Sicko

Sicko is no doubt at all a bias film. It's one of those movies you have to watch with a skeptical eye. Much of the issues are exaggerated to the point where it might even be a little comical. That's not to say that the film wasn't interesting or though provoking. But in the long run, a slanted film such as this does very little to influence my opinion of our health care system. And much less would I move to to another country based on this film. "Sick in America" however, I found to be very informative. It shook up my view of things and gave me more points to consider. As a result of research, I had begun to lean towards supporting universal health care... not that this 20/20 series changed my mind, but it did cause me to reconsider my position and do more research on some of the points it brought up.

tell me something I don't know...

I tried to watch this movie before, but I turned it off after a few minutes. I'm glad that I had another opportunity to watch it in it's entirety. Now I can see why this movie sparked so much criticism amongst it's viewers. I'll be the first to admit that the US health care system is not near perfection, but this movie paints a portrait as though it is completely broken. Really? All the people mentioned in the film had truly sad stories, but I'm sure that if I looked into specific cases in other countries that I would be able to find similar tragic stories, if not identical. MM sets out to show how the US system falls short compared to other 1st world countries and even goes as far to show how some under developed countries provide superior medical care. Personally, I don't think that MM does justice to the US system. He never goes out and interviews the hundreds of thousands of Americans who are satisfied and happy with our current system. I feel that if MM really wanted to drive home the point that the US medical care system needs change that he would be willing to offer both sides of the story instead of force feeding the audience an emotionally packed one-sided view.

eye opening

The movie "Sicko" is a very slanted view of the American Healthcare system as well as other aspects of government. However I found it to be very eye opening to many issues that we as Americans are so oblivious to.  The movie made many poignant comparisons of the US to other nations. Ultimately I think this movie accomplished the task at hand: to show viewers the many flaws of the US Healthcare system and present the success of alternate systems. 

The movie is lacking in depth and completeness because it fails to show the successes of the US Healthcare system and the flaws of alternate systems.  The documentary that does both would be a better documentary. However Michael Moore  may not succeed as a great documentarian, but he does succeed at creating a sense of disgust and desire for change in the viewer.  Personally, it made me want to move to France, smelly French people and all.  

The Missing Pieces of Sicko

The movie as a whole displays a viewpoint that American healthcare is horrible and that European/Canadian Universal healthcare is the god of all healthcare. People can go on vacations from sickness for as long as they want until they feel like going back to work. Who wouldn't want that? And obviously for any country that would just throw their patients out onto the street and drive away still in the hospital gown must be a very bad place.

The movie presents a very negative viewpoint of healthcare in the USA without touching on any positive aspects of what is being done here or offering any sort of concrete solutions to fix it except that universal healthcare is the only way. Is it that simple?

It doesn't show the consequences of universal healthcare either, only that it is again the god of all healthcare and everyone is happy in their country because of it. I mean they pay you money when you get sick! I want to move there too!

Sicko doesn't paint a complete picture

Under the weather...

So... Here's the big issue with this film: Moore claims to have America's "pulse" on the health care woes of the U.S., and hints at solutions by exibiting various selected clips of the health care system of other countries. These clips make Cuba and France seem like Eutopia relative to the States. The problem is that while "Dr. Moore" does a fairly decent job in diagnosing the patient (special interests of the pharmaceutical companies, corrupt government officials, expenses beyond necessity with HMOs and PPOs, etc.), he offers no prescription on the remedy. Displaying single moments of care (assisted by Mr. Moore to initially be placed in that posisitoin) given to emotionally vulnerable citizens of the U.S. with an interesting history on why they got to where they are is not a solution to the cracks of our health care system. That is where Sicko is lacking... and may need to consult a specialist.

Is America really that sick?

The movie, I thought was really well done , quite dramatic and definitely worth applauding for Moore's sense of humor. I liked the fact that he had a website where he got responses from real people and connected to them to find out how healthcare had affected them. Who had been left out for what they had been left out. I definitely thought some of those stories were horrific , especially with the man who had to choose one of his fingers, the woman from the county hospital who was just dropped off on the road somewhere in an incoherent state.

I like the potrayal of the Insurance companies and how they hire doctors to do their ugly work and leave out those who realy need care. Also makes us realise how most of these insurance companies are unaccountable to any regulatory body for the decisions they make.

I thought a lot of the glorious views of other countries health systems were lopsided. I definitely think a singlepayer system needs to be in place in the US and I also think that theres a lot to adopt from other countries but will definitely need a lot of tailoring for a huge country like the US.

