It's my new exfoliating sponge, Faloofal!

It is true that Viagra does have an actual medical use, its heart medication (the boners it causes are a side effect).

Birth control pills have a real medical use as well they help women regulate and control their period, and to treat endometriosis.

One difference, there are more effective drugs than Viagra to treat heart conditions. Women with especially debilitating menstrual cramps or endometriosis have few if any other options.

This issue confuses me.

Anywhere I've worked in the last several years, the insurance has been the opposite -- BC covered, ED meds not.

Are there insurance stats to back this up?

Isn't it in the economic interest of the insurance companies to cover birth control? I would imagine covering birth control is cheaper than covering the pregnancy and subsequent child.

Apparently Bill wants poor people to have more babies.

Code_Archeologist: Women with especially debilitating menstrual cramps or endometriosis have few if any other options.

i hear cheesecake works.

pizen: Isn't it in the economic interest of the insurance companies to cover birth control? I would imagine covering birth control is cheaper than covering the pregnancy and subsequent child.

If this were true, you'd think they'd be doing it.

They should.

/it's a plot to keep women out of the workplace

Code_Archeologist: It is true that Viagra does have an actual medical use, its heart medication (the boners it causes are a side effect).

Are you saying that treating impotency caused by an underlying physiological condition is not an "actual medical use"?

Boner.

/McCain Facepalm

tallguywithglasseson: Are you saying that treating impotency caused by an underlying physiological condition is not an "actual medical use"?

yep... you can live without a boner.

Let's cut to the chase here. Both products have one use. farking. Viagra enables farking by giving impotent (and often older) men erections. Birth control pills enable farking by preventing pregnancy, which itself might otherwise prevent farking from happening in the first place.

So what Bill-O is saying is that old people farking is worth my monthly premiums, but responsible, fertile people farking is not. I'm sorry, Bill, if you can't get it up, or you can't find a woman under 50 who will put up with your gargantuan, watermelon shaped head. But stop pissing in the corn flakes for the rest of us, okay?

Code_Archeologist: tallguywithglasseson: Are you saying that treating impotency caused by an underlying physiological condition is not an "actual medical use"?

yep... you can live without a boner.

i can live without my teeth too, but my insurance still covers dental.

aden_nak: Birth control pills enable farking by preventing pregnancy, which itself might otherwise prevent farking from happening in the first place.

No, there'd still be farking, we'd just end up with more single mothers and/or abortions.

pizen: Isn't it in the economic interest of the insurance companies to cover birth control? I would imagine covering birth control is cheaper than covering the pregnancy and subsequent child.

You must be new to insurance. They never see things that way.

Sometimes they come around. Most of the time they don't. Like my grandmother's recent cataract operation -- only partially covered. I'm sure she'd be a costlier policy holder were she to go blind.

Some have started to cover Lasik. Mine doesn't. I'm not a good candidate anyway, but wouldn't it be cheaper to cover the procedure than to cover a life of contacts and/or glasses?

Insurance pays for quick fixes. They don't pay for long term wellness. My mother has near debilitating arthritis in her lower spine that is best managed by physical therapy. She had to jump through hoops just to get two months of therapy. But they'll readily cover her muscle relaxants and pain meds.

I need a bridge replaced. I could get the permanent fake tooth thing done (drill a post and form a fake tooth around it). Not covered. But they will cover a lifetime of bridge replacements (which you really can't do for a lifetime becuase you have to drill into the surrounding teeth - only so far you can go).

Penny wise and pound stupid IMHO. But what do I know? I'm poor and missing a tooth.

aden_nak: Let's cut to the chase here. Both products have one use. farking. Viagra enables farking by giving impotent (and often older) men erections. Birth control pills enable farking by preventing pregnancy, which itself might otherwise prevent farking from happening in the first place.


Anyone who thinks that hormonal birth control is only good for one thing needs to grow uterine tissue just so they can experience the miracle of endometriosis.

The pill treats several medical conditions, you lying scumbag.

soze: Anyone who thinks that hormonal birth control is only good for one thing needs to grow uterine tissue just so they can experience the miracle of endometriosis.

A-farking-men. Not to mention PMS--the real kind, not "OMG I'M CRANKY"--, cramps, nausea, the migraines that can go along with all of it...

