The Tea Party and Ron Paul Cheer for the Uninsured to Die

[JoeChalupa]

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/09/12/the-tea-party-and-ron-paul-cheer-for-the-uninsured-to-die/
During the Tea Party debate, a question was asked to Libertarian favorite, Ron Paul. Ron Paul was asked if an uninsured 30 year old has a serious accident, who would pay for treatment under your health plan? Paul tried to run around the question and claim that the uninsured would want the government to pay if they wanted a socialist system, but then he finally got to his real answer.

Ron Paul: That is what freedom is all about and taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to take care of everyone…

(Tea Party crowd cheers)

Moderator: But congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?

(Tea Party crowd screams YES!) Something tells my I hear CC screaming as well.

[boutons_deux]

The problem is perfectly resolved by requiring everyone to be docked from their pay (no caps) for a universal, no-opt-out, public health insurance option. Everybody pays, everybody's covered, no questions asked, no hesitation to seek treatment.

Civilized countries do it, for-greedy-UCA-profit America doesn't.

Paul's position is nothing but the moral and ethical depravity of Ayn Rand's crap. It also puts him at odds with a long-standing American humanitarian policy that taxpayer financed medical facilities be open to anyone without insurance. Paul is so fringe he'll never break 10% in a big election.

The blood-thirsty Repug/tea bagger mob cheering "let the injured die" and also cheering Jimmy Ricky's lose-no-sleep TX execution record is irrefutable proof of their sociopathy.

[ManuBalboa]

A 30 year old man should be able to pay $200-300 a mo. for insurance as was given in Wolf's example. Sucks, but that's the game. Take the risk, accept the consequences.


Go deliver pizzas.

[ElNono]

A 30 year old man should be able to pay $200-300 a mo. for insurance as was given in Wolf's example. Sucks, but that's the game. Take the risk, accept the consequences.

Go deliver pizzas.

Not in this economy.

Good luck delivering pizzas and having an extra $200-$300 on the side. Unless you're the owner of the pizza place or single with no kids at 30.

[George Gervin's Afro]

A 30 year old man should be able to pay $200-300 a mo. for insurance as was given in Wolf's example. Sucks, but that's the game. Take the risk, accept the consequences.


Go deliver pizzas.

What a country! If you happen to lose your job/insurance don't expect other citizens to pitch in for the treatment to give you a chance at life... they probably don't pay federal income tax so they don't deserve ANYTHING


coming from the pro-life crown nonetheless....

[George Gervin's Afro]

A 30 year old man should be able to pay $200-300 a mo. for insurance as was given in Wolf's example. Sucks, but that's the game. Take the risk, accept the consequences.


Go deliver pizzas.


Mom Loses Job After Kidney Donation
Updated: Tuesday, 13 Sep 2011, 9:58 AM EDT
Published : Monday, 12 Sep 2011, 5:11 PM EDT

PHILADELPHIA - A Philadelphia mother ready to return to work after giving her son a kidney finds out she doesn't have a job to return to.

If you're a mom, chances are you'd do anything for your child.

Claudia Rendon didn't hesitate when her son needed one of her kidneys.

But she didn't think she'd have to choose between her child and her job.

She's smiling now, but make no mistake, this has been the toughest year of Rendon's life.

"It was the hardest thing i ever had to go through, bury my mother," Rendon said.

Even as Rendon mourned her mom, she found out her father had leukemia, her uncle passed away, and her son's kidneys failed.

"Everything was coming down all at once. I felt like the best thing that happened to me this whole entire year was that God gave me the blessing of being able to give my son my kidney."

Through it all, Rendon showed up to work at the Aviation Institute Of Maintenance, in Northeast Philadelphia.

The company teaches would-be mechanics how to fix planes.

Rendon used her vacation time to be with her mother. But she needed a leave of absence to donate her kidney to her son.

"She saved my life basically,” says Alex Rendon. “Who else can say their mom gave them life two times?"

Before she left, she says her boss made her sign a paper, saying her job would not be guaranteed.

Sure enough, late last week, her supervisor told her he had hired someone else.

Fox 29 tried to find out why the Aviation Institute Of Maintenance fired someone the company itself describes as a good employee.

"I have no comment and I'll have ask you to leave," said Rendon's former boss.

The company had the right to terminate her employment under FMLA, or the Family Medical Leave Act. FMLA covers an employee for 12 weeks and Rendon took off less time than that. But she also worked for a small company with under 50 employees, and those companies operate under different FMLA rules.

A company representative also said it was in its legal rights to let Rendon go.

if she has complications..she knew the 'risk' of donating her kideny to her child could cost her job.....so she should accept that it's her time and just die already..


sincerely,

the christian right

[boutons_deux]

If Allah wills it ...

[Winehole23]

The problem is perfectly resolved by requiring everyone to be docked from their pay (no caps) for a universal, no-opt-out, public health insurance option. Everybody pays, everybody's covered, no questions asked, no hesitation to seek treatment.So you and RP agree on the free rider problem, you just differ on the remedy.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/09/12/the-tea-party-and-ron-paul-cheer-for-the-uninsured-to-die/
During the Tea Party debate, a question was asked to Libertarian favorite, Ron Paul. Ron Paul was asked if an uninsured 30 year old has a serious accident, who would pay for treatment under your health plan? Paul tried to run around the question and claim that the uninsured would want the government to pay if they wanted a socialist system, but then he finally got to his real answer.

Ron Paul: That is what freedom is all about and taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to take care of everyone…

(Tea Party crowd cheers)

Moderator: But congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?

(Tea Party crowd screams YES!) Something tells my I hear CC screaming as well.

Joe, did you actually see the debate or do you let articles tell you what you should see?? smh If I remember correctly, he explains himself right where that clip conveniently cuts off. I guess it had 'beetus <shrugs>

[cheguevara]

:lmao at the tea party crowd. They remind me of the audience at the Running Man tv show:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_u93Wi1U2HII/TJyL3s7_15I/AAAAAAAAAGM/gr4SaXOM8Yw/s1600/stills-the-running-man-1987-3.jpg

[Viva Las Espuelas]

People cheering remind you of tea party people??? You get reminded during sporting events as well?

[Th'Pusher]

Joe, did you actually see the debate or do you let articles tell you what you should see?? smh If I remember correctly, he explains himself right where that clip conveniently cuts off. I guess it had 'beetus <shrugs>

He went on to say it should be paid for by charity/churches, which is unrealistic.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

He went on to say it should be paid for by charity/churches, which is unrealistic.

I don't think that's an accurate complete summary of what he said. He did mention charity and churches but I don't think he said they "should" pay for it. I'm just going off memory though.

[mingus]

I agree with providing healthcare to those with conditions and illness that they cannot help. But I worked in a hospital for 3 years and I know that many, many, many people are victims of their own bad habits, bad lifestyles, etc. No accountability.

[Bill_Brasky]

Paul has a good foreign policy, domestic not so much. But it's an answer I would expect out of someone who believes that there should be literally zero government interference with our lives.

[ManuBalboa]

ITT: people butthurt there are still people in this world who prefer to be responsible for themselves

I can understand how seeing people on tv cheer at the idea of a man having to accept the negative consequences of his foolish choice intimidate you knowing you could not survive on your own in such a world.

There's a difference between Running Man Crowd and Tea Party crowd who just wants you to pay your own fking bills tbh imho irl kthxbye. It's not like the Tea Party crowd are all top 1%'ers. They are getting up at 5am and working their ass off to afford their bills just like the rest of us.

[Th'Pusher]

ITT: people butthurt there are still people in this world who prefer to be responsible for themselves

I can understand how seeing people on tv cheer at the idea of a man having to accept the negative consequences of his foolish choice intimidate you knowing you could not survive on your own in such a world.

There's a difference between Running Man Crowd and Tea Party crowd who just wants you to pay your own fking bills tbh imho irl kthxbye. It's not like the Tea Party crowd are all top 1%'ers. They are getting up at 5am and working their ass off to afford their bills just like the rest of us.

So they hypothetical 30 year old with no insurance is taken to the hospital in need of urgent care. What is the doctor to do?

[ManuBalboa]

Take care of the next patient in need of urgent care who has health insurance.

Moral of the story: quit having kids you can't afford, work harder & longer, educate yourself, pass up the depreciating assets and take care of emergency funds/insurance, prepare for bad times, and keep hoping insurance costs come down.

How stronger would the nation be as a whole, if individuals approached life this way. In the meantime, we can quit worrying about Afghani women and help out single moms in our own country. :toast

[Th'Pusher]

Take care of the next patient in need of urgent care who has health insurance.

Moral of the story: quit having kids you can't afford, work harder & longer, educate yourself, pass up the depreciating assets and take care of emergency funds/insurance, prepare for bad times, and keep hoping insurance costs come down.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required...

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

[Phenomanul]

Take care of the next patient in need of urgent care who has health insurance.

Moral of the story: quit having kids you can't afford, work harder & longer, educate yourself, pass up the depreciating assets and take care of emergency funds/insurance, prepare for bad times, and keep hoping insurance costs come down.

How stronger would the nation be as a whole, if individuals approached life this way. In the meantime, we can quit worrying about Afghani women and help out single moms in our own country. :toast

I hear you, but then I guess the Hippocratic oath needs some revisions...

You simply can't box everyone under the sun with such broad sweeping strokes... some jobs (jobs needed by society, mind you) simply don't pay enough and have nothing to do with whether or not someone is lazy (or having children etc...)

[jack sommerset]

So George, did you ever decide if you would go bankrupt to save my life?

