Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

A little personal commentary

Posted by CliffStamp 
This forum is currently read only. You can not log in or make any changes. This is a temporary situation.
Re: A little personal commentary
March 02, 2014 11:09PM
People are frequently more careful with what they put into their septic system than the atmosphere.
Re: A little personal commentary
March 02, 2014 11:42PM
Is arguing that people produces gases the same thing as arguing that people are responsible for climate change? It is certainly part of the argument but it doesn't answer the question does it?

This subject is so overly politicized, and so many large companies are banking that they can sell people on man-made global climate change, that disinformation on the subject is probably akin to the disinformation regarding cutlery steels on BF.

I also think that many people who champion the fight against Global Warming er, Climate Change, are just concerned with pollution in general. That is fine, but let's call it what it is.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member
Re: A little personal commentary
March 02, 2014 11:45PM
"What if all this climate change stuff isnt true and we make a better world for nothing"
Re: A little personal commentary
March 02, 2014 11:54PM
Quote
Mark a
"What if all this climate change stuff isnt true and we make a better world for nothing"

What if giant corporations get billions of dollars in taxpayer money to sell shitty lighbulbs because people will believe anything they are told?


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member
Re: A little personal commentary
March 03, 2014 01:50AM
Oh I am we'll aware of the financial "consequences" of the climate change game.
Re: A little personal commentary
March 03, 2014 04:19AM
My led lights are great they last for so much longer, well worth getting.

Re: A little personal commentary
March 04, 2014 04:26AM
Quote
Chum
Quote
Mark a
"What if all this climate change stuff isnt true and we make a better world for nothing"

What if giant corporations get billions of dollars in taxpayer money to sell shitty lighbulbs because people will believe anything they are told?

You're sort of falling into an extremely complex multi-faceted argument without realizing it. What if you assume that our fossil fuels will some day run out, irrespective of global climate change. What do you think we, the human race, will be doing over that last cubic mile of gasoline?

The ironic reversal is that there is a well documented economic phenomenon that, when you improve efficiency, you in turn will begin to consume more ultimately leading to a higher level of resource consumption than prior to the efficiency improvement. Ironic eh? Obviously not true in all cases.

I do actually get a kick out of, and more or less concur with, Mark's statement of "What if all this climate change stuff isnt true and we make a better world for nothing."


Quote
Chum
Is arguing that people produces gases the same thing as arguing that people are responsible for climate change? It is certainly part of the argument but it doesn't answer the question does it?

Actually it is PRECISELY the same thing. You've fallen into the false dichotomy trap, essentially arguing that if a set "narrow" range of climate temperature predictions don't occur, then no climate change occurred. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our climate is the air we breathe. If it contains significantly more carbon dioxide than before, that means you've changed it. Nobody really gives a fuck whether it gets warmer, cooler, stays the same temp, or Kim Kardashian shows us her tits again, it has still changed. Just as an example, I read a study the other day regarding the effects of our increased CO2 levels on T. radicans' urushiol production. The study concluded that the change in our atmosphere had already made an impact in the plant's toxic oil production. Now perhaps you live in a happy part of the planet where there is no poison ivy, so you get to happily tell us all to fuck off, but maybe you do and maybe the next time you get some you'll take a moment to think about that.

Or there is global dimming via aircraft, again a measurable impact we're having on our climate.

But I think my favorite is Beijing right now. Its not been terribly popular on the news, at least not in the US, but if you go looking for the actual news rather than the bimbos on CNN you can find that Beijing is really suffering at the moment. I defy you to tell me that everything is totally cool with the climate over there, and that what you're seeing is totally normal and natural fog...... in the middle of a desert.



So, again, the question isn't whether we're altering our climate, we have already measurably altered our climate, the question is what effect it will have on our biosphere.

And let me say this as clearly as possible:
If you deny that we have had any change on our climate, you unequivocally discredit yourself because the evidence that we have is incontrovertible. The only reasonable debate remaining then isn't whether or not we have had an effect, but rather what the changes we have made and are continuing to make will have on our biosphere in the long term. If you're absurdly egocentric, you could break that down further to "what effect could this have on me personally, and what can I do to mitigate any potential detrimental effects."


