I actually don't know first hand. I only heard it was easier and thought it was a well known fact. Thanks to your comment I think it may just be a popular myth rather than a well known fact.
Either way if you're saying the "hardness" is the same, the conclusion still stands. "Hardness" is not the metric that is making European quality of care better than the US because both countries have the same "hardness".
>I did read all of your answers. From them, I was at least able to understand that you've got a personal problem with docs. No shame in that, many people are the same. That must be part of a bias such as those that you talk about so often.
Could be true. I don't think it's personal though. I think doctors have a real problem. But then again that could be just my bias. Hard to determine it either way. You can't prove it's bias any more than I can prove it's not.
I will say my thoughts apply exclusively to US doctors as my experience has solely been with them. Additionally the exorbitant costs and comparative worse quality of care then their European counterparts could exacerbating my bias if bias is what's going on here.
>Now, you associated "I am a researcher in that field" with "docs think their patients are inferior beings". So, how about a reference supporting your statement? Or were those statements accidentally associated?
I didn't make this association at all. I stated I'm a researcher in the field to give more credibility to an example I made that was used to illustrate a point.
This association was accidentally invented by you.
I do think that subconsciously US docs think of their patients as less intelligent and they tend to dismiss the opinions of the patients and just solely rely on their training to arrive at a predetermined conclusion. This has nothing to do with my background at all.
Also can we get off of my background? My background should have nothing to do with what I'm talking about here.
>This is not a legitimate question to be answered and therefore has no scientific or research merit, so stop dragging biologists into it.
Stop dragging biologists when a biologist was attached to the research study I sent you? Makes no sense.
>Your linked article asks the questions about the genetic origins of homosexuality, which has fuckall to do with your own invented concept of “normal” or “disorder”.
All conceptions of the terms "disorder" and "normal" are invented concepts and highly opinionated. Humanity at one point called Homosexuality a disease and at another time they called it normal. That is simply a choice of definition.
Regardless of the semantic pedantry you're trying to bring up here, you know what I fuckall mean by the terms. If homosexuality is proven to have no genetic basis and is only a recent phenomenon, then it is not biologically normal. Simple.
>Your whole premise is bollocks. You’re convinced that you have some enlightened thought exercise here but you really need to get your head out of your own ass. We get what you’re trying to say - but it’s too stupid to argue against.
You know it's actually not MY premise. It's well established that this is inconclusive in academia.
Why the hell do you think the genetic origins of homosexuality was researched at all if it was definitively considered to be normal and genetic? The problem is INCONCLUSIVE hence the research study.
You need to realize you are not arguing with me. You are arguing with established opinions in academia.
The fact that you're a doctor makes me question the scientific neutrality of doctors in the field. Are all of them as biased and emotional as you?
Either way if you're saying the "hardness" is the same, the conclusion still stands. "Hardness" is not the metric that is making European quality of care better than the US because both countries have the same "hardness".