Was relatively surprised to see Kevin MD state that, in the end, he would vote for the health care reform bill before the Senate. [Note, the post was written on 12/21, and it didn't pass until 12/24, so I'm not exactly clear on what changes may have been made between the 21st and 24th, and if that would impact his opinion. Only surprised because Kevin strikes me as a basically conservative guy. His post is long, thoughtful, takes a look at both sides and brings some different perspectives to the table. Like how about this one:
And, as I wrote earlier this year in the USA Today, medical malpracticeneeds to be reformed for the patient’s sake, not the doctors’.Of course, he's getting mostly slammed in his comments. By people who'd rather be condescending and dismissive than actually address points with data or citations of any kind.
Read his post. And read the comments too, so you can know what the latest talking points are on the side of the divide.
And my second link is another example of all hat no cattle, or whatever that phrase is.
In the post Warning: Graphic Health Politics, GetBetterHealth examines a graph originally published on the National Geographic blog. Some are using the graph to draw the conclusion that countries with public health or universal care or single-payer get more bang for their health care buck than we do. And the author of the post disagrees that this conclusion can be drawn.
It's a really interesting post, yes, and certainly brings up some outliers. Or exceptions to the rule. And then questions whether there are more outliers than not. More exceptions than rules.
But I kind of wish he'd offer some answers...or draw some alternative conclusions.
What DOES the graph tell us? That's my question, and it goes unanswered for now.