 |
A Short Course in Brain Surgery Posted by: StuartBrowning
Video duration: 336 seconds Filmmaker Stuart Browning shows the callousness of "single-payer", government-run health care systems as practiced in Canada. Related: canada, care, health, healthcare, michael, moore, politics, sicko, single-payer, solution Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
Dead Meat Posted by: StuartBrowning
Video duration: 1486 seconds Dead Meat is a 25 minute short film which shows the reality of health care under Canada's socialized medical system: Canadians wait ... and wait ... and wait. ... And sometimes they die while waiting for free government health care. Related: canada, care, health, healthcare, michael, moore, politics, sicko, single-payer, solution Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment Latest comments made on this video:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Two Women Posted by: StuartBrowning
Video duration: 272 seconds Filmmakers Browning & Greenberg shows that having the government determine health care priorities can have unfortunate consequences. Related: canada, care, health, healthcare, michael, moore, politics, sicko, single-payer, solution Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment Latest comments made on this video:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
The Lemon Posted by: StuartBrowning
Video duration: 476 seconds The Lemon demonstrates how single-payer health care systems have a lot in common with the failed economic systems of Soviet-era eastern Europe. Related: canada, care, health, healthcare, michael, moore, sicko, single-payer, universal Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment Latest comments made on this video:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Latest comments made on this video:
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 14 Nov 08, 22:44:23
The point was that the UHC in the UK is rewarding their doctors and driving better patient results than the US. Yet this is your so called gov't "bureaucracy" where results are still better than the US. You are also wrong about medicine in CAN. The Canadian system is Gov't price controlled and is the reason why many Americans purchase their medicine from Canada(ie.cheaper). In fact there have been a few US politicians that have advocated US citizens to buy their medicine from Canada.
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 14 Nov 08, 22:34:22
When you can't dispute the facts, you make baseless accusations of the people conducting the study. This is typical dishonest right wing tactic. You said healthcare providers need to be rewarded, here's the UK doing just that and getting results. It's just another way the UHC system is driving results superior to the US private system. In fact the head of the Canadian Medical Association wants to bring this same system of reward to Canada. Makes sense.
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 14 Nov 08, 22:22:57
You miss the point. If the US had such "strong libertarian ideals" the gov't would not have bailed out these corps. Which renders your point above FALSE. The reason Canada does not support a private system like the US is because IT DOESN'T WORK. It is not that we are so much more responsible than Amercns but it is that we have the ACCESS to healthcare and utilize the system to better manage our health. Of the US uninsured, 30.4% have an unmet health need due to cost, 7 times higher than CAN.
By: eilloross. on 14 Nov 08, 05:54:57
Also, you bring up an irrelevant point- the UK has SOCIALIZED medicine, where the government provides the infrastructure and employs the workers... NO ONE of importance in the US (not even the most socialist politicians) are advocating socialized medicine. Canada doesn't even have socialized medicine. The liberals here simply want to decide how much to pay for health care, WITHOUT providing it. Under a socialized system, the tax-payers would have to PROVIDE the health care. Nice try though.
By: eilloross. on 14 Nov 08, 05:49:25
Didn't bother to look that person up- only the person you mentioned...oh surprise surprise, Himmelstein is also a Primary Care Doc, Middle-aged, and a tenured professor! Ha, good luck getting American doctors to be able to get "results" from many American patients. You'd need to infect obese people with dysentery to get them to lose weight. Also, good luck getting specialists to take on difficult patient cases where a "reward" is unlikely....
By: eilloross. on 14 Nov 08, 05:43:46
Since when did I support this government bailout?
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 14 Nov 08, 02:11:38
You failed to mention co-author of the study Dr. David Himmelstein. If Dr.Woolhandler is biased then according to your logic, Dr. Himmelstein must be as well. What is his reason for a bias in this? As seen in Sicko, the UK rewards their Doctors for achieving patient results as is done in employment in non-govt positions. Yet they still spend less than half of what the US does on healthcare and are healthier than Americans. How can this possible within as you call it a govt bureaucracy?
