Monthly Archive for July, 2009

ObamaCare Mythology

Clifford Asness debunks many healthcare mythologies and explains why they exist in this report:

Lots of people are scared and misinformed by their politicians and the media or else they would understand the whitewash that is going on here and reject socialist “solutions” to a problem best solved for their families by freedom…

The rush to pass a huge expansion of government now, and limit debate and discussion, is indicative of a group that knows it is wrong, and if people have time to think they will refuse to go along, but is attempting an exercise of naked power, to impose dictatorship before the people wake up.

Actually the media is often just plain intellectually lazy, repeating tired leftist dogmas and looking down on anyone who believes in freedom as just a red state moron (trust me, they think that). How else do you explain free infomercials for Obama’s socialized medicine without rebuttal?

Some politicians may indeed just be idealistic dupes who actually want to help people but don’t realize they will harm them. I have sympathy for these people but they still should not win the day. Some just want to feel important. But let’s leave Ms. Pelosi out of this for now. Let’s talk about the smart ones who understand these issues. I do not think true confusion among the political and intellectual class is most of their problem. I do not think they believe for a second that socialized medicine will make people better off. How could they?

Lots of politicians understand that the simple free system leaves them out in the cold. No power for them. No committees to sit on to decide people’s lives. No lies to tell their constituents how they (the government) brought them the health care they so desperately need. No fat checks from lobbyists as the crony capitalists pay dearly to make the only profits possible under this system, those bestowed by the government.

Libertarians are often accused wrongly of loving “big business,” but we don’t, particularly when corporate executives predictably turn themselves into crony capitalists who try to succeed by wheedling from the government. On the other hand the socialists love cronies of all sorts, ones who command large enterprises all the better. Liberals are far closer than libertarians to building and countenancing the all-powerful corporate state they claim to fear.

Odd I know!

That an array of crony capitalists are lining up from Wal-Mart to hospitals to medical insurers (bringing back Harry and Louise - this time for socialism) hoping to cut the best deals for themselves before the iron curtain falls is sad. That they are being lauded by the administration as a sign its health care position is right is simply propaganda. Yep, when someone agrees to pay Al Capone protection, it’s a clear sign Al Capone was right to begin with….

We further see this predicted abuse of power as the health care proposals are already filled with freebies to the President’s friends - including exempting unions from onerous features. Gee, the same unions in whose favor he has re-written the bankruptcy rules and wants to exempt from the most American of ideas, the secret ballot. It’s good to be a friend of “the most ethical administration ever.”

For another example how this is about government power and the suppression of private liberty, and not about helping people, look no further than the fact that their proposed massive tax increase on the “rich” (which by leftist definition are never paying their “fair share” if they have enough left over to remain rich) is on pre-deduction income.

That means if you give all your money to charity you still owe Caesar his 5+ percent on money you did not keep and do not have, but gave away to a good cause. This might raise some revenue, but it is largely about the destruction of private charity. Barack and Harry and Charlie and Nancy and the other gang of four (yes our gang of four is much bigger than four) are about the people having to crawl on their knees to government (them) instead of anyone else, including private charity, not about helping people.

BTW, Congressman Rangel, the House’s chief tax writer and current tax cheat investigatee, said lawmakers targeted high earners because it “causes the least amount of pain on the least amount of people.” So does, in the short-run, imprisoning the rich and harvesting their organs for better health care for everyone else. Charlie, any thoughts on where you stop? When is enough enough?

The rush to pass a huge expansion of government now, and limit debate and discussion, is indicative of a group that knows it is wrong, and if people have time to think they will refuse to go along, but is attempting an exercise of naked power, to impose dictatorship before the people wake up.

Paraphrasing Mark Twain, a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. They are counting on this, and they don’t want to give the truth time to be shod.  (More here)

Published
by
admin
on July 24, 2009
in Healthcare, Opinion, Political and Reform
. 0 Comments

CA Surgeon Explains Proposed ObamaCare

California surgeon Linda Halderman reports that Congress’ version of ObamaCare will feed the federal deficit and “cause small businesses to hemorrhage and carve a pound of flesh from patients forced to navigate the new bureaucracy it creates.”

H.R. 3200 rewards middlemen paid to deny medical care recommended by a patient’s physician. These political appointees, charged with “Comparative Effectiveness” determinations, would make treatment recommendations far from the exam room without ever having examined the patient whose treatment is denied…
Patient choice is another casualty of H.R. 3200. The effect of the bill’s new bureaucracy, a public (government-controlled) health plan, is described by The Lewin Group. Over 88 million workers would be shifted to the public plan from private coverage. Yearly premiums for individuals with private coverage would increase as the result of cost shifting from the government-sanctioned plan…
To the needs of older Americans, the bill mandates an “Advanced Care Planning Consultation” in which senior citizens must meet at least every five years with a doctor or nurse practitioner to discuss “dying with dignity.” (more here)
Published
by
admin
on July 24, 2009
in California, Healthcare, Opinion and Reform
. 0 Comments

Medical Care Confusion

Thomas Sowell writes:

The confusion of “health care” with medical care is the crucial confusion. Years ago, a study showed that Mormons live a decade longer than other Americans. Are doctors who treat Mormons so much better than the doctors who treat the rest of us? Or do Mormons avoid doing a lot of things that shorten people’s lives?

