The author makes a good argument, though with questionable assumptions. The notion that the quality of care at university hospitals is less than it is at private hospitals is plausible enough, though there are certainly exceptions to this rule. For example, community hospitals may be staffed by relatively inexperienced general practitioners, but they still provide medical care to a greater degree of convenience for people who live in less-populated areas, thereby providing a level of convenience that university hospitals do not. Furthermore, the profit levels at private and community hospitals are not directly comparable. Some hospitals charge exorbitant rates, while others charge very little. While private hospitals may technically be making less money per patient, they are more able to charge more because they have higher operating costs, such as high salaries for doctors. Another factor that must be considered is that the way doctors are paid at private hospitals is often based on how many procedures they perform. If a doctor performs more procedures, he or she is more easily able to make more money. Therefore, it is quite possible that a doctor at a private hospital has more patients to see in a day than a doctor at a university hospital, and this makes it more likely that the doctor will be more thorough in his or her examinations and treatments. The argument that university hospitals make less money per patient also does not necessarily hold true. University hospitals are often smaller in scope, and therefore have much lower salaries for their doctors than do private hospitals. While it may be true that university hospitals employ fewer doctors, the staff that they do have is highly qualified. Therefore, the quality of care that they provide is of a much higher caliber than at private hospitals

While the argument made by the author has some merit, there are certainly other factors to consider. First, there are certainly many private hospitals that employ fewer doctors, and these hospitals may charge higher prices. In this way, money can be made by charging people more for medical care. Second, not all doctors are on equal footing when it comes to the level of training and experience. While it is true that many doctors at private hospitals are highly skilled, there are certainly many who are less skilled. While a university hospital may not be able to hire the same expert physicians as private hospitals can, the staff of university hospitals is nonetheless generally highly qualified. And third, it is possible that university hospitals are providing better quality care than private hospitals. Many university hospitals also have research facilities, and this gives doctors more opportunities to further their knowledge about medicine. Furthermore, university hospitals often employ more specialized physicians, such as cardiologists, than private hospitals do. And, last but not least, university hospitals are able to provide a higher level of care to patients who may not be able to afford private care, as these hospitals often have lower charges

Perhaps the best way to evaluate the argument made by the author is to consider what sort of evidence is needed to support it. While it is certainly true that doctors at private hospitals are paid more, how often does the quality of treatment at private hospitals compare to that at university hospitals? Also, are university hospitals, in general, able to provide better care than private hospitals? Finally, could the care that university hospitals provide be of better quality than at private hospitals? These are questions that should be asked in order to conclude whether the author’s conclusions are supported by the evidence

As with all arguments, this one requires consideration of its assumptions. For example, is the author suggesting that all universities employ an equal number of doctors, or that all the doctors at a university have the same number of patients to see each day? The latter option would indeed be unlikely, as a doctor may not have the time or the inclination to treat as many patients as he or she does at a private hospital. Furthermore, the author assumes that all university hospitals have the same number of doctors, which is highly doubtful. Most universities have medical schools that provide training to doctors in exchange for them practicing at the university hospital for a certain amount of years. Thus, some universities may have more doctors than others, which may account for some of the discrepancies in the number of doctors employed at different hospitals

While the argument made by the author has some merit, there are certainly other factors to consider. First, there are certainly many private hospitals that employ fewer doctors, and these hospitals may charge higher prices. In this way, money can be made by charging people more for medical care. Second, not all doctors are on equal footing when it comes to the level of training and experience. While it is true that many doctors at private hospitals are highly skilled, there are certainly many who are less skilled. While a university hospital may not be able to hire the same expert physicians as private hospitals can, the staff of university hospitals is nonetheless generally highly qualified. And third, it is possible that university hospitals are providing better quality care than private hospitals. Many university hospitals also have research facilities, and this gives doctors more opportunities to further their knowledge about medicine. Furthermore, university hospitals often employ more specialized physicians, such as cardiologists, than private hospitals do. And, last but not least, university hospitals are able to provide a higher level of care to patients who may not be able to afford private care, as these hospitals often have lower charges.