That's nothing. This is what's scary. (new window)

My BCPs, which are prescribed by my doctor for a legitimate medical condition, do NOT equal an abortion.

grapefruitgal: That's nothing. This is what's scary. (new window)

My BCPs, which are prescribed by my doctor for a legitimate medical condition, do NOT equal an abortion.

Ugh, I agree. Besides, they aren't even an abortion by the medical definition! They don't STOP a pregnancy--they prevent one from ever occurring.

Code_Archeologist: yep... you can live without a boner.

You can live without a hand, too, but if you had a persistent infection on it you'd probably get it treated.

There are plenty of examples of medical treatments for non-life threatening conditions.

All you trollers should be taking notes from this guy. He's one of the best.

OK, listen up. Viagra is used to help a medical condition. That's why it's covered. Birth control is not a medical condition. It is a choice. Why should I or anybody else have to pay for other people's choices? Do I have to buy you dinner before you use the birth control?

If you don't cover birth control, then cover abortion. personally, I think birth control is cheaper and less damaging in the long term but hey - what do I know?

Personally, I'd take viagra off the market completely and make it a schedule I drug. It obviously encourages immoral behavior and we just can't have that in a Christian Nation, right Bill?

Code_Archeologist: tallguywithglasseson: Are you saying that treating impotency caused by an underlying physiological condition is not an "actual medical use"?

yep... you can live without a boner.

No, no, no. YOU can live without a boner.

He's right. ED is the specific failure of a body part or system to work properly. Pregnancy is everything working as it should.

Alien Robot: He's right. ED is the specific failure of a body part or system to work properly. Pregnancy is everything working as it should.



As was said upthread, what about endometriosis, or irregular periods? Those are the body not working properly.

Both you and Bill O'RLY didn't think your cunning plans through.

Alien Robot: He's right. ED is the specific failure of a body part or system to work properly. Pregnancy is everything working as it should.

so you're saying that we shouldn't cover pregnancy?

I'd think insurance companies would be falling over themselves trying to cover contraception. It would save them money in the long run (pregnancy care ain't cheap you know).

Not being able to get a boner because your body can no longer support it is NOT A MEDICAL CONDITION in most cases.

It's a symptom of aging.

the conservatives want to keep women at home, getting pregnant all the time. srsly

grapefruitgal: That's nothing. This is what's scary. (new window)

My BCPs, which are prescribed by my doctor for a legitimate medical condition, do NOT equal an abortion.

Not defending BushCo and I didn't read the article, but some of the anti-birth control people have put out papers that state if a woman manages to ovulate on birth control and the egg is fertilized, birth control can make it so the egg does not attach to the uterus. They equate that with an abortion.

Um, I know it's a bunch of guys talking so we wouldn't know, but insurance covers birth control pills. My wife has endometriosis, so she has to take 2x birth controls pills as normal, and it is all covered, $10 a month.

Well, one helps him with his inner gayness and the other doesn't. Of course he's gonna sound 'Fair and Balanced' about this.

I guess we now know Bill needs help gettin' it up.

Alien Robot: He's right. ED is the specific failure of a body part or system to work properly.

Hair loss is a specific failure of a body part or system to work properly. Should health insurance cover the hair club for men? Should they subsidize purchase of laser combs?

Most health plans don't even cover hearing aids, and even glasses are often not under a basic plan but offered as supplemental insurance. Let's get plans to cover these specific failures of a body part of system before we cover old guys who need help getting it up.

Weaver95: If you don't cover birth control, then cover abortion.

They're the same thing to some people, ORLY might be one of them - he claims to be devoutly Catholic. That's probably why he claims to be against the death penalty.

burndtdan: Code_Archeologist: tallguywithglasseson: Are you saying that treating impotency caused by an underlying physiological condition is not an "actual medical use"?

yep... you can live without a boner.

i can live without my teeth too, but my insurance still covers dental.

That is the best retort I've read all day.

Weaver95: Alien Robot: He's right. ED is the specific failure of a body part or system to work properly. Pregnancy is everything working as it should.

so you're saying that we shouldn't cover pregnancy?

Sure, take this to its logical conclusion:

Insurance companies shouldn't cover any pre-, perio-, neo-, or post-natal care because getting pregnant is a choice!

