As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

socialized medicine

The ScribeThe Scribe Registered User regular
edited July 2008 in Debate and/or Discourse
In the United States conservatives claim that the U.S. health system is the best in the world. They like to complain about long “waiting lists” in countries that have “socialized medicine,” and to boast of people who travel to the United States to benefit from U.S. health care. Nevertheless, a Harris Poll taken July 2, 2008, indicates that of “Ten Developed Countries: The U.S. System Is Most Unpopular and Dutch System the Most Popular.”

In addition to being unpopular, the U.S. health system is more expensive per capita than the health system of any other country. Nevertheless, the life expectancy in the United States is lower than in countries with universal health care, and the child mortality rate is higher.

The Scribe on
«1345

Posts

  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    The infant mortality rates really aren't comparable between the US and other nations due to how they're measured.

    moniker on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Also: don't call it "socialized medicine." That's a misnomer, one deliberately chosen by opponents of universal health care to carry negative connotations.

    The Netherlands doesn't have socialized medicine.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    DukiDuki Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Why is that a misnomer?

    Duki on
  • Options
    ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2008
    The Scribe wrote: »
    In the United States conservatives claim that the U.S. health system is the best in the world.

    I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks this, conservative or not.

    edit: well, maybe with the exception of medical insurance companies and big pharma.

    ege02 on
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Duki wrote: »
    Why is that a misnomer?

    Private health care providers paid by social health insurance.

    moniker on
  • Options
    Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ege02 wrote: »
    The Scribe wrote: »
    In the United States conservatives claim that the U.S. health system is the best in the world.

    I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks this, conservative or not.

    edit: well, maybe with the exception of medical insurance companies and big pharma.

    Rep. Tom Tancredo said that any discussion of health care reform should be focused on reducing government regulation and programming.

    "You know, (filmmaker) Michael Moore went to Cuba not too long ago, and wrote this documentary about the greatness of the system, how wonderful it was to be in Cuba and have a socialized medical system. You notice, however, that Michael Moore came back to the United States," Tancredo said. "Now, there's a reason that he did that, of course. It's because we have the best system in the world. And why? It's because we do rely more on individuals than not."

    Robos A Go Go on
  • Options
    NocturneNocturne Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ege02 wrote: »
    The Scribe wrote: »
    In the United States conservatives claim that the U.S. health system is the best in the world.

    I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks this, conservative or not.

    edit: well, maybe with the exception of medical insurance companies and big pharma.

    Rep. Tom Tancredo said that any discussion of health care reform should be focused on reducing government regulation and programming.

    "You know, (filmmaker) Michael Moore went to Cuba not too long ago, and wrote this documentary about the greatness of the system, how wonderful it was to be in Cuba and have a socialized medical system. You notice, however, that Michael Moore came back to the United States," Tancredo said. "Now, there's a reason that he did that, of course. It's because we have the best system in the world. And why? It's because we do rely more on individuals than not."

    Quotes like this make me wonder if most politicians truly believe what they are saying is a logical thought reached through critical thinking and facts, or if they just say shit that they know is wrong as long as it supports "their team."

    Basically I'm wondering if this guy is actually that fucking stupid, or like any intelligent conservative/republican, really just cares about keeping his money and says whatever he needs to to reach that end.

    Nocturne on
  • Options
    PicardathonPicardathon Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Nocturne wrote: »
    ege02 wrote: »
    The Scribe wrote: »
    In the United States conservatives claim that the U.S. health system is the best in the world.

    I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks this, conservative or not.

    edit: well, maybe with the exception of medical insurance companies and big pharma.

    Rep. Tom Tancredo said that any discussion of health care reform should be focused on reducing government regulation and programming.

    "You know, (filmmaker) Michael Moore went to Cuba not too long ago, and wrote this documentary about the greatness of the system, how wonderful it was to be in Cuba and have a socialized medical system. You notice, however, that Michael Moore came back to the United States," Tancredo said. "Now, there's a reason that he did that, of course. It's because we have the best system in the world. And why? It's because we do rely more on individuals than not."

    Quotes like this make me wonder if most politicians truly believe what they are saying is a logical thought reached through critical thinking and facts, or if they just say shit that they know is wrong as long as it supports "their team."

    Basically I'm wondering if this guy is actually that fucking stupid, or like any intelligent conservative/republican, really just cares about keeping his money and says whatever he needs to to reach that end.

