I can't help but note you didn't substantively reply to anything I said but instead opened up with a blatant insult then proceeded to cite numerous personal experiences, which while I'm sure are important to you can hardly count as evidence or argument of any sort. But let me reply point for point, perhaps you might do the same next time and keep the venom to yourself.



Pointlessly rude.



Yes, I have this weird obsession with pointing out false data or flawed studies when I happen to be aware of it. I call it 'ethics', and make a point of doing it even when I like the results. You have a issue with this?



Considering polls are nothing like studies I don't usually refute them since they can be so easily biased, but I will make a special exception in this case.



In this particular case, I think it noteworthy that another poll conducted by Investors Business Daily has found, amongst other things...

• Two-thirds, or 65%, of doctors say they oppose the proposed government expansion plan. This contradicts the administration's claims that doctors are part of an "unprecedented coalition" supporting a medical overhaul.

• Four of nine doctors, or 45%, said they "would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement" if Congress passes the plan the Democratic majority and White House have in mind.

Now I for one consider polls, unlike serious studies, to be more or less exempt from serious scrutiny since they have a tendency to be easily biased. However, I can not help but notice that the one say 70% for and the other 65% against. Also note that it is the AMA that is known for heavily supporting this, yet they make up only 18% of practitioners and have seen many defections considered to have resulted from their support. I also sincerely doubt that 45% of doctors would be considering leaving the business if the plan passed if 70% thought it was a great idea.

Perhaps one or both of these polls are flawed, considering they are both recent it will doubtless take a while before which and how much is known regarding error - as I mentioned, I don't take polls on 'opinion' too seriously. "Are you voting for Candidate X or Y" tends to be fairly accurate, these kind rarely are.



He is, of course, entitled to his view, but there could easily be a doc in the next room over who disagrees heavily. Is my opinion supposed to be swayed by your doctor? Incidentally, I agree with him, I consider the health insurance system to be badly damaged these days, and since pharm, insurance, and docs are the only people involved - besides the government - I should fully expect them to be blamed. I know someone in medical insurance who says something very similiar but is harsh on pharm, hospital bureacrats, and government mis-regulation. Needless to say I sincerely doubt that either represents an unbiased opinion. I rather expect pharm says the same things too.



I seriously doubt either he or she could really make a judgement on the rebellious tendencies of Norweigans. I really don't see how that is the least bit germane to this. Americans aren't exactly known for being doormats to industry or government either, haven't seen much rioting going on over it. Actually the most heated citizen activity seems to have been the townhalls and the people in question were against it, not for it.

If you don't mind, let's please keep this to a civil debate, minus the insults and personal experiences which I can not possibly refute nor reasonably be expected to.