-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Tim May wrote:
The FDA has probably killed more people in the last 30 years than all the wars the U.S. has been in during the same time. Mostly because of the game-theoretic nature of the system: all that matters to FDA officials is covering their ass so that promotion is ensured. No points for approving a controversial drug, but lots of demerits for approving a drug which hurts even one person (if the media reports it as "another FDA oversight"). Avoiding flipper children is the raison d'etre for these people.
Tim no doubt already knows this, but I'm going to mention it anyway. The FDA has other reasons for existing such as protecting the major drug cartels from competition and providing wonderful employment opportunities for former FDA employees in said drug cartels. The choice of medical products and services as a choke point to exploit is a particularly evil one as the link between government imposed oligopoly profits and people's lives is very clear. And, of course, this is worst of all for poor people because they are least able to manage their situation. I have my doubts as to whether it is possible to set up a really good anonymous insurance scheme. At some point the customer must physically be matched up with the policy. The damage may be minimized by putting a hash of the customer's DNA markers in the policy instead of the markers themselves. But, when the customer wishes to draw on the policy, his or her markers will have to be taken. If there were a way for the representative of the insurance company to absolutely verify the DNA markers such that the customer could be absolutely certain the information didn't leave the room, a really good anonymous policy would be feasible. But, I can't think of a way to do this. The really good way to protect your medical privacy is to self insure. Most people are happy with policies that tap out at $1 million. If you would be happy with such a policy, then all you need is $1 million to protect your privacy. It is likely that this $1 million will not ever be consumed by health care costs. (Probably much less likely than that a policy holder will hit that limit. People tend to spend their own money more responsibly than somebody else's.) One of the most important criteria for issuing insurance must be age. Is there anyway to unambiguously determine somebody's age? I know how to do it with trees, but it doesn't work with people. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFgp6ZaWtjSmRH/5AQES/wf+Ijrvktr6VxOxFRKZsad19G6fLuotWLTx /kGEncb+3cAHg26Pxn2FRjt8FO4fdqNp/adaEtCmaVDJeJavhhiqW+XyXuLb1Iy4 5YrvG/xIbbPIIYdVeZ5coATNAIaKZvQu0UWrbDQzbmyxi0bIHmaixxx53isc14w1 qn+4PrlV7jVyKCPf/BMw7Mv7L33v8ZR3r3iS15L/OjIxBtvpVDvnBv8BdKwMA7C+ S5HBSYhiYjSGi1CnisnKI0POD9BqXXr5LwNA+407hPWDTkSGZ4iRqY3koiO0e/Je eEvfbcSBEazaXcqlMtuI5xkFhLOY3L9oF+BtRjAfc9TRocFTTzZwHA== =VcKo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----