Government health care Re: Mammograms/PAP tests by OPPYH

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
That's obviously not what they're saying. Going from every year to every other year and not doing it "regularly" doesn't mean ignoring it completely. Doesn't compute.

Sorry you feel that way, but that is exactly what they are recommending.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33973665/ns/health-womens_health/

* Most women in their 40s should not routinely get mammograms.
* Women 50 to 74 should get a mammogram every other year until they turn 75, after which the risks and benefits are unknown. (The task force's previous guidelines had no upper limit and called for exams every year or two.)
* The value of breast exams by doctors is unknown. And breast self-exams are of no value.

......I don't know what the reasoning here is, but this is the first strike in a scary scenario.
Task force...government...health care. These words just don't add up.

And like i said earlier, this is scary stuff.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 19, 2009 7:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

If we ALL took more personal responsibility for our health care, like asking if a test is necessary, deciding if we want to take what the doctor says carte blanche, it would be one of the ways to cut health care costs by not engaging in unnecessary tests and treatments.

Breast cancer doesn't discriminate between healthy and unhealthy. You could be the picture of perfect health, and still develop it. Doctors can help detect cancer early on so you have a chance to beat it.

This "task force" seems to deem mammograms as a complete waste of time if you're under 50(14% of breast cancer occurs under 50 years of age in females).

Nikki, have a heart.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 19, 2009 7:43 PM

GINOBIFFARONI

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

If we ALL took more personal responsibility for our health care, like asking if a test is necessary, deciding if we want to take what the doctor says carte blanche, it would be one of the ways to cut health care costs by not engaging in unnecessary tests and treatments.

Breast cancer doesn't discriminate between healthy and unhealthy. You could be the picture of perfect health, and still develop it. Doctors can help detect cancer early on so you have a chance to beat it.

This "task force" seems to deem mammograms as a complete waste of time if you're under 50(14% of breast cancer occurs under 50 years of age in females).

Nikki, have a heart.

I'm not sure about the US, but the every two year recommendation has been made in Canada as well with the provision that if you have any family history of cancer you stick with once a year...

so with that 14%, taking into account those with a family history that number would actually be even lower.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 11:44 AM

bump

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 4:34 PM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:

This "task force" seems to deem mammograms as a complete waste of time if you're under 50(14% of breast cancer occurs under 50 years of age in females).

Seems like, given those figures, they ARE a complete waste of time for at least 86% of women under 50.

As for "having a heart", try telling that to the 47 million uninsured who can't even GET a mammogram, or any other kind of medical treatment, at any age.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 10:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Seems like, given those figures, they ARE a complete waste of time for at least 86% of women under 50.

Yeah, it's just nearly 6,000 women(40, and under) every year that die from it. No biggie. They probably didn't have much to live for anyhoo.
Also, government guidelines for medical care should become the norm. With the government in charge, I think we'll all sleep a little better at night.

You've changed my mind about all of this. Sometimes it's better to be uncaring, and self centered than worrying about other people woes.

"Are you Alliance?"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 10:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

As for "having a heart", try telling that to the 47 million uninsured who can't even GET a mammogram, or any other kind of medical treatment, at any age.

I wouldn't bother. They are the people that chose the shitty jobs without health insurance, not me.

They made their choices, let them accept the consequences.

Besides most of them are unemployed. By choice. They make the decision to live poverty stricken lives by skimming on welfare. Not because they are disabled, but because they choose NOT to work. Career losers.
Continue to be the champion of these peoples cause, maybe you can follow suite, and become one of them.

You like Ramen noodles, and macaroni and cheese?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 11:07 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"They are the people that chose the shitty jobs without health insurance, not me."

Hello,

I don't think anybody chooses this. I think they end up with this when all their hopes and dreams turn to ash, and they must choose to earn an income, any income, that will allow them to feed themselves and provide themselves with shelter.

Perhaps you've never worked a shitty job. My first job was at Radio Shack, for about minimum wage, and I can assure you I'd much prefer to have been working a better job with better benefits.

