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.
rubbish, you are excluding the millions saved from avoiding taking drugs that would kill them, or do nothing to help them.
the efficacy matters and safety matters too. There is a reason we crash test cars, water heaters, TV's too.
What if TV's without leaded glass were sold for the last 50 years....
What if anyone could make a car and "let" the market decide.
what if i could give you a drug that sent you wild and you killed people who would not have taken the drug.
If you got your way within no time at all you would be first in line crying about you were cheated...
libertarianism is simply the acceptable face of anarchy. I wish you guys really could get a country going , just as long as you did not have access to anything that might hurt neighboring nations.
There are programs to help people who can't afford their prescriptions. I have no particular "love lost" for the drug companies, but you can't blame all the problems with prescription drugs on drug safety.
Of course I considered the cost of what we pay for health care. That was the whole point of the comparison. The only real people benefiting from single payer healthcare are the 10% that don't get their insurance from the government or their employers. You might want to actually read what I wrote in its entirety (which includes multiple posts) before replying.
Admittedly, in reading through a few more posts on this thread, it's amazing to me how much BS is spewed on the Internet. There are so many disingenous statements, I don't even know where to start. I did find the comment regarding life expectancy to be the biggest joke, since organizations like the World Health Organization seem to think its okay to include car fatalities and homicides to judge the success of medical care and its relation to life expectancy.
There is no sense in regurgitating all the facts that have put these misnomers to bed. People that believe in single payer healthcare are just like a religious cult. There's nothing you can say to them to change their minds so it's not worth arguing about. They are simply a group of close minded, intellectually rigid people.
Ok, let's consider infant mortality then. So where do we, the nation with highest healthcare spending per capita, stand in that table? here is a hint, go past Cuba, and keep going a bit longer.
Ok, let's consider infant mortality then. So where do we, the nation with highest healthcare spending per capita, stand in that table? here is a hint, go past Cuba, and keep going a bit longer.
rubbish, you are excluding the millions saved from avoiding taking drugs that would kill them, or do nothing to help them.
the efficacy matters and safety matters too. There is a reason we crash test cars, water heaters, TV's too.
What if TV's without leaded glass were sold for the last 50 years....
What if anyone could make a car and "let" the market decide.
what if i could give you a drug that sent you wild and you killed people who would not have taken the drug.
If you got your way within no time at all you would be first in line crying about you were cheated...
libertarianism is simply the acceptable face of anarchy. I wish you guys really could get a country going , just as long as you did not have access to anything that might hurt neighboring nations.
What great problems occurred between 1940 and 1962?
There are programs to help people who can't afford their prescriptions. I have no particular "love lost" for the drug companies, but you can't blame all the problems with prescription drugs on drug safety.
Thalidomide was a safety problem, not an efficacy problem. Clue: The tragedy happened in Europe, not America, before we had the Kefauver-Harris amendment.
AZT was all they had. As your link states--there was nothing else. Of course that was denied by the FDA.
Thalidomide was a safety problem, not an efficacy problem. Clue: The tragedy happened in Europe, not America, before we had the Kefauver-Harris amendment.
AZT was all they had. As your link states--there was nothing else. Of course that was denied by the FDA.
Yes, I know that (about Thalidomide). Most people who rage on about the FDA bring up Thalidomide, but it was never approved in the US. Didn't I already say that? Didn't I show some pictures of German "Thalidomide babies"? Kefauver was introduced to avoid another such problem.
Yes, I know that (about Thalidomide). Most people who rage on about the FDA bring up Thalidomide, but it was never approved in the US. Didn't I already say that? Didn't I show some pictures of German "Thalidomide babies"? Kefauver was introduced to avoid another such problem.
Yes....finally it was approved as beta blockers were in the 1960's after tens of thiousand's of American deaths.
Thalidomide was a safety concern, not an efficacy concern. The Kefauver_Harris Amendment has killed many more than it has saved and pushed prescription drug prices to exorbitant levels.
I got the bill recently for my DD's "free" physical exam. Around $60.
Won't exactly break the bank, but why must this program continue to make claims that are false? Well, tomorrow I must schedule my DS for his free physical exam.
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.
