Actually, that's factually incorrect. Every condition is fixable by definition. At worst it would require rewiring every cell in the body to function like that of a person without the condition. It literally cannot be more difficult than that, and in most cases would be easier.
Seems pretty easy to fix... assign the bulk of grant money to replication rather than new research. Or require that any study receiving public funding have a replication component. Have a government journal devoted to publishing replications.
Just imagine how much better the world would be if you had a $1000 lifetime cure instead of a $100/month maintenance. You could give that $100 to charity and help feed the hungry. Now multiply that by 100 million people on maintenance drugs instead of cures.
I again think the difference is about whether you have a choice. For most DD there is a choice involved. You choose (while NOT drunk) to go out drinking at a bar, bringing your own car rather than other transit.
For prescription driving, you are more typically going about your daily business: e.g. driving to the store to get food. Necessary functions of life, with driving necessitated by the design of our society.
To me, the second is a much more understandable and forgivable action. Yes, there are some DD incidents that are more forgivable as well, which is why it would be nice to bring all such cases to trial rather than have automatic sentencing without a jury.
That's a nice theory, but not true. A lot of people in this country have no way to get basic necessities (like groceries) without driving. Having someone else to drive you isn't available to everyone either.
In a later post you mention being in Israel, where MD salaries are apparently reasonable. Here in the US, typical salaries are roughly currently about 10 times what you make, so I'm proposing bringing them down to only 3 times what you make. Or to bring their low end salaries from 5 times the high end of IT salaries to 1.5 times the high end of IT salaries.
Well, you could cut all the doctors pay to 1/3rd, then hire twice as many, and still have saved substantial amounts of money. If we could lower the cost of medical school it would actually work pretty well, and solve many of the problems with the US medical system.
You'd almost certainly calibrate it to a safety margin rather than the best performance of the individual. You set the target to be 10 or 25% better than the minimum level of performance determined to be safe. Any drunk employee will presumably fail, and any non-drunk employee will presumably pass by a wide margin.
Just make it a mandatory day off. From their vacation budget. If they run out of vacation, treat it as you would an employee who tried to take more vacation time than they had (presumably a fireable offense).
Alcohol is singled out because it's a choice. Very few medications that will have you unfit to drive are optional in that sense. If you have a prescription for alcohol due to some medical condition, I think most of society would be quite willing to treat that differently.
I was under the impression that a refusal to take a breathalyzer in most states landed you in jail until your blood was drawn. That's how it is here in MN.
I just don't understand any legitimate concern to decline a breathalyzer test. It's non-invasive and it's not like it's a cheek swap DNA test. But I bet that no drop of blood goes to waste once they draw that...
The rate of false positives on the breathalyzers is pretty high. Do you want to lose your license / go to jail for years on a false positive? The rate of false positive on the blood test is a lot lower.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, that's factually incorrect. Every condition is fixable by definition. At worst it would require rewiring every cell in the body to function like that of a person without the condition. It literally cannot be more difficult than that, and in most cases would be easier.
I don't think pharma is hiding cures, I don't think they're seeking cures.
Leeches are for the flu. For a cold you want rhino horn.
Seems pretty easy to fix ... assign the bulk of grant money to replication rather than new research. Or require that any study receiving public funding have a replication component. Have a government journal devoted to publishing replications.
Yikes, I don't know what industry your phd biochemists are going into, but if they go work for a drug company they can make a solid 200K+.
George got it precisely right.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie
: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
Just imagine how much better the world would be if you had a $1000 lifetime cure instead of a $100/month maintenance. You could give that $100 to charity and help feed the hungry. Now multiply that by 100 million people on maintenance drugs instead of cures.
I again think the difference is about whether you have a choice. For most DD there is a choice involved. You choose (while NOT drunk) to go out drinking at a bar, bringing your own car rather than other transit.
For prescription driving, you are more typically going about your daily business: e.g. driving to the store to get food. Necessary functions of life, with driving necessitated by the design of our society.
To me, the second is a much more understandable and forgivable action. Yes, there are some DD incidents that are more forgivable as well, which is why it would be nice to bring all such cases to trial rather than have automatic sentencing without a jury.
It's the choice that makes it a vice. It actually isn't that easy to measure, a whole bunch of technology had to be invented for the cause.
Improperly prescribed narcotics are indeed a problem, and would surely be considered the same by most people as unnecessary drinking.
That's a nice theory, but not true. A lot of people in this country have no way to get basic necessities (like groceries) without driving. Having someone else to drive you isn't available to everyone either.
In a later post you mention being in Israel, where MD salaries are apparently reasonable. Here in the US, typical salaries are roughly currently about 10 times what you make, so I'm proposing bringing them down to only 3 times what you make. Or to bring their low end salaries from 5 times the high end of IT salaries to 1.5 times the high end of IT salaries.
Really, off-topic? Did you read the headline mods?
But as a counter-point: very few of them want to schedule their surgeries for 3 am.
Well, you could cut all the doctors pay to 1/3rd, then hire twice as many, and still have saved substantial amounts of money. If we could lower the cost of medical school it would actually work pretty well, and solve many of the problems with the US medical system.
That's probably something that will be solved medically in the next 50 years. There's a lot of research in the area, and drugs are rapidly improving.
There are also a lot more truck drivers than surgeons. The payoff for beneficial rules comes a lot faster when amortized over a larger population.
You'd almost certainly calibrate it to a safety margin rather than the best performance of the individual. You set the target to be 10 or 25% better than the minimum level of performance determined to be safe. Any drunk employee will presumably fail, and any non-drunk employee will presumably pass by a wide margin.
Just make it a mandatory day off. From their vacation budget. If they run out of vacation, treat it as you would an employee who tried to take more vacation time than they had (presumably a fireable offense).
Alcohol is singled out because it's a choice. Very few medications that will have you unfit to drive are optional in that sense. If you have a prescription for alcohol due to some medical condition, I think most of society would be quite willing to treat that differently.
Thankfully, the majority is on my side.
I'd be willing to travel preferentially on an airline that made that a condition of employment. But mandating it for all pilots by law? No thanks.
I'd say that american history is all about the gradual expansion of civil rights at the cost of state powers, but interpret history how you'd like.
I think you meant bastion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bastion
I was under the impression that a refusal to take a breathalyzer in most states landed you in jail until your blood was drawn. That's how it is here in MN.
I just don't understand any legitimate concern to decline a breathalyzer test. It's non-invasive and it's not like it's a cheek swap DNA test. But I bet that no drop of blood goes to waste once they draw that...
The rate of false positives on the breathalyzers is pretty high. Do you want to lose your license / go to jail for years on a false positive? The rate of false positive on the blood test is a lot lower.
Lucky me, I bought a used vehicle that came licensed, so I didn't have to agree to any of those terms.