>medicine is improving.
I doubt whether this is true. Lots of hype, but no tangible improvement to show for chronic conditions for common people.
I doubt whether this is true. Lots of hype, but no tangible improvement to show for chronic conditions for common people.
- fast acting analog insulins that are metabolized in 2-3 hours instead of 6-7
- insulin pumps that automatically dose exactly the right proportion of insulin
- continuous glucose monitoring system that lets you see your BG update in real time (before, it was finger sticks 4-5 times a day; before that, urine test strips where you pee on a stick to get a 6 hours delayed reading (!))
- automated dosing algorithms that can automatically correct BG to bring it into range
In aggregate, these amount to what is closer than not to a functional cure for type 1 diabetes. 100 years ago, this was a fatal condition.
The systems that deliver the medical care might be, however (and indeed observably locally are, in many cases).
You are mistaken. To realize that you will have to look back several decades and read the literature of those times, of what is left. Now note I'm taking about chronic illnesses (diabetes, cancer etc) not acute ones like an infection etc. The medical practitioner of yesteryear did not have the fancy diagnostic tools that we have today, but several of them appear to me to be sharp observers.
If you make claims that bold no one should even bother to read on.
The actual issue, which is the only worthwhile thing you wrote about, is cost and availability.
The vaccines were not the result of medicine getting "better" - they just happened to have a solution for the right thing at the right time, which is fortunate (and we're lucky that it worked, because there was no guarantee of that beforehand) but if the pandemic hadn't happened, what advances would we be discussing? What advances are actually making medicine better aside from once-in-a-hundred-year worldwide emergencies?