[George Gervin's Afro]

So George, did you ever decide if you would go bankrupt to save my life?

what's your life worth jack? how much money is too much?

[mingus]

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required...

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

Here's the thing: A lot of doctors around the country treat people who are directly responsible for their own bad health: High BP, Diabetes, Heart disease, whether it be from excessive eating, drinking, or smoking. Not everyone BUT ALOT. They do that to themselves. They're affecting their own familly.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Paul has a good foreign policy, domestic not so much. But it's an answer I would expect out of someone who believes that there should be literally zero government interference with our lives.

I don't have much faith in him having faith in other countries to leave us alone if we leave them alone. I just don't buy that.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

But at the same time, I'm not saying we gotta step up our occupation count. Force begets force.

[ElNono]

I guess all those people that choose to have cancer, lost their jobs, insurance, and went bankrupt getting treatment only have themselves to blame. Getting cancer was their choice, right?

[ElNono]

Here's the thing: A lot of doctors around the country treat people who are directly responsible for their own bad health: High BP, Diabetes, Heart disease, whether it be from excessive eating, drinking, or smoking. Not everyone BUT ALOT. They do that to themselves. They're affecting their own familly.

Then have a plan that covers certain things and not other things.

[PizzaDeliveryGuy]

Not in this economy.

Good luck delivering pizzas and having an extra $200-$300 on the side. Unless you're the owner of the pizza place or single with no kids at 30.

Word. The tips ain't that great.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I agree with providing healthcare to those with conditions and illness that they cannot help. But I worked in a hospital for 3 years and I know that many, many, many people are victims of their own bad habits, bad lifestyles, etc. No accountability.

Are patients ever turned away on account of them not having insurance?

[jack sommerset]

So George, did you ever decide if you would go bankrupt to save my life?



what's your life worth jack? how much money is too much?

Still no answer.

Save your money for your son.

[Bill_Brasky]

I don't have much faith in him having faith in other countries to leave us alone if we leave them alone. I just don't buy that.

We'd still have a beast military, they would just be at home, and ready to fight if we ever were to be attacked.

Btw who would attack us? Iran? With what, rocks?

[mingus]

Are patients ever turned away on account of them not having insurance?

Believe it or not my dad who is a doctor treats many patients w/o insurance. But there are some not sure how many who turn them away. As far as hospitals, not sure. I held a clerk job in the rad department and wasn't involved in all that.

[4>0rings]

The whole question was based on a guy doing well(ie, making money) and deciding NOT to purchase insurance... yet still wants to be treated. The fuck??

[Viva Las Espuelas]

We'd still have a beast military, they would just be at home, and ready to fight if we ever were to be attacked.
Depends on your definition of "beast". It should be slightly more than adequate and able.


Btw who would attack us? Iran? With what, rocks?The man says "rocks" :lmao

[Viva Las Espuelas]

The whole question was based on a guy doing well(ie, making money) and deciding NOT to purchase insurance... yet still wants to be treated. The fuck??

Shhhhh. You're ruining everyone's feign-dom....

[mingus]

Then have a plan that covers certain things and not other things.

Exactly. Im all for that. Unfortunately no one in politics wants to touch the obesity epidemic in America.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Believe it or not my dad who is a doctor treats many patients w/o insurance. But there are some not sure how many who turn them away. As far as hospitals, not sure. I held a clerk job in the rad department and wasn't involved in all that.

I commend your dad :toast Would you have any percentages for anything you commented on.

I just don't see how our medical community will just turn their backs on people with emergencies, illnesses, etc. If we can nurse some lunatic jackass that killed 14 people on a military base back from a coma then I can not believe that our healthcare is all that "broken". I just can't.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Then have a plan that covers certain things and not other things.

You'd think a man with a "proclaimed" scalpel in hand would've done that in the first place......

[boutons_deux]

"I can not believe that our healthcare is all that "broken". "

It's broken, and broken badly. keeping that shooter alive is a specific, local technical achievement, not a systemic health care measure.

[JoeChalupa]

Joe, did you actually see the debate or do you let articles tell you what you should see?? smh If I remember correctly, he explains himself right where that clip conveniently cuts off. I guess it had 'beetus <shrugs>

Yes, I did watch the debate. Yeah, he does explain himself but the initial reaction to the "should we just let him die" comment was what was strange.

[baseline bum]

Exactly. Im all for that. Unfortunately no one in politics wants to touch the obesity epidemic in America.

There is an easy way to kill it; stop letting McDonald's brainwash kids into thinking fries and cokes are fun to ingest and a way to get a free toy.

[Bill_Brasky]

tbh why wasn't a thread made when the crowd literally cheered the hardest for a mere mention of the death penalty during the Repub debate?

[ElNono]

You'd think a man with a "proclaimed" scalpel in hand would've done that in the first place......

Unfortunately, not even a baseline single-payor plan can be discussed without 'socialism' being thrown around.

[Wild Cobra]

If you all watched the YouTube clip, he says "NO!"

PepQF7G-It0

[boutons_deux]

so Paul and his rabid killer dog fans diverge on this key life-or-death vote?

"let the church's do it" is typical RP fantasy, right up with WC ivory tower ideology.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I agree with providing healthcare to those with conditions and illness that they cannot help. But I worked in a hospital for 3 years and I know that many, many, many people are victims of their own bad habits, bad lifestyles, etc. No accountability.
This. Free healthcare should be given on a case-by-case basis but some should be denied it. For starters, anyone who smokes should be responsible for all of his/her health costs.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

If you all watched the YouTube clip, he says "NO!"

PepQF7G-It0
I don't see the problem with Ron Paul's answer because of the specific question. If someone with a well paying job who can get an insurance plan for 200-300 bucks a month decides not to, he should assume the responsibility.

If the goal was to point out how flawed the free market approach to healthcare is (and I think it is a flawed approach), it was a horrible question.

[JoeChalupa]

This. Free healthcare should be given on a case-by-case basis but some should be denied it. For starters, anyone who smokes should be responsible for all of his/her health costs.

Then so should anyone who has ever had a drink, had a Big Mac, eaten candy, or drank a soda, or eaten red meat, doesn't run 3 miles a day, doesn't zumba once a week, isn't on P90, etc. And anyone who is "healthy" and has a heart attack needs to get their ass to the morgue on their own.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Then so should anyone who has ever had a drink, had a Big Mac, eaten candy, or drank a soda, or eaten red meat, doesn't run 3 miles a day, doesn't zumba once a week, isn't on P90, etc. And anyone who is "healthy" and has a heart attack needs to get their ass to the morgue on their own.
:lol looks like someone is a smoker who tries to convince himself smoking isn't that bad

Those are fuckin retarded comparisons. Eating unhealthy food is better than eating no food at all. Smoking cigarettes isn't better than smoking nothing at all.

With that said, being overweight is something I'd also consider a self-inflicted health problem. If someone who's a fatshit needs bypass surgery, it shouldn't be the taxpayer's expense. People who should get free healthcare are people who have unavoidable health problems.

[JoeChalupa]

:lol looks like someone is a smoker who tries to convince himself smoking isn't that bad

Those are fuckin retarded comparisons. Eating unhealthy food is better than eating no food at all. Smoking cigarettes isn't better than smoking nothing at all.

With that said, being overweight is something I'd also consider a self-inflicted health problem. If someone who's a fatshit needs bypass surgery, it shouldn't be the taxpayer's expense. People who should get free healthcare are people who have unavoidable health problems. So how do you prove that their health problems are unavoidable? Even the healthiest of people get diseases or have heart attacks or get clogged arteries. It happens. And not every over weight person dies from self-inflected health problems.

[JoeChalupa]

Oh, and our insurance covered by diabeetus which runs in our family and yes, it can be controlled with proper diet and excercise.....and mustard.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

So how do you prove that their health problems are unavoidable? Even the healthiest of people get diseases or have heart attacks or get clogged arteries. It happens. And not every over weight person dies from self-inflected health problems.
:lol you are clearly self-conscious about your shitty eating habits contributing to your dia beetus

":cryeven healthy people can have beetus:cry"

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Oh, and our insurance covered by diabeetus which runs in our family and yes, it can be controlled with proper diet and excercise.....and mustard.
type 2 diabetes also runs in my family, guess what that means to a responsible person? I don't drink soda, don't eat any sweets, eat a minimal amount of processed carbs, and my cholesterol level is 130 last I checked. Quit acting like you're the first person who has diabetes that runs in his family and that made diabetes inevitable no matter how healthy you were.

[mavs>spurs]

BeetusJoe just mad that people twisted Ron Paul's words and made it seem like he wants Joe to just go die a slow death while all his limbs fall off one by one imho.

[JoeChalupa]

type 2 diabetes also runs in my family, guess what that means to a responsible person? I don't drink soda, don't eat any sweets, eat a minimal amount of processed carbs, and my cholesterol level is 130 last I checked. Quit acting like you're the first person who has diabetes that runs in his family and that made diabetes inevitable no matter how healthy you were.

Oh STFU and go back to eating your damn tofu and stop acting like everyone should eat like you do. This America damnit and I'll eat what I want and when I want and stay the hell out of my life. And yes, diabetes can strike even the healthiest eaters. Kids can get it at a very young age.

[ElNono]

type 2 diabetes also runs in my family, guess what that means to a responsible person? I don't drink soda, don't eat any sweets, eat a minimal amount of processed carbs, and my cholesterol level is 130 last I checked. Quit acting like you're the first person who has diabetes that runs in his family and that made diabetes inevitable no matter how healthy you were.

That's borderline high (if you're talking LDL). I guess you need to be more responsible?

