If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   In the latest salvo fired in the Republican War on Women, Governor Bobby Jindal suggests that birth control should be over the counter. Wait, what?   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 224
    More: Interesting, Bobby Jindal, human beings, Equal Pay Act, Paycheck Fairness Act, obstetricians, Priebus tried, shiny objects, Priebus  
•       •       •

1539 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Dec 2012 at 1:20 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



224 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-14 02:26:15 PM  

Nabb1: what_now: I actually disagree. Hormonal birth control should be monitored by a doctor. There can serious emotional and physical side effects from using BC, and a woman should be able to have a doctor prescribe and monitor her use, until they find the correct dosage.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists disagrees. Link


If it is or is not implementable it is still a genius statement on his part as it effectively disarms the entire thing and opens dialog and soundly places him in the not a nut category. He needs to do that as he has been painted as a nut.
 
2012-12-14 02:27:50 PM  

un4gvn666: lennavan: urbangirl: You can buy condoms OTC precisely because they don't have anywhere near the potential long-term serious consequences of OBC

What are the potential long-term serious consequences of BC?

There's a link provided in this very thread.


The long-term serious consequence of BC is it reduces cancer? I assumed by potential long-term serious consequence she meant a negative consequence.

The use of oral contraceptives (birth control pills) for five years or more decreases the risk of ovarian cancer in later life by 50%.[43] Combined oral contraceptive use reduces the risk of ovarian cancer by 40% and the risk of endometrial cancer by 50% compared to never users. The risk reduction increases with duration of use, with an 80% reduction in risk for both ovarian and endometrial cancer with use for more than 10 years. The risk reduction for both ovarian and endometrial cancer persists for at least 20 years.[20]

Oh, right there the negative side effect is, blood clots.

The risk of thromboembolism varies with different types of birth control pills. For the second-generation pills (with an estrogen content less than 50 μg), the risk of thromboembolism is relatively small, with an incidence of approximately 15 per 100,000 users per year, compared with 5 per 100,000 per year among non-pregnant women

Well less risk of cancer, higher risk of blood clot, let's weigh the pros and cons, shall we?

Overall, use of oral contraceptives appears to slightly reduce all-cause mortality, with a rate ratio for overall mortality of 0.87 (confidence interval: 0.79-0.96) when comparing ever-users of OCs with never-users.[65]

You're right, women might start using BC and lowering their mortality rate. Truly scary.
 
2012-12-14 02:29:33 PM  

lennavan: urbangirl: You can buy condoms OTC precisely because they don't have anywhere near the potential long-term serious consequences of OBC

What are the potential long-term serious consequences of BC?


Raise cholesterol, lower blood pressure to dangerous levels, blood clots, gallstones, clinical depression. Can cause serious problems if you're prone to cardio-vascular disease. Probably more that I don't know about. Not to mention if you happen to already be pregnant, you can really mess up the fetus.

This is not like an allergic rash from a condom that will go away in a few days. This is life-threatening stuff.
 
2012-12-14 02:32:56 PM  

urbangirl: lennavan: urbangirl: You can buy condoms OTC precisely because they don't have anywhere near the potential long-term serious consequences of OBC

What are the potential long-term serious consequences of BC?

Raise cholesterol, lower blood pressure to dangerous levels, blood clots, gallstones, clinical depression. Can cause serious problems if you're prone to cardio-vascular disease. Probably more that I don't know about. Not to mention if you happen to already be pregnant, you can really mess up the fetus.

This is not like an allergic rash from a condom that will go away in a few days. This is life-threatening stuff.


Honestly, I don't know why I bothered. lennavan is just doing the same selective reading routine he pulled in the "Marco Rubio refuses to stand up to social conservatives on the age of the Earth" thread. It's why I have him farkied as "Rubio at least deserves an A for effort!"
 
2012-12-14 02:35:31 PM  

BSABSVR: There are very good reasons to keep some medications prescription only, even if you want recreational drugs to be legal (as I do). We are already seeing issues with bacterial infections developing resistance to antibiotics, creating MRSA, residtant strains of Gonorrhea, etc.

