medicine is one of the areas where being economically driven causes problems.
medical research is stupidly expensive and companies need to recover their costs for their to be progress at all. incidentally its the /only/ valid argument i have seen for patents. it also explains a lot of the high expenses involved... its a shame, i feel that this is an industry that desperately needs to be nationalised because, even with the best of intentions, a business must be profitable to survive.
we regularly see layers of rhetoric and polical manuveuring attacking e.g. Obama care, the NHS and similar initiatives and from this i feel we lose out - they criticise the specifics for a political agenda. imo the spirit of these programs is exactly right - the problem is always sloppy implementation by politicians (as with any case where nationalisation is not effective - which is /provable/ almost in the mathematical sense). We can't expect them to do well though - they are winners of popularity contests which essentially boil down to competitions of rhetoric and salesmanship - they have no reason to have any of the prerequisite skills for us to expect them to do a good job in that arena - or even leadership in general. it is a massive failing of our particular flavour of democracy imo.
on the other side doctors are supposed to be bound by the Hippocratic oath. this utterly rules out not helping people because they can't afford it - and yet many physicians have to make that choice regularly - which is not just breaking their word, but against the entire spirit of medicine and morality.
all in all its a horrible situation, but one that i believe is incredibly fixable... however articles like this are attacking the institutions which currently allow us to have medicine and portraying it in a way that the common man will empathize with. its just another pile of rhetoric distracting us from being productive imo... if you dig into any of the details as other commenters have mentioned, the factual basis is weak.
medical research is stupidly expensive and companies need to recover their costs for their to be progress at all. incidentally its the /only/ valid argument i have seen for patents. it also explains a lot of the high expenses involved... its a shame, i feel that this is an industry that desperately needs to be nationalised because, even with the best of intentions, a business must be profitable to survive.
we regularly see layers of rhetoric and polical manuveuring attacking e.g. Obama care, the NHS and similar initiatives and from this i feel we lose out - they criticise the specifics for a political agenda. imo the spirit of these programs is exactly right - the problem is always sloppy implementation by politicians (as with any case where nationalisation is not effective - which is /provable/ almost in the mathematical sense). We can't expect them to do well though - they are winners of popularity contests which essentially boil down to competitions of rhetoric and salesmanship - they have no reason to have any of the prerequisite skills for us to expect them to do a good job in that arena - or even leadership in general. it is a massive failing of our particular flavour of democracy imo.
on the other side doctors are supposed to be bound by the Hippocratic oath. this utterly rules out not helping people because they can't afford it - and yet many physicians have to make that choice regularly - which is not just breaking their word, but against the entire spirit of medicine and morality.
all in all its a horrible situation, but one that i believe is incredibly fixable... however articles like this are attacking the institutions which currently allow us to have medicine and portraying it in a way that the common man will empathize with. its just another pile of rhetoric distracting us from being productive imo... if you dig into any of the details as other commenters have mentioned, the factual basis is weak.