/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7041518
>An approach to diagnosis based on abundant availability of high-quality expert systems
You are just uttering words now. What you said has no meaning. Mainly because you have no understanding of what you are talking about.

>scarce access to inadequate, biased, and unreliable human experts
Are you the "computer guy" again?

>genuine competition between independent systems of scientific medicine
It exists. It's called "peer review" and "reputation".

>persistent incompetence and refusal to make appropriate use of modern technology resulting in continual unnecessary death and suffering
Here we go again with the zero-facts allegations.

>deregulation and encouragement of private competition
You have no comprehension of what you are saing. SpaceX is subject to FAA regulations and is not a consumer product.

>there are some deaths
Yes, of the experimenters themselves. If used by the general population it would kill 99,99% of the passengers and more when it falls into a city and leaves behind orphans. The difference is that the general population, you being a perfect example of, has no comprehension of that danger when it comes to drugs.

>The gold-plated superexpert model of medicine doesn't work so well.
It is among the pinnacle of human scientific achievement and these are no facts you can bring against it.