From where I sit, in the land of socialized medicine just north of most of you, it would seem that the only 'death panels' occupy space in Congress and in the head offices of health insurance companies. Up here, if a doctor prescribes any pharmaceutical, the patient gets the prescription filled. It is strictly a matter to be decided by doctor and patient. And before I hear any uproar about 'free prescriptions'. we pay for our prescriptions unless we are indigent or low-income. In my case, as a person living on a pension, my prescriptions are paid for by a provincial program called Pharmacare for about three months of the year. I pay for them for the other nine months.     

Mar 5, 2012 -- 3:38PM, Kwinters wrote:

Just curious how many other services righties here will object to:

Under the Affordable Care Act, women’s preventive health care – such as mammograms, screenings for cervical cancer, prenatal care, and other services – is covered with no cost sharing for new health plans. However, the law recognizes and HHS understands the need to take into account the unique health needs of women throughout their lifespan. 

The HRSA-supported health plan coverage guidelines, developed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), will help ensure that women receive a comprehensive set of preventive services without having to pay a co-payment, co-insurance or a deductible.  HHS commissioned an IOM study to review what preventive services are necessary for women’s health and well-being and should be considered in the development of comprehensive guidelines for preventive services for women.  HRSA is supporting the IOM’s recommendations on preventive services that address health needs specific to women and fill gaps in existing guidelines.

Do you also oppose mammograms? Cervical cancer screenings?  Should women have to pay out of pocket for those too?

No .... mammagrams, cervical screenings, colonoscopies, even dexa scans, all qualify as preventative for Disorders.  Pregnancy is not a disorder.

Are you saying that pregnancy is a disorder??  A disease??

Here is more information on the noncontraceptive rates of use for oral contraceptives from the University of Florida:  news.health.ufl.edu/2012/18504/multimedi...

Birth control pills: They’re not just for birth control any more. At least according to a new study, which found that more than one-point-five million women in the United States take birth control pills for reasons other than preventing pregnancy.

In fact, more than 726,000 women who take birth control pills have never had sex. More than 95 percent of those users say they take the pill for reasons other than contraception.

The research was compiled by the nonprofit Guttmacher Institute, which used data from the National Survey of Family Growth. They found that 14 percent of all women who take the pill do so for reasons unrelated to controlling pregnancy.

So why else would someone take a birth control pill? More than 30 percent of the women surveyed said they take the pills to reduce menstrual pain and cramps. About 30 percent said they wanted to regulate their menstrual cycles, which can help prevent side effects such as migraine headaches.

Another common reason is controlling endometriosis, a condition where tissue from the uterus grows in other areas of the body, such as the ovaries, bowel or bladder. Some women also take birth control pills to reduce acne. In fact, almost half of the women surveyed said they took the pill for multiple reasons.

Source information: Gutmacher Institute:  www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_contr_use.htm...

The woman has become a poster person for the right to women's health care.  This is a clever argument  invented by some smart   person in the administration or the Democratic party.

To treat the sexual activities of a woman as a heathcare issue is totally absurd. Clever as a political ploy, but absurd. 

 There can be possible  health complications with anticonceptives like  could be with anything else, but to use that as a reason for providing anticonceptives is a stretch. If there are health problems, they should be treated as a health problem, regardless of  the origin. 

If some insurance company wants to make it part of their plan, fine.  To require it is ridiculous.

I am personally for  universal healthcare as a safety net, which could probably include anticonceptives. But other than basic care, it should be apt to the individual and insurance companies.

Mar 5, 2012 -- 9:40PM, aarroottoonn wrote:

Mar 5, 2012 -- 3:38PM, Kwinters wrote:

Just curious how many other services righties here will object to:

Under the Affordable Care Act, women’s preventive health care – such as mammograms, screenings for cervical cancer, prenatal care, and other services – is covered with no cost sharing for new health plans. However, the law recognizes and HHS understands the need to take into account the unique health needs of women throughout their lifespan. 

The HRSA-supported health plan coverage guidelines, developed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), will help ensure that women receive a comprehensive set of preventive services without having to pay a co-payment, co-insurance or a deductible.  HHS commissioned an IOM study to review what preventive services are necessary for women’s health and well-being and should be considered in the development of comprehensive guidelines for preventive services for women.  HRSA is supporting the IOM’s recommendations on preventive services that address health needs specific to women and fill gaps in existing guidelines.

Do you also oppose mammograms? Cervical cancer screenings?  Should women have to pay out of pocket for those too?

I don't oppose any of those things, but I do oppose them being free. Medical care is medical care, and should at least have a co-pay or deductable. All this does is make insurance companies pass along those costs to everyone in other forms. There is no free lunch, no matter what the left thinks.

Guess who's much heralded affordable health care act began with cutting out mammograms?  Until he flip flopped......

A Breast Cancer Preview

The mammogram decision is a sign of cost control to come.

And dont think this idiot wont flip again.