[JoeChalupa]

BeetusJoe just mad that people twisted Ron Paul's words and made it seem like he wants Joe to just go die a slow death while all his limbs fall off one by one imho.

:lmao I'm not mad at all TC. I was just pointing out how some tea party peeps cheered when "let him die" was mentioned. That simple.

[mavs>spurs]

Have you seen what kind of shit kids eat these days brah? Soda's, cookies, sugary yogurt and cereals for breakfast and usually kool aid and hot dogs for dinner because mom and dad don't have time to cook a proper meal. Diabetes is like 90% dietary you worthless no will power having FUCK.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

That's borderline high (if you're talking LDL). I guess you need to be more responsible?
:lmao what? That's not high at all (doctor doesn't think so anyway). What is LDL?

[mavs>spurs]

Oh and btw..this may be AMERICA but your health is comparable to that of someone living in your home country imho..but you don't want to talk about your childhood.

[JoeChalupa]

Have you seen what kind of shit kids eat these days brah? Soda's, cookies, sugary yogurt and cereals for breakfast and usually kool aid and hot dogs for dinner because mom and dad don't have time to cook a proper meal. Diabetes is like 90% dietary you worthless no will power having FUCK.

Oh, STFU and you too can eat your damn tofu and bean sprout sammiches you colon cleansing fucks.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I'm talking total cholesterol level, ElNono.

[mavs>spurs]

Oh, STFU and you too can eat your damn tofu and bean sprout sammiches you colon cleansing fucks.

Oh great, now he's labeling us snobs because we still have all of our toes and appendages :lmao

Sorry joe, i'm drinking a soda right now but at least i keep my body fat under 10%

[JoeChalupa]

Oh and btw..this may be AMERICA but your health is comparable to that of someone living in your home country imho..but you don't want to talk about your childhood.

What you want to talk about? I'm not ashamed of anything. America..the land of the FREE!! Can I eat a hamburger with fries? OH YES I CAN!!

[ElNono]

:lmao what? That's not high at all (doctor doesn't think so anyway). What is LDL?

There's two types of cholesterol, LDL (bad) and HDL (good).
Normally, people refer to just LDL since it's the bad one. HDL you want to keep high. LDL you want to keep low.

For LDL:

- Less than 100 mg/dL (2.59 mmol/L) — Optimal
- 100-129 mg/dL (2.59-3.34 mmol/L) — Near optimal, above optimal
- 130-159 mg/dL (3.37-4.12 mmol/L) — Borderline high
- 160-189 mg/dL (4.15-4.90 mmol/L) — High
- Greater than 189 mg/dL (4.90 mmol/L) — Very high

source (http://labtestsonline.org/understanding/analytes/ldl/tab/test)

[JoeChalupa]

Oh great, now he's labeling us snobs because we still have all of our toes and appendages :lmao

Sorry joe, i'm drinking a soda right now but at least i keep my body fat under 10%

Oh, so you labeling us fat slobs is okay? I don't give a fuck about your body fat %. Tell that to someone who watches your figure. Don't do nothing for me.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

There's two types of cholesterol, LDL (bad) and HDL (good).
Normally, people refer to just LDL since it's the bad one. HDL you want to keep high. LDL you want to keep low.

For LDL:

- Less than 100 mg/dL (2.59 mmol/L) — Optimal
- 100-129 mg/dL (2.59-3.34 mmol/L) — Near optimal, above optimal
- 130-159 mg/dL (3.37-4.12 mmol/L) — Borderline high
- 160-189 mg/dL (4.15-4.90 mmol/L) — High
- Greater than 189 mg/dL (4.90 mmol/L) — Very high

source (http://labtestsonline.org/understanding/analytes/ldl/tab/test)
I was talking total cholesterol

[ElNono]

I'm talking total cholesterol level, ElNono.

Well, HDL and LDL are measured separately on a lipid panel. Because you want one high and the other low. So on the labs tests you get two values.

[JoeChalupa]

Well, HDL and LDL are measured separately on a lipid panel. Because you want one high and the other low. So on the labs tests you get two values.

That is a correct statement.

[mavs>spurs]

Yeah I'm labeling you a fat slob because someone had to pay for your toe amputation and your beetus meds, you and the rest of America need to stop being so damn pathetic.

You're a christian guy, right Joe? God says to treat your body as your temple.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Well, HDL and LDL are measured separately on a lipid panel. Because you want one high and the other low. So on the labs tests you get two values.
I was talking total cholesterol for the 3rd time. Sorry your joke didn't pan out.

[ElNono]

But total cholesterol IIRC is the addition of LDL and HDL, so if your total is 130, and taking a 'normal' HDL is 40, that makes LDL 90, which would be optimal. :tu

[ElNono]

I was talking total cholesterol for the 3rd time. Sorry your joke didn't pan out.

Not a joke, tbh.

Let us proceed.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

But total cholesterol IIRC is the addition of LDL and HDL, so if your total is 130, and taking a 'norma' HDL is 40, that makes LDL 90, which would be optimal. :tu
Now that you mention it, I remember the doctor explaining a "good" "bad" cholesterol to me and how my ratio of one to the other was good. I guess he was talking LDLs and HDLs with my total being 130 and my LDL being below 100.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Oh, STFU and you too can eat your damn tofu and bean sprout sammiches you colon cleansing fucks.
:lol this post seems angry

[ElNono]

No diabetes in my side of the family, and not obese either. But I had to be very watchful of the stuff you buy around these places. It looks like you can't buy anything that doesn't have fructose corn syrup these days.

[ElNono]

Now that you mention it, I remember the doctor explaining a "good" "bad" cholesterol to me and how my ratio of one to the other was good. I guess he was talking LDLs and HDLs with my total being 130 and my LDL being below 100.

You asked what LDL was, that's why I posted all that. You should keep an eye on it if you have a family history.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

The problem is that when I buy groceries and try to buy healthy its expensive as fuck. I only buy frozen vegetables now because fresh veggies are too expensive and they go bad too quickly.

[ElNono]

Just read the label. I switched from regular coke (syrup) to coke zero (aspartame) and dropped a few pounds just like that. diet coke has syrup too :lol

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

You asked what LDL was, that's why I posted all that. You should keep an eye on it if you have a family history.
I have a family history but it seems like I'm pretty immune to high cholesterol (prolly not the beetus tho). When I was at my FATTEST and weighed 285 with like 2 of my meals every day regularly involving cheese and/or red meat, my total cholesterol was only at 165.

[mavs>spurs]

The problem is that when I buy groceries and try to buy healthy its expensive as fuck. I only buy frozen vegetables now because fresh veggies are too expensive and they go bad too quickly.

A lot of people wouldn't agree with me here, but it's all part of the globalists plan to make us unhealthy as shit. It's way easier and cheaper to eat processed toxic crap than it is to actually eat healthy.

[ElNono]

I have a family history but it seems like I'm pretty immune to high cholesterol (prolly not the beetus tho). When I was at my FATTEST and weighed 285 with like 2 of my meals every day regularly involving cheese and/or red meat, my total cholesterol was only at 165.

You're young though and age matters. The older your pancreas, the more susceptible to damage.

[Bill_Brasky]

Joe nobody said you can't eat whatever you want, just saying we don't want to foot the bill when your shitty eating habits land you in the hospital.

[Capt Bringdown]

How is the Teahadist death-panel cheerleading different from this:

September 13, 2011
Obama Looks for Big Health Cuts, Worrying Democrats (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/us/politics/obamas-expected-plan-for-entitlement-savings-worries-democrats.html)
By ROBERT PEAR

WASHINGTON — As Congress opens a politically charged exploration of ways to pare the deficit, President Obama is expected to seek hundreds of billions of dollars in savings in Medicare and Medicaid.
- more - (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/us/politics/obamas-expected-plan-for-entitlement-savings-worries-democrats.html)

[Viva Las Espuelas]

There is an easy way to kill it; stop letting McDonald's brainwash kids into thinking fries and cokes are fun to ingest and a way to get a free toy.

Or have them not hold the gun to close to their heads or their parents.

[ElNono]

tbh, with a lemon being $1.50 and a tomato $2 over here, I can see how eating at McDonals becomes an option if you're broke.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Yes, I did watch the debate. Yeah, he does explain himself but the initial reaction to the "should we just let him die" comment was what was strange.

How was it strange? He answered it. How is his explanation ok but his initial reaction isn't. It's not like he backpeddled. Had "think progress" used the whole answer, this wouldn't have been a news "item". Good job, Joe. Yes, the tea party want sick people to die. Yay for the "D".

[Viva Las Espuelas]

If you all watched the YouTube clip, he says "NO!"

PepQF7G-It0

Don't confuse Joe with what he actually said. He's on a roll.

[mingus]

so Paul and his rabid killer dog fans diverge on this key life-or-death vote?

"let the church's do it" is typical RP fantasy, right up with WC ivory tower ideology.

to be fair to the church, they do a lot of work in communities not only in the country but out of it as well. my mom goes out of the country once or twice a year as an NP to help the poor through a church community which organizes them. i went to Ethiopia for a month through a church and stayed in a city that was 80% Muslim, poor as fuck and the community of nuns and priests there got all the medicines and treatment for the physically and mentally ill.

the question of whether the Church, solely, would be able to cover all treatment in the U.S. is probably not even a question. they simply wouldn't be able to cover the cost. but give credit where credit is due. they deserve a lot of credit for their work around in the U.S. and around the world.

[mingus]

Or have them not hold the gun to close to their heads or their parents.

if they didn't have guns then...

:lol

[JoeChalupa]

Joe nobody said you can't eat whatever you want, just saying we don't want to foot the bill when your shitty eating habits land you in the hospital.

