War medicine was from Mars, Social medicine from Venus ?

The very word "war" medicine seems to stir something vaguely Mars-like, deep within the soul of the chickenhawk doctor or scientist.

Successfully conceiving ,in an academic lab at the University of  Chicago, a way to reduce combat deaths from shock seems to transport one almost up to the frontline evacuation hospitals, directly under hostile fire.

Being there, doing it, roughing it , all sweaty and virile-like : medical science with the smell of the locker room and the men's shower stall about it.

By contrast, what can any doctor - any real doctor - actually do about those dying of subacute bacterial endocarditis (SBE) ?

These hopeless cases shouldn't even be occupying an acute hospital bed - particularly in wartime.

They should be handled by women - nurses - in a secondary hospice or in a palliative care situation at home.

And arthritis 'care' - not really medicine is it ? Helping impoverished old ladies too frail to bend over properly to get dressed and to do their toiletry.

Again - women's work. A job for personal care assistants and social work case workers. Social medicine.

But (Martin) Henry Dawson persevered , hung on in there , all through the war, treating those chronically ill with arthritis and the very 4Fs of the 4Fs, those dying of SBE .

Perhaps because he was that rarity : an American medical researcher in 1940 who already had a stirling war record in the front lines (in the medical corp, infantry and artillery), with a medal for valour and two serious war wounds to back him up.

The Military Cross winner from Venus, as it were ......

the ANTI-BIBLICAL republicans most popular among bible-"loving" evangelicals

     The BIBLE ,remember it ? , said that that would be easier for a Republican elephant to go through the eye of a needle than it would be for a One Percenter to get to Heaven.
    The Republican elephants have responded, in Florida and elsewhere, by saying "that was then, this is now: we're going to make harder for a Ninety Nine Percenter to get through our new voter registration process, than it would be for Mother Theresa to get to Heaven."

    One then has to ask why are rich Republicans Chicken Hawks so eager to send other families' children off to die oversea, to ensure poor dark youth overseas can vote, when they are working so hard to deny the same voting opportunities to similar poor dark youths back in America?
   Why indeed are they simultaneously chickens and hawks?
   Any effort to find consistency in the Republican Deniers on a political science scale, as resting somewhere between libertarians concerned above all with freedom and the hierarchy-oriented concerned about restraint are going to flounder - chicken cum hawks simply aren't found exclusively at either pole.
   Rather the scale we want to look at is a moral scale, one that has
at one pole those who are selfish and self centred.
   Then, all Republicans' self-centred behavior does display its own powerful internal logic and consistency : its all about me, all the time, everywhere.
    Spoil a child of the One percent Class, teach them the world is their's on a silver spoon and then just stand back.
     Spoil a child ...... and ruin a world.
    Senators who deny the idea of free publicly funded medicare for all, on the Canadian model, will then have no moral problem going into publicly funded Navy hospitals, free, when they are ill ---- because they are self-centred .
    To the extent that they really believe in the rule of law at all, they believe there is one law for the 1% and another totally different law for the 99%.
    All the denier-watching bloggers are not ever going to get a handle on the denier libertarian/authoritarians' behavior if they restrict themselves to the insights from economists, political scientists and psychologists and the like --- useful as they all are.
    They are going to need help on this one, from those who have long studied ethics  : because being greedy is truly humanity's oldest profession.....