Gupta vs Moore (on CNN's Larry King)

Dr. Sanjay Gupta gives Michael Moore a run for his money on his statistics and fact gathering skills.

This is all about health care.

I have been around enough to have experienced all sorts of health care, and have been in a position to observe it. My father and one of my grandfathers were doctors. As a three-year-old child, I accompanied my grandfather on house calls in poor neighborhoods where people could scarcely pay anything (as I later learned). I have received socialist healthcare in the former Eastern Bloc. I have talked to Cuban refugees about their situation. I am now in Canada.

Here’s what I observe.
1. Our American health care used to be much more under the control of the doctors. It was much more a calling, and doctors did not expect to live quite so much like princes. They made house calls. They did not charge poor patients much of anything at all. They even gave free service. For example, during the Great Depression, my grandfather continued his medical practice as usual, but his income declined drastically, simply because many of his patients could not pay.
2. On the other hand, in the 1890s a doctor could get a degree in two years, skipping four-year college. There simply was not that much to learn compared to today. Medical expenses are higher now because the training is longer, and the technology is more complex. I don’t know very many people who say that we should give up what modern science has given us.
3. People always want something for nothing. Most of them don’t know much biology. When they get sick, or life is threatened, they will demand that heaven and earth be moved in their behalf (whether they are worth it or not). There is almost no limit to what people want others to do for them. Naturally, they do not wish to pay. This is a problem.
4. Socialist medicine has some of the same problems as any other. There are limits to what one can spend, and since socialist societies are generally poor, they ration health care. They just don’t talk about what they are doing. The rationing takes place in several ways: “pulling the plug” on older patients, giving different grades of care to different social strata (oridinary people vs. party members and high officials); and avoiding expensive treatments (such as advance cancer surgery).
5. Cuba. How can a country where at one time oranges required a doctor’s prescription, be considered to have good health standards? They have a primitive system. Therefore, Moore and others note approvingly how inexpensive it is! They point to the good infant-survival rate. Assuming that the statistics are even trustworthy (which in socialist countries is almost never true), this is nice, but not impressive. Most babies are born naturally, and survive, with a modicum of very cheap measures. In a socialist system, you can order the mother to come for prenatal care. Here, it is up to the mother, who may be a crack-using derelict. In Cuba, they can abort a fetus which doesn’t look so good. Here we keep alive premature infants who would be considered hopeless cases elsewhere.
What about life expectancy? This is really interesting. Extensive experiments with rats show that the starved rats live longer than the well fed ones. So it is with people. In Cuba, there is little chance for a normal person to over-indulge in fatty foods. Most people there are slender there for a reason: there isn’t that much food available. It is not such a comfortable life, but it is good for life-extension.
6. Canada. The care in Canada parallels their postal system. Canada Post has the nicest people possible in their offices, and everything seems proper (except that the postage rates are almost double those in the USA). However, their reliability is a joke. Last I checked, they did not even offer insurance, because they would lose money on the deal. They just don’t perform that efficiently.

In their medical care, the doctors and nurses are well trained and motivated, in my experience. However, they do not even have some of the drugs which we in the US have available. Why not? A central board determines which drugs will be offered, and avoids some newer ones to save money. The waiting lines for some simple procedures are very long. People point out that a dog can get an MRI at a vet in a day, but for a human it may take months. Furthermore, it is illegal for medical care to be given outside the socialistic system! In England and most western European countries, you can always go outside the government healthcare network (at your own expense). Even in formerly communistic Poland, there were little ways to get around the creaky government system: by seeing friends who were doctors, or visiting quasi-private “health cooperatives.” Not in Canada. They even argue whether private MRI scanning facilities should be allowed. Apparently they have a phobia about any one person getting anything better than anyone else, so all must be at a mediocre level. It is the fairness idea run amuck.
When in Canada, I hold my medical work for when I return to the States. By contrast, I get my car repairs done in Canada, because the work is cheaper and very good. If the Canadians can repair cars, they can take care of a human hulk, also — and they could do it better with a free system.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.