posted April 19, 2007 07:39 PM            

This year's festival will take place from May 16-27. "Sicko" will play out of competition, per Michael's request. It will be the first time the film will be seen by the public. "Sicko" is scheduled to be in theaters this summer.

"I'm honored to be asked again to come to Cannes," Michael said. "It's been a good luck charm for us and the perfect place to present our work to the rest of the world. I'm hoping that this film will have the impact I think it will have."

This year marks the 60th Anniversary of the Cannes Film Festival. On May 20, Michael will join all the living Palme d'Or winners on the stage in celebration of the festival.

posted April 19, 2007 08:03 PM            

quote:

---

This film is about how 45 million people in the US, the world's richest country, have no health care...BlueRoamer

---

As usual, bullshiiit from the leftists among us who cannot connect the dots between "health care" and "health insurance".

It would be helpful if just once a leftist ever managed to get something right.

So now, the bloated lying shuckmeister Michael Moore is going to treat everyone to some "moore" fairytales.

posted April 19, 2007 08:48 PM              

I have blue cross, blue shield...from my X

but, my sister, has healthcare provided by welfare, and she has the best doctors....

so, if you need health insurance, get it!

when I didn't have health insurance, I was never refused care at any emergncy room...

so, what is the big hoop-lah???

posted April 19, 2007 10:41 PM            

so, what is the big hoop-lah??"

posted April 20, 2007 12:10 AM              

you are so wonderful to call me ignorant, and a moron....

medical bills don't go on your credit report...
if you feel quilty, you can surely pay them $5.00 a week, or month. ...or not....

posted April 20, 2007 01:48 AM              

can someone give some feedback about this? i don't know anything about this system, and am already wary of it.

any thoughts would help. thanks.

posted April 20, 2007 03:39 AM            

quote:

---

hospital bills do not go on your credit report..so, am I ignorant????

---

posted April 20, 2007 11:16 AM            

I don't know exactly how insurance companies get away with it but they sure manage to make a lot of money without covering a lot of procedures/medicines, etc.

Sometimes hospitals charge too much money, I do understand that. But the idea that doctors are getting all your money isn't really true. Insurance companies are getting your money. The cost is prohibitive for many people. The kind of coverage generally affordable is mediocre and even then insurance companies make it difficult for doctors to be paid fully and promptly.

Big for the state of health insurance in the US.

Not a big fan of conventional health care, either.

******

naiad

As far as medicaid goes, you really have to educate yourself on providers and coverage. You have to make an effort to make sure the health care providers you qualify for are providing the kind of service you want for your child. Also, I believe medicaid leaves you without many options out of standard medical treatments. The facilities I've been to (as a child when I qualified and with my nephew when he qualified) have been very ... mainstream. Vaccines are expected and promptly, medications prescribed over any "alternatives", long waits and rushed service, and a lot of questions and contempt(?) when you ask about alternative options or the safety of procedures. These are just my experiences and that was in too-big-for-comfort Miami.

It was similar to my experiences more recently when I qualified for WIC when our son was born (probably still do) and participated in the program for a few months. Not my cup of tea. Again, very mainstream healthcare, not much room for differing opinions/views. Hounded about vaccines and being a vegetarian. Coaxed into formula feeding "just in case". No coverage for organic options. Things like that. Not trying to say it's horrible. Just wasn't for us so we quickly dropped it.

Anyway, back to medicaid, I've heard that the system varies greatly depending on where you live. Maybe you could find people in your area who could share their experiences with you and give you some tips? I hope I haven't soured you. Those have just been my experiences and I'm sure other people have had better ones or been less put off than I was.

Best of luck to you and your little one.

posted April 20, 2007 12:03 PM              

the medicaid is for me, not my babe.

yes, i understand the part about mainstream medicine, lol....

posted April 20, 2007 12:07 PM            

quote:

---

But the idea that doctors are getting all your money isn't really true. Insurance companies are getting your money.

---

That is very true as I used to do billing for a doctor. And while I was there, she never saw alot of the money she was owed by the insurance companies. I believe she was in the process of getting a lawyer and filing for that money the last time I did billing for her.

posted April 20, 2007 01:44 PM              

the medicaid, health insurance my sister gets, and this was in the last year, is very impressive to me, I was surprised, at the options given to her, so perhaps it has gotten better, than it has been in the past...

