Sen’s argument that health equity cannot be reduced to equal distribution of healthcare is compelling, but it raises a tension he does not fully resolve. He insists health equity is “multidimensional” and must account for outcomes, processes, and broader social arrangements all at once, which is intellectually convincing, but the more dimensions you add to a concept the harder it becomes to act on. His example of women living longer than men is a useful test case. A strict equality-of-outcomes approach would require giving men preferential treatment in healthcare, which Sen argues is clearly wrong because it violates what he calls “process fairness.” However, no real solution is presented to this. This is where my issue arises, he can discuss his qualms with health equity for as long as he wants, but what is the solution? What I find most interesting is that his framework implicitly acknowledges that health is shaped by who has power and who does not, which connects him to Alexander, Brayne, and Gottschild even though they are not writing about health at all. The question of who gets resources, who gets watched, and who gets protected are all versions of the same underlying problem, unequal distribution of power.