Michael Moore - brilliant and uplifting - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-24-2007, 04:57 PM   #81
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar
Americans live for 2 years shorter than Canadians and some Western European countries, but I still think it's an uneven comparison. For example, African-Americans are 13% percent of the US population, and have a life expectancy of around 5 years less than white Americans. So, that will affect the average. Some Asian countries also have a life expectancy of 2 years longer than Canada and the Western European countries.
Americans live 3 years shorter than Canadians (men and women) per OECD. If you look at Japan, their men live only 1 year longer than Canadian men and 4 years longer than American men, so it is not as huge of a difference - Asians used to have a greater disparity 10-15 years ago.

A good question to ask is why do African Americans live 5 years shorter and whether this is a genetic issue or a failure of the social safety net? Life expectancy is indirectly related to health care. People who have yearly physicals and who have their own family physician who monitors them and advises them about their diet, their weight, and any fluctuations in their cholesterol levels, who does routine and regular blood work, takes urine samples and so on are going to live healthier. Poor people do not see the doctor as often, and preventive medicine plays a small role in their overall wellbeing. If you have a healthcare system which is beyond the reach of these most at-risk populations, that is certainly going to play a role in their lifetime expectancy.
__________________

anitram is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 05:00 PM   #82
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 06:36 PM
Quote:
Life expectancy is indirectly related to health care.
I would (and did) say

directly
__________________

deep is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 05:04 PM   #83
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 12:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
[B]



seems a bit odd, to bring race in to the picture


I think people with good health care and better nutrition/ diet opportunities

live longer than people without

My guess is that "native Americans" live shorter lives
for the same reasons




goes to book shelve to dust off copy of
"Bell Curve"

oh yeah, don't own it and never will
Good nutrition for one population may not be good for another, look at incidences of lactose intolerance across the different asian and native american populations compared to european populations.

Curse the racist enzyme!

Although I think that poverty has a much stronger effect on mortality since it just makes people even less likely to take preventative measures against diseases that they may be predisposed to, just look at the third world life expectancy our aboriginal population enjoys.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 05:04 PM   #84
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 4,903
Local Time: 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


seems a bit odd, to bring race in to the picture


Which I did because the CDC tracks it:



But it looks like life expectancies are going up for everyone, which is good news.
ntalwar is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 05:20 PM   #85
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 06:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Good nutrition for one population may not be good for another, look at incidences of lactose intolerance across the different asian and native american populations compared to european populations.

Curse the racist enzyme!

Although I think that poverty has a much
This middle aged white man
living on the beach is CA
is Lactose intolerant.

I think we are doing too much dairy.

It is killing the palnet and us - heart disease.

After adolescence we should cut way back.

I am sure there are some nutritionist looking in
that can weigh in on this.
deep is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 05:26 PM   #86
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 06:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar



Which I did because the CDC tracks it:



But it looks like life expectancies are going up for everyone, which is good news.
I do get what you are saying.

My guess is that the "native people" in Canada have shorter life spans, too.

And if they are 15-20% of that population
I would not want to separate them out to presuppose a higher average.

A National average includes all Nationals regardless of sub-group category.

It is good to look at sub-groups
to learn what we can do for groups that are at greater risk.
deep is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 05:39 PM   #87
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 4,903
Local Time: 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


And if they are 15-20% of that population
I would not want to separate them out to presuppose a higher average.
Actually about three and a half percent, but I get what you're saying as well.
ntalwar is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 05:56 PM   #88
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 03:36 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar



Which I did because the CDC tracks it:



But it looks like life expectancies are going up for everyone, which is good news.

The thing that jumps out at me from this graph is how much lower male life expectancies are by comparison to female, for both races.

But to merely draw attention to this is to invite ridicule from the so-called liberals, as we've seen in other threads on this forum.
financeguy is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 06:00 PM   #89
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep

This middle aged white man
living on the beach is CA
is Lactose intolerant.

I think we are doing too much dairy.

It is killing the palnet and us - heart disease.

After adolescence we should cut way back.

I am sure there are some nutritionist looking in
that can weigh in on this.
I am very lactose intolerant as well.

Giving cow's milk to young babies has some serious potential consequences (think juvenile diabetes). This was a very important finding by a research team in Toronto, several years ago. The dairy industry and dairy lobby have done a very good job. It is only a few decades ago that governments used to subsidize diary farmers in their battle against the evils of margarine. And today, there are still jurisdictions (Quebec most notably), where margarine has to be a certain colour, lest the public confuse it with wholesome butter.
anitram is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 06:04 PM   #90
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 4,903
Local Time: 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy

But to merely draw attention to this is to invite ridicule from the so-called liberals, as we've seen in other threads on this forum.
It's not a conservative/liberal thing for me. I merely used the government chart for statistical reasons, because it's proven that race and gender are factors in life expectancy for certain countries. E.g. life expectancy of a native American male versus a native Canadian male, or a white American woman versus a white French woman takes many of the factors out of the comparison, and is more credible.
ntalwar is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 06:05 PM   #91
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 06:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy



The thing that jumps out at me from this graph is how much lower male life expectancies are by comparison to female, for both races.

