Isn’t it funny how contraceptives are free * * *, but malaria prevention isn’t?
Did you know that malaria is the most easily preventable disease of all catastrophic diseases in the world?
The use of an insecticide treated mosquito net that surrounds a person’s bed at night while they sleep, will prevent mosquito bites.
So would any one of a half dozen malaria medications.
One million Africans die PER YEAR from Malaria. The number of deaths caused by pregnancy is miniscule in comparison. Yet preventative measures and abortifacients for pregnancy are free for those who could most easily afford it. Malaria treatment and prevention costs, dearly, for those who can least afford it.
Malaria is just one example. Where are our priorities? Why do we consider it more important to prevent babies than prevent frequently terminal brain fever?
Jim Pettit wrote:
You must admit that contraceptives serve both purposes.
Posted on 08-Mar-08 at 11:50 am | Permalink
Brian wrote:
Well as for the malaria issue , the blame lies squarely at the feet of so called environmentalists such as Rachel Carlson and her fraudulent book Silent Spring which helped to convince US EPA czar , William Ruckelshaus who was also a closet “greenie” to ban DDT.
Posted on 08-Mar-08 at 12:18 pm | Permalink
Smarter than Ezra wrote:
Take a step back and look at this from the larger picture, why don’t you? You make it sound like this is the only trade off happeneing. My question is, why do we spend so much on security and the military when that money could be used to cure all disease in the world?
Sure, that sounds like leftist clap trap, but we spend more money looking for oil and protecting it than we do on preventing disease.
The trade-offs for government resources happen at much higher levels - once those decisions have been made, then people concerned with medical issues are left to fight over a very small pot of money in comparison.
It isn’t as simple as you are trying to frame this issue.
Posted on 08-Mar-08 at 12:47 pm | Permalink
Nick D. wrote:
“Well as for the malaria issue , the blame lies squarely at the feet of so called environmentalists such as Rachel Carlson and her fraudulent book Silent Spring which helped to convince US EPA czar , William Ruckelshaus who was also a closet “greenie” to ban DDT.”
Yes, how dare they ban a toxic substance from being sprayed all over environmentally sensitive areas and populations ??!
Posted on 08-Mar-08 at 1:36 pm | Permalink
Shane Edwards wrote:
I am not trying to frame the issue at all. I know that the government isn’t sitting there in the budget going, “hmm. Let’s see. We have $500 million for preventative medical support. Let’s spend it all on funding Plan B for Africans and screw all those poor blighters with Malaria.”
The point is that we the people, and the media as well, have a voice. We should be telling the government what our priorities are. And we are. We as a society consider birth control to be more important to Africans than malaria control. Hence, we lobby the government harder for it.
I say that is messed up. We need to reorder our priorities - not just as a government, but as a society. I mean, get a grip. It ain’t the end of the world if your 16 year old daughter has a baby. It is the end of the world if she catches malaria and dies.
Posted on 08-Mar-08 at 1:48 pm | Permalink
Reid wrote:
The world is over populated. Preventing conception should be free and it should cost money to fight disease and save/extend lives.
Yes I’m a cold hearted bastard. But we’ve been interferring with nature thinning out the herd on it’s own for too long now.
Posted on 08-Mar-08 at 7:53 pm | Permalink
Shane Edwards wrote:
Your position would certainly seem to explain the current philosophy employed by socialist developed nations. Funny, they would have us believe they aren’t heartless bastards, but bleeding heart liberals. Well, at least you’re honest about what drives you to that position.
Posted on 08-Mar-08 at 8:11 pm | Permalink
Reid wrote:
That’s how you can tell I’m no socialist. Unlike lefties I don’t try to pretend my $h1t don’t stink.
Posted on 08-Mar-08 at 9:16 pm | Permalink
Grog wrote:
Shane writes:
The number of deaths caused by pregnancy is miniscule in comparison.
This is about the most dishonest characterization of the picture that I’ve ever seen or heard of.
While I agree that anti-malarials should be much, much more available than they are, your insinuation of hypocrisy devalues your argument by overlooking the number of Africans who die every year from diseases like AIDS or any of a dozen other STIs.
Posted on 09-Mar-08 at 9:33 am | Permalink
Nick D. wrote:
Shane, you seem to be presenting this as an ‘either/or’ issue when really availability of both methods of prevention is possible (and imo both equally important!).
Posted on 09-Mar-08 at 1:01 pm | Permalink
Shane Edwards wrote:
I’ll tell you what’s dishonest, Grog. You not reading the post before taking pot shots. Never once did I say anything about condoms. Or STDs. I am talking about contraceptives. most contraceptives do nothing to prevent disease. They are about preventing conception. Did you not get the “life” thing? I didn’t say, “prevent one disease or another”.
Posted on 09-Mar-08 at 1:50 pm | Permalink
Grog wrote:
Shane, Condoms are by far the most common form of contraceptive out there. (and are significant parts of programs in Africa)
Ignoring that aspect of the picture distorts your argument in about a dozen different ways. If you wish to talk about life, then you have to ask the question about condoms - thorny questions like why the Church-run hospitals in parts of Africa won’t make condoms available? Or perhaps why the US funding rules yank funding from programs that teach about anything other Bush’s vaunted (and never happens) abstinence?
If you wish to talk arbitrarily about “lives in the balance”, especially in third world regions of the world, I claim that you must recognize the condom as part of that very picture.
Posted on 09-Mar-08 at 3:13 pm | Permalink
Charles Anthony wrote:
Shane,
I am going to honestly address your last questions in you Opening Post — although, I warn you now that I am cynical.
First of all, “we” do not consider it more important to prevent babies than to prevent anything else. In fact, there is no “we” in this scenario. Collective priorities do not exist. There are only middlemen disguised as benevolent charity workers who happen to score more money in the Third World Charity Business by peddling contraceptives. These middlemen make a living by lobbying governments and soliciting donations. Some of them may actually have a political agenda but I bet they are ruled by The Almighty Dollar more than anything else.
—-
It is unwise to assume that people in third world countries want contraception. Most poor people have only one insurance policy in life: their children.
Poor people can not rely on free health care, free retirement pensions, free anything. In their old age, their best bet is to have their children take care of them. Ergo, they have many children.
—-
I can not resist here:
Sounds kinky.
Posted on 10-Mar-08 at 7:21 am | Permalink