Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trump Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said that people with Type 2 diabetes don't deserve to have health insurance because they gave themselves diabetes.
To deny type 2 diabetics their health insurance would put would put extreme financial hardship on many millions of Americans afflicted with the disease, werent you righties making a big deal about death panels not too long ago? and now you are advocating the very course of action you attributed to the previous admin. what a bunch of hypocrites.
Both are the deleterious results of one's own bad choices. 90% of those with diabetes are overweight/obese. Being overweight/obese is a choice.
It's called self-medicating by the uninsured. Obviously the uninsured need the same access to safe pharmaceuticals as the insured, so help them get off the unsafe stuff.
Trump Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said that people with Type 2 diabetes don't deserve to have health insurance because they gave themselves diabetes.
Isn't this the logical outcome of Republican policies which have left so many Americans uninsured for so long? Diabetes has a long, er, gestation period, if you will.
I don't think type two diabetics should have no coverage at all... but it's high time we started holding patients accountable for certain lifestyle decisions, especially if we are moving in the direction of universal healthcare. Healthcare providers are already being made responsible for the progress of patients' type two diabetes via reimbursement rates... yet they can't be there to say "No!!" in the middle of the night when a diabetic patient dives into the cupboard for the Oreos. I'd rather healthcare spending go toward patients with conditions that they have limited or no control over - cancer, asthma, type 1 diabetes, etc. And prevention.
It's called self-medicating by the uninsured. Obviously the uninsured need the same access to safe pharmaceuticals as the insured, so help them get off the unsafe stuff.
Overeating isn't necessarily the result of self-medication. Much of it is just gluttony. The USDA OIG agrees, as well, and has recommended a reduction in means-tested Federal free food program benefits. But those who can only emote and can't think rationally scream bloody murder when that's proposed even though doing so would benefit the poor.
Oh, I understand it perfectly well. People want to be subsidized for the consequences of their own bad choices.
And you seem to be unaware that not one State had a unanimous vote for Trump. Given that, you have to look at the demographic statistics of those with Diabetes. The demographic groups that have the highest rates of Diabetes are those which were least likely to vote for Trump.
Isn't this the logical outcome of Republican policies which have left so many Americans uninsured for so long? Diabetes has a long, er, gestation period, if you will.
It's largely the result of bad eating habits which also result in obesity. 90% of those with Diabetes are overweight/obese. One doesn't need insurance to recognize that oneself is overweight/obese.
I don't think type two diabetics should have no coverage at all... but it's high time we started holding patients accountable for certain lifestyle decisions, especially if we are moving in the direction of universal healthcare. Healthcare providers are already being made responsible for the progress of patients' type two diabetes via reimbursement rates... yet they can't be there to say "No!!" in the middle of the night when a diabetic patient dives into the cupboard for the Oreos. I'd rather healthcare spending go toward patients with conditions that they have limited or no control over - cancer, asthma, type 1 diabetes, etc. And prevention.
The demographic groups that have the highest rates of Diabetes are those which were least likely to vote for Trump.
The demographic groups you mention have the lowest total number of cases compared to the majority population which has the largest actual number of people.
Kind of like the fake tax cut.
The beauty of using percentages, you can push a point till the actual numbers show up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
