16 Responses

  1. Jules
    Jules March 29, 2007 at 8:22 am | | Reply

    I knew Michael Moore at Michigan State University and couldn’t stand him then and can’t stand him now. I’m kind of disappointed Amy that you’re promoting his mean spirited propaganda.

  2. Scott
    Scott March 29, 2007 at 9:35 am | | Reply

    Apparently, according to his website (as of last year) the movie will feature a patient with type 1 diabetes who “needs a pancreas transpant” but cannot get one because he/she lacks healthcare insurance. That is probably true, as Medicare only covers it with a kidney transplant, but not a pancreas transplant alone. I have no way to verify it, but it will be worth seeing! BTW, there are relatively few standalone pancreas transplants done, most are done in combination with a kidney transplant.

  3. Hannah
    Hannah March 29, 2007 at 9:57 am | | Reply

    As someone who’s had to jump through more hoops for the health insurance system this year than any other time in my life, I am completely stoked to see this film. Whether you agree with Moore or not, the release of a talked-about documentary can always put a subject at the forefront of the minds of the entire nation.

    And for the record, in my communications classes in college, I learned that a documentary’s purpose is to present facts and tell a true story. Nowhere is it said that a documentary must present all facts on both sides of every story. That’s what the NEWS is supposed to be for–y’know, fair and balanced, like Fox. *eye roll*

    It’s a fact that so many people in this country get screwed over by health insurance every single day. Kudos to Michael Moore for making a film that will bring this subject to light.

    As someone who hears the phrase “pre-existing condition” as the four-letter-word this country makes it out to be, I appreciate the debates, discussions and controversies this film will surely bring about.

  4. Journeywoman
    Journeywoman March 29, 2007 at 12:01 pm | | Reply

    Michael Moore never claims to be unbiased.

    But seriously, is a 7 year old girl being shot by a 7 year old boy any less horrible because he talked about it in a film?

    Health insurance companies will pay for the amputation of a limb due to diabetic complications, but they won’t pay for testing strips to make this less of a problem. I too can’t wait to see this.

  5. mcityrk
    mcityrk March 29, 2007 at 12:10 pm | | Reply

    Hi Guys-

    I’m tired of this 15 year morass of health care rangling ammounting to Rome burning while Nero fiddles. What does a MM mockumentary do to help with this problem? Just seems like more usage of other peoples suffering for MM to profit by [unless he plans to use some of his movie profits to pay for the health insurance of all his interviewees for the next five years].

    The writeup on the alternate documentary by his “opponents??” looks infinitely more interesting and truer to the form. However, where are the real documentaries about quality ideas and people willing to roll up their sleeves and do the hard work to fix this health-care insurance problem???

  6. Jules
    Jules March 29, 2007 at 1:47 pm | | Reply

    Hello again:
    “Sicko” – person who thinks Michael Moore will present a thoughtful and well researched investigation into the American healthcare system.

    I wonder if he’ll place any blame on obesity…a far bigger reason for rising health care costs than greedy drug companies.

  7. Bernard Farrell
    Bernard Farrell March 29, 2007 at 7:29 pm | | Reply

    If the movie generates some discussion about the short sightedness of health insurance companies in the US, then I’m all for it.

    Why do those of us who work hard at staying healthy with diabetes have to continually battle with our insurance providers. Especially when we know that some of these things will actually save the companies money in the long run.

    I’m just about to start with my friendly insurance company to see whether I can get coverage for the Dexcom. Wish me luck.

  8. julia
    julia March 30, 2007 at 7:54 am | | Reply

    mcitryk – the people who should be rolling up their sleeves and working to fix healthcare in this country are the people we’ve elected to the Congress and Senate.

    I think that you need to take MM’s documentaries with a grain of salt. He does get people talking, though, and that is always a good thing.

  9. Kendra
    Kendra March 30, 2007 at 9:48 am | | Reply

    Hannah – a sound AMEN and YAHOO to your comment. That’s exactly how I feel. Even if Moore is off his rocker, I want people to think about this. I want to be able to live my life without considering how my choices will impact my health coverage. I never want to have to fear being without the medicines I need to survive. If his film will open some eyes and ears to this issue, I am ALL FOR IT.

  10. mcityrk
    mcityrk March 30, 2007 at 12:34 pm | | Reply


    No argument from me as to putting the blame on the people in Congress and the executive office for going around in circles by talking, talking, talking and constatly raising money for reelection from special interests. It coincides with my “15 year morass” comment going back to the early 90′s when there was this “great commission” to “fix” health care problems [when they might have still been fixable] that ammounted to mostly bluster and minimal useful action, a problem that has been perpetuated ever since.

    As to taking MM with a grain of salt, I do. In each of his movies I find about 10 minutes of LOL hilarity, an hour of material I sadly have to agree with, and a half hour of ambush journalism, cheap-shots, and selective editing that makes me cring. But hey, everyone is entitled to their artistic style and if the public enjoys it and is willing to pay good money to see it that’s their right as well. As for me I’ll wait three years until it hits cable, the buzz has died down, and I can view it more objectively.

  11. Lori
    Lori March 30, 2007 at 1:05 pm | | Reply

    Although I’m Canadian, I’m very interested to see this film.

    Despite what you may have heard about Canadian healthcare, it is not as great as you may think. We have slowly been moving towards a privatized system over the years, with less and less covered by the government.

    Yes, we are lucky to have most doctor’s appointments and visits to the emergency room/hospital covered, but we need our own health insurance for prescriptions, etc. And unfortunately, most companies around here offer poor group plans in an attempt to keep their costs low (my plan isn’t the greatest, they only cover 50% of my pump supplies, but I can say that it IS better than most, with no maximums on prescriptions).