I may not necessarily like elements of the government health care plan, but I acknowledge that there are people suffering under our current system. I do not like that, and I can't believe you do, either. How can you be so critical about a deficiency in one place and so nonchalant about a deficiency in another?

Even if you don't support socialized medicine, surely you can sympathize with the sentiments of people who do.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 3:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Seems like, given those figures, they ARE a complete waste of time for at least 86% of women under 50.

Yeah, it's just nearly 6,000 women(40, and under) every year that die from it. No biggie. They probably didn't have much to live for anyhoo.
Also, government guidelines for medical care should become the norm. With the government in charge, I think we'll all sleep a little better at night.

You've changed my mind about all of this. Sometimes it's better to be uncaring, and self centered than worrying about other people woes.

"Are you Alliance?"

Yeah, under the current system it's only 42,000-plus people every year that die from not having insurance. No biggie - they probably didn't have much to live for anyway.

Also industry guidelines for medical care should become the norm. With the insurance industry in charge, I think we'll all sleep a little better at night.

Keep telling us all how you're "a liberal", 'cause that joke NEVER gets old.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 3:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

As for "having a heart", try telling that to the 47 million uninsured who can't even GET a mammogram, or any other kind of medical treatment, at any age.

I wouldn't bother. They are the people that chose the shitty jobs without health insurance, not me.

This, coming from the person who was telling Niki to "have a heart". Priceless. It's not that you don't care about PEOPLE, it's just that you don't give a flying fuck about POOR people. And surely those 47 MILLION uninsured made a conscious choice to have shitty jobs without insurance, right?

Quote:

They made their choices, let them accept the consequences.

Hey, if you're too stupid to figure out for yourself whether to get a mammogram or not, then you deserve what you get, right? Isn't that what you've just said above?

Tell me - do you follow ALL the government guidelines in everything you do every single day? 'Cause if you say yes, you really ARE an Alliance shill. I guess maybe you're not bright enough to figure out that the word "GUIDELINES" does not equate to the words "LAWS" or "RULES". Maybe you can show us all where in any version of any healthcare reform bill it's written into law that you CAN'T get a mammogram more than once every two years. Go, fetch!

Quote:

Besides most of them are unemployed. By choice. They make the decision to live poverty stricken lives by skimming on welfare. Not because they are disabled, but because they choose NOT to work. Career losers.
Continue to be the champion of these peoples cause, maybe you can follow suite, and become one of them.

You like Ramen noodles, and macaroni and cheese?

47 million unemployed? Really? I'll take it as given that you actually have documentation and cites to support those ludicrous claims; you just CHOOSE not to share them with the rest of us, right?

By the way, I think you missed the subtle irony in your claims: if "these people" (as you call them) are really skimming by in their chosen career as "welfare queens", then they do indeed have medical coverage.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 3:40 AM

See, Oppyh, here's the thing: The thing you accuse others of doing - not giving a shit about these 6000 women in need - is THE EXACT SAME THING YOU'RE DOING when you say you don't care about FORTY-SEVEN MILLION AMERICANS in need, and FORTY-TWO THOUSAND who will die.

And then you accuse me of being crass and dismissive about it, by being crass and dismissive.

You want me to argue on your level? Okie-dokey.

I'm a male. I should give two flying shits about mammograms in the first place, WHY, exactly? What does breast cancer have to do with me? And if you've made stupid choices that result in you getting titty cancer, then that's on you, not me. And don't expect me to care, 'cause you made the choice to bring this on yourself.

Is that what you want? Is that the conversation you want to have here? If you want to lash out, don't get your panties in a bunch when someone else lashes out in response.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 6:37 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"I'm a male. I should give two flying shits about mammograms in the first place, WHY, exactly? What does breast cancer have to do with me?"

Hello Mike,

This is an unexpected statement.

Breasts are amazing fantasyland playthings that provide endless hours of entertainment and delight to males everywhere.

I want all the breasts to be safe.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 7:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
"I'm a male. I should give two flying shits about mammograms in the first place, WHY, exactly? What does breast cancer have to do with me?"

Hello Mike,

This is an unexpected statement.

