Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't think it will take more than 5 teenage overdose deaths to get most Americans to disagree.


Opposite those ODs you have thousands of people spending an arm and a leg on medicine that truly improves their lives, with no ill effect to them.

The way I see it, services like Hims are forcing a discussion that needs to have happened a long time ago. If people are willing to rely on them for medicines that can have some pretty serious side effects, what does that say about our existing system that people are eschewing? When you're asking people to choose between being able to afford to eat, and being able to afford something like insulin, why the fuck would you expect the decision making process to be anything otherwise?

Maybe many americans would disagree, right until the moment when they're nearly vomiting their guts out at the pharmacy, waiting for their zofran, which is going to cost them several hundred dollars, just because they're getting a version with a little glucose added so it doesn't taste as bad when you take it.


>what does that say about our existing system that people are eschewing?

"clearly we need to spend more on lobbying to get our ability to extract out pound of flesh more thoroughly written into the law"

-the system


It would only take that many for lobbyists to misrepresent the size of the problem and convince the public that it was a huge issue. Then they would enact regulations to widen the moat of legacy health care companies under the guise of "protecting the children".


Kind of tired of making life hard for everyone because a few stupid people might potentially make some bad decisions.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: