Posted March 7, 2012 at 6:43pm · Edited April 3, 2012 at 7:48pm · Just Curious

Lost in the media frenzy of who called whom what is the point that "womens health" must be provided for free--without a deductible, or a co-pay.

Not just $9/month birth controls pills--sterilization procedures (surgeon, outpatient surgical center, anesthesiology, etc).

Oddly, however, Kathleen Sibelius has not seen fit to provide breast cancer treatment without a deductible or co-pay. In fact, Kathleen Sibelius saw fit to explicitly prohibit federal funds from being used to pay for a drug that was regarded as effective in treating late-stage breast cancer. 

Alas, I can't remember the name of the drug. Anybody know?

Why is the Obama Administration so willing to perform sterilizations--but so unwilling to provide care for breast cancer victims?

Join Ricochet or Sign In to add your comment.

Answer by whatmeworry

Posted March 13, 2012 at 6:06am

I believe you may be thinking of Avastin ?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203611404577046133283707236.html

Join Ricochet or Sign In to add your comment.


Would you like to answer this Question?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In