I've been in a tremendous amount of pain recently:
I have severe TMJ (Jaw disorder if you don't know) which on its own creates a devastating effect, combined with a whip-lash ridden neck and there is not much you can do to stop the debilitating tension and migraine headaches.
My teeth chip bits of others off, lash my tongue, its so awful. The pain is immobilizing.
LUCKILY, I have a one of the most skilled doctors when it concerns botox,Dr. Fredrick Brandt, (yes he has a skin line) that I have known since I was a child and I had a huge amount of *strictly medical botox that was injected into the muscles in my jaw, into the sides of my head to my temporal muscles (all along the sides of my head, above the ear and farther back) and into my neck (the sides, the scalene muscles).
Yet insurance does not recognize this and it likely would be taxed. That would be horrible. In-door tanning does SERIOUS damage and causes skin cancer, botox wears off after 4-6 months and cause very little long term damage to a micro-minuscule fraction of the population that receives it.
The treatment I had was very pricey and necessary and WONDERFUL. Otherwise I would grind off all my own teeth. I've done damage to the back, but hopefully this will stop the front.
If it is not recognized as medically necessary or a viable treatment by the American Medical Association it WILL BE taxed. It takes a long long time for a drug to be approved for a treatment of a condition.
As a woman, I have absolutely no problem with taxing elective plastic surgery.
As a woman, I have a real problem with arguments against taxing elective plastic surgery as being discrimination against women. Really? Is that what we all do? Is that what we all want? Is elective plastic surgery so mainstream now that it is essential to womanhood?
I know women who have had plastic surgery. That's fine, that is there choice. I've got other things to worry my pretty little head about (and worrying causes wrinkles!). But please do not insinuate that plastic surgery is a woman's health care issue.
@Thus Spake KATE!: It bothers me especially because people act like only women get plastic surgery! Maybe it's just me, but I know a few men who have had calf implants, face work or hair plugs, and I wouldn't say they are that disproportionate to the women I know who have had work done.
I'd like to see the actual proportion of men and women who have had work done, and a breakdown of ages, like a population pyramid.
@boxspelunker: It doesn't automatically sway me against the bo-tax, but women made up nearly 92% of the total cosmetic procedures last year, so there's no question the impact would be disproportionate. This site has comprehensive statistics by year that include gender and age distribution. It's actually pretty fascinating.
@Squabble: Thanks! That is really interesting. I wanted to know also what the procedures were. Do men tend toward fewer surgeries or more? Does the same person go in over and over for different procedures, or does it tend towards a one-time thing?
There are some people who get botox for non-cosmetic reasons. Botox is a godsend for people who sweat excessively or people with migraines, for example.
Indoor tanning is completely a luxury, and if done with light instead of spray/lotion, it's dangerous and has no benefits other than cosmetic ones. Thus, even if a tanning tax discriminates against women, I'm more okay with that than the botox tax.
@icyblonde: Botox is also used in the treatment of overactive bladder. They inject it into the bladder muscle to prevent those uncontrollable muscular contractions that result in urinary urgency and urine leakage.
@icyblonde: I had never heard that before! I wish that was also discussed in these sorts of issues. Maybe something like a medical waiver would suffice? If you have problems with migraines or sweating, maybe a doctor could write a prescription for Botox, like they do for tanning?
Slightly off topic, but regarding the picture, I don't know if it's the height difference but Snooki really is one of those people who is ageless. She could be that other girl's 13 year old kid sister, or she could be her mother. OR anything in between.
Ok, first I must advise against against looking at the comments over on the article (yet I always do, why is that??).
Second, I have kind of mixed feelings about this. I suspect it will still affect women disproportionately, but not nearly as much as a botox tax would've. Also, it is a known health risk, and unlike smoking it is not actually physically addictive so I think a "sin tax" on it might be more effective. Ultimately I just don't really like sin taxes, however, since the two end goals of reducing a particular behavior while also increasing tax revenue are contradictory, and realistically both can't be achieved simultaneously so one always falls by the wayside. And, of course, the one that falls by the wayside in 95% of situations is reducing the dangerous behavior.
@amowls: I live in Kentucky, and I do actually know a few men who go to tanning salons. I suspect I actually know several, but not all of them will admit it.
@amowls: I live across from Planet Beach, a tanning salon in Minnesota, and I see a disturbing amount of men going in and out.
Also, it's MINNESOTA, everyone knows you assholes didn't get your tan on the beach, it looks unnatural when it's -20.
@amowls: I grew up in the sticks outside of Seattle, and I knew guys who went tanning (and this was 12+ years ago). Once I moved to the more affluent suburbs, it was pretty common for guys to go tanning, but now that I'm actually in the city, I don't know anyone who goes tanning. Tax the fuck out of it, I say. It's dangerous, and it's visually offensive to me. YOUR SKIN IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THAT COLOR.
@amowls: I'm curious: is "guido" the accepted term? It sounds like it should be a racial slur to me, but it's used in advertising! Is it an offensive term?
@boxspelunker: The only time I have heard people say it's offensive is by people who are not Italian and aren't familiar with the culture surrounding guidom and assume that it is. Like Snooki says, anyone can be a guido regardless of race. I use it to mean a specific kind of douche bag (one that over tans, over body builds and over spikes their hair).