/Thinks insurance should cover contraception if they were smart.
//Doesn't think it should be legislated.

meat0918: but some of the anti-birth control people have put out papers that state if a woman manages to ovulate on birth control and the egg is fertilized, birth control can make it so the egg does not attach to the uterus. They equate that with an abortion.

How do you terminate a pregnancy (abortion) if the egg has not implanted itself in the uterus (pretty much the start of pregnancy)?

They can equate it to abortion all they want. It doesn't make them right.

meat0918
grapefruitgal: That's nothing. This is what's scary. (new window)

My BCPs, which are prescribed by my doctor for a legitimate medical condition, do NOT equal an abortion.

Not defending BushCo and I didn't read the article, but some of the anti-birth control people have put out papers that state if a woman manages to ovulate on birth control and the egg is fertilized, birth control can make it so the egg does not attach to the uterus. They equate that with an abortion.

That's what my link said:

Bush's Department of Health and Human Services is drafting a rule that would place new restrictions on domestic family planning programs. The provision would threaten the funding of organizations and health facilities if they do not hire people who would refuse to provide birth control and defines abortion so broadly that it would include many types of birth control, including oral contraception.

That's way scarier than anything O'Reilly said.

Dr.Zom: Not being able to get a boner because your body can no longer support it is NOT A MEDICAL CONDITION in most cases.

It's a symptom of aging.

I agree, but unfortunately, this is not the place to have a reasoned debate about a complex subject. For example, try arguing that ED treatment for an otherwise healthy young man distressed at his inability to start a family should be covered -- after all, we quite reasonably treat other forms of infertility -- but that ED medication for somebody in their 70s encountering natural aging effects should not. Not only will you find yourself up against the advertising budgets of pharma giants who found that they too quickly reached the ceiling of people with a genuine medical condition and therefore have to persuade aging boomers that they are entitled to a hard-on until the day they die... but also the many people who think that complex questions can answered with an unconditional Yes or an unconditional No.

And when I say "this is not the place", the place I have in mind is "America".

Kuta: Insurance companies shouldn't cover any pre-, perio-, neo-, or post-natal care because getting pregnant is a choice!

An act of god?

Tarl3k: Um, I know it's a bunch of guys talking so we wouldn't know, but insurance covers birth control pills. My wife has endometriosis, so she has to take 2x birth controls pills as normal, and it is all covered, $10 a month.

1. O'Reilley is an idiot (anyone here not clear on that yet? Olbermann is too, but that's another subject).

2. Not being able to get it up because of age is not a medical condition.


3. Some insurance covers birth control. I bet you'll discover the same thing with Viagra, some insurance providers do not cover it....

My wife's birth control is covered under our insurance. $10 co-pay. Though thankfully we'll stop needing them soon. Not the thankfully we'll stop needing them part, the menopause is a never ending mother farking biatch

/help me, I'm trapped living with a bi-polar alien serial killer who insists on keeping the thermostats at 68 degrees.

//for you younger married male Farkers, on the bright side it only lasts 4-8 years.

soze: Anyone who thinks that hormonal birth control is only good for one thing needs to grow uterine tissue just so they can experience the miracle of endometriosis.

A winner is you.

I have a friend who has started to take Yaz for her severe bouts of PMS. She is taking Yaz to better regulate her periods.

I would like to see O'Reilly locked in a room with a bunch of women who are PMS'ing and tell them that their birth control pills should not be covered under health insurance. Let's see how long he survives before they all go Andrea Yates on his ass.

meat0918: I'd think insurance companies would be falling over themselves trying to cover contraception. It would save them money in the long run (pregnancy care ain't cheap you know).

Think of it this way - pregnancy results in childbirth. To an insurance company, that's a new insured to collect premiums from.

Our premiums went through the roof when our son was born.

Technically he's correct, but it's just so stupid not to cover both.

Medicine normally used as a contraceptive but prescribed for medical conditions should be covered and probably are.

I can get Viagra on the black market. Its expensive.

Their thinking is this:

[Monthly cost of BC x (# of months a woman would take BC in her lifetime)] - [(average cost of pregnancy coverage)]= too expensive for coverage.

Then they add in the fact that most women/couples will pay for BC out of their own pocket anyway.

Here's a radical idea: purchase your own health insurance so that you can get the kind of coverage you want instead of biatching about it.

jjorsett: Here's a radical idea: purchase your own health insurance so that you can get the kind of coverage you want instead of biatching about it.

THIS.