Congress mandates Viagra coverage? I don’t think you are correct, not that you’ve been correct about anything previously.
Sometimes the spam filter blocks Vi&gra and sometimes it doesn’t. Wierd.
Are employers required to provide Vi&agra? Are they required to provide it with no copay?
Drugs like Vi&gra work to restore normal biological function, often as a result of poor blood flow from medical conditions. Contraceptives are designed to prevent normal biological function. That’s a fundamental difference.
I don’t get the gender wars approach. You think there is a war on women so you hate men or something?
You realize the “other” side doesn’t hate men or women right? and doesn’t base its arguments on gender right?
Let’s hear you hate of men or whatever you are going on about though.
The entire drug pharmacopeia should be marched through and have drugs reassigned “Over-the-counter”. Then the “medical devices” (Compression socks = wtf.).
To the point that “prescription” pretty much means “narcotic” or halucinagenic or psychotropic.
“To the point that “prescription” pretty much means “narcotic” or halucinagenic or psychotropic.”
Yup, but don’t try and tell that to a doctor. They get kinda bi***y when you question their authority.
I would still be experiencing crippling pain if I listened to the “expert”. Good thing I can read the internet and watch med school classes on youtube.
Unless V*agra [spam filter don’t seem to like its real name] coverage is mandated by the State it’s irrelevant.
(And if it is, well, it helps to remind people that unless it’s a gay man using it, women are directly benefiting, too.
Not that that means it should be required – nothing should be, period – but it does point out that even V*agra is not somehow Anti-Women or Only Relevant To Men.
But then it’s ludicrous that the State controls anything but antibiotics with laws restricting issue to the MD or RN monopoly…
As usual, more Government to “save us” from us ends up with problems that they need more layers of Government to solve, rather than throwing them out.)
“Not that that means it should be required – nothing should be, period – but it does point out that even V*agra is not somehow Anti-Women”
/puts on progressive hat: Anything that benefits a man is inherently anti-woman.
Don’t women benefit from Vi@gra as much as men?
Some of the most extreme feminists believe all heterosexual sex is rape, so they’ll likely see Vi&gra as a rape-enhancing tool.
But then it’s ludicrous that the State controls anything but antibiotics with laws restricting issue to the MD or RN monopoly.
RNs don’t have prescription authority. Nurse Practioners do within limits but not RNs.
So the question Ihave is:
Are Birth Control pills still tuned to the recipient? Or are they pretty much stock formulations?
If a doctor has to prescribe a specific BC formulation for the patient then it behooves the patient to get that formulation from the doc first.
Other than that, they should be over the counter.
All women need to see a doctor before taking birth control. Some women need to see a doctor regularly to monitor their reaction to birth control (especially women taking birth control pills for non-contraceptive reasons). As far as I’m aware, doctors cannot write a single ‘script with a lifetime of repeats, so many women go to the doctor just to get refill ‘scripts.
How about getting the government out of it altogether and caveat emptor?
This business about restrictions and mandates is a perennial. I once advocated, regarding big-child car seat mandates, that the gov simply publish the relevant safety stats and then butt out. The pushback argument was along the lines of ‘Well, that’s fine for YOU, who can READ and understand and even possibly make sane decisions, but what about the rest of the great unwashed population? They will do the WRONG THING unless they are led by the nose / forced to do it my way.”
It’s universally applicable. Maybe adults could opt to sign an emancipation contract at age 18; those who don’t sign get to be coddled by gov all their lives, and the signers get a bit of their freedom back. (See what I did there, on July 4? Clever, neh?)
Or stop covering Viagra under prescription plans.
Congress mandates Viagra coverage? I don’t think you are correct, not that you’ve been correct about anything previously.
Sometimes the spam filter blocks Vi&gra and sometimes it doesn’t. Wierd.
Are employers required to provide Vi&agra? Are they required to provide it with no copay?
Drugs like Vi&gra work to restore normal biological function, often as a result of poor blood flow from medical conditions. Contraceptives are designed to prevent normal biological function. That’s a fundamental difference.
I don’t get the gender wars approach. You think there is a war on women so you hate men or something?
You realize the “other” side doesn’t hate men or women right? and doesn’t base its arguments on gender right?
Let’s hear you hate of men or whatever you are going on about though.
The entire drug pharmacopeia should be marched through and have drugs reassigned “Over-the-counter”. Then the “medical devices” (Compression socks = wtf.).
To the point that “prescription” pretty much means “narcotic” or halucinagenic or psychotropic.
“To the point that “prescription” pretty much means “narcotic” or halucinagenic or psychotropic.”
Yup, but don’t try and tell that to a doctor. They get kinda bi***y when you question their authority.
I would still be experiencing crippling pain if I listened to the “expert”. Good thing I can read the internet and watch med school classes on youtube.
Unless V*agra [spam filter don’t seem to like its real name] coverage is mandated by the State it’s irrelevant.
(And if it is, well, it helps to remind people that unless it’s a gay man using it, women are directly benefiting, too.
Not that that means it should be required – nothing should be, period – but it does point out that even V*agra is not somehow Anti-Women or Only Relevant To Men.
But then it’s ludicrous that the State controls anything but antibiotics with laws restricting issue to the MD or RN monopoly…
As usual, more Government to “save us” from us ends up with problems that they need more layers of Government to solve, rather than throwing them out.)
“Not that that means it should be required – nothing should be, period – but it does point out that even V*agra is not somehow Anti-Women”
/puts on progressive hat: Anything that benefits a man is inherently anti-woman.
Don’t women benefit from Vi@gra as much as men?
Some of the most extreme feminists believe all heterosexual sex is rape, so they’ll likely see Vi&gra as a rape-enhancing tool.
But then it’s ludicrous that the State controls anything but antibiotics with laws restricting issue to the MD or RN monopoly.
RNs don’t have prescription authority. Nurse Practioners do within limits but not RNs.
So the question Ihave is:
Are Birth Control pills still tuned to the recipient? Or are they pretty much stock formulations?
If a doctor has to prescribe a specific BC formulation for the patient then it behooves the patient to get that formulation from the doc first.
Other than that, they should be over the counter.
All women need to see a doctor before taking birth control. Some women need to see a doctor regularly to monitor their reaction to birth control (especially women taking birth control pills for non-contraceptive reasons). As far as I’m aware, doctors cannot write a single ‘script with a lifetime of repeats, so many women go to the doctor just to get refill ‘scripts.
How about getting the government out of it altogether and caveat emptor?
This business about restrictions and mandates is a perennial. I once advocated, regarding big-child car seat mandates, that the gov simply publish the relevant safety stats and then butt out. The pushback argument was along the lines of ‘Well, that’s fine for YOU, who can READ and understand and even possibly make sane decisions, but what about the rest of the great unwashed population? They will do the WRONG THING unless they are led by the nose / forced to do it my way.”
It’s universally applicable. Maybe adults could opt to sign an emancipation contract at age 18; those who don’t sign get to be coddled by gov all their lives, and the signers get a bit of their freedom back. (See what I did there, on July 4? Clever, neh?)