Monday, November 26, 2007

Men's health funding 'unfashionable'?

Billions of pounds were spent telling us we were ALL at risk from Aids. But as scientists now admit the threat was overblown, Britain's top cancer expert attacks the political correctness that influences too much medical spending.

Also see:

Breast cancer currently receives 10 times more NHS funding than prostate cancer. Even acounting for the older age of most prostate cancer patients, the statistics do not appear to support this inequity. There are 41,700 new cases of breast cancer diagnosed per year, compared to 32,000 of prostate cancer. Breast cancer kills 12,400 women per year while prostate cancer kills 10,000 men.

3 comments:

mike savell said...

Women have the whip hand in anything which has to be funded.
Men are such a pathetic group of people now,they mostly seem to belong to a femdom club.The answer is for all men to ask for a sex change,they might then get a decent press.

Hawaiian Libertarian said...

This reminds me...have you ever encountered a feminist-minded person that sneers at the popularity of Viagra/Levitra and other ED medications?

Or those that are outraged at the company insurance policies that cover ED medication, but not birth control?

They all act as if ED meds solely benefit men.

These selfish, self-centered creatures can't even fathom the thought that ED medication actually benefits the Wives and Girlfriends who love men with ED...

Curiepoint said...

ED is usually a symptom of a more serious medical condition, all of them potentially life threatening. Treating the symptoms of an illness is equally valid in the eyes of most medical and insurance professionals. Keep in mind that Viagra was a blood pressure medication that had the side effect of improving erectile function.

Birth control is entirely elective. However, if the femnags insist, I am all for making it coverable by insurance, just as long as it becomes a mandatory program for most of them.