A very interesting read!!
this is obviously an endless argument, but I couldnt help comment (and I tend to like a lot of what gladwell writes...)
Regarding his equating quality care with MRI and CT scanners; technology does not replace good clinical care/judgement. (ie his eye was probably fine, sounds like nothing needed to be done except wait for swelling to go down - a ct scan one week earlier wouldnt have made a difference)
CT and MRI scanner are certainly NOT in every doctors office in the US.
Charity care does ensure care for trauma, but its typically given at county hospitals, which are way underfunded and thus cannot give the kind of care a privately funded hospital can. Yes, the privately funded hospital does have to provide emergency care, but not all are (nor want to be) elgible to offer level 1 trauma care (which is what you need if youre being helicopter'd after an accident).
His gender health care analysis is way off. Men do need care during their younger/middle age years. That was total crap. Men need so much intesive/acute care, moreso than woman, because they put off ever seeing a doctor until they cant urinate bc their prostate is the size of their head, full of cancer, after its been groing for 25 years.
-six years later Gladwell concedes
yeah 6 years later a lot of things in the US have changed. the insured vs. uninsured gap has widened, and federal, state, and local muni's have spent more and more $$ in reactionary care that won't be paid back.
there is a serious case for federal afforable health care.
i don't buy socialized medicine though. that would be catostrophic for the world.
he did concede even cringed looking back on his statements. seemed like he was more of a devil's advocate however, not truly heart felt.
thanks for the links to his (gladwell's) writing the other day as well. (million dollar murray)
very insightful and conversational stuff.