Speaking of misinformation - the corporate mouthpiece

Neil Harrington wrote:
"Birth control" is a misnomer when it's used to mean pregnancy prevention,
as it generally is.

In any case, pregnancy prevention whatever it's called is not "health care,"
unless there is a medical reason for avoiding pregnancy. In only a
vanishingly small number of cases is that true.

EFFECTS OF PREGNANCY (physical only--does not consider the economic
investment of time lost from career, emotional trauma of problem
pregnancies, and other non-physical repercussions.)

Normal, frequent or to-be-expected temporary side effects:

--exhaustion (weariness common from first weeks)
--increased appetite
--nausea and vomiting
--weight gain
--dizziness and light-headedness
--bloating and attendant discomfort
--hemmorhoids
--cramps
--backache--mild to severe
--increase headaches
--difficulty sleeping
--increased urination and incontinence
--swelling of joints, and some attendant pain
--difficulty sitting, standing later in pregnancy
--inability to take regular medications
--hair loss
--tendency to anemia
--infection
--hormonal mood changes
--extreme pain on delivery
--continued post-partum exhaustion and recovery period, exacerbated if
c-section (major surgery) is required, sometimes taking up to a full
year to fully recover

Here are the normal, to be expected, or frequent permanent side effects:

--stretch marks
--permanent aesthetic changes to the body, including permanent weight
gain or redistribution, loose skin, changes to breasts, varicose veins,
muscle weakness and other (downplayed by women because it's not
acceptable to admit to in a culture that values youth and beauty)
--scarring from episiotomy or c-section
--increased proclivity for hemmorhoids
--incontinence in old age
--loss of dental and bone calcium (cavities and osteoporosis)
--vaginal changes

Here are not uncommon, but not necessarily expected side effects:

--permanent injury to back
--severe scarring requiring later surgery, esp. with multiple pregnancies
--dropped uterus, esp. with multiple pregnancies
--eclampsia, pre-eclampsia (risk of death)
--gestational diabetes
--high blood pressure
--severe cramping
--blood clots
--medical disability requiring full bed rest--frequently ordered during
part of many pregnancies varying from days to months for health of
either mother or baby
--serious complications of pregnancy or delivery
--torn abdominal muscles
--severe infection
--hormonal imbalance
--severe post-partum depression and psychosis
--broken bones (ribcage, "tail bone")
--many others

Here are uncommon, but occurring permanent side effects:

--permanent disability and death

Pregnancy/childbirth was the leading cause of death of American women at the
turn of the century and remains the leading cause of death of women in many
countries in the world.

--
Ray Fischer

"Neil Harrington" wrote:
You are confusing two different concepts -- "health care" does not mean
"birth control."

True, those terms are not equivalent by any means.
But birth control is part of health care, just like washing your hands
or sufficient sleep or a heart transplant. And it is a lot cheaper than
a delivery with subsequent 18-25 years of expensive maintenance.

jue

John A. wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 00:39:49 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"John A." wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:54:30 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


Or do you really not understand the difference between "control"
and "prevention"?

I assume since you're in this NG you must have at least one DSLR.
It has certain exposure CONTROLS, does it not? Are any of them
called PREVENTIONS?
Do you say, for example, "Now I'm going to set this shutter speed
prevention
at 1/250"?

"Birth control" is a misnomer when it's used to mean pregnancy
prevention, as it generally is.

In any case, pregnancy prevention whatever it's called is not
"health care,"
unless there is a medical reason for avoiding pregnancy. In only a
vanishingly small number of cases is that true.

Not as small as you'd think.

Vanishingly small.

Funny that I should happen to know a couple. What are the odds of
that?

I don't know, but the number of pregnancies prevented by condom must be in
the tens of millions, at least.


Pretty good, actually, given that "the pill" is often prescribed to
treat PCOS, endometriosis, and even acne.

What does such use have to do with birth control? Emergency tracheotomies
have been performed with ball point pens, but that doesn't make writing by
hand a form of surgery.


In any case, you are obviously being deliberately obtuse in regards
to birth control being a part of healthcare in order to stubbornly
defend a faulty argument.

Then you should be able easily to show the fault in the argument. Is
it some sort of secret thing that you don't want to share?

That's right, Neil. I've been keeping it a secret from you that birth
control falls under the heading of healthcare. I guess the jig is up.
Now you know.

No, I already understood that you have for some reason confused "pregnancy
prevention" with "health care." What I'm baffled about is why you have
confused those two things. Do you know any women whose medical problems have
been corrected or improved by their significant other's using a condom? For
example, has that gotten rid of their gall stones, or cleared up their
sinuses?

Jürgen Exner wrote:
"Neil Harrington" wrote:
You are confusing two different concepts -- "health care" does not
mean "birth control."

True, those terms are not equivalent by any means.

Thank you.

But birth control is part of health care, just like washing your hands
or sufficient sleep or a heart transplant.

Well, washing your hands or getting sufficient sleep are not things most
people need health care insurance for. Here I think you are confusing
"health care" with "care of your health" -- insurance for the former is
something someone has to pay for, and the cost is usually considerable; the
latter has to do with being sensible about taking care of yourself and the
cost is usually little or nothing.

A heart transplant is in quite a different category.

And it is a lot cheaper
than a delivery with subsequent 18-25 years of expensive maintenance.

Suicide would be cheaper still, and would eliminate all future costs, fees,
charges, and even taxes. But very few people regard suicide as a form of
health care.