    I think he's just reading off the teleprompter, no clue what he's saying.

    Picardathon on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Duki wrote: »
    Why is that a misnomer?

    Socialism implies collective control of resources administered by a central governmental agency. In socialized medicine, medical resources are directly controlled by the government: hospitals and equipment are government-owned, doctors and nurses are paid directly from government payroll, etc.

    This is different from a system in which doctors and nurses are self-employed or employed by private businesses or nonprofit organizations and are not beholden to the government; where hospitals and facilities can be built by any private company or foundation; where patients - if they choose and have the capability - can pay for private insurance or even pay a doctor cash directly; but where the government will pay for treatment rendered to private citizens who either cannot pay for it themselves or have opted for the public insurance system.

    Most first countries have both: a public (i.e., "socialized") system works alongside a private system. Only a small handful of countries have a fully public system (Canada being one notable example). No first-world country that I know of has a fully private system. Even the United States currently has a few medical programs that could rightly be called "socialized" (the Veteran's Administration, for instance), we just limit the extent and reach of them.

    Nobody with any brains or influence has ever seriously suggested that the US adopt socialized medicine - neither the early 90s "Hillarycare" nor Obama's plan could be correctly called "socialized" or "socialist." So the "socialized medicine" bogeyman is at best a disingenuous turn of phrase and at worst a deliberate and dishonest strawman.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ege02 wrote: »
    The Scribe wrote: »
    In the United States conservatives claim that the U.S. health system is the best in the world.

    I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks this, conservative or not.

    edit: well, maybe with the exception of medical insurance companies and big pharma.

    Some people do genuinely think that the US has the best medical system in the world.
    Some people also have no fucking idea what they're talking about.
    I suspect that the relevant Venn diagram has a gigantic area of overlap.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Feral wrote: »
    ege02 wrote: »
    The Scribe wrote: »
    In the United States conservatives claim that the U.S. health system is the best in the world.

    I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks this, conservative or not.

    edit: well, maybe with the exception of medical insurance companies and big pharma.

    Some people do genuinely think that the US has the best medical system in the world.
    Some people also have no fucking idea what they're talking about.
    I suspect that the relevant Venn diagram has a gigantic area of overlap.

    untiyttledvb1.jpg

    Couscous on
  • Options
    KungFuKungFu Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Nocturne wrote: »
    ege02 wrote: »
    The Scribe wrote: »
    In the United States conservatives claim that the U.S. health system is the best in the world.

    I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks this, conservative or not.

    edit: well, maybe with the exception of medical insurance companies and big pharma.

    Rep. Tom Tancredo said that any discussion of health care reform should be focused on reducing government regulation and programming.

    "You know, (filmmaker) Michael Moore went to Cuba not too long ago, and wrote this documentary about the greatness of the system, how wonderful it was to be in Cuba and have a socialized medical system. You notice, however, that Michael Moore came back to the United States," Tancredo said. "Now, there's a reason that he did that, of course. It's because we have the best system in the world. And why? It's because we do rely more on individuals than not."

    Quotes like this make me wonder if most politicians truly believe what they are saying is a logical thought reached through critical thinking and facts, or if they just say shit that they know is wrong as long as it supports "their team."

    Basically I'm wondering if this guy is actually that fucking stupid, or like any intelligent conservative/republican, really just cares about keeping his money and says whatever he needs to to reach that end.

    You can find all sorts of dumb shit that Tancredo has said. During his run for the Republican Presidential Nomination, he said that he would bomb Islamic holy sites anytime the US was attacked by terrorists. That'l end terrorism!

    KungFu on
    Theft 4 Bread
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    titmouse: <3

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Feral wrote: »
    Some people do genuinely think that the US has the best medical system in the world.
    Some people also have no fucking idea what they're talking about.
    I suspect that the relevant Venn diagram has a gigantic area of overlap.

    I'd suggest that the people who honestly thing the US has the best system in the world are A) people with excellent insurance and B) people with enough income that that insurance doesn't seem expensive to them. If you fit both (A) and (B), then the US actually does have the best system in the world.

    Otherwise, not so much.

    I forget what I was reading once upon a time, but they pretty much summed it up...depending on your personal income, the US has either the best healthcare available on the planet, or care roughly on par with that of sub-Saharan Africa...or anywhere in between.

