Contraceptives and Viagra

[ShockerPrez]

How many would actually save that $3000/yr for medical or other unplanned expenses?

Vacations, new car payments, restaurants and $75 insurance on $500 TVs are the likely uses of those savings. But maybe that would spur the economy.

I would agree with that. LOL.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

How many would actually save that $3000/yr for medical or other unplanned expenses?

Vacations, new car payments, restaurants and $75 insurance on $500 TVs are the likely uses of those savings. But maybe that would spur the economy.

This is why humanity can't have nice things.

[wufan]

How many would actually save that $3000/yr for medical or other unplanned expenses?

Vacations, new car payments, restaurants and $75 insurance on $500 TVs are the likely uses of those savings. But maybe that would spur the economy.

This would weed out the stupid people through natural selection, or as you mentioned, spur the economy so people have better jobs to help pay for more stuff...but less would be invested in business since insurance invests a lot in the market, so some companies would lose investment capital and jobs would be lost. Then we could spur the economy by creating more regulations forcing companies to invest in useless technology. Then they would have to pay their workers less to remain profitable. Thank goodness we have government to protect us from our selves!

[Aargh]

Since this is morphing into a discussion of costs that run through insurance, Harvoni is a Hepatitis C drug that is sometimes successful in curing Hepatitis C. Here are the costs for a 12-week course of treatment in a few countries around the world:

US - $94,500
Canada - $80,000
India - $900
UK - £39,000
Germany - 48,000€
Egypt - $1200

http://esofosbuvir.com/harvoni-cost-in-usa-canada-europe-egypt-india/

A friend of mine tried a different drug - can't remember the name. It was a 12-month treatment which cost $90,000. His wasn't asuccessful. I imagine that makes him eligible for trying Harvoni.

His wife died from Hep C. After it advanced to a terminal stage, the medical industry ran up $400,000 in charges before she died.

[wufan]

Since this is morphing into a discussion of costs that run through insurance, Harvoni is a Hepatitis C drug that is sometimes successful in curing Hepatitis C. Here are the costs for a 12-week course of treatment in a few countries around the world:

US - $94,500
Canada - $80,000
India - $900
UK - £39,000
Germany - 48,000€
Egypt - $1200

http://esofosbuvir.com/harvoni-cost-in-usa-canada-europe-egypt-india/

A friend of mine tried a different drug - can't remember the name. It was a 12-month treatment which cost $90,000. His wasn't asuccessful. I imagine that makes him eligible for trying Harvoni.

His wife died from Hep C. After it advanced to a terminal stage, the medical industry ran up $400,000 in charges before she died.

I think the question is: Why does it cost 100 times more in the US than in India? Hint: it isn't because of their health care system.

[pinstripers]

Actually it is. I was originally prescribed them due to periods where I bled so much I had anemia

Absolutely can be prescribed for a heath condition. When used solely for prevention of pregnancy it probably would not qualify as such, but I suppose it's a debate.

[Aargh]

I thought this thread had gone the way of all threads, but I see it's experienced the Lazarus effect.

Pregnancy is one of the most dangerous medical conditions a woman experiences in her lifetime. It can be fatal in many ways. As recently as 100 years ago, death by pregnancy or childbirth was one of the more common causes of death among young women. We've gotten past that, but there are A LOT of health care dollars spent to ensure that women survive pregnancies.

I've never heard of a guy dying from erectile dysfunction. I have heard of guys dying from having sex.

I would support mandatory (free) long-term birth control for anyone on government assistance. If someone can't afford what they've already got, I'll be damned if I'm supposed to pay for more.

[pinstripers]

I'm dying here

[Aargh]

I'm dying here

ROFL - I didn't get that right at first. Well played. I didn't mean to interrupt.

[Kung Wu]

Actually it is. I was originally prescribed them due to periods where I bled so much I had anemia

Right, but that's obviously not the same thing.

[wufan]

I thought this thread had gone the way of all threads, but I see it's experienced the Lazarus effect.

Pregnancy is one of the most dangerous medical conditions a woman experiences in her lifetime. It can be fatal in many ways. As recently as 100 years ago, death by pregnancy or childbirth was one of the more common causes of death among young women. We've gotten past that, but there are A LOT of health care dollars spent to ensure that women survive pregnancies.

I've never heard of a guy dying from erectile dysfunction. I have heard of guys dying from having sex.

I would support mandatory (free) long-term birth control for anyone on government assistance. If someone can't afford what they've already got, I'll be damned if I'm supposed to pay for more.

The pill is not a successful means of contraceptive for folks that are irresponsible with their life. They just don't take it regularly. IUD is much better, and is also offered for free through Medicaid. Again, however, a disproportionately large number of ladies on welfare aren't interested in NOT having babies. There are a number of smokers that visit the OBGYN that request a prescription for Tylenol so that Medicaid will pay for it, but they refuse any contraceptive...it hardens the heart to see.

[Kung Wu]

Again, where is the research on this?

Here's a mindboggling relevant statistic: Nearly HALF the children in our country are born to women in the Medicaid program!

"A new study out of George Washington University School of Public Health finds that the number of births in the U.S. covered by Medicaid has risen again, from 40 percent of births in 2008 to 48 percent—nearly half of all births—in 2010."

The women in the Medicaid program have access to subsidized birth control.

[Aargh]

Here's a mindboggling relevant statistic: Nearly HALF the children in our country are born to women in the Medicaid program!

"A new study out of George Washington University School of Public Health finds that the number of births in the U.S. covered by Medicaid has risen again, from 40 percent of births in 2008 to 48 percent—nearly half of all births—in 2010."

The women in the Medicaid program have access to subsidized birth control.

The time frame of that statistic is odd. How do you adjust for the Great Recession? The years cited seem to be before and at the worst part of that recession.

I'm not questioning the rather surprising percentages you are reporting. It's been a long-running American tradition that poor people have lots of babies. If that is considered a "problem", I don't think you'd like the "solution".

[Kung Wu]

Okay, do they want children? That statistic is irrelevant if they in fact want children.

But the argument is that they want the children because they get a bigger welfare check if they have more children. And there's a pretty easy way to demonstrate it.

50% of children are born to women on medicaid, but only about 15% of women aged 19 to 44 are on medicaid.

That's absolutely mindboggling. I'm not sure what it means in terms of whether birth control should be covered or not, but clearly medicaid is being horrifically ABUSED. Of course we know that already, because it's a form of government interference with price controls and all economists recognize that this is what ends up happening in those types of systems.

[Kung Wu]

The time frame of that statistic is odd. How do you adjust for the Great Recession? The years cited seem to be before and at the worst part of that recession.

I'm not questioning the rather surprising percentages you are reporting.

But aren't you?

You are right, I would not like the "solution". I would LOVE it. You see, I love babies. I love poor people. I love poor babies. I don't love paying for poor people's poor babies. Simply reduce the welfare state and remove the incentive for poor people to have FREE babies that increase the size of their monthly welfare check.