I tried to read the study itself but ... well, it was a little too academic for my taste and comprehension.  But it seems they were talking about 250 dead doctors.  Killing yourself is not necessarily an indication of job dissatisfaction.  ; ) If you kill yourself after retirement, are you still a doctor suicide?  I did love the references to "sexual harrassment" as if that were an impetus to off oneself.  If that were the case, there'd be a heckuva lot more female suicides. 

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Q: what happens when a govt institutes socialized medicine?

A: they tell you how to live your life -- if you want health coverage

What's the point of having "national" health coverage if it doesn't cover ALL citizens who pay into it? So now we only cover those who "deserve it"? And what's the next step? Get AIDS through an "unhelathy lifestyle" of unprotected sex - is govt health care going to be there for you? Or how about cancer caused by cigarette smoke?

Of course the UK report is stating that this is just a way of making citizens more proactive rather reactive when it comes to their health. They try to sell it posively: "It is inconsistent with the concept of the responsible citizen to imagine that it is realistic for citizens, having paid their taxes, to expect that the state will underwrite the health implications of any lifestyle decision they choose to make," the report states.

But it's just a step toward the destruction of freedom -- right now only in the UK, but ultimately another step toward the loss of freedom in other countries as others follow that lead.

Jordan .

I sure hope America is paying attention to this health care debate. Hillary released her new version of Hillary-Care. Here's the article.

First few paragraphs:

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday that a mandate requiring every American to purchase health insurance was the only way to achieve universal health care but she rejected the notion of punitive measures to force individuals into the health care system.
 
"At this point, we don't have anything punitive that we have proposed," the presidential candidate said in an interview with The Associated Press. "We're providing incentives and tax credits which we think will be very attractive to the vast majority of Americans."

She said she could envision a day when "you have to show proof to your employer that you're insured as a part of the job interview — like when your kid goes to school and has to show proof of vaccination," but said such details would be worked out through negotiations with Congress.

So a question to all my left-leaning to moderate friends - we know us right-wingers are against thsi kind of health coverage, but what are your thoughts? "Traditional liberalism" would be against this because it's FORCING someone to do something they may not want to do. As people who have a tendnacy toward libertarianism - does this concept scare anyone (besides us right-wingers)? Govt telling you what you that you MUST have insurance to HAVE a job. What about the homeless who don't have jobs, or the illegal immigrants who have jobs below the radar? Is govt going to require  you to exercise 30 minutes a day in order to be on their health care plan? And how will that be checked? Dentists say that brushing your teeth supposedly improves overall health (including heart -- don't believe me? -- next time you go to the dentist look through their pamphlets), so will govt require you to brush twice a day even if you only brush once a day? We're all so concerned about govt being in our bedrooms, but what about this? Any concern at all, or is this just something that good citizens should do (or be FORCED to do)?

Jordan .

It is really an unbelievable new to here. But however medical team has made wonderful effort to save baby. Karen Jepp and her husband JP should really thankful to doctors.

===========

Brook

http://www.addictionlink.org/drug-rehab-center/quebec

If the US under Obama adopts universal health care for all ( including illlegal aliens by the 10s of millions) quality health care will evaporate. If those covered jumps from about 250 million to around 310 million ( that even discounts the illegals ), health care will ipso facto become a waiting list program. The number of doctors will remain constant, with a sudden increase in patients load of 25 %!  Medical coverage will be stretched and denial of service coverage and long waiting lists will be the result. You can die waiting for rushed,  substandard coverage. 

Hopefully Obama will see this catastrophy and not push the program. To his credit, Obama is showing some practicality with some of his administration appointments much to the chagrin of leftist radical (ex) supporters. Our best hope (IMO ) is a move to the responsible center by Prez-Elect Obama.  

Pshaw on all this handwringing.

Canada is full of people who get high quality health care within pretty short waits the vast majority of the time.  They don't go broke doing it.  And they don't have anyone standing over their shoulder telling them they can't smoke or eat crappy food or anything else, either (unlike the many health-care insurers who will decline coverage for anyone silly enough to not lie on their application/to their doctor.

Like the American system, it mostly works.  The question is which flaw is more acceptable to the national character:  having poor people have less or no access to treatment, or having poor people have to wait longer for treatment.

No take on my props to Obama on some practical admin picks?

Anyway, I suppose the choice posited above would be a moot point with the patient expired in either case.

I'll spare us the articles and statistics on Canadian health care. But, when 4 patients per doctor overnight becomes 5 patients per a strain on the U S healthcare system seems a valid concern.

Agreed with your analysis Bio !!

OT: I changed my browser to Firefox because of a problem with I E.  I was unable to login with my info lost and reregistered as raymondo. Hope that is no problemo.