BTW, if you think Obama's stupid lightbulbs are expensive, just look at the cost of going to war for oil. tongue sticking out smiley What is the current US debt? About 45K for every man woman and child in America? I'm not about to make the argument for those stupid ugly import hybrid rotboxes, in part because they're miserable machines, in part because the nickel in their batteries are in many ways worse for the environment than all the gasoline a Range Rover supercharged will burn over the course of its lifetime, but mainly because I believe there is nothing on heaven or earth that will keep us from burning every last drop of oil on this miserable little planet. The question is simply: who gets to enjoy the most of it, and who gets to die for refusing to give it up? As a pompous American, I feel reasonably confident that when the dust from WWIII settles, the few of us left will be the ones laughing over the last barrel of oil on our ruined continent.
Re: A little personal commentary
March 04, 2014 05:10AM
I'm not a champion of pollution. I simply don't wish to by lied to by my government, or the UN, or anyone else for that matter. I would prefer that people call things what they are.

"Climate Change" is simple the new and improved catch phrase for "Global Warming." It's like Sugar Smacks changing its name to Honey Smacks because it sells better today.

I also don't think that throwing money at a problem is necessarily going to solve that problem, and in this case it is more akin to the government throwing our money at their big business buddies so that they can get an ultra high paying special interest job after they leave their elitist government job. Oh and look, organizations like Greenpeace are lying to us as well so they can get their piece of the pie. Nice.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member
Re: A little personal commentary
March 04, 2014 01:11PM
I personally have more faith than you spike, this year denmark priduced all of its electricity with wind turbines for one day. Yes that is miniscule but it is something.
With the idea of going to war over the last bit of gas if so foolish to me why not spend the same on alternative energy, it is going to run out anyways. Not to mention how many of the last few barrels of oil would the actual war use? I can just see the headline "war over gas ends, it ran out"
Re: A little personal commentary
March 04, 2014 01:32PM
In regards to topics similar to this then I have no issues with them being discussed, however if you are going to make statements about such positions being true/false then you have to be prepared to reference them.

It is completely pointless to say something is happening or it isn't as if your opinion of it meant something because to be frank it doesn't, the only thing that means anything is the data.

Quote
Hunterseeker5
...
Kim Kardashian shows us her tits again ...

There are women and underage people who are members here, they came to learn about and participate in discussions about knives. I have no problem with discussions not about knives, but there is no need for comments of that nature.
Re: A little personal commentary
March 05, 2014 05:11PM
Well Chum, generally speaking any time you change something that surrounds an existing infrastructure, it costs money. In this case, as with any, there will likely be some winners and some losers. We could go point by point and debate causality, probability, and estimated cost and maybe you'd win a few bouts since its all hypothetical anyway, but the big picture doesn't really change. I'm not sure why being lied to by your government about this, as opposed to everything else, gets your hackles up. In general I find politicians and their affiliates to be the least reliable source of information on any given subject.

Quote
Mark a
With the idea of going to war over the last bit of gas if so foolish to me why not spend the same on alternative energy, it is going to run out anyways. Not to mention how many of the last few barrels of oil would the actual war use? I can just see the headline "war over gas ends, it ran out"

I'm sorry, did I say that war was a rational and logical means of addressing our energy crisis? I apologize. War is, almost universally, the stupidest possible way to solve a problem in this day and age, as you're not even allowed to properly exploit the people/resources in the given area you've conquered. I still have no faith in humanity. Just look at our war in Afghanistan. They want us out, everyone over there wants us out, and all of us (Americans) want get out and yet our politicians for "reasons unknown" are trying everything possible to keep us there even now. This is the nature of politics and power, maybe some day the whole story will come out, but maybe not.

Quote
CliffStamp
There are women and underage people who are members here, they came to learn about and participate in discussions about knives. I have no problem with discussions not about knives, but there is no need for comments of that nature.

