re: #350 Lidane

I’m trying to look at this realistically. We can pull out all the bullshit math we want about how many calls can be handled in an hour, but let’s face it— we’re talking about an emergency service. It’s not that simple.

Emergency services need to be tied to the area they serve. Period. You wouldn’t want to call some regional police clearinghouse when someone’s in your home so that some phone jockey four states away can patch you through to 911. Why would you want to go through that if your kid has swallowed God knows what and is on the floor having a seizure?

I’m not sure. I imagine it could work ok either way. The specific details of the implementation being the key to success. But I can definitely see advantages and disadvantages to either approach.

However, to step back from the theoretical math and broad ideological points brings us back to the real question. What’s to be gained from changing the structure/funding/etc of the poison control centers? It is an effective program. It helps save money, eyes, and lives. And it hasn’t been demonstrated that there is anything wrong with the program as it is now.

So why would we abandon a program that is effective and hope that someone will think of something better? For ideology?