Movie Review: Sicko

**We've moved!!**


Please visit our new site, ModernAlternativeMama.com.


Comments on this post have been locked and updates are no longer being made to this page. Please click here to view this article on the new site.


Recently, we watched the movie Sicko, by Michael Moore, which originally came out in 2006. The film is about the state of health care in America, and Moore offers the solution of socialized medicine. There is no better time to examine this film than now, when Congress is attempting to make socialized medicine here a reality. Moore makes several claims about the current situation in this country (as well as the situation in other countries which have socialized medicine already) and explains why he believes socialized medicine is the answer.

While Moore makes several good points in the movie, and sets up a story that clearly shows the problems of the American health care system, I believe his solution is completely wrong. The answer to the health care problem isn't "who should pay," but "why is the care we are getting so expensive, and why do we 'need' this type of care?" Nearly everyone in his movie (he features sob story after sob story, and uses very few actual facts) is overweight, suffers from cancer, diabetes, heart disease, etc. Why are all these people sick? One woman is on NINE prescription drugs (unfortunately, this is lower than average; in 2004, the average number of prescription drugs per person in a year was twelve). Why do these people 'require' so many drugs to stay healthy?

Briefly, I'd like to discuss Moore's "documentary" technique. Moore relies on using a series of tragic, personal stories to make his point. He does not look at both sides of the issue, and he does not cite facts. He tells story after story to show examples of his point. It's effective -- many people watching the movie will feel sorry for the people featured, and feel outraged at a government and a health care system that could let these people fall through the cracks. He is more of an artist than a documentarist (is that a word? Spell check says yes). His goal is to evoke an emotional reaction from his audience, for them to feel outrage, which primes them to seek a solution, and therefore to accept the solution that he puts forth: socialized medicine. This is not, of course, how a responsible documentarist would handle the situation.

In the U.S., nearly every story Moore features is of a low-income person, some homeless. Many are minorities and/or immigrants. ALL of these people have HMO health insurance, or none at all. This is a very selective group of the population. There are many people in this country who are not poor, who are not minorities, and who have other health insurance (non-HMO) options. Really, Moore is crucifying the HMO system more than the health care system as a whole, although of course he does not differentiate between HMO and non-HMO systems in his films. Most Americans are already aware that HMOs are not a good option if you can afford anything else.

We, personally, do not have an HMO and have been nothing but satisfied with our insurance coverage. They covered an average of 92% of my first hospital birth (policy says they will cover 80%), and 60% of my home birth (they told us they would not cover it at all). So, clearly, there ARE better options already available.

Another problem is that the "facts" that Moore does state are faulty. For example, he says at the beginning of the movie that "47 million Americans are currently uninsured." This is an often-quoted statistic, but it is false. That number includes illegal aliens (not eligible for insurance, and won't be eligible for socialized medicine, either), those who are eligible for current programs but do not partake (either because they don't choose to or don't know they are eligible), and those who make at least 2.5 times the poverty level and have access to health care, but choose not to purchase it. The real number is more like 5 - 8 million who are truly uninsured. This, however, is not nearly as dramatic.

Moore paints a nice picture of socialized medicine in other countries: people who make plenty of money (he only features people who have money, and who are satisfied with their situation, other than one very brief scene in France where he shows protesters, which makes little sense with the rest of his movie), who have completely free health care, who have lots of vacation and sick time (5 - 8 weeks of vacation in France and unlimited sick days). He says they enjoy a much higher standard of living than we do in the U.S. This, however, is incorrect. It also makes one wonder how such a system is sustainable -- where the government pays for unlimited health care, unlimited sick days, long maternity leaves (up to a year -- which would be nice! -- a topic for another day), and extensive vacation. How can the country be productive? How can their taxes be reasonable? The U.S.'s GDP (per capita) is $47,440. Canada is $38,098. U.K. is $36,358. France is $34,205. So, of these countries -- our GDP (and standard of living, if one defines it by GDP) is the highest.

As for the tax rate, Moore features a family who makes 6000 euros per month, or 72,000 per year. This puts them by far in the highest tax bracket for France (Moore says they are an "average" family -- the highest tax bracket begins around 48,000 euros per year, so they are definitely above average, likely far above). This bracket is taxed 48% of their income, meaning they take home only 52%. That's how they pay for all these nice services.

So, it's looking like socialized medicine isn't really the amazing panacea that Moore sets out to be. It's also, truly, beside the point. I only felt it necessary to get into at all because the politicians in this country are trying desperately to push it through and make it a reality here, and I wanted everyone to be informed why it's NOT a good idea.

That doesn't mean, of course, that our system isn't broken. It is. Moore is correct that politicians are paid a lot of money to back up the drug companies. The drug companies are more concerned with profits than helping people, as are the insurance companies (at least some are). Doctors are concerned with covering themselves so they don't get sued. Profit is the motivator. Drugs are the ONLY answer, so says the FDA. Supplements and other natural medicine is useless.

The way to true health, of course, is to spread mass awareness that drugs and vaccines are NOT the answer. Public health campaigns to teach people to eat less processed food and more fresh produce (NOT GMO or irradiated), and real meats is necessary. People need to learn to get enough sunlight, or take vitamin D supplements. They need to be aware of alternative medicine. They need to know how to balance blood sugar and prevent (or cure) obesity, through proper diet.

This won't happen, because all of these industries -- factory farming, drugs, processed food, etc. -- are controlled by large companies, where money is the bottom line. Sunlight is free. Sustainable agriculture is not big business. There is little money to be made in these areas, as it stands. But, that is the way to true health.

Watch the movie if you're interested. But take it with a grain of salt. If you're reading this blog, you already know the system is broken. Focus on doing YOUR part to fix it by avoiding it as much as possible and trying to keep your family healthy by eating whole, natural foods and using alternative medicine when necessary.

Did you watch Sicko? What did you think? If you are new or have never left a comment, leave one today! I have enabled it so that ALL readers can comment, even without signing in! You can even do so anonymously! Although I'd love it if you left me your first name. :)