Krugman Poll on Canadian Healthcare

[Harry Dresden]

So the rich in America get great healthcare, and the poor get no healthcare until they are at death's door.

Is this a great country or what?

why do you ruin all these good threads asshole with .....THE SAME ******* SHIT YOU SAY IN EVERY ******* THREAD YOU POST ON.....are you that stupid Chris that you cant come up with something new?.....

 

[Political Junky]

so really you get the healthcare you can afford.

Exactly.

 

[Harry Dresden]

so really you get the healthcare you can afford.

Exactly.

Jay....answer a question for me if you will....is it true it is against the law to purchase private healthcare Ins. in Canada....and if it is yes why?....

 

[Vast LWC]

I have returned. Reponse to an older post:

Of course they lie.

Of course! Any organization that uses numbers and facts to presentthe public with information must be lying if said information doesn't adhere to what Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are telling you, right?

Damn those pesky facts. Always getting in the way of the "Fair and Balanced" agenda.

You see, if I were like you, I'd be posting data from Keith Olberman's show...
But instead I go out and search for reliable information, rather than someone's opinion.

Quite an etherial defense.

I note that you were not able to deny the the WHO does no more than copy the data given by member nations.

Minus one.

" Any organization that uses numbers and facts to presentthe public with information must be lying if said information doesn't adhere..."
This was not consistent with any part of my post, an obvious attempt to deflect.

Minus two.

"...Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are telling you, right?"
I quoted neither of your 'bete noire.' Clearly a straw man argument, or in this case, straw men.

Minus three.

I hate to embarrass you in public in this manner, but here on the USMB we have come to expect a higher level of debate than you have, thus far, evinced.

Suggestions? Cut down on the vituperation, bulk up on data and links. Nothing wrong with a little jab, but I expect argument less 'so are you...' and more 'here are the reasons for my belief a), b) c).

I'm sure you can do better.

Interesting tactic. Declare victory, "grade" your opponent, and then pretend you had a valid point to begin with.

Very "Ann Coulter-esque".

But there's a few problems with your response.

1. Why would WHO want to paint US health care in a bad light. What could possibly be their motivation? I suppose this all yet another part of the world-wide conspiracy againsnt free-market capitalism that you people are always going on about?

2. You quoted neither of my 'bete noire' because you didn't site anyone at all, you just claimed that the data was faulty because it didn't fit in with your worldview

and

3. "Embarrass me"? LOL, good luck with that one.

Perhaps you're used to being in an echo-chamber message board where everyone is of the same viewpoint and "common-right-wing-knowledge" talking points are accepted as truth, but that just doesn't cut it in real debate.

In conclusion, I'm not sure what you're used to but, perhaps, as this board evolves and gets more varied, you should slink on over to "TownHall", where everyone will accept your "Liberal Agenda" talking points as funny little "truths".

Sorry to "Embarrass" you. LOL.

 

[Vast LWC]

Toro, you said:

Like I've said before, if I were poor or lower middle class, I'd much rather be in Canada. If I were rich or upper middle class, I'd rather be in America. Middle class is a toss-up. Since I do okay, I'd rather be in the US.

However, I don't think you'll ever see a universal single-payer government health care system in America. It runs too counter to the American mindset. Canadians are more collective and trustful of government. Americans are the opposite.

I believe you to be correct here, but I believe that is why there is no "universal health care" proposal being put on the table.

Instead they are trying to insert a public option, so we can have the choice between paying a premium for very expensive health care, OR going the route of the government plan, in other words, the best of both worlds.

By the way, I thought your posts on comparisons between Canadian and US health care were fantastic. Well done sir.

 

[Toro]

so really you get the healthcare you can afford.

I have a great plan.

 

[Toro]

how many people live in the U.S.A? cause I think it's a couple more than 1000 peeps on a media call list?

Almost all polls in the US are with 1,000 people. The polls before the 2008 Presidential election were very accurate.

 

[Toro]

Toro, you said:

Like I've said before, if I were poor or lower middle class, I'd much rather be in Canada. If I were rich or upper middle class, I'd rather be in America. Middle class is a toss-up. Since I do okay, I'd rather be in the US.

However, I don't think you'll ever see a universal single-payer government health care system in America. It runs too counter to the American mindset. Canadians are more collective and trustful of government. Americans are the opposite.

I believe you to be correct here, but I believe that is why there is no "universal health care" proposal being put on the table.

