Quote:


I do understand, but I dont believe YOU do. You have your own distrust and agenda to stick to apparently, which is causing you to not get what I've been saying.

N.R. was at a resort in Quebec...since when is that "rural"??




There is a particular point to that abstract. You can read the full article to get a better sense of how the authors attempted to define "rural", but in a nutshell: They were focusing on medical centers that are not trauma centers, that are outside of major metropolitan areas, that are not staffed by physicians specializing in trauma care (another term you should not assume you understand), and that have to transfer their patients to tertiary care hospitals more than a variable number of miles away.

In other words, it doesn't matter what the size of the city is, it only refers to the level of trauma services offered. It is common language term that is used specifically and narrowly in a medical sense, not a common language sense.

HOWEVER, more important, my comment was directed at the notion that the whole point of the article was missed by you. Focusing on the definition of "rural" was so trivial and unimportant to the point. Furthermore, if you weren't in full argument mode, you could have gotten that simply by context if you had been open minded.

Natasha Richardson was not skiing through downtown Quebec! She was at a ski resort whose local medical facility EXACTLY matched the definition of rural facility being discussed in that article. It was a small facility that was not a trauma facility. It referred patients out to a nearby hospital that was larger, but still was not a large trauma center. That second hospital referred out to New York City.

Do you understand now that they weren't talking about the restaurants, shopping centers, or affluence of the local community when they used the term "rural"? Or are you still in full argument mode and want to fight more over the definition of rural?


Quote:

You know ALL the details? Really?



Yes.


Anyway, I would love to discuss my "distrust and agenda" in more detail since it is something that is clearly misunderstood by you and others (in a different recent thread), but maybe in a different area of the board, yes?

In short, when a person very much loves and respects some field they tend to resent people who are not as passionate. For example, a chef who demands excellence and criticizes fast food chains, does not hate cooking. A teacher who castigates other teachers who simply pass students who can't read, and shouldn't be advanced, does not hate education.

Likewise, a person who hates doctors like SexyDJ described, or those like Micheal Jackson's doctor (the ones I was referring to) who practice bad or defensive medicine instead of good evidence based medicine does not hate doctors or the medical field. On the contrary, that person loves, respects, and is passionate about excellence in medical care and about passionate, competent, physicians, nurses and other ancillary health care personnel.

_________________________
--Some of us look for The Way in opium and some in God, some of us in whiskey and some in love. It is all the same Way and it leads nowhither.