I hear ya but there are millions who we foot the bill for who are physically hurt so why should I foot the bill for some dumbass who gets in a car accident, or who has a house fire and gets hurt, or hurts their back and goes on disabilty? There are billions spent on health care that have nothing to do with the patient's eating habits.

[vy65]

I hear ya but there are millions who we foot the bill for who are physically hurt so why should I foot the bill for some dumbass who gets in a car accident, or who has a house fire and gets hurt, or hurts their back and goes on disabilty? There are billions spent on health care that have nothing to do with the patient's eating habits.

Because you have greater control over and therefore greater responsibility for the filth you cram down your 'beetus riddled mouth. How are you still not getting this?

[ElNono]

How about what NY has done, banning all trans-fat from restaurants?
Thoughts?

[vy65]

How about what NY has done, banning all trans-fat from restaurants?
Thoughts?

Good first step tbh.

I'd put a tax on fast food if it wouldn't fuck over poor people. Then again, I wonder if it's cheaper to buy produce/meats at the grocery store?

[Nbadan]

Good first step tbh.

I'd put a tax on fast food if it wouldn't fuck over poor people. Then again, I wonder if it's cheaper to buy produce/meats at the grocery store?

Carbos are cheap, veggies and lean meat expensive...why do you hate the poor? What did they do to you?

[DarrinS]

tbh, with a lemon being $1.50 and a tomato $2 over here, I can see how eating at McDonals becomes an option if you're broke.


Dude. Where the fuck do you live that produce costs that much? Healthy food is not expensive. People by junk food and fast food because they are lazy fucks and don't want to cook.

[ElNono]

Dude. Where the fuck do you live that produce costs that much? Healthy food is not expensive. People by junk food and fast food because they are lazy fucks and don't want to cook.

New Jersey. And you have to pay a premium for "Jersey Fresh" produce. In other words, tomatoes from Canada are cheaper than locally grown.

I'm not even talking organic here.

Here's a local catalog:
http://foodtown.mywebgrocer.com/CircularItemList.aspx?catid=588&s=166182271&g=688e5366-f44a-401e-8138-483c2ec89871&uc=51AB135

[DMX7]

Another proud event for the Tea Baggers. At least this one didn't involved 2,000 fat people on Rascal Scooters.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Tbh food becoming so expensive IMO is largely because of so many fatasses that consume like $60 worth of food every day.

[mingus]

If you're that poor ur getting food stamps. At least the poor people that I know do. What they do with the food stamps is another story.

[mavs>spurs]

Just read the label. I switched from regular coke (syrup) to coke zero (aspartame) and dropped a few pounds just like that. diet coke has syrup too :lol

part of that lost weight was the aspartame eating holes in your brain

[ElNono]

part of that lost weight was the aspartame eating holes in your brain

Another truther?

[SnakeBoy]

I have a family history but it seems like I'm pretty immune to high cholesterol

You are not immune to high cholesterol, you're just young.

[Wild Cobra]

That's borderline high (if you're talking LDL). I guess you need to be more responsible?
Get a little sun and convert it to Vitamin D.

[Wild Cobra]

Just read the label. I switched from regular coke (syrup) to coke zero (aspartame) and dropped a few pounds just like that. diet coke has syrup too :lol
Yuk...

If you drink sodas, buy the "throwbacks." They went back to cane sugar. Some sugar is good for you. Just not that high fructose corn syrup or artificial sweeter.

[mavs>spurs]

if someone is in poor health condition at a relatively young age, im not saying all but in most cases its because he is too lazy to take any exercise & eats too much junk food or has sex way too often. im a celibate and a vegan thats why im so MF'N healthy i guess

[Franklin]

if someone is in poor health condition at a relatively young age, im not saying all but in most cases its because he is too lazy to take any exercise & eats too much junk food or has sex way too often. im a celibate and a vegan thats why im so MF'N healthy i guess

wtf? how is sex bad for you, unless you're engaging in gay sex with someone who has the aids? sex is a form of cardio, and it's great for your mental health as well. how you've made it 20+ years without dropping a load in a female and still remain sane is unbelievable

[Wild Cobra]

if someone is in poor health condition at a relatively young age, im not saying all but in most cases its because he is too lazy to take any exercise & eats too much junk food or has sex way too often. im a celibate and a vegan thats why im so MF'N healthy i guess
LOL...

Vegan...

You'll be lucky to live into your 60's.

[Wild Cobra]

wtf? how is sex bad for you, unless you're engaging in gay sex with someone who has the aids? sex is a form of cardio, and it's great for your mental health as well. how you've made it 20+ years without dropping a load in a female and still remain sane is unbelievable
No shit.

Daily sex keeps the prostrate healthy.

[RandomGuy]

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/09/12/the-tea-party-and-ron-paul-cheer-for-the-uninsured-to-die/
During the Tea Party debate, a question was asked to Libertarian favorite, Ron Paul. Ron Paul was asked if an uninsured 30 year old has a serious accident, who would pay for treatment under your health plan? Paul tried to run around the question and claim that the uninsured would want the government to pay if they wanted a socialist system, but then he finally got to his real answer.

Ron Paul: That is what freedom is all about and taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to take care of everyone…

(Tea Party crowd cheers)

Moderator: But congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?

(Tea Party crowd screams YES!) Something tells my I hear CC screaming as well.

That was misleading. Only one person actually yelled "yes", if you watch the video, not really the entire crowd.

They did applaud the "take personal responsibility part".

That said, it was pretty telling that RP would essentially apply the death penalty for someone who chose or couldn't afford insurance.

"We expect society to care for everyone", as if that was undesirable or immoral.

I generally call this the "war on the poor" waged rather relentlessly by the right in this country. Sad that we went from a war on poverty to "fuck the poor, they have only themselves to blame for being poor".

[RandomGuy]

No shit.

Daily sex keeps the prostrate healthy.

How does that keep those who lie down on the ground healthy?





:p:

[RandomGuy]

Yuk...

If you drink sodas, buy the "throwbacks." They went back to cane sugar. Some sugar is good for you. Just not that high fructose corn syrup or artificial sweeter.

Sugar is sugar is sugar. Ask any chemist.

That was one of the "silly" things that my wifes organic chemistry professor harped on.

I have maybe a soda once per week or so, and I have come to like the "half" option.

Many places that let you self serve have a little button for "soda" that is just water and carbonation without any syrup.

I have found that if you go half soda water, and half any regular flavored syrup soda, it is just as good. Better actually, IMO, because it isn't overwhelmingly sweet.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Still no answer.

Save your money for your son.



First and foremost you're an idiot.

Are you trying to compare our public healthcare system to an individual's personal finances?


That's real stupid.

That's why we pay taxes you fool. Our taxes collectively fund what currently is considered public medicine. There will never be a time where one citizen will ever have to go bankrupt to help someone like you, so the question is ridculous and makes no sense.

[boutons_deux]

"Sugar is sugar is sugar. Ask any chemist."

bullshit. chemists aren't biochemists, aren't metabolic chemists.

all are carbohydrates, but sucrose, dextrose, fructose are metabolized differently.

eg, fructose (corn "sugar" industrially polluting nearly everything to sucker people's sweet tooth) is metabolized in the liver. There's so much of it that NAFLD (non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, aka "foie gras") is now widespread in all age groups. NAFLD is related to insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome, also appearing in younger age groups, along with CVD.

It's All Good (for sick-care profits, after the food corps have profited from selling the taxpayer-subsidized garbage).

[CosmicCowboy]

if someone is in poor health condition at a relatively young age, im not saying all but in most cases its because he is too lazy to take any exercise & eats too much junk food or has sex way too often. im a celibate and a vegan thats why im so MF'N healthy i guess

A celibate vegan?

:lmao

Why would you want to live a long life?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

:lol anyone who is taking Y.H.'s post seriously


Back on point, I'm liberal, but this is where I'm sickened by how little accountability liberals want Americans to have. If someone who can't afford healthcare has been a chain smoker for 30 years and gets diagnosed with lung cancer, denying them free healthcare isn't "sentencing them to the death penalty." It's Americans not wanting their tax dollars they worked hard to earn foot the bill for an irresponsible jackass who didn't bother to figure out what puffing smoke down his lungs might lead to.

[CosmicCowboy]

As for the original question. A guy that works and can afford insurance but chooses not to have any and gets in an accident. What to do? In my opinion we should save his life, stabilize him and do the absolute minimum necessary to get him out of the hospital. Then send him a bill for services rendered.

[RandomGuy]

As for the original question. A guy that works and can afford insurance but chooses not to have any and gets in an accident. What to do? In my opinion we should save his life, stabilize him and do the absolute minimum necessary to get him out of the hospital. Then send him a bill for services rendered.

"Absolute minimum" for life-threating major vehicle crashes easily runs into the low six figures. (personal experience reviewing actual medical claims at HMOs)

Leading cause of bankruptcy in the US: medical bills.

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jun2009/db2009064_666715.htm


The study was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and published online June 4 by the American Journal of Medicine. It will appear in the Journal's August print edition. The researchers examined the court records of a random sample of 2,314 bankruptcy filings across the nation during early 2007, and also contacted those filers for written explanations. The researchers then followed up with extensive phone interviews of 1,032 of those filers.

They found that a number of medical factors contributed to a family's financial disaster. More than 90% of medically related bankruptcies were caused by high medical bills directly or medical costs that were so high the family was forced to mortgage their home. The remaining 8% went bankrupt because a medical problem caused them to lose income. The authors were not able to track credit-card defaults caused by medical bills, but a 2007 study found that, of low- and middle-income households with credit-card debt, 29% used their plastic to pay off medical expenses.