Canadas healthcare system was impressive and will definitely be a challenge to implement here . France definitely has a lot that we can adopt right from doctors visiting homes, I thought that was really cool.

Well I would definitely not move to France because of their healthcare system , they definitely pay a lot in taxes, so the hidden cost for the services they get is not visible to us.

Bon Voyage

I don't think I'll necessarily be moving to France anytime soon despite my title, but I was definitely captivated by Michael Moore's documentary on the healthcare systems around the world. I think he definitely did what he needed to in order to get viewer's to watch the movie, but at the same time, it was a very one-sided piece that I feel could've been more fair in portraying the disadvantages of universal healthcare as well as the advantages (which he seemed to stress quite heavily).

Needless to say, I was definitely appalled at the conditions that certain Americans are forced to deal with without access to insurance, and even sometimes when they do have insurance (or even WORK FOR an insurance company!). There should never be a time when a person is only able to choose one finger to help fix when he needs two. Forget about bailing out AIG and letting them give bonuses to their employees (who obviously screwed up in the first place to force a bailout), the U.S. should be bailing out these people in need of healthcare.

Hate it or love it...

It is easy to see how a well-constructed documentary can make even a very educated population question a system that has had its share of scrutiny. What makes Moore’s documentary even more powerful is its ability to tug at our heartstrings and make the personal become fodder for resentment. Of course there is an inclination to question our system, to harbor anger for insurance company fat cats or even move across the pond. What remains to be seen however, is the other side of the story. People may have their uncles or friends that have moved to Europe and found salvation in the healthcare system, and of course it is warranted to question just how happy they are, but there is an indubitable appreciation for healthcare among the majority of foreign healthcare recipients. Moore’s questioning nature is not one to scoff at or place on a pedestal; it is simply another resource that we as professionals must examine and utilize for or against our arguments.

My Thoughts on SICKO

I personally felt super upset after watching this movie.  I guess it was because I could not even imagine putting myself in some the situations that some of the families and people were forced to face.  When I was watching it at home, there were some points in the film where I was tearing up because I really felt bad for the families.  Also, after hearing how great the French and British healthcare systems were, I was like...I want to move to Europe.  Then I could have someone do my laudry for free and get all these perks. I spoke to my cousin who just moved to France, she absolutely loves the healthcare system, but she also spoke of how expensive life is in Europe.

Obviously after thinking about the movie some more, this movie did not show all the ups and downs of the European system.  I mean the taxes alone are reason enough to maybe stay away from universal healthcare.  I think that there are ups and downs for every system.  The universal healthcare system would be extremely difficult to establish in the US. People are already moaning and groaning about taxes, I don't think we are at a point in our economic system to establish this type of grand reform.  This movie was extremely eye opening.

Sicko was definitely a well constructed documentary that had both entertainment and educational value, and I think for that it deserves a tremendous amount of credit. I think that Moore brings forth great examples of people who have experienced some really horrific episodes with the US Health Care System. To say that he makes the our health care system look bad would be like saying the economy is a bit rocky right now.

I was really looking forward for something negative about the Canadian Health Care System or the French Health Care System. I don't remember him mentioning anything about how much higher taxes are in France or in Canada. Certainly there has to be somebody somewhere in Canada or France unhappy with the quality of health care that they receive. I wish we could have heard something about them. It just seemed too one sided at times.

Nonetheless, I think the movie does raise an excellent issue of the disparities in our health care system; I think a lot of people, as a result of this movie, are a little more curious to learn more about our health care system. All in all a great documentary though.

Sicko

While (a few of) my initial reactions to the film were profound disappointment with our healthcare system and a combination of disgust and indignation (e.g. the absurdly inhumane situation of the guy with the price on the fingers), I feel it's important to take a few things into consideration. First, how objective is Michael Moore in his presentation of things, and how often do these things happen (and while we're at it, how many cases of people having to choose 1 finger over another are we willing to accept as the "cost" of a certain type of healthcare system)? There is also the issue of what it would take for the US to implement a different healthcare system, such as a single-payer nationalized system. What would we be giving up to ensure that everyone in the country was ensured? Higher taxes? Longer waits to see doctors? Lower quality of care? I think it's reasonable to assume that at least a few people would object to "free" universal healthcare if they had to pay more taxes or give up some of the things they enjoy with our current system. Despite the manner in which Moore presents his case etc., several important points are raised in the film which cannot be ignored, and it seems obvious that a system in which someone has to choose which of his fingers to have reattached because of the price is in need of some serious change.