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    KilroyKilroy timaeusTestified Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Tancredo was also the one whose immigration policy was "drive all the Mexicans into the sea." I have no trouble thinking that he actually believes that.

    Kilroy on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Some people do genuinely think that the US has the best medical system in the world.
    Some people also have no fucking idea what they're talking about.
    I suspect that the relevant Venn diagram has a gigantic area of overlap.

    I'd suggest that the people who honestly thing the US has the best system in the world are A) people with excellent insurance and B) people with enough income that that insurance doesn't seem expensive to them. If you fit both (A) and (B), then the US actually does have the best system in the world.

    Actually, even with that caveat, we're still not the best in the world. Even if you have the money to pay for it, the US is still mediocre in terms of medical errors, physician coordination, and patient satisfaction (see the Harris Poll above), and [url=overall health.

    Yes, there is an attitude that if you're swimming in money and you have a serious condition, the US is the place to be. There are a lot of anecdotal reports of people flying in from another country (almost always Canada) to receive care in the US. (Even if that were the case, that just suggests that we're doing better than Canada, not that we're the best in the world.) Unfortunately, because there is very little systematic data collected about the care of the very rich, there's no data to suggest how much this attitude reflects reality.

    Even if you have great insurance, there are still major problems with the US health care system that affect the rich. Doctors don't talk to one another, our management of chronic conditions is poor, there's no impetus to go to digital medical records, and the administrative burdens of dealing with health insurance companies drives costs up and quality down for everybody.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Okay, I don't want to be totally down on the US. There are a few things we do pretty well. We're good at giving the insured access to preventative and diagnostic services - pap smears, mammograms, blood tests, biopsies, etc. Insurance companies are generally pretty willing to cover those. Consequently, our early detection rates are really high, and our survival rates are high for diseases that benefit from early detection. The US has the highest breast cancer survival rate IIRC.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    saggiosaggio Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I have to mention that in Canada, surgeries and procedures that aren't deemed necessary, or are considered cosmetic, will always be bumped by those considered necessary. So aside from a few cases where people are genuinely screwed or fall through the cracks, the people who fly to the U.S. to get medical procedures done are undergoing surgeries or procedures that aren't considered medically necessary by the Canadian system.

    It's not like people are regularly flying to the US to get open heart surgery done.

    Just thought I'd point that out.

    saggio on
    3DS: 0232-9436-6893
  • Options
    gtrmpgtrmp Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Feral wrote: »
    Okay, I don't want to be totally down on the US. There are a few things we do pretty well. We're good at giving the insured access to preventative and diagnostic services - pap smears, mammograms, blood tests, biopsies, etc. Insurance companies are generally pretty willing to cover those. Consequently, our early detection rates are really high, and our survival rates are high for diseases that benefit from early detection. The US has the highest breast cancer survival rate IIRC.

    Ladies - come to America! Nobody can take care of your breasts like we can.

    gtrmp on
  • Options
    AdrienAdrien Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    saggio wrote: »
    I have to mention that in Canada, surgeries and procedures that aren't deemed necessary, or are considered cosmetic, will always be bumped by those considered necessary. So aside from a few cases where people are genuinely screwed or fall through the cracks, the people who fly to the U.S. to get medical procedures done are undergoing surgeries or procedures that aren't considered medically necessary by the Canadian system.

    It's not like people are regularly flying to the US to get open heart surgery done.

    Just thought I'd point that out.

    And it shouldn't surprise anyone that the well-to-do come to America so they can cut in line— that's exactly what universal healthcare is there to prevent.

    Adrien on
    tmkm.jpg
  • Options
    QliphothQliphoth Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    saggio wrote: »
    I have to mention that in Canada, surgeries and procedures that aren't deemed necessary, or are considered cosmetic, will always be bumped by those considered necessary. So aside from a few cases where people are genuinely screwed or fall through the cracks, the people who fly to the U.S. to get medical procedures done are undergoing surgeries or procedures that aren't considered medically necessary by the Canadian system.

    It's not like people are regularly flying to the US to get open heart surgery done.

    Just thought I'd point that out.

    Theres a similar thing in Australia in the public health system. There are 2 categories of surgery, ones called elective, I forget what the other is called, but elective includes basically anything where you arent immediately going to die without it. The elective list has a reasonably long waiting period and for those in extreme pain etc that period is excrutiatingly long. I do hear of cases of people going to the US for surgery but usually thats for illnesses that are extremely rare or the occaisional very new procedure.

