Capitalism


Zombie Medicine

This morning, sitting in a waiting room, I read about the sleepless residents who provide sleep deprived health care patient sitting. Well, I said to myself, I’ll have to blog about this later. I couldn’t believe that supposedly intelligent people would have to perform a study to figure out things like:

Young doctors make far fewer mistakes when their hours are restricted to let them get enough sleep, according to the first study to directly examine the issue.
The study of 24 student doctors caring for seriously ill patients in a hospital found that those who were restricted to working no more than 16 hours without a break made about one-third fewer serious errors that could harm patients.
Anyone who has pulled an all nighter knows this.
David Leach, Executive Director of the group that oversees medical residency hides from the obvious:
“I cannot emphasize enough that this situation is more complicated than just one variable. I don’t know if it’s as simple as reducing hours,” Leach said. “We could end up doing more harm than good.”
From this quote I was going to jump into a diatribe about just who was going to be harmed the most. But, heck, Megan McCardle and Jonathan Wilde are already all over this.
Perhaps a series of tort awards based on malpractice due to resident’s poor work conditions will bring a more rapid change. Is this another reason that the medical profession wants tort limits: to protect their government sponsored monopoly. Because, to cut back on resident’s hours the medical education system will have to produce more residents which ultimately means more doctors serving patients.
NB: I do wish that Megan would cross post her Instapundit guest posts at Asymetrical Information. Her stuff is really too good for Instapundit and it does kind of irk me to have to go there to find her material.


Boycott or Buy? Part 2

In Boycott or Buy? Part 1 I encouraged each of you to make your own fair and balanced decision as how you might respond to the Sinclair Broadcasting issue. I still do.
Jim Henley reminds us, though, that it should not be an FCC issue at all:

It may arguably be bad business, in which case they’ll pay, but it’s not the FCC’s business. I enjoyed the hell out of the Sundance Channel’s live broadcast of the Vote for Change finale concert last night. That wasn’t station owners using their facilities for partisan political purposes?
I enjoyed listening to Vote for Change on a local radio station and Jim’s question jumped into mind just about two songs1 in…
I agree with Jim that it should not the FCC’s business. Primarily because the FCC should not even exist.
Sinclair owns the stations so they should be able to broadcast what they want. We can use our channel changers or the power switch to watch or not watch and we can choose to buy or not buy from their sponsors.
However, Sinclair Broadcasting along with their media and corporate ilk exist in the form they do only with the complicity of their regulatory monitors partners and our their executive, legislative, and judicial representatives. As long as this parasitic partnership rides on our backs it seems perfectly reasonable to pour sugar in its tanks and turn one limb against the other to the extent possible.
1I enjoyed almost all the music I heard on this broadcast and these late in the show pieces were amongst my favorites: Dave Matthews performing Don’t Drink the Water and Ant’s Marching and Springsteen’s Star Spangled Banner>Born in the USA.


LEAP

I haven’t thoroughly investigated Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) but their byline suggests that they have taken a step in the right direction:

Current and former members of law enforcement who support drug regulation rather than prohibition.

I’d rather see outright freedom but if we have to go through a regulatory stage on the way that is better then the current morass.
At first look this organization looks to be worth of support and they have a flyer you can print and hand out to your local law enforcement folks.
There is a lot of written material linked on their site and I’m sure I’ll have more to say as I read through it.
Via …muttered the ogre.


Government Helping the Needy

I know some of you have probably forked over big bucks for that new HDTV set and are enjoying some excellent picture quality. I haven’t and have yet to see one at a size and price point that makes me say, “I have got to have that.” And, I also haven’t seen the value in buying that digital cable package. Basic does just fine for the few hours a week that I watch TV.
Since there are apparently a lot of other folks like me out and about our ever helpful federal government is accelerating its work on behalf of big electronics:

It’s one of the biggest technical changes in television since color TV: the digital transition. And because many Americans remain in the dark about it, federal regulators began an education campaign Monday to enlighten them.
Remind me, please, just why it was congress needed to set a target date for “all digital” and why the FCC needs to be spending tax money to act as the marketing arm for the electronics industry in what seems no more than a wealth transfer exercise.
When the perceived value hits the right point people will buy the stuff in droves.