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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: biotech_bull who wrote (69190)	5/29/2008 1:48:10 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542728

BB, I agree that Bush and his rabid supporters pushed the pendulum far off center and that it set the stage for Obama. Interestingly, however, the lessons of competence over ideology, pragmatism over purported idealism and compromise over partisanship are lessons where the pendulum settles with a loud thud right where it needs to sit. Other issues of government non intervention in the regulatory market, the appointment of right wing judges who see things in conservative black and white, and trickle down economics may swing too far from the far right...time will tell. We won't know if the pendulum has swung too far from the right until it settles in and we see the results. Will the provision of health care become more efficient and be allocated more justly, will regulation be smarter and create a more efficient and more just economic environment, will we have a cleaner America without undermining the economy, will education become more equally available and more suited to the needs of our many children and displaced workers, will regulatory agencies begin to function for the good of those they are charged with protecting rather than for the good of those who need regulation...we'll find out over the next years. If some things work we'll keep them, if they don't we'll drop them. I think it's clear that some significant new experiments in American government should be examined. The economy has left too many strong backed, willing workers out in the cold, it has left too many powerful financial interests with too much power over the vast majority of Americans and it has left too many of our fellow citizens with too little hope. In the end we can forget all the scare talk. It's not about whether something is "right wing" or "left wing," it's about whether it works or whether it doesn't. In my view many of the purported "left wing" policies attributed to Obama seem workable. Ed

To: biotech_bull who wrote (69190)	5/29/2008 2:24:45 PM
From: spiral3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542728

PS As for the crazy neurosurgeon, I agree with the analogy that competence is paramount. But character imo is equally important, it's best to get a second opinion from a less talented surgeon one trusts to ensure the surgery is indeed necessary. From what I’ve read about it, I understand that the risk of being sued for malpractice has little to do with how many mistakes a doctor makes. There are doctors who make a lot of mistakes and never get sued and there are those who make few mistakes, but get sued a lot. Obviously there’s a lot in between as well. Most patients suffering under medical error, never sue. Of course they have been harmed, but they sue when they feel that they have received inadequate personal attention. When they perceive negligence. People do not sue doctors they like. From voice testing in medical situations, some interesting implications towards dealing with the medical malpractice clusterf*ck we have in this country. At the least an opportunity to cut spending dramatically, because basically it’s free. Impossible to argue with the economics of it. Unfortunately it would put a lot of people out of work which is what happens when you assume that healthcare is a commodity. What was found was that doctors with dominant voices were more likely to be used, I mean sued, but a surgeon with a less dominant, more concerned sounding voice was more likely to land up in the non-sued group. Physicians who had never been sued tended to spend a few minutes more with their patients, I believe about 3, than doctors who had been sued. The non sued group were much more likely to have made, orienting comments and to engage in active listening. They were far more likely to laugh or be funny. The amount and/or quality of the information dispensed was found to be similar. The difference was entirely in how they talked to their patients. Stripping out the content, what doctors and patients were actually saying to each other, and leaving just some sort of sonic modulation, reveals correlations nigh causation between intonation, pitch and rhythm, and who get’s sued and who doesn’t. By designating sound proxies for things such as warmth, aggression, hostility and anxiousness it was possible to predict which doctors were more likely to be sued. Obviously a lot of work needs to be done on medical error as well since this by itself, is a massive problem. But malpractice suits occur when respect for the patient is missing. So I think you raise a good point.