MOVIES: 'Sicko'

  • Thread starter Thread starter WanderAimlessly
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
estesbob said:
Have you ever noticed that those who decry the lack of health insurance always wantt me(the business owner) to pay for it? Its easy to be compassionate with other peoples money.
Click to expand...
Right you are.
 
here is what a reviewer said at Christianasnwers.net

a conservative apologetic website

christiananswers.net/spotlight/movies/2007/sicko2007.html
Artistically speaking, the film is nearly flawless. The documentary style is put to good use as Moore conducts interviews, explores other cultures, and performs his signature stunts. Documentaries are nearly never this engaging, as this style is used to create a film that feels more akin to an engrossing drama. The two hours passed by at a lightning pace for me, as I watched individuals from multiple cultures deal with health care and insurance. Much time is also spent educating viewers on the beginnings of American health care, those responsible for its current state, and those who have attempted to improve it.
“Sicko” is also entertaining. For those familiar with Moore’s previous films, this one may come as a surprise. It is a more good-natured and humorous film than his others, and is more focused on the actual subject matter. The mood is kept light by humorous content. While it would not seem that a film dealing with health care could really be that funny, I heard more laughter in my theater than I’ve heard during some regular comedies.
Aside from its humor, this movie is disturbing and shocking, but not in a graphic way. Watching a mother discuss the death of her 18-month child because of refused treatment, or hearing the story of how a woman’s husband died, simply because his claim was denied on the grounds of his treatment being “experimental,” was truly unsettling. Watching 9/11 rescue workers be denied treatment because of their non-government status was also incredibly disturbing.
Click to expand...
 
Indyann said:
Yes, I do think it is reprehensible for pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies to make mega-profits at the expense of the most vulnerable, the ill and dying.

Michael Moore, liberal though he may be, said in an interview, I saw just a couple of days ago.(paraphrased) “One of the questions Jesus is going to ask at your judgement is how did you care for your poor.”

47 million Americans are without any kind of medical insurance. My son, has 4 children and his employer offers no medical insurance. Just yesterday, we were discussing this and he said that it would cost around $1,000 a month to get insurance for the family. They barely scrape by now.

Another family member had to file bankruptcy due to huge medical bills. Someone else (niece’s husband) died at 48 because he had been on dialysis for many years and then developed a bowel obstruction. By the time they got the ok from the insurance, etc. it was too late.

So yes, I think that the whole US system is reprehensible. When the insurance companies make the decision whether we live or die, the system is broken.
Click to expand...
Think what you want about our heathcare system, but I wouldn’t be alive today had it not been for our local hospital, and our fine doctors. Maybe he would prefer Canada’s system where you can wait months for major surgery, and maybe die in the process. Yes, it could be improved, but don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.
 
I just saw “Sicko” and thought is was totally consistent with Catholic teaching. Health care should NOT be a commodity that is determined by markets… it is a human right. The only real “pro-life” position on health care is to provide it for ALL. As the film points out, we already have government libraries, schools, police and fire protection. What is the big hangup about government health care. You will not see the people in Europe/Canada begging to go to the U.S. system. Why is that? And why does everyone keep repeating the concern about the long lines. Any real data to support that, because the movie website has stats that it is a myth. Catholics need to get moving on this topic… pro-life goes beyond the womb.
 
davy39 said:
Think what you want about our heathcare system, but I wouldn’t be alive today had it not been for our local hospital, and our fine doctors. Maybe he would prefer Canada’s system where you can wait months for major surgery, and maybe die in the process. Yes, it could be improved, but don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Click to expand...
Yes, praise God for all of the caring doctors and nurses in our country and that you survived due to them.

Michael Moore calls into question the insurance industry in his film, not the doctors.

Case in point: an American man has two of his finger tips severed in an accident. Because he is uninsured (he is among millions of working poor individuals/families who cannot afford it), he is told when he arrives in the ER that he has to choose which one he wants to have reattached. The ring finger would cost him $12,000 and the middle finger, $60,000. He chose the former and the other finger tip was tossed in the trash. A man from Canada arrives in the ER with several fingers severed and the entire hospital staff, including several surgeons, goes into high gear to get the job done. Cost to the individual? Nothing.

Which country is more just and compassionate toward the poor and vulnerable in their midst?
 
davy39 said:
Think what you want about our heathcare system, but I wouldn’t be alive today had it not been for our local hospital, and our fine doctors. Maybe he would prefer Canada’s system where you can wait months for major surgery, and maybe die in the process. Yes, it could be improved, but don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Click to expand...
Who is blaming the hospitals or the doctors? Doctors are victims also. Care dictated by insurance companies. Many fine physicians not able to deliver babies anymore. Why? Can’t afford the insurance.

I don’t see anybody advocating throwing out the baby, just the bathwater.
 