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 14 Nov 08, 02:06:20
You have such strong libertrn ideals but you have no prob. with bailing out failed institutions like banks, insurance companies, auto ind. That's SOCIALISM. Where's the big bailout in Canada. NADA. As I mentioned the US study states that the UHC system has done a great job of educating CDNs. Most school campaigns are directives from Health Canada or the provincial gov't. It's logical for a gov't to reduce spending on Healthcare, to educate those that use the service. Not the same in the US.
By: eilloross. on 13 Nov 08, 03:03:29
Excuse me for finding the bias in this doctor, but it DOES exist. I'd imagine a 34 year old specialist doctor with a mound of debt wouldn't appreciate your or Dr.Woolhandler's delegating of altruism (it requires no self sacrifice on your part to do so). As I have mentioned before, Americans are not interested in spending a dime to help health care providers- just spending a dime on health care period. If US wants great health care delivery, the providers have to be greatly rewarded. Period.
By: eilloross. on 13 Nov 08, 02:56:00
1. America is very unique in that we have strong libertarian ideals, while other countries such as Canada have more socialist ideals, probably stemming from a tradition of having strong central governments in the past. We tend to despise and distrust a strong central government (the Revolutionary War). Free market (or a close proxy) dictates pretty much every facet of American society. 2. So you're admitting that it's an educational issue? So I guess our public schools or not doing their jobs...
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 13 Nov 08, 02:47:39
It is typical, for those that cant dispute facts from a study, to claim a bias. You have dug up personal information on this doctor, made assertions about her personal finances and made a baseless accusation of a bias. This clearly shows that you are a very presumptuous person. With this it mind, it begs the questionHow can you expect anyone to believe anything youve posted on this thread?
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 13 Nov 08, 02:46:33
If we and the rest of the world are that much more responsible for our health than Amercns then why wouldnt we want private healthcare? As you say, since we are so responsible a private healthcare system would be less taxes,more choice etc. Yet CDNs and the rest of the world overwhelmingly support UHC. A Unv. Of Arizona study stated that CDNs eat twice as many fruits and veg. than Amercns, due to the educational campaigns the UHC system runs. Again, UHC positively impacting health of CDNs.
By: eilloross. on 12 Nov 08, 18:01:19
Stephanie Woolhandler: 1. 57 years old = Doesn't have to worry about medical school debt and buying a house, etc in this age where everything is expensive. 2. Is a primary care physician = Perhaps resents the fact that specialists make a lot more money than she does, and knows UHC won't impact her salary very much. 3. Is a tenured professor = Job security No wonder she supports UHC! She has NOTHING to lose from it. It's the other people who are going to have to make sacrifices. How convenient.
By: eilloross. on 12 Nov 08, 17:50:47
I would agree that CDNs and the rest of the world are more responsible than Americans. For one thing, you guys don't have the obesity problem we do and are less materialistic. "Pretty big insult..." YES, I am blaming Americans for anything less than optimal health care. Whether through disregard for their own health or through their indifference to healthcare provider suffering. Wow, Woolhandler huh? Dr. Kary Mullis (Nobel Prize Chemistry) says HIV doesn't cause AIDS, I better believe him too.
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 12 Nov 08, 00:17:23
I guess by your study you are saying that we(CDNs) & the rest of the world are all responsible, productive, intelligent, diligent, educated etc. much more than Amercns, since the health of people in countries with UHC is so much better than Amercns. Pretty big insult to the people of your country. As much as I appreciate your compliment, when a top med.school publish. your study maybe it will have some merit. As DR.S. Woolhandler of Harvard Med. states,The data is clear and really irrefutable.
