They need a 1:1000 to have a valid argument.
Well, the IPCC report into climate change only reported a 9:1 chance of global warming being due to humans. I think most people would agree that climate change being anthropogenic is a valid arguement, even those who sceptical of the science.
Change "brilliant medical ethicist" to "faceless bureaucratic peon"
Change "faceless bureaucratic peon" to members of the community who voluntarily work on ethics panels.
If I can afford to pay for a private doctor and the private equipment to keep my "vegetable" family member alive for an extra week at home, completely out of the health system should I be "allowed"
Who ever said that?! Thats fine. You can do whatever you want with your money. Personally I would be horrified if I found out that I would be kept as a vegetable for an extended period of time. There is such a thing as dying with dignity
what's to stop the rich from hiring all the best doctors privately for themselves?
Shock, Horror. Some people go into the the medical profession to help people, not keep vegetables alive and pander to the rich.
Totalitarian is the best word to describe the NHS and any model that places heavy restrictions on doctors practising privately
Where an Earth did you get this? It is simply not true. This idea that the NHS is awful is totally wrong. Is it perfect, no, would we like to get rid of it, hell no! Yeah we complain about the NHS all the time but we are British, we complain about everything!
Sure, but you need not be conclusive to publish.
And in this case, we need not be conclusive to act. We've got a problem that won't wait around, we can't afford to wait for 3-sigma evidence. Even deferring the decision is, itself, a decision that we're making all the time. So really, all we can do is go with the best data available and do what we can.
When it is not necessary to make a decision, it is necessary not to make a decision.