"John A." wrote in message
...
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:10:47 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:

John A. wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 00:39:49 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"John A." wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:54:30 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


Or do you really not understand the difference between "control"
and "prevention"?

I assume since you're in this NG you must have at least one DSLR.
It has certain exposure CONTROLS, does it not? Are any of them
called PREVENTIONS?
Do you say, for example, "Now I'm going to set this shutter speed
prevention
at 1/250"?

"Birth control" is a misnomer when it's used to mean pregnancy
prevention, as it generally is.

In any case, pregnancy prevention whatever it's called is not
"health care,"
unless there is a medical reason for avoiding pregnancy. In only a
vanishingly small number of cases is that true.

Not as small as you'd think.

Vanishingly small.

Funny that I should happen to know a couple. What are the odds of
that?

I don't know, but the number of pregnancies prevented by condom must be in
the tens of millions, at least.


Pretty good, actually, given that "the pill" is often prescribed to
treat PCOS, endometriosis, and even acne.

What does such use have to do with birth control? Emergency tracheotomies
have been performed with ball point pens, but that doesn't make writing by
hand a form of surgery.

But pens are not routinely used for such purposes,

That's the point, yes. That something is used for other than its design
purpose does not negate the fact that it has a design purpose. Al Capone's
favorite instrument for dispatching an unfaithful associate is said to have
been a baseball bat applied vigorously to the head. Abe Reles of Murder Inc.
is known to have preferred an ice pick to the back of the neck. And so on.

nor are they FDA
approved for such use. (Not that anyone would complain if that's all
that was available, unless it happened in a facility that should have
the proper devices.)

In any case, you are obviously being deliberately obtuse in regards
to birth control being a part of healthcare in order to stubbornly
defend a faulty argument.

Then you should be able easily to show the fault in the argument. Is
it some sort of secret thing that you don't want to share?

That's right, Neil. I've been keeping it a secret from you that birth
control falls under the heading of healthcare. I guess the jig is up.
Now you know.

No, I already understood that you have for some reason confused "pregnancy
prevention" with "health care." What I'm baffled about is why you have
confused those two things. Do you know any women whose medical problems
have
been corrected or improved by their significant other's using a condom?
For
example, has that gotten rid of their gall stones, or cleared up their
sinuses?

Do I really need to explain to you how condoms can prevent disease?

No. Of course abstinence will prevent STD even more surely than condoms, but
I don't know of anyone who thinks of it as "health care."

"John A." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 17:19:49 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"John A." wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:10:47 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:

John A. wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 00:39:49 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"John A." wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:54:30 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


Or do you really not understand the difference between "control"
and "prevention"?

I assume since you're in this NG you must have at least one DSLR.
It has certain exposure CONTROLS, does it not? Are any of them
called PREVENTIONS?
Do you say, for example, "Now I'm going to set this shutter speed
prevention
at 1/250"?

"Birth control" is a misnomer when it's used to mean pregnancy
prevention, as it generally is.

In any case, pregnancy prevention whatever it's called is not
"health care,"
unless there is a medical reason for avoiding pregnancy. In only a
vanishingly small number of cases is that true.

Not as small as you'd think.

Vanishingly small.

Funny that I should happen to know a couple. What are the odds of
that?

I don't know, but the number of pregnancies prevented by condom must be
in
the tens of millions, at least.


Pretty good, actually, given that "the pill" is often prescribed to
treat PCOS, endometriosis, and even acne.

What does such use have to do with birth control? Emergency
tracheotomies
have been performed with ball point pens, but that doesn't make writing
by
hand a form of surgery.

But pens are not routinely used for such purposes,

That's the point, yes. That something is used for other than its design
purpose does not negate the fact that it has a design purpose. Al Capone's
favorite instrument for dispatching an unfaithful associate is said to
have
been a baseball bat applied vigorously to the head. Abe Reles of Murder
Inc.
is known to have preferred an ice pick to the back of the neck. And so on.

nor are they FDA
approved for such use. (Not that anyone would complain if that's all
that was available, unless it happened in a facility that should have
the proper devices.)

In any case, you are obviously being deliberately obtuse in regards
to birth control being a part of healthcare in order to stubbornly
defend a faulty argument.

Then you should be able easily to show the fault in the argument. Is
it some sort of secret thing that you don't want to share?

That's right, Neil. I've been keeping it a secret from you that birth
control falls under the heading of healthcare. I guess the jig is up.
Now you know.

No, I already understood that you have for some reason confused
"pregnancy
prevention" with "health care." What I'm baffled about is why you have
confused those two things. Do you know any women whose medical problems
have
been corrected or improved by their significant other's using a condom?
For
example, has that gotten rid of their gall stones, or cleared up their
sinuses?

Do I really need to explain to you how condoms can prevent disease?

No. Of course abstinence will prevent STD even more surely than condoms,
but
I don't know of anyone who thinks of it as "health care."

And yet abstinance-only sex education programs have more students
getting pregnant than those that teach them to use condoms and other
birth control. I haven't heard the figures, but I would expect the STD
rate differences to be comparable.

So what? Have you forgotten what you're arguing about?


As for the second part of your reply, since you won't take my word for
it, I suggest you ask your doctor if patient education is part of
health care.

Equally irrelevant. You seem to be an inexhaustible source of non sequiturs,
I'll give you that.