By: eilloross. on 11 Nov 08, 06:10:14
Those Americans who have good health insurance are likely to be productive in their occupations. If they are productive in their occupations, they are likely to be diligent, intelligent, educated, and/or responsible...if the are (blah), they tend to take better care of their health. Now try and "prove" my "study" wrong. Be careful of confounding variables, false causations, and hidden agendas.
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 11 Nov 08, 05:29:52
The dishonest right states that healthcare systems in other countries have nothing to do with the fact that other countries have more healthier people than in the US.Yet as reported by the Harvard Medical School(US Study) and published in the July 2006 American Journal of Public Health, those Amercns that have good health insurance are identical in health to Canadians. Those that dont have health insurance were drastically less healthy and lived shorter lives. Managed care is the difference.
By: eilloross. on 11 Nov 08, 05:08:21
1. Makes sense that we spend a lot on health care- we are very unhealthy as a people, and much of our health care is equity based and many people in this country have equity. 2. Again, what a politician says and what a politician does are different things. People voted for Obama because of perception (also, his competition sucked) 3. Non-profits CAN survive in the US- but at the cost of quality. Homeless shelters vs. The Hilton 4. There is dishonesty and propaganda on both sides. Seen Sicko?
By: KNWTHEFACTS70. on 11 Nov 08, 03:57:02
US healthcare system is the most costly in the world ranking behind 36 UHC systems(WHO)in perform. to its citizens. Obama has been given a mandate by voters to reform the system bringing universality at lower costs. Comments such as a nonprofit system cant survive in the US(Medicare) or UHC cant survive in a capitalist nation($40B Govt gave to AIG today) are false. It's refreshing to see voters ignore right wing dishonesty and propaganda(this video) to reform the system like other nations.
By: eilloross. on 11 Nov 08, 00:28:51
... 5) Understand that Obama can change very little, even if he COULD mold health care into the plan he proposes. This is because he isn't doing anything to make the health care providers happy. Sooner or later, we are all going to get sick and need health care. So it is in our best interest to make sure that the health care providers are happy. Because if they aren't happy, ain't no body going to be happy. Tragically, Americans have failed to grasp this concept.
By: eilloross. on 11 Nov 08, 00:04:11
In conclusion, KNWTHEFACTS70, if Americans want good health care they need to: 1) Put that triple cheese burger and meth down 2) Stop blowing their money on materialistic crap and complaining that health care "costs too much" 3) Stop delegating altruism to health care providers as it requires no self sacrifice to do so. Provide it yourself. 4) Understand that you can't suffocate someone and expect them to provide CPR. The health care PROVIDERS need to be happy 5) Obama can change very little.
By: eilloross. on 10 Nov 08, 23:57:32
If the US wants a "better" system, they need to make their providers happy. For starts, the average medical school graduate graduates with 150,000+ dollars in debt (not including interest that accumulates on loans and the opportunity cost of having no income while being in school for such as long time), and people in this country are seriously wondering why only 2% of med students are considering going into primary care??? But like I mentioned before, Obama has no intention of serious reform.
By: deerobertson13. on 10 Nov 08, 23:44:52
older patients are refused because they are not as cost effective as a younger patient
By: deerobertson13. on 10 Nov 08, 23:41:27
i go to the uk frequently.they have nationalized healthcare. death from breast cancer are much worse because of the waiting period. the birth defects are heartbreaking.things that would be prevented here from prenatal care aren't done. getting costly drugs is impossible.there was a news story recently that hositals were turning bedsheets instead of washing them to cut costs.private healthcare insurance is growing.
By: eilloross. on 10 Nov 08, 23:40:22
And what do the liberals want to do about this? They want to replace the insurance oligopoly with a single-payer MONOPOLY. Do you honestly believe that the health care providers are going to respond to favorably to another effort to short-change them? Last time I checked, for-profit insurance companies pay them more for services than Medicare does. As I mentioned before, health care delivery is private. Good health care doesn't depend on who pays for it, it depends of who PROVIDES it.