During the 2001-2002 Anthrax scares, every idiot under the sun decided they needed Cipro, just in case Truth or Consequences, NM was going to be terrorized. I don't particularly care if some dude develops a tolerance for meth or adderall as it doesn't really do me any harm. That dude running around spewing a super bug because he takes Zeftera every time he gets the sniffles, or thinks that Cipro will clear up his athlete's foot can cause me harm.


Birth control may have side effects, but it won't become useless if overprescribed. It's not like sperm can adapt to the Pill and become supersperm.
 
2012-12-14 02:35:38 PM  

urbangirl: Not to mention if you happen to already be pregnant, you can really mess up the fetus.


There are lots of ways to mess up a fetus if you are already pregnant. Should alcohol be prescription only, so long as you pass a pregnancy test?

urbangirl: This is not like an allergic rash from a condom that will go away in a few days. This is life-threatening stuff.


No, it's really not. High cholesterol will be found in your general checkup. You can survive until then. So will low blood pressure. If blood pressure gets too low, you'll be dizzy. If you're dizzy for a few days, you'll probably head to the doctor's office. It worsens depression in already depressed people. Those people are already seeing psychiatrists and if they're not, the OBGYN isn't the right place to force them to start.

The sum of all of your life-threatening things and we still have a lower mortality rate for women on BC. It's not so scary.
 
2012-12-14 02:37:39 PM  

lennavan: un4gvn666: lennavan: urbangirl: You can buy condoms OTC precisely because they don't have anywhere near the potential long-term serious consequences of OBC

What are the potential long-term serious consequences of BC?

There's a link provided in this very thread.

The long-term serious consequence of BC is it reduces cancer? I assumed by potential long-term serious consequence she meant a negative consequence.

The use of oral contraceptives (birth control pills) for five years or more decreases the risk of ovarian cancer in later life by 50%.[43] Combined oral contraceptive use reduces the risk of ovarian cancer by 40% and the risk of endometrial cancer by 50% compared to never users. The risk reduction increases with duration of use, with an 80% reduction in risk for both ovarian and endometrial cancer with use for more than 10 years. The risk reduction for both ovarian and endometrial cancer persists for at least 20 years.[20]

Oh, right there the negative side effect is, blood clots.

The risk of thromboembolism varies with different types of birth control pills. For the second-generation pills (with an estrogen content less than 50 μg), the risk of thromboembolism is relatively small, with an incidence of approximately 15 per 100,000 users per year, compared with 5 per 100,000 per year among non-pregnant women

Well less risk of cancer, higher risk of blood clot, let's weigh the pros and cons, shall we?

Overall, use of oral contraceptives appears to slightly reduce all-cause mortality, with a rate ratio for overall mortality of 0.87 (confidence interval: 0.79-0.96) when comparing ever-users of OCs with never-users.[65]

You're right, women might start using BC and lowering their mortality rate. Truly scary.


The average woman might, yeah. The atypical woman, on the other hand, will be completely farked up by them meds. It's not a situation we design to the mean case - we decide based on the experiences of the outliers.
 
2012-12-14 02:37:50 PM  

un4gvn666: Honestly, I don't know why I bothered. lennavan is just doing the same selective reading routine he pulled in the "Marco Rubio refuses to stand up to social conservatives on the age of the Earth" thread. It's why I have him farkied as "Rubio at least deserves an A for effort!"


You do realize the linked article references how the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists agrees with me, right?

Are they also doing selective reading and you totally know better what with your MD/PhD and all?
 
2012-12-14 02:40:22 PM  

urbangirl: Raise cholesterol, lower blood pressure to dangerous levels, blood clots, gallstones, clinical depression. Can cause serious problems if you're prone to cardio-vascular disease. Probably more that I don't know about. Not to mention if you happen to already be pregnant, you can really mess up the fetus.


Gosh, if it's that dangerous what have we been doing it handing it out so freely these past 60 years?
 
2012-12-14 02:41:52 PM  

Gulper Eel: urbangirl: Raise cholesterol, lower blood pressure to dangerous levels, blood clots, gallstones, clinical depression. Can cause serious problems if you're prone to cardio-vascular disease. Probably more that I don't know about. Not to mention if you happen to already be pregnant, you can really mess up the fetus.

