What made you go WTF today?

[Aimless]

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...-cancer-fungus

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...n-cure-cancer/

Dodgy GOP lawmaker claims cancer is a fungus and that it can be flushed out with saltwater and baking soda, coincidentally runs dodgy home-healthcare business man this is some Lewkowskian kinda shit

[Loki]

In England, the government healthcare system pays for homeopathic cures.

[Flixy]

Over here you need to take out extra insurance to get it covered. Glad I had something I could easily choose not to take without much thought

[earthJoker]

In England, the government healthcare system pays for homeopathic cures.

Here sometimes too, and we even voted for it. Well I didn't, I voted against it. But all the other fools

[Aimless]

It is one of the more odd features of the British healthcare system. I mean, on some level I can see how you might allow it in select extremely hopeless and tragic cases, even though even that feels a little off to me, but the NHS (in many places) seems to have a far more generous and far less defensible policy.

[Loki]

And yet they won't pay for new cancer drugs because they're expensive.

[Aimless]

And yet they won't pay for new cancer drugs because they're expensive.

It is indeed very suspect, although I believe the numbers (and other things) still work out against the cancer drugs when they're evaluated by the strict criteria to which the NHS has to adhere. Regardless, if you want public support for denying possibly legitimate treatment options and cutting down on legitimately important services then you should probably avoid paying for homeopathic medicine

[Loki]

The criterion is cost relative to chance of survival. Interesting that most American insurers take a more humane position on these issues...

[Aimless]

That is a somewhat misleading description of how NICE approaches these matters. They consider what they're buying (ie. how effective it has been clearly shown to be or how crappy it is) as well as what they're being asked to pay for it. If it's worth buying at all, they can try to negotiate a lower price (although they frequently just say "no thanks" and place the ball in the drug companies' court). If its value is dubious, and its cost high, then they have to consider whether or not that extra money might be better spent in some other way. That other way should not be homeopathy of course, but apparently it is, which is shocking. Cancer drugs are already evaluated using far more generous criteria. To say that NICE is being inhumane is no more justifiable than saying that a drug company is being inhumane for having insane markups on important drugs or that insurance companies are inhumane for denying claims or participating in a system that leaves people either uncovered or bankrupt. There are advantages and disadvantages to every solution.

[Loki]

The UK places a huge priority on cancer treatment and the cancer budgets are quite large. I can't help but feel that if a few extra million were needed to prolong the life of a small number of cancer patients, that money could be found. In fact, I imagine that simply refusing to fund homeopathy would do the trick...

Incidentally, what makes the UK system an even bigger joke is that even if the patient manages to obtain the drugs on their own (by buying them from the US), the NHS will refuse to provide that person treatment using those drugs.

On an unrelated note: http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/...m-campus-lobby It seems that student governments tend to attract people who care less about governance than about promoting their rather narrow ideologies (or themselves).

[GGT]

On an unrelated note: http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/...m-campus-lobby Student governments tend to attract people who care less about governance than about promoting their rather narrow ideologies (or themselves).

If ALL flags have to be accommodated, and treated equally (as freedom of speech/expression) what's so bad about having a flag-free space within the university?

[Loki]

Other than the fact that the university happens to be located in the US and supported by American taxpayers (and the fact that the student loans of most of the students there are subsidized by the US government)? Furthermore, if someone is offended by the American flag, I can recommend about 192 other countries where they can go.

[GGT]

I don't think flying the US flag should be required by US universities. But I do think flying a Confederate, Nazi, or ISIS flag can have monumental, unintended consequences. Based on that, I have no problem with "flag-free" zones within a university campus.

[Flixy]

Other than the fact that the university happens to be located in the US and supported by American taxpayers (and the fact that the student loans of most of the students there are subsidized by the US government)? Furthermore, if someone is offended by the American flag, I can recommend about 192 other countries where they can go.

And “freedom of speech, in a space that aims to be as inclusive as possible can be interpreted as hate speech.” is a real gem too. If hanging a flag of the country you're in is hate speech...

[Loki]

I don't think flying the US flag should be required by US universities. But I do think flying a Confederate, Nazi, or ISIS flag can have monumental, unintended consequences. Based on that, I have no problem with "flag-free" zones within a university campus.

No difference at all between flying the US flag and the ISIS flag.

And “freedom of speech, in a space that aims to be as inclusive as possible can be interpreted as hate speech.” is a real gem too. If hanging a flag of the country you're in is hate speech...

Someone should tell them that attacking the flag in this way can be interpreted as hate speech as well. Heck, anything and everything can be interpreted as hate speech. Let's ban it all.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ter-copenhagen

Conquest by marketing.

And for OG, ominous Florida man strikes again: http://jezebel.com/florida-man-shoot...sex-1689688260

[Aimless]

The UK places a huge priority on cancer treatment and the cancer budgets are quite large. I can't help but feel that if a few extra million were needed to prolong the life of a small number of cancer patients, that money could be found. In fact, I imagine that simply refusing to fund homeopathy would do the trick...

If only that were the case, but I don't think it is. Estimates of how much homeopathy currently costs the NHS range from £3-12m (although a few poorly substantiated estimates go up to ca £50m). These estimates say nothing about how much these patients would cost the NHS if they did not get free access to homeopathic magic. For example, instead of being treated by a very cheap drug (aka. an expensive placebo) they may have to book frequent visits to doctors for a variety of complaints that can't easily be treated by real medicines.