Sorry Cliff, I'll try to avoid it in the future. It is worth mentioning though that I'm pretty sure that women have a rather general idea of what they look like, and those young internet savvy kids a very specific idea of what they look like, perhaps even more so than we do. winking smiley The internets is a brave new world, granted this might be a discussion for another thread.
Re: A little personal commentary
March 05, 2014 05:31PM
No apologies necessary, I was simply commenting on the nature of the world. Some where I heard a rumour cloaked in a mystery that there is a large deposit of minerals in Afghanistan that are important in the production of batteries.
Re: A little personal commentary
March 06, 2014 04:50AM
[www.washingtontimes.com]
Little article that popped up recently, shockinglingly not covered by the liberal media...

"Perhaps the simplest way to expose the fallacy of 'extreme certainty' is to look at the historical record... When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time. Then an ice age occurred 450 million years ago when CO2 was 10 times higher than today. There is some correlation, but little evidence, to support a direct causal relationship between CO2 and global temperature through the millennia," Moore told lawmakers.

I don't particularly care for pollution, but that has been on the decline, I've only heard stories of the wonderful LA smog alerts, but that seems like a perfectly noble battle...

Many people are willing to overlook immorality and the like for cheap goods, like the conditions in which the "workers," if they can be even called that, that produce many of our inexpensive goods go about their labor... is it really a surprise we go for the cheapest energy source, whatever the consequences?
Re: A little personal commentary
March 06, 2014 11:02PM
Quote
Hunterseeker5
I'm not sure why being lied to by your government about this, as opposed to everything else, gets your hackles up.

Being lied to by my government, or anyone else for that matter, always gets my hackles up. In this case there happened to be a discussion about it on the forum I frequent... thus my commentary.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member
Re: A little personal commentary
March 13, 2014 07:46PM
Global warming is bunk precisely because of the fact that the liberal warmists have pussied out of their first argument. "We didn't actually mean "global warming," per se. What we actually meant was "climate change." A total capitulation. Rephrasing. Changing their tune, the pussies.

When did "skeptic" become a dirty word in science? When did a skeptic require quotation marks around it? You tell me you can predict the world of 2100.

Nobody believes a weather prediction twelve hours ahead. Now we're asked to believe a prediction that goes out 100 years into the future? And make financial investments based on that prediction? Has everybody lost their minds?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/13/2014 07:52PM by Lord_Helpus.
Re: A little personal commentary
March 20, 2014 01:57AM
Quote
Lord_Helpus
When did "skeptic" become a dirty word in science?

Probably when a bunch of intellectual featherweights started pushing things like anti-vaccine (thanks for bringing polio back to this country), flat earthers are a thing on a planet which we've known to be spherical and the rough dimensions of for millennia, and that the likes of climate science deniers often find themselves of the same ilk as anti-evolutionists. The word "skeptic" in science doesn't mean an ignorant ingrate who stuffs their fingers in their ears and hums loudly for the purpose of dismissing things based on farcical reasoning like a political word change, it means someone who has a factual scientific reason for questioning a specific experiment or assertion.


This discussion has become absurd, and quite frankly shocking given the context.
Re: A little personal commentary
March 29, 2014 09:55PM
Hello all. Hadn't planned to do my first post on somthing like this but there seems to be some confusion regarding the terms being used.

Quote
Chum

"Climate Change" is simple the new and improved catch phrase for "Global Warming." It's like Sugar Smacks changing its name to Honey Smacks because it sells better today.
.

And (I can't work out how to quote multiple people) Lord-Helpus' contribution

"Global warming is bunk precisely because of the fact that the liberal warmists have pussied out of their first argument. "We didn't actually mean "global warming," per se. What we actually meant was "climate change." A total capitulation. Rephrasing. Changing their tune, the pussies."

So inspite of the potential for absurdity - time for an introduction to the terms:

The Green House Effect – Remember That?

