Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

"Healthcare" in the US

A "caravan" of Americans is crossing the Canadian border to get affordable medical care

A "caravan" of Americans living with Type 1 diabetes made its way across the U.S. border into Canada over the weekend in search of affordable medical care in a country where they can get the "exact same" life-saving drugs for a dramatically lower price.

"We're on a #CaravanToCanada because the USA charges astronomical prices for insulin that most people can't afford," tweeted caravan member Quinn Nystrom as she shared updates on the journey.

Nystrom was among a group of Minnesotans who piled into cars on Friday to make the 600-mile journey from the Twin Cities to Fort Frances, Ontario, where she said insulin, the hormone patients with Type 1 Diabetes rely on to regulate their blood glucose levels, can be bought for a tenth of what it costs in the U.S.


The caravan was organized as part of a campaign launched under the banner "#insulinforall" to call on the U.S. government to regulate the cost of life-saving drugs, including insulin, and make medication affordable for anyone who needs it.
 
They're saying they want the Government isn't regulating the price in the States, but if that's the case, why is no one heading over to Canada in a big truck, buying a few tonnes of insulin and massively undercutting the US stores? :confused:


Pretty sure it is illegal for Americans to buy Canadian medication.

I think I read an article on that several years ago.
 
Pretty sure it is illegal for Americans to buy Canadian medication.

I think I read an article on that several years ago.

That was my guess.
Sounds like regulation to me.

The FDA and all manner of US Government bodies regulate and redistribute heavily. They're just very selective about who gets the redistribution.
 
Abortions after six weeks will now be illegal in Georgia

Georgia Gov. Kemp has signed into law the state's "fetal heartbeat bill," a piece of legislation that would prohibit abortion after a heartbeat is detected in an embryo. That is something that usually happens between five and six weeks into a women's pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.
The bill appears to be a violation of Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that protects a woman's right to an abortion up until when the fetus is viable, which typically happens between 24 and 25 weeks. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Reproductive Rights have promised to challenge the legislation long before it goes into effect in January 2020.

Basically, that's a total ban on abortion. Six weeks means 4 weeks after conception and only 2 weeks after a missed period - not giving much time to take off work, gather the money and find a doctor and clinic within reasonable distance to have the abortion. That's also assuming one has a regular cycle - and you even know you're pregnant before 6 weeks.

Although it should be tossed out by the court, remember all the Trump/GOP puppets that have been installed in all the courts, including the SCOTUS, so who knows?
 
The ACLU plan to challenge the Georgia law through the courts with a view to overturning it before is due to be implemented in January I think. It's unconstitutional, but these days, that doesn't seem to matter much. :(

Meanwhile, while Georgia says "We'll pass the strictest law, making it virtually impossible for anyone to have an abortion," Ohio says, "Hold my beer!"

Ohio Legislature Considering An Abortion Bill That Is More Restrictive Than The "Heartbeat Bill"

The bill would ban nontherapeutic abortions that include "drugs or devices used to prevent the implantation of a fertilized ovum.”

And Becker says the bill also speaks to coverage of ectopic or tubal pregnancies where the fertilized egg attaches outside of the womb.

“Part of that treatment would be removing that embryo from the fallopian tube and reinserting it in the uterus so that is defined as not an abortion under this bill," Becker explains.
This bill just had its first hearing in committee. If it goes further, supporters, opponents and medical professionals will testify for or against it.

Less than a month ago, Ohio lawmakers passed and Gov. Mike DeWine signed a law that bans abortion as early as six weeks into a pregnancy - at the point a fetal heartbeat can be detected. If this legislation goes through as written, it would go even further.

So, they've passed a law banning abortion after 6 weeks already. Now they want to ban private insurers from covering abortions at an early stage AND ban practically all but barrier forms of contraception, as theoretically the coil and hormonal contractions could stop implantation of a fertilised ovum.

But Christ on a slice of buttered toast, the bill bizarrely requires surgeons to "save" an embryo that attaches outside the uterus and implant it in the uterus . . . a procedure that would be impossible to do without the patient quickly bleeding to death. I think that surely defeats the object of "saving" the embryo. Surely it means though that surgeons wouldn't intervene if an ectopic is diagnosed, else they be prosecuted if the patient survives but the pregnancy doesn't. I. just. can't.

Again, this hasn't been implemented yet and as in Georgia, will be challenged, but who knows what will happen?
 
Okay, so Alabama's joining the party, intent on outdoing Georgia and Ohio with this . . .

Alabama ‘Human Life Protection Act’ (HB 314)

HB 314 would make abortion and attempted abortion felony offenses except in cases where it’s necessary in order to prevent a serious health risk to the pregnant person, or when a pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.

