THIS Sicko thread is for folks who have actually seen it...- Page 5

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 11:55pm

The federal government isn't responsible for evacuation or providing with care for the first 72 hours. That duty, at least the delegation of it, anyway, belongs to the state. There was admittedly some lag on the federal gov't's behalf, but mainly because of the sheer size of the situation.

Updated On: 7/17/07 at 11:55 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 11:59pm

Poor quality of care [check]: My boss's broken arm was set wrong by a doctor in a well-respected Northeast hospital and had to undergo surgery a month later and will have a titanium plate in her arm for the rest of her life as a result;, decent HMO plan through her employer

ridiculous amounts of waiting time [check]: My special friend had to wait two months to get a much needed MRI on his lower back and now has to wait another month to get to a muscular-skeletal clinic; and he has a top-tier HMO plan through his employer

the hampering of medical research [check]: major ivy league university research colleague of mine recently gave up and went to the private sector because of restrictions on proposals that included the words "gay men" and "anal sex" brought to you by the same adminstration that removed mention of condoms as an AIDS prevention tool from the CDC website upon taking office; her speciality? HIV prevention among men who have sex with men

doctors who are paid more to do less work [check] apparently some doctors who deny cases to HMOs are paid more when they deny OTHER doctors the chance to help their patients, and of course there's the flip side in the US when HMO doctors are limited in the amount of time they are allowed to spend with each patient

But the US is so much better.

Why are you against people getting the healthcare they deserve and if you're not, why don't you want to contribute to them being able to access it?

[Craig]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 12:00am

The Federal gov't might not be designated as the first line of action - but that doesn't mean they couldn't jumo in immediate to help.. They didn't. So I would think it's fair to say that BOTH the Federal and State failed.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 12:05am

And they might have done better by the people of New Orleans BY NOW, but of course they haven't. Why? Because "goverment doesn't work." (As long as they don't want it to.)

Also, could we just put the billions of dollars being spent to kill hundreds of thousands of people back on the table and ask where the ethics are in finding THAT kind of spendable cash and not being able to find the money to fund healthcare for all of the citizens of the greatest country on earth and not just those with the good fortune to be able to get it through their employers or their own personal wealth?

[Craig]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 12:10am

Namo. We don't take care of our own.

I am very disheartened when I read about 3rd world countries and I am pleased we do something to help them out.

But what about those in this country that are homeless and starving?

Our roads and countryside are filled with needs for repair, litter removal, etc and yet how many people are on welfare and are not given any "incentive" or skills to work. Most of them WANT or would work for the check (there's something to be said about earning money) rather than collecting a handout.

Just another quick aside...

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 12:10am

Fair enough, but to blame it on the federal government alone is wrong. Besides, when has the government ever been efficient?

Two months is nothing when it comes to the NHS, and that was just one incident: in universal healthcare systems, thousands are made to wait, and for much longer. And after that wait, often their appointments are cancelled and rescheduled. And I guarantee that your friends wouldn't have waited had they had a problem in which time is a big factor, such as cancer or a major surgery. In universal systems, everyone, no matter the illness or its severity, is made to wait. And personal anecdotes don't really make proper evidence. As for your boss's arm, I am sorry for that, but mistakes happen--low quality healthcare in universal systems are different, such as hospitals and equipment being in poor condition. Of course, seeing as how doctors have no competition, one could argue that they may not do as good of a job as they would in a system where they are not paid equally no matter how well they perform their job.

"A study in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that 50 people died while on a wait list for cardiac catheterization in Ontario. A study of Swedish patients on a wait list for heart surgery found that the "risk of death increases significantly with waiting time." In a 2000 article in the journal Clinical Oncology, British researchers studying 29 lung cancer patients waiting for treatment further found that about 20 percent "of potentially curable patients became incurable on the waiting list.""

Your friend doing research in the private sector won't have any place to do his/her research if healthcare becomes public. There won't be a private sector.

Everyone in the US has access to healthcare, insured or not. Hospitals do not turn anyone away; they discharge after stabilizing, but they do not make them rot on a waiting list for 6 months. And I believe that there are better solutions to the problem of the poor and healthcare than making everyone pay for it. Making healthcare more competitive would improve quality and lower prices, making treatment more affordable. This is not a black and white issue as you are making it appear to be.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 12:19am

All we've seen with healthcare being competitive is billionaire CEOs and prices beyond the means of most people.

Of course I was giving you anecdotes, they were the first real-life in my circle of friends incidents that have all happened within the last six months that popped into my head when I read your list.

