Classic medical advice: you're darned if you did and you're darned if
Anything else they'd like to "make" us do?
Just what we need, more government regulation of our personal lives. Long live
the nanny state!
Isn't this part of Obamacare? The part no one knows is there, yet?
If the govt is going to 'make' us take the aspirin, then the govt is
going to have to pay for the aspirin. No worries, though. Just make it part of
Obamacare and, if you are 40+ years old, the govt can just mail it to our homes.
And we can check a box on our income tax returns stating whether we took it or
Nowhere in this article does it say the government is "making" anyone do
anything--except the headline. But, it does get the Republican sheep
going, doesn't it? haaaLearn to read before you bahhh
I know there are documented benefits to taking Aspirin, but I have concerns with
the notion that governments demanding things is the solution. There are a ton
of other health-related aspects where government influence has not improved
situations. Additionally, if the government is going to step in and demand
things, then maybe work to keep people from blowing second-hand smoke in my face
in any public setting or regulating smokers' thoughts that the world (and
my hood on the highway) is their personal ashtray.A few years ago I
began taking a baby Aspirin each day following my Dad have a stint inserted due
to heart issues. The use of the Aspirin correlated with tinnitus and
Meniere's-like symptoms which included horrible ringing and other sounds in
my ear along with debilitating vertigo. I can't say the cause was the
aspirin for sure but those symptoms decreased dramatically when I ceased taking
the daily dose of Aspirin. Others have reported similar issues so requiring
everyone to take it may inadvertently bring about some side effects.Oh and it's actually trademarked as "Obamacareless."
Superfluous. Republican sheep? haaaa. According to the last election, there are
far more Obama sheep running around bleating for more free stuff and that always
gets them going. Now, if we can just figure out how the rest of us are going to
pay for it all! Now there is an interesting question, isn't it?
Oh for crying out loud!One doctor somewhere makes a proposal --
whether good or bad or just as a point of discussion (or maybe even just a joke)
-- and the ultrarightwingnuts go even more nuts.I'm wondering
if the DN news headline writer thought he'd toss a little red meat out just
What a misleading headline. How could the government "make" anyone take
aspirin? What the article SAYS is "why not make it public policy to
encourage middle-aged people to use aspirin?” Calm down righties. Again
you're getting your knickers in a twist over nothing.
@MountanmanYou wanted a 20% tax cut so you're in no position to
complain about other people wanting free stuff.
"Make" v. "Encourage" aside, there is a VAST difference between
MMR/polio and cancer/heart disease: Cancer and heart disease are not
communicable ailments. Taking aspirin might be a good idea, but failure to do so
puts no-one else at risk.
@MountanmanTake an aspirin"Vote for Romney"...but
don't call me in the morning...what am I going to do with ALL
this "free stuff"?
@ atl134: Wait a minute. Keeping my own hard-earned money is somehow
"getting free stuff"?! Difficult logic at best.
To summarize the far right's response to this article: If the government
learns about scientific studies that show an aspirin a day would help most
adults avoid some types of disease, the government must under no circumstances
publicize that information. If the government mentions the results of this
research in any way, that in and of itself constitutes the government
"telling me what to do". It is much better if I remain in ignorance of
any scientific fact if the alternative is that the government makes any
recommendation based on scientific research. Does that about cover it?
One old manWell, you've got to admit that with all the unknowns
in "Obamacare' that people could reasonably jump to conclusions that
weren't necessarily true but plant ideas for down the road in the minds of
those with the "cradle-to-grave" mentality of regulations (that liberals
seem to enjoy).This whole discussion is just funny. Obama wants
free contraception for those who profess to not believe in it, yet they vote for
him anyway because now it's "free" and a "personal choice."
People are very entertaining in what they want, demand or will tolerate from
their government and I include not only national but state, county and city.
@toosmartforyou -- The only people who would jump to such a silly conclusion
(that the government was going to come in your house every day and check to see
if you'd taken your daily aspirin) are people who believe in every crackpot
conspiracy theory that comes along. Never mind any logic or truth. The only
thing these fearful folks care about is: Does this piece of info involve Obama
or the government and make my blood boil? Well then I believe it!!