The bill defines “serious health risk” to mean when a pregnant person has a condition that necessitates an abortion to avert their death or to avert serious risk of substantial physical impairment of a major bodily function.

If a physician determines an abortion is necessary due to a medical emergency, a second physician would need to provide confirmation of the determination within 180 days after the abortion is completed.

An abortion performed in violation of this act would be a Class A felony—punishable by 10 years to life in prison.

An attempted abortion performed in violation of this act would be a Class C felony—punishable by one to 10 years in prison.
I'm seeing reports that this would also mean traveling to another state to have an abortion, where it's legal, could get you 10 years to life, as would helping someone make arrangements to travel out of state for an abortion.

 
Interesting angle on states trying to ban abortion by stealth - that it may be in violation of freedom of religion under the First Amendment, as Judaism mandates that abortion must be performed in certain situations.

 
Interesting angle on states trying to ban abortion by stealth - that it may be in violation of freedom of religion under the First Amendment, as Judaism mandates that abortion must be performed in certain situations.


That was a hugely interesting thread, even outside of the context of States banning abortion. I especially enjoyed the little dig at Christians taking the entire bible as being equally important (We don't make Law from Psalms, you idiots).
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRI
I was vaguely aware that Evangelical Christians / right wingers in the US weren't always trying their damnedest to get abortion banned. I remember abortion being the topic of debates in high school speech class or the subject of essays, and they were pretty civil. That was in the late 70s / early 80's.

Seems it was really only Catholics who were dead against Roe v Wade, other denominations seeing it as a private matter. But, then, it was developed into a subject to unite the right, when it was no longer so acceptable to overtly appeal to white supremacy. Was all a part of the rise of the Moral Majority, which Reagan appealed to so successfully. You can follow the breadcrumb trail to the Trump / MAGA phenomenon now, sadly.

The Real Origins of the Religious Right
 
This could have gone in education, but was too lazy to find the thread.

San Francisco parents rally around teacher with cancer who has to pay for her own substitute

A group of parents in San Francisco are rallying around a second-grade teacher with breast cancer who was required to pay for her classroom's substitute teacher while she is on medical leave.

The parents at Glen Park Elementary School were stunned to learn that the teacher's paycheck was being docked $195 for each day she is out ill with the disease.

"I just feel sad that from what I heard, she is a very good teacher and I just feel sad what's going on to her," Narciso Flores-Diaz, a parent, told NBC Bay Area on Wednesday. "Our school is pulling together to help her and to make her feel that she’s not alone."

Teachers in the San Francisco Unified School District get 10 sick days per year, and then another 100 days of extended medical leave time.

But after a teacher uses the 10 sick days and is on the extended leave, the district bills them for the cost of a substitute, in keeping with a little-known provision of California's education code.

Parents at the school have raised more than $13,000 to cover the substitute's pay.

The popular teacher, who has asked the media to withhold her name, also had another backstop -- her union's bank of donated sick days for members in need.

"This is not unique to San Francisco. This is not a district-only rule," San Francisco Unified School District spokeswoman Laura Dudnick said in a statement to NBC News on Thursday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRI
I was vaguely aware that Evangelical Christians / right wingers in the US weren't always trying their damnedest to get abortion banned. I remember abortion being the topic of debates in high school speech class or the subject of essays, and they were pretty civil. That was in the late 70s / early 80's.

Seems it was really only Catholics who were dead against Roe v Wade, other denominations seeing it as a private matter. But, then, it was developed into a subject to unite the right, when it was no longer so acceptable to overtly appeal to white supremacy. Was all a part of the rise of the Moral Majority, which Reagan appealed to so successfully. You can follow the breadcrumb trail to the Trump / MAGA phenomenon now, sadly.

The Real Origins of the Religious Right
Just a further point after following a few discussions on line about new laws restricting abortion mentioned above. I hadn't thought about it, but legislation coming through now will actually make it far harder to get an abortion than before Roe v Wade, with far harsher punishments.

Back then, sometimes doctors or lay people were convicted for performing abortions, but not the women who sought them. If you were poor, you could try to do it yourself, or perhaps go to someone who could "help." My great aunt died of infection after a self-induced abortion during the 1930's. Better off women could either pay a doctor to do a "Therapeutic D & C" or go to Cuba or Sweden to have a safe, legal procedure.

If these state laws get through, you'd be looking at 10 years to life for trying any of these. Seriously, wtf?

Oh, and here's another piece on the racist origins of the anti-abortion movement in the US.

The little-known racist origins of the 'pro-life' abortion movement
 
Last edited:
With great timing, the annual "March For Life" is taking place in London tomorrow (the US one seems to be in January) along with "Lifefest 2019" to kick off the summer festival season I guess. I understand that there will be counter-protests at Parliament Square.
 
