If Californians thought like Texans

[joeprogressive]

I read an article today that talked about all of the embryos that are being created in fertility clinics in Texas that will not be used for stem cell research unless private money is used to pay for it. Then I remembered when California was going through their rolling blackouts, many Texans were saying that they got what they deserved because of all of their environmental protection had caused their energy shortfalls and Texas companies had every right to charge them anything they wanted.

Now that it looks like California will be on the forefront of embryonic research with 3 billion set aside over the next ten years for this type of research. My question, since republicans, many residing in Texas, think health care is a right and not a privilege, how much are you willing to pay California if they come up with a cure for cancer or Alzheimer's? Should they let you suffer until you pay them an exorbitant amount? Final question: How much do you fertility clinic conservatives think it costs to freeze your embryos forever, so you can claim they weren't destroyed? Infinity is a long time.

Of course withholding treatment or a cure is a fairly ridiculous example that I do not condone. However, drug companies do it every day and doctors are forced to do it every day because of our ridiculous health care system that is responsible for 45 million uninsured Americans.

The use of Texans in my example is not to disparage but to prove a point. I am a Texan so I was around to hear my fellow Texans laugh at California for their energy woes.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. drug companies do it every day

"new drugs" many of which have a generic counterpart or a similar drug on which the patent has run out that might be safer, definitely cheaper and oftentimes much more effective.

The medical person is prodded to prescribe the "new drug" by drugco frontmen. This is a criminal act, and the administration looks the other way. They are complicit in the crime against people who are having a hard time affording medications, or are dealing with the wicked side effects of drugs they should not be taking because an older more proven, safer one would work as well if not better for less money.

http://www.citizen.org/congress/reform/drug_industry/index.cfm
Drug Industry:
Prices, Profits and R&D,
Campaign Contributions & Lobbying

(6/23/2004) The Medicare Drug War: Drug Companies and HMOs Led an Army of Nearly 1,000 Lobbyists to Promote Misguided Legislation and Increase Profits

www.drugawareness.org

[joeprogressive]

2. Spending on marketing for drugs has surpassed R&D spending

In the U.S. at least. Pretty sad.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

3. My point is that there should be some sort of legal option available to go

after these knuckleheads when they prescribe a newer more costly drug over a PROVEN SAFE older counterpart, that is cheaper and just as effective. This is IMHO a FRAUD against the consumer, and it many times involves life and death, or at least the start of a process that may worsen matters and lead to death of perhaps incapacitation. This is a bunch of hooey the way they go about hawking "new lamps for old" if you are old enough to remember the days of the pop-eye cartoon.

[joeprogressive]

4. I agree, very fraudulent

n/t

[joeprogressive]

5. mixed my words

sorry, I meant "privilege and not a right" when describing the conservative mentality