Heart warming story from CNN

Med School Insiders
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Yeah I figured I would share this, i think its a good reminder to see these sort of things to help keep the medical profession in perspective during all the controversy regarding health coverage and the whole nursing debate.

Also points out one of the things I like most about the medical profession, it puts you in a really good position of authority/knowledge in a niche that allows you to have the clout to found effective and much needed charities.
 
surftheiop said:
Yeah I figured I would share this, i think its a good reminder to see these sort of things to help keep the medical profession in perspective during all the controversy regarding health coverage and the whole nursing debate.

Also points out one of the things I like most about the medical profession, it puts you in a really good position of authority/knowledge in a niche that allows you to have the clout to found effective and much needed charities.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. 👍

It's refreshing to know people still work with sincerity in medicine, and everyone isn't consumed with money, as it sometimes appears.
 
IndianVercetti said:
Absolutely agree. 👍

It's refreshing to know people still work with sincerity in medicine, and everyone isn't consumed with money, as it sometimes appears.
Click to expand...

some of those some times are right 🙂.
 
Good to see fellow Iranians doing good in this world. What a wonderful program!
 
From the article: "So far, it has helped 80 families in California and across the country, including the Pachecos...So far, Miracle Babies has provided a total of $70,000 in assistance."

First things first, for a doctor to give 70,000K to charity is not impressive in any way at all.

Thats 70,000 to save/help 80 families.

It costs 22/month or 264/year to feed a child in India (https://shop.thehungersite.com/store/item.do?itemId=31038&siteId=220)

With the same amount of money, you could feed 80 children in India, every day for more than 3 years.

82687605.preview.jpg
 
Last edited:
Or you could provide for people in AMERICA, you know, the place where you live.
 
skiddoc said:
Or you could provide for people in AMERICA, you know, the place where you live.
Click to expand...


You're right an American's life is worth so much more than some poor kid in India - thank you so much for showing me the light!
 
NH14 said:
You're right an American's life is worth so much more than some poor kid in India - thank you so much for showing me the light!
Click to expand...

I'm not going to debate the relative worth of lives. What I will say is that we are more likely to see the fruits of our labor if we help people in our vicinity; sure it's selfish, but I'm only human.
 
skiddoc said:
I'm not going to debate the relative worth of lives. What I will say is that we are more likely to see the fruits of our labor if we help people in our vicinity; sure it's selfish, but I'm only human.
Click to expand...

"Poor living conditions" is very relative. A family of 4-5 living on <$15,000 is almost unimaginable in the US, but it's a living reality for most of India.

We just take so much for granted as Americans.
 
IndianVercetti said:
"Poor living conditions" is very relative. A family of 4-5 living on <$15,000 is almost unimaginable in the US, but it's a living reality for most of India.

We just take so much for granted as Americans.
Click to expand...

Actually, a family of 4 living on 15,000 is doing VERY well in India, considering the average income is about $1,000.

poverty%20india.jpg



The living reality for about 400 million people in India, is LESS than ONE dollar per day.
 
.
 
Last edited:
DrArete said:
Actually, a family of 4 living on 15,000 is doing VERY well in India, considering the average income is about $1,000.

poverty%20india.jpg



The living reality for about 400 million people in India, is LESS than ONE dollar per day.
Click to expand...

I'm completely aware, I was trying to draw a reasonable comparison.
 
wow. let's go ahead and ruin a great "feel good" thread. awesome work guys. lets get in a big argument about feeling good or bad for this guy. it is great what he is doing.

why do i even come to this board. the maturity is nonexistent and it gets frustrating.
 
FrkyBgStok said:
wow. let's go ahead and ruin a great "feel good" thread. awesome work guys. lets get in a big argument about feeling good or bad for this guy. it is great what he is doing.

why do i even come to this board. the maturity is nonexistent and it gets frustrating.
Click to expand...

Agreed. This Doctor needs to be commended.
 
Only on SDN is it possible for charitable acts to be attacked because they somehow aren't charitable enough.
 
.
 
Last edited:
DrArete said:
At the time, I was in the club, and I argued strongly against it, pointing out that with a similar amount of money, one could simply donate directly to people already in the country, and GIVE JOBS to unemployed locals with actual construction experience, and in the end, more people would then have housing.
Click to expand...
In theory, this sounds great but in reality its tough to make sure the money is actually allocated to the right place/people.
DrArete said:
We got last laugh though, and wrote a nice article mocking them in the student paper, and they ended up losing university funding for any future such trips.
Click to expand...
That's too bad. Something is always better than nothing. Now, they donate nothing....and the children in India aren't laughing.
 
It seems more like, for this case, donating to India would be more of "so I can feel better about myself" kind of thing, rather than a "this subject is personally meaningful to me and so I am dedicating a significant portion of my life to it" kind of thing.