Canada versus U.S. the quality of care is much better here, it's just my opinion/s

posted April 20, 2007 02:14 PM              

I know people who just don't go to the doctor for any reason no matter what, due to having no health insurance. There was a man in my state, without insurance recently who had cancer and by the time he ended up going to see what the problem was it was too far gone. I've read of people pulling their own teeth because they can't afford a dentist.

Hospitals will generally charge uninsured people more for the same service as insured.

Health care I feel is not a privilege. I think we can do better. I think we can find a way to make sure that all people can go to the doctor, go to the dentist, go to the optometrist if they need to.

Until recently my family had no insurance. When our youngest son was two, he ended up sticking a peppercorn into his ear, as toddlers are sometimes prone to doing. They like to see if small things fit in holes.

We ended up having to go to two emergency rooms, and at the second one, they were going to refuse me service due to the fact that I had no insurance. They wanted me to pay for the surgery up front. The ear, nose and throat speciallist was going to do the surgery. It was only until I got very loud and angry, and was drawing attention to myself from the other people there that they backed down. That was a $1600 day, from one hospital only. That didn't include the other emergency room and the ambulance bill.

We can find a solution to this problem. This may mean looking at other countries solutions to the problems and using those to come up with a good answer to our own.

posted April 20, 2007 02:58 PM            

quote:

---

"Hospitals will generally charge uninsured people more for the same service as insured."

---

I've been without health insurance, and I never let that stop me from seeing a doctor or dentist. I was however lucky enough to never have anything significant happen when I was without insurance - I do know that if I hadn't had insurance when I got cancer several years ago, Stanford, where I was treated, would have treated me anyway. They have a lot of programs for people without insurance, and I'm assuming many hospitals do as well.

Then there's the county hospitals which I admit I wouldn't want to go to if I had absolutely any other choice. But they're there and they do provide emergency services, including dental - they won't make your teeth look pretty when they're done, but they do extractions (and root canals I believe) and such if you go in with a massive toothache.

One of the big problems I see is with prescriptions - Drug stores won't cut you a deal cause you're broke or without insurance. That's where you just have no work around unless you can get Medicare (or is it medicaid, I get them mixed up).

posted April 20, 2007 03:18 PM              

Honestly I'm not sure if anyone knows what the answer is. It's such a complex issue. It's not just that people dont' have insurance. They don't get it because their job doesn't offer, or pay enough to get it. maybe they have a health problem that won't be covered by insurance. I'm sure there are other factors, those were the first two that come to mind.

Maybe there is a way to take the best of socialized medicine - for the routine run of the mill problems, and (what is our system called anyhow) what the US does, for the major issues.

posted April 20, 2007 07:49 PM              

By Joi Preciphs

April 19 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. women with health insurance are more likely than men to go without needed care because of higher premiums and related costs, a study said. A larger percentage of women also have trouble paying their medical bills.

More women didn't fill prescriptions, skipped recommended visits with specialists, failed to get tests, or just didn't seek treatment when they had a medical problem, according to a national survey by the Commonwealth Fund, a private, New York- based group that supports research on health and social issues.

Other studies have suggested that women often pay more for care because they need more routine exams, such as those related to pregnancy. These issues should be part of the national debate as employers switch to plans with higher deductibles and policy makers seek flexible, lower-cost options for 44 million uninsured and 16 million ``underinsured'' adults, the report said.

Politicians and advocates ``should ensure that any proposal provides comprehensive benefits and low cost-sharing,'' said Judith Waxman, vice president of the National Women's Law Center, in a statement yesterday. Waxman co-wrote the report with Elizabeth Patchias, a health policy analyst at the center, in Washington.

Less Money, Higher Expenses

More than 4,000 adults ages 19 and older participated in the survey, researchers said. Of that number, 33 percent of insured women and 68 percent of uninsured didn't get the health care they needed because they couldn't afford it, compared with 23 percent of insured men and 49 percent of uninsured men who went without care.

Among full-time workers, women earn 77 cents for every dollar men earn, according to the most recent Labor Department figures.

