Cancer vaccine for dogs almost doubles survival rates in clinical trial
Cancer vaccine for dogs almost doubles survival rates in clinical trial
The biggest tragedy of pet ownership is that they just don’t live long enough. Thankfully scientists are working on that, with a new cancer vaccine for dogs that almost doubles their survival rates in the face of certain types of the disease.
You're viewing a single thread.
can't afford to get my old man back fixed, but rich people dogs gonna live forever
In America, you can get free coverage if you are broke enough.
Where are you living? What kind of income?
And you think dog vaccines are bad because you have other problems? You should be embarrassed for letting your hurt turn into intentionally wishing more pain and death on others.
I'm sure your father would love to see your love for him turn into pointless hatred for dogs.
Backs are notoriously hard to fix. And low coverage often will not cover anything more than physical therapy and an opium addiction.
There are states where you can’t get medical coverage from the state unless you’re a child or disabled. Every state didn’t expand Medicaid eligibility and every state runs its healthcare system differently.
If you’re going to veer into such an intentionally bad faith reading of someone else’s comment you should at least be right about what you’re saying.
What states are you talking about? What bad faith discussion?
Projection. Yall just want to shit on a system ypu don't understand. Definitively a bad faith dispute.
What kind of people defend shitting on cancer vaccinations of any type?
It’s easy to search it yourself, but there are 10 states that haven’t expanded Medicaid. People in these states who are “just” poor (not disabled or children) do not have access to low/no cost healthcare as you suggested.
Reading someone saying they wish they could get their back fixed and complaining about rich people’s pets having a better standard of healthcare than people, then jumping straight to “they hate dogs and want them to die of cancer” is bad faith. Their feelings about dogs are clearly not the subject of their comment. It’s a complaint about the system that has left them without adequate access to healthcare.
It's obviously not that easy, seeing as how you have created a strawman and are arguing false information.
The claim wasn't about the expansion of medicaid, it was that free coverage exists in all states.
Texas is one of your 10 listed states but has a "Charity Care" law for all non profit hospitals requiring they provide free aid to those that qualify.
https://www2.texasattorneygeneral.gov/faq/access-to-health-care-qa
People who pretend a topic is simple to dismiss the claims of others are typically wrong.
By National law, you are required to be provided any kind of emergency care needed, https://www.patientadvocate.org/explore-our-resources/preventing-medical-debt/uninsured-and-facing-an-emergency-know-your-rights/.
Seems like you are full of shit and want to strawman the topic to be about medicaid expansion.
The hate dogs portion is to address their actual comment which shits on a vaccine for dogs because of coverage not offered by their government. You're just another shitty person looking to justify hating on modern medicine because you're bitter.
It's bad faith to pretend a direct address to his shitty comment is bad faith because it upsets you. I was holding my dog who is currently dying of cancer, while typing that portion, so I would love for you to have said this shit to my face. Fuck his and your shitty attitude on medicine for dogs. Would be pure poetry for the two of yall to taste cancer treatments to know what yall are wishing on people.
Seeing as how you can't piece together a thought that isn't 100% pieced together by bullshit, I'm going to move on from this convo. Have a good one.
In America, you can get free coverage if you are broke enough.
Can you tell me who gives broke people free coverage for chemo? How about physical therapy after a serious injury? Mental health care?
Medicaid has different income limits for different states. For a family of 3 in Michigan it's about 2755 per month. If you make less (per household) you qualify for Medicaid. Search "Medicaid Requirements" plus your state. Everything is covered. The 2400ish we bring home a month barely covers our bills, but it's worth it for Medicaid if you have a chronic health condition (or on our case my spouse, our child, and myself all have serious health conditions). My medication for my pituitary deficiency would cost me thousands a month. My spouse and child have a genetic vascular condition and they need scans every year to make sure they're not about to die.
Another thing you can do is a Medicaid spend down. I'm not sure how it is for every other state. But let's say your limit is 3000 for your family but your income is 4000 and your medical bills are 2000 a month. You pay the difference between your income and the limit (1000), and Medicaid covers the rest. I believe you have to have a serious health issue to qualify for a Medicaid spend down.
If you are low enough income to qualify for SSI, Medicaid is given automatically (I think in every state).
In our state of Michigan you apply for Medicaid at DHHS. They have a very easy to use website for a few years now (it was a big hassle before that). Let me know if you have more questions about this.
Hey, thanks for the detailed breakdown.
Cherrypicking.
The point is we are way better off than most nations on healthcare. You could be stuck in Russia where your medical options are get drafted to the front line and killed in your sleep by fellow soldiers over who gets the last soup.
Sorry... how am I cherrypicking by proving my point that being poor doesn't necessarily get you chemo?
How does it prove your point that, "In America, you can get free coverage if you are broke enough?" Because it seems like it shows the exact opposite.
You didn't prove that chemo isn't provided coverage, you provided select times where coverage doesn't sustain long term.
The claim was never all medical bills is covered in the USA.
And that has nothing to do with what the previous commenter said that you quoted your response too.
It's nitpicking for holes in a statement made about the place where coverage is. Yall aren't interested in solutions to "my old man's back problems." Yall are looking for a political point to bitch about to justify shitting on a cancer vaccine.
The claim was never all medical coverage is covered in the USA.
Sorry, what does: "In America, you can get free coverage if you are broke enough" mean then?
It means "In America, you can get free coverage for certain things if you are broke enough but for other things, unless you have money, too bad, you're going to die?"
I'm not going to write to a person that can't read. You are literally demonstrating how you have to rewrite what was there to justify your idiotic responses.
Nothing in that sentence is a 100% guarantee and it obviously opens up the door to needing more information to tell.
That isn't the comment you left your response to either, dipshit.
I hope you get a chance to encounter uncurable cancer of your loved ones so you can have a little empathy for these moments.