Staying in the U.S.

I like Moore’s humor especially when the film makers placed money tags on individual representatives of congress to show how much they received from pharmacy companies to support their efforts. However, I did not like how Moore just simply referred to the man’s lost finger as being located in a landfill. Although this man lost his finger and sure it might be located in a landfill I thought it was inappropriate. What I found most informative was that Britain covers a person’s medical bills if injured so that might be an incentive to visit when I get older. I found there was a lot of propaganda towards supporting a health care system set-up like the ones in Europe. Although Moore interviewed a few people from various places there is always more to a story. Therefore, I would not start packing my bags or planning a new life in France anytime soon.

there are pros and cons in all healthcare systems.

Yeah after watching this film, it made me depress for a day. I had a strong urge to do something to change our healthcare system but again I feel so hopeless. We must have more people to unite together to work on this change.

In another hand, over this spring break I went to Baltimore to visit my cousins and both of them were doctors from Johns Hopkins. I discussed this issue with them and both of them saw this movie before too. They thought it was too judgemental and even if British seems to have better health care system, their healthcare system is going bankruptcy due to the over spending of the money. Plus they thought British's healthcare system is als not good, because each doctor is only required to fill to certain quota. None of the doctors would want to do non-pay work if their quotas are already filled. Therefore, if a patient need a surgery but since all the doctors already filled their quota, then the patient will be put on the waitlist till next year. Both of my cousins thought it is even "worse" than then U.S health care system, because at least the "rich" can be cure as long they have money.

I guess the Sicko movie didn't reveal the "cons" of other countries' healthcare system, however, it is not the excuse for us to change our healthcare system. Maybe if we can come up with a system that have the good qualities of British, French, Cuban and U.S' health care system together...I wonder what kind's system it will turn out?

SICKO

There were definitely parts of the film that were difficult to watch. It was sad and frustrating to see people lose everything to our costly health care system. Michael Moore did a great job of publicizing the lack of quality access to health care and making the personal stories relatable to the whole of America. Although our system most definitely needs a reform, I think that expressing the UK/French/Canadian health care systems as the answer to all problems is a little false advertising on Moores part. For example, my relatives in the UK say that there is practically no preventive care in NHS, which is something that we really try to emphasize here in the US. I wish the film would have showed universal health care in a more honest light with the good and the bad, not just the perfect picture that Moore showed.

Thoughts on Sicko

As a journalist I find myself critical of most everything I watch and read. "Sicko" is no exception. It's clearly biased and that's fine as long as we realize that it is. There is definitely more to the story as a whole as well as much more involved in each individuals background. It's important not to get caught up in the humor and presentation of the film and take time to look at it with a critical eye. We are shown a very romanticized picture of universal healthcare. Though many aspects of the documentary may be accurate, that does not mean that there aren't many other truths that were omitted. 

I have seen this film several times and every time it does leave me feeling a little disturbed about our system even though I understand that this is not the whole story. I have to give credit to the film for that. It has the cinematic elements that can incite serious reactions from its audience. That's both admirable and dangerous if people view this as the whole story. 

 

off to france

Every time I have viewed Sicko, I always am galvanized to move to France or at least retire there. Moore has valid points: 1.) Our healthcare system lobbies congress to maintain healthcare as a free market enterpise 2.) We, the U.S. as a western super power, should have the resources to provide universal healthcare as does Cuba who is poorer than us 3.) We purposefully create cracks for people to fall through so that they are disqualified for healthcare. Insurance companies pay off politicians to secure their role in weeding out the sickest people from their pool of insured thus reducing theie company's cost. Moore is clear in showing that even people who possess insurance are unable to receive care. For instance the couple in the beginning who had to forfeit their home due to their obscene co-pays proves that even though people can pay premiums throughout their working years, the healthcare system can drop them anytime- in their case, after the husband's multiple heart attacks. Indeed, Moore's film has exaggerated and biased depictions of our healthcare system and he can be politically obnoxious, but I still think his grounds are fair to say that the U.S. is flawed in ot being able to care for the well-being of its citizens.