    Qliphoth on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Qliphoth wrote: »
    saggio wrote: »
    I have to mention that in Canada, surgeries and procedures that aren't deemed necessary, or are considered cosmetic, will always be bumped by those considered necessary. So aside from a few cases where people are genuinely screwed or fall through the cracks, the people who fly to the U.S. to get medical procedures done are undergoing surgeries or procedures that aren't considered medically necessary by the Canadian system.

    It's not like people are regularly flying to the US to get open heart surgery done.

    Just thought I'd point that out.

    Theres a similar thing in Australia in the public health system. There are 2 categories of surgery, ones called elective, I forget what the other is called, but elective includes basically anything where you arent immediately going to die without it. The elective list has a reasonably long waiting period and for those in extreme pain etc that period is excrutiatingly long. I do hear of cases of people going to the US for surgery but usually thats for illnesses that are extremely rare or the occaisional very new procedure.
    Elective surgery has long waiting lists because the public system naturally tends towards being overcrowded. If you have the money however, you are free to pay for your own surgery at a private hospital and predictably, cut in line as it's been put.

    What continually amazes me is that the US voting public at large seems to have somehow been convinced to support a system which actively does not support them, and that's the really incredible part.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    What continually amazes me is that the US voting public at large seems to have somehow been convinced to support a system which actively does not support them, and that's the really incredible part.

    Civil War Rebels.

    Incenjucar on
  • Options
    ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2008
    What continually amazes me is that the US voting public at large seems to have somehow been convinced to support a system which actively does not support them, and that's the really incredible part.

    Wasn't it moniker who said something along the lines of the Republicans today being very similar to the slave owners before the Civil War in a sense that both were rich as hell and were really good at convincing the poor to work/vote against their own interests?

    ege02 on
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ege02 wrote: »
    What continually amazes me is that the US voting public at large seems to have somehow been convinced to support a system which actively does not support them, and that's the really incredible part.

    Wasn't it moniker who said something along the lines of the Republicans today being very similar to the slave owners before the Civil War in a sense that both were rich as hell and were really good at convincing the poor to work/vote against their own interests?
    The problem is they basically appeal to the aspirations of the middle class - you say something like you are moving up in the world, Americans have never had it so good etc. and what they're really saying is "you will be rich soon, if we do X then you won't be able to enjoy being rich"

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Basically they've convinced people that life preservers will sink ships.

    Incenjucar on
  • Options
    ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2008
    ege02 wrote: »
    What continually amazes me is that the US voting public at large seems to have somehow been convinced to support a system which actively does not support them, and that's the really incredible part.

    Wasn't it moniker who said something along the lines of the Republicans today being very similar to the slave owners before the Civil War in a sense that both were rich as hell and were really good at convincing the poor to work/vote against their own interests?
    The problem is they basically appeal to the aspirations of the middle class - you say something like you are moving up in the world, Americans have never had it so good etc. and what they're really saying is "you will be rich soon, if we do X then you won't be able to enjoy being rich"

    Yeah.

    Sounds to me like the aspirations of the middle class are actually just illusions perpetuated the rich. It's like carrot on a stick.

    ege02 on
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Basically they've convinced people that life preservers will sink ships.
    I was thinking more along the lines of "but if we don't lock the 3rd class passengers in, no one else will get a life boat!"

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Basically they've convinced people that life preservers will sink ships.
    I was thinking more along the lines of "but if we don't lock the 3rd class passengers in, no one else will get a life boat!"

    At this point they're holding the doors closed while the water's rising.

    Incenjucar on
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2008
    gtrmp wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Okay, I don't want to be totally down on the US. There are a few things we do pretty well. We're good at giving the insured access to preventative and diagnostic services - pap smears, mammograms, blood tests, biopsies, etc. Insurance companies are generally pretty willing to cover those. Consequently, our early detection rates are really high, and our survival rates are high for diseases that benefit from early detection. The US has the highest breast cancer survival rate IIRC.

    Ladies - come to America! Nobody can take care of your breasts like we can.

    But our insurance companies won't pay for your birth control, while handing out free viagra!

