• GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Well it’s both. Space age treatments… If you can afford it.

      (I’m not saying it provides the best overall outcomes for the whole population, but you can’t contest the quality of high end hospitals like mayo clinic or similar)

      • Jax@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        I don’t think you give someone an A+ for doing 1% of the project really really well.

        Like the Nazis were actually environmentalists. They also advanced medical science by decades. Do we praise them for it?

        I don’t mean to invoke Nazis, but you get my point yeah? If the vast majority of the people who need the treatment cannot get it? That isn’t ‘both’ in my opinion.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Their medical work was bunk

          The both is america medical pinnacle is a+. American general availability is c-. (Anyone can go to a quality emergency room but won’t afford regular care)

      • c10l@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        A lot of third world countries have top of the line medical treatments. The difference to socially developed countries is in how accessible it is to the general population.