Dying in America and Great Britain
Niall Ferguson commenting on American gun violence. Adding a remark about how often the British die from various illnesses. One imagines that the second paragraph is a paean of sorts to the National Health Service. From a Sunday London Times column:
Why assume definitions are the same?
ReplyDeleteIt seems worth noting that the state-by-state homicide rate varies greatly from 1.1/100k for New Hampshire to 10.3/100k for Louisiana, although the UK's rate is 0.92/100k, so just below our "best" state. (Our average 4.88/100k if you want to check your state, while Canada is 1.68/100k.)
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_in_the_United_States_by_state
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
But we can feel good our illegal drug money and our weapons manufacturing and sales are helping to fuel a 16.3/100k homicide rate for Mexico. So surely Trump is right, not all the illegals coming here from Mexico are boy scouts.
Again, I offer you this website for Chicago shooting numbers: http://heyjackass.com
ReplyDeleteTake a closer look at some of the more detailed numbers down the page. Three numbers are interesting: (1) ration of head and torso shots... the Chicago criminals are quite accurate; (2) the racial makeup of victims and assailants; and (3) a dismal 12.5% homicide clearance rate.
Chicago is a war zone.
No justice, no peace.
NHS health care is wonderful. Still, Charlie Gard could not be reached for comment.
ReplyDeleteSam L, apparently God couldn't be reached for comment either, since he let Charlie die too.
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Gard_case
---
Charlie Gard was an infant boy from London, born with mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome (MDDS), a rare genetic disorder that causes progressive brain damage and muscle failure. MDDS has no treatment and usually causes death in infancy. The case became controversial because the medical team and parents disagreed about whether experimental treatment was in the best interests of the child.
...
Dr Hirano told the court that having seen the 30th March EEG, the damage to Charlie's brain was more severe than he had thought. He said in his evidence that the treatment was unlikely to be of any benefit to Charlie's brain. He agreed that there could be no reversal of the structure of Charlie's brain... that the effect on brain function would be less or minimal or non-existent. GOSH had determined that the chances of benefit to Charlie were vanishingly small, the effort would be futile and the treatment potentially painful for him.
---
The tragedy to me is not the peaceful death of a brain-damaged child, but the fact the parents could not let go peacefully.
If we're worried about death-panels, we can also bring that up to the widow of my 70-something uncle who died after being denied a heart transplant, and she might want to sign your Never again Charlie Gard petition.