As part of our Operation Health Freedom series, British MEP Daniel Hannan talks about the National Health Service (NHS), England's publicly-funded health care system, and looks at why it is so diff...
As part of our Operation Health Freedom series, British MEP Daniel Hannan talks about the National Health Service (NHS), England's publicly-funded health care system, and looks at why it is so difficult to reform such a system once people get used to it.
Like to rate videos and let people know what you think?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
Like to share videos with friends?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
hate to break it to you, but it looks like he is making it up
look go to google books and add this to the url for the essay books?id=VWNNYqZMqMkC&printsec =frontcover&source=gbs_navlink s_s#v=onepage&q=hospitals&f=fa lse
didn't see it there, i saw some of the other info that dilorezno used there, maybe the percentages came from somewhere else. if i cared enough, i would email him.
re: fda, you are using faulty 'cetaris paribus' analysis, saying the fda has helped keeping drugs off the market - because you are imagining a scenario where bad drugs are on the market, but people take them cause they outsource their diligence to fda.... but if fda is removed, info on drugs will be provided by competing companies.
No, he clearly says 'In a 1992 study published by the Hoover Institution, entitled "Input and Output in Health Care," Friedman noted that 56 percent of all hospitals in America were privately owned and for-profit in 1910.... "
He was either lieing or such a poor scholar that he didn't check his main source.
re: fda. explain how I'm using a 'with all other things being equal' analysis.
I'm just saying that even with the FDA, and competiting companies, there have been toxic harmful drugs sucessfully sold. Without the FDA you think people would be protected by info on drugs provided by competing companies? Really? Even though they could only get this info after the drug has gone to market? Even though the competing info claims would be a gift to lawyers? It wouldn't matter how diligent people were
with no fda, people's actions in regard to determining which drugs they want to take changes. they don't just assume that drugs on the market are good - which is a dangerous proclivity even when there is an fda.
finally, fda is a monopoly, and as such, will suck at its job and take way too much money. And block natural medicines cause its beholden to the pharma companies.
But you expect any drug released in such a FDAless market wouldn't be aggressivly marketed? Getting rivals to fact check would take years (and probably millions of dollars in legal fees) after said drug had been released to the general public.
So, the US Army sucks then? The fireservice? The police force? Do they all suck? They are all monopolies in the same way that the FDA is.
The influence of large companies upon the governing of the US is a different mater
That youtube video is interesting but fails to take into account how many lives were saved by not letting unregulated and untested drugs onto the market.
You may want to look up 'genocide' in the dictionary. Unless the FDA's legislation was the cause of death of a specific ethnic/religious group in the US it's not genocide.
Don't cheapen the word.
re: your leaning comment: people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Mr "cut and paste without verifying the facts "
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
Nowhere does he note percentages of hospital essays.
Don't you bother to fact check your dodgy cut and pastes?
look go to google books and add this to the url for the essay
books?id=VWNNYqZMqMkC&printsec =frontcover&source=gbs_navlink s_s#v=onepage&q=hospitals&f=fa lse
and see for yourself
Prove me wrong if you can, go on... :)
re: fda, you are using faulty 'cetaris paribus' analysis, saying the fda has helped keeping drugs off the market - because you are imagining a scenario where bad drugs are on the market, but people take them cause they outsource their diligence to fda.... but if fda is removed, info on drugs will be provided by competing companies.
He was either lieing or such a poor scholar that he didn't check his main source.
Both aren't a good look. You look up to him, why?
I'm just saying that even with the FDA, and competiting companies, there have been toxic harmful drugs sucessfully sold. Without the FDA you think people would be protected by info on drugs provided by competing companies? Really? Even though they could only get this info after the drug has gone to market? Even though the competing info claims would be a gift to lawyers? It wouldn't matter how diligent people were
finally, fda is a monopoly, and as such, will suck at its job and take way too much money. And block natural medicines cause its beholden to the pharma companies.
peace out.
So, the US Army sucks then? The fireservice? The police force? Do they all suck? They are all monopolies in the same way that the FDA is.
The influence of large companies upon the governing of the US is a different mater
pease out to you sir as well...
You may want to look up 'genocide' in the dictionary. Unless the FDA's legislation was the cause of death of a specific ethnic/religious group in the US it's not genocide.
Don't cheapen the word.
re: your leaning comment: people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Mr "cut and paste without verifying the facts "