``The combination of lower incomes and higher out-of-pocket spending means that many women are more likely to spend greater than 10 percent of their income on health-care expenditures and premiums,'' Patchias and Waxman wrote in the report.

Almost 38 percent of all women surveyed reported difficulty paying medical bills, compared with 29 percent of men, the report said. Among the insured, 31 percent of women had trouble with bills compared with 22 percent of men. About a quarter of the women said they weren't able to pay their bills at all, and about the same percentage said they're paying them off over time.

A separate study by Harvard Medical School researchers earlier this month said high-deductible or so-called ``consumer- driven'' plans hurt women. The authors said the median expense for men under 45 in the plans was less than $500, while women typically paid more than $1,200.

About a third of insured men in that age group spent more than $1,050 in yearly medical costs, while 55 percent of women had out-of-pocket costs at the same level.

Preventive Care Included

Some benefits providers have challenged the researchers' assumptions about consumer-driven plans, saying that a number cover preventive care for women or other costs. They also say the plans, which can have deductibles of $1,000 or more for employee- only coverage, offer spending flexibility to the women who choose them.

``One of the advantages I've seen is that these women now have more freedom to seek out alternative forms of care instead of being stuck in a traditional form, where what the doctor says goes,'' said Robert Hurley, vice president of strategic initiatives at eHealth Inc., a seller of health insurance on the Internet, based in Mountain View, California.

For now, enrollment in the plans remains low because of confusion about them and consumer wariness about care limits present in some plans when they were first introduced, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute, a Washington-based group that focuses on economic security issues.

Insufficient Information

Initial data on the plans suggests that those currently using them are more cost-conscious, the institute said in a December report. The institute found that many of those surveyed weren't satisfied with the quality of information the plans provided to help them make informed decisions about their care.

Insurance companies ``need to do a better job'' of packaging their plans so people can quickly see and understand the pluses and minuses of each, e-Health's Hurley said in a phone interview yesterday. He added that more research is needed to determine whether women are buying higher levels of deductibles than men.

As of 2005, 247 million people in the U.S. had some kind of public or private health coverage, according to the Census Bureau.

To contact the reporter on this story: Joi Preciphs in Washington at jpreciphs1@bloomberg.net .
Last Updated: April 19, 2007 15:33 EDT

posted May 18, 2007 09:37 AM              

BY JORDAN LITE
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Friday, May 18th 2007, 4:00 AM

* Print
* Email
* Suggest a Story

As Michael Moore trades barbs with the Bush administration over his unauthorized jaunt to Cuba to make his new movie, there's at least one person who's grateful for the controversial director - a sick Ground Zero worker who got free health care on the trip.

Disabled carpenter-EMT John Graham objects to critics who say Moore made false promises to three desperate 9/11 responders featured in "Sicko," which premieres tomorrow at the Cannes Film Festival.

Cuban doctors gave him medicines that work better than ones he tried in New York, he said.

"See the movie, because everyone else is wrong," Graham, 45, told the Daily News. "There were no promises of a cure; there were promises of doctors that are willing to do tests that would cost thousands of dollars in the United States."

Overwhelmed by the prospect of paying $5,000 himself for a test here, Graham traveled with Moore in March to Communist Cuba, where medical care is free.

Over five days at a Havana hospital, Graham said he underwent "intensive tests" that confirmed the breathing problems his doctors in New York found - and was told that no better treatment exists.

But the Cuban doctors also discovered digestive problems that Graham, a former health and safety instructor for the city carpenters' union, didn't know about before, he said. Drugs they gave him for reflux "seemed to be a lot better," said Graham, of Paramus, N.J.

While foreigners sometimes get better care than Cubans in "shiny clean facilities" in Havana, there isn't much difference between the drugs available there and the U.S., said Dr. Peter Muennig, an assistant professor of health policy and management at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University.

Graham said he worked at the World Trade Center site on the day of the terrorist attacks and for several days each week until it was cleared, and multiple news accounts describe him as being present there on 9/11 and for months afterward.

Retired since 2004 on $400 a week in workers' compensation, Graham said the health care he needs is expensive, and the red tape too thick to navigate.

