<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[The Healthcare Debate]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[I think <a href="http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/08/on-tony-wilson-.html">criticism</a> of my <a href="http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/08/quote-for-the-8.html">minimalist link</a> to a Brit who died because the National Health Service refused him a costly, experimental drug is legit. I should explain what I was trying to convey with less Instapundit-style passive aggression. I guess what I'm saying is that the reality of healthcare in a world where technology is making the whole concept of health a relative and constantly shifting term is that there will always be limits. This will be the case whatever system we're in. The cost of some new treatments, or procedures, or drugs will always exceed the capacity to pay for them for everyone who needs them. Someone will die or suffer because of this. It's relative, of course. A few decades ago, there would have been fewer agonizing choices because we didn't have such an amazing array of options. But it stings nonetheless.]]></html></oembed>