I think some clarification is in order. When I said "I wonder how many of these people blame god", what I meant was that most of the 57% would probably NOT think it an act of god if the family member/hospitalized person/sick person in question were to die. From my personal experiences with religion in so far as it deals with miracles and healing, seems to me a subject filled mainly with irony. Among many religious individuals, god is credited when an individual is healed or saved, yet he is not held accountable in any terms if that individual were to die. The default is this (in my eyes)... if god is responsible for the overall health and well-being of humankind, then he is to deserve: credit for keeping individuals alive responsibility for allowing someone to die. However, what I am saying is that in some religious circles, there are many individuals who would even go as far as to say that: "Maybe this was gods way of punishing him for such-and-such a sin." or "He should have taken better care of his health." or I've even heard.. "The world is a cold place and god probably wanted to take her to a better place." What I am saying in essence is that the argument of god being responsible in any way for the savior/health or failure/death of a human being is filled, in my humble opinion with irony. Even if you assume some of the values that many religious individuals hold in terms of divine intervention as it relates to life/death.. there are loop-holes that "they" (mentioned religious individuals), are never able to defend. If a child dies of cancer but an alcoholic child-abuser lives, why is god never mentioned? I'm not concerned with the ethics of it.. but very rarely do the above mentioned 57% decide to bring god into these debates. What I here am saying is that there is a reason why... and the reason in my eyes is because there isn't a logical explanation. Faith is faith for one reason, it lives within us with or without reason or evidence.