Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease • Hacker News Board

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#61

Post by paulhauggis » Thu, Jan 05, 2012, 11:57 PM UTC

arethuza wrote: post #54

paulhauggis wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Get a doctor and some nurses, put them in a clean building, and give them a few million to buy machines and stocks. Even the government can do it, and the government does it at a lower price, because they aren't looking to rip off desperate people." They may not be looking to "rip off desperate people", but they sure don't know how to efficiently spend money (example: every single government-run system in the histor…

The UK NHS is usually regarded as being extremely efficient, but not the most effective health system e.g.: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/07/nhs-among-most... Private health care in the UK really isn't that expensive - I have it for our accident prone family of 3 and I don't think it's more than about £400 a month, with pretty minimal excess levels (about £100 per treatment). Note that I get this as part…

That's actually pretty affordable. Thanks for the link. I will check it out.

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#62

Post by seanyseanysean » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 12:10 AM UTC

_dps wrote: post #58

parfe wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope! Whenever you see an American ignorantly claiming the US as #1 in something you can safely chalk it up to American Exceptionalism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism It's a neat little ideal that helps people assert we, as Americans, are intrinsically better than everyone else, by fiat. It avoids all the hassle of constantly working to live up to our own ideals, or expending any effort to impro…

Having spent many of my childhood years in Europe (and being of European origin), I agree that US exceptionalism is a problematic phenomenon, but I also think that lately it has become a thought-collapsing meme amongst intellectuals. One cannot deny that America is unique in its global position, and that said uniqueness is not just of the special-snowflake variety that every nation has. It has an extremely high conce…

I won't comment on your other points but with regard to the flow of medical research information, I'd like to point out that it goes both ways.

Private US healthcare also feeds from research carried out world-wide without baring development risks.

For example, look at the amount of work done in genomic research in say the UK.

I think it would be somewhat naive to say that private US healthcare firms and their patients didn't benefit hugely by work placed into the public domain by organisations like the Wellcome Trust.

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#63

Post by spiralpolitik » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 12:13 AM UTC

rmc wrote: post #40

paulhauggis wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Yea, you don't need money to be healthy in a civilized country." You just need enough other people's money. "Someday, America might catch on, but I'm not holding my breath." Why is it that anyone with any kind of money that needs urgent care comes to the US? I will give you a hint: it's not because of nationalized health care. Our system isn't perfect and is expensive, but in my opinion, it's the best in the world (…

Why is it that anyone with any kind of money that needs urgent care comes to the US? Do they? Here in Ireland people going for specialized treatment would go to private hospitals in the UK.

A couple reasons for this but the main one is for many a year the NHS was underfunded by the Conservative governments of the 80s and 90s in the hope that it would crawl into the corner and die so did not/does not have the resources (doctors, nurses, beds, equipment etc) necessary to cope with a growing and aging population.

This resulted in waiting lists that for some patients are unacceptable and so people pay to go private to skip the wait.

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#64

Post by _dps » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 12:33 AM UTC

seanyseanysean wrote: post #62

_dps wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having spent many of my childhood years in Europe (and being of European origin), I agree that US exceptionalism is a problematic phenomenon, but I also think that lately it has become a thought-collapsing meme amongst intellectuals. One cannot deny that America is unique in its global position, and that said uniqueness is not just of the special-snowflake variety that every nation has. It has an extremely high conce…

I won't comment on your other points but with regard to the flow of medical research information, I'd like to point out that it goes both ways. Private US healthcare also feeds from research carried out world-wide without baring development risks. For example, look at the amount of work done in genomic research in say the UK. I think it would be somewhat naive to say that private US healthcare firms and their patient…

Yes, I don't think I ever implied that that the flow is unilateral, but I feel like this is indicative of the broader point.

The sensitivity to US exceptionalism has made it hard to say something seemingly trivial like "the US is a huge, rich, politically powerful economy and contributes a huge fraction of global medical research" without having to caveat against "You know, other people contribute as well."

No reasonable person (certainly not me, reasonable or otherwise ;-) suggests that the flow is unilateral.

If anything I feel like there's a reverse statistical bias here. If we assume the UK is equally productive in research per capita as the US, you'd expect about a 6x research contribution from the US relative to the UK just based on population (never mind that the GDP per capita in the US is about 50% higher, as is the number of "top universities" per silly metrics like http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities-ran...). Assuming no intrinsic difference in ability between the US and the UK citizens, it would be extremely surprising for the UK's contribution to be comparable to that of the US just based on population, university density, and economic output. This is not a judgement of UK researchers; it is merely a statement about the aggregation of people that is the US vs the aggregation that is the UK.

Anyway, I will reiterate that I recognize important contributions from all over the world. That doesn't directly bear on relative contributions and the net flow of research benefits.

(edit: clarified second-to-last paragraph with final sentence)

(edit 2: having looked up the relative GDP per capita on google, my 50% was an overestimate... 25% seems about right).

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#65

Post by burgerbrain » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 12:38 AM UTC

paulhauggis wrote: post #38

gnaritas wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, you don't need money to be healthy in a civilized country. Someday, America might catch on, but I'm not holding my breath.

