Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

First Responders Bill Doesn't Cover Cancer

Page 1 of 1 [ 5 posts ] 

Previous topic | Next topic

number5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

29 Jul 2011, 1:15 pm

Just when we thought we finally passed a bill to provide healthcare coverage to the 9/11 workers, we now find out the this bill does not cover cancer. Really?! It covers laryngitis and carpel tunnel, but not cancer. Apparently, there's not a direct, proven link between the cancers suffered by the workers and the huge pile of carcinogen-laced debris they were cleaning up.

On his show last night, Jon Stewart said, "“Who gives a [bleep]? The worst-case scenario here is we accidentally treat a 9/11 responder’s cancer, even though his cancer may not be proven to have its gen­esis on 9/11.”

http://www.salon.com/news/morning_clip/ ... r_coverage



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

30 Jul 2011, 5:46 pm

How ridiculous. And how can Jon Stewart say that, especially as a New Yorker! I've lost all respect for him.



number5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

31 Jul 2011, 1:17 pm

I believe you misunderstood. He was saying who cares whether the link, that's so glaringly obvious, is scientifically proven or not. The bill should cover cancer with or without the link.

Stewart is actually largely credited with getting this bill passed in the first place. It's just a slap in the face how they've removed the most substantial part of it in a effort to save a buck. I'm pretty sure the link to laryngitis or asthma can't be proven with 100% accuracy either, but treating these illnesses is more affordable, so it's not an issue.



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

31 Jul 2011, 1:20 pm

donnie_darko wrote:
How ridiculous. And how can Jon Stewart say that, especially as a New Yorker! I've lost all respect for him.
Did you actually understand what he said?

Edit: Ok, since it was already explained. What he means is that he doesn't get why is this so important. It is as if the government were trying too hard to avoid unnecessarily curing cancer on heroes...


_________________
.


donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

31 Jul 2011, 4:36 pm

number5 wrote:
I believe you misunderstood. He was saying who cares whether the link, that's so glaringly obvious, is scientifically proven or not. The bill should cover cancer with or without the link.

Stewart is actually largely credited with getting this bill passed in the first place. It's just a slap in the face how they've removed the most substantial part of it in a effort to save a buck. I'm pretty sure the link to laryngitis or asthma can't be proven with 100% accuracy either, but treating these illnesses is more affordable, so it's not an issue.


Oh okay, I get it now.