This is the process of ‘green house’ gasses trapping the suns energy within the atmosphere.
A large portion of the sun’s energy is reflected back into space by the earth’s albedo (reflectivity). Gasses such as Carbon dioxide, methane, CFCs and the like, as well as water vapour work to reduce this, functioning as a form of atmospheric insulation. As their levels within the atmosphere increase so does the effect of this insulation, effectively trapping a larger portion of the sun’s energy here on earth. Increasing the levels of these gasses could be likened to wearing thicker and thicker jumpers on a hot day.

Global Warming
This is simply the increase in the mean average temperature of the earth as a whole. The primary driver of man made global warming is the greenhouse effect.

In the last century or so the earth has warmed by around 10C. This does NOT mean that everywhere is now 10 warmer or warmer all the time. For example the North Atlantic feeding grounds of the Atlantic salmon have seen a mean average rise in winter sea temperatures of 70C this is having a considerable impact on the salmon population (Kirby & Retiere 2009). Other areas have had widely varying degrees of warming and I believe some have even cooled slightly. This is why it is the mean average temperature that is typically quoted.
It should be noted that even if global warming resulted in a rise of 50C, generally considered to be at the apocalyptic end of the scale, you could still die of hypothermia if you tried to walk to Cliff’s house in winter wearing your beach clothes!

Climate Change

In context, this is changes to climate and weather resulting from Global Warming.

This is where things get interesting because the results are unpredictable. It is very likely that increased sea temperatures will result in more frequent and intense storm events. These events are ‘powered’ by warm sea temperatures. More warmth in the sea directly correlates to more energy in storms and more energy to produce them. As temperatures increase sea levels will rise, not from melting ice caps but because water expands as it increases in temperature. This will itself have unpredictable effects beyond simply inundating low lying areas. Land and water impact climate in different ways so changing the proportions of these around the world could have interesting results. Changes in local climate have been seen resulting from the formation of very large lakes when rivers are dammed for hydroelectricity schemes notably in parts of Africa.
The range of possible changes that can be caused by a warming climate is vast and could even lead to a new period of glaciation as warming ocean currents shift or fade completely!


A couple of people have mentioned Patrick Moore stating that we had an ice age with "CO2 emmissions 10 times higher than today". First we are still having an ice age we are currently going through an interglacial warm period. The ice age will not end untill there is no permanent ice at the Poles. Second I think this may be a misquote. CO2 levels could well have been that high, but I am not sure about the agent of the emissions. It shoud also be noted that if this was emissions then it would have been offset by the very large areas of the world covered in forrest. There were so many trees that at times oxygen levels in the atmosphere were as high as 35% so there was a fair amount of carbon fixing going on.

Any way hope this is of interest to somone.

Hopefully I can talk about sharp objects sometime soon.
Re: A little personal commentary
April 04, 2014 03:59PM
The Nazis were green environmentalists. And so is the faggy Huntersqueaker.
Re: A little personal commentary
April 04, 2014 04:08PM
Can I at least have my incandescent lightbulbs back... [www.anh-usa.org]
Re: A little personal commentary
April 04, 2014 04:09PM
Again, there are only two rules :

-no personal attacks

-peer review

If you can't follow these then please go somewhere else.

If you want to discuss an academic topic then you have to be able to source arguments. If you are not willing to properly reference them then again, please go else where.
Re: A little personal commentary
April 04, 2014 04:16PM
Quote
Lord_Helpus
The Nazis were green environmentalists. And so is the faggy Huntersqueaker.

So your argument is that, because the Nazi party may have been affiliated with it, somehow it has to be bad? Hummm...... I somehow feel like the Nazi party was remembered for something other than its environmental policies, but what could that have been? confused smiley eye rolling smiley

I guess its a shame they also were the first with a functional jet powered fighter aircraft in combat, as we use those too these days. Also a shame they liked socialized medicine which in today's world produces significantly better outcomes at lower cost.


My crass assessment of your non-argument aside, I must confess I am pleased you finally surrendered the pretense of intelligent discourse and showed your hand in this "debate."
Re: A little personal commentary
April 04, 2014 04:26PM
Do Canadian cancer patients like the long waiting lines for treatment? Why do they go south of the border?

