Now on ScienceBlogs: Another contender for the worst reporting ever: "Coma man"

Seed Media Group

Collective Imagination

Mike the Mad Biologist

Mad rantings about politics, evolution, and microbiology

Search

Profile

ntm4-30-7 Mad rantings about politics, evolution, and microbiology. Comment policy: say what you want, but back it up with an email address. I don't like anonymous trolls.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Science Links

« Obama and Self-Inflicted Negotiation: More of the Same? | Main | Puzzling Gallup Poll on Internet Use »

Bush, OSHA, TB, and the Need for a Universal Healthcare System

Category: Healthcare
Posted on: January 6, 2009 10:09 AM, by Mike

While others have commented on the gross ineptitude of OSHA, which is charged with worker safety, during the reign of Little Lord Pontchartrain, one point that wasn't raised is that the OSHA fiasco also shows why we need universal healthcare that has government insurance, not private. From the Washington Post article:

Among the regulations proposed by OSHA's staff but scuttled by political appointees was one meant to protect health workers from tuberculosis. Although OSHA concluded in 1997 that the regulation could avert as many as 32,700 infections and 190 deaths annually and save $115 million, it was blocked by opposition from large hospitals.

There's a simple reason why hospitals opposed this regulation: it would cost them money to implement these procedures, but the hospitals wouldn't realize any of the savings--insurance companies would. Arguably, this is why there are regulators: some things, such as not turning 190 hospital workers into dead people, are worth the financial hit. But as long as savings--and keep in mind the program would have lowered overall costs by $115 million annually--are parceled out among different special interest groups*, each armed with lobbyists that can corrupt oversight mechanisms, then we will continue to have health care inefficiencies that kill people.

That's why we need socialized insurance--not answerable to shareholders--because it's actually more efficient economically and in terms of public health.

*Younger readers might not know this, but there was a time when the phrase special interest group did not mean black people or teachers' unions.

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/89176

Comments

1

OSHA standard setting is a very complicated process designed to make it extreamly hard to get something through, too hard I thing. More information on OSHA standards can be obtained at www.osha30hourtraining.com, you should check it out if you need more indepth training.

Posted by: OSHA Pro | February 22, 2009 10:16 PM

2

To setup OSHA Standards by a company is really difficult & time consuming process. Further information about such training can be available from http://www.oshacompliancesafetytraining.com can be available.

Posted by: OshaTraining | September 30, 2009 7:49 AM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Enter to win a free copy of The Monty Hall Problem
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement
Collective Imagination

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM