Join | Log in

Advanced Search

What is Helium

Is Michael Moore right about the US health care system?

Title endorsed in part by:

National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA)

Results so far:

No		31%	89 votes	Total: 285 votes
Yes		69%	196 votes	Total: 285 votes

No

1 of 5

by Gloria Allen

No. Filmmaker Michael Moore is wrong, even though his heart may be in the right place.

There are several huge assumptions that Mr. Moore makes:

The first one is that health care should be free to everyone. He made this statement as a guest on Oprah Winfrey's show last year and a woman in Oprah's audience who either works for Hillary Clinton or is privy to her health care plan, responded to Michael Moore's comment by saying, "No. Health care won't be free." Then there was a stunned silence in the room. He was clearly stunned and a look of betrayal swept over his face. He was so convinced that the Democrats were going to give everyone in the United States FREE health care. This is hardly happening, so wake up people.

So putting aside any value judgments about whether or not Moore is advocating socialism or communism - let's look at the practical side of it. Who will pay for this free health care? No doubt his answer would be, "the rich," because in socialized countries that's who pays for it. Ask the rich here if they want to pay for it. No doubt their answer will be a NO! If we force the rich to pay, that's unconstitutional, isn't it?

The next question is, if the US Constitution were violated and the rich were forced to pay for those who can't afford health care, is there enough money from the rich in this country to pay for the uninsured? Probably not. Even if the rich in the US were rightly made to pay for their decent share of taxes, there would still not be enough money to pay for all the people in the US who need it. This is a huge country, unlike Great Britain, from where he makes his comparisons.

Forcing the rich to pay for those who can't afford health care just might bankrupt this country, since money - like it or not, is the force that creates and drives all facets of business, which creates an economy and jobs. Take away all the money from the rich and you got zip left. A third-world country.

The second one that Mr. Moore makes is that the health care costs are exorbitantly high. I do agree with him one hundred percent on this assumption, which is accurate.. The mark-ups on prescription drugs is as high as over 568,958% for a drug like Xanax (yes, you read correctly - that's five hundred sixty nine thousand, nine hundred fifty eight percent over the original cost of the drug). Go to www.anxiety-and-depr ession-solutions.com /articles/convention al/pharmaceuticals/r ealdrugcosts.php and see for yourself all the mark-ups on drugs.

This has got to be the biggest rip-off scam in history and few people are raising hell about it. So the question is why not? Is everyone making money off these huge mark-ups? Is this payola and corruption?

What I don't agree with Michael Moore is that people need this kind of "medicine." Most if not all of these drugs have serious side-effects, some of which have been fatal. The reason why there are toxic side-effects are several: These drugs are synthetic, not organic botanicals as one would find in any good health food store - and our cells reject synthetic substances. The rejection of this toxicity gives the side-effects. Also, people often take more than one drug and the combination of different drugs can be lethal, unless the doctor is extremely knowledgeable, and most don't seem to be - or else why would there be so many deaths from prescription drugs and medical malpractice suits? Also, doctors get a cut or a percentage on the sale or prescription written for the drug, so that's a conflict-of-interest folks. Is anyone who has any power questioning why if it's even ethical or honest for a doctor to prescribe prescription drugs, IF the physician is making money from that prescription?

So the bottom line for me is, I don't want these drugs and neither do millions of people who shop for natural healing methods which includes but is not limited to wildcrafted, organic botanical tinctures, grown without pesticides, grown from real seeds, not cloned seeds or genetically modified plants. I can tell you from my personal experience with a variety of different herbs that wholistic health cae works. Any decent health food store - and there are thousands of them all over the country - have books as well as simple-as-pie offline computer programs allowing any person to look up information about any herb that has passed FDA approval; amino acid; enzyme, etc. that explains what historically the herb has been used for and the given amount. This kind of medicine is about one hundred percent safe, when taken as directed. There are virtually no side effects. And having completely healed any illness that I've had over the past thirty years from gallstones blocking my biliary duct; to high blood sugar, to a virus that left me almost unable to breathe - ALL have been healed by me by purchasing products bought at a huge health food store, not from seeing any doctor.

But most people have been brainwashed that only the multi-billion dollar "prescription drugs" heal illness and that the huge panoply of alternative/health is wussy, and not "real medicine." Nonsense.

And while yes, I am aware that most people are nowhere near as knowledgeable as I am about wholistic health care - still, there are thousands of natural health care providers in this country who make an honest living healing people without prescription drugs. These include wholistic M.D.'s and other licensed non-MD health care providers.

In short, there are so many other options to health care other than the one proposed by Michael Moore, and in effect Hilary Clinton and the synthetic drug aspect of the pharmaceutical industry. And there are also many good pharmaceuticals that are NOT synthetic and these, wholistic-minded people like myself, have no problem with.

Even the Queen of England has a homeopathic doctor. The woman is in her eighties and she walks without a cane. Hear hear!

But if we want to reform health care industry in this country, my suggestions are that we must::

1) Allow people who are able to take care of their own health on their own, like myself and millions like me, to have the option of NOT coming under ANY health care plan.

2) If a health care plan is forced on us (and might I say unconstitutionally, since this violates The Bill of Rights and FREE CHOICE) then let it be by a wholistic health care provider of our own choice, even when that provider does not include anything labeled "pharmaceuticals" or "prescription drugs" as treatment.