But to merely draw attention to this is to invite ridicule from the so-called liberals, as we've seen in other threads on this forum.
you are pretty consistent

looking out for us oppressed males
deep is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 06:07 PM   #92
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 06:36 PM
I'm fine with the women on top.
deep is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 06:08 PM   #93
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 09:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy



The thing that jumps out at me from this graph is how much lower male life expectancies are by comparison to female, for both races.

But to merely draw attention to this is to invite ridicule from the so-called liberals, as we've seen in other threads on this forum.


Draw attention to it all you want, just don't make ridiculous inferenences that it means males in general are discriminated against.

And if "so-called liberals" means someone who uses logic, then call me a "so-called liberal".
BVS is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 06:13 PM   #94
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 06:36 PM
Could this be a contributing factor?

Quote:
CDC: Men have 3 times more sex partners

By John Lauerman
Bloomberg
Article Last Updated: 06/22/2007 11:54:42 AM MDT

Almost one in three American men say they've had sex with at least 15 partners in their lives, triple the rate of similar behavior found in interviews with women, according to a government survey.

The results, reported today by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, came from surveys that probed the sexual habits and drug use of 6,237 people age 20 to 59 who answered questions from 1999 to 2002. About 4 percent of adults overall, and only 11 percent of unmarried adults, said in the survey that they never had sex.

President George W. Bush's administration has tried to promote sexual abstinence among unmarried people in the U.S. as a way to prevent diseases such as HIV, which are spread by intimate contact. The survey results, which are the first collected by the CDC on the number of lifetime sex partners, suggest the abstinence message may not be enough.

"To rely on just one strategy for something is just bad; the more options you have, the more likely people are to use one of them," said Bean Robinson, a psychologist and sexual behavior researcher at the University of Minnesota Medical School's Program in Human Sexuality in Minneapolis.

The average number of female sexual partners for men was 6.8, said Kathryn Porter, a medical officer for the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics in Hyattsville, Maryland, and one of the study's co-authors. Women reported an average of 3.7 male sexual partners, she said.

or maybe
we have sub-groups skewing this number, too.
deep is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 06:36 PM   #95
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 03:36 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
Initially there was a hodge podge of coverage. You had some private insurance, some employer co-pay insurance (much like in the US), and then the poor would be admitted to hospital on a charity basis, essentially. The way it evolved was basically like this: first, in Saskatchewan, a pilot program was started giving every citizen of SK free hospital coverage only. Then, a second program in a smaller town (can't remember which one off the top of my head) provided all the citizens in that town with complete, universal health insurance. When other provincial governments saw that this was functioning well and efficiently, a national commission was established with the view of expanding it throughout Canada. In 1958, every Canadian had free hospital services and 10 years later, the Medical Care Act was passed. This was eventually modernized into the act we have to day, The Canada Health Act, which establishes an agreement between the provinces and the federal government, outlining the five criteria which the provincial healthcare systems had to meet to qualify for a full federal cash contribution.

I will give you some statistics, as well so that you can see that this private healthcare by no means guarantees you more service or better service.

The OECD published a study in 2003, outlining health expenditures. The US health spending is 15% of total GDP (compared to Canada 9.9%, UK 7.7%, France 10.1%, Germany 11.1%, Japan 7.9%, Denmark 9%, etc). However, when you look at the # of acute beds per 1000, the US has less than all those countries. It has 2.8 acute beds/1000, compare to Canada 3.2, Germany 6.6, France 3.8, UK 3.7, Japan 8.5, Denmark 3.4. The US does have more MRIs per million than the UK, Canada, France and Germany, but lags behind Denmark (9.1 vs. 8.6) and REALLY lags behind Japan (8.6 v. 35.3).

The same study looked at other comparisons. The US has a lower life expectancy at birth than Canada (both men and women), a higher infant mortality rate, comparable cancer rates, considerably higher rates of cardiovascular deaths, higher rates of diabetes, obesity and smoking. I won't even compare to European countries because there the disparity is enormous. Plus, Canada and the US have more similar societies than the Europeans.

So that's just a quick overview for you.
Thanks anitram, that was really fascinating. Do you happen to know anything about what the level of resistance from private insurers, pharmaceutical companies and so on was like? As you pointed out earlier, that's obviously a huge factor in the political debate here...those are enormous, usually deep-pocketed, politically powerful actors with extensive interests of their own to protect and little reason to prioritize the longterm 'common good' over those.

Personally I've never been impressed by the it-would-break-our-backs-financially argument against changing anything, but fair enough it does exist. Although I think fear of giving the state too much power is generally a more influential line of criticism here (though of course there's some overlap between the two).
Quote:
Poor people do not see the doctor as often, and preventive medicine plays a small role in their overall wellbeing.
Inarguably true, though I can't help but find it a sad commentary that our collective lifestyle habits are such that preventive medicine (as opposed to a reasonably sound lifestyle to begin with) are that necessary in the first place.

