Are gay men more at risk for cancer? (New study says Yes)

Reuters ^ | May 9, 2011 | Genevra Pittman

[Morgana]

[Pontiac]

Nope, since homos are a politically preferred group, they’ll get all the resources they need to continue spreading their moral and physical diseases.

Yes I realize that is a likely outcome.

However all things being equal (they never are of course) Obama care implemented as intended would impact the homosexual community rather hard. Especially AIDS victims as there is no identified cure and it is costly to treat.

[Pontiac]

[Scientists] agree that there is still an important message [besides the need for more government funded research] to take away from the findings: gay, lesbian and bisexual people need more attention from the healthcare community, specifically when it comes to their cancer risks.

Another theoretical result of Obama care would be that so called “Orphan” diseases (rare diseases afflicting tiny portions of the population) would be even more neglected .

Homosexual men being about 3 percent of the population and any specific disease of that population would constitute an insignificant number of individuals therefore there could be no fiscal justification for investing dollars in research on those diseases.

[Chode]

damn FDRQ...

[MrB]

No fiscal justification, of course.

However, the quintessence of liberal/leftist ideology is the wielding of power unequally in order to reward politically friendly groups and punish opponent groups.

There is NO WAY the equivalent of “NICE” (and I bet you could even look at how NICE and see disproportionate spending) would simply be examining each case fiscally and not politically.

I assert that this is THE core reason for implementing such a system here.