Whenever I watch the film, I do feel angry, frustrated, and sympathetic...I have found myself in similar situations with the characters in the film. Healthcare in the U.S. is as important as finding a good job, getting in to a good college etc. It's a luxury here, whereas it is a necessary given in other countries. When I had to look for my first full-time job after undergrad, the first thing my parents advised me was to get a job that provided health insurance, of course secondary to me getting a job that made me happy and fulfilling and alligned to what I had studied in under grad...it just made me think how difficult it is to be insured.

Thoughts on film

Personally I like the film because I think there is a lot of truth in it. I understand that although not all is 100% accurate, and perhaps the worst of the worst stories were chosen for the film. Still, I have still heard and seen similar stories in my life. Definitely the film is meant to support a single payer/universal health care system, but what is the problem with that? I think there would be a problem if it were criticizing an existing good system for the promotion of a corrupt new system. On the contrary, it is only pointing out the problems of a failing system and encouraging suggestions (from the comparisons of other countries) for a better and less-selfish system. Every time I see the film, I do think that I would love to be in France and not worry about health care ever. I don’t know how much of the film accurately portrays France, but if true, who wouldn’t want commodities, reduced costs, and free healthcare? What I think could have given more credibility to the greatness of living in France, would be showing the views of a French working class family and not just families in good economic conditions. A working class family perspective would have provided us with a more realistic view of some of the outcomes of having universal health care.

Review

I would have to agree with the majority of my peers and say that Sicko was a bit exaggerated. I do believe that the United States is in need of health care reform, but I would not say that it is driving me to pick up and move to France.I did like the way the movie was filmed, and how Moore used interviews from real people to help prove his point. I thought Moore presented valid criticisms, and I definitely learned things I didn't know about before regarding health care systems in different countries. Although the movie is definitely bias, I feel that it makes you think, and hopefully by raising awareness, change can start to happen.

SICKO

I have mixed feelings about this movie because by the end of it, I felt like the point that was trying to be made was becoming exaggerated. Clearly, the United States healthcare system is in a troubled state and there are many flaws within the system. Most of us understood that there are millions of US citizens that are currently living without health insurance and services, however, it was a real eye opener to grasp the concept that there are also thousands of people who have health insurance that still cannot get the care they need because of the system we have in place.

The problem I had with the movie is how perfect it portrayed all of the other countries. Even if I knew nothing about these other healthcare systems, I would have a very hard time believing that any one of them is perfect; is what society is anything or everything perfect. There isn't one because we are humans and it is in our nature to learn from mistakes. Having spent time in some of the countries that were mentioned and studying/working in these healthcare environments, I recognize that some aspects are superior as well as some aspects being inferior to our current system.

Michael Moore tried to give a dramatic representation of how our country is failing its own citizens. It might have been too excessive for us to jump in and say that we need to alter our system to these other countries but at least he began to open the eyes to millions of Americans out there who didn't know what was going on. All I know is that it is going to take a heck of a lot more than a documentary film by Moore to get this country moving and implement a system that works for US, not the citizens of these other countries.

A one sided perspective

To me Michael Moore is the ultimate idealist and his outlook on health care clearly colors his documentary "Sicko" in a biased way. There's certainly no question that there are problems with the United States health care system...I think we have all (at least to some extent) come to this realization by this point.  Sicko does an adequate job of pointing out glaring flaws, issues, and providing a worldly perspective.  But certainly, other systems are not infallible, gold standards in which the US should model its health delivery systems.  

Michael Moore does an excellent job painting vivid pictures by using melodramatic, isolated stories (boohoo!). This does an inadequate job of displaying certain undisputed truths: such as wait lines, sustainability, overall aggregate care etc. For example, the system in the United Kingdom is now, by many, considered unsustainable due to the high costs associated with health care delivery. Moore also calls health care in other countries "FREE," a completely misguided thing to say, as the population clearly pays for health care in the form of much higher taxes, which Sicko never mentions.  

Lastly, I find Michael Moore's credibility greatly limited as he has no medical experience, expertise, or work experience in this particular field.  Moore illustrates the notion that one need not credentials to portray a powerful message, but merely sound artistic merit and a steady dose of highly melodramatic, isolated stories.  Unfortunately, the real world and the United States health care system does not exist in a comparable vacuum.    

Sicko Should Show Pro and Con of Every Health Care System

I believe the movie is fun to watch and does a good job in nailing the fact that the U.S. health care system is broken and other western countries are doing a better job in managing the health care of its citizens... especially pointing out that the U.S. is 38th place on the The World Health Report 2000.

