- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 744
- Reaction score
- 2
but go to the comments page and read some of the comments by the public...wow
http://www.slate.com/id/2217146/?Gt1=38001
http://www.slate.com/id/2217146/?Gt1=38001
nice article on md shortage
- Thread starter bigpharmD
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2002
- Messages
- 2,713
- Reaction score
- 74
Very good read and the comments are right on!
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2008
- Messages
- 83
- Reaction score
- 0
How do you get to the comments section? Do you have to click the title one by one? I only read one that seemed like a rant...
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2007
- Messages
- 716
- Reaction score
- 2
Scroll down just a little past the article and look for this in a grayish box
"
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES"
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2008
- Messages
- 83
- Reaction score
- 0
Yeah I got to that part. But every comment (secretly coded "message") is unthreaded, and you have to click each one by one. You can't read them all, nor follow a conversation because all the comments seem independent and not addressing other people's comments. Of the 128 comments, only about ~4 comments have more than 3 replies. The majorities of comments have zero replies, which means the author of a comment just rants and no discussion arises.
I don't know which comments are valid, or are rants. I'm truly trying to learn the counterarguments to the popular arguments which are very common at SDN.
I can find plenty of criticism about the healthcare system from a pro-doctors stance, but have yet to find a valid counterargument. Isn't anyone else curious if there is a great explanation for all the mess that is discussed on various forums? I want to become a doctor who spends maximum amount of time with patients, has minimum overhead expenses and hassles with HMO's and insurer's, paperwork, bureaucratic instructional creep, etc...
I trust that most legislation gets argued by opposing viewpoints of good-faithed people and the resultant laws and rules and bureacracy are the result of compromise. I am frustrated with the lack of intellictual debate that I can follow at a pre-med level. I follow current events and like to understand things. The health care discussions like the one on that site just have an aura of strawman and unfair imbalance.
I ordered a relevant book from amazon a few days ago; maybe it's best for me to fully educate myself on the current status before I try to understand details such as the one presented in the slate article.
I don't know which comments are valid, or are rants. I'm truly trying to learn the counterarguments to the popular arguments which are very common at SDN.
I can find plenty of criticism about the healthcare system from a pro-doctors stance, but have yet to find a valid counterargument. Isn't anyone else curious if there is a great explanation for all the mess that is discussed on various forums? I want to become a doctor who spends maximum amount of time with patients, has minimum overhead expenses and hassles with HMO's and insurer's, paperwork, bureaucratic instructional creep, etc...
I trust that most legislation gets argued by opposing viewpoints of good-faithed people and the resultant laws and rules and bureacracy are the result of compromise. I am frustrated with the lack of intellictual debate that I can follow at a pre-med level. I follow current events and like to understand things. The health care discussions like the one on that site just have an aura of strawman and unfair imbalance.
I ordered a relevant book from amazon a few days ago; maybe it's best for me to fully educate myself on the current status before I try to understand details such as the one presented in the slate article.