Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (1919)	8/30/2007 4:24:51 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 42652

I could reasonably be seen as creating a dichotomy, and to the extent it does, it is indeed a false one. But maybe its the doctors creating the dichotomy. There not arguing "we have to consider our particular expertise along with the statistical information", as much as they are (at least according to the book excerpt and blog post) rejecting the statistical evaluation program completely. (Although maybe there is some other reason they dislike and discard the program, that the post doesn't mention, and the "cookie-cutter medicine" is only part of the issue) Megan applies it more generally, seeing a similar thought with the teachers who hate "teaching to the test", or journalists who want to write articles in non-standard ways. There is probably something to that, but each of those have their own separate issues that aren't necessarily easy to disentangle. Also the quality of writing, or probably even teaching is IMO harder to measure in any sort of objective sense than medical results (not that medical results are necessarily easy to quantify and measure, "easier" doesn't imply "easy")