I was vaguely aware that Evangelical Christians / right wingers in the US weren't always trying their damnedest to get abortion banned. I remember abortion being the topic of debates in high school speech class or the subject of essays, and they were pretty civil. That was in the late 70s / early 80's.

Seems it was really only Catholics who were dead against Roe v Wade, other denominations seeing it as a private matter. But, then, it was developed into a subject to unite the right, when it was no longer so acceptable to overtly appeal to white supremacy. Was all a part of the rise of the Moral Majority, which Reagan appealed to so successfully. You can follow the breadcrumb trail to the Trump / MAGA phenomenon now, sadly.

The Real Origins of the Religious Right

I am not sure it was "developed" into an issue to unite the right, so much as one of a small number of issues that managed to get people to donate money (guns being another one), which has of course led to a perverse feedback loop as politicians bring in ever more shocking measures to criminalize abortion / legalise guns whilst also talking up the threat of abortion / guns being taken away so the money can keep rolling in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRI
vax.png

No, this is not a photo of a young American girl who got cancer from her vaccines

But the person in the photograph is not a young American girl who got cancer from her vaccines.

A reverse image search on Google led to this report from Canadian broadcaster CTV on August 7, 2018.

The caption of the original photo reads: “Nevaeh Denine, a 9-year-old girl from St. John’s, N.L., who raised thousands of dollars for other kids with cancer, has died after a battle with neuroblastoma”.

St. John’s is a city on Canada’s Newfoundland island.

original.png
 
I am not sure it was "developed" into an issue to unite the right, so much as one of a small number of issues that managed to get people to donate money (guns being another one), which has of course led to a perverse feedback loop as politicians bring in ever more shocking measures to criminalize abortion / legalise guns whilst also talking up the threat of abortion / guns being taken away so the money can keep rolling in.
True - I don't think it was the ONLY issue used to rally the right when it was no longer quite so socially acceptable to oppose de-segregation. When I was growing up in the 70's in quite a rural area, lots of people did have guns - for hunting, farmers had them I guess to shoot vermin, but it was very low key. If other people had guns, or had them on their person, they didn't broadcast it. All this concealed carry and open carry stuff is definitely a new development - a really shitty one.
 
Not surprising, but still :( and :mad:.

60 percent of maternal mortality cases in U.S. are completely preventable, CDC reports

According to the CDC, maternal mortality in the U.S. is being exacerbated largely due to lack of access to health care and missed or late diagnoses — problems that can be attributed at least in part to the country’s continued failure to provide poor women with adequate health insurance coverage, maternity leave or even basic postpartum care.
The U.S. is the world’s only developed country to see its maternal mortality rates increase in recent years, a trend that has correlated strongly with Republican-led efforts to strip women of access to family-planning services and prenatal care. A legal loophole that allows low-income mothers covered by Medicaid to have their health insurance coverage revoked just 60 days after giving birth also appears to be a major contributing factor to the crisis.
African-American women, statistics show, are particularly vulnerable — and die from pregnancy-related causes at three to four times the rate of white women in the U.S.
 
A legal loophole that allows low-income mothers covered by Medicaid to have their health insurance coverage revoked just 60 days after giving birth also appears to be a major contributing factor to the crisis.

why is the coverage revoked?
What type of twister logic makes this a good idea?
 
Just a quick question to gauge opinion - to what degree do posters think the anti-vaxx and anti- proper cancer treatments stuff happening is down to a climate of mistrust in the pharma industry?
 
Just a quick question to gauge opinion - to what degree do posters think the anti-vaxx and anti- proper cancer treatments stuff happening is down to a climate of mistrust in the pharma industry?
I'd actually say other way round. I'm sure it was nearly 25 years ago you started getting the rubbish circulating linking autism to the MMR vaccine, and I don't remember at that time there being much of a concern about "Big Pharma" as such. But I think all the pseudo science about vaccines being dangerous contributed to mistrust in the Pharmaceutical industry, and more recently, mistrust in scientific interest generally.

Even more recently, you have this, which some have gone so far as saying that it's a tool of cyber warfare that results in actual deaths (i.e. not vaccinating children, rejecting life-saving treatments, etc.)

Weaponized Health Communication: Twitter Bots and Russian Trolls Amplify the Vaccine Debate

Conclusions. Whereas bots that spread malware and unsolicited content disseminated antivaccine messages, Russian trolls promoted discord. Accounts masquerading as legitimate users create false equivalency, eroding public consensus on vaccination.

Public Health Implications. Directly confronting vaccine skeptics enables bots to legitimize the vaccine debate. More research is needed to determine how best to combat bot-driven content.

Russia trolls 'spreading vaccine discord'
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom