Live data from Hacker News

A woman who is allergic to water (2016)

bbc.com

11–20 of 64 posts

Re: A woman who is allergic to water (2016)

#11

> For Rachel, diving into this pool would be like swimming in potent bleach I find this choice of analogy really interesting, since diving into the pool is like swimming in bleach for everyone else too.

I like the fact that the BBC felt compelled to add pictures to this story at all, for the benefit of readers who might be unfamiliar with what a swimming pool or glass of water would look like.

Re: A woman who is allergic to water (2016)

#12
post #2

Wow. Even NHS won’t cover off-label that works?

Too bad there aren't any NHS competitors.

> Too bad there aren't any NHS competitors.

This comment in a nutshell reveals the ignorance of US consumers. Just because you think something should work the way you want, doesn't mean that's reality.

There is no "health insurance market" in the US, since you can't actually negotiate with any entity in the insurance industry.

Even for most companies, come Jan. 1, they switch providers to the lowest-cost they can find since there is no ability to negotiate with their current provider after the inevitable and compulsory 20%/annum increase.

Re: A woman who is allergic to water (2016)

#13
post #11

> For Rachel, diving into this pool would be like swimming in potent bleach I find this choice of analogy really interesting, since diving into the pool is like swimming in bleach for everyone else too.

I like the fact that the BBC felt compelled to add pictures to this story at all, for the benefit of readers who might be unfamiliar with what a swimming pool or glass of water would look like.

For some reason, lots of writers seem to feel that useless pictures are better than no pictures. I see this all the time with programming blog posts too; they’ll stick some stock art of HTML or a computer on a desk or something like that. With news it’s not just burning through my data plan but sometimes it can be actively misleading, like when they pick a picture to represent something but it’s not the actual thing they are talking about.

Re: A woman who is allergic to water (2016)

#14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too bad there aren't any NHS competitors.

Right, because markets where there is competition work so well? I can't think of an insurance company in the US that'd cover this. Can you?

it's a serious stretch to call the US healthcare system an open market in any meaningful sense of the term

Re: A woman who is allergic to water (2016)

#15
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the fact that the BBC felt compelled to add pictures to this story at all, for the benefit of readers who might be unfamiliar with what a swimming pool or glass of water would look like.

For some reason, lots of writers seem to feel that useless pictures are better than no pictures. I see this all the time with programming blog posts too; they’ll stick some stock art of HTML or a computer on a desk or something like that. With news it’s not just burning through my data plan but sometimes it can be actively misleading, like when they pick a picture to represent something but it’s not the actual thing…

Sometimes pictures help break up the monotony of the text, sometimes they're there because the editor said this is how things are done. I'd say the second case is true here because no sane person writing that text would think "This article would be too difficult without a photo of a glass of water."

Re: A woman who is allergic to water (2016)

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ofcourse there are - we have private insurance marketin UK, few people need them, many employers provide one.

But then you are paying for both private and public healthcare, so it isn’t really competition.

Given the context in this thread is diversity rather than price, that does not matter.

Re: A woman who is allergic to water (2016)

#19
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the fact that the BBC felt compelled to add pictures to this story at all, for the benefit of readers who might be unfamiliar with what a swimming pool or glass of water would look like.

For some reason, lots of writers seem to feel that useless pictures are better than no pictures. I see this all the time with programming blog posts too; they’ll stick some stock art of HTML or a computer on a desk or something like that. With news it’s not just burning through my data plan but sometimes it can be actively misleading, like when they pick a picture to represent something but it’s not the actual thing…

There's actually a really specific reason for this. If you have an image it gets shown in link preview on social sites like Facebook and Twitter - this will also work for the article overview on the site if they have one. Links with image previews get shown larger in the feed and get more clicks. So many writers will always try to have an image, no matter how arbitrary.
Post reply on HN