SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A US National Health Care System?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Alighieri who wrote (14151)3/9/2010 12:31:04 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 42652
 
So because the study is hard to conduct the Harvard study is by default bogus?

The claim isn't that its bogus, but that its so far from definitive as to not provide a reliable guide as to what the real number is. Other similar studies show wildly different numbers, other different types of studies show little evidence of any mortality effect.

"The only truly experimental study on health insurance, a randomized study of almost 4,000 subjects done by Rand and concluded in 1982, found that increasing the generosity of people’s health insurance caused them to use more health care, but made almost no difference in their health status."

Don't know about you, but I see the potential to save a bundle by following the above to its absurd conclusion.

Increasing generosity not resulting in saved lives, does not imply that reducing generosity will not cost lives, and certainly doesn't imply spending nothing will not cost lives. It simply isn't "following the above" to a conclusion.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News