You must log in or register to comment.
Michael Rose
This was not written by some reach asshole. This was written by someone on the payroll of some rich asshole.
Yes! Without shared ownership over the companies we work at, we have no ownership over how our labor is used. This is why a worker owned economy is such a critical part of Marxism and why Social democracy’s attempt to achieve socialist goals through higher taxes and labor rights isn’t enough (a golden cage is still a cage.) The heart of socialism is giving people a shared ownership over their labor which means they get a voice and vote on how their labor will be used
we have no ownership over how our labor is used
You can just not work for someone like that
Guys, very seriously after the whole covid scam, do you still believe in this kind of stuff? The covid was biggest wealth-transfer to rich class in whole history.
COVID is real. All crisis serves as a way to force the less wealthy of the Petite Bourgeoisie to sell off their Capital to the Haute Bourgeoisie, and in this manner furthers monopolization.
Pardon me, but, Mr Rose, can you please tell me… What fucking better treatments?
My brother is T1D and he’s been like that since his teens. Literally the only way for him to continue to live, at all, is to take insulin.
It’s times like this that make me thankful I don’t live in the USA.
But seriously, if anyone knows of a “better” treatment for type 1 diabetes, I’m all ears. I’ve been looking for something for my brother for years, and I’ve come up with jack shit.
Basically they’ve come up with insulin analogs that are faster acting, ones that are longer lasting, and even ones that “lock” themselves so they can’t be absorbed without a high enough presence of glucose
Here’s a paper comparing a bunch of them. I’m no expert and it’s a deep rabbit hole, but there are a bunch of options, each with their own trade-offs
So you offer the newer, better treatments for free, right? Right???
That’s the neat part, you don’t.
I hope these motherfuckers and their apologists die.
Too soon?
Not soon enough.
No
Luigi doing it! And now u can do…
Is that Tony Hawk why does that look like Tony Hawk
No lmfao that’s Tim Robinson 😂😂😂😂
Capitalism fixes everything, duh. Why didn’t I realize. I’m so dumb. It’s science. Apply capitalism, and bam, nuclear energy.
take so hot
hot hot take
take so hot you fry an eggThis only makes sense if the new treatments are cheaper or free than insulin. Which I’d bet a body part they aren’t.
Ozempic is expensive af. Even more so than insulin.
Any society which holds “your money or your life” as a valid argument is not one which should exist.
Hmm, who is this Rose fellow?
Michael Rose is a senior resident in internal medicine and pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
The only person The Atlantic could find to peddle this shit isn’t even allowed to practice medicine without supervision? lmao
credit to michael rose, they want all diabetes medications to be cheaper or free.
That’s fair! It’s entirely possible they got rolled by The Atlantic and didn’t know what the editors were going to do to the piece. But like, at the same time maybe question why a national publication would need someone who isn’t able to practice on their own to do an opinion piece about something highly politicized…
another comment pointed out elsewhere that the titles are rarely made by the writer, so im inclined to believe that the atlantic recieved this piece and wanted to slant it for those who just read the headline, yeah.
Not even an endocrine doctor. IM knows diabetic medicine because they happen to run into it a fair amount, along with a lot of other diseases from a lot of other body systems like kidney disease or COPD, but they’re not nephrologists or pulmonologists either.
What’s worse - taking diabetes medication that’s somewhat outdated, or taking no diabetes medication at all?
I’m not a doctor, but I bet I know the answer.
Also most of those newer treatments treat either type 2 (diet / metabolism related) or are an adjunct therapy for a type 1 (genetic) who has also developed insulin resistance over time. With or without insulin resistance a type 1 isn’t making any insulin in their pancreas at ALL and is going to need to take manufactured insulin, whether by a syringe or with an artificial pancreas that needs to be filled with an insulin cartridge. For them a metabolism altering medication isn’t going to make their pancreas start producing insulin again, it’s just going to help their cells respond better to the insulin they still have to inject.
People have gotten so used to conceptualizing diabetes as a “fat people” disease that they completely ignore the type 1 genetic diabetics who are actually the main users of insulin. Oh and most children with diabetes have type 1 (since it’s genetic) vs type 2 which can be managed with the fancier newer drugs is the “fat people” / diet related type, and most people don’t get that until they’re at least middle aged and have been eating garbage for decades. When people talk about insulin they act like they’re talking about adults who made a choice when most of your exclusively insulin dependent diabetics are gonna be type 1s who got it from genetics and have had it since childhood.
We should absolutely be caring about people regardless of these moralistic fat shaming arguments but the kind of people saying it’s not a big deal that a month of insulin costs $500 are also usually the same people crying “think of the children!” and the raw hypocrisy of that just drives me fucking bonkers.