Gosh, if it's that dangerous what have we been doing it handing it out so freely these past 60 years?


By "freely" you mean "in consultation with a doctor", right?
 
2012-12-14 02:43:38 PM  

Exception Collection: The average woman might, yeah. The atypical woman, on the other hand, will be completely farked up by them meds. It's not a situation we design to the mean case - we decide based on the experiences of the outliers.


Yeah that's just completely not true. People are allergic to ibuprofen and may actually die from taking it. Ibuprofen is OTC. The atypical woman might have kidney problems and not know it. If she takes asprin, she's in some deep shiat. I can continue this forever with things you just accept as okay.

I'm sure you know where this will end up but let's play anyway. I have a new drug I want to be OTC. Here are its side effects:

stomach pain, tenderness, bloating,
constipation or diarrhea;
green-colored vomit;
blood in the stools;
unusual weakness;
seizure (convulsions);
twitching or uncontrolled muscle movements; or
fever, fast or slow heart rate.

Prescription or OTC? You'll never answer because you can actually feel the hammer ready to drop if you do.
 
2012-12-14 02:47:29 PM  

lennavan: un4gvn666: Honestly, I don't know why I bothered. lennavan is just doing the same selective reading routine he pulled in the "Marco Rubio refuses to stand up to social conservatives on the age of the Earth" thread. It's why I have him farkied as "Rubio at least deserves an A for effort!"

You do realize the linked article references how the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists agrees with me, right?

Are they also doing selective reading and you totally know better what with your MD/PhD and all?


The recommendation by ACOG to make contraceptives OTC would not exist if there were not significant barriers to access, which themselves would not exist if conservatives would get out of the way of Obamacare, stop attacking and defunding Planned Parenthood, and actually gave a shiat enough about women to make a strong effort towards increased access and availibility of HBC. The fact that that isn't likely to happen due to the prevalence of ignorance in our society is probably why they just threw up their hands and said "fark it, may as well make it OTC then."

Conservatives embracing a flawed and potentially hazardous solution to a problem they have created is not far off from the image of the snake eating its own tail, in that it's amusing and bewildering at the same time.
 
2012-12-14 02:49:13 PM  

lennavan: Exception Collection: The average woman might, yeah. The atypical woman, on the other hand, will be completely farked up by them meds. It's not a situation we design to the mean case - we decide based on the experiences of the outliers.

Yeah that's just completely not true. People are allergic to ibuprofen and may actually die from taking it. Ibuprofen is OTC. The atypical woman might have kidney problems and not know it. If she takes asprin, she's in some deep shiat. I can continue this forever with things you just accept as okay.

I'm sure you know where this will end up but let's play anyway. I have a new drug I want to be OTC. Here are its side effects:

stomach pain, tenderness, bloating,
constipation or diarrhea;
green-colored vomit;
blood in the stools;
unusual weakness;
seizure (convulsions);
twitching or uncontrolled muscle movements; or
fever, fast or slow heart rate.

Prescription or OTC? You'll never answer because you can actually feel the hammer ready to drop if you do.


Completely banned by the FDA, unless it's a boner pill.
 
2012-12-14 02:49:13 PM  

hillbillypharmacist: Well, I kind of thought the same thing, but the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists thinks its safe enough to give OTC. Which kind of sways me to think it's probably okay. It would be behind the counter, and pharmacists would be there to answer questions and help them with the choices (ideally).

But yes, I think it should be drop dead free no matter what kind of healthcare system we have.


TANSTAAFL. (TANSTAFHC?) Anyway, don't they already do the behind-the-counter thing with Plan B?

Gulper Eel: Birth control may have side effects, but it won't become useless if overprescribed. It's not like sperm can adapt to the Pill and become supersperm.


If Robert Kirkman ever wants to do another comic series after The Walking Dead, I hope it's Supersperm.
 
2012-12-14 02:57:43 PM  
This is pretty much a typical Jindal statement. Makes a sort of decent political point of sorts, but stumbles at the goal line by being incredibly ignorant of basic science.

Should BC be easily accessible? Yes. So his... general theme has its heart in the right place.