However, the director Michael Moore needed to do a Pro and Con list of other countries he visited as well. There must have been some deficits or negatives about Canada's, Cuba's, and France's Health Care system that Michael Moore needed to point out (i.e. excessive wait times for dental care or getting certain operations). Also, instead of blaming the politicians and insurance companies throughout the whole darn movie, his movie should have focused on possible solutions to the U.S. health care system and getting people like former president Bill Clinton to offer possible solutions.

Give me liberty or death and stuff.

For Sicko thoughts. I find that I need to simplify my thoughts to the bare minimum because this issue is already so complicated and I like being as objective as possible.

Entertaining: For example: "Star Wars" music for list of pre-existing conditions. Laura Burnham's ambulance-ride-preapproval story was really funny, Moore even used it for his movie trailer.
Dramatic: For example, cancer patient dies during the making of the movie. Also Becky Malke's on camera crying was truly moving.
Propaganda: Man who had to choose a finger, what is the back, back story?
Sense of relief: For example, 911 rescue workers get easy and free health care in Cuba and meet with Cuban fire fighters, basically declare themselves brothers, united.

With all the components, it's a movie alright. A good one too.

Plus, Moore brings up good ideas: For example, we basically have socialized fire and police agencies and schools. However, we Americans want to be free of constraints, freedom. Ambulances were deregulated to boost conditions. Even better, we have a choice in how we educate our children with private and chartered elementary schools.
Choice keeps agencies on its toes and I want that when it comes to my health care. That is how Barack Obama won me over in the CA primary election.

Final thoughts: Decrease insurance costs so that every American can AFFORD comprehensive health insurance and tell me your ideas on how to do this. I'm really interested, but don't show me a man with nine fingers to try to convince me.

A Few Do Not Represent the Whole

I am spectacularly impressed with Michael Moore's ability to create such a compelling documentary without presenting any aggregate data whatsoever.

What Moore has sucked his audience into is perhaps the most damaging fallacy in any population-level field of study: he is using a few people (or a few clinics) to represent the situation of entire nations. We are all susceptble to this sort of bias: you have a 2-hour conversation with a cancer patient, and you become far more sympathetic to his plight. You have some connections with senior government officials or some private organizations, and you fight for funding on behalf of cancer treatment programs or advocacy groups. Now, I'm not saying that special interest or minority groups shouldn't have any advocates. But what if you had just happened to talk to an MS patient instead? Or someone with end-stage renal disease? Perhaps that funding you fought so hard for would have ended up elsewhere.

Surely having so many special interest groups all over the place ultimately becomes damaging and framentative instead of beneficial.

But this is exactly what Michael Moore does in his movie. He tells a few, heart-wrenching stories about real US citizens to get us to become sympathetic to their plight. He then uses a few, uplifting examples of people (or services) from other nations to try and convince us that their system is superior to ours.

But this is absolutely the wrong discussion to have. As I've mentioned before in a previous post, there is no nation with a "perfect" healthcare system; there are only nations with imperfect healthcare systems that have accepted what each believe to be the lesser of several evils. Michael Moore showed us a concrete example of a single French family to convince us that the French are better off than we are. He interviewed a single UK physician to convince us that doctors over there are perfectly happy with the NHS. He then went to a single clinic in Canada to dispell the "myth" that Canada has long wait times. He backs his claim with evidence from real patients in a real healthcare setting, so we are inclined to lend credit to what he says.

But zoom out from that single clinic, and this is what the aggregate data shows us:



Clearly, if you look at the nation as a whole, Canada's average wait times are much longer than the US's (and a number of other developed countries). Does this mean that Canada's healthcare system is bad? No. But it does mean that it is not as perfect as Michael Moore leads us to believe.

While humanistic stories from real people are extremely important for capturing or conveying the significance of healthcare problems, I firmly believe that these stories cannot form the basis of policy decisions at the population-level. You can't base healthcare reform that will affect hundreds of millions of people on the stories (however touching) of a few.

The only reliable source of information for national reform is national data. Sadly, Sicko seems to miss out on this point.

