Alejandro Garcia Rhodes English 201 12 June 2009 Will the HPV vaccine save or kill lives Opponents and proponents of mandatory vaccinations have a huge dilemma. On one hand, Gardasil, a new Merck drug may prevent the human papilloma virus (HPV), from infecting millions of women worldwide. On the other hand, others are skeptical of administering the vaccine at all. Several bills have been introduced which would of informed parents about the HPV vaccine, and require them to vaccinate their daughters before entering middle school. The new Merck drug, Gardasil, should not be mandated by the federal government because it is a violation of parental rights and fast tracking a new vaccine could prove to be disastorous.
An example of fallacies from the article would be, when or if you take away birth control more women will get pregnant and our world will indeed over populate. This is a great example because I am using fear to scare the readers. An example of using specific rhetorical devices in our speech would be for example; taking away birth control will prevent more teenage pregnancies or actually have a drastic increase in diseases and pregnancies than expected. This is a good example because it is stating two sides and is contradictory for a higher meaning. * How did the speaker address arguments and counterarguments?
This is one of the main risk factors for developing breast cancer. Men can develop breast cancer, but this disease is about one hundred times more common among women than men B. A patient would probable choose to have a prophylactic mastectomy, which is the removal of a healthy breast, done in order to reduce risks of developing breast cancer in the healthy breast. Women, who decide to have a prophylactic mastectomy done, mostly end up with a nearly zero percent risk of having breast cancer. C. If Mary had not had the left breast mastectomy done, the ductal carcinoma in situ would probably cause her problems in the future.
Statistics do not show the US as a stand-out performer in either quality or quantity. A recent study published in Health Affairs states: “the United States often stands out for inefficient care and errors and is an outlier on access/cost barriers.” Streamlining payment through a single nonprofit payer per the PNHP would save more than $400 billion per year. The PNHP is not alone in their belief. Health Care Now and the recently proposed “Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act,” H.R. 676 introduce plans to provide health care for all, give consumers the most choices, provide strong health coverage and saves money for government, business and individuals.
Ra’anan Sistare ENG 112 Dr. Boyer 6/5/15 Why Anabolic Steroids Should be Legal “Die young, die strong, Dianabol.” This is the motto chanted by 40 percent of teenage steroid users that said they wouldn’t stop regardless of potential or apparent side effects. Young and veteran users of Anabolic Steroids seem to outweigh the benefits of using versus the side effects or dangers of using. Blown out of proportion by the media, outlawed by the federal government, and not nearly enough education on steroids has led to many users overdosing and harming themselves. Anabolic Steroids should be legalized and allowed in sports because they are safe when safely administered, already extremely accessible, and can allow for individuals to reach their
These people are projected to have incomes too high to qualify for their state’s existing Medicaid programs, but below the federal poverty level (nearly $11,500 for an individual) required to be eligible for federal subsidies to buy private coverage on the new online insurance marketplaces set up by the Affordable Care Act. Medicaid is the state-federal health insurance program for the poor. “Millions of adults will remain outside the reach of the ACA and continue to have limited, if any, options for health coverage,” the study concludes. The law provides full federal funding for three years to states that expand Medicaid to cover residents under 138 percent of the poverty level (or just under $15,900 for an individual). But the Supreme Court made that requirement effectively optional for states, and most Republican led-states have opted against expanding the
Ohio does not mandate breast reconstruction after mastectomy like many other states. Breast reconstruction can be a very pricey procedure. The cost of implant reconstruction can range from $10,000 to $30,000 total. The most commonly used implant is a saline filled implant with a silicone shell on the outside layer. Implants don’t always last a lifetime and sometimes have to be replaced, with in the first ten years.
Pharmaceutics researchers should take marijuana more seriously as a source of new treatments, especially in the field of AIDS research, where promising treatments are few and far between. It is difficult, considering the reputation of marijuana as a recreational drug, for the medical community to take it seriously as a subject of research. But for millions of patients suffering from glaucoma, it is one of the most promising treatments for inter-ocular pressure, and as such should be treated like any other substance under scrutiny as a viable
The Standard is Zero Preventable Harm MAJ Tyler Burningham DMD Zero preventable harm must be the goal of every healthcare provider and the mission of every healthcare facility. According to a 2013 report, between 210,000 and 440,000 patients die yearly as a result of preventable medical errors.1 Death is one problem with preventable mistakes, fixing the mistake will waste money and resources. Additional appointments will be needed, medical supplies used, and hospital staff working longer hours. Why are providers and hospital administration content with such high rates of preventable errors. I have heard so many poor excuses, but the fact of the matter is they are nothing but excuses.
Although this is true, I believe it is a human right that does not need to be listed in such a document to be recognized. The cons of Universal Healthcare include a decrease in competition, decrease in quality due to increased demand, and an increase in government spending. This may also prove to be true but quality doesn’t have to suffer as the government could offer incentives for high achieving students to become doctors thus providing well-staffed facilities. Yes, historically when government intervenes with healthcare, spending does increase. Although this is correct, the government uses taxpayer money to fund wars for our “well-being” and safety so why shouldn’t Healthcare also be funded in this way?