Know what's kind of funny...
- 07-24-2006, 03:33 PM
Originally Posted by BigVrunga
- 07-24-2006, 04:24 PM
True, and most people arent proactive enough about their health, which leads to rising health care costs across the board. But still, unless your job pays for it, health insurance for a small family can cost upwards of $1500 a month...consider median household income in America is ~$45k. That's almost half the average family's gross yearly income just for insurance.
Of course, consider the cost of major surgery and a lengthy stay in the hospital, and eve $2k/month doesnt sound that bad. And there are government subsidary funds like Medicare, etc.
Still, the cost of health care in this country makes health care benefits a primary motivator when Im looking for an employer. Most people who go to college, get a corporate job, etc wont have to worry about it.
I think about my Dad though, he was recently out of work for nearly 7 months when he got laid off from his job. Him and my mom were down to taking 1/2 doses of their medication, their doc was giving them free samples to help with the costs.(Dad is Type2 diabetic and Mom has thyroid issues)...I was about to start helping them out and my Dad made it happen and got what could be the best job he ever had, so its cool now but still...really had me worried.
07-24-2006, 04:33 PM
You have to have a lot of ducks in a row in order for health insurance to not only be afforded but kept when something happens. I pay 400 a month and my part has now gone upwards of 2k on my cost for the bloodwork, mri's and surgery associated to the tumors.
07-24-2006, 05:29 PM
Originally Posted by Jayhawkk
you my friend were the exception i was talking about. most people can but some people with major health issues really can not
bv, you are completely correct about taking small measures to maintain your health so that so many health issues can be avoided, ie diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, heart attacks, and more.
paying 20-40 a month is much cheaper than high insurance costs....
07-24-2006, 05:44 PM
Here is the case for "most families":
"This year, the average annual premium for family coverage hit $10,880, with employers paying an average of 74% of that cost and workers paying the rest. Workers this year paid on average $2,713 toward family coverage, or $1,094 more than they paid five years ago, the survey found."
USATODAY.com - Average family health policy nears $11,000
In most cases no health insurance is a problem because the family puts their priorities elsewhere. $225/month is what most families would need to dedicate toward their health insurance, and I'm sure most of you have seen most adults driving their kids around in $35k cars (a 600 to 800/month car payment).
There are plenty of great options for entrepeneurs and other people without benifits afforded to them by employers, I'm actually reading quite a bit on the subject right now. People CAN make their families health affordable, IF they care to go out of their way and LOOK and PRIORITIZE.
I'm not saying there isn't a problem with insurance companies RAPING us, I'm just saying that more people should be prioritizing on their families health instead of their material goods--which is not the case. I still believe that we need to make major reform in the insurance industry.
07-24-2006, 06:50 PM
I agree mrs. gimpy. I think the family needs to decide priorities as well and put forth their own effort in securing their health.
Unfortunately more and more employers are offering less or stop coverage because of the costs.
07-25-2006, 03:46 AM
Just got done checking out our insurance. For an A grade PPO we'd be looking at a $1,500 deductible with $100/month. That is, $0 for hospital stays of unlimited duration, $0 outpatient surgery, $6,000,000 total hospital coverage, and much more than I could name off without having the paperwork in front of me.
For standard HMO you're looking at much closer to $0 D and $50/month. That's what many businesses are going to offer anyway. Its not that horrible. Like Gimpy said...its all about prioritizing. If you don't do this early and find out you've got an illness / disease while you don't have insurance, YOU'RE SCREWED FOR LIFE!
We got on this b/c my mom was telling Gimpy she was going to work a second job so she could get insurance. Gimpy said she'd get her a good insurance. My mom now has a PPO, $0 deduc. and about $100/month. that's great insurance and she won't be looking for a second job.
Prioritizing + Research = Success
Average Person = Doesn't do either of the previously mentioned things and...they fail.
07-25-2006, 10:44 AM
07-25-2006, 10:53 AM
07-25-2006, 03:41 PM
Yeah, that Mrs. got all that info for "me" lol. she's a nutcase when it comes to financial planning / prep.
07-26-2006, 10:23 PM
Thats one huge difference between Canada and the U.S. -- health care. Jayhawkk -- you'd have no worries here -- its all gov't funded and so very low stress. The down side of that is that like Mrs. Gimpy is saying, obeisity and preventable diabetes -- issues that can be controllable are paid by the gov't too, so health care is more expensive for all of us overall . . . a healthy person pays in allot more than they'll get out . . . anywho you probably knew thatOriginally Posted by Mrs. Gimpy!
07-26-2006, 11:01 PM
The the other problem in Canada is getting emergency services and major operations done...get in line and bend over You still need private coverage up there if you want good coverage, and for the amount of money you pay the government up there, most people would be much better off buying good insurance on their own.
08-01-2006, 07:52 PM
I am one of those "whackos" who believe life begins at conception, I wasn't aware of my whackiness but that's probably because dilusion is part of being whacky,I really hate it when people sling mudd at someone based on religious beliefs/moral issues(sorry had to get that off my chest).I am torn over the embryonic stem cell issue, on one hand I do view it as a human life and I would not kill another human being to cure myself, however we are killing unborn humans by the millions in this country with legalized abortion so I think why not use the stem cells as they are already going to die. another thing that bothers me is that I have read that stem cells collected from adults have shown just as much promise in curing disease, if this is true then why the need for embryonic stem cells.Talk about hypocracy how many states in this country have laws on the books that call it murder to kill the fetus of a pregnant woman, yet that same woman can abort(kill) her own fetus and that's perfectly legal.Originally Posted by BioHazzard
08-01-2006, 07:59 PM
The thing is, they're not raising humans just to kill them. They're from aborted fetus'. I don't see the difference between studying an aborted fetus and a full grown adult, with the single small exception that the fetus cannot give consent. In that case, I believe the parents should have the final say.