Even in Ron Paul's world of "everyone for himself", everyone else would still be footing the bill for the uninsured.

Higher lending costs (lenders taking write-downs in bankruptcies) and higher insurance premium costs (hospitals have to charge insurers extra) would still be felt by everybody.

If you are not prepared to let such a person literally die in the ER by withholding treatment, you are forcing cost-shifting onto the rest of society.

Congratulations, CC, you are officially a socialist. :p:

[boutons_deux]

US smoking population seems to have reached a lower asymptote.

Why not make cigarettes illegal? Including illegal to manufacture in USA? The cigarette companies are now targeting Asia and Africa youth since Western Europeans and North Americans are educated about the risks of tobacco.

Take away the corporate profits from pushing cigarette drugs?

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/

for-profit and govt insurance probably wastes $50K-$200K per 440K smoking-related deaths per year, EVERY year. Lung cancer has a 5-year mortality rate of 90%.

Cig companies buy enough politicians to be protected by making cigarettes illegal.

[boutons_deux]

"let such a person literally die in the ER by withholding treatment"

licensed doctors are sworn not to refuse treatment.

[DMX7]

If you're that poor ur getting food stamps. At least the poor people that I know do. What they do with the food stamps is another story.

What do they do with the foodstamps? Trade them for drugs? They certainly aren't buying beer with them since the government tightly restricts what can be bought. I don't think they're even allowed to buy perishable food - aside from like fruit.

[mingus]

US smoking population seems to have reached a lower asymptote.

Why not make cigarettes illegal? Including illegal to manufacture in USA? The cigarette companies are now targeting Asia and Africa youth since Western Europeans and North Americans are educated about the risks of tobacco.

Take away the corporate profits from pushing cigarette drugs?

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/

for-profit and govt insurance probably wastes $50K-$200K per 440K smoking-related deaths per year, EVERY year. Lung cancer has a 5-year mortality rate of 90%.

Cig companies buy enough politicians to be protected by making cigarettes illegal.

plenty of people who have ciagarettes only do them socially. same with alcohol. and if you can pay for the insurance (which i hear premiums are going to increase by $30 a month so good luck), then have at it.

then again i smoke socially so i'm probably biased. but i also have insurance.

[mingus]

Old Dirty Bastard buying his food stamps:
http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYy1QI6ZOeY (http://http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYy1QI6ZOeY)

LOL

food stamps are pretty easy to get and the system is easily exploitable. the government's oversight w/ regards to it is a complete disgrace.

[vy65]

Even in Ron Paul's world of "everyone for himself", everyone else would still be footing the bill for the uninsured.

Higher lending costs (lenders taking write-downs in bankruptcies) and higher insurance premium costs (hospitals have to charge insurers extra) would still be felt by everybody.

If you are not prepared to let such a person literally die in the ER by withholding treatment, you are forcing cost-shifting onto the rest of society.

Congratulations, CC, you are officially a socialist. :p:

Not really. You could just make those costs non-dischargeable.

[boutons_deux]

same with medicare/medicaid, both seem to be rampantly defrauded, not by crooks only, but by 3rd parties, docs, hospitals, etc.

[RandomGuy]

Not really. You could just make those costs non-dischargeable.

I don't think that would help.

Puting medical bills into a special category of loans, and ahead of all other creditors, is not something I am sure the banks or any other interest would go for.

Even if you make it non-dischargable, what forces someone who doesn't have the money to pay it?

(just to be clear, you mean dischargeable in a bankruptcy, yes?)

[ElNono]

Not really. You could just make those costs non-dischargeable.

You're still going to get a portion you can't collect from (ie: people that sign up with phony info, like illegals).

[RandomGuy]

Old Dirty Bastard buying his food stamps:
http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYy1QI6ZOeY (http://http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYy1QI6ZOeY)

LOL

food stamps are pretty easy to get and the system is easily exploitable. the government's oversight w/ regards to it is a complete disgrace.

I would wonder about the cost-to-benefit of good oversight.

You will have abuse in any system, but if the costs of oversight outweigh the cost of abuse, you have actually made less money to help the people who need it.

I am willing to accept the cost of helping those who need it is that someone will defraud the system, just as the cost of running a store is that someone will eventually shoplift from you.

Not saying there isn't room for improvement, just that one should consider such things.

[vy65]

I don't think that would help.

Puting medical bills into a special category of loans, and ahead of all other creditors, is not something I am sure the banks or any other interest would go for.

Why not?


Even if you make it non-dischargable, what forces someone who doesn't have the money to pay it?

The same thing that makes them pay any other non-dischargeable debt (i.e., alimony, federal tax liens, etc...)


(just to be clear, you mean dischargeable in a bankruptcy, yes?)

Yes.

[vy65]

You're still going to get a portion you can't collect from (ie: people that sign up with phony info, like illegals).

I don't think you can get away with using phony info in your bankruptcy filing.

Can illegals file for bankruptcy? I honestly don't know.

[RandomGuy]

You're still going to get a portion you can't collect from (ie: people that sign up with phony info, like illegals).

You also have states, like Texas, where unsecured creditors, like hospitals, have certain amounts of personal assets immune to even court settlements, and there is no garnishment of wages.

[vy65]

And a non-dischargeable debt is not a debt that has higher priority. It's a debt that carries through the bankruptcy and has the same effect as it did prior to the petition date.

[vy65]

You also have states, like Texas, where unsecured creditors, like hospitals, have certain amounts of personal assets immune to even court settlements, and there is no garnishment of wages.

lol homestead exemption.

That shit is a pittance. Like 50k-60k overall (home, clothing, etc...).

[Wild Cobra]

Sugar is sugar is sugar. Ask any chemist.
There are simple sugars from glucose to there more complex ones. Even alcohol has the same molecular components.

There are differences in the metabolic processes for the different forms of sugar. You are correct by classification. However, they are still different.

Methane and modern candle wax are both paraffins. Simpler to more complex forms of the same thing. So is kerosine, octane, and mineral oil. Would any chemist say they are the same?

[Wild Cobra]

What do they do with the foodstamps? Trade them for drugs? They certainly aren't buying beer with them since the government tightly restricts what can be bought. I don't think they're even allowed to buy perishable food - aside from like fruit.
Haven't you ever heard of people selling them? It happens.

[mingus]

I would wonder about the cost-to-benefit of good oversight.

You will have abuse in any system, but if the costs of oversight outweigh the cost of abuse, you have actually made less money to help the people who need it.

I am willing to accept the cost of helping those who need it is that someone will defraud the system, just as the cost of running a store is that someone will eventually shoplift from you.

Not saying there isn't room for improvement, just that one should consider such things.

Guess nobody will know. Nobody will make a documentary about the general laziness and apathy of a huge segment of the population.

[Wild Cobra]

A celibate vegan?

:lmao

Why would you want to live a long life?
LOL...

No kidding. Without a good woman to cleave with, what good is life?

[Wild Cobra]

As for the original question. A guy that works and can afford insurance but chooses not to have any and gets in an accident. What to do? In my opinion we should save his life, stabilize him and do the absolute minimum necessary to get him out of the hospital. Then send him a bill for services rendered.
Absolutely.

lack of insurance doesn't mean lack of compassion. He has the financial resources, he can pay. Just that simple.

[RandomGuy]

lol homestead exemption.

That shit is a pittance. Like 50k-60k overall (home, clothing, etc...).

The exemption for Texas is one house, one car per licensed adult in the house, and 60k.

If one does not have the money for health insurance, the liklihood that one has assets that could satisfy a judgment is low to begin with.

(edit)
( TITLE 5. EXEMPT PROPERTY AND LIENS )

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PR/htm/PR.41.htm#A

Sec. 41.001. INTERESTS IN LAND EXEMPT FROM SEIZURE. (a) A homestead and one or more lots used for a place of burial of the dead are exempt from seizure for the claims of creditors except for encumbrances properly fixed on homestead property.


http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PR/htm/PR.42.htm

Sec. 42.001. PERSONAL PROPERTY EXEMPTION.
(a) Personal property, as described in Section 42.002, is exempt from garnishment, attachment, execution, or other seizure if:

(1) the property is provided for a family and has an aggregate fair market value of not more than $60,000, exclusive of the amount of any liens, security interests, or other charges encumbering the property; or
(2) the property is owned by a single adult, who is not a member of a family, and has an aggregate fair market value of not more than $30,000, exclusive of the amount of any liens, security interests, or other charges encumbering the property

[CosmicCowboy]

http://content.clearchannel.com/cc-common/mlib/700/09/700_1315938103.jpg

[vy65]

I still don't see why this would be a reason for not making medical bills dischargeable under specific circumstances?

[ploto]

Supposed pro-life people who cheer the death penalty and letting the uninsured die.

[ElNono]

I don't think you can get away with using phony info in your bankruptcy filing.

Can illegals file for bankruptcy? I honestly don't know.

I'm talking at the hospital. If you don't know who the debtor is, then how are you going to charge him?

[ElNono]

There are simple sugars from glucose to there more complex ones. Even alcohol has the same molecular components.

There are differences in the metabolic processes for the different forms of sugar. You are correct by classification. However, they are still different.

Methane and modern candle wax are both paraffins. Simpler to more complex forms of the same thing. So is kerosine, octane, and mineral oil. Would any chemist say they are the same?

As far as what we're discussing, which is calorie intake, fructose corn syrup and regular sugar is just the same. 4 calories per gram.

[vy65]

I'm talking at the hospital. If you don't know who the debtor is, then how are you going to charge him?

