<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cleveland Clinic on CNN</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ephblog.com/2009/06/20/cleveland-clinic-on-cnn/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ephblog.com/2009/06/20/cleveland-clinic-on-cnn/</link>
	<description>All Things Eph</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:15:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: frank uible</title>
		<link>http://www.ephblog.com/2009/06/20/cleveland-clinic-on-cnn/#comment-58335</link>
		<dc:creator>frank uible</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:10:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ephblog.com/?p=18422#comment-58335</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re taking this silliness way too seriously.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re taking this silliness way too seriously.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JeffZ</title>
		<link>http://www.ephblog.com/2009/06/20/cleveland-clinic-on-cnn/#comment-58333</link>
		<dc:creator>JeffZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:49:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ephblog.com/?p=18422#comment-58333</guid>
		<description>Frank, congrats.  The comment notification for your last comment was my 10,000th message in my gmail inbox.  Alas, there is no prize or reward, but just thought you&#039;d like to know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frank, congrats.  The comment notification for your last comment was my 10,000th message in my gmail inbox.  Alas, there is no prize or reward, but just thought you&#8217;d like to know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: frank uible</title>
		<link>http://www.ephblog.com/2009/06/20/cleveland-clinic-on-cnn/#comment-58332</link>
		<dc:creator>frank uible</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:43:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ephblog.com/?p=18422#comment-58332</guid>
		<description>Are we bringing back the concept of &quot;deservedness&quot; into the field of welfare as it existed in the days when charity was mostly privately funded?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are we bringing back the concept of &#8220;deservedness&#8221; into the field of welfare as it existed in the days when charity was mostly privately funded?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jeffz</title>
		<link>http://www.ephblog.com/2009/06/20/cleveland-clinic-on-cnn/#comment-58331</link>
		<dc:creator>jeffz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:55:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ephblog.com/?p=18422#comment-58331</guid>
		<description>By the way, I don&#039;t pretend to understand how best to reform health care in a cost-effective way that won&#039;t involve some real sacrifices in quality.  No one honest really does.  But it seems like, per Cosgrove&#039;s comments above, one aspect of reform that is a an absolute no-brainer is to seriously  incentivize, via rate changes, people to exercise, eat healthy, and certainly not smoke.  That is of course tricky in and of itself, as you don&#039;t want to punish people who just have a natural disposition towards being overweight in particular and there are serious enforcement / monitoring issues (short of having a national network of creepy guys in closets a la &quot;Cat&#039;s Eye&quot;), but it seems to make sense.  As does devoting a far greater percentage of resources to preventative medicine vs. life-extending measures very late in life, again an extremely tricky issue but one that is far more sensible, effective and efficient viewed holistically.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way, I don&#8217;t pretend to understand how best to reform health care in a cost-effective way that won&#8217;t involve some real sacrifices in quality.  No one honest really does.  But it seems like, per Cosgrove&#8217;s comments above, one aspect of reform that is a an absolute no-brainer is to seriously  incentivize, via rate changes, people to exercise, eat healthy, and certainly not smoke.  That is of course tricky in and of itself, as you don&#8217;t want to punish people who just have a natural disposition towards being overweight in particular and there are serious enforcement / monitoring issues (short of having a national network of creepy guys in closets a la &#8220;Cat&#8217;s Eye&#8221;), but it seems to make sense.  As does devoting a far greater percentage of resources to preventative medicine vs. life-extending measures very late in life, again an extremely tricky issue but one that is far more sensible, effective and efficient viewed holistically.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