Yes. Thank you. I have T1, and with T2 being ~20 times as common, I don’t think the difference will ever be understood by the public. I wish it would get a different name, though that wouldn’t lower the price of insulin, right.
same here. If type 1’s dont take insulin they die, period. Symptom onset is fast and its not a pleasant or fast death. All the type1s rationing insulin are cooking their organs and in some stage of the process of dying, and they feel it happening. The only option is to not eat any food at all and hope you can make the process of dying stretch out a bit. But as soon as you eat, the food turns to glucose (sugar) in the blood, your body cant use that sugar without insulin and it acidifies in your blood and cooks you.
Right. I starved even with food in T1 onset and then later got DKA, which was excruciating.
YoU jUsT hAvE To WaTcH yOuR DiEt
-them probably
yOu juSt hAve To cuT swEetS, maYBe tRY tHe CArniVorE DieT
- them actually
Other times they’ll just advise you to use honey, because they think that’s not sugar.
Except if diabetics had cheap safe access to insulin none of them would die…………
No. Idiot. Only the capitalist class can construct hypothetical scenarios.
The point it seems like they are trying to make (and I have only read up till the paywall) is that there are multiple forms of insulin, and newer versions basically work better. Many people are getting the newer, better drugs, but having to ration them because of how expensive they are. If plain, old insulin becomes cheap enough such that people switch to it (critically, without some extra effort by our healthcare system), a percentage of people will end up dying. Managing diabetes is all about keeping blood glucose stable, and that is asier to do with the modern stuff.
They retitled the article to “Making Insulin Cheaper Isn’t Enough”, which i think is a much better headline.
And again, I could only read up till the paywall, so i could be giving them too much credit.
Maybe that would motivate pharmaceutical companies to work on treatments that actually cure diabetes?
Seems like are breakthrough treatments we are getting over recent years is just to manage the sickness.
Funny how pharmaceutical’s motivation to cure doesn’t exist.
The fact they changed the headline is itself praiseworthy, but the fact it was click bait and sensationalist to begin counters it.
The point about making the older stuff cheaper is something that isn’t mentioned as much as it should be in these debates.
Ultimately even if the older stuff is worse and requires more attention and monitoring (less convenient), it is still better than nothing.
Someone posted a link to the full text. Looks like their main point is that for most people with diabetes (who have type 2), insulin of any form isn’t the best first line treatment, things like glp-1 receptor agonists (e.g., ozempic) work way better, but since it’s not “insulin” it’s not covered.
I’m guessing the editors of the Atlantic gave it the original bad headline, cause it seems like the author is genuine.
So the physician cares about patient wellbeing while the newspaper cares about engagement? Sounds about right
“Making Insulin Cheaper Isn’t Enough” sounds like a good headline on its own, but with the context of the original headline and tagline, it sure sounds like the rest of the article is going to be making point for not making insulin cheaper at all.
Maybe there is a real call to action buried past the paywall, but I don’t see it, and therefore I can only assume that what I can see without paying is the message they want to push.
Someone posted a link to the full text. Looks like their main point is that for most people with diabetes (who have type 2), insulin of any form isn’t the best first line treatment, things like glp-1 receptor agonists (e.g., ozempic) work way better, but since it’s not “insulin” it’s not covered.
I’m guessing the editors of the Atlantic gave it the original bad headline, cause it seems like the author is genuine.
That makes more sense, I suppose.
Still seems like an odd article choice since type 1 and 2 diabetes are totally separate diseases with different causes and treatments. So of course reducing insulin prices won’t do anything to help type 2 diabetics.
That’s true, t1 and t2 are basically opposite conditions with some overlapping effects. A significant portion of people with type 2 do use insulin, though.
I didn’t have a paywall for some reason, so here’s the gist of it:
Insulin is only the first choice for type 1 diabetes. For type 2, there are alternatives (not just variants of insulin, but actually different drugs) with fewer side effects, and which are more effective against the serious dangers like heart attacks. But when insulin gets much cheaper, those patients (i.e. the majority of diabetes patients) could end up using insulin and run a higher risk of those more deadly symptoms. Towards the end, the article even says: “In place of capping the out-of-pocket cost of just insulin, lawmakers should cap the out-of-pocket cost of all diabetes medications.”
The old forms of insulin (R, NPH) are already cheap and available at Walmart without a prescription. They are only $25 a vial, but suck to use though. Pretty sure they’re referring to the metabolic drugs given to people with type 2.
There’s plenty of countries with cheap insulin, and people there are fine because other treatments for diabetes are cheaper too.
This is horrfying. Shame on the atlantic for publishing it.