Breasts are amazing fantasyland playthings that provide endless hours of entertainment and delight to males everywhere.

I want all the breasts to be safe.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

Anthony - Too true.

I was exercising what's known as a "response-in-kind", using logic and language of the kind used by Oppyh in her (his?) argument and railing against the poor, which reminded me a bit of Hunter Thompson's meeting Richard Nixon, in which Nixon responded to Thompson's question "But what about the doomed?" by answering, "Fuck the doomed."

Oppyh seems to be advocating the Republican healthcare plan which was exposed by Rep. Allen Grayson, which essentially consists of two mandates:

1) Don't get sick.

2) If you do, die quickly and get out of our way.

So, my response-in-kind about her (his?) concerns about breast cancer: Why should *I* care?

By the way, I'm married for over 20 years, so there's officially only two breasts I'm supposed to care about. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 7:49 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

The recommendations I saw were against routine mammography for women less than 50 years of age. It accepted them for women with a history or risk factors.

I don't have access to their statistic base, but they have a large enough data base to make worthwhile cost-effectiveness analysis. To test every woman in her 40's to catch only 14 % of cases does not seem very efficient, and if 6000 women in their 40's die of breast cancer each year, out of 280 million, that's a very small percentage.

The question is about the reliability of these policy people. Who are they, really? Whose pocket are they in? The anti-insurance reformers? The insurance companies? Obama's? The anti-tax, government waste folks? Are they practicing oncologists? I, personally, need to look into that, as should we all, instead of adopting or rejecting what they reported on the basis of our own pre-prejudices and existing objectives.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 8:14 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

I just looked these folks up. Note the time difference -- took less than 15 minutes of Interent research-- The policy task force members are MD's, either practicing physicians or medical school professors. They are partnered with the AARP, the CDC, and the Surgeon General's office, among others, including AHIP, the American Health Insurance Plans association.

Those opposing them include Fox News ( And what does that say about their opponents' credibility?), and Republicans who who oppose reform and are now saying, " This MIGHT lead to health care rationing."

I gotta admit that the Administration caving in on it LOOKS bad-- but that's a political choice, not a medical one.

My wife, who has a history of hormonal problems, and a family history of cancer, and is in her late 50's, hasn't had one in 5 years, and isn't worried about it. I support her choice.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:04 AM

PARTICIPANT

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

I want all the breasts to be safe.

--Anthony

Amen

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

By the way, I think you missed the subtle irony in your claims: if "these people" (as you call them) are really skimming by in their chosen career as "welfare queens", then they do indeed have medical coverage.

Yup, and you seem to be OK with it, so like I said why don't you quit you're job, and join them?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

By the way, I think you missed the subtle irony in your claims: if "these people" (as you call them) are really skimming by in their chosen career as "welfare queens", then they do indeed have medical coverage.

Yup, and you seem to be OK with it, so like I said why don't you quit you're job, and join them?

Probably for the same reason you don't inject yourself with breast cancer. Just because you can sympathize with someone, that doesn't mean you want to BE that person.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:19 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"Kwicko (Mike) does not give TWO FLYING SHITS about mammograms in the first place"

Hello,

Another thread title change, designed to blatantly and crassly insult an individual.

What infantile impulse is driving wooden-headed anti-intellectual thugs to sabotage someone else's message?

If you have something intelligent or useful to say, then bloody well post it. Do not go back and alter someone else's words. If you can't win by adding your own words in a thoughtful fashion, then you're not a winner.

You're a bloody loser.

And pathetically sad.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Keep telling us all how you're "a liberal", 'cause that joke NEVER gets old.

Here is a concept...try to keep up you brain freeze.

I am a liberal in every sense of the word. Unlike you, when I see a bad idea I speak out against it. recommending someone not to get checked for cancer if you're under 50 is a pretty fucking stupid idea.
Just because you're a democrat doesn't mean you have to believe every thing the administration purposes is a brilliant idea.

Think outside the box. Or continue to be a lemming slave with low mentality. Get an idea of what you think is right, take that thought and believe in it. it's really simple.

