Universal Free Health Care (.......nanny and laundry)
Charlene M Morris
cvmmorris at gmail.com
Mon Jul 2 13:05:56 BST 2007
This was INCREDIBLE, Doc!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well-written and although long, this should be an editorial in every major
medical journal.
May we use this on other listserves?!
Maximum respect--
Charlene Morris, PA-C
Stonewall, NC
On 7/2/07, KMATTOX at aol.com <KMATTOX at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> I have now seen the movie, SiCKO, in its entirety, twice - once on the
> small
> computer screen and then, today, in a theater. I went to the theater to
> see
> the people, listen to their reactions, and also see and hear the movie in
> a
> big screen setting. And, indeed, some of the material is better
> appreciated
> in the theater, rather than on the small screen.
> First, someone has changed the image of the producer, Michael
> Moore. Both
> in the movie and on the publicity talk shows, he is less angry, less
> hostile,
> and has "cleaned up" in speech and appearance since his previous movies
> and
> books. He is a producer and was very, very specific in what he wished to
> create, and he created it. He knew just what he needed to show, what he
> needed
> NOT to show, and in what order he needed to show the material.
> Unfortunately, the movie approaches an extremely complex and many-faceted
> issue in a totally superficial manner, the goal being to elicit emotions
> and
> reactions with regard to the dismal state of health care in
> the United States.
> Many of the essential elements for the success of our health care network
> were totally omitted. Just a few of these omitted issues include:
> 1. Biomedical research,
> 2. the long list of medical educational issues
> (nursing,
> allied health, pre med, medical school, graduate medical education,
> continuing
> education, etc.),
> 3. Critical Care and all of its ramifications
> a. Sepsis
> b. Futility
> c. End of life expenses
> d. Demands of families regarding doing "everything" in critical care
> 4. Complex operations done (and expected) almost
> exclusively in the United States, such as thoracoabdominal
> aneurysms, etc.
> 5. Regulatory Industrial Complex and its
> contributions to
> the cost of health care in the United States
> 6. Medical legal issues, although MM has talked about
> medical legal issues in the talk shows
> 7. Costs of new pharmaceuticals (the majority of which
> are developed at great research and safety costs in the United States)
> 8. and many many others
> I was sympathetic and in agreement with a number of points that the
> producer
> made repeatedly. These include:
> 1. Condemnation of the greed, cold-bloodedness, profit motive of
> the
> insurance industry
> 2. Condemnation of the same thing in HMOs
> 3. Condemnation of managed health care in general
> 4. Criticism of big money that the pharmaceutical industry throws
> at
> politicians (and the politicians who take it)
> 5. The hundreds of millions of dollars spent by insurance, HMOs,
> and
> industry for LOBBYING
> 7. Condemnation of Sen HR Clinton for her greed in receiving the
> second highest amount of lobbyist money AND in her ineffectiveness in
> addressing
> health care reform in the 1990s.
> 8. Hassle factor in the sea of paperwork
> 9. Condemnation of insurance and HMO medical directors and doctor
> reviewers who are rewarded for DENIALS
> The producer's main point throughout the movie and in his final scene
> was a
> plea/demand for UNIVERSAL FREE HEALTH CARE FOR ALL (and he tossed in free
> day
> care, free college, and free nanny visits to new Mom's). This is where I
> totally part ways with his views and motivations. No service is
> FREE. He
> visited 5 countries to prove his point about "free" care – UK, Canada,
> France,
> and Cuba and the US. Both access and quality of care in the UK, Canada,
> France and Cuba, according to what was presented in this movie, are
> superb.
> Furthermore, patients and physicians in these countries could not be
> happier with
> their respective systems. Based on this movie, the paperwork hassle
> factor
> that both docs and patients deal with in the US is nonexistent in these
> countries. Also, based on this movie, the cost of all these government
> provided
> services is not a hardship on anyone or any group. Not a single person
> interviewed in any of these countries had a remotely negative thing to
> say about
> care, quality or even taxes to support the system. Contrarily, ALL
> interviews in
> the US were totally negative – not ONE success story was
> presented. Hence,
> my greatest criticism of this movie – bias to the point of deception.
> There appeared to be a good bit of manipulation of timing of events to
> support the producer's position. For instance, when attempting to
> present the AMA
> as an organization opposing "healthcare for all," he showed a portion
> of a
> speech from Dr. Annis, President Elect in the AMA in the EARLY
> 1960s. This
> was more than 40 years ago. Such mixing of past and present was common
> throughout the movie.
> I listened to and watched the views of the people who accompanied
> Mr. Moore
> to Cuba. I have tried to read in the newspapers about just what was done
> for
> them in Cuba which they did not get in the United States. One was
> apparently given a diagnosis of sarcoidosis, which he did not have prior
> to going
> (although sarcoidosis is often a dx of exclusion). One was taken off a
> couple of
> her medications, something we all do when we see a referred
> patient. Others
> were given outlines of treatment plans for them to try when they go home.