08-01-2006, 10:30 PM
The biggest difference is the fetus never had an option to live or as you pointed out to give consent.Regardlesss of where you stand on the issue you have to recognize that it is an ethical delemna,and I agree with you the aborted fetus is not coming back but as I stated in the last post I would not benefit from the taking of another human life even if I myself did not do the deed.Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
08-01-2006, 11:52 PM
Good grief! Stem research does not require aborting a fetus to extract the stemcells. That is BS.
We are talking about some freaking zygotes. Fertilized eggs that have started to multiply, people! Nobody is talking about aborting fetus to extract stemcells, for god's sake. We are talking about in vitro research. It isn't about chopping up unborn babies! People are bellyaching about destruction of life. For god's sake, we are talking about fertilized eggs that have no chance of developing into a full blown human being, unless you implant them into viable wombs and then carried to full term. Implanting fertilized eggs is a hit or miss thing, meaning, plenty of fertilized eggs will simply never develop into fetus. They are simply rejected by the body. Besides, the body rejects naturally fertilized eggs all the time, and the woman doesn't even know she has even being pregnant.
So, where do we draw the line? Are we going to go ape over all those fertilized eggs that are never carried to full term? My freaking goodness!! How many billions of lives have been destroyed over the history of humanity?!
According to some people, destroying these zygotes is tentamount to destruction of human life. Well then, are you going to charge the scientists with murder then? If not, then why not? By your reasoning, it ought to be murder!! Heck, since it is all pre-planned, then it ought to be premeditated murder! Even conspiracy too! What's next? The kid whacking off is going to be charged for destroying potential life as his sperms are alive? For fcvk sake! This is what I mean by nutjob insanity creeping in.
This is all BS. The fundamentalist extremists are accomplishing nothing, except to hand over the lead in this field to foreign researchers. What they are doing, is to hold back American advance in this field. Other countries are not constrained by this BS.
The knowledge we gain from stemcell research may very well embark us on a path that changes the human evolutionary process.
What the fundamentalist extremists are doing to stemcell research parallels to what the Church did to Galileo, Da Vinci and the like. They are throwing their beliefs as road block onto the path of science and advancement. Needless to say, they will fail in their frivolous attempt. They are only hindering American scientists in this field.
BTW, FWIW, I am a staunch Republican, a Roman Catholic, and a neo con. Most of the views I posted in this forum (except in this thread), reflect hardcore right wing conservatism. So, this isn't a case of anti social and anti religious crusade from the left wing extremist camp.
08-02-2006, 03:39 AM
Yeah, no kiddin'. Now that I think about it, I can't believe I ever bought into the idea that "embryonic stem cell research" had anything to do wtih a fetus. It specifically says embryonic. LOL. MMkkay I feel dumb. *Biology major lowers his head in shame*
I guess it was the episode of South Park where Christopher Reeves was cracking open fetus' like coors lights and went from a cripple to superman.
08-02-2006, 07:26 AM
I haven't read this thread yet but just wanted to chime in and say good point BigVrunga and I have had similar thoughts. Actually, I have noticed this type of inconsistency over the years with both parties and their issues/platforms, especially from members of the parties that are on the extreme ends. For example, it cracks me up when I see a car laden with bumper stickers that say something along the lines of "Save the whales" or "Animals have rights too!" or "Save the rainforests!"Originally Posted by BigVrunga
...then, on the same bumper is some sort of pro-choice sticker...
Yeah...OK...save the whales and trees and protect the animals, but kill those unwanted babies...
08-02-2006, 07:42 AM
08-02-2006, 08:31 AM
See, if humans could give birth to Rhinos and other endangered animals, we wouldnt have a problem.Yeah...OK...save the whales and trees and protect the animals, but kill those unwanted babies...
08-02-2006, 09:09 AM
The problem the anti-stem cell people have(from the ones i've spoken and debated with). Believe that the problems will arise from abuse/misuse by the clinics. I see their concern I just don't think it trumps the benefits.
Risk vs. Reward is used all over.
08-02-2006, 10:34 AM
Dude...I'm literally almost falling out of my chair laughing so hard.Originally Posted by BigVrunga
I like the way you think Bro!
08-02-2006, 10:41 AM
08-02-2006, 09:31 PM
08-03-2006, 09:23 PM
why wouldn't you "buy in to the idea" that embryonic stem cell research has everything to with a fetus.you are a biology major so you very well know that zygote,blostocyst,embryo or fetus these are all terms to describe ONE thing a human being,they are some of the different stages of development of a human life,people who favor abortion and stem cell research use these terms to devalue that life but it is a life just the same.A zygote meets all the criteria for life,it grows, it has metabolic processes,it reacts to stimulation and it can(in the case of twinnig) reproduce.I do believe that if our govt. gives it's approval and funding to stem cell research those aborted fetus will be used next trust me that's how it works one unethical step at a time until we are completely desensitized. so I applaude our president for taking this stand.also it's worth saying again that stem cells can be obtained from other sources,umbilical cords,adults etc and can be obtained ethically and with full permission.Embryonic stem cells have also shown a greater proclivity to produce malignancies than adult stem cells.Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
Similar Forum Threads
- By Colochine in forum Post Cycle TherapyReplies: 10Last Post: 07-18-2011, 01:16 PM
- By VolcomX311 in forum MMAReplies: 14Last Post: 02-16-2010, 08:24 PM
- By seanf76 in forum SupplementsReplies: 7Last Post: 02-18-2009, 10:53 AM
- By Hbs6 in forum Nutrition / HealthReplies: 31Last Post: 04-26-2006, 04:13 PM
- By Rhinoman in forum AnabolicsReplies: 37Last Post: 07-07-2003, 04:03 AM