I'm sorry if offended any of the lesbians or homosexuals on this bboard. Eskimos too.

Hunterseeker is green-to-the-bone. If totalitarianism were to come about overnight he would be the first one standing in line to shoot me in the back of the head, Cheka style.

I guess its a shame they also were the first with a functional jet powered fighter aircraft in combat

Indeed it is.

...don't everone jump in at once
Re: A little personal commentary
April 04, 2014 05:11PM
Quote
Lord_Helpus
Do Canadian cancer patients like the long waiting lines for treatment? Why do they go south of the border?

I'm sorry if offended any of the lesbians or homosexuals on this bboard. Eskimos too.

Hunterseeker is green-to-the-bone. If totalitarianism were to come about overnight he would be the first one standing in line to shoot me in the back of the head, Cheka style.

I guess its a shame they also were the first with a functional jet powered fighter aircraft in combat

Indeed it is.

...don't everone jump in at once

I would like to start by saying I'm quoting your replies, not because I think you'd mistake who I'm replying to, but because they're so incredible I wish to preserve them for posterity.

Why do Canadian cancer patients go south of the border for treatment? I honestly couldn't tell you, given that the WHO ranks us as being number 1 in costs BY FAR and we are currently 37th in the world in terms of the quality of our outcomes.
Little citation for that:
[en.wikipedia.org]
And before you cry foul, in order to put something on Wikipedia you have to have a citation so if you don't like it feel free to peruse that article's citations.

Canada by the way is 30th in regards to outcomes and 10th in regards to cost.

You might find this enlightening:
[youtu.be]

I didn't fact check everything he said, but he does cite a few sources and he is broadly pretty well researched. I would be extremely surprised if you could come up with something to discredit his core argument.

I do find your assertions of my "green-ness" and how that somehow is linked to totalitarianism and murder to be a bit puzzling. Whether or not they're true isn't strictly relevant, as I have not expressed any of the aforementioned sentiments publicly, and I would defy you to produce an example to show otherwise.
Re: A little personal commentary
April 04, 2014 07:02PM
Wow, thought I'd put everyone off on this one.

First PiMan, if my opinion matters you are very welcome to have incandescent lightbulbs back. You should try the LED ones though. They use very little power and last a ludicrously long timesmiling smiley.

Next Cliff "If you want to discuss an academic topic then you have to be able to source arguments. If you are not willing to properly reference them then again, please go else where. "

That could, not unfairly, be aimed at me so: 7o rise in North Atlantic comes from Kirby R and Retiere C 'Comparing the Effects of Rance and Severn Barrages' Maritime Engineering -issue 162 PP11-26 March 2009.

1o temperature rise this centuary [en.wikipedia.org] & [www.wunderground.com]

Lake formation - climate change in Africa - a documantary I watched once. However for a different example of this effect [link.springer.com]

Ocean warming affecting the atlantic conveyor [ocean.nationalgeographic.com]

35% oxygen during Late Paleozoic from a documentary by David Attenborough - First Life Episode 2, 2013 I think and also [www.scientistlive.com]

Providing references for the actual definitions that I gave is less easy. They are what I was taught at college and university and also what I then taught at the college. So reference would be ME! Berkshire college of Agriculture 2005/6. If anyone thinks I am telling porkies they could have a quick look at Wikipedia or an environmental science text book.

Lord_Helpus I am the only wannabe totalitarian dictator on this forum. As the founder of the Liberal Fascist Party I can assure you that you will not be shot when I come to power.
Re: A little personal commentary
April 04, 2014 10:51PM
Quote
HedgeChopper
Lord_Helpus I am the only wannabe totalitarian dictator on this forum. As the founder of the Liberal Fascist Party I can assure you that you will not be shot when I come to power.


But haven't you heard, we're all liars and so will say that........ until our evil schemes are realized. Muahahahahahahahahahahaha
Re: A little personal commentary
April 04, 2014 11:09PM
Wow way to show your real colors Lord Helpus.