    Not that there isn't a similar problem here (the government subsidises viagra, but only a couple of pill varieties, and charges GST on tampons but not condoms, etc etc fuck you the government), but US medical care is fraught with sexual-health related silliness. This is more relevant to the boob thing given that the pill reduces risk of many cancers, including breast cancer.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2008
    Qliphoth wrote: »
    saggio wrote: »
    I have to mention that in Canada, surgeries and procedures that aren't deemed necessary, or are considered cosmetic, will always be bumped by those considered necessary. So aside from a few cases where people are genuinely screwed or fall through the cracks, the people who fly to the U.S. to get medical procedures done are undergoing surgeries or procedures that aren't considered medically necessary by the Canadian system.

    It's not like people are regularly flying to the US to get open heart surgery done.

    Just thought I'd point that out.

    Theres a similar thing in Australia in the public health system. There are 2 categories of surgery, ones called elective, I forget what the other is called, but elective includes basically anything where you arent immediately going to die without it. The elective list has a reasonably long waiting period and for those in extreme pain etc that period is excrutiatingly long. I do hear of cases of people going to the US for surgery but usually thats for illnesses that are extremely rare or the occaisional very new procedure.

    Its actually not too bad, especially considering the waiting periods associated with private health cover. If you never needed it, or had a too-low level of it to get your surgery, you still have to wait x months before your fund will cover it, in most cases. Happened to my dad - it took a while for his private insurance to upgrade enough that he could get his hips replaced. There was really no way to fast-track his surgery through any scheme (and the other problem is ye olde not-enough-surgeons). It would have been super if he could have gotten it faster, because taking all those pain meds probably wasn't so awesome for him, but still.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    The problem with a lot of the health choices come down to the sheer power of the modern elderly.

    Tampons and birth control don't help Mr. and Mrs. Horny Geriatric Millionaire.

    Incenjucar on
  • Options
    ZephyrZephyr Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    The problem with a lot of the health choices come down to the sheer power of the modern elderly.

    Tampons and birth control don't help Mr. and Mrs. Horny Geriatric Millionaire.

    damn old people, at it again

    Zephyr on
    16kakxt.jpg
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    The problem with a lot of the health choices come down to the sheer power of the modern elderly.

    Tampons and birth control don't help Mr. and Mrs. Horny Geriatric Millionaire.

    At least I can remind myself that they're now all contracting the clap from each other at record rates.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2008
    The Cat wrote: »
    gtrmp wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Okay, I don't want to be totally down on the US. There are a few things we do pretty well. We're good at giving the insured access to preventative and diagnostic services - pap smears, mammograms, blood tests, biopsies, etc. Insurance companies are generally pretty willing to cover those. Consequently, our early detection rates are really high, and our survival rates are high for diseases that benefit from early detection. The US has the highest breast cancer survival rate IIRC.

    Ladies - come to America! Nobody can take care of your breasts like we can.

    But our insurance companies won't pay for your birth control, while handing out free viagra!

    Not that there isn't a similar problem here (the government subsidises viagra, but only a couple of pill varieties, and charges GST on tampons but not condoms, etc etc fuck you the government), but US medical care is fraught with sexual-health related silliness. This is more relevant to the boob thing given that the pill reduces risk of many cancers, including breast cancer.

    Yeah it's fucked up. Birth control pills are not covered by insurance either.

    ege02 on
  • Options
    IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    The Cat wrote: »
    At least I can remind myself that they're now all contracting the clap from each other at record rates.

    Yeah but they already have to use laxatives to get through the day.

    Incenjucar on
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2008
    Huh? No, I'm saying that BC coverage has been withdrawn entirely or scaled back by US insurance companies in the last few years, as has a lot of gyno/repro-health stuff. And that's a problem. Sorry if the phrasing was unclear.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    To our credit, a number of states have passed laws requiring insurance companies to provide some birth control coverage.

    Of course, those tend to be the same states where abortions are accessible and sex education is a little more sophisticated than "abstinence will set you free." So if you live in Missouri, you're still pretty much fucked.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Feral wrote: »
    So if you live in Missouri, you're still pretty much fucked.

    U-S-A! U-S-A!

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • Options
    The ScribeThe Scribe Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Feral wrote: »
    Also: don't call it "socialized medicine." That's a misnomer, one deliberately chosen by opponents of universal health care to carry negative connotations.

    I called it "socialized medicine" because it's enemies call it "socialized medicine." I was being facetious.

    The Scribe on
Sign In or Register to comment.