Instead they are trying to insert a public option, so we can have the choice between paying a premium for very expensive health care, OR going the route of the government plan, in other words, the best of both worlds.

By the way, I thought your posts on comparisons between Canadian and US health care were fantastic. Well done sir.

Thanks. I find there are a lot of myths about both countries.

 

[Vast LWC]

possibly including Obama himself, that will disprove your assumption about hr3200.

i could be wrong but obama, his health secratary, and a few others or on record stating different goals for our healthcare.

People are on many ends of the spectrum in what they want, what is reasonable, and what's actually going to happen.

Obama probably feels deep down that we should have universal health care. That's what he wants.

He knows he's not going to GET universal health care, so instead, he's making compromises, to get as many people covered as he can. This is being reasonable.

What's actually going to happen is that certain members of Congress who get paid off by the private insurers and private health care industry are going to keep screaming about this, and getting the right-wing media to scream about this, which leads to either two things happening:

1. Democrats decide that they can't deal with these people, so there are no further negotiations necessary, thus creating a more far-left version of the bill

or

2. Opponents of the bill will succeed in beating it into the ground, once again, and many more people will continue to die un-necessarily because they don't have health coverage.

 

[Bfgrn]

Hey PC, I know you're not interested in finding out anything that resembles the TRUTH...

YouTube - BILL MOYERS JOURNAL | Preview: Wendell Potter pt 2 | PBS

The Truth about ObamaCare Eugenics and Euthanasia Program:

"Ultimately, the complete lives system does not create 'classes of Untermenschen whose lives and well being are deemed not worth spending money on,' but rather empowers us to decide fairly whom to save when genuine scarcity makes saving everyone impossible." --

Obama's own Dr. Mengele, Ezekiel Emanuel

Another right wing "truth" based on LIES... keep swallowing the shit being fed to you by insurances and phama corporations pea brain...


Ezekiel Emanuel, MD, PhD
Title:
Chair of the Department of Bioethics at the Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health

Position:
Con to the question "Should euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide be legal?"

Reasoning:
"The proper policy, in my view, should be to affirm the status of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as illegal. In so doing we would affirm that as a society we condemn ending a patient's life and do not consider that to have one's life ended by a doctor is a right. This does not mean we deny that in exceptional cases interventions are appropriate, as acts of desperation when all other elements of treatment- all medications, surgical procedures, psychotherapy, spiritual care, and so on- have been tried. Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia should not be performed simply because a patient is depressed, tired of life, worried about being a burden, or worried about being dependent. All these may be signs that not every effort has yet been made.

By establishing a social policy that keeps physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia illegal but recognizes exceptions, we would adopt the correct moral view: the onus of proving that everything had been tried and that the motivation and rationale were convincing would rest on those who wanted to end a life."
"Whose Right to Die?," The Atlantic, Mar. 1997

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

You guys know what the real lie with all this is right?

The lie is that our govt....the same govt that has failed to properly fund cash-for-clunkers, maintain social security, provide the promised native american healthcare, run the medicare insurance program, or spend less than they take in....is telling us they can do better with a more complex program like healthcare.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

uh Supergirl still waiting for your super answer....what happens if you don't have health insurance and you get sick or injured in the U.S?

She goes to the emergency room. No one in America is denied healthcare.

You are one stupid ****!!!

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

uh Supergirl still waiting for your super answer....what happens if you don't have health insurance and you get sick or injured in the U.S?

She goes to the emergency room. No one in America is denied healthcare.

You are one stupid ****!!!

yup even with no insurance you can still go to the ER.

You might end up with bad credit if you can't pay the bill but you can still get fixed up.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have returned. Reponse to an older post:

Of course! Any organization that uses numbers and facts to presentthe public with information must be lying if said information doesn't adhere to what Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are telling you, right?

Damn those pesky facts. Always getting in the way of the "Fair and Balanced" agenda.

You see, if I were like you, I'd be posting data from Keith Olberman's show...
But instead I go out and search for reliable information, rather than someone's opinion.

Quite an etherial defense.

I note that you were not able to deny the the WHO does no more than copy the data given by member nations.

Minus one.

" Any organization that uses numbers and facts to presentthe public with information must be lying if said information doesn't adhere..."
This was not consistent with any part of my post, an obvious attempt to deflect.

Minus two.

"...Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are telling you, right?"
I quoted neither of your 'bete noire.' Clearly a straw man argument, or in this case, straw men.

Minus three.