Anyway I think the poor outcomes for health care in america needs to be broken down more than just saying hey American healthcare sucks.

Lets look at Research and development costs. Wikipedia lists them here

What do we see, well 5 or so countries are contributing the majority of the funds towards research being done in the world.
Global R&D 1.363511 trillion dollars. The top 5 countries contribute 987.7 billion or 72.4% of all medical R&D. America contributes 405.3 billion to total medical R&D or 29.7%. while only repersenting about 5% of the worlds population. If money spent on R&D correlates dirrectly to improvements in healthcare for the world at large and not just the country doing the research America is contributing greatly to the worlds improving healthcare even if its own citizens benefit less from it. Even if you argue a large amount of America's medical R&D is being used to research boner pills for the sake of profit. Well that profit is still funding a huge amount legitimately important research.

I think one thing we all know is that spending more doesn't result in linear gains in performance either. Is the healthcare in Morocco really better than Canada? You know the country with nearly 10 times the infant mortality rate of Canada. Or does Morocco just get more milage out of the incredibly small amount of money they spend on healthcare. Is Morocco benefiting from the spending of France, China, America, Korea, Japan, and Canada. Yes.

So great Canadians will live 3 years longer on average than Americans, and have 4 infant deaths per thousand instead of 6. But is it benefical or just another nationalist pissing match.

Re: A little personal commentary
April 05, 2014 12:57AM
There are a couple nitpicks to make with your argument there Old Spice.

First and foremost is that the R&D costs contributing to our insane healthcare costs is a bit absurd. This is in part because everyone who uses a medical treatment has to defray some of those costs, but mostly because we spend about 18% of our GDP on healthcare costs so even if we had to pay the ENTIRE whopping 2.7% of of our GDP on healthcare research costs for the entire world, it'd still only account for 15% of the problem.

Another thing to note is that a lot of the spending on medical research is either publicly funded but not typically counted as part of healthcare costs (the government provides grants for all sorts of research) or charitably funded. You may not be aware of this, but a large part of the medical R&D going on out there actually starts in university laboratories. The biotech industry in our country has developed a very strange model. You see while the large companies out there who you know like Pfizer and Merck and so on actually are responsible for shockingly little original medical innovation. They spend a lot of their time suing each other and marketing and other tasks like that. The business model dejour currently is for some professor somewhere with promising research to have their intellectual property purchased or licensed by a small VC funded startup. That startup then will basically push through whatever approval is necessary to make the work look promising, like the FDA will approve it. At some point, the big pharma companies will be eyeing this little startup and eventually one will "lose" at the game of chicken and buy them out (assuming the treatment/machine doesn't fail one of its milestones) and simply bring the treatment the rest of the way through the FDA approval process by greasing the right palms and, if it works, tada your "innovation."

There are a variety of highly illegitimate financial and marketing games being played by big pharma by the way. They're not responsible for all the evils, but don't ever make the mistake of thinking they're the good guys. One of my favorite examples is the prilosec/nexium debacle. I assume you're all aware of chirality? If not, google is your friend. Anyway, a particular molecule which has one chiral center, is a proton pump inhibitor in one configuration and totally inert in the other. Prilosec was a mashup of the two, because its annoying to segregate chiral molecules. When its patent ran out, Nexium was created and heavily marketed so as to lock the market priced generics out of the market.

Because you like references Cliff, here you go, although the facts in this case are not debated so......
[scienceblogs.com]

You could spend days reciting stories like this, often more sordid. Anyone see The Constant Gardener? A dramatization yes, but far more palatable than the less exciting, but no less sordid, true story.