I don't particularly object to a rational cost/benefit analysis to do the maximum amount of good (though I'm not convinced that "most people helped in some fashion" is the only way to compute that), but it seems fairly ridiculous to me to claim that that is the only way to decide how to give of yourself to the world. If doing it in a meaningful way to you makes you happy in life and gives you purpose, that seems like a good way to go to me - that motivates you to act for the benefit of others, and so you do. It's all to the good.

Help Americans, help Indians, help babies, old people, whatever - do it for the reasons that work for you in the way that works for you, and if we all do some, then the world is better, and good on us. Getting all bogged down in which way is better and who benefits and how much they benefit doesn't help anything.
 
DrArete said:
How about, instead of feel good, think logically?

You remind me of some misguided people years ago at my university in this Habitat for Humanity club.

They got 12 people (students, with no construction experience), together, and went to nicaragua for 2 weeks, the last 3 days on a beach, and spent something like 15,000 dollars to do an amateurish job of building partially a couple of houses, just so they could feel good about themselves.

At the time, I was in the club, and I argued strongly against it, pointing out that with a similar amount of money, one could simply donate directly to people already in the country, and GIVE JOBS to unemployed locals with actual construction experience, and in the end, more people would then have housing.

They were not amused by my arguments, and voted against the arguments of myself and 3 other people.

We got last laugh though, and wrote a nice article mocking them in the student paper, and they ended up losing university funding for any future such trips.
Click to expand...

and you remind me of person that thinks everything they do is so noble and courageous. only the charities you donate to are good, right? you did a good thing mocking everyone in the group and lost funding. as the above person said, that is hilarious. you have got a lot to learn about life.

why don't you think logically. have you an idea what it is like to have a premature child? do have the slightest clue about real responsiblity? have you ever looked back in tears because when your daughter almost died in the hospital and the mortgage company didn't give a s**t? The credit card companies put you in collections because you haven't made it home to open up your mailbox. You don't have the faintest idea about what you are talking about. This doctor used his own money to help these people out. this is an incredibly noble cause. so until you have a child and are put in that situation, you have no right to say this is not noble. and i hope with all my heart you aren't put in that situation.

instead go make more threads that have been covered on this site 1000 times.
 
charity is charity whether you are helping here or afar!
stop this nonsense argument!
 
FrkyBgStok said:
wow. let's go ahead and ruin a great "feel good" thread. awesome work guys. lets get in a big argument about feeling good or bad for this guy. it is great what he is doing.

why do i even come to this board. the maturity is nonexistent and it gets frustrating.
Click to expand...


I didn't mean to be immature or cynical - it's just that we need to take into consideration the ramifications our actions have. We need to consider all sides of an issue. We're all in this together. And yes, what this doctor did was selfless, compassionate, and kind. I never said it wasn't. It's just that resources are limited and by spending $$$ to save X lives when the same amount of money could have been used to save X + 1,000 lives, it doesn't make sense.
 
NH14 said:
I didn't mean to be immature or cynical - it's just that we need to take into consideration the ramifications our actions have. We need to consider all sides of an issue. We're all in this together. And yes, what this doctor did was selfless, compassionate, and kind. I never said it wasn't. It's just that resources are limited and by spending $$$ to save X lives when the same amount of money could have been used to save X + 1,000 lives, it doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

So if you have a patient that is ill, and the treatment that can save them takes 20 hours of your time, but you can save the lives of 3 other patients in 20 hours, you tell patient 1 that you can't help them because it's just not cost efficient? I see what you're saying, but quantifying lives as 1-to-1 and deciding things purely on that basis seems a bit soulless, not to mention pretty sucky for anyone who has a time-intensive (or money-intensive) problem.

I think you're right that it is important to consider our resources when we decide what to give, but that can't be the only consideration. There are more than numbers at stake here.
 
NH14 said:
I didn't mean to be immature or cynical - it's just that we need to take into consideration the ramifications our actions have. We need to consider all sides of an issue. We're all in this together. And yes, what this doctor did was selfless, compassionate, and kind. I never said it wasn't. It's just that resources are limited and by spending $$$ to save X lives when the same amount of money could have been used to save X + 1,000 lives, it doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

If your absolute goal is to save as many lives as possible, your obviously considering the the wrong profession.

Go become a civil engineer and design water systems for the 3rd world, or an agricultural engineer and figure out how to farm efficiently in Africa, etc.
 
Okkkkk now, getting back to the original post...

Happy babies and happy families make me happy, so thank you OP. 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lunchlady45
Can my W/A and PS work together to generate the full story?
Replies
3
Views
457
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
T
Withdrawing LOR from Family Member
Replies
6
Views
1K
TMDSASSY
T
CWRU.Sman
Interview Advice + Tips from Admissions Officers
Replies
0
Views
956
CWRU.Sman
CWRU.Sman
P
Activities continued from High School
Replies
6
Views
646
PreMed2006
P
S
Strong LOR from non-university, or weak LOR from university
Replies
1
Views
743
The OTC
The OTC
Top