Or put you're brain on autopilot, don't think for yourself and put all of you're trust and admiration in something you will never be a part of.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
This, coming from the person who was telling Niki to "have a heart". Priceless. It's not that you don't care about PEOPLE, it's just that you don't give a flying fuck about POOR people. And surely those 47 MILLION uninsured made a conscious choice to have shitty jobs without insurance, right?

Oh you see I wasn't being serious. I just thought I'd post a crass comment like the one originally posted. If you had anyone you loved die from breast cancer, maybe you'd be upset with you're tacky response also.

Liberal-Liberals generally believe in neutral government, in the sense that it is not for the state to determine personal values.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:34 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
This, coming from the person who was telling Niki to "have a heart". Priceless. It's not that you don't care about PEOPLE, it's just that you don't give a flying fuck about POOR people. And surely those 47 MILLION uninsured made a conscious choice to have shitty jobs without insurance, right?

Oh you see I wasn't being serious. I just thought I'd post a crass comment like the one originally posted. If you had anyone you loved die from breast cancer, maybe you'd be upset with you're tacky response also.

Liberal-Liberals generally believe in neutral government, in the sense that it is not for the state to determine personal values.

Hello,

If you are not serious about your point of view, it will be difficult for people to seriously understand you.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Keep telling us all how you're "a liberal", 'cause that joke NEVER gets old.

Here is a concept...try to keep up you brain freeze.

I am a liberal in every sense of the word. Unlike you, when I see a bad idea I speak out against it. recommending someone not to get checked for cancer if you're under 50 is a pretty fucking stupid idea.
Just because you're a democrat doesn't mean you have to believe every thing the administration purposes is a brilliant idea.

Think outside the box. Or continue to be a lemming slave with low mentality. Get an idea of what you think is right, take that thought and believe in it. it's really simple.

Or put you're brain on autopilot, don't think for yourself and put all of you're trust and admiration in something you will never be a part of.

The only "liberal" thing about you is "you're" (!) liberal abandonment of decent writing skills in trying to point out someone else's "low mentality".

Work on that, then get back to me. If you want to impugn someone's intelligence, it bolsters your case if you can actually do so without revealing yourself to be of much lower intelligence.

Now, if I were a woman, and had a family history of breast cancer, I reckon I'd get myself checked regularly, no matter what the government guidelines said. Likewise, if I knew I was at risk, I'd likely get checked regularly no matter what my INSURANCE COMPANY said, too.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Hello,

If you are not serious about your point of view, it will be difficult for people to seriously understand you.

--Anthony

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Now, if I were a woman, and had a family history of breast cancer, I reckon I'd get myself checked regularly, no matter what the government guidelines said. Likewise, if I knew I was at risk, I'd likely get checked regularly no matter what my INSURANCE COMPANY said, too.

There, now was that so hard?

Congratulations that is the kind of response that I was looking for.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:41 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Hello,

If you are not serious about your point of view, it will be difficult for people to seriously understand you.

--Anthony

Hello,
Eat shit and die mother fucker

Hello,

I think I understand what you are about now.
Please stop tampering with thread titles.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

I think I understand what you are about now.
Please stop tampering with thread titles.

--Anthony

I didn't touch the thread title

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:44 AM

PARTICIPANT

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Keep telling us all how you're "a liberal", 'cause that joke NEVER gets old.

Here is a concept...try to keep up you brain freeze.

I am a liberal in every sense of the word. Unlike you, when I see a bad idea I speak out against it. recommending someone not to get checked for cancer if you're under 50 is a pretty fucking stupid idea.
Just because you're a democrat doesn't mean you have to believe every thing the administration purposes is a brilliant idea.

Think outside the box. Or continue to be a lemming slave with low mentality. Get an idea of what you think is right, take that thought and believe in it. it's really simple.

Or put you're brain on autopilot, don't think for yourself and put all of you're trust and admiration in something you will never be a part of.

In Defense of Mike, maybe he was drinking when he posted that junk

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:44 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

I think I understand what you are about now.
Please stop tampering with thread titles.