I hate to embarrass you in public in this manner, but here on the USMB we have come to expect a higher level of debate than you have, thus far, evinced.

Suggestions? Cut down on the vituperation, bulk up on data and links. Nothing wrong with a little jab, but I expect argument less 'so are you...' and more 'here are the reasons for my belief a), b) c).

I'm sure you can do better.

Interesting tactic. Declare victory, "grade" your opponent, and then pretend you had a valid point to begin with.

Very "Ann Coulter-esque".

But there's a few problems with your response.

1. Why would WHO want to paint US health care in a bad light. What could possibly be their motivation? I suppose this all yet another part of the world-wide conspiracy againsnt free-market capitalism that you people are always going on about?

"For years, overseas admirers of the U.S. have had to endure witless editorials and boorish dinner companions ranting about how Uncle Sam is the root of all evil. Unfortunately, the government of the United States has failed miserably at defending itself in the court of world opinion.
Maddox makes the case for American indispensability. “American values are Western values,” she titles her third chapter. She stresses to her non-American readers that whatever differences they might have with America, they would do well to understand that the United States ultimately stands for individual rights, political freedom, and the free exchange of goods—all distinctly Western ideas."
CJ Mobile

I suggest you read the entire article, but, of course, the UN is among the "boorish dinner companions ranting about how Uncle Sam is the root of all evil. " Any aspect of America is a target for such boors. Do you count yourself among them?

2. You quoted neither of my 'bete noire' because you didn't site anyone at all, you just claimed that the data was faulty because it didn't fit in with your worldview

I made a point, and a correct one, as indicated by the fact that you are not able to avow that the WHO does collect its own data. Here is another chance to do same. Should you be unable to do so, the minus stands.

and

3. "Embarrass me"? LOL, good luck with that one.

The indication that you are embarrassed is the 'lol' deflection.
As Shakespeare so aptly stated, "The [lady] doth protest too much, methinks."

Perhaps you're used to being in an echo-chamber message board where everyone is of the same viewpoint and "common-right-wing-knowledge" talking points are accepted as truth, but that just doesn't cut it in real debate.

In conclusion, I'm not sure what you're used to but, perhaps, as this board evolves and gets more varied, you should slink on over to "TownHall", where everyone will accept your "Liberal Agenda" talking points as funny little "truths"

.

A bit of self-aggrandizement, don't you think, to state that I need any help to put you in your place.

Sorry to "Embarrass" you. LOL.

And, as they say, imitation is the sincerest of flattery. Complements on your good taste.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Hey PC, I know you're not interested in finding out anything that resembles the TRUTH...

YouTube - BILL MOYERS JOURNAL | Preview: Wendell Potter pt 2 | PBS

The Truth about ObamaCare Eugenics and Euthanasia Program:

"Ultimately, the complete lives system does not create 'classes of Untermenschen whose lives and well being are deemed not worth spending money on,' but rather empowers us to decide fairly whom to save when genuine scarcity makes saving everyone impossible." --

Obama's own Dr. Mengele, Ezekiel Emanuel

Another right wing "truth" based on LIES... keep swallowing the shit being fed to you by insurances and phama corporations pea brain...


Ezekiel Emanuel, MD, PhD
Title:
Chair of the Department of Bioethics at the Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health

Position:
Con to the question "Should euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide be legal?"

Reasoning:
"The proper policy, in my view, should be to affirm the status of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as illegal. In so doing we would affirm that as a society we condemn ending a patient's life and do not consider that to have one's life ended by a doctor is a right. This does not mean we deny that in exceptional cases interventions are appropriate, as acts of desperation when all other elements of treatment- all medications, surgical procedures, psychotherapy, spiritual care, and so on- have been tried. Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia should not be performed simply because a patient is depressed, tired of life, worried about being a burden, or worried about being dependent. All these may be signs that not every effort has yet been made.

By establishing a social policy that keeps physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia illegal but recognizes exceptions, we would adopt the correct moral view: the onus of proving that everything had been tried and that the motivation and rationale were convincing would rest on those who wanted to end a life."
"Whose Right to Die?," The Atlantic, Mar. 1997

“Another key administration figure… is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff…”is one of those responsible for inserting into the “healthcare bill” the ideas that we no longer should have rights, such as determining what care we can buy, or how long we should live, and doctors should no longer look to the Hippocratic Oath, and the particular patient, but neglect the patient in the interests of ‘social justice,’ and the society as a whole.
CPN - Tools


Dr. Emanuel says that the usual recommendations for cutting costs (often urged by President Obama) are window dressing: "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records, and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change." (Health Affairs, February 27, 2008.)

