Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
They could have joined the military when they were NOT too old. Having pre-existing condition is irrelevant. Neither the VA or Trump considers that a limiting factor (as he mentioned in this acceptance speech).What do you say to people the military won't accept because they are too old or have a pre-existing condition?
"Anecdote" ? Just the opposite, dupe. The anecdote is your so-called "actual data" which could be twisted to look like anything.So an anecdote is 1,000,000 times as important as actual data? I'm happy for her but millions are infected with COVID-19 and his law helped only 10 people. Doesn't sound like a real solution to me.
As saw what you wrote > June 2019.Didn't really "read all that" did you now? If you had gotten through the first sentence you'd see the number from August 2020, as in THIS month.
They have a platform of VERY MANY THINGS, and if you are ignorant of that you shouldn't be posting here. Go watch a video of Trump's acceptance speech.Maybe we would have more independent thinking & qualified people, Republican & Democrat. Maybe we would not have people in top positions who have little to zero qualification for the job they hold. Maybe we would not end up with 7 people working just for Trump, & not the Republican party, who were found to be criminals. Maybe the republicans would have had a platform this election cycle, not just elect a king based convention.
So if they got their health insurance through their jobs but got laid off due to the pandemic, you have no sympathy?They could have joined the military when they were NOT too old. Having pre-existing condition is irrelevant. Neither the VA or Trump considers that a limiting factor (as he mentioned in this acceptance speech).What do you say to people the military won't accept because they are too old or have a pre-existing condition?
I know someone who was not helped by his law, Natalie Harp:"Anecdote" ? Just the opposite, dupe. The anecdote is your so-called "actual data" which could be twisted to look like anything.So an anecdote is 1,000,000 times as important as actual data? I'm happy for her but millions are infected with COVID-19 and his law helped only 10 people. Doesn't sound like a real solution to me.
And the real thing is Natalie Harp's years of hospital intensive care, with severe pain, and futile treatments, with doctors' prognosises of terminal bone cancer. Only reversed by treatments coming after Trump's Right to Try Law. And her recovery, and now good health. Pure living PROOF.
View attachment 381716 View attachment 381723
And you don't know how many people have been helped by Trump's law. You posted a date of June 2019.
Watch your language.
Remember when he said he would force drug companies to list prices on advertising? He failed to do that too. Put that on top of all of the other failures.Federal Register :: Request Access
www.federalregister.gov
You got here looking for trouble. You found it. Trump isn't the one who puts out the advertisements. He just sets up the law. Go crab at the drug companies...and Democrats, for taking up everybody's time with the impeachment fiasco, and then the Covid. I've seen some ads with prices. They're usually small in the fine print. What's the matter - You watching on a 10" screen ?Yet the prices are not being mentioned on the advertisements. Trump promised it. He failed. As always.
Slight Correction: There will be MUCH MORE rioting in the streets if Democrats get elected.Beware, there’ll be rioting in the streets if Democrats get elected.
Bullshit. And you just contradicted yourself. You said the drug was "approved". Yeah ? And "approved" FOR WHAT ? The point is it was NOT APPROVED FOR USE. People couldn't use it (which is all that matters). The only thing it was "approved" for, was for scientists to conduct experimentation, not for Natalie Harp et al TO USE IT. Looks like you're trying to scam the readers here, with word games, and you're doing a piss poor job if it..I know someone who was not helped by his law, Natalie Harp:
Under the bright lights of the Republican National Convention on Monday night, California entrepreneur Natalie Harp said President Trump literally saved her life.“When I failed the chemotherapies that were on the market, no one wanted me in their clinical trials,” Harp said in an emotional address. “They didn’t give me the right to try experimental treatments, Mr. President. You did, and without you, I’d have died waiting for them to be approved.”But experts cast doubt on that story: They point out that Harp’s description of the treatment she received and her timeline for receiving it make it unlikely Trump had any effect on her case.Harp has repeatedly credited a “Right to Try” law, pushed by the president and signed into law in May 2018 for saving her life. But the treatment she said she has received — "an FDA-approved immunotherapy drug for an unapproved use” in her own words — would not have been covered under Right to Try because the drug had already been approved.
They can still get health coverage. And I said previously, they could have free health coverage for life, if they had joined the military when they were young and healthy. It was their choice to not do that. For people who have health conditions that the military rules out (a very small % of the population), there are other agencies of the federal govt that will take people who are disabled, and one can fulfill government service in a civilian capacity, with great benefits.So if they got their health insurance through their jobs but got laid off due to the pandemic, you have no sympathy?
Trump is lying about the preexisting conditions being covered and you're lying about the military. If you are missing an arm, the military won't take you.
