I feel like this is similar to asking your insurance to cover NyQuil and Tylenol. Not exactly unreasonable for them to stick to what they’ve been covering so far, and not expanding into otc just because it is birth control. It’s equivalent also to asking them to buy your condoms.
The thing is your doctor can absolutely prescribe you Tylenol (or at least acetaminophen), and your insurance will cover it. I’ve been prescribed ibuprofen before. Just because it’s over the counter doesn’t mean your doctor can’t prescribe it, and the OTC things insurance will cover already is pretty broad: diabetes supplies and COVID tests, for example.
I would’ve assumed the insurance companies would weigh the cost of birth control vs. the costs associated with pregnancy and childbirth and that they’d prefer the cheaper option, but I’m not sure how exactly medical insurance works in the U.S so maybe I just have an idealistic view!
I was surprised there were no incentives from my pet insurance for me getting my dogs spayed, but they were quite clear that they didn’t cover any costs relating to having puppies and I would hope medical insurance would cover pregnancy and childbirth…
I don’t see that going well for those headscarf police. The populace isn’t putting up with it anymore. Those police are going to be beaten up pretty badly at least.
U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut ruled that banning large capacity magazines and requiring a permit to purchase a gun falls in line with “the nation’s history and tradition of regulating uniquely dangerous features of weapons and firearms to protect public safety,” Oregon Public Broadcasting reported.
They are going to have a hard time proving magazine capacity limits have historical precedent on appeal. Such gun control was only implemented within the last few decades.
Well, older than that. Gun control are the last of the Jim Crow laws. Its why you have to pay giant tax stamps and get permits and all, its to keep minorities from arming themselves.
We can keep going if you want more links and maybe a peer-reviewed study. Any form of limiting firearms is rooted in racism to restrict minorities from having agency in their communities.
@JustZ how the fuck are you a lawyer and never understood the history of firearm legislation? Nepotism sounds likely.
The judge is dumb because I, an idiot, can not read anywhere in the U.S. Constitution where it says the Second Amendment was written with self-defense in mind.
It literally only says that everyone can own a firearm because a militia (an organization that exists outside of the military or law enforcement institutions, but answers to a state governor) is necessary to maintain a free country protected from any threats to the country.
And a militia can't exist without regular people being able to own guns, so they can train with them, hence where it says "well regulated militia": meaning in good working order. You can't have a militia in good working order without being able to train with your firearm.
Five years ago does not sound right to me at all, but I looked it up and apparently it was in 2018, so I guess it has been five years after all. Total mandela effect moment for me.
Poster is also a China-shill/misinformation operator. Check their post/comment history. Sowing confusion and hatred all around is abc in their playbook.
Wait, what if this is just a massive misunderstanding?
It could be the Kentucky Konnected Kommunity? A service that just happens to share the same unfortunate… Wait no, it’s just a bunch of backwards racist snowflakes? Oh well.
We all know that their browser history is completely full of jungle fever. I hope some day they embrace it fully.
There’s a bigger picture at play too. China has been making itself attractive for researchers in general. It’s not just Chinese scientists moving back. An increasing number of other scientists are choosing to work in China over the U.S.
In fields where China was pushing it earlier we’re starting to see the results already. There are several fields where a plurality of top tier publications come from China.
No idea if China is better but western academia requires spending 95% of your time playing politics/begging for funding and pays worse than fast food for the first decade or so whilst requiring you to go into debt you will never pay off while everyone around you not-in-academia accuses you of being a woke coastal elite, grooming children, and spreading lies about poor defenseless shell and chevron for profit.
Debt is likely less of an issue here. These are PhDs and they tend to be funded by grants. Students typically pay no tuition and get some stipend for expenses.
Of course, graduating debt free with a PhD in molecular biology from a top program is less exciting when you can’t land a single interview for a junior faculty role.
Industry may pay twice as much but if you love research and China offers you lab space, you’ll consider it.
China now graduates almost twice as many STEM PhDs as the US does. A lot of people move after their PhD but they tend to stay in country.
I also think, anecdotally, that new PhDs have a harder time finding a job here.
Overall China just seems to make more effort to attract scientists. They promise, and deliver, the two things scientists care about, funding and academic freedom.
No, it’s the same incident but it was another guy called Vernon Unsworth, I think he was the head of the operation whereas the one in the article was “just” one of the guys on the team providing medical aid.
I’m also glad that the article does not mention Musk and his whole stupid PR stunt at all but instead focuses on the people actually involved.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.