Why would I find this objectionable? Why not make people "quit smoking"
or "eat less fat and/or sugar" or even, this is a great thought,
"stop drinking?" Just think of all the unused cancer centers that
we'd have without smoking and fewer funerals without DUI's, etc. Man,
this is something that we ought to do right away! And while we're at it,
make everyone own a gun and keep it loaded for personal safety (oh, oh, now
we'll need those funeral palors after all) and limit cars from going the
wrong way on freeways, speeding etc. We can all be SAFE as we become robots!I'm sure the good doctor was making a joke....don't you
realize doctors "joke" about health care all the time? (Then they charge
you for your visit, whether they helped you or not.)Good ideas,
here, to MAKE everything safer and better. (Outlaw war too---weapons are
expensive and we could use the money to help us all "go green," another
worthy federal government goal that should be required of everyone.)Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.....what an article and reaction(s) to it. (Sarcasm to the
@toono actaully if you have not taken the time ot educate yourself on this
issue there is no one to blame but yourself and using lack of understanding of
the law makes ofr a weak argument.
@ TolstoySo what, in your mind, is the issue? Is it what "Why
would I" talks about and the headline references as to mandatory ingestion
of medication and the loss os ability to decide for one's self about health
issues, or it is the fact that medical research has shown that certain medicines
tend to help reduce health problems as people age and such could benefit
everyone? To which law are you making reference? Remember the flap
that ensued what Uncle Sam decided that ketchup in a school lunch qualified as a
vegetable? Is this similarly ridiculous or not?It sounds to me like
many commentors jumped into the fray regarding the headline and not necessarily
the article itself. Can't you handle that? I see more than one issue here
so what about you? What do you see?
I love a well placed post, without the benefit of a sarcasm font. Not sure
whether its the "ultrarightwingnuts" or the
"ultraleftuptighties" that make it the most fun...
I am so excited about my new life of free stuff from the government
(hyperventilating). The only thing I am bummed out about is I wasted so much of
my life working and paying taxes when I didn't need to! I can qualify for
free housing, free food stamps, unemployment checks, free healthcare, free birth
control pills for my wife, free abortions for my daughter until she is 26, and
yes, even a free phone) Wait! What's that you greedy, selfish Republicans
are saying..'who is going to pay for all my new found free stuff'? I
don't care, I am a Democrat now! Whooopie isn't life great?
All joking aside, anyone who has an ulcer will rue the day they took this
aspirin advice. Internal bleeding is no joke. Aspirin only aggravates the
bleeding, causing frequent heartburn and stomach pain.
The DN article cites an op-ed piece written by David Agus and provides a
connection to that article. In that article the author suggests:"When does regulating a person’s habits in the name of good health
become our moral and social duty? The answer, I suggest, is a two-parter: first,
when the scientific data clearly and overwhelmingly demonstrate that one
behavior or another can substantially reduce — or, conversely, raise
— a person’s risk of disease; and second, when all of us are stuck
paying for one another’s medical bills (which is what we do now, by way of
Medicare, Medicaid and other taxpayer-financed health care programs)."If the government has power to tell me I must have health insurance or
be fined, it also has power to regulate the things I do (or don't do) to
@meta -- But the thing is, how in the world is the government going to determine
that you've taken your daily aspirin? How can anyone with any common sense
think that this would be a law or regulation that the government would enact?
Whether or not you buy insurance is easily measurable. What do you seriously
think the government is going to do to make sure you take your aspirin? Draw
your blood on a daily basis? Send someone to your house to watch you take your
pill? Of course not. Thus it is lunacy to really be afraid of something like
this. I think people just look for things to be afraid of. It's quite
I cannot take aspirin. It eats my stomach walls. I cry after taking a half
Why object to the emphasis on good health measures? We casually accept 1000+
deaths per day in the US from tobacco use. Why not casually accept sound medical
advice? Anyone who makes this a liberal v. conservative issue is badly
re: Mountanman"According to the last election, there are far
more Obama sheep running around bleating for more free stuff and that always
gets them going. "At least, 47% of the populace, right????
Interesting information provided.