Should people be allowed to buy and self-dose human-compatible hormones? Hell to the no. That shiat can fark you up incredibly hard if you fark up the dosage, and the probability of someone self-prescribing a medication farking up the dosage is somewhere between 100% and 300% (they'll somehow manage to fark up the dosage three times just to fark with statisticians). So it's a terrible, terrible idea to OTC any medication that can't be safely accidentally doubled a couple of times or ignored for a week without major adverse effects.

Basically, this is another "volcano monitoring" comment, where yes the general point is fine (that we should scrutinize our research expenditures as much as our other expenditures) but the specific point is stupid (there are several major potentially active volcanoes in the US in populated areas).

Nabb1: Denying women the option of OTC birth control when doctors are okay with it and demanding they have to go through Planned Parenthood/Obamacare is nothing more than a political agenda.


If your doctor is OK with hormone treatments being sold over the counter, you should probably alert the AMA.
 
2012-12-14 03:00:52 PM  

qorkfiend: By "freely" you mean "in consultation with a doctor", right?


By "in consultation with" you mean "given a cursory once-over and rubber-stamped by", right?
 
2012-12-14 03:01:37 PM  

un4gvn666: The recommendation by ACOG to make contraceptives OTC would not exist if there were not significant barriers to access


You should read the ACOG recommendation. It agrees with what I was saying before and clearly demonstrates you did not read it. (OC = Oral Contraceptive)

Safety of Over-the-Counter Medications
No drug or intervention is completely without risk of harm. For example, common nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, such as aspirin, have documented adverse effects, including gastrointestinal bleeding. These effects may occur even at doses used for prophylaxis of cardiovascular disease (11). Additionally, over-the-counter use of acetaminophen is linked to serious liver damage (12). Safety concerns about OCs frequently focus on the increased risk of venous thromboembolism. However, it is important to understand that the rate of venous thromboembolism for OC users is extremely low (3-10.22/10,000 women-years) (13, 14) and to put this risk in context by recognizing the much greater risk of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy (5-20/10,000 women-years) or in the postpartum period (40-65/10,000 women-years) (14). Overall, the consensus is that OC use is safe (15-17).

They said "OC use is safe." How did you summarize it?

urbangirl: This is life-threatening stuff.


Right.

You know what else ACOG said?

Both studies showed that in cases of discrepancy, women were more likely to report contraindications than were health care providers. A study conducted in the United Kingdom replicated the findings that women take a more conservative approach

You're actually more conservative if you're in charge of yourself, rather than under the care of doctor. If you're so worried about these side effects, the data shows you're more likely to do something about it if you're not under the care of a doctor.
 
2012-12-14 03:02:26 PM  

lennavan: urbangirl: This is life-threatening stuff.


lennavan: un4gvn666: The recommendation by ACOG to make contraceptives OTC would not exist if there were not significant barriers to access


Okay, that was amazingly stupid of me. I apologize to you both, that was not intentional.
 
2012-12-14 03:03:22 PM  

Gulper Eel: urbangirl: Raise cholesterol, lower blood pressure to dangerous levels, blood clots, gallstones, clinical depression. Can cause serious problems if you're prone to cardio-vascular disease. Probably more that I don't know about. Not to mention if you happen to already be pregnant, you can really mess up the fetus.

Gosh, if it's that dangerous what have we been doing it handing it out so freely these past 60 years?


So freely that you have to consult with your doctor, who reviews your other medications and your medical history before writing a 'scrip, and then have a follow-up appointment 6 months later (maximum) even if you have no problems to review the 'scrip renewal, and are instructed to call back much earlier at the first sign of a long list of adverse effects.

It's handed out about as "freely" as steroid treatments for allergy suppression of weight gain... appropriately, since those are also human-compatible hormones.

The fact that you can generally get a prescription for a drug if you actually have the condition it treats is not the same as the drug's distribution being uncontrolled. If you have insomnia you're not going to have any trouble getting a prescription for ambien, either.
 
2012-12-14 03:05:03 PM  
Hormonal birth control is serious medicine and should be administered under a doctor's care. Most women require some tuning to find a protocol that works for their body. No clue about how this has somehow become an issue for Republicans in year 2012.
 