I do think elective cosmetic surgery discriminates against women--after all, society all but requires us to remain youthful and beautiful.
This makes more sense, not only because a lot of men tan, but because it's been proven to have an adverse impact on one's health. We tax smoking, and at least most smokers have the excuse of addiction.
I wish he would have kept in the 5% tax on elective cosmetic procedures AND added a tan tax. Future reality show contestants probably hate me for saying that.
Also - is it just me or do Snookie's shoes look a good two sizes too big for her in that picture?
@Sev: lots of cosmetic procedures are deemed "elective", like cleft palette, reconstructive breast surgery, fun little things like that. so I don't think there should be a tax, but its not just women who benefit from this.
@pikachugo: I think phantom lady was referring to the way that insurance companies classify these surgeries. Necessary, or at the very least beneficial surgeries, are determined to be "elective" so that insurance companies don't have to shell out the money to pay for them.
@CandyColoredFrown: Thank you @pikachugo: what CandyColored said. I'm on hopped up on cold meds and probably shouldn't even be commenting today since I am a bit incoherent. But she summed up what I was trying to say.
Instead of only focusing on what this plan lacks, we should discuss constructive solutions to achieve a more inclusive option. Complaining about its inadequacies without recognizing the immense amount of progress this legislation represents, is shortsighted. By placing this issue in the appropriate context, its significance can be better understood. I think we should attempt to facilitate a dialogue which addresses the historical, political, and social aspects of this issue, as opposed to contributing to pessimist sentiments.
I was at a funeral mass this weekend, the deceased was a doctor and the priest went out of his way to note the many conversations he (priest) had had with the deceased where they expressed their passionate belief that all people deserve health care. It was nice.
@bluebears: I think that's why a lot of people want to be doctors--not all, but a significant portion. It's why I would like to be a doctor, partially. I'd like to do research medicine, but hope to be in a place where I can see people who need it pro bono not too long after I finish all of my training (at this point I'm looking for a 2013/14 med school entry). I think I'd rather eat packet soups so I can afford to make sure people get the help they need than buy fancy stuff.
12/21/09
I've been in a tremendous amount of pain recently:
I have severe TMJ (Jaw disorder if you don't know) which on its own creates a devastating effect, combined with a whip-lash ridden neck and there is not much you can do to stop the debilitating tension and migraine headaches.
My teeth chip bits of others off, lash my tongue, its so awful. The pain is immobilizing.
LUCKILY, I have a one of the most skilled doctors when it concerns botox,Dr. Fredrick Brandt, (yes he has a skin line) that I have known since I was a child and I had a huge amount of *strictly medical botox that was injected into the muscles in my jaw, into the sides of my head to my temporal muscles (all along the sides of my head, above the ear and farther back) and into my neck (the sides, the scalene muscles).
Yet insurance does not recognize this and it likely would be taxed. That would be horrible. In-door tanning does SERIOUS damage and causes skin cancer, botox wears off after 4-6 months and cause very little long term damage to a micro-minuscule fraction of the population that receives it.
The treatment I had was very pricey and necessary and WONDERFUL. Otherwise I would grind off all my own teeth. I've done damage to the back, but hopefully this will stop the front.
If it is not recognized as medically necessary or a viable treatment by the American Medical Association it WILL BE taxed. It takes a long long time for a drug to be approved for a treatment of a condition.
12/21/09
12/21/09
As a woman, I have a real problem with arguments against taxing elective plastic surgery as being discrimination against women. Really? Is that what we all do? Is that what we all want? Is elective plastic surgery so mainstream now that it is essential to womanhood?
I know women who have had plastic surgery. That's fine, that is there choice. I've got other things to worry my pretty little head about (and worrying causes wrinkles!). But please do not insinuate that plastic surgery is a woman's health care issue.
12/21/09
12/21/09
I'd like to see the actual proportion of men and women who have had work done, and a breakdown of ages, like a population pyramid.
12/21/09
[www.surgery.org]
12/21/09
GRAPHS I AM SO EXCITED
12/21/09
Indoor tanning is completely a luxury, and if done with light instead of spray/lotion, it's dangerous and has no benefits other than cosmetic ones. Thus, even if a tanning tax discriminates against women, I'm more okay with that than the botox tax.
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
Also...penis implants? I think my penis just tried to turn itself inside out and become a vagina.
12/21/09
LOL.
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
Second, I have kind of mixed feelings about this. I suspect it will still affect women disproportionately, but not nearly as much as a botox tax would've. Also, it is a known health risk, and unlike smoking it is not actually physically addictive so I think a "sin tax" on it might be more effective. Ultimately I just don't really like sin taxes, however, since the two end goals of reducing a particular behavior while also increasing tax revenue are contradictory, and realistically both can't be achieved simultaneously so one always falls by the wayside. And, of course, the one that falls by the wayside in 95% of situations is reducing the dangerous behavior.
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
Also, it's MINNESOTA, everyone knows you assholes didn't get your tan on the beach, it looks unnatural when it's -20.
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12:15 AM
*twinkle* THE MORE YOU KNOOOOW
12/21/09
This makes more sense, not only because a lot of men tan, but because it's been proven to have an adverse impact on one's health. We tax smoking, and at least most smokers have the excuse of addiction.
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
Also - is it just me or do Snookie's shoes look a good two sizes too big for her in that picture?
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09
12/21/09