"Yea, you don't need money to be healthy in a civilized country." You just need enough other people's money. "Someday, America might catch on, but I'm not holding my breath." Why is it that anyone with any kind of money that needs urgent care comes to the US? I will give you a hint: it's not because of nationalized health care. Our system isn't perfect and is expensive, but in my opinion, it's the best in the world (…

"You just need enough other people's money."

The point of a tax is that it is not your money. It is societies money. "The public's" so to speak.

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#66

Post by chunkyslink » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 2:41 AM UTC

paulhauggis wrote: post #38

gnaritas wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, you don't need money to be healthy in a civilized country. Someday, America might catch on, but I'm not holding my breath.

"Yea, you don't need money to be healthy in a civilized country." You just need enough other people's money. "Someday, America might catch on, but I'm not holding my breath." Why is it that anyone with any kind of money that needs urgent care comes to the US? I will give you a hint: it's not because of nationalized health care. Our system isn't perfect and is expensive, but in my opinion, it's the best in the world (…

Its not much good to those people who cant afford it. In fact it might as well not be there at all. I think that is the point.

Steven has said he owes his life to a FREE healthcare system provided by the government and you want to dismiss this claim with a rant about how great the US system is. Just typical.

Why can't you just accept that 'socialised care' has worked for someone and has done some good. He would have got the same treatment if he had been rich or poor. Like millions of other people in the UK.

Its not about who's money pays for it, its about respecting the value of all human life equally regardless of wealth. In this respect the American system does not even come close to competing.

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#67

Post by chunkyslink » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 2:56 AM UTC

wisty wrote: post #43

paulhauggis wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Yea, you don't need money to be healthy in a civilized country." You just need enough other people's money. "Someday, America might catch on, but I'm not holding my breath." Why is it that anyone with any kind of money that needs urgent care comes to the US? I will give you a hint: it's not because of nationalized health care. Our system isn't perfect and is expensive, but in my opinion, it's the best in the world (…

North Koreans think their country is the best too. The US health system sucks. The US spends more public money on health, let alone private money, and still has a crappy system. The reality is, medicine is something that any idiot can manage. Get a doctor and some nurses, put them in a clean building, and give them a few million to buy machines and stocks. Even the government can do it, and the government does it at…

> North Koreans think their country is the best too.

I often see many similarities between the USA and North Korea too.

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#68

Post by juhanima » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 3:38 AM UTC

_dps wrote: post #64

seanyseanysean wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't comment on your other points but with regard to the flow of medical research information, I'd like to point out that it goes both ways. Private US healthcare also feeds from research carried out world-wide without baring development risks. For example, look at the amount of work done in genomic research in say the UK. I think it would be somewhat naive to say that private US healthcare firms and their patient…

Yes, I don't think I ever implied that that the flow is unilateral, but I feel like this is indicative of the broader point. The sensitivity to US exceptionalism has made it hard to say something seemingly trivial like "the US is a huge, rich, politically powerful economy and contributes a huge fraction of global medical research" without having to caveat against "You know, other people contribute as well." No reason…

Nice to see an argument in such a civilized manner.

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#69

Post by veidr » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 4:17 AM UTC

paulhauggis wrote: post #38

gnaritas wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, you don't need money to be healthy in a civilized country. Someday, America might catch on, but I'm not holding my breath.

"Yea, you don't need money to be healthy in a civilized country." You just need enough other people's money. "Someday, America might catch on, but I'm not holding my breath." Why is it that anyone with any kind of money that needs urgent care comes to the US? I will give you a hint: it's not because of nationalized health care. Our system isn't perfect and is expensive, but in my opinion, it's the best in the world (…

Our system isn't perfect and is expensive, but in my opinion, it's the best in the world (in terms of quality doctors, surgery, and hospitals).

That's probably true for the best doctors, surgery, and hospitals in the USA.

But it isn't true on average. The average hospital in the US isn't as good (well-equipped, well-staffed) as the average hospital in, say, Japan.

It also isn't true for most people -- even those with health insurance -- because most people simply cannot pay out of pocket for this best-of-breed care. The health care that most people in the USA actually get is well below the quality of many other countries.

So US health care is only the 'best in the world' in the same sense that a $1.7 million dollar Bugatti Veyron might be considered the 'best sports car in the world'.

Great, if you're rich as fuck. Otherwise not too relevant.

Re: Stephen Hawking to turn 70, defying disease

#70

Post by veidr » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 4:48 AM UTC

helmut_hed wrote: post #27

As a native South Carolinian, I encourage everyone to read the comments on the original article, and compare them in tone, content, and relevance to those posted on HN.

OK. Top-voted comments from the site:

1. "...making a killing on hypothetical theories... pie in the sky science. I'm sick and tired of these theories... Lying to keep the global warming cash cow rolling..."

2. "When Hawking stands at The Great White Throne Judgement and asks why he (Hawking) is being cast into the Lake of Fire, Jesus will tell him... blah blah blah"

4. "I think that Mr Hawking is going to be in for a big surprise when he is standing before the throne of God..."

Etc. etc. etc.

Comparing tone, content, and relevance, I'd say three to nil HN. Was that your point?