Medical monitoring and treatment are available for responders, workers and others at the Fire Department, Mount Sinai Medical Center and Bellevue Hospital.

Graham, who will become one of the faces of that battle when the film opens June 29 in the U.S., isn't sure what to make of his upcoming notoriety.

"I've never been a movie star before," he said. "I'd give up all the fame for Sept. 10." http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/05/18/2007-05-18_dont_slam_moore_sez_911_victim_on_cuba_t-2.html

posted May 18, 2007 11:21 PM              

The studies by the Commonwealth Fund found that the United States, which has the most expensive health system in the world, underperforms consistently relative to other countries and differs most notably in the fact that Americans have no universal health insurance coverage.

"The United States stands out as the only nation in these studies that does not ensure access to health care through universal coverage and promotion of a 'medical home' for patients," said Commonwealth Fund president Karen Davis.

"Our failure to ensure health insurance for all and encourage stable, long-term ties between physicians and patients shows in our poor performance on measures of quality, access, efficiency, equity, and health outcomes."

In "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: An International Update on the Comparative Performance of American Health Care", the study focused on interviews with physicians and patients in Australia, Britain, Canada, Germany, New Zealand and the United States who were asked to speak about their experiences and views on their health systems.

The US ranked last in most areas, including access to health care, patient safety, timeliness of care, efficiency and equity. Americans were also last in terms of whether they had a regular physician.

"The US spends twice what the average industrialized country spends on health care but we're clearly not getting value for the money," Davis told AFP.

She also noted that 45 million Americans, or 15 percent of the US population, have no health insurance, which contributes to the country's medical woes.

The United States is also far behind in adopting modern health information technology, which translates into spiralling costs and poor care.

"We pride ourselves on being advanced on so many areas of technology but it's not the case on health information technology," Davis said. "Other countries have just moved ahead."

Britain got the top score in overall ranking among the countries in the study, followed by Germany. New Zealand and Australia tied for third followed by Canada and the United States.

The second study delves into why health costs in the United States are so much higher than in eight other countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development: Australia, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands and New Zealand.

The study, "Multinational Comparisons of Health Systems Data," found that even though the US spends the most on publicly and privately financed health insurance, its citizens had the most potential years of life lost due to circulatory and respiratory diseases as well as diabetes.

"This study blows a lot of myths about the US health system," Davis said. "We spend three times what the average country spends on a day of hospital care and we also spend twice what the average country spends on prescription medication."

Health care is likely to be a prominent issue in the 2008 US presidential elections with various candidates already promising to tackle rising costs and the burden placed on big business to provide health insurance.

posted May 23, 2007 01:15 AM              

'Sicko' Shows Michael Moore's Maturity as a Filmmaker

By Roger Friedman - Fox News - 20 May 2007

Filmmaker Michael Moore's brilliant and uplifting new documentary, "Sicko," deals with the failings of the U.S. healthcare system, both real and perceived. But this time around, the controversial documentarian seems to be letting the subject matter do the talking, and in the process shows a new maturity.

Unlike many of his previous films ("Roger and Me," "Bowling for Columbine," "Fahrenheit 9-11"), "Sicko" works because in this one there are no confrontations. Moore smartly lets very articulate average Americans tell their personal horror stories at the hands of insurance companies. The film never talks down or baits the audience.

"This film is a call to action," Moore said at a press conference on Saturday. "It's also not a partisan film."

Indeed, in "Sicko," Moore criticizes both Democrats and Republicans for their inaction and in some cases their willingness to be bribed by pharmaceutical companies and insurance carriers.

In a key moment in the film, Moore takes a group of patients by boat to the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba because of its outstanding medical care. When they can't get into the U.S. naval base, Moore proceeds onto Havana where the patients are treated well and cheaply.

This has caused a great deal of controversy, with the federal government launching an investigation into the trip, which officials say was in violation of the trade and commerce embargo against the Communist country.

"This administration flaunts the law, flaunts the constitution," Moore said at the press conference, explaining the flap over the trip to Cuba.

Moore now claims the U.S. government says his Cuban footage may be illegal, and Moore said he made a second master copy of "Sicko" and had it shipped it to France immediately just in case of potential government issues.

Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,273875,00.html