I guess. I don't see the relevance of that.

[ElNono]

I guess. I don't see the relevance of that.

Considering government provides subsidies to 'safety-net' hospitals in order to offset the loses from people they can't collect on (ie: uninsured), I would say it's pretty relevant. We're basically in the hook for it.

[boutons_deux]

"subsidies to 'safety-net' hospitals"

When health care providers don't get (fully) reimbursed uncompensated care, they simply up their prices to health insurers who up their premiums.

[vy65]

Considering government provides subsidies to 'safety-net' hospitals in order to offset the loses from people they can't collect on (ie: uninsured), I would say it's pretty relevant. We're basically in the hook for it.

Still not seeing why this is a reason to make medical bills accrued when one is uninsured dischargeable?

[boutons_deux]

Ron Paul’s Campaign Manager Died of Pneumonia, Penniless and Uninsured

Back in 2008, Kent Snyder — Paul's former campaign chairman — died of complications from pneumonia. Like the man in Blitzer's example, the 49-year-old Snyder (pictured) was relatively young and seemingly healthy* when the illness struck. He was also uninsured. When he died on June 26, 2008, two weeks after Paul withdrew his first bid for the presidency, his hospital costs amounted to $400,000. The bill was handed to Snyder's surviving mother (pictured, left), who was incapable of paying. Friends launched a website to solicit donations.

According to the Wall Street Journal's 2008 story on his death, Snyder was more than just a strategic ally: He was the only reason Paul thought he ever had a shot at the presidency in the first place.

"It was Kent more than anyone else who encouraged and pushed Ron to run for president," said Jesse Benton, a spokesman for Mr. Paul. "Ron would not have run for the presidency if it had not been for Kent. Ron was really hesitant, but Kent drove him forward."

The Kansas City Star quoted his sister at the time as saying that a "a pre-existing condition made the premiums too expensive."

http://gawker.com/5840024/ron-pauls-campaign-manager-died-of-pneumonia-penniless-and-uninsured

[Wild Cobra]

As far as what we're discussing, which is calorie intake, fructose corn syrup and regular sugar is just the same. 4 calories per gram.
No, we were not discussing just calories, but the metabolic process.

Yes, to single digit accuracy, 4 is correct, but the metabolic processes are still not identical.

Health is not just about calorie intake, but how they are metabolized. We all need what... at least 2000 calories a day?

That's the energy content of food we use as fuel. Coal and hydrogen both provides calories in heat when burned. If you want a better example of same molecular type, look at methane and kerosine. One burns very clean, the other produces toxins with hydrogen and coal. I will contend this is a equally valuable to think about, that some food energy sources are better than others.

Sucrose has 3.94 kcal/gram, glucose has 3.75. I didn't quickly find other sweeteners, but more importantly, they have a far different glycemic index. Fructose is 22, lactose is 46, sucrose is 64, and glucose is 96. That's more than a 1:4 range. As for sweetness, lactose is 16, glucose is 74.3, sucrose is 100, and fructose is 173.

The body treats these the same in some aspects, but differently in others.

[George Gervin's Afro]

lmao at the 'pro-lifers' in this thread

[ElNono]

No, we were not discussing just calories, but the metabolic process.

No we weren't. We were talking about diabetes, and stuff that makes you fat, which is why *I* brought up high fructose corn syrup.

Don't tell me what I was discussing before you even got here.

[ElNono]

Still not seeing why this is a reason to make medical bills accrued when one is uninsured dischargeable?

I never said it was a reason. I said you'll still going to have some people you can't collect on, and we'll be in the hook for.

[mingus]

lmao at the 'pro-lifers' in this thread

At some point you have to just stop covering people for making stupid decisions or else it's just a neverending cycle of stupidity. You're empowering people to be stupid if your going to be there to cover their ass.

[rascal]

I hear you, but then I guess the Hippocratic oath needs some revisions...

You simply can't box everyone under the sun with such broad sweeping strokes... some jobs (jobs needed by society, mind you) simply don't pay enough and have nothing to do with whether or not someone is lazy (or having children etc...)

Especially in this economy where companies are all out for profit at the employee expense. Now it takes two jobs to support a family because many salaries are down and companies no longer pay a liveable wage like they did 50 years ago.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Supposed pro-life people who cheer the death penalty and letting the uninsured die.

You can make an excellent fruit salad with that statement.

[Borat Sagyidev]

At some point you have to just stop covering people for making stupid decisions or else it's just a neverending cycle of stupidity. You're empowering people to be stupid if your going to be there to cover their ass.

Covering people? I doubt the tea party stops at that point. They aren't satisfied until sexual encounters are planned by a panel.

[Borat Sagyidev]

I think it's fantastic that some of the conservatives posting here actually admitted that not all sugar is the same. You know, product manufacturers will never say this. They'll never say how the overwhelming amount of corn and soybean (Omega 6) is detrimental either.

Fantastic, about 5 years ago that would never happen.

That scientific stuff is contagious, by the time retirement rolls in for some of you I expect some full out militant liberals. If not, you're gonna die anyway.

[ElNono]

At some point you have to just stop covering people for making stupid decisions or else it's just a neverending cycle of stupidity. You're empowering people to be stupid if your going to be there to cover their ass.

tbh, if the determination is already made that a good percentage of people are simply stupid, then regulate the market for stupid decisions. You don't HAVE to attack it from the coverage angle. The banning on trans-fat is an example.
Then again, you'll have the usual idiots :cry how the government tells you what you can or can't eat.

[mingus]

tbh, if the determination is already made that a good percentage of people are simply stupid, then regulate the market for stupid decisions. You don't HAVE to attack it from the coverage angle. The banning on trans-fat is an example.
Then again, you'll have the usual idiots :cry how the government tells you what you can or can't eat.

i don't believe people are stupid, but lazy and irresponsible. i don't know why the government has to be involved in this. they shouldn't have to act for us or on our behalf. the people of this country need to stand up to these food companies and have the change the way they're making food via social pressure. people don't protest.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I do believe people are stupid, that's why I'm a big fan of anyone who smokes getting lung cancer and dying. Anyone in this day and age who still smokes cigarettes regularly knowing the health affects is a fucktarded idiot who shouldn't have kids because he/she would be polluting the gene pool. I just wish cigarettes would kill anyone who smokes them quick enough for them not to have kids.

[Yonivore]

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/09/12/the-tea-party-and-ron-paul-cheer-for-the-uninsured-to-die/
During the Tea Party debate, a question was asked to Libertarian favorite, Ron Paul. Ron Paul was asked if an uninsured 30 year old has a serious accident, who would pay for treatment under your health plan? Paul tried to run around the question and claim that the uninsured would want the government to pay if they wanted a socialist system, but then he finally got to his real answer.

Ron Paul: That is what freedom is all about and taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to take care of everyone…

(Tea Party crowd cheers)
Right here is where the lying starts...


Moderator: But congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?

(Tea Party crowd screams YES!) Something tells my I hear CC screaming as well.
So, here's what really happened...

1Tstpu5mDEI
Congressman Paul answered Blitzer’s question “No.” By my count, three people yelled “Yeah” in response to Blitzer’s question, should “society” let the young man die.

Paul’s answer was actually good: he said that when he was practicing medicine, the churches took care of indigent patients, and “we never turned anyone away.” That got another round of applause. “Society,” in other words, includes much more than the government.

So what really happened is that the “Tea Party” crowd cheered two things: 1) the proposition that people are entitled to take risks and the government should not be counted on to solve all problems, and 2) churches and other private groups should pay medical bills when an improvident individual can’t. This was transmuted by Yahoo into “Debate crowd cheers letting uninsured die.”

This is the sort of ignorant prejudice against which conservatives struggle every day.

[mingus]

I do believe people are stupid, that's why I'm a big fan of anyone who smokes getting lung cancer and dying. Anyone in this day and age who still smokes cigarettes regularly knowing the health affects is a fucktarded idiot who shouldn't have kids because he/she would be polluting the gene pool. I just wish cigarettes would kill anyone who smokes them quick enough for them not to have kids.

:lmao

[ElNono]

i don't believe people are stupid, but lazy and irresponsible. i don't know why the government has to be involved in this. they shouldn't have to act for us or on our behalf. the people of this country need to stand up to these food companies and have the change the way they're making food via social pressure. people don't protest.

When it's life on the line, being lazy and irresponsible = stupid. Plus even if you were to say that you don't give a shit about those people, it ends up costing all of us money, so I don't see why the government wouldn't step up.

[ElNono]

Obviously, I'm not suggesting something as severe as tying up tubes, like the resident Nazi, but banning stuff that everyone knows it's fucking unhealthy. Take smokes for an example.

[mingus]

When it's life on the line, being lazy and irresponsible = stupid. Plus even if you were to say that you don't give a shit about those people, it ends up costing all of us money, so I don't see why the government wouldn't step up.

i'm not completely against the idea of what your saying. we both want the same result, but it sicken me that people don't care enough to do much at all about it by taking it into their own hands and boycott and/or protest the problem, or just eat McDonalds in moderation.

[mingus]

Obviously, I'm not suggesting something as severe as tying up tubes, like the resident Nazi, but banning stuff that everyone knows it's fucking unhealthy. Take smokes for an example.

the list can go on and on. you going to ban alcohol too?

[nkdlunch]

:lol this thread title is good

[vy65]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/opinion/krugman-free-to-die.html?_r=1&src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB

[ElNono]

i'm not completely against the idea of what your saying. we both want the same result, but it sicken me that people don't care enough to do much at all about it by taking it into their own hands and boycott and/or protest the problem, or just eat McDonalds in moderation.

