If I'm understanding correctly, public doctors are in a good position to get experience in dificult cases and learn from worst cases before to jump to private hospitals
I have a problem with the idea of "passionate nurses".
Nurses shouldn't be "passionate", they have to be professional. Passionate people, unable to emotionally detach, will burn quickly in such place like an hospital (where the supply of suffering people is endless, and they can't decide and bassically obey orders from the upper staff). This has lead in the past to compassionate serial killers. Death angels have always the best intentions drawn in their head. Trying to be the mother and best friend of each one of your patients is a terrible strategy at long term.
When I look at what surgeons actually do, it seems clear to me that more than anything else they need lots of practice. Life isn't very fair, so I'm guessing most of the practice happens to poor patients and most of the competence happens to rich patients.
How can they be terrible and have the best doctors at the same time ?
> Cleanliness is another major issue in Indian hospitals. Even in the best ones most staff don't follow basic sterilization procedures that are common in the western world.
You mentioned before that some private hospitals are amazing, yet here you mention that cleanliness is an issue in indian hospitals. How can they be amazing if cleanliness is an issue ?
> So all in all its great that the hospitals in India are affordable to a cross section of Indians but they can be better with better government oversight and having well trained and passionate nursing staff which might increase costs.
Are you saying that all the nurses in the US come all 'passionate' ?