3 ms·

> This is medicine. You cant just compete, the Nephrology Board has to approve these standards of practice The “Nephrology Board” is only one country. Even sup

> This is medicine. You cant just compete, the Nephrology Board has to approve these standards of practice The “Nephrology Board” is only one country. Even supposing US medical institutions decided to block a treatment being developed in the US, they have no authority to stop its development in other countries. If it was seen to be working in other countries, they’d find it very hard to justify refusing to allow it in the US. But politically I think the scenario you are describing is very unlikely - the US medical system justifies its “uniqueness” (such as extreme expensiveness) on the grounds that “we have the best medical technology on the planet”. Blocking medical advances would undermine that justification, and hence is not in the best interests of the people who control the US medical system

shkkmo 3y ago
You say this as if the only way this happens is through a big top down conspiracy. In reality it's several separate actors with aligned incentives that create unnecessary headwinds to the adoption of cost saving medical advances To pretend that there aren't groups who will work to delay and limit the rollout of industry shattering technology like this is naive at best.
- skissane 3y ago
  > You say this as if the only way this happens is through a big top down conspiracy. In reality it's several separate actors with aligned incentives that create unnecessary headwinds to the adoption of cost saving medical advances I didn’t intend my comment as saying anything about whether this suggested phenomenon is “top-down” or “bottom-up”. I think my two counterarguments-“other countries exist” and “contrary to collective political self-interest” have about as much force in either case. > To pretend that there aren't groups who will work to delay and limit the rollout of industry shattering technology like this is naive at best. I never claimed such groups don’t exist - I’m sure there are some individuals and groups who (consciously or not) possess the agenda you describe. The real question is whether they will succeed in achieving that goal-I’m sceptical they will make any significant difference to whether or when these advances are achieved

shkkmo 3y ago

You say this as if the only way this happens is through a big top down conspiracy. In reality it's several separate actors with aligned incentives that create unnecessary headwinds to the adoption of cost saving medical advances To pretend that there aren't groups who will work to delay and limit the rollout of industry shattering technology like this is naive at best.

skissane 3y ago
> You say this as if the only way this happens is through a big top down conspiracy. In reality it's several separate actors with aligned incentives that create unnecessary headwinds to the adoption of cost saving medical advances I didn’t intend my comment as saying anything about whether this suggested phenomenon is “top-down” or “bottom-up”. I think my two counterarguments-“other countries exist” and “contrary to collective political self-interest” have about as much force in either case. > To pretend that there aren't groups who will work to delay and limit the rollout of industry shattering technology like this is naive at best. I never claimed such groups don’t exist - I’m sure there are some individuals and groups who (consciously or not) possess the agenda you describe. The real question is whether they will succeed in achieving that goal-I’m sceptical they will make any significant difference to whether or when these advances are achieved