3) Only make emergency health care billable on a sliding care depending on income

4) Mandate that ALL health insurance companies or Health Care "Plans" absolutely MUST make available non-synthetic medicine coverage, such as one would purchase at a health food store.

Michael Moore is right about the fact that the health care system in his country is broken - because people are sick from all of the side-effects produced by drugs, which are not only NOT healthy for a person's immune system but are immorally expensive.

The answer is not to continue this form of prescription drug or pharmaceutical "treatment" for free, at low-cost or in any kind of "plan."

The answer is an option-out of any prescription drug plan - unless for an ER situation where pharmaceutical drugs will be used, like it or not. But, for far better health care, because the quality/content is totally different, as are the results, wholistic medicine is THE answer.

Learn more about this author, Gloria Allen.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Yes

1 of 14

by Will Patching

Just because Michael Moore is a Democrat does not make him wrong, despite the rabid foaming mouths of his detractors. The facts outlined in Sicko should make Americans cringe and hang their heads in shame: to so loudly proclaim righteous Christian credentials, yet ration the availability of medical treatment for the least fortunate in society is barbaric and uncharitable.

In Britain, the National Health Service is less than perfect. But, as a secular nation inclusive of all, the Brits manage to find the funds to treat those less fortunate - the old, the poor, the long term chronically sick... and even illegal immigrants.

In America, people can be bankrupted by the crippling costs of health care. Why? Because, as Moore points out, the whole system is a business that is solely interested in benefiting corporations and greedy individuals - at the expense of the nation.

For those who say that a social based system - like that of the British - would mean a dearth of innovation, longer waiting times for all, poorer levels of treatment, more disease among Americans etc, it is worth noting the following facts:

Many medical innovations, be it drug developments or technological creations, originate outside the US. In fact the UK is "...ranked as the best performer in the G8 leading economies per unit of R&D spend." (Source: http://www.dti.gov.u k/about/ministerial- team/page39412.html)

So what?

Britain has just 1% of the world's population yet "5% of its science, 9% of its scientific papers and 12% of its citations. It is also ranked second in the world in areas such as biological, clinical and pre-clinical research." (Ibid)

Clearly, the Bits are anything but socialist. Alongside the state funded (actually taxpayer funded) National Health Service there is a thriving multi-billion dollar Private Health Care system. This is available to those who choose to pay a premium - either in insurance or directly to the medical professional/institu tion of their choice. The capitalist system thrives: if you have the money, you can pay to see a specialist. Right now. Your MRI scan or other tests need not wait. You can have a private room in a luxury hospit-hotel. Nurses will pander to your every whim. Treatment will be as good as in the best US hospital. Or maybe even better...

Doctors in the UK have yet to suffer the idiocies of the US legal system - the "it must be somebody's fault so I want to sue" syndrome. Sadly, this outlook is starting to insinuate itself into the UK, but doctors there are not yet in the ridiculous position of worrying about being sued before they treat a patient. They will not elect to undertake an unnecessary Cesarean for fear that complications involved in a natural birth will lead to a law suit. They will do their utmost best for you - within their abilities. How can you ask more?

In fact the over-commercialized US system is dragging even the wealthy American into an unenviable position versus their UK counterparts: "The US population in late middle age is less healthy than the equivalent British population for diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, myocardial infarction, stroke, lung disease, and cancer." ("Disease and Disadvantage in the United States and in England," Journal of the American Medical Association, 2006)

It gets worse: "...individuals in the top of the education and income strata in the United States have comparable rates of diabetes and heart disease as those in the bottom of the income and education strata in England." (Ibid) So, healthwise, a poor Brit is as well off as a rich American!

Yet America is the richest nation on earth. How can this be?

In the name of its people, the Bush government is currently responsible for one half of the total military spending on the planet. The media and the government want people to believe this is normal and necessary. But is it?

America spends some eight times the military expenditure of China and Russia. Combined.

Iran, the latest so-called military threat - conjured up by the Neo-con media to keep US citizens fearful for the nation's security whilst comatose on social welfare programs - spends some 6 billion. About one percent of the amount the US will expend this year.*

The CIA uses non-dollar comparisons in its 'fact book' - comparing the percent of GDP spent on the military to justify this hideous reality. On this spurious basis Chad (one of the poorest nations in the world in the heart of the African continent) spends more than the US!

With elections looming, Christianity is a big deal in the US right now. Yet it is focusing on the wrong things. For example, Christian pro-lifers hysterically proclaim that a few cells of a fertilized human egg constitutes a 'precious' life, to be protected at all costs. To outsiders this seems completely hypocritical when the US health system allows millions of citizens to die through lack of access to adequate medical care.

What price a precious life in New Orleans last year? Why is the child mortality rate in Detroit more than that of El Salvador (15.9 deaths per thousand births versus 10.5)?* Why is a recently fertilized human egg more 'precious' than a Detroit baby, stillborn because her mama has no money?

Not everything Moore says is right, but on one thing there should be no argument: a free universal health care system should be implemented. The US has the funds. Does it have the will to divert some in a truly Christian fashion?

*http://en.w ikipedia.org/wiki/Li st_of_countries_and_ federations_by_milit ary_expenditures

*htt p://www.michaelmoore .com/sicko/checkup/

Learn more about this author, Will Patching.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.