Letters to the Editor

Editor,

I would agree that Michael Moore’s movie is a one sided view. He was out to make a point about health care in the United States and did so, I think, effectively. It is not a fair and unbiased report, but as a person who is a part of the health care industry, it is sadly very true. It is also true while the other health care systems that he glorifies have problems with wait times and shortages; they cover all of their residents with quality care at a lower cost with higher patient satisfaction. These include countries with government-sponsored programs such as England and France as well as those that have private insurance such as Israel, the Netherlands and Switzerland. What I really do not understand is Atención’s defense of the health care system in the United States.

Your two articles in Atención are filled with partial facts and one-side reporting beyond what I found in the movie. If you were well read in health policy, you would not be defending health care in the States. Even most of our politicians realize that we have a serious problem that needs a systemic fix. The only issue is whether we have the will to change an entrenched industry that does not well serve much of our population. It is true you can get superior health care in the States, but the overall quality of health care is not high for many people. In fact, it is lower than other industrialized nations. (37th is the quoted figure) and this is not just based on WHO’s assessment. Much research has been conducted and many juried studies published with the conclusion that although the States has some of the world’s best equipped hospital and spends double the median of other industrialized nations, it ranks lower in all cases on the quality of care. These include 37 indicators from public, professional and nat
ional organizations in five broad domains: health outcomes, quality, access, efficiency and equity. These indicators are not patient satisfaction but include serious issues like infant mortality, hypertension care, ability to see a doctor when sick on the same or next day, after care after an emergency visit, preventative care, etc.

I could go on about the reason for the problem and potential solutions. Many professional organizations and our government are trying to do just that. What I do not understand is why the Atención staff does not understand the seriousness of the health care problem and the need to have major restructuring in health care delivery to solve these problems. My last query is who are the Atención staff members and what is their background to take on this critical issue?

Joan Duke


In response,

We thank you for your comments and would like to explain that the publication of the articles about Michael Moore’s documentary Sicko was done with the idea of providing an alternative viewpoint. It must be admitted that all three articles on the topic were tinged with bias, in one direction or the other; however, we are certain our readers are able to come to their own conclusions after reading the said articles.

The Atención staff have varying opinions, experiences and backgrounds. The issue of health care is one that affects everyone and thus knowledge of and experience with it is not limited to a select few. It would be ridiculous to say that we do not hope for better health care in the US (and, that being said, everywhere) and the articles were by no means meant to give the impression that US health care is infallible.

We hope this clears the matter and restores your faith in the staff.


The Atención staff

Editor,

I’ve just moved to San Miguel from Chicago and notice that, where I live on Aldama, the cats are very thin. My neighbor says that’s true all over town because there are very few mice. For sake of the poor starving cats, I believe we should have mice shipped here. A friend in Dallas tells me that he can send a truck load. What do you think?

J. Alfred

LETTER FROM THE PUBLISHER

In a letter in the July 20 issue of Atención by Mr. Pedro Jimenez, a reference was made to Mr. José Luna in the context of the efforts by the hospitality industry to reinstate the Sanmiguelada. By way of introducing the topic, Atención staff reported, in a preface to the letter, that an Internet campaign was protesting the cancellation of the Sanmiguelada. The research done at the time showed that the only person mentioned by name on the website supporting the campaign ( www.sanmiguelada.org ) was Mr. José Luna.

The content of the letter itself reflects only the opinion of the writer, Mr. Pedro Jimenez, who seems to have also used other media for the same purpose, and in no way should be construed as part of an editorial position of the newspaper or its publisher, the Biblioteca Pública. Moreover, the publication never meant to offend Mr. Luna or any of the members of CANIRAC or any other association representing the owners and employees of hotels, restaurants and bars of San Miguel.

Atención is a community newspaper without any political or private interests and aims beyond informing the public of issues and events of civic and cultural interest. The only affiliation the newspaper has is with the Biblioteca Pública de San Miguel de Allende, an institution that has been at the service of the community for over 50 years and whose mission is to help the youth of the municipality.