Aim high!Trump out of the White House is the prize. Anything else the DEMs would do If they win will just be gravy.
My apologies, I had no idea you knew absolutely nothing about the FDA, drugs, or our healthcare system, so let me explain using small words. The FDA approves certain drugs for certain issues. An example would be the FDA approval for using hydroxychloroquine to treat malaria. Once approved, drugs can then be used for other reasons since they have been proven safe. That is why Trump was able to get hydroxychloroquine to treat covid. Trump's law covered only drugs not yet approved by the FDA so, since the drugs Natalie used were "Off Label" his law was unnecessary:Bullshit. And you just contradicted yourself. You said the drug was "approved". Yeah ? And "approved" FOR WHAT ? The point is it was NOT APPROVED FOR USE. People couldn't use it (which is all that matters). The only thing it was "approved" for, was for scientists to conduct experimentation, not for Natalie Harp et al TO USE IT. Looks like you're trying to scam the readers here, with word games, and you're doing a piss poor job if it..I know someone who was not helped by his law, Natalie Harp:
Under the bright lights of the Republican National Convention on Monday night, California entrepreneur Natalie Harp said President Trump literally saved her life.“When I failed the chemotherapies that were on the market, no one wanted me in their clinical trials,” Harp said in an emotional address. “They didn’t give me the right to try experimental treatments, Mr. President. You did, and without you, I’d have died waiting for them to be approved.”But experts cast doubt on that story: They point out that Harp’s description of the treatment she received and her timeline for receiving it make it unlikely Trump had any effect on her case.Harp has repeatedly credited a “Right to Try” law, pushed by the president and signed into law in May 2018 for saving her life. But the treatment she said she has received — "an FDA-approved immunotherapy drug for an unapproved use” in her own words — would not have been covered under Right to Try because the drug had already been approved.
She was terminally sick, dying, and only after Right to Try drugs (not approved for use), did she recover. You're listening to anti-Trump dupe talk, I notice you don't mention the name of the drugs she took (before and after Right to Try). You don't mention HOW drug(s) were "approved".
I know someone who was helped by Trump's Right to Try law - Natalie Harp. And I know someone who is a liar. YOU.
Show me something that Trump has done (not said) that would force insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions? Spoiler Alert: You won't find anything. If companies cover pre-existing conditions once Obamacare is killed, it is because they choose to not because they have to.And NO, Trump is NOT lying about pre-existing conditions being covered. YOU are who is lying. I have friends who have private health insurance of different companies. All cover pre-existing conditions.
Thanks for telling me what you know I already know. Bottom line is, Harp's drug wasn't approved for her use, and the Right to Try gave her the approval for it. From that, it when from unapproved for her to use it, to approved for her to use it. DUH!My apologies, I had no idea you knew absolutely nothing about the FDA, drugs, or our healthcare system, so let me explain using small words. The FDA approves certain drugs for certain issues. An example would be the FDA approval for using hydroxychloroquine to treat malaria. Once approved, drugs can then be used for other reasons since they have been proven safe. That is why Trump was able to get hydroxychloroquine to treat covid. Trump's law covered only drugs not yet approved by the FDA so, since the drugs Natalie used were "Off Label" his law was unnecessary:
Understanding Unapproved Use of Approved Drugs "Off Label"
As I said, I have friends who have private health insurance of different companies. All cover pre-existing conditions.Show me something that Trump has done (not said) that would force insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions? Spoiler Alert: You won't find anything. If companies cover pre-existing conditions once Obamacare is killed, it is because they choose to not because they have to.
www.foxbusiness.com
You really are a sad spokesman for your cause. What you know is wrong, plain and simple. You are being played and you're too ignorant to know it and too arrogant to bother to learn the facts.Thanks for telling me what you know I already know. Bottom line is, Harp's drug wasn't approved for her use, and the Right to Try gave her the approval for it. From that, it when from unapproved for her to use it, to approved for her to use it. DUH!
Again you are being played. If an Executive Order was enough, Obama would not have needed to pass a law:As I said, I have friends who have private health insurance of different companies. All cover pre-existing conditions.Show me something that Trump has done (not said) that would force insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions? Spoiler Alert: You won't find anything. If companies cover pre-existing conditions once Obamacare is killed, it is because they choose to not because they have to.
Some people have to be told twice.
So you want me to show what hasn't happened yet, but Trump has announced it is going to. If we were to play "SHOW ME, I could show you dozens of good things that Obama/Biden had 8 years to do and didn't do, and Trump did them.
Trump will require insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions
The president recently took action to lower the cost of prescription drugs.