True change, writes Dr. Emanuel, must include reassessing the promise doctors make when they enter the profession, the Hippocratic Oath. Amazingly, Dr. Emanuel criticizes the Hippocratic Oath as partly to blame for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he wrote. Physicians take the "Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others." (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008.) Of course that is what patients hope their doctors will do. But Dr. Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere. Many doctors are horrified at this notion, and will tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.
Defend Your Health Care

Dr. Emanuel also blames high U.S. spending on standards Americans take for granted. "Hospital rooms in the United States offer more privacy...physicians' offices are typically more conveniently located and have parking nearby and more attractive waiting rooms." (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008.)
By far, the most dangerous misconception in Washington is that the way to rein in health spending is by slowing the development and use of new technology. Imagine any industry or nation thriving on such a philosophy. Dr. Emanuel criticizes Americans for being "enamored with technology."
Defend Your Health Care

Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia" (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96).
Translation: Don't give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson's or a child with cerebral palsy.
He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years" (Lancet, Jan. 31).
Since Medicare was founded in 1965, seniors' lives have been transformed by new medical treatments such as angioplasty, bypass surgery and hip and knee replacements. These innovations allow the elderly to lead active lives. But Emanuel criticizes Americans for being too "enamored with technology" and is determined to reduce access to it.
DEADLY DOCTORS - New York Post

And, to see what American 'healthcare' would look like under these prescriptions:
LONDON, July 31, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a case that is being hailed as a victory for proponents of assisted suicide, Britain's Law Lords have ruled that the public prosecutors must "clarify" current law on the issue. The House of Lords judicial committee ruled yesterday that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for England and Wales must issue "guidance" on when and in what circumstances the law making it a criminal offense to assist suicide will be prosecuted.
Britain's Law Lords Rule in Favor of Assisted Suicide Seeker

And so we note that once again leftists and their dupes are never able to 'connect the dots' to see where their plans would lead, and are quick with the ubiquitous term 'lies' for any that disagree, or show them to be the dissemblers that they are.

I challenge the dupe who wrote the post to deny any of the material, and therefore to accept that the major 'cost savings' envisioned is in the denial of technology and pharmaceutical aid to the sick and the old.

 

[Jay Canuck]

so really you get the healthcare you can afford.

Exactly.

Jay....answer a question for me if you will....is it true it is against the law to purchase private healthcare Ins. in Canada....and if it is yes why?....

you can buy extra insurance if you feel you need extra coverage.

 

[Jay Canuck]

uh Supergirl still waiting for your super answer....what happens if you don't have health insurance and you get sick or injured in the U.S?

She goes to the emergency room. No one in America is denied healthcare.

You are one stupid ****!!!

I'm not speaking of just the emergency room Elmer....if you have been diagnosed with a serious disease/illness and you don't have insurance or your HMO decides it was a pre-existing condition and your denied coverage what happens to you?

 

[Jay Canuck]

how many people live in the U.S.A? cause I think it's a couple more than 1000 peeps on a media call list?

Almost all polls in the US are with 1,000 people. The polls before the 2008 Presidential election were very accurate.

You are ok with polls conducted on 1,000 people and then being presented as the opinion of all of the U.S.A and I am not.
Maybe the polls got close in the election but that doesn't lead me to the conclusion that they are to be trusted - even a broken watch is right twice a day.

 

[Bfgrn]

The Truth about ObamaCare Eugenics and Euthanasia Program:

"Ultimately, the complete lives system does not create 'classes of Untermenschen whose lives and well being are deemed not worth spending money on,' but rather empowers us to decide fairly whom to save when genuine scarcity makes saving everyone impossible." --

Obama's own Dr. Mengele, Ezekiel Emanuel

Another right wing "truth" based on LIES... keep swallowing the shit being fed to you by insurances and phama corporations pea brain...


Ezekiel Emanuel, MD, PhD
Title:
Chair of the Department of Bioethics at the Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health

Position:
Con to the question "Should euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide be legal?"

Reasoning:
"The proper policy, in my view, should be to affirm the status of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as illegal. In so doing we would affirm that as a society we condemn ending a patient's life and do not consider that to have one's life ended by a doctor is a right. This does not mean we deny that in exceptional cases interventions are appropriate, as acts of desperation when all other elements of treatment- all medications, surgical procedures, psychotherapy, spiritual care, and so on- have been tried. Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia should not be performed simply because a patient is depressed, tired of life, worried about being a burden, or worried about being dependent. All these may be signs that not every effort has yet been made.

