3 ms·
My main points is that I do not believe that it's OK for the state to be paying for things that have not proven their efficacy. My whole relatives are MD Doctor
by IMTDb 4y ago
My main points is that I do not believe that it's OK for the state to be paying for things that have not proven their efficacy. My whole relatives are MD Doctors (father, 5 sisters, wife and best friend) and they all agree that we are lacking funding for the health sector as a whole, so paying for people beliefs isn't a priority.
On top of that, it puts the state in a weird situation because it has to decide which beliefs are OK (acupuncture fixes fibromyalgy is an OK belief -> reimbursed) and which one aren't (getting a PS5 fixes depression is not and OK belief -> not reimbursed).
People are absolutely entitled to have their own beliefs, but if a treatment hasn't shown any efficacy, we should aim for a close to 0 spending of the public health sector on it.
I feel that creating a state controlled millilitre water bottling company would make some placebo available at virtually no cost, so could be a nice way of offering some effectiveness for free, but acupuncture isn't.