The Spin Doctor Will See You Now

"If I had to do it all over again, I don't think I would use the Ontario system," said Canadian cancer patient Lindsay McGreith. "I would get my wife to drive me to Buffalo, because I know in Buffalo you'd get looked after, whereas here you'd just sit for seven and a half hours. ... Our system is lousy." McGreith's comments are in a soundbite and B-roll video package (basically, an unassembled video news release) distributed by the PR firm MultiVu and funded by Health Care America, which is funded in part by pharmaceutical and hospital companies. It's part of an organized industry response to the Michael Moore movie "Sicko." Another MultiVu fake news video, which was funded by America's Health Insurance Plans, promotes a "public-private" health care system and decries Moore's single-payer proposal as an unpopular, "simplistic" and unrealistic "public takeover of the healthcare system."


Julia Schopick

It's so sad that this anti-SiCKO media campaign has been mounted. Michael Moore made this wonderful film to create discussion -- and change. For critics to concentrate their efforts on pointing out that the UK and Canada, with universal healthcare, have long lines and waiting lists, is counter-productive.

The interesting thing is that NO ONE has accused Michael Moore of inventing the horrific stories of the people he showcased in his movie -- both the uninsured and the insured.

The truth is that these kinds of healthcare disasters happen every day in America. As Lee Einer, the film's insurance company "hitman" says: "You’re not slipping through the cracks. Somebody made that crack and swept you towards it. And the intent is to maximize profits.”

Our healthcare system is in grave trouble. I don't think we have the time to argue about whether or not England and Canada have long lines.

We really should get to work to fix this problem!

To read my complete (and rather long) review of SiCKO, please go to

Many thanks for your wonderful work!

Julia Schopick

Maybe I just don't understand health care well enough but I just don't see how prices would really change all that much with "free" government health insurance. I've always been under the impression that our medicine was expensive because of how we obtain it and that our care was expensive because doctors have been sued to hell and have ridiculous insurance that they have to afford themselves. I don't see either of these changing just because just because the government is taking care of things. More people would have health care but there'd still be the same overhead and it would be getting paid by our taxes going up instead of big personal bills each month, right?

I think the privatized idea sounds a lot nicer. Competition is one of the most effective ways to lower the cost of anything. Of course there might still be limits due to malpractice insurance and whatnot. If I'm missing something about this let me know.

I make music at
I offend people at

Thats what they want you to believe, Your two impressions are exactly what insurance companies have been harping for years. When premiums go up by 5-6% every year for the last decade and inflation is only at 2-3% a year somethings fishy. They want us to believe it costs them soooo much money to bring us the care, and its not them driving prices up.

Go look at market share in every state. Almost 40 states have at least 2 companies that control over 50% market share in those states. Some states just 2 companies own more then 80% of the market share.This isn't competition. If we had competition our prices wouldn't go up more then 5% a year, double the rate of inflation.

Isnt insurance supposed to be us paying someone else to take the risk? Its not working that way at the moment. They just pass the risk and all costs associated with it down to us. Why is it we cant find out how much services cost? Why must we be in agony after getting seriously hurt because the $1000 we spend every month on premiums might not cover me?