--Anthony

I didn't touch the thread title

Hello,

If that's true, I'm glad to hear it.

"Eat shit and die mother fucker"

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:48 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Hello,

If that's true, I'm glad to hear it.

"Eat shit and die mother fucker"

--Anthony

Was that necessary?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:50 AM

PARTICIPANT

Ok guys, it stopped being funny a long time ago.
Thread title is supposed to read ' Government health care'
If this continues I recommend a carpet banning (myself included)

The firefly board is supposed to be a friendly community and don't dragged down by this troll kingdom schoolboy crap

PARTICIPANT
SIGNING OFF FROM A VERY CRAP AFTERNOON OF POSTING

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:51 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Hello,

If that's true, I'm glad to hear it.

"Eat shit and die mother fucker"

--Anthony

Was that necessary?

Hello,

It was your quote, sir. I simply copied and pasted it into my post.

Noting that you edited your original statement, I am now certain that you are a villain in this little drama.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

The only "liberal" thing about you is "you're" (!) liberal abandonment of decent writing skills in trying to point out someone else's "low mentality".

Not true, and there is nothing wrong with my writing skills.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by participant:
Ok guys, it stopped being funny a long time ago.
Thread title is supposed to read ' Government health care'
If this continues I recommend a carpet banning (myself included)

The firefly board is supposed to be a friendly community and don't dragged down by this troll kingdom schoolboy crap

I try to be as polite as possible, but sometimes I get a little upset.

Kwicko, sorry to bug you. You're good people.

AnthonyT please accept my apology.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:55 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

The only "liberal" thing about you is "you're" (!) liberal abandonment of decent writing skills in trying to point out someone else's "low mentality".

Not true, and there is nothing wrong with my writing skills.

Hello,

Only with your morality, judgment, and intentions.

--Anthony

Edited to add: I see you have inserted an apology. If you are genuine in your remorse, I accept the apology and am prepared to move on.

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 11:30 AM

I have a query - probably because I am too lazy and not interested enough to trawl through a whole lot of articles on American health care reforms....if you wanted one at 45 because you are a mammogram freak or you are worried, could you pay for one yourself?

Secondly, what do insurance companies currently provide for in the way of routine mammograms?

Here in Australia, the recommendation is for over 50 as well - any younger and you'd pay the full cost unless you had a history etc

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 11:46 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
"I'm a male. I should give two flying shits about mammograms in the first place, WHY, exactly? What does breast cancer have to do with me?"

Hello Mike,

This is an unexpected statement.

Breasts are amazing fantasyland playthings that provide endless hours of entertainment and delight to males everywhere.

I want all the breasts to be safe.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

I really hope you're being facetious, because otherwise that's a disgusting amount of sexism you just spewed, Anthony.

I think the reason men should care about breast cancer is because it has the potential to kill women they love, or because it can kill so many human beings in general (after all, 1 out of 100 breast cancer cases are in men*), which is a tragic loss of life. Not because boobs are hawt (so what about the women whose lives are saved by having mastectomies, and therefore don't have hawt boobs to play with anymore? should men not care about that? and what about not-hawt boobs? I guess you don't care about saving them.).

Plus, the way you stated it "I want all the breasts to be safe," disembodies them from the people whose breasts they are, which is dehumanizing and gross.

However, if it's the case you really were being facetious, then you failed to differentiate yourself from the genuine campaigns that espouse the same logic you did here:

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/09/if-ladiez-dont-have-boo
bs-how-will-we.html
http://contexts.org/socimages/2008/05/12/save-the-ta-tas-fight-breast-
cancer

* http://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/guide/breast-cancer-men

PS: I think it was actually participant who changed the thread title. If you click "reply" to people's posts, you can see what title they used. For example, I can see that it was Niki who changed the title to "Government health care," because she's the first person who used it, and then when other people respond to her that carries the title over, and so on, unless they change it.

A witty saying proves nothing. - Voltaire

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 11:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
I think the reason men should care about breast cancer is because it has the potential to kill women they love, or because it can kill so many human beings in general (after all, 1 out of 100 breast cancer cases are in men*), which is a tragic loss of life. Not because boobs are hawt (so what about the women whose lives are saved by having mastectomies, and therefore don't have hawt boobs to play with anymore? should men not care about that? and what about not-hawt boobs? I guess you don't care about saving them.).

