Sicko did create an awareness after all, even if folks did not see the movie...the AMA and Sicko though are on different sides of the table as far as solutions go...BD
The American Medical Association plans to spend $5 million on the initial phase of a campaign designed to make health care reform the top issue on voters' minds in the 2008 presidential election. The ultimate goal is to win passage of legislation in 2009 that would provide health insurance coverage to every American. "This is a full-court press ... to get voters talking and politicians acting," said AMA President-elect Dr. Nancy Nielsen, an internist from Buffalo. "We're going to spend as much money as it takes to get all Americans covered.
A new Kaiser Family Foundation poll found the film has had a much bigger influence on the health care debate than its so-so box office numbers would suggest.
About half of those surveyed viewed health insurers and drug companies unfavorably. Hospitals and doctors were seen in a more favorable light.
It would be best to look beyond the "we're in it together" marketing and note 1) the AMA supports tax penalties for those middle class individuals without health insurance and 2) the AMA supports Point of Service, the subject of marketing blitz campaigning where Medicare recipients can opt to see any physician who accepts Medicare and for this "privilege" insureds pay increased costs--note that the shortfall in PAYING for this new "option" is assigned to the insureds. Instead of just knee-jerk get them some coverage nonsense, we need to call the AMA on the carpet that it has all this money to spend on marketing any insurance at all instead of participating in a real way to get universal health care for individuals.- conoutofconsumer
ReplyDelete