any detail, no footage from Australia was used, and nobody from Australia was interviewed. If I'm wrong I welcome correction but I think I'd remember a segment that focused on Australia.

As to whether you skewered anything, I invite you once again to either start a new thread on that topic or drop the subject.

 

[easycruise]

Deleted, because Sicko isn't about dental treatment. Whether or not NHS England covers English people for dental treatment is also off topic, and I'm not going to pursue it.

Earth to Rolfe. Dental treatment is healthcare. If you have an infected tooth, you could die. If you have an infected cut on your leg, you could die.

(I did request a thread split for the Australian healthcare posts, because it does happen that a derail will arise naturally out of an aside reference in a post, but it didn't happen. Might be considered again if someone else makes the request?)

But wasn't Australia mentioned in Sicko? Other posters here say it was. I'm not sure, so I say we live it in, OK? Especially since Australia also has socialized medicine and that is what Sicko is about. You guys look like you are running scared with this split thread demand.

 

[easycruise]

As to whether you skewered anything, I invite you once again to either start a new thread on that topic or drop the subject.

I've already made my debating points about Australia and you have yet to refute them or debate them in any way. That recent 300 page report was a real expose, wasn't it?

 

[Rolfe]

Everyone, even illegal aliens can get care at hospital emergency rooms around the country.

And indeed, everyone including illegal immigrants can get care at hospital emergency rooms in Britain. You know what the difference is?

They don't have to pay for it.

You trumpet the US law that compels private businesses to give away their goods and services to people who have no hope of paying for them, as a good thing? You think it's really good that such emergency care is funded by forcing these businesses to overcharge their paying customers?

And of course, that includes people who are not entirely destitute, but who need emergency care they don't have insurance to cover. OK, show up at the hospital with your severed finger in a bag, or your gaping leg wound, and see what happens.

In Britain, you'll get the gash sewn up and the microsurgery to re-attach your finger, with money never an issue. End of story.

In the USA it appears that you'll get the gash sewn up, and then you'll get the bill. If you can't pay, they'll send the debt collection agencies round for you. If you're destitute, they'll write it off eventually. But if you have assets, prepare to lose them.

In the USA, you'll get the finger reattached if you have $60,000 (or whatever it was) to pay them. If not, you'll get the stump repaired, and the finger thrown in the trash can.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

But wasn't Australia mentioned in Sicko? Other posters here say it was. I'm not sure, ....

Hey, how about you go watch Sicko, since that's what the thread is about, and the link to the online film was given in the OP, with a specific request that people should watch it before piling in with irrelevancies.

Then you find the bit about Australia, and we can discuss it.

Rolfe.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Earth to Rolfe. Dental treatment is healthcare. If you have an infected tooth, you could die. If you have an infected cut on your leg, you could die.

Is this going somewhere? I ask because it's not clear how this fits in to your argument. Is the argument "The UK has only limited socialised dentistry, therefore socialised non-dental medical care doesn't work", or what? Are you planning on tying this in to Sicko at some point?

 

[easycruise]

Although you have lost time, other countries have come to universal healthcare late, and are managing quite competently. Belgium and Australia come to mind.

Belguim having big problems too. The evidence against socialized medicine is mounting contrary to what was presented in Sicko.

http://www.msf.org.au/media-room/pr...-denied-in-the-belgian-healthcare-system.html

 

[easycruise]

Better for who, and by what measure? Citation please. I'd be very surprised if the outcomes in the US were better for uninsured people, or those who can't afford the cost of treatment even with insurance, but I'd believe it if I saw the data.

Post 146 on this very same thread. Please read the posts for content next time so you don't look foolish, OK?

The problem here is that there are other things that could be done with that money, that would extend someone else's life for longer. As long as medical resources remain finite there will always be some treatments that aren't worth it.

Thank YOU! You just defined rationing, which we have been warning about with socialized medicine. Unintended consequences, dontcha know. Thanks!

Citation please. Show that "socialized medicine is deteriorating around the world", and don't just link to random anecdotes.

Already cited many times on my posts. Are you actually reading them with any comprehension?

Your opponents are saying that? Who said that, and where? Citation please.

Yes, they are. Go to any loony left-wing website such as the Daily Kos or the Huffington Post.

 

[Cicero]

The U.S. should definitely use the British free dental care as a blueprint for success. Shane Macgowan of the British group The Pogues is a shining example.

 

[ddt]

Belguim having big problems too. The evidence against socialized medicine is mounting contrary to what was presented in Sicko.

http://www.msf.org.au/media-room/pr...-denied-in-the-belgian-healthcare-system.html

You do realize this press release from 2004, from Medecines sans Frontieres, is only about health care for illegal immigrants? Just saying'. "Big problems" suggests it's a general problem.

 

[easycruise]

Socialized medicine in Australia..not doing so well...more horror stories

"Hospitals are closing operating theatres to doctors wanting to perform planned surgery for up to a third of the year to save money, despite there being almost 70,000 people on NSW waiting lists."

"There are currently 65,348 people waiting for elective surgery in NSW. More than 9000 have been waiting over a year"

"Nurses upset over staffing shortages at Maitland Hospital have closed 26 beds. The nurses carried out their threat of industrial action after representatives of the NSW Nurses Association met the Hunter Area Health Service's Reasonable Workloads Committee to ask for extra staff. It is believed to be the first time such action has been taken by nurses in NSW. Four of the paediatrics ward's 14 beds, four of the medical ward's 34 beds and eight of the surgical ward's 34 beds have been closed. The general secretary of the association, Brett Holmes, said nurses were furious that Hunter Health had not provided sufficient funds to employ enough nurses to run the hospital safely."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National.../2004/11/22/1100972329979.html?oneclick=true#

 

[Rolfe]

Is this going somewhere? I ask because it's not clear how this fits in to your argument. Is the argument "The UK has only limited socialised dentistry, therefore socialised non-dental medical care doesn't work", or what? Are you planning on tying this in to Sicko at some point?

I think the point was in relation to the matter of the uninsured US guy shown at the very beginning of Sicko who sutured his own leg. A reference was found to someone in England who had tried to pull his own tooth out.

I've agreed that the latter is unacceptable too, however I noted that the article didn't explain why the man couldn't or wouldn't pay the £80 or so (say $150) to have a proper dental extraction. However, the point remains that the provision of dental care to the poor is inadequate in England. I'm still not clear how that relates to medical services, as the two are treated separately in Britain.

Easycruise hasn't addressed my point about the differing treatment of the poor/uninsured when presenting to emergency rooms between Britain and the USA, which arose directly from that.

Rolfe.