Sicko Thoughts

As one-sided as Michael Moore presents pretty much anything in his documentaries, I must say that I still did learn a lot from Sicko. I might have even momentarily contemplated a move to Britain seeing how persuasively he illustrated their seemingly easier and better lifestyles. And, although it was clearly a biased portrayal of our health care system, I believe it was very effective in putting the flaws of our health care system in the public eye. I thought it was a very good move on his part to use patient horror stories to portray the worst aspects of the system we are living with today because it put faces on those worst case scenarios that we typically only hear about from "my one friend's aunt's mother's cousin's brother." One of the things that I also found interesting was how they mentioned how one of the differences between the British and American governments is the fact that the British government is scared of their general public, while our American public is scared of our government. This clearly translates in the way the health care systems differ in these two countries and could possibly give the American public a little more incentive to take action in attempting to help reform our health care system. I also liked learning about the different places that already use a single payer system because it's still something that I'm slowly learning about and becoming more familiar with. It was very interesting to see how different it is from our current system because I've never experienced any other health care system other than ours here in the US.

My thoughts on SICKO

This film was a real eye opener to the many flaws that are present in our healthcare system. The story of the child that was refused care is just crazy to me, but unfortunately it happens. I felt like this movie made countries seem perfect. I left leaving if life is so great other places than why are people always migrating to the US? I felt as if I was not being given the full story. It is not possible for life to be that great in places such as France and Canada. I felt that the health care system here is flawed, but it is not doomed the way Michael Moore presented it. I do agree that health care can be a money hungry business, but some comparisons were just too beyond me for me to actually believe them. Such as the story about terrorists getting better healthcare than us, I do however realize this makes good television. After watching both sicko and sick in America I feel on fence about the subject. I do however believe that the United States is in dire need of health care reform.

Michael Moore

I could rant and rave about over my issues with Michael Moore and his one sided reporting but in terms of the movie Sicko, I actually found his work very interesting, that is assuming it is all accurate.  As the blog prompt inquires, I did find myself considering a move to France, especially if I ever become pregnant.  I wish he would have provided a more comprehensive view of the economy as a whole in the other countries he reported from because it is difficult to see the overall picture without talking about taxes, education, and other major important issues because they all go hand in hand.  Sicko was an eye opener but it's hard for me to objectively watch anything Michael Moore produces in his typical anti-American prose.   

Sicko...

I watched this movie considering Professor Stevens' suggestions.

I appreciate Moore's work, which makes it very easy for me to love his material and believe EVERYTHING that he presents. Consequently, I had a challenge, when watching Sicko and that was to be critical of Moore's work.

This is what I came up with:
Moore attempts to summarize the problems with the American health system. How does he present these problems? the documentary provides real-life health care inequalities within the US through various cases and compares each case to the health care management of Cuba, France, and Britain.
As a result, the documentary is very basic and does not provide strong evidence. It isn't appropriate to look at each case and see how it would be manipulated by a free medical care system. In presenting our faulty healthcare system, Moore should have removed his bias for universal health care and provide additional methods to change in the health care access within our already existing system.
On another note, Sicko educated the general public on American medical services and its lack of sensitivity and value for money over public/individual health.

"Sicko"

I enjoyed the film - my favorite parts were when they visited other countries and it just showed how our health care system is in desperate need of reform. The part in the movie where someone comes to your house to help you with your kids is outrageous! I never in my wildest dreams thought the government would pay for that. After watching the film, I considered what life would be like if I moved to France or Canada, however, I had second thoughts after watching “Sick in America”. As much as I enjoyed “Sicko”, I thought it might be too good to be true. The 20/20 special stressed the importance of competition and how that leads to innovation. America, without a doubt, has developed many lifesaving techniques, procedures, and medications. However, something has to be done about the soaring costs. What is the point of having all these great things if no one can afford them?

Sicko

This is my first time watching the movie although I have heard about this controversial movie from my friend before. Because I don't know much about other countries' heatlhcare systems, I learnt so many things after watching the movie. I also noticed anti-American sentiment portrayed in the movie.

Although I agree that US healthcare system needed to be reformed, I think, US also has its own advantages. US has been the world leader in R&D in medical technologies, and state-of-the-art medical facilities. It has world's best physicians and specialists and it also possesses world most innovative pharmaceutical industries etc. The only problem is the skyrocketing healthcare cost and equal access to health. But, I think, there is no perfect healthcare system in the world. Every country has its own strengths and weaknesses.

