Re: Medicine is useless

"George Conklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Herman Rubin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Gretchen Evans  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >On 16 Nov 2003 13:38:14 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Herman
> > >Rubin) wrote:
> >
> > >>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > >>Gretchen Evans  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>On 15 Nov 2003 13:01:45 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Herman
> > >>>Rubin) wrote:
> >
> > >>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > >>>>George Conklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >>>>>"Herman Rubin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >>>>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>>>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > >>>>>> Drol Yag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > ...................
> >
> >
> > >>>>The only non-totalitarian method available is economic.
> >
> > >>>How about simply making verious contraceptive measures easily
> > >>>available to all that desire them?
> >
> > >>They have been in India for the entire period during which
> > >>peasant women continue to have so many more children than
> > >>they can support.
> >
> > >Non responsive to the suggestion, Herman.
> >
> > I do not see how it is not responsive.  Contraceptive measures
> > have been easily available for the whole period; they are not
> > used by most peasant women until they have had lots of children.
> >
> >
>   The average number of children per woman in India is under 3, but then
> that upsets Herman's demonology.

First:
He seems to concerned about India's overpopulation problem.  This is a
country with about a billion inhabitants.  They are growing at a rate of
2.15% per year.  Birth control should be an important topic in that nation.

Second:
Your stat of under 3 children per year is based on???  According to the
Census of India, each woman averages 4.3 children total, with 3.7 surviving.