Like I said maybe the people who don't give a hoot about breast cancer, or mammograms might think very differently if their wife or mother suffered and lost their lives because of it.

Government run health care won't work, as what were seeing is the first stage in cost cutting measures that will cost thousands of lives.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 12:16 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello YinYang,

You brought up some poignant arguments and complaints here, and I wanted to address them.

Of course I was going for a little poke in the ribs and a laugh with Mike there.

I'd like to add that my primary concern with all types of illness is the loss of valuable human beings, women or not, cancer or not, breasts or not.

However, I have to present some disagreement with parts of your complaint.

I do find breasts attractive. All breasts, generally. I also find women's legs and derrieres attractive. And lips.

I enjoy my wife's body as though it was a playground. I revel in it. I enjoy touching it, rubbing it, and generally doing all sorts of romance related activities with it.

I do not know why I find a woman's body attractive, or why particular parts of a woman's body excite me. I suspect part of it is cultural (what is concealed becomes alluring) and I suspect part of it is biological (I am programmed to propagate the species, and I am given drives and tastes that support that mandate.)

While I do not think a woman missing a breast becomes a less valuable person, I would be lying if I said it made her no less attractive to me. I suspect if I was given the choice between two nearly identical women- one disfigured and one not disfigured- I would choose the not-disfigured woman. I don't consider it particularly sexist to respond to my conceptions of beauty.

You expressed some concern about single breasted or no breasted women. What if society as a whole deselected them for desirability?

I consider this problem somewhat preposterous. From experience, I can tell you that when I fall in love with someone, my perceptions of them become greatly changed, and I find them desirable in ways and to degrees that would have seemed impossible beforehand.

I have enjoyed romance with perhaps eight women in my lifetime, and only two of them could be described as universally desirable in terms of society's generic view of beauty. Yet my most fantastic romantic experiences have been with the remaining six, not the 'desirable' two. A good personality is the pathway to friendship and eventually love, and once love enters the picture, classic dimensions of beauty matter little. I dare say if such was not the case, I would not have wooed even eight women in my life!

I have heard concerns like yours before, YinYang. Concerns about the objectification of women, the dissection of them to desirable parts, and the treatment of women as sex objects. I can understand why someone might have such concerns, but I will tell you what I think is normal and correct.

I think it's normal that if I am a heterosexual male, that I find the opposite sex physically attractive, and capable of engendering a physical and lusty response within me.

I think that in order to find the opposite sex physically attractive, it is normal that I should find aspects of their physique arousing.

I think it is normal that when I give over my emotional devotion to someone, that I find their physique, any physique, much more alluring due to the filter of the human mind and heart.

I think it is normal to treat all human beings as having equal worth, whether you find them physically attractive and alluring or not. Only a person's actions, inactions, and expressions of self should modify this base position.

If you find any of this sexist, then I apologize for injuring your sensibilities. I think it's all quite fantastic.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 12:24 PM

FREMDFIRMA

He was being facetious, and snarking at some of the ridiculousness of a couple of the "arguments" at the same time, Ying.

Me, personally, I think any healthcare related decision oughta damn well be up to the person who's health it is - don't you ?

Personal choice and risk assessment should be the primary foundation of any medical procedure, and to do it any other way offers too many opportunities for corruption or exploitation.

Your health, YOUR choice.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 12:29 PM

Anthony,

It wasn't me who posted any complaints - I got that you were being facetious

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 12:33 PM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

Ahem. (I'm yinyang, not Magonsdaughter.)

I wasn't saying that I find your attraction to breasts problematic. Heterosexual men, as well as gay women and bisexual people, do tend to find breasts attractive, and I have no problem with that. (Otherwise I would have to have a big problem with myself first, before criticizing anyone else.)