When the MRI FINALLY happened (after it was cancelled by the MRI people with no notice, as it so happened), my friend was diagnosed with two lumbar herniated discs. It was a long two months for a citizen of a country that tries to frighten people with legends of long waits in other countries.

You're presuming that in some future world in which a goverment managed to get all of its citizens quality healthcare it wouldn't be interested in research for important prevention initiatives? I thought conservatives were supposed to be the OPTIMISTS? You mean it would be bad as it is now with THIS administration?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 12:22am

I have to hit the sack but I would just like to say I wish Mark Manley had the vaguest idea how to have these kinds of conversations, in his own words, and without resorting to disruption and childish thread title changing.

It's fun to engage with somebody who makes a point, and who responds to the points I make in response to the points she makes.

Could you give Marky some lessons, Spork?

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 12:24am

Conservatives are for as little government involvement as possible. So of course we are pessimistic about what the government would all do. And this administration is by no means conservative, so like I said, stop lumping us together.

For the last time, I am not claiming that the US system is perfect, but that Moore did not present both sides to the issue of healthcare in his film. I am claiming not that the US is superior, but that other countries' systems have just as many flaws, and Moore whitewashed over them in the film in order to get across his political agenda. He showed only the good sides of universal healthcare, and only the bad sides to the US's system. As I've said, his motives are not to improve healthcare; he wants universal healthcare, no matter what. All I want is honesty.

Edit: Thanks, same to you! I haven't had a good debate like this in a long time. And, haha, I can try.

Updated On: 7/18/07 at 12:24 AM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 12:35am

Oh, I am SO glad I checked back one more time before logging off:

And this administration is by no means conservative, so like I said, stop lumping us together.

Sing it Goddess, SING IT! I would put in that unintelligible thing Mark wrote about your being something-something coloratura (I'm assuming it was supposed to be a compliment but who can tell?), but instead I'll just say, "Brava, sister."

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 1:10am

I'm a little confused--are you being sarcastic, or agreeing with me?

And, haha, the funny thing about that coloratura remark is that I am a soprano.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 9:27am

I'm completely agreeing with you.

Ya see, one of the problems I have with Mark Manley, no matter what screen name he's posting under, is that he would never, ever admit such an obvious point about this administration. He marches in lockstep and in fact lumps all conservatives together (like you mentioned). If you too don't agree with every point, he says you're not a real conservative.

So I'm pointing out that you SHOULD continue to sing out and demonstrate to him and everybody how to have a heated discussion without resorting to all the foolish BS he always falls back on.

So, thank you.

[Craig]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 9:29am

Actually, if you don't agree with every point, you're a Manhattan Elitist Liberal.

As pointed out, the "collective" also ALWAYS uses the Straw Man "debate" tactic. It's tiresome.

But yes.. Spork - very refreshing to read your views and see a worthwhile discussion taking place.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 11:18am

of course some of the "wait time" that happens in places such as Canada may have something to do with the fact that people there do not HESITATE to go to the Doctor. They go at the first sign of a problem. Here in America I know many people (even WITH insurance) who will wait until they can't stand it any more and then go to the doctor. It is the thought that it will go away, it is not as bad as I think and if I go to the Doctor I will NEVER be able to pay for it. Sometimes the delay can be deadly.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 11:47am

Finding Namo: Ahh, I see, thanks for that Yes, I am by no means a fan of Bush's domestic policy; he is what my friend calls a "RINO" (Republican In Name Only.) Sadly, there are a lot of those nowadays...

Craig: Thanks, I'm glad that you feel that way about what I'm saying. I'm one of those people who always, always have to back up their opinions.

SueleenGay: That's actually something that people criticize about universal healthcare systems; even though sometimes the things people go in for are part of something more serious, that isn't always the case. But, in fact, the same happens in American ERs... I believe that they questioned people, and only 20% of them thought that what they were being seen for was serious. I've seen people come in for things like congestion. It's illegal, however, to turn anyone away, even if the place is crowded--everyone receives an examination no matter the severity of their condition. But as I said, unlike in the NHS systems, severe cases are seen more quickly. The rule for our hospital is "chest pain, trouble breathing, or shortened breathing." We also admit people right away if they are bleeding a lot; even people with bloody noses don't have to go through the Triage nurse. So, as you can see, there are good and bad things about both US and other healthcare systems.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 1:28pm

Thanks for that insider's scoop. I'm gonna get some of those theatrical blood capsules just in case.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 1:36pm

Haha, that's a good idea. I think we also took a kid who'd overdosed on pills back right away. Which makes sense. :P

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/18/07 at 11:31pm

I wonder if Marky has seen the 12:24 and 12:35 posts from this morning yet?

We'll never know, of course, since this thread is only for people who have seen Sicko!