melancharisbron (![[info]](http://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} melancharisbron) wrote,@ 2009-08-14 19:25:00 |
 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friends Stop Friends from Digging Deeper Holes
Well, some of you may have encountered the bru-ha-ha over Investors' Business Daily. That was where an editorial tried to use Stephen Hawking as an example of the sort of person who, supposedly, the UK-style National Health Service would have cut off because trying to treat his illness would have cost too much. (There is one of the many reactions to this here.)
Except for that pesky bit where, uhm... Stephen Hawking has lived in the UK most of his life? And has been treated for his condition through the NHS, with good results: I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS,... I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived."
Now, I know admitting one has been wrong can be difficult. But...
Instead of just making a plain admission of an error, the IBD has apparently tried to salvage their initial thesis - by implying that Stephen Hawking only got the care he needed because he was famous. The quote (here if you want to give the IBD a click before they change that, too) is repeated in the second paragraph of a column from The Guardian of the UK, "Okay, we got it wrong but "not everyone suffering from a debilitating disease is Stephen Hawking, and we hope our critics would acknowledge that."
However, I'm sure it takes very little effort to go check the initial onset of Hawking's case and the first inklings of fame. He was born in 1942. (Saith the Wikipedia.) The disease manifested age 21. That, and his subsequent treatment, would appear to predate the main work for which an amateur crank like me would have heard of him - A Brief History of Time, from 1988.
I hope that someone acknowledges that not only is the NHS not in possession any time-travel tech or communications, but also that accusing anyone of that kind of standard of judgement for treatment seems to have a bit of an odor about it - the odor of the crooked innkeeper, to be exact.
(h/t to the-gardener)
Oh, and a link to a gratuitious HawkingLOL - http://lh3.ggpht.com/_3pqx_Cf9Pj0/SoTnO
and not a LOL but a very sweet photo, I think: http://marydell.livejournal.com/92331.h
Well, some of you may have encountered the bru-ha-ha over Investors' Business Daily. That was where an editorial tried to use Stephen Hawking as an example of the sort of person who, supposedly, the UK-style National Health Service would have cut off because trying to treat his illness would have cost too much. (There is one of the many reactions to this here.)
Except for that pesky bit where, uhm... Stephen Hawking has lived in the UK most of his life? And has been treated for his condition through the NHS, with good results: I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS,... I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived."
Now, I know admitting one has been wrong can be difficult. But...
Instead of just making a plain admission of an error, the IBD has apparently tried to salvage their initial thesis - by implying that Stephen Hawking only got the care he needed because he was famous. The quote (here if you want to give the IBD a click before they change that, too) is repeated in the second paragraph of a column from The Guardian of the UK, "Okay, we got it wrong but "not everyone suffering from a debilitating disease is Stephen Hawking, and we hope our critics would acknowledge that."
However, I'm sure it takes very little effort to go check the initial onset of Hawking's case and the first inklings of fame. He was born in 1942. (Saith the Wikipedia.) The disease manifested age 21. That, and his subsequent treatment, would appear to predate the main work for which an amateur crank like me would have heard of him - A Brief History of Time, from 1988.
I hope that someone acknowledges that not only is the NHS not in possession any time-travel tech or communications, but also that accusing anyone of that kind of standard of judgement for treatment seems to have a bit of an odor about it - the odor of the crooked innkeeper, to be exact.
(h/t to the-gardener)
Oh, and a link to a gratuitious HawkingLOL - http://lh3.ggpht.com/_3pqx_Cf9Pj0/SoTnO
and not a LOL but a very sweet photo, I think: http://marydell.livejournal.com/92331.h