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.
I just came back from a young adult cancer conference at one of the best, most well-funded cancer hospitals in the country (Dana-Farber). We sure would appreciate knowing where all of these charities are, because the professional nurse navigators, "professional" patients and caretakers, and nonprofit leaders who specialize in helping young adults (15 - 35ish) with cancer certainly don't know where they are in quantity to help all of us who need it. So please, feel free to share what we all don't know.
Wow, talk about a stereotype. Some are born with the disease despite healthy habits. And even so, I wouldn't feel comfortable just telling your average diabetic that they don't deserve to live.
I'm so glad I'm not an extreme conservative. I don't know how I could live with myself if I had such a mean attitude toward others.
A mean attitude would be loading that card up every month knowing people are going to buy the wrong food in massive quantities and impose no restrictions because that would cost Democrats votes.
Save the haunting violin solo, I've seen these people at Walmart, Kroger and anywhere else a soulless corporation joins hands with a soulless government bureaucracy to feed a deadly addiction in exchange for money and votes.
If it makes me an "extreme conservative" to point out the fact that food stamps issued in excess and without restriction on their use is a threat to the public health, then so be it.
Sigh. You know, I got the Lancet study they reference. And I call bull****.
First off, they are comparing 5-year survival rates, which are more affected by timeliness of diagnosis than any treatment. The US does have strong screening and often finds cancers earlier. Allow me to quote from the Lancet study:
"With regard to the comparison between EUROCARE and US SEER data, the differences in survival were greatest in 2000–02 for the major cancer sites...which probably represents differences in the timeliness of diagnosis."
"That we found a 5-year relative survival for prostate cancer as high as 99·3% in the USA suggests that the increase in survival is largely an artefact from the introduction of screening..."
"With the exception of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, the survival of patients with haematological malignancies was comparable in the US SEER and EUROCARE populations."
"However, when excluding prostate cancer, the survival decreased to 38·1% in Europe and 46·9% in the USA, so that, in men, over half of the difference in survival between Europe and the USA can be attributed to prostate cancer. For women, the 5-year survival for all cancers combined in the USA (62·9%) was comparable with that in some of the wealthiest European countries (from 59·7% in Italy, up to 61·7% in Sweden); the slightly higher survival in the USA was largely due to better survival for colorectal and breast cancer."
Now it is true that America does have somewhat better results in cancer survival than Europe does. Nowhere near as large as you're trying to make out but lumping eastern and western europe together, but still a very good performance.
To go with its poorer performance in amendable mortality, infant mortality, maternal mortality, preventive medicine, organ transplants etc, etc. It is good to have one area that is not failing but doing well. Still, even if you get an "A" in French, if you fail all your other classes you still fail.
Also, the USA data are from SEER, who do not carry any information about insurance status. They only cover about 25 % of the US popualtion, while the European data source, EUROCARE is far more comprehensive.
Oh, and I forgot genius, the millions who are uninsured, what is it now--forty million? I suppose they're happy with their insurance too. 80% my ass.
That 40 million figure, used by the Dems to justify Obamacare, is totally fabricated. More importantly, uninsured is not the same thing as without medical care. Most of the uninsured get treatment through Medicaid. And some would qualify for Medicaid but for whatever reason haven't applied. And how many of the uninsured are illegal aliens? Presumably they have excellent healthcare in whatever country they're from. After all, according to the Marxists on this site, only the U.S. is so heartless as to not care for its citizens.
A mean attitude would be loading that card up every month knowing people are going to buy the wrong food in massive quantities and impose no restrictions because that would cost Democrats votes.
Save the haunting violin solo, I've seen these people at Walmart, Kroger and anywhere else a soulless corporation joins hands with a soulless government bureaucracy to feed a deadly addiction in exchange for money and votes.
If it makes me an "extreme conservative" to point out the fact that food stamps issued in excess and without restriction on their use is a threat to the public health, then so be it.
So have I, but I don't then label all diabetics as being diabetic because they were morbidly obese. I'm smart enough to know that that's not the only way to get diabetes. I'm also usually too busy getting my own groceries and minding my own business to worry about what's in other peoples' carts.
That 40 million figure, used by the Dems to justify Obamacare, is totally fabricated. More importantly, uninsured is not the same thing as without medical care. Most of the uninsured get treatment through Medicaid. And some would qualify for Medicaid but for whatever reason haven't applied. And how many of the uninsured are illegal aliens? Presumably they have excellent healthcare in whatever country they're from. After all, according to the Marxists on this site, only the U.S. is so heartless as to not care for its citizens.
I buy that. 40 million sounds too high, lets shoot for 15 million working, full blooded Americans.
80% of Americans are happy with their healthcare. But of course Republicans couldn't be fighting for them. It has to be that the Republicans are fighting for the private healthcare companies.
I'm just trying to hold my patience in check, when I read stupid comments by 0bama sycophants and ignorant libs, who try to present the absurd notion, that if we do not approve of the federal government taking over control of some aspect of our lives, whether it's health care or schools lunches, that some how it means we just want to see people suffer and die.
That is exactly what you want though, isnt' it? You post on this forum telling millions of unemployed Amercicans without health insurance that their health is insignificant to your own and that they should simply rot away. It simply comes down to greed. You would rather uninsured Americans die than you have to pay taxes for a universal healthcare system.
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.