2012-12-14 03:11:33 PM  

carpbrain: Hormonal birth control is serious medicine and should be administered under a doctor's care.


OBGYNs say otherwise.
 
2012-12-14 03:13:16 PM  

lennavan: You're actually more conservative if you're in charge of yourself, rather than under the care of doctor.


Mustn't be telling the key voter demographics that the primary person responsible for their health care is looking at them in the mirror.
 
2012-12-14 03:14:09 PM  
If women could buy birth control without a prescription, he argues, employers would not have to pay for it against their moral objections, and Democrats could no longer accuse Republicans of being anti-birth control.

FAIL. The fact that they want birth control to be OTC because they have moral objections to it and thus don't want to "pay" for it is in fact "anti-birth control" and "anti-woman".
 
2012-12-14 03:20:06 PM  
Sounds like somebody wants to be president!
 
2012-12-14 03:38:04 PM  

Elandriel: My wife was on 4 different kinds of oral contraceptives, one after the other for 3 month courses each, before she gave up and went off the pill -- the hormonal imbalances were impossible for her to deal with and we almost ended up divorced because there was no balance at all and we were fighting over everything. I did my best to be supportive but she was absolutely manic all the time over everything, no matter how inconsequential, and I was the scapegoat. Please hold your "lol women" comments because she was not herself in any sense.

Making an untrained woman personally in charge of ingesting medicine that has enormous hormonal change is hilariously irresponsible. People are still so damn hung up on this being about not getting pregnant, instead of the host of other effects BC pills have on a woman from cyst prevention to cycle regulation. Making it OTC divorces the process of consultation and medical expertise from it, and endangers women everywhere.

Also it is another huge payout to insurance industries who were only just recently mandated to cover BC. So.


THIS

I've known women who had more or less the same experience your wife did. They had to go through several brands/strengths to get one that didn't turn them manic. Hell, when I was in high school, most of the girls at my school were on birth control for various reasons ranging from sex to lighter periods/less cramping. One of my classmates had her mom take her to the doctor to change her birth control prescription when she would start bawling uncontrollably at random commercials. I don't mean sad commercials I mean chocolate bar commercials, diaper commercials etc.

How would girls even know what brand to ask for if it was OTC?

"Hello, I'd like some um... birth control please"

"Okay which one?"

"Um... that one in the blue box over there?"
 
2012-12-14 03:48:50 PM  

Gulper Eel: BSABSVR: There are very good reasons to keep some medications prescription only, even if you want recreational drugs to be legal (as I do). We are already seeing issues with bacterial infections developing resistance to antibiotics, creating MRSA, residtant strains of Gonorrhea, etc.

During the 2001-2002 Anthrax scares, every idiot under the sun decided they needed Cipro, just in case Truth or Consequences, NM was going to be terrorized. I don't particularly care if some dude develops a tolerance for meth or adderall as it doesn't really do me any harm. That dude running around spewing a super bug because he takes Zeftera every time he gets the sniffles, or thinks that Cipro will clear up his athlete's foot can cause me harm.

Birth control may have side effects, but it won't become useless if overprescribed. It's not like sperm can adapt to the Pill and become supersperm.


No, but there is verifiable harm that can come from taking the wrong form or dose of HBC. Does that harm outweigh the benefits of making it OTC?

But I think you can think that some drugs should be OTC (that currently are not) and some drugs should still require an extra step to get, and that recreational drugs should be legal or decriminalized without being "OMG LOOK AT MY BADASS STATIST JACKBOOTS", or being a hypocrite, which Nabb1 and jjorsett seem to be implying.
 
2012-12-14 04:00:40 PM  

hillbillypharmacist: what_now: I'm torn on the prescription birth control issue because not every woman can afford to see a gynecologist.

Exactly. While having OTC birth control might be the best solution right now, what we really need is single payer health care.

Exactly, exactly. If I ran the US, no woman would ever pay a damn dime for BC, and she would have access to a gynecologist to consult about it.


BC should be free and easily accessible to anyone who wants it.
 