By establishing a social policy that keeps physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia illegal but recognizes exceptions, we would adopt the correct moral view: the onus of proving that everything had been tried and that the motivation and rationale were convincing would rest on those who wanted to end a life."
"Whose Right to Die?," The Atlantic, Mar. 1997

“Another key administration figure… is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff…”is one of those responsible for inserting into the “healthcare bill” the ideas that we no longer should have rights, such as determining what care we can buy, or how long we should live, and doctors should no longer look to the Hippocratic Oath, and the particular patient, but neglect the patient in the interests of ‘social justice,’ and the society as a whole.
CPN - Tools


Dr. Emanuel says that the usual recommendations for cutting costs (often urged by President Obama) are window dressing: "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records, and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change." (Health Affairs, February 27, 2008.)

True change, writes Dr. Emanuel, must include reassessing the promise doctors make when they enter the profession, the Hippocratic Oath. Amazingly, Dr. Emanuel criticizes the Hippocratic Oath as partly to blame for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he wrote. Physicians take the "Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others." (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008.) Of course that is what patients hope their doctors will do. But Dr. Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere. Many doctors are horrified at this notion, and will tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.
Defend Your Health Care

Dr. Emanuel also blames high U.S. spending on standards Americans take for granted. "Hospital rooms in the United States offer more privacy...physicians' offices are typically more conveniently located and have parking nearby and more attractive waiting rooms." (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008.)
By far, the most dangerous misconception in Washington is that the way to rein in health spending is by slowing the development and use of new technology. Imagine any industry or nation thriving on such a philosophy. Dr. Emanuel criticizes Americans for being "enamored with technology."
Defend Your Health Care

Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia" (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96).
Translation: Don't give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson's or a child with cerebral palsy.
He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years" (Lancet, Jan. 31).
Since Medicare was founded in 1965, seniors' lives have been transformed by new medical treatments such as angioplasty, bypass surgery and hip and knee replacements. These innovations allow the elderly to lead active lives. But Emanuel criticizes Americans for being too "enamored with technology" and is determined to reduce access to it.
DEADLY DOCTORS - New York Post

And, to see what American 'healthcare' would look like under these prescriptions:
LONDON, July 31, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a case that is being hailed as a victory for proponents of assisted suicide, Britain's Law Lords have ruled that the public prosecutors must "clarify" current law on the issue. The House of Lords judicial committee ruled yesterday that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for England and Wales must issue "guidance" on when and in what circumstances the law making it a criminal offense to assist suicide will be prosecuted.
Britain's Law Lords Rule in Favor of Assisted Suicide Seeker

And so we note that once again leftists and their dupes are never able to 'connect the dots' to see where their plans would lead, and are quick with the ubiquitous term 'lies' for any that disagree, or show them to be the dissemblers that they are.

I challenge the dupe who wrote the post to deny any of the material, and therefore to accept that the major 'cost savings' envisioned is in the denial of technology and pharmaceutical aid to the sick and the old.

WOW PC...you continue to post the same GARBAGE that I have debunked...

You really are the most disingenuous person on this board... you post TOTAL lies, promote them as undeniable truths and then spout condescending bluster...

You couldn't POSSIBLY have READ any of the articles written by Dr. Emanuel that your scum bag sources have hacked up with the express purpose of to portraying a twisted and most often OPPOSITE view of the man's beliefs...it really is amazing just how scummy and unscrupulous you right wingers are...TRUTH is not even a consideration in your piles of GARBAGE...

 

[Toro]

how many people live in the U.S.A? cause I think it's a couple more than 1000 peeps on a media call list?

Almost all polls in the US are with 1,000 people. The polls before the 2008 Presidential election were very accurate.

You are ok with polls conducted on 1,000 people and then being presented as the opinion of all of the U.S.A and I am not.
Maybe the polls got close in the election but that doesn't lead me to the conclusion that they are to be trusted - even a broken watch is right twice a day.

I know how polls are constructed, the statistical analysis and the testing methodologies used to create a scientific sample for polling data. Most polls are a fairly accurate assessment of the opinions at a given time.

Almost always, at least in my experience, the people who question the accuracy of the polls are the ones who disagree with the conclusions.