What I do have a problem with is framing the fight against breast cancer solely in terms of this attraction. Women are more valuable than the beauty that people may find in their breasts, and there are far better reasons to support breast cancer awareness and prevention than because of a self-centered desire to want to have breasts to look at and play with. In fact, I would think such a seemingly nice and intelligent man such as yourself would value the prevention of deaths from breast cancer, even if that prevention meant diminishing attractiveness via the loss of someone's breasts.

I also have a problem with this framing because it seems to me to be the only widespread case involving cancer where people cite this type of desire, to save a body part because it is sexy. There is no, for example, "Save the Penis" campaign. Now, partly this may be because penile cancer isn't as widespread, and partial or full amputation of the penis is probably a rarer treatment. But, part of it I think has to do with the fact that we don't as often objectify men in the way we objectify women, by erasing their existence as people and reducing them to the body parts we find desirable. And, rather than demand equality and start a campaign like "Save the Penis," I would rather eliminate campaigns like "Save the Boobs," because I find the sort of objectification in this instance does a disservice to us all.

ETA: I had hoped that you were kidding, Anthony, but, again, it read to me exactly like the real campaigns that use this type of logic that I honestly couldn't tell the difference. So, I thought it was worthwhile to address it, because I think you're better than that.

A witty saying proves nothing. - Voltaire

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 12:33 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

My apologies, it was Yinyang who complained. I shall correct my response.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 12:42 PM

It's interesting reading a little research into this topic. I was wrong, you can actually get free mammograms after 40 in Oz, it's just not recommended.

There are appears to be some controversy over the usefulness of having regular mammograms when you are younger, because of the inaccuracies of the procedure. It misses 30% of present cancers, and in addition there is a high rate of an incorrect positive result, leading to further invasive and unnecessary biopsies. Other screening and diagnostic tools such as MRI's and ultrasound have better result rates.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 12:54 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello YinYang,

I apologize for getting the name wrong. And I apologize to MagonsDaughter too.

I think there are aspects of the Breast Cancer campaign that may be working against your sensibilities, and you may not realize it.

Most people can appreciate a pair of female breasts. I personally enjoy thinking of breasts in various sizes, shapes, ages, and perkiness. It is an enjoyable feeling to imagine a naked woman, breasts in particular. Endorphins are released which make us happy when we think about such things. It is a positive experience.

Thinking of human beings sickening and dying is not a positive experience. It makes us sad, it makes us uncomfortable. We prefer not to think about it. When the various Feed the Hungry commercials come onto the television showing skeletal children with distended bellies, I find a swelling of sympathy within me followed by a great discomfort and a desire to see and think about something else. We are not, as a species, programmed to pursue such imagery or sustain thoughts about it. If anything, such imagery invokes a desire to separate oneself from it.

Accepting these realities, you have to decide what your goal is. If your goal is to find a solution to the problem of breast cancer, and to motivate people to donate money and effort to solve the problem, you should pursue the best route to victory.

Women are very very fortunate that breasts are so desirable and so programmed into the culture and biology of people who might enjoy sex with women. This means that rather that relying on an ad campaign that promotes breast health by showing sick, dying, distressed human beings, you can tap into something that makes people feel good.

If people feel good about something, they pursue it with gusto and happily think about it often. They will buy products that make them think about it. They will donate money to it. They will give you exactly what you want.

I believe it is for this reason that Breast Cancer is funded to a greater degree than other forms of cancer. NCI spent 572 million on Breast Cancer research, about doubling the second runner up: Prostate Cancer.

I am glad that Breast Cancer is getting such great publicity. I am glad for every pink product and every 'save the boobs' shirt. I am thankful that such a horrible cancer can also be spun to make people want to think about it and want to donate to it and not shrink away or look away in horror. Where some fella might glumly donate some spare change to solve Leukemia, that same fella might joyfully slap down twenty bucks or more to proudly claim their defense of their favorite female body parts.

This isn't a problem. It's a solution.

I wish the prostate was sexier. Unfortunately, I don't even like thinking about my prostate because of the invasive exams associated with it.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 1:01 PM

Aha! Welcome to a woman's world. Invasive Exams R US!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 1:05 PM