2012-12-14 04:00:43 PM  

AgentKGB: Making an untrained woman personally in charge of ingesting medicine that has enormous hormonal change is hilariously irresponsible. People are still so damn hung up on this being about not getting pregnant, instead of the host of other effects BC pills have on a woman from cyst prevention to cycle regulation. Making it OTC divorces the process of consultation and medical expertise from it, and endangers women everywhere.

Also it is another huge payout to insurance industries who were only just recently mandated to cover BC. So.

THIS

I've known women who had more or less the same experience your wife did.


Get this - an untrained woman knows she is untrained and is more likely to report and follow-up on minor side effects. If she is under the care of a doctor, they are more likely to ignore it.

But don't let facts get in your way!
 
2012-12-14 04:13:16 PM  
Making birth control over the counter is a fast-track to watching a lot of women with heart problems Die. So thanks, Bobbie.

Additionally, it ensures 100% that birth control will not be covered by Any insurance plan, as insurance doesn't cover OTC medications, virtually ensuring that a greater majority of women won't have access to it. Don't for a second think that Jindal is trying to turn coats here, his agenda hasn't changed.
 
2012-12-14 04:44:06 PM  

lennavan: AgentKGB: Making an untrained woman personally in charge of ingesting medicine that has enormous hormonal change is hilariously irresponsible. People are still so damn hung up on this being about not getting pregnant, instead of the host of other effects BC pills have on a woman from cyst prevention to cycle regulation. Making it OTC divorces the process of consultation and medical expertise from it, and endangers women everywhere.

Also it is another huge payout to insurance industries who were only just recently mandated to cover BC. So.

THIS

I've known women who had more or less the same experience your wife did.

Get this - an untrained woman knows she is untrained and is more likely to report and follow-up on minor side effects. If she is under the care of a doctor, they are more likely to ignore it.

But don't let facts get in your way!


Report to who?
 
2012-12-14 04:52:57 PM  
How credible is the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists? Are they on the up and up?
 
2012-12-14 04:54:03 PM  

Kazan: what_now: I actually disagree. Hormonal birth control should be monitored by a doctor. There can serious emotional and physical side effects from using BC, and a woman should be able to have a doctor prescribe and monitor her use, until they find the correct dosage.

Now, we should have single payer healthcare and BC should be free, but someone needs to prescribe it.

what she said


I don't see any religious objection to paying for insurance that covers hormonal monitoring. The religious object to covering birth control, not its side effects.
 
2012-12-14 04:58:24 PM  

un4gvn666: lennavan: AgentKGB: Making an untrained woman personally in charge of ingesting medicine that has enormous hormonal change is hilariously irresponsible. People are still so damn hung up on this being about not getting pregnant, instead of the host of other effects BC pills have on a woman from cyst prevention to cycle regulation. Making it OTC divorces the process of consultation and medical expertise from it, and endangers women everywhere.

Also it is another huge payout to insurance industries who were only just recently mandated to cover BC. So.

THIS

I've known women who had more or less the same experience your wife did.

Get this - an untrained woman knows she is untrained and is more likely to report and follow-up on minor side effects. If she is under the care of a doctor, they are more likely to ignore it.

But don't let facts get in your way!

Report to who?


Oh, to the store manager where she bought them at probably.
 
2012-12-14 05:11:03 PM  

un4gvn666: lennavan: AgentKGB: Making an untrained woman personally in charge of ingesting medicine that has enormous hormonal change is hilariously irresponsible. People are still so damn hung up on this being about not getting pregnant, instead of the host of other effects BC pills have on a woman from cyst prevention to cycle regulation. Making it OTC divorces the process of consultation and medical expertise from it, and endangers women everywhere.

Also it is another huge payout to insurance industries who were only just recently mandated to cover BC. So.

THIS

I've known women who had more or less the same experience your wife did.

Get this - an untrained woman knows she is untrained and is more likely to report and follow-up on minor side effects. If she is under the care of a doctor, they are more likely to ignore it.

But don't let facts get in your way!

Report to who?


Um, I guess the doctor that she's not going to.

/Wow, that flaw got pointed out quick!
 
2012-12-14 05:55:39 PM  

Nabb1: hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: So, you would have the government continue to control what a woman does with her body for the political sake of a larger entitlement agenda?

The only control in that scenario would be by a physician. And they aren't the government.

I'm not a straw man.

