On 2-10-2009 1:22, Neeum Zawan wrote:
> On 10/01/09 13:41, andrel wrote:
>> Referring to studies with just as many weaknesses. Probably not
>> mentioning the studies that are in agreement with the Bush paper etc.
>> Let me put it this way: I don't believe any study that claims one or the
>> other. The only way to prove anything is running the whole economy for
>> 20 odd years with one option and then rerun the same period with the
>> other option. Which is impossible.
> 
>     Which is also why people like yourself are not ones policy makers 
> want to listen to.<G>

Normally I am not so 'scientific' about this sort of things. Yet, in 
this case there are so many confounding factors. E.g. you can not look 
to one state, take a measure that might influences the salary of someone 
and assume that the fact that the neighbouring state pays more is of no 
effect. There is also a whole chain of things influenced by law suits. 
Not only the physician but also the other medical staff and the board of 
the hospital etc. Even larger than that, law suit influence the mindset 
of a whole country. You can not look to the experience in another 
country either because too many things are different...

>     And BTW, even that won't tell much. There are too many other 
> significant variables over that 40 year period which may impact health 
> care more than this.

Correction, I was talking about the same 20 years twice. So it is not 
only practically and politically impossible, but even physically.

Post a reply to this message