Sto ti ne citira recenicu prije toga?GandalfSivi wrote: ↑20/02/2020 19:25Pa sto ne citira recenicu prije toga? Ono, lik je usput i director of Yale University’s Center for Infectious Disease Modeling and Analysis. Tesko da bi stavio takvu reputaciju na kocku zato sto gotivi Sandersa...jeza u ledja wrote: ↑20/02/2020 19:19 The paper discloses that Galvani served as an “informal, unpaid advisor” to Sanders’s Senate office as it developed the Medicare For All Act.
Ma ja se generalno slazem sa Medicare for All idejom, ali za to bi trebalo proci dosta tranzicijskih faza. Tako sam ja shvatao ACA.
Ne vidim da se oni toga doticu, kao ni naravno politike.
Onda bi znao da nije "on", nego "ona"
i znao bi da nije ekspert na ovom polju. Ona i jos 4 autora - svi epidemiolozi. Ona je objavila pun kurac radova, nijedan nema ni slicne veze sa sistemom zdravstvenog osiguranja. Svi su relativno mladi i izivinuces, ne zvuce mi kao vodeca imena sto se tice datog istrazivanja.Ne mislim da stavlja reputaciju na kocku zato sto gotivi Sandersa. Ti nekako uvijek zamisljas da neko nesto radi iz skrivenih namjera. Jednostavno sam skeptican na papir koji ovako obecava, i to radjen od ljudi koji nisu eksperti u health care administraciji.
MIslim, kazem ti opet meni to sve zvuci smisleno, ali bojim se da nam treba jos ovakvih radova., od ljudi koji ne rade za kampanje politicara.
Imam cijeli papir evo pred sobom, ovako pise na kraju:
Malo mi ovo zvuci vise kao politicka poruka, nego zakljucak naucnog rada.Time to act
As public support for health-care reform mounts in the USA, legislators are poised to transform the health-care system and save thousands of lives every year. Single-payer universal health care has the potential to improve the quality, cost-effectiveness, and accessibility of medical services. Our projections indicate that implementing the Medicare for All Act specifically would generate net savings across a wide range of possible expenditure and financing options. Objections to the Medicare for All Act based on the expectation of rising costs are mistaken. Some Americans express concern about the federal government controlling this large sector of the economy, or about violating capitalist principles. However, the health-care sector is already highly regulated in many aspects, and deviates from capitalist ideals through opaque and often monopolistic pricing. Strong opposition should be expected from powerful vested interests, including the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries. Counterbalancing these concerns is the moral imperative to provide health care as a human right, not dependent on employment or affluence. The medical community should seize this opportunity to promote wellbeing, enhance prosperity, and establish a more equitable health-care system for all Americans.
Volio bih procitati reakcije drugih naucnika na ovaj clanak, jer je clanak pravo frisak.
PS: Usput, kad vec citiraju clanak mogli su staviti njegov naziv
(Improving the prognosis of health care in the USA)
