This seems to me at least in part to be an irreducibly normative question, which means that the permissiblity of any particular form of rationing is not defined by “objective” “quantitative” ways of assessing (and in any case, such methods are hardly immune to bias). I tend to think a qualitative, subjective means of evaluating the ethics of rationing might also provide some valuable insight on where we’d like to go with this is a society.

There has to be some unbiased, objective, quantitative way of doing this. For example, you meet such and such criteria (determined by CRTs and scholarly sources) and therefore you can/cannot get an MRI.

Its tough to grasp all the possibilities with the uncertainty that underlies all health care problems.