> What else is new? When any patient presents with continuing symptoms, we
> manipulate their treatment plans and their medications if there is not an
> operation or directed acute interventional treatment which is
> indicated. Quite
> frankly, I saw nothing in the Cuba trip that gave anything new to any of
> those
> accompanying Mr. Moore. I was impressed that while in Cuba, I saw none of
> them
> appear to be dyspnec, or lacking energy. I was impressed with their
> HIKE
> down the hillside to the Navy Base. Interestingly, neither of the
> two "patients
> " with lung problems (and obese) exhibited shortness of breath. I also
> know
> that the Cubans would also go out of their way to maximize the propaganda
> opportunities of this visit. Many on this list have been to medical or
> surgical
> meetings in Cuba, as have I. The Cuban doctors are very dedicated and
> hungry for new knowledge. Many of their facilities are often not as well
> equipped
> as ours, and I have seen hospitals far different from the examination
> rooms
> shown in the Havana Hospital in this movie. If all I had to base my
> reactions
> of medicine in Cuba was this movie, I would "know" that there is a state
> of the art hospital and virtually free pharmacy on every corner and
> available
> to any and all who need services.
> There are members of this list server who reside in Canada, Cuba, United
> States, France, and England, and we all respect each other. Each of
> us knows
> the many differences in our "systems," both good and bad. We know the
> many
> frustrations with our own "system". We know of two, three, or even four
> tiers of care in EACH of the cited countries. We know of rationing by
> various
> means and limitations. None of the negative issues in any country
> except the
> US were even mentioned, much less openly discussed. I have been told by
> Canadian physicians and patients of various problems with that system. I
> have
> just been in London for a week and heard about the frustrations and
> regulatory
> difficulties of the NHS from the physicians' points of view. AND I have
> gotten an "ear full" of the frustrations from French surgeons I know,
> all of
> whom have second offices to see "private patients" who pay cash. Mr.
> Moore
> cited none of this other side.
> This is not the time and place to criticize other country's health care
> delivery system, for we all have our share of horror stories and
> difficulties, as
> well as great successes. I have cited many of the problems in the United
> States, and Mr. Moore re-stated many of the problems many on this list
> have
> expressed in the past. However, he only gave one side of the story – his
> side
> - to push his vision of FREE CARE (up to and including the government
> doing
> his laundry) for ALL.
> Most of the members of this list server have at one time or another
> been on
> a debating team. One overstates a point to make a point and picks the
> most
> extreme examples of good and bad that can be found to accentuate the
> point to
> be made. Mr. Moore has done that in SiCKO. I would have found this an
> exceptional piece of film and, indeed an historical event, had he had the
> insight,
> intellect and integrity to just as aggressively present the opposite side
> of
> the debate. In that way, the American people and the world could have
> seen
> and possibly comprehended the many complicated aspects of health care and
> come
> closer to a solution.
> I was interested to see who attended the movie. This is the second day
> that
> SiCKO is showing in Houston and is in three movie theaters. I went at a
> "
> popular movie going time." Several of the 15 movies showing were sold
> out
> 15-30 minutes before the show started. SiCKO was shown in one of the
> smaller
> rooms and was only about 25%-33% full. About 15% of the attendees were
> Medicare
> age, and 2 people were receiving supplemental oxygen. I was a
> bit amused to
> see a lady come in on a "Hover-Around." I wonder how many people in the
> UK, Canada, Cuba and France have those paid for by their governments? I
> saw NO
> other doctors in the room that I recognized, and I do know many of the
> Houston doctors. I estimate that about 30 nurses were present, as they
> were
> carrying the flyers sent to nurses across the country by the California
> Nursing
> Union. Every time a statement was made about giving FREE anything, such
> as
> child care, laundry, cooking, extra vacation time for a honeymoon,
> (anything to
> be paid by the government), there were murmurs of approval, sometime
> clapping, in the theater. Based on the Houston attendance, I would not
> think this
> show will have a very long running at the box office. Because it presents
> a "
> you can and should have it all at no real cost to YOU," I have no doubt
> that
> many individuals and groups will "latch" onto this film and champion
> it. I
> cannot envision it having any long term real societal impact on health
> care,
> simply because it does not present anything new or offer solutions on HOW
> we
> reach this nirvana state that is enjoyed in France, UK, Cuba and Canada.
> At one point, Mr. Moore emphasized that the US is a country where people
> are "
> afraid of government," afraid to speak out and demonstrate – implying
> this
> was quite different in France, Cuba, Canada and the UK. I'm still
> puzzled
> by that premise. When in recent history have Americans had ANY reticence
> about
> speaking out and demonstrating???
> I will admit again that some of the central core complaints are common
> among
> patients, nurses, doctors, organized medicine, and medical professional
> groups. Those core issues about which there is agreement were cited in
> the first
> paragraphs of this review, and I will not repeat them. It would be
> wonderful if we could unite in addressing THOSE core issues with a
> massive
> communication effort to policy makers (inside and outside
> the government). I am afraid
> that the solutions are going to be very complex and multifactoral and not
> as
> simple as getting the "government to give you free drugs, free doctors,
> free
> hospitalization, and free laundry services."
> Kenneth L. Mattox, MD
>
>
>
> ************************************** See what's free at
> http://www.aol.com.
> --
> trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG
> To change your settings or unsubscribe visit:
> http://www.trauma.org/index.php?/community/
>
More information about the trauma-list
mailing list