Michael Moore Documentary Rattles Health-Care Giants

Advertising Age ^ | 8/21/06 | Rich Thomaselli

[Huntress]

NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- The health-care industry is worried sick over "Sicko."

Few details have emerged about the 2007 documentary from Michael Moore, the filmmaker who ripped apart Detroit automakers with "Roger and Me" and now has his sights set on the $1.5 trillion pharmaceutical and health-care industry. But it's still enough to mobilize health-care trade groups who are trying to discredit the film.

No balance from Moore "A review of America's health-care system should be balanced, thoughtful and well-researched to pin down what works and what needs to be improved," said Ken Johnson, senior VP for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. "You won't get that from Michael Moore."

Added a spokesman for one of the top 10 pharma companies: "We expect it will be one-sided and biased, just like his other documentaries."

Several other pharmaceutical makers did not return calls for comment. But Pfizer, AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline all advised their employees last year not to speak to Mr. Moore when he began his research for "Sicko." It is not known whether any HMOs or drug companies will appear in the film.

"We were approached, but declined," said a spokeswoman for a second top-10 drugmaker. "Frankly, as much as we felt like we wanted to get our message across, in the end we didn't want to subject ourselves to the editing process."

Academy Award winner Mr. Moore, the Academy Award-winning director of "Bowling for Columbine" and "Fahrenheit 9/11" -- the latter the biggest-grossing documentary in movie history -- recently told Variety that the drug companies have been on to him for some time.

"They're so hip [to me] that whenever we have a family" with a health-care nightmare "they get free health care," Mr. Moore said during panel discussions last month at his second annual Traverse City Film Festival in Michigan. "There has been a 100% success rate of the people we're filming of getting whatever they need from the HMOs, pharmaceutical companies, whatever."

On his website, Mr. Moore offered a snapshot of what the documentary entails. "Back in February, I asked if people would send me letters describing their experiences with our health-care system, and I received over 19,000 of them," he wrote. "To read about the misery people are put through on a daily basis by our profit-based system was both moving and revolting. We've spent the better part of this year shooting our next movie, 'Sicko.' As we've done with our other films, we don't discuss them while we are making them. If people ask, we tell them 'Sicko' is a comedy about 45 million people with no health care in the richest country on Earth."

Film in flux Mr. Moore didn't return calls for comment. But on his site he said that, like his other films, what he starts with is not necessarily what he ends with.

"That, I can say with certainty, is happening now as we shoot 'Sicko,'" he wrote. "I don't think the country needs a movie that tells you that HMOs and the pharmaceutical companies suck. Everybody knows that. I'd like to show you some things you don't know. So stay tuned for where this movie has led me. I think you might enjoy it."

[kinghorse]

If you say so. I think they were running scared.

[L98Fiero]

"If some healthy, single 28-year-old chooses not to pay $400/month for health insurance, that's his choice."

I was offered healthcare much cheaper than through employers When I was younger and always turned it down. I didn't think it was worth the money at the time and I don't remember missing it.

[robertpaulsen]

Yeah, but since he thought it was, that's how I'd handle it.

[Conservative Actuary]

But the fact of the matter is, statistically, he's not going to get sick enough at that age to justify the expenditure. He's way money ahead by paying cash for the few services he uses

Insurance is not supposed to be a good deal for the buyer. It is to protect against the low probability of a very expensive loss. The main problem with health insurance is that it has to much 1st dollar coverage, which is why HSA insurance policies are such a good idea.

[sbMKE]

The system is messed up alright - I'm facing $1,000's of bills for a recent delivery and associated care for my wife. United Health Care says they won't cover us due to the fact that we're covered by another provider. Even though we're not. So, we're covered but not covered, paying premiums but not recieving benefits. We've been through 3 months of this now and the claims keep getting rejected. What happens when insurance refuses to pay based on trumped up charges? Mind you, it isn't that UHC is saying I'm not covered, it's that they're insisting that another phantom provider should be receiving and paying claims before they do.

[syriacus]

Surprised he didn't call the film Fahrenheit 98.6

[mockingbyrd]

Could you get them for breach of contract?