    I’m hoping this film creates some buzz in Canada too.

  12. Allie Beatty
    Allie Beatty May 10, 2007 at 3:25 pm | | Reply

    Michael Moore is known for his controversial style, and (albeit mean-spirited) in-your-face portrayal of social malfeasance — but it always leaves you thinking. He’s making a documentary. This means he will have to produce documents and factually accurate events to truly curry favor with his audience. It’s never fair to judge others – it’s always fair to judge for yourself. Amy, as always – well done!

  13. Manny Hernandez
    Manny Hernandez June 9, 2007 at 9:06 am | | Reply

    Right on, Amy! I am very excited about the movie. I posted a reply to Michael Moore’s video on YouTube, sharing a little bit of my story about diabetes and health insurance:

  14. canuckistan
    canuckistan June 25, 2007 at 12:57 am | | Reply

    I have now seen the film and it isn’t primarily about Americans who don’t have health insurance but rather the nightmares faced by those who do have insurance.

    And yes he takes to task the health insurance industry and big pharma.

    As the spouse of a very brittle Type 1 diabetic who is undergoing a major period of hospitalization, I know that any American would be going broke through this kind of experience.

    Fortunately, I’m a Canadian and don’t have to worry about this kind of thing.
    My spouse’s healthcare needs are dealt with by the system and paid out of tax dollars.

    Our system does have its problems, but fundamentally, it looks after everyone regardless of income status.

    And most of the problems we have are caused by the ideological cousins of American’s right-wing politicians.

    We do have right-wing politicians in Canada, it’s just that it’s political suicide to advocate going back to the bad old days pre-1960′s. Instead, Canada’s right-wing politicians will make cuts around the edges to the system…delist a service here…or privatize a service there.

    Then America’s lobbyist-stuffed politicians will point to Canada’s problems and say “see…look at those problems…socialized medicine doesn’t work!” and successfully manage to “scare” the American public. When in fact, the problems we have are mostly caused by their Canadian buddies.

    We still don’t have a universal pharmacare system in Canada, although there are controls on pharmaceutical pricing…a reason why many Americans are buying their prescription drugs in Canada.

    And our prices would be lower than they currently are had the government of former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney not caved into big pharma and lengthened drug patents back in the 1980′s.

    One Canadian political party is talking about pharmacare (we have four major parties in our national parliament)…but it hasn’t yet gained much traction.

    At present though provincial governments (our equivalent of state governments in the U.S.) all have a patchwork of prescription drug plans for seniors with coverage varying from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

    Dental and optical care also isn’t covered. Although workplace-based private group insurance plans often cover pharmaceuticals, dental and optical care.

    So we have much still to do and many battles to be fought in Canada but every day I want to say a big thank you to the late Tommy Douglas…our country’s patron saint of medicare.

  15. Neil
    Neil June 25, 2007 at 8:11 am | | Reply

    As another Canadian, I think Americans in general should be careful drawing any kinds of conclusions from the Canadian experience. The USA is the richest nation there has ever been in the history of the world, so you have more resources than us. You also have a much larger population and a very different political culture. You have the resources to solve your problem, but you have a bigger problem, in terms of population and in terms of political opposition.

    It may be possible that in order to fix your health care problem, you will need more than just institutional change, but you may have to find some way of de-fanging that rabid individualism in US culture that *hates* to see anybody get help from the state, and wants to *force* them away from all support, to sink or swim – as if this kind of abandonment of another human being in some way restores justice to the universe (a justice that was threatened by the evil spectre of mutual aid). This is a charicature, but it is out there, and US politicians can count on stirring it up to protect their corporate buddies while the tradition of mutual aid dies in the US.

    It’s not that the US as a whole seems this way from afar, it’s just that it’s hard to understand why the extreme hatred of any kind of socialized plan has such a lock on some minds, and why so many people respect those kinds of rigid punishing ideas – ironically many of those people calling themselves Christians, in the name of someone who symbolized the opposite (in fact, a homeless man who lived on charity).

  16. canuckistan
    canuckistan June 25, 2007 at 7:05 pm | | Reply

    The political fight over single payer medical care you are having right now in the U.S. we had in Canada in the early 1960′s.

    A single payer medicare system was first introduced in the province of Saskatchewan in 1962. But it took a very gutsy politician…a former Baptist preacher to lead the fight. Just that this former Baptist preacher was not of the “Christian right” variety…he was a preacher who promoted the “social gospel” of helping your fellow human being.

    Saskatchewan even endured a province-wide doctor’s strike and every scare tactic you can think of. But the provincial government stood firm and implemented single payer medicare. It was so succesful and so popular that by 1966-67 the programme was implemented nationally across Canada.

    “Sicko” looks at healthcare systems in Canada, the UK, France and Cuba. It would probably make the most sense for the U.S. to “copy” the key elements of the Canadian system. Partly because we’re probably culturally/socially closer to the U.S. than say the UK, France and certainly Cuba. It would require the least “radical” change…although…it would be a very radical change for the U.S.

    I guess I have a bit of a self-interest in seeing the USA move forward on single payer medical care. Why? Because I’d like to see the Canadian system become more comprehensive along the lines of my other post (above). As long as the USA has “no” system…it puts a bit of a “drag” on moving the Canadian system forward.

    Don’t get caught up in silly debates about whether people “like” Micheal Moore or not. Whether you “like” his personality or not is really a diversion from the substantive issues.

    The real issue is making sure that all Americans regardless of income receive adequate health coverage…and that isn’t going to happen as long as the insurance companies run the system.

Leave a Reply