The Underworld Of Lightly (& Logically) Moderated Discussion & Debate


    Tax payer funded medical treatment

    Share
    avatar
    83T'na
    Nymph
    Nymph

    Re: Tax payer funded medical treatment

    Post  83T'na on Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:38 am

    Sassydot wrote:
    canterella wrote:
    83T'na wrote:
    Sassydot wrote:Now I struggle to see any logic, any reasoning at all other than plain bigotry, behind your viewpoint that we should be funding ELECTIVE COSMETIC SURGERY, but telling someone, who has little money and is facing an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy, that they have to suck it up.




    I'd rather fund someone who has the balls to stand up and say, I am not ready for this child, please help
    Cos do you know what? That IS taking responsibility.

    You're happy doing that repeatedly? Maybe once, but not 3 times, surely.

    Well after deep and meaningful thinking, I'd be happy for them to do it as many times as needed rather than see another unwanted, neglected and/or abused child filling our child murder statistics.


    BINGO

    I'd rather fund a tubal ligation. Certainly for the woman Waireka told us about.

    ydekm
    Nymph
    Nymph

    Re: Tax payer funded medical treatment

    Post  ydekm on Tue Jun 15, 2010 11:12 am

    Psalter wrote:I personally know someone who has had 4 medical terminations and she and her sister came over with McDonalds after her sister had her last one... having a great laugh they were.

    That is sad and retarded.
    And makes me wonder if she really had, had a termination? Most people I know can barely get out of bed afterwards.
    avatar
    Lynz
    Nymph
    Nymph

    Re: Tax payer funded medical treatment

    Post  Lynz on Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:56 am

    At the third abortion make speying compulsory.


    The Herceptin nonsense points out the reason why Health Professionals should be the ones making the decisions. The whole thing was driven by emotion. So he - or she - who squeals the most gets what they want. Regardless of the science surrounding the efficacious of a particular treatment.

    If Herceptin therapy 12 months was a magic bullet for breast cancer, then I'd say fund it. But it is not. It would be interesting to see how many women, being diagnosed with breast cancer, are asking their doctors for what is a very expensive drug. I wonder how many doctors then prescribe it, if for no other reason than it gives their patient some hope or peace of mind. While further down the line, money is not available to someone for a procedure that will benefit them.
    avatar
    83T'na
    Nymph
    Nymph

    Re: Tax payer funded medical treatment

    Post  83T'na on Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:07 pm

    Lynz - I'd be interested to know what you're basing your comments re: Herceptin on.

    I personally have not seen any evidence that it is not the best option available for early breast cancer treatment.
    avatar
    Donkeycheese
    Nymph
    Nymph

    Re: Tax payer funded medical treatment

    Post  Donkeycheese on Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:13 pm

    get private medical insurance - there is one company that funds all drugs approved by MedSafe, regardless of whether they are funded by Pharmac

    ydekm
    Nymph
    Nymph

    Re: Tax payer funded medical treatment

    Post  ydekm on Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:15 pm

    83T'na wrote:Lynz - I'd be interested to know what you're basing your comments re: Herceptin on.

    I personally have not seen any evidence that it is not the best option available for early breast cancer treatment.

    Google it - there are studies avaliable. It was the whole reason the Pharmac funding was so controversial.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Tax payer funded medical treatment

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:38 pm