Are you or are you not in favor of making birth control medication available OTC? If the medical community is in favor, then the resistance to it is going to largely be political, which means by restricting women's access by legally requiring a prescription that doctors by and large believe is unnecessary from a medical standpoint, then you are placing a barrier to women that is based on a political agenda.


Thus started the liberal war on women.
 
2012-12-14 06:00:39 PM  

lennavan: Exception Collection: The average woman might, yeah. The atypical woman, on the other hand, will be completely farked up by them meds. It's not a situation we design to the mean case - we decide based on the experiences of the outliers.

Yeah that's just completely not true. People are allergic to ibuprofen and may actually die from taking it. Ibuprofen is OTC. The atypical woman might have kidney problems and not know it. If she takes asprin, she's in some deep shiat. I can continue this forever with things you just accept as okay.

I'm sure you know where this will end up but let's play anyway. I have a new drug I want to be OTC. Here are its side effects:

stomach pain, tenderness, bloating,
constipation or diarrhea;
green-colored vomit;
blood in the stools;
unusual weakness;
seizure (convulsions);
twitching or uncontrolled muscle movements; or
fever, fast or slow heart rate.

Prescription or OTC? You'll never answer because you can actually feel the hammer ready to drop if you do.


Its over the counter. You can buy them at Mcdonalds sometimes. Its call the McRib.
 
2012-12-14 06:00:43 PM  
While I like the fact that more women would have access, I'm concerned. I had serious side effects to mine and it took quite a few changes in my prescription before we found one I could live with. Messing with hormones is a bad idea without a doctor's supervision.
 
2012-12-14 06:07:43 PM  

what_now: I actually disagree. Hormonal birth control should be monitored by a doctor. There can serious emotional and physical side effects from using BC, and a woman should be able to have a doctor prescribe and monitor her use, until they find the correct dosage.

Now, we should have single payer healthcare and BC should be free, but someone needs to prescribe it.


This and even if your basic orthotricycleen WAS safe and predictable enough to be otc, what about all the other options? Should the next generation of bc be forced to compete with ortho while being prescriptions based or should it get a fast track to otc?

Both of those are bad options. Jindal is kicking the can down the road so he can keep the retard vote without vocally supporting them. He has made his anti-science mistakes in the past and is smart enough to take and keep his foot out of his mouth for a while prior to a run for higher office.
 
2012-12-14 06:12:06 PM  

Nabb1: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Nabb1: what_now: I actually disagree. Hormonal birth control should be monitored by a doctor. There can serious emotional and physical side effects from using BC, and a woman should be able to have a doctor prescribe and monitor her use, until they find the correct dosage.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists disagrees. Link

As I said above, read that a little more carefully, they base a whole ton of their findings on phone surveys and some pretty loosey-goosey assumptions.

There are side effects to any OTC medication with long term use. A concerned woman should obviously talk to her physician about such usage, but there is no reason to restrict access to birth control to prescription-only. The objections to this seem more political than scientific, to me, anyway.


And will one's religious boss be forced to pay for an appointment about that? And if so, what dilemma have we sorted out, exactly?

Feel free to carry that line of thinking out as far as you like. If it makes the religious employers look like they haven't a leg to stand on it is because their argument is inconsistent relevent to the various things their insurance plan will cover anyway.
 
2012-12-14 06:23:53 PM  

Mr_Fabulous: sweetmelissa31: Is this a ploy to get people to pay more out of pocket for birth control?

I already do pay out-of-pocket for OTC birth control.

[t2.gstatic.com image 268x188]


When I was single the women payed.

pics1.ds-static.com
 
2012-12-14 06:56:09 PM  

lennavan: Exception Collection: The average woman might, yeah. The atypical woman, on the other hand, will be completely farked up by them meds. It's not a situation we design to the mean case - we decide based on the experiences of the outliers.

Yeah that's just completely not true. People are allergic to ibuprofen and may actually die from taking it. Ibuprofen is OTC. The atypical woman might have kidney problems and not know it. If she takes asprin, she's in some deep shiat. I can continue this forever with things you just accept as okay.