The point? There is no escaping the fact that over..... huh. I was going to say over 300,000 people die annually in the US due to medical errors, but it appears NPR cites a somewhat more disturbing 440,000.
"An estimate of 440,000 deaths from care in hospitals "is roughly one-sixth of all deaths that occur in the United States each year," James wrote in his study. He also cited other research that's shown hospital reporting systems and peer-review capture only a fraction of patient harm or negligent care."
(ref. [www.npr.org])


I feel like my post wandered around a bit. The point is that medical care in the US really is appalling, but its critical to understand its also highly inconsistent. There are some world class doctors and hospitals in this country. There are also some abominations. Our healthcare system, as a whole, really deserves no word other than appalling though.
Re: A little personal commentary
April 05, 2014 03:25AM
I think you misinterepted my arguement. My point was that medical research benefits everyone regardless of who is doing it(as long as it is legimate research). Without the research there would obviously be no medical advancements for anyone so that spending is very much a good thing. The fact that our country wastes 18% of the GDP on healthcare(only 6.1% more than the #1 ranked country France) and sees a poor return on it goes hand in hand with people that spend $400 on a knife that can't cut. The point being that spending more doesn't mean better results. It is has as much to do with American culture as it does actual healthcare.

A New, Evidence-based Estimate of Patient Harms Associated with Hospital Care study .
Found that those acidents contribute to but are not the proven cause of the patients death.

The problem with all of this though is that no comparisons are being made, all these stats are available to condem America. But I never see anyone compare them to stats from other countries, I just see America spends a lot of money and gets slightly worse results than the rest of the developed world. No detailed comparisons. Comparisons would either show that hey it is a hell of a lot worse, or just hey Americans waste money which isn't anything new.

Re: A little personal commentary
April 05, 2014 04:40AM
Quote
Old Spice
I think you misinterepted my arguement. My point was that medical research benefits everyone regardless of who is doing it(as long as it is legimate research). Without the research there would obviously be no medical advancements for anyone so that spending is very much a good thing. The fact that our country wastes 18% of the GDP on healthcare(only 6.1% more than the #1 ranked country France) and sees a poor return on it goes hand in hand with people that spend $400 on a knife that can't cut. The point being that spending more doesn't mean better results. It is has as much to do with American culture as it does actual healthcare.

A New, Evidence-based Estimate of Patient Harms Associated with Hospital Care study .
Found that those acidents contribute to but are not the proven cause of the patients death.

The problem with all of this though is that no comparisons are being made, all these stats are available to condem America. But I never see anyone compare them to stats from other countries, I just see America spends a lot of money and gets slightly worse results than the rest of the developed world. No detailed comparisons. Comparisons would either show that hey it is a hell of a lot worse, or just hey Americans waste money which isn't anything new.

Really well said Old Spice smileys with beer


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member
Re: A little personal commentary
April 05, 2014 02:23PM
Ah, I see, apologies I did misinterpert your argument. In that case I do concur with it to a greater extent. I just have two nitpicks:



Quote
Old Spice
Found that those acidents contribute to but are not the proven cause of the patients death.

The problem with all of this though is that no comparisons are being made, all these stats are available to condem America. But I never see anyone compare them to stats from other countries, I just see America spends a lot of money and gets slightly worse results than the rest of the developed world. No detailed comparisons. Comparisons would either show that hey it is a hell of a lot worse, or just hey Americans waste money which isn't anything new.

1) I believe "proven" would require a far higher level of certainty than any hospital would allow. I would interpret this sentence from their conclusion as concurring with my argument:
"Yet, the action and progress on patient safety is frustratingly slow; however, one must hope that the present, evidence-based estimate of 400,000+ deaths per year will foster an outcry for overdue changes and increased vigilance in medical care to address the problem of harm to patients who come to a hospital seeking only to be healed."
(ref. [journals.lww.com])

2) I'm not sure I see the relevance of the detailed comparisons you request. Denmark for example keeps extremely detailed patient records, cradle to grave, and thus is the subject of a LOT of patient studies. They have their own studies on medical errors, not necessarily in English. The point? A political pissing match requires comparison, so I'll ceded the point from that aspect of the argument, but true self improvement doesn't require that you know you're worse or better than someone else its just as simple as "how can we reduce the number?" If you're producing toothpaste, building failure into the production to keep costs much lower makes sense, but an empty tube of toothpaste is very different from leaving forceps in someone's chest. You really don't need a statistic to tell you thats a major screwup.