The thing is, with Michael Moore, we will never know what the true facts are. He is know for leaving things out, taking things out of context, and inserting things that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

His movies are not documentries, they are fiction. :mad:
 
dmcsherr said:
I just saw “Sicko” and thought is was totally consistent with Catholic teaching. Health care should NOT be a commodity that is determined by markets… it is a human right. The only real “pro-life” position on health care is to provide it for ALL. As the film points out, we already have government libraries, schools, police and fire protection. What is the big hangup about government health care. You will not see the people in Europe/Canada begging to go to the U.S. system. Why is that? And why does everyone keep repeating the concern about the long lines. Any real data to support that, because the movie website has stats that it is a myth. Catholics need to get moving on this topic… pro-life goes beyond the womb.
Click to expand...
yea but the argument on the other side would be that a person’s health is largely determined by their lifestyle. Hence someone who smokes a pack a day is going to be more at risk than some one works out instead.
 
Sagefrakrobatik said:
yea but the argument on the other side would be that a person’s health is largely determined by their lifestyle. Hence someone who smokes a pack a day is going to be more at risk than some one works out instead.
Click to expand...
In Britain, doctors are given a pay increase if they counsel their patients about healthy lifestyle and convince them to quit smoking. There are no such incentives here in the U.S. Why, you might ask? It is easier for HMO’s to deny health care altogether due to “pre-existing conditions.” This is much more profitable to the insurance industry and its stockholders. :eek:
 
Here are some quotes from a link I found. michaelsiegel.net:80/?p=322
This guy makes some good points.

"‘Like Moore, we also found that more money does not equal better care. Both the French and Canadian systems rank in the Top 10 of the world’s best health-care systems, according to the World Health Organization. The United States comes in at No. 37. The rankings are based on general health of the population, access, patient satisfaction and how the care’s paid for.’

Read those last words. “How the care is paid for”, i.e., the US system is ranked low partly because it’s not socialized. And as I’ve noted many times, “general health of the population” contains no corrections of America’s high rates of obesity, violence, car crashes and drug abuse. And by the way, those things are high because Americans are making stupid choices, not because their healthcare system has failed them…

…‘Moore focuses on the private insurance companies and makes no mention of the U.S. government-funded health-care systems such as Medicare, Medicaid, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program and the Veterans Affairs health-care systems. About 50 percent of all health-care dollars spent in the United States flows through these government systems.’

Hmm. Do you think there’s a reason he doesn’t talk about them? Like the rat-infested VAArmy hospitals? Or the crummy payments made by Medicare and Medicaid that cause us to cost-shift to people with private insurance? "
 
WanderAimlessly said:
The thing is, with Michael Moore, we will never know what the true facts are. He is know for leaving things out, taking things out of context, and inserting things that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
His movies are not documentries, they are fiction. :mad:
Click to expand...
One never knows if Moore presents “true facts?” All one has to do is check the sources of his claims. All sources are listed and documented on his website. He has offered $10,000 to the first one to prove his facts are not accurate. Maybe you can show us where he goofed and collect the loot. Can you present EVIDENCE that his films are fiction? Is it possible that his point and his methods simply make you uncomfortable. Again, as a Catholic, I say that he is more pro-life than many of my Catholic friends. Health care for all - why is that controversial to Catholics?
 
Sagefrakrobatik said:
yea but the argument on the other side would be that a person’s health is largely determined by their lifestyle. Hence someone who smokes a pack a day is going to be more at risk than some one works out instead.
Click to expand...
Huh? So, people who are sick should be left out of the system because it might be their own fault. If I don’t exercise, I should be denied? Too much red meat - denied! Take a job in a polluted factory? My fault! WWJD?
 
dmcsherr said:
Huh? So, people who are sick should be left out of the system because it might be their own fault. If I don’t exercise, I should be denied? Too much red meat - denied! Take a job in a polluted factory? My fault! WWJD?
Click to expand...
How could you possibly get that out of what sage said?
 
Moore seems to envision something like Medicare, only for everybody. Being a beneficiary of Medicare myself, I guess I can’t quarrel with it. The only problem is that Medicare (along with social security and medicaid) is already on a course which will bankrupt the country.
 
From the beginning, Moore took a hostile position and wanted to control the whole interview. With all the insults and name calling coming from him, no wonder it took three years for Moore to be back on CNN. :rolleyes: Moore comes off like the leftist bully that he is.
 
WanderAimlessly said:
The thing is, with Michael Moore, we will never know what the true facts are. He is know for leaving things out, taking things out of context, and inserting things that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

His movies are not documentries, they are fiction. :mad:
Click to expand...
Amen to that! My point in my post was the fact that in other countries, the Netherlands for example, the health care is free, to those who can get it. I’m afraid in a system of government provided health care, the elderly would be forgotten in favor of treating some younger person. Also, if the government got their nose stuck in it too far, it would be a real mess, just like medicare and medicaid. I believe euthanasia is just around the corner, and that universal health care would help this country turn that corner.
 
Omitted from this discussion are issues such as “migration” for health care. Seems to me that there is “migration” (movement, not residency) from other countries to the U.S. for health care, not the other way around.

I’m sure there are data to back this up. Not sure where to find it.

Then there is the issue of “rationing”, in which waiting times for certain procedures vary from country to country and also dependent on the age of the patient.

Finally, there is the issue of voluntary and involuntary euthanasia, in which elderly patients may be put to death rather than treat their ailments.

It would be worthwhile to examine each of these three issues as well as the specific details of how rankings of the various countries’ health care systems were determined.

The details are important.

In the past, when I have looked at various details of ranking systems, I was always surprised.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top