My insurance wouldn't cover my daughter's 24 month shots. Because she was 24 months and three weeks old when we got them. They paid for the shots, but they wouldn't cover the office visit. (Which was $150 for a three minute visit)

I am a firm believer in capitalism, but only in capitalism guided by Christian values, which is not what we have in this country now.

[robertpaulsen]

"Insurance is not supposed to be a good deal for the buyer."

It's a good deal for anyone who uses it.

"The main problem with health insurance is that it has to much 1st dollar coverage, which is why HSA insurance policies are such a good idea."

I don't disagree. But how do you get people to spend their own money on preventative check-ups? Colonoscopies, for example, aren't cheap.

[ukie55]

"Sicko: My Life Story" by Michael Moore

[Stultis]

Huh? Sicko is about health care?! I assumed it was autobiographical.

So, anyway, what is the healthcare industry worried about? It's impossible to imagine criticism coming with less credibility. Indeed Moore has a proven track record of perversity such that his criticism has negative, i.e. reverse, as opposed to zero, credibility. IOW if M.M. savages you, most Americans will assume you are doing good and worthy work.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

"In the short time it took Tom Green to be diagnosed, screened with ultrasound and CAT scans, and operated on twice in the United States, a typical Canadian man would still be waiting to see a urologist for an initial consultation."

This is too true.

The socialized health-care system rations care in many ways. Throughout the 1990's admissions to medical schools, and nursing programs was restricted (or cut back). The theory was "doctors create their own demand" -- in other words, the government deliberately set out to create long queues for care as a sneaky way of rationing & budget-balancing. Now, without a hint of shame, these same politicians claim we can't have private care clinics because they would "steal doctors from the public health care system".

Complaints about waiting lists were dismissed as "right-wing dogma" for many years. Now, many (not most, unfortunately) Canadians have at last recognized that access to a waiting list is not the same as access to health care.

People forget that the alternative to a socialized health care system isn't paying the full shot for expensive operations -- it's paying for insurance to cover the eventuality of needing those operations. If taxes were reduced by the amount of the cost of the health care system, the majority could buy equivalent or better insurance with the savings.

[Conservative Actuary]

Insurance only works (not just health, but life, auto and any other type) if at the time the buying decision is made the person is paying more in premium than their expected claim costs. It can not work any other way that is why states with community rating have no affordable individual insurance.

The problem of getting people to pay for their basic care is difficult since people have been conditioned not to pay for it. If people could price shop then cost of most services would come down. Their are HSA policies available that after the deductible provide 100% coverage that to cap your out of pocket costs in any one year. Also the more expensive tests are usually not required till 40+ so a person could save in their HSA account in their 20s and 30s to help cover those costs.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

Hypochrondriac Lawyers with fat kids?

[Tulsa Ramjet]

"One way to cut costs is to pay attention to outcome studies, cost vs outcome."

You mean cost effectiveness studies. Not everyone can have brain surgery. Not everyone requires it. Not everyone can pay for it. That doesn't mean the system is wrong. If everyone needed brain surgery, the costs would be greatly reduced. Instead, everyone needs pills, and they are greatly re...oops, they are high too. Hmmm. The goal of the pharmacuetical community is not to heal you. Its to use pills to prolongue your life so that you can buy more pills and keep stock up. :) Well not all pills.

Much of the problems are preventative diet and habits. And yes folks, smoking is one of them, as is overeating. I shouldn't have to pay for it either through taxes, or increased insurance premiums. Frankly, you live badly, you die early.

[3catsanadog]

A friend of mine who is a Democrat wants "free" health care so bad. He gushes over Hillary's plan to charge corporations - as he told me - $1.40 for every hour worked by each employee. That would be $11.20 every day the company I worked for would have to shell out to Big Brother to pay for my health care. $112.00 every 2 weeks.

No way a small business could keep up with that additional expense. And my friend could not understand why he would not be seeing his regular raises any more.

[3catsanadog]

Just look at how well my hero Fidel did recently.

Why do I have this image of the operating room, Fidel under anesthesia, the gowned surgeons and nurses hovering over to do his surgery and armed Castro bodyguards ready to shoot dead the surgeon who slips up.