{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022727272727272728, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0015151515151515152, 'mean_word_length': 5.12037037037037, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
It Is Bad Policy and Contrary to Federal Law to Prioritize Local Allocation of Livers to Address Geographically Based Social Inequities

In the article “Geographic Disparities in Liver Availability: Accidents of geography or consequences of poor social policy” Ladin et al argue that those who live in underserved areas, with high rates of preventable deaths from gunshot wounds, motor vehicle accidents and reduced medical services, may have a “special claim” to local organs in order to adjust for the geographically based “poor social policies” that contribute to low access to healthcare (1). 
 
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.