I'm sure you know where this will end up but let's play anyway. I have a new drug I want to be OTC. Here are its side effects:

stomach pain, tenderness, bloating,
constipation or diarrhea;
green-colored vomit;
blood in the stools;
unusual weakness;
seizure (convulsions);
twitching or uncontrolled muscle movements; or
fever, fast or slow heart rate.

Prescription or OTC? You'll never answer because you can actually feel the hammer ready to drop if you do.


I said we design for outliers, not 100% perfection. I don't know the percentages, but yes a small percentage of people always have issues with certain meds. With the meds that are OTC, those side effects are either incredibly rare, require abuse-level dosages/ignoring clear warnings or not severe. HBC has severe side effects in a minority of women, at the therapeutic dose, more than x% of the time. Despite that, because of complications and issues with overly expensive and/or backwards-ass pharmacists, doctors and hospitals a larger portion of the populace would be saved via OTC HBC vs the current system. If HBC and access to it were almost free, it would be better to have it be prescription.
 
2012-12-14 07:05:07 PM  

un4gvn666: lennavan: AgentKGB: Making an untrained woman personally in charge of ingesting medicine that has enormous hormonal change is hilariously irresponsible. People are still so damn hung up on this being about not getting pregnant, instead of the host of other effects BC pills have on a woman from cyst prevention to cycle regulation. Making it OTC divorces the process of consultation and medical expertise from it, and endangers women everywhere.

Also it is another huge payout to insurance industries who were only just recently mandated to cover BC. So.

THIS

I've known women who had more or less the same experience your wife did.

Get this - an untrained woman knows she is untrained and is more likely to report and follow-up on minor side effects. If she is under the care of a doctor, they are more likely to ignore it.

But don't let facts get in your way!

Report to who?


It is almost like he wants otc bc so that we can save a doctors apt but that women on it should see their doctors anyway.

Will my emplpyer pay for that apt?
 
2012-12-14 08:19:56 PM  
Anderson recognizes that the kind of tax increases Obama proposes aren't going to impinge on his life materially, and he supports them philosophically. But he adds that he thinks Obama and other Democrats make being rich "sound like a bad thing," which he says is a mistake.

I don't recall much that's been said about rich people in general by democrats, maybe about a couple of people in particular.

I do recall some AM radio hosts making this claim. Loudly, and often. Almost repeating something at escalating volume makes it true.
 
2012-12-14 08:35:28 PM  

vharshyde: Making birth control over the counter is a fast-track to watching a lot of women with heart problems Die. So thanks, Bobbie.

Additionally, it ensures 100% that birth control will not be covered by Any insurance plan, as insurance doesn't cover OTC medications, virtually ensuring that a greater majority of women won't have access to it. Don't for a second think that Jindal is trying to turn coats here, his agenda hasn't changed.


Sure, but on the other hand it would likely become cheaper and therefore more available. Maybe Bobbies idea would work for the wrong reasons. That almost sounds like a compromise.
 
2012-12-14 09:55:23 PM  

what_now: I actually disagree. Hormonal birth control should be monitored by a doctor. There can serious emotional and physical side effects from using BC, and a woman should be able to have a doctor prescribe and monitor her use, until they find the correct dosage.

Now, we should have single payer healthcare and BC should be free, but someone needs to prescribe it.


^ This
 
2012-12-14 10:34:43 PM  
Still waiting to hear where an individual's sexual choices falls under the purview of government....
 
2012-12-14 10:36:16 PM  

vharshyde: virtually ensuring that a greater majority of women won't have access to it.


When you say "access" what you really mean is "Free"

If it is sold OTC at CVS, I can access it. And i have a penis.
 
2012-12-14 10:48:04 PM  
No it should not. There are risks, amd some women absolutely should not use it.


/100% pro choice.
 
2012-12-15 02:13:57 AM  

o5iiawah: Still waiting to hear where an individual's sexual choices falls under the purview of government....


You are perhaps struck deaf when some Publican spews off about teh ghey?
 
2012-12-15 02:53:15 AM  
But Jindal claims in his op-ed that the idea that Republicans are opposed to birth control is "hogwash."

Ah, well then that explains why they so often preach that we should teach abstinence-only sex ed.
 
Displayed 50 of 224 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report