Apparently they don't. 1 in 3 Americans is considered obese as of 2008, and it's only been trending up.


the list can go on and on. you going to ban alcohol too?

I don't know about outright banning. I think certain things are easier to deal with that way when you know there's no 'positives' from it.

IMO, we can't just keep on ignoring it.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I don't think you can ban cigarettes. To my understanding, you can't ban something the body naturally produces. I could be talking out of my ass but I believe I learned that years ago. <shrugs>

[vy65]

I don't think you can ban cigarettes. To my understanding, you can't ban something the body naturally produces. I could be talking out of my ass but I believe I learned that years ago. <shrugs>

The body naturally produces cigarettes?

[Yonivore]

The body naturally produces cigarettes?
That body is a gold mine!

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Ha. Sorry. I left out "on account of the nicotine" Oops.

[mingus]

Apparently they don't. 1 in 3 Americans is considered obese as of 2008, and it's only been trending up.



I don't know about outright banning. I think certain things are easier to deal with that way when you know there's no 'positives' from it.

IMO, we can't just keep on ignoring it.

a lot of things are sold that have no positives to them. again, i don't completely disagree with you. i wish people were more like me and took preventative measure about their eating habits. it's not hard.

[ElNono]

a lot of things are sold that have no positives to them. again, i don't completely disagree with you. i wish people were more like me and took preventative measure about their eating habits. it's not hard.

But bottom line is they won't. Maybe we need some sort of system that doesn't penalize those that are responsible. I don't know, maybe some sort of "health card" you have to present before purchasing certain goods. If you've been caught drunk, then it will be marked appropriately so you're not allowed to buy alcohol. If your BMI exceeds certain amount, you're not allowed to buy certain foods.

Notice you would receive such marks only by your own decisions. Obviously, it would also allow for a review of your condition to remove those marks.

Just throwing it out there. I'm sure there would be some caveats to it too. I just haven't given it some major thought outside that basic idea.

[JoeChalupa]

Right here is where the lying starts...


So, here's what really happened...

1Tstpu5mDEI
Congressman Paul answered Blitzer’s question “No.” By my count, three people yelled “Yeah” in response to Blitzer’s question, should “society” let the young man die.

Paul’s answer was actually good: he said that when he was practicing medicine, the churches took care of indigent patients, and “we never turned anyone away.” That got another round of applause. “Society,” in other words, includes much more than the government.

So what really happened is that the “Tea Party” crowd cheered two things: 1) the proposition that people are entitled to take risks and the government should not be counted on to solve all problems, and 2) churches and other private groups should pay medical bills when an improvident individual can’t. This was transmuted by Yahoo into “Debate crowd cheers letting uninsured die.”

This is the sort of ignorant prejudice against which conservatives struggle every day.

Even Rick Perry said he was shocked at the response and it wasn't just three from all accounts including Perry's.
You all really think that "eating healthy" should be the rule on if you live or die or get insurance. People with know health issues already pay more than a healthy person. Smokers pay higher rates than non-smokers so if smokers or real eaters pay higher premiums for health insurance why are you all bitching? YOU pay lower rates.

[JoeChalupa]

Yes, I've already stated, maybe not clear enough, that I did watch the debate and I am guilty of a misleading thread title. Sorry, I National Enquired it.

[Yonivore]

Yes, I've already stated, maybe not clear enough, that I did watch the debate and I am guilty of a misleading thread title. Sorry, I National Enquired it.
Thanks.

[mingus]

But bottom line is they won't. Maybe we need some sort of system that doesn't penalize those that are responsible. I don't know, maybe some sort of "health card" you have to present before purchasing certain goods. If you've been caught drunk, then it will be marked appropriately so you're not allowed to buy alcohol. If your BMI exceeds certain amount, you're not allowed to buy certain foods.

Notice you would receive such marks only by your own decisions. Obviously, it would also allow for a review of your condition to remove those marks.

Just throwing it out there. I'm sure there would be some caveats to it too. I just haven't given it some major thought outside that basic idea.

that would still cost the tax payer money though. even a streamlined process like the one you mentioned would be costly.

nobody should be obligated to pay a price for someone's self-inflicted bad health. and you shouldn't feel sorry for them either. i don't. i don't expect anyone to feel sorry for me 20 years from now if i get lung cancer and die because i'm a social smoker. i don't expect anyone to have to pay for my treatment if that were to happen. know who i feel sorry for? people who are trully a victim of circumstance. people who are starving in 3rd world countries, people who are genetically vulnerable to cancer, disease, etc. i've travelled to and lived in some of the poorest places in the world and lived with poor people. i'm done feeling sorry for American's who take it all for granted and piss on all they have.

that said, if i want to privately raise money to pay off soemone's expenses, i'd do it. my dad raised more than $30,000 for one of his workers in his office who had breast cancer. i'm all for something like that.

and people like to downplay what Ron Paul said about the church but he's been a doctor for a long time and knows how a big a role the church plays in giving people treatment. i know it myself because my parents help people through the church all the time. and many other doctors and nurses do as well.

[ElNono]

that would still cost the tax payer money though. even a streamlined process like the one you mentioned would be costly.

It costs money to do nothing. That ship has already sailed. The question here is what can we do so it costs less money.


nobody should be obligated to pay a price for someone's self-inflicted bad health. and you shouldn't feel sorry for them either. i don't. i don't expect anyone to feel sorry for me 20 years from now if i get lung cancer and die because i'm a social smoker. i don't expect anyone to have to pay for my treatment if that were to happen. know who i feel sorry for? people who are trully a victim of circumstance. people who are starving in 3rd world countries, people who are genetically vulnerable to cancer, disease, etc. i've travelled to and lived in some of the poorest places in the world and lived with poor people. i'm done feeling sorry for American's who take it all for granted and piss on all they have.

That's very nice but it isn't addressing reality. Some people do a piss poor job managing their health, and I wouldn't care less except that when they age they get kicked to the taxpayer funded health program and we're on the hook for it. Obviously, getting rid of the taxpayer funded health program isn't a solution because there's people that genuinely need it, took care of themselves or had some sort of disability and should receive the treatment.

So how do we find a solution that forces people to make better decisions about their health during their lifetime? (and I say force simply because non-forced hasn't worked).

I frankly think providing better access to care would be really important to address some of this. Thus the reason you don't see the same scale of this kind of problems in other developed countries.


that said, if i want to privately raise money to pay off soemone's expenses, i'd do it. my dad raised more than $30,000 for one of his workers in his office who had breast cancer. i'm all for something like that.

and people like to downplay what Ron Paul said about the church but he's been a doctor for a long time and knows how a big a role the church plays in giving people treatment. i know it myself because my parents help people through the church all the time. and many other doctors and nurses do as well.

I don't downplay it. But I also understand that church's charity simply cannot provide the type of help and funding required at this scale. It simply can't.

[mingus]

It costs money to do nothing. That ship has already sailed. The question here is what can we do so it costs less money.



That's very nice but it isn't addressing reality. Some people do a piss poor job managing their health, and I wouldn't care less except that when they age they get kicked to the taxpayer funded health program and we're on the hook for it. Obviously, getting rid of the taxpayer funded health program isn't a solution because there's people that genuinely need it, took care of themselves or had some sort of disability and should receive the treatment.

So how do we find a solution that forces people to make better decisions about their health during their lifetime? (and I say force simply because non-forced hasn't worked).

I frankly think providing better access to care would be really important to address some of this. Thus the reason you don't see the same scale of this kind of problems in other developed countries.



I don't downplay it. But I also understand that church's charity simply cannot provide the type of help and funding required at this scale. It simply can't.

i just don't know how true it is that accumaltive private funding for people who aren't irresponsible enough to eat, drink, and/or smoke themselves to heart diasease & and have no insurance can't be helped on a mass scale by the church and other private funding. if we had a system where the govt. basically threw the burden on private funding people who are not insured would probably start to manage their eating habits better knowing that the govt. won't be there for them in any case. i trully believe that in times of uncertainty people are more responsible. look at the uncertainty of the economy right now and how suddenly people are starting to be more wise with their money. they're more pragmatic, paying off debt and not taking as many chances as before. it think the same thing would happen with food but the climate would have to change.

[ElNono]

i just don't know how true it is that accumaltive private funding for people who aren't irresponsible enough to eat, drink, and/or smoke themselves to heart diasease & and have no insurance can't be helped on a mass scale by the church and other private funding. if we had a system where the govt. basically threw the burden on private funding people who are not insured would probably start to manage their eating habits better knowing that the govt. won't be there for them in any case. i trully believe that in times of uncertainty people are more responsible. look at the uncertainty of the economy right now and how suddenly people are starting to be more wise with their money. they're more pragmatic, paying off debt and not taking as many chances as before. it think the same thing would happen with food but the climate would have to change.

$600 billion in 2008. It's going to hit $1 trillion pretty soon. Sorry, it's not happening.

And I think you're mistaken about the insured/uninsured. If having insurance is a carte-blanche to lead an unhealthy life, after they hit 65 and really need the coverage, we're going to foot the bill for the bad choices made while they still had insurance. You really can't tackle this from the angle of insured/uninsured.

The most people I actually know that are uninsured are either unemployed or are the stupid kind that think they're too healthy and will do no wrong to ever require care. Until some accident happens.

I actually think this is one of the few countries where insurance is tied to the job, which is completely backwards. If you're seriously injured and unable to work for some respectable period of time (say, over 12 weeks, which is what the FMLA establishes), that's exactly when you're going to need medical treatment the most. Removing insurance at that point is almost criminal.