The last time I went back to my hometown in Mississippi for a visit, a black friend of mine who's now a public health nurse showed me a recent study of US centenarians which, among other things, included the ironic finding that while black Southerners today are on the whole just about the worst-off socioeconomic group from a health standpoint, they nonetheless at that time accounted for almost 17% of all US centenarians--in other words, way overrepresented in that category. She had her theories as to why this might be true (based primarily on dietary, secondarily on other 'lifestyle' changes), but at any rate, it clearly wasn't a question of their having received superior healthcare. Of course centenarian studies don't provide the best basis for generalizing about things like that, but it was an interesting discrepancy.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 06:52 PM   #96
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland

Thanks anitram, that was really fascinating. Do you happen to know anything about what the level of resistance from private insurers, pharmaceutical companies and so on was like? As you pointed out earlier, that's obviously a huge factor in the political debate here...
I'm not an expert here but I don't believe the major resistance came from pharma and insurance companies. Remember, back in the 1960s, our level of private insurance was nowhere near what you have in the US, nor did they ever have the same amount of political leverage.

The largest opposition came from the Canadian Medical Association (and obviously their primary concern was with billing potential, regardless of how they disguised it). Universal healthcare was a political process here - once citizens of other provinces saw that the SK model worked, the NDP became a much more viable political entity. Although, certain provinces did not want federal intrusion into what they saw to be the provincial sphere (this is an issue of federalism which is tedious and boring and I won't get into it). In fact, Quebec flatly refused. But, the Canadian government hiked federal taxes by 2% in 1968 under the guise of social development, when everyone knew that the extra revenue would contribute to the national universal healthcare plan. Because every citizen would be paying this tax, the standout provinces like Quebec joined in, as they saw no benefit in opting out.

It's interesting that all the political strife and struggle happened a mere 40 years ago. And yet today, no national party could run on a platform of privatizing healthcare without a revolution in the streets. It's something Moore discussed in the movie, but using the UK model - how it's unthinkable to even suggest private healthcare over there. It's completely unacceptable to the population and that's why it just won't be viable. There has been talk of a two-tier system in Canada for a long time, usually it's in Alberta, but under the current model, resorting to such ideas would mean that you'd lose out on federal payments (if you institute things like user fees, the feds will not pay out your full amount of health transfer, since you are profiting in other ways).
anitram is offline  
Old 06-25-2007, 01:40 AM   #97
Refugee
 
dazzlingamy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The city of blinding lights and amazing coffee - Melbourne.
Posts: 2,468
Local Time: 01:36 PM
Just wanted to apologise for my greedy = obesity comment. I don't agree with that sentiment, and it was poorly worded. I mean to say that the Us (and most 1st world countries) are very much 'i want it NOW!' societies, which is a very big product of greediness.

Relly my whole point in my comments we that i feel so bad, and anguished for families and people who are screwed over by medical companies, and doctors when i believe giving people a fighting chance at life is such a basic human act.
dazzlingamy is offline  
Old 06-26-2007, 08:21 AM   #98
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,324
Local Time: 10:36 PM
PETA blasts Michael Moore for eating meat
Animal-rights group says filmmaker is the true ‘Sicko’
By Jeannette Walls
MSNBC
Updated: 3:11 a.m. ET June 26, 2007

PETA has a message for Michael Moore: You’re the Sicko.

The animal-rights group is blasting the filmmaker as a hypocrite for criticizing the U.S. healthcare system in his new documentary, “Sicko,” because they say he’s in such poor health himself.

“There’s an elephant in the room, and it is you,” PETA president Ingrid Newkirk wrote in a letter to Moore.

Newkirk urged the rotund Moore to become a vegetarian, which many nutritionists say is a good way to lose weight, and visit PETA’s Web site GoVeg.com for veggie recipes.

Writes Newkirk: “As they say at Nike (sorry!): ‘Just do it.”
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 06-26-2007, 09:14 AM   #99
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 10:36 PM
^ oh fucking spare me, PETA.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 06-27-2007, 11:20 AM   #100
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 10:36 PM
so i've been doing some reading around on this topic, which includes the bad parts of genuinely socialized medicine, and it seems to me that something is always lost and something is always gained no matter which model one chooses. at this point, what seems to make sense to me is what Romney (!!!) proposed in Mass, where health insurance is required of all citizens, in a manner similar to car insurance. perfect? no. but i think it's a step, a bridge to universal coverage, as opposed to socialized medicine.

what also struck me as interesting is that it seems that high prices in the US market for pharmecutical drugs actually lower prices in the rest of the world. without the US cash cow, you'd all be paying a whole lot more for your Valtrex. it does make sense that a profit-motive does spur innovation, and we've seen some starting innovation over the past 10 years, not least of which has been HIV medication, which will ultimately trickle down to keep more Africans alive. it does seem true that the US health system is subsidizing -- at least when it comes to pharmaceuticals -- other countries when it comes to both lower prices and higher innovation.

so what do we do, assuming the above is (generally) correct?
__________________

Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×