by watson 347 Replies latest jw friends
And that's exactly why Dawkins does not want to live in a Darwinian society.
The rich and successful not_getting_value_for_their_money would leave the rest to wither. They do not see the benefit of someone else getting services at their expense.
Huh?
Oh Christ, I won't bite.
You brought it up doll. Dish or STFU.
So has America largely ignored stem cell research or has it developed alternatives, or both, or neither?
Are you kidding?
Go back and read my post carefully. Not angrily. It is very clear. I won't deny that advances have beem made in Europe. But you guys over there are so busy looking at your navel lint, looking down your long noses at the frontier rustics, and being distracted by Bush's non-funding of new cell lines (this is a FAR cry from a BAN!) that you don't realize that we have made embryonic stem cells obsolete for therapeutic purposes. We can manufacture them out of the patient's own tissues- we swap genes and lengthen telomeres to make them pluripotent and non-senescent.
BTS
Tort reform is necessary. It is one of many pieces in the puzzle.
Tort reform is miniscule in relation to overall healthcare cost, as you have pointed out on this very forum. It's the smallest, most not-healthcare-so-much-as-legal-reform, standalone, piece of the puzzle. Deal with it.
Tort reform is miniscule in relation to overall healthcare cost, as you have pointed out on this very forum. It's the smallest, most not-healthcare-so-much-as-legal-reform, standalone, piece of the puzzle. Deal with it.
Oh! look what the internet shitted out!
Tort reform is miniscule in relation to overall healthcare cost
$25,000,000,000 per year is hardly miniscule. Unless you are talking about a Marxist's budget deficit.
A big number and a picture! Oh, Look what the internet shitted out!
Although damage award caps could slightly limit the future growth of liability insurance premiums – about 6 to 13 percent over time, says Mello, “it tends to be oversold as a solution and it’s pretty unfair to patients.”
Annual jury awards and legal settlements involving doctors amounts to “a drop in the bucket” in a country that spends $2.3 trillion annually on health care, Amitabh Chandra, another Harvard University economist, recently told Bloomberg News. Chandra estimated the cost of jury awards at about $12 per person in the U.S., or about $3.6 billion. Insurer WellPoint Inc. has also said that liability awards are not what’s driving premiums.
And a 2004 report by the Congressional Budget Office said medical malpractice makes up only 2 percent of U.S. health spending. Even “significant reductions” would do little to curb health-care expenses, it concluded.
A study by Bloomberg also found that the proportion of medical malpractice verdicts among the top jury awards in the U.S. declined over the last 20 years. “Of the top 25 awards so far this year, only one was a malpractice case.” Moreover, at least 30 states now cap damages in medical lawsuits.
have I told you lately that...
Go back and read my post carefully. Not angrily.
No anger here dude. Just asking.....
So
we have made embryonic stem cells obsolete for therapeutic purposes
interesting....
and how long before America achieves its rightful place in the healthcare performance and life expectancy league tables?
What did I say 6er? Did I say it was the single wholesale solution? No. I said it was one of many pieces of the puzzle. I did not say it was the panacea. Your rebuttle based on that strawman, therefore, is moot.
Healthcare spending in the US for 2009 will reach 2.5 trillion. Do the math. 2% of that is no joke.
BTS