Cancer drugs are more expensive by many orders of magnitude and I'm not sure why you have the impression that the number of people who'd benefit from the treatments that aren't on the NHS as being "small". The Cancer Drugs Fund, which provides funding for drugs that aren't recommended by NICE due to insufficient evidence of being cost-effective, recently slashed a number of drugs from its list after a review. This move is expected to save them £80m this year, but they'll still be out £340m by the end of the year. These cancer drugs are ridiculously expensive, but I don't think you can get up to those numbers with only "a small number of cancer patients". Regardless, you can't get up to those numbers by banning public funding for homeopathy.

Publicly funded homeopathy doesn't compete with expensive cancer treatments in financial terms. It competes with things like getting to see your doctor on time or getting someone to care for your grandmother a little more often. It should be banned based on principles, not because of any expectations of major savings (ironically, it is currently permitted based on principles of respecting "clinical judgement" and "patient choice"). The savings one might make from banning homeopathy are vanishingly small in comparison to the losses the NHS would incur by not putting the brakes on cancer treatments. The argument cannot be based on money.

Incidentally, what makes the UK system an even bigger joke is that even if the patient manages to obtain the drugs on their own (by buying them from the US), the NHS will refuse to provide that person treatment using those drugs.

There are several arguments for why it may not be appropriate for the NHS to manage a treatment that it doesn't endorse but that it will nevertheless have to administer, follow up and assume responsibility for. However, what you describe has not really been the case for at least 5 years. The NHS allows people to "top up" their care with drugs and services that are not on the NHS without losing their eligibility for receiving NHS care. There have been a few widely publicised and misrepresented stories that seem to contradict this, eg. one about a girl with cystic fibrosis, but further examination of those stories show them to be less straightforward than they're made out to be in the press.

[Wraith]

And “freedom of speech, in a space that aims to be as inclusive as possible can be interpreted as hate speech.” is a real gem too. If hanging a flag of the country you're in is hate speech...

Freedom is slavery! War is peace! Ignorance is strength!

[Wraith]

Ecstasy and crystal meth, among other drugs, are legal in Ireland until Thursday. Weed is still illegal there, so the Dutch tourism market is safe.

[Flixy]

Ecstasy and crystal meth, among other drugs, are legal in Ireland until Thursday. Weed is still illegal there, so the Dutch tourism market is safe.

Ecstacy is illegal here but easy and cheap to get anyway, so I think we're safe. You can't test it as easily as you used to anymore though

[Aimless]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31864218

Measles is a psychosomatic illness caused by the trauma of separation :bulb;

[Loki]

Someone needs to do a psychological study on people like him. A large part of the population believes in one or two conspiracy theories, but I can't help but feel that anyone who believes in conspiracies of this magnitude must have some serious underlying psychological problem.

[Khendraja'aro]

Naw, he just played too much Pokémon: "Gotta catch them all!"

[GGT]

Practically everything makes me go WTF these days. I love my sisters dearly, and they're the only Family, besides my children, that I truly care about. But no, I don't care about third cousins twice removed, or Family Reunions based on surnames that are really just a bunch of strangers getting together for a BBQ, with t-shirts as a consolation prize. My mother was adopted, but it never occurred to her (or us, as her offspring) that tracing DNA mattered much in identity.

So WTF is up with today's Genealogy trend? Why are there so many people buying "leafs" on web sites...and think they can better know themselves if they knew their ancestry?

[Wraith]

This comic book cover was pulled after internet outrage over it being misogynist.

[Ominous Gamer]

morons. considering the joker has raped her in previous comics the cover is rather tame.

[Wraith]

I know that's one interpretation of The Killing Joke, but I never got that from the book.

Also, as long as I'm here: Oracle was a better character than Batgirl anyways.

[Ominous Gamer]

I didn't think there was much left to question concerning that, at the very least its rather extreme sexual violence for DC. Original ink: https://twitter.com/BillyHynes/statu...805889/photo/1

The part I'm in the air about is if Batman kills the Joker on the last page.

[Hazir]

So you are used to celebrity designers doing special selections for H&M clothes stores. Now, the last week or so ads pop up with the picture of David Beckham in them. I never looked at the text, but did notice David is still quite a looker, despite the disgusting amount of he has. But now I realised that the campaign is for clothes not designed by him but 'selected' by him. I mean.. WTF?

[Khendraja'aro]

So, Facebook is very lenient with racist, violent, misogynistic and hate speech.

They have a big problems with breasts, however, and have repeatedly deleted pictures which contain them. Even when it's about stuff like "Breast cancer awareness" or a painting from Rubens.

And now they blocked an account of Die Partei - a satiric political party, offshoot of the magazine Titanic (a German Charlie Hebdo if you will). Why were they blocked?

Well, they commented on the violent Blockupy protests in Frankfurt with the words: "Eastern Frankfurt is off school! The EZB banker are quite imaginative how they're wooing future teenage capitalists!"


And at the same time, people clamoring for gassing all the jews aren't blocked.

[GGT]

Apparently, I can't deduct my homeowner's insurance premium on my tax returns, but if it was my second home, or an 'investment' property, I could. WTF?