Overall, it's a good movie to learn different healthcare systems, at least for someone who is unfamiliar with other healthcare systems, like me.

some thoughts on Sicko

I think the most important thing a documentary like this does is get people thinking about the issue. Clearly healthcare, and its delivery, or perhaps lack thereof, is an issue that we, as citizens of this country, need to think about. It needs to be, as it is once again thanks to the new administration, of primary concern to the whole country. However, Michael Moore, being the partisan individual that he is, probably doesn't adequately portray the issues to people who don't think there's actually a problem. By pointing out only one side of the issue, and framing it so that the grass is always greener in other countries than it is in the US, I think he loses some credibility. But, since I agree that change needs to come, it floored me to hear about some of the very basic ways that even Cuba is so much better than our own country at caring for its people. And actually, is so much better at caring for us, even though we are supposedly on opposite sides of the political spectrum. Documentaries like this always have a profound effect on me, but I think the key is to follow through on changing what is wrong.

still can't afford for those insured

I must admit that before watching this movie, I thought that the access to proper medical care is only a problem for uninsured.  But now I realize what happens to the 250 million Americans who do have health insurance: they cannot afford either.  

In the movie a former insurance company “hit man” talks about combing through a patient’s past medical records and life history, looking for excuses to deny coverage.  I think what Michael Moore want to tell us is that we are always the disadvantaged comparing to insurance company employees since they are much more familiar with those so called insurance rules, using them to take way our money as much as possible and to offer services as little as possible.  This happens because health care is industry in the U.S. and profit is still the first concern of insurance companies.  I think it's really hard to change this situation without changing the whole system.

muy interasado

sick indeed

i thought it was an interesting movie, the way that mikey played dj and spun the tables on this subject was pretty artful. although at times i did feel that he was too anti-america, he did what he had to do in order to get the point across. thats what it took to push the envelope. it just opens up my eyes to what is going on around the world, and how not-cool our health care system is. with all of our resources, we're supposed to be better than we are right now. of course that is what we have been dealing with.

on the flip side, mista moore makes it look like it would be so easy to convert our system to universal health care, but let's face facts. it aint that easy, peasy. more than anything, this movie is a useful tool in order to open america's eyes towards a goal of universal health care, and gain more support in the fight. it certainly is a piece of filmmaking but i just feel like we have to play the cards we're dealt right now, and although moorey does have a plethora of valid points, its going to take time, its a process.

once you've fallen deep into the hole of a money-hungry, selfish, self-absorbed, cold, and heartless health care system, its going to take more than a movie to pull you out of there. you look up at the light, and you're going to need to come up with a solid macgyver plan to climb out and escape. but this isnt a 50 minute episode on ABC. this is the real world. it will take more than rubber bands, paper clips, and michael moore. let's hope we can climb out soon.

SICKO

Well, it was my first time watching SICKO and I must add that it had some entertainment value that I was not expecting. While the film seemed to reveal some real concerns about our present health care system, I felt that it focused more on bashing every entity of our present health care system and expressed an anti-American sentiment which took away from any credibility that the film may have possessed. I think the film tries to make a POINT and it does that to some extent but after the first hour of the same thing it seems to get a bit too much. My overall take on the film is that it was a bit too one sided. Moreover, the film doesn't seem to focus much on the problems of other countries' health care systems which is a bummer because as we all know, there's no flawless system out there. To add, one of the high lights of the movie was the POPCORN....I was starving! haha

Greatest country in the world?

This was my second time watching Sicko and it was just as crazy as the first time I watched it. It's just weird hearing about other countries getting free healthcare, getting reimbursed for transportation, and being provided with maid/baby-sitters at no cost. I think if the hospitals in America just started reimbursing us for the gas we waste driving to the hospital, everyone would be ecstatic. I think that's sad compared to how citizens in other countries are being treated. In France, the government is actually there to take care of the people to make sure everyone is healthy and happy. Our government doesn't seem to even care about us, they just care about money and the economy. Sicko is just a really good movie because it opens your eyes to how horrible our healthcare system is. We hear about it all the time, but actually seeing real people talk about their insurance company stories gets you more emotionally involved and makes you feel so bad for these people. Both times I watched this movie, I was upset afterwards because the supposedly "greatest country in the world" can't even provide it's citizens with free healthcare.

Thoughts on SICKO

I think Michael Moore certainly did demonstrate in his film that there are several discrepancies with the U.S. healthcare system--and that just because you have insurance doesn't mean you're getting quality care. But no system is perfect, and while I understand that it wouldn't have fit with his overall message, it was kind of irritating to see other countries' systems portrayed as such.

But as a whole, the documentary is entertaining, it makes you think, and if nothing else, I actually believe that it brought health care concerns to the attention of the masses who were otherwise oblivious.