[vy65]

How does better access to care cause people to make better decisions about their health? If anything, these are social and cultural issues - how is access relevant?

[boutons_deux]

"how is access relevant"

yes, a complex issue.

America has a poor longevity rating for the entire population vs other modern countries, but as soon as Americans hit 65 ("access" to Medicare), their longevity shoots right up there with more civilized, humane, adult, progressive countries. So people make the decision to obtain sick-care when they can afford it via Medicare. This also means that below 65, USA's exorbitant, rip-off, for-profit medical care is not used sufficiently by people who could benefit, so they get sicker (more expensive) and stay sick longer(more expensive), and end up in the public emergency room, cost shifting to taxpayers.

"I actually think this is one of the few countries where insurance is tied to the job"

correct, in countries with national health insurance, the only qualification for lifetime medical care is citizenship. The other side of "compulsory" health providing is compulsory health insurance contribution taken out of every paycheck, which of course totally refutes the right-wing blatant lie of "free" medical care.

[ElNono]

How does better access to care cause people to make better decisions about their health? If anything, these are social and cultural issues - how is access relevant?

It's tied with prevention. The poor/uninsured normally skip yearly physicals and see a doctor only on emergencies. By the time the doctor sees those patients, it just might be too late (ie: already developed diabetes or obesity is out of control). Early detection and giving patients information is a way to mitigate the problem. It won't solve it, but it helps.

[ElNono]

McDonalds (and junk food in general) exists in every country, including those without the strict standard like the FDA, yet America leads the pack on obesity by a wide margin:

http://www.diet-blog.com/archives/world-obesity.gif

[ElNono]

FWIW, I expect Greece to fall off the ranking soon, tbh :lol

[vy65]

I guess, but I don't really see how it's preventative. Preventative measures, to me, should be indoctrinating kids with healthy habits and not rewarding them with a toy every time they eat a happy meal.

[ElNono]

I guess, but I don't really see how it's preventative. Preventative measures, to me, should be indoctrinating kids with healthy habits and not rewarding them with a toy every time they eat a happy meal.

That's part of it too. Everything helps.
But as DoK was pointing out, some people have a family history and have more propensity to those diseases. Those people require monitoring more often from a professional. Early detection is always cheaper in the long run.

[boutons_deux]

"have a family history"

genetic defects aren't the problem.

A family of fatties is most often not genetic, but the parent's fat and lifestyle "infecting" the children.

The biggest health problems US has today are self-inflicted, personal decisions:

smoking: 350K smoking lung cancer deaths/year.

overweight and obesity (eat too much and too much industrial food-like substances) leading to complications in nearly all other diseases and medical procedures, and leading to strokes, heart disease, diabetes, and very probably brain dysfunction in later years.

In the last year or so, there have been reports about how both the man's and woman's health and diet affects the quality of egg, the sperm, and health of the fetus, even PERMANENTLY.

[vy65]

That's part of it too. Everything helps.
But as DoK was pointing out, some people have a family history and have more propensity to those diseases. Those people require monitoring more often from a professional. Early detection is always cheaper in the long run.

For sure. I was thinking more about those people whose health problems are self inflicted. We're talking past each other but I agree with you.

[vy65]

lol I actually agree with croutons.

McD, BK, Wendy's, and all other BigBurger corps are a key cog in UCA and a cornerstone of the VRWC, right?

[mingus]

I guess, but I don't really see how it's preventative. Preventative measures, to me, should be indoctrinating kids with healthy habits and not rewarding them with a toy every time they eat a happy meal.

every kid gets taught about eating habits from an early age in both grade school and high school. it boils down to the parents. parents who are lazy and don't want to make the time to make meals for their kids on a regular basis should be scrutinized more.

if Jimmy goes to school 20 pounds heavier than he was the year before, child protective agency should be contacted and his parents should be evaluated. treat it as negligence.

[vy65]

every kid gets taught about eating habits from an early age in both grade school and high school. it boils down to the parents. parents who are lazy and don't want to make the time to make meals for their kids on a regular basis should be scrutinized more.

if Jimmy goes to school 20 pounds heavier than he was the year before, child protective agency should be contacted and his parents should be evaluated. treat it as negligence.

That's my point. That's why I said indoctrinate and not educate. This shit is way more on the parent's than schools. The idea that schools are responsible for teaching kids how to eat is symptomatic of the problem tbh.

[Wild Cobra]

McDonalds (and junk food in general) exists in every country, including those without the strict standard like the FDA, yet America leads the pack on obesity by a wide margin:

http://www.diet-blog.com/archives/world-obesity.gif
I don't think it has as much to do with access to unhealthy food as it has to do with lack of access to healthy food. Almost everything we have here is process, pasteurized, irradiated, or something else that kills all the natural enzymes.

[ElNono]

I don't think it has as much to do with access to unhealthy food as it has to do with lack of access to healthy food. Almost everything we have here is process, pasteurized, irradiated, or something else that kills all the natural enzymes.

What kind of healthy food the rest of the world has access to that the US doesn't?

I frankly can't think of a country I've visited that didn't have the same kind of food than here (including pasteurized, processed food).

[boutons_deux]

"healthy food the rest of the world has access to that the US doesn't"

As US BigFood/FastFood marketing and BigFood industrial food-like substances spread to other countries, those countries are also beginning to struggle with overweight and obesity.

A big difference is that portions, at home and at restaurants/fast food are enormous compared to traditional portions in other countries. The "French paradox" is baloney. French women eat everything, but much, much smaller portions. And of course, there's much more social stigma attached to being fat in France than in USA, where being fat is the accepted norm.

[SA210]

"have a family history"

genetic defects aren't the problem.

A family of fatties is most often not genetic, but the parent's fat and lifestyle "infecting" the children.

The biggest health problems US has today are self-inflicted, personal decisions:

smoking: 350K smoking lung cancer deaths/year.

overweight and obesity (eat too much and too much industrial food-like substances) leading to complications in nearly all other diseases and medical procedures, and leading to strokes, heart disease, diabetes, and very probably brain dysfunction in later years.

In the last year or so, there have been reports about how both the man's and woman's health and diet affects the quality of egg, the sperm, and health of the fetus, even PERMANENTLY.

Great post! Cancer being one of those diseases.

[vy65]

The biggest health problems US has today are self-inflicted, personal decisions:

smoking: 350K smoking lung cancer deaths/year.

overweight and obesity (eat too much and too much industrial food-like substances) leading to complications in nearly all other diseases and medical procedures, and leading to strokes, heart disease, diabetes, and very probably brain dysfunction in later years.

In the last year or so, there have been reports about how both the man's and woman's health and diet affects the quality of egg, the sperm, and health of the fetus, even PERMANENTLY.

All of which are effective forms of population control tbh.

[Agloco]

All of which are effective forms of population control tbh.

Unfortunately they're not conducive to lowering health care costs.........

Most health issues arise from following the herd so to speak. Most often people will simply eat what others around them do. The likelihood increases with time.

[ElNono]

Most health issues arise from following the herd so to speak. Most often people will simply eat what others around them do. The likelihood increases with time.

Is that just a guess from observation or ?

[boutons_deux]

Is that just a guess from observation or ?

There have been a couple of studies showing that overweight and obesity are "contagious", in the sense that if your friends or co-workers are fat or obese, your probability of being fat/obese is higher, even when the friend is at a distance. The average black or Latino in SA, of all ages, is an irrefutable observation that fat/obesity is "contagious".

Imagine that effect when one or both parents exemplify overweight/obesity AND feed their diet to their kids.

Cows and people will eat pretty much whatever they're fed, and that is whatever makes the most profits for the food producer. The taxpayer-subsidized Standard American Diet, S.A.D, eaten by herds of Human-Bovines, is clearly pathogenic.

[ElNono]

Yeah, I found this:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa066082

Interesting

[Agloco]

Is that just a guess from observation or ?

Over a decade of personal observation. Also, herd behavior is quite a well chronicled phenomenon.

[boutons_deux]

The Most Powerful Response To The 'Let Him Die' Party


http://front.moveon.org/the%2Dmost%2Dpowerful%2Dresponse%2Dto%2Dthe%2Dlet% 2Dhim%2Ddie%2Dparty%2D2/?id=31264-4330971-ElRGuHx

====

most tea baggers see themselves as Christ-centered "Christians" full of love and compassion for their fellow man (well, as long as he is lucky, white, American, rich, "Christian")

[Th'Pusher]

The Most Powerful Response To The 'Let Him Die' Party


http://front.moveon.org/the%2Dmost%2Dpowerful%2Dresponse%2Dto%2Dthe%2Dlet% 2Dhim%2Ddie%2Dparty%2D2/?id=31264-4330971-ElRGuHx

====

most tea baggers see themselves as Christ-centered "Christians" full of love and compassion for their fellow man (well, as long as he is lucky, white, American, rich, "Christian")

Steve likely smoked and is responsible for his own death.

[Wild Cobra]

The Most Powerful Response To The 'Let Him Die' Party


http://front.moveon.org/the%2Dmost%2Dpowerful%2Dresponse%2Dto%2Dthe%2Dlet% 2Dhim%2Ddie%2Dparty%2D2/?id=31264-4330971-ElRGuHx

====

most tea baggers see themselves as Christ-centered "Christians" full of love and compassion for their fellow man (well, as long as he is lucky, white, American, rich, "Christian")
There are problems with her story. You simply cannot replace an older person with a younger one. There has to be just cause because the laws protect against it. Maybe he was too unhealthy to competently do his job already.

I wonder what we would find if you could dig up the whole truth behind her story.