To: Lane3 who wrote (8478 ) 8/21/2009 12:06:12 AM From: Archie Meeties Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 42652 Go back to the original issue. Hight rate of injury and death from a cause - drinking and driving. A method of reducing it that can be implemented in emergency rooms. No incentive to implement this method because it is population based. Not compensated by current private insurance. = an example of where a universal system which focuses on the public good would be benficial. And FYI your post contained 2 examples of the straw man logical fallacy. One, "For that matter, I suppose "epidemiologists" could consider all murders to be health problems. The result of that kind of thinking would be that all deaths by accident and murder are health care system failures. WHO apparently thinks so as do you..." Just making stuff up here... Two, "Blaming all deaths from trauma on the health care system is a real stretch." Which I never did and in fact went out of my way to rank alcohol related injury as within the top 5. (Rankings for accidental injury are actually age dependent, but in the late teen, early adulthood age group are #1 or #2 as a source of morbidity/mortality, and within that group, some 30-40% are alcohol related). This part "If alcoholism and trauma have such a strong cause and effect relationship then perhaps the term, "accident," is being misappropriated by your epidemiologists. Accidents are, by definition, unforeseen events. If trauma can be predicted, then the trauma is not unforeseen, ergo not an accident. It's as much a health consequence from alcoholism as a leg amputation is from diabetes." is thoughtful. And actually one can attempt to predict the incidence of alcohol related injury by looking at rates of alcoholism, avg. time spent driving, use of seatbelts, road conditions, and a few other variable. That statistical rate doesn't necessarily mean that we should call an individual death not an accident for statistical purposes.