The point is that health care is largely in your hands. Medical care is in the hands of doctors. Things that depend on what doctors do - cancer survival rates, for example– are already better here than in countries with government-run medical systems…

Published
by
admin
on July 21, 2009
in Opinion and Reform
. 0 Comments

Nursing Union Buster or Bête Noire?

Imagine finding flyers posted all over a hospital sounding the “alert that a professional union buster was on site”, and that flyer used to identify a nearly 70 year old great grandmother who has to use an electric scooter to get around.  What power this person must have to send the California Nurses Association (CNA) in paroxysm’s of fear and panic and to engage in their usually tactics of lies and misinformation.  I was met with just such exhibitions fear-mongering and hysteria by CNA recruiters, representatives and supporters when I made a recent visit at the invitation of a fellow nurse from Cy-Fair Hospital in Houston.
Their flyer identified me as a professional union buster, which I guess is a recognition of how much they fear my presence; but truth be told I’m not a professional union buster, and in particular I’m not a nursing union buster.  The CNA and many other pro-union people love to use the word union-buster since it tends to invoke images of a Simon LeGreed character replete with requisite black hat and clock and evil laugh.
I have nothing against unions for the blue-collar worker, but I’m far from convinced that professionals such as registered nurses need unions to represent them.   So when nurses contact me for my opinion and advise about how to speak for themselves I am always happy to help my fellow RN in advocating for our profession and for themselves.  I’m happy to help in the effort of showing nurses they can and do have a strong voice as both an individuals and as a group without paying a nursing union dues of upwards to $80.00 a month for the favor.
In the case of two recent nursing union attempts, one nursing staffs attempt to stay free from the CNA and one nursing staff attempt to decertify from the CNA.  As fate would have it, I was in a position where I could help both in spirit and in person so I did.  At the first hospital my fellow nurse and I found CNA representatives playing shenanigans with hospital elevators so that the floor where a “No to the CNA” nurse had been given a meeting room was locked out.  This malfunction only affected the one floor that we had to reach on both days, what a coincidence.  You may wonder why I think CNA representatives capable of such underhanded techniques.  Simple, I still haven’t forgotten a CNA strike in the San Fernando Valley where pro-CNA nurse locked out much need medical equipment, hiding/destroying manuals, etc., so that the relief nurses were hard pressed to provided nursing care to patients many of whom were in intensive care; and the CNA strike was suppose to be all about their concern for patient safety  — go figure!  And at the second hospital I got treated to the experience of being stalked by not one, not two, but upwards to three CNA representatives at a time.  The situation became of such concern that hospital HR and security had to become involved; but I guess I should feel honored that the CNA felt the need to have so many people watching my every move.
Whether or not nurses chose a union to represent them or not should be up to the nurses themselves but this seems to rarely be the case these days.  As in the case of the Tenet Healthcare/CNA neutrality agreement Houston nurses that had opposing views to the CNA material, propaganda or message had no one to turn to; at least that’s what the CNA representatives thought, except they overlooked a grassroots network of informed RNs that were available for these nurses to reach out to; which they did and we responded.  One would think that the CNA representatives would be excited to learn that nurses were empowering one another, oh that’s right it only counts if the nursing unions are doing the empowering.    So sorry, we didn’t get that memo. One would also think that the CNA would invite and encourage an open and lively discussion about the benefits of a nursing union, but they couldn’t be bothered to even accept the invitation extended by one group of nurses to present their viewpoint in an open debate.  Instead they skulked about passing out flyers full of misstatements and lies since it so much easier to insult the intelligence of nurses rather than respect them.
In the case of the flyer they suggested that the nurses ask me a set of questions, and I responded with an open letter.  One pro-CNA nurse chose to mark up my open letter with graffiti instead of addressing me nurse to nurse.  But then again it’s become common practice for pro-nursing union nurses to engage in such childish behavior.  It’s a sad day when our honorable profession is marred by such immature behavior.  However, I see these as indicators of how much the organizational structure of the CNA fears nurses who chose to take back or carry on with their own voice.  In the past several years their membership has been declining (their last official report in 2008 has their membership at just over 72,000 almost a full 8,000 or 13,000 drop depending on which CNA official report you read).  I think it’s this drop that has them scrambling for new members in the other 49 states.
But in some parts of our country nurses don’t want anything to do with them, and even when Tenet handed the CNA the proverbial keys to the kingdom providing CNA organizers unfettered and unprecedented access to RNs on the floor, scheduling information and even home addresses and telephone numbers; the CNA has found resistance to their siren song.  They couldn’t even gather enough cards at Park Plaza and Northwest Hospitals in Houston to even call an election and they slunk out of Houston so quietly that few even knew they had abandoned their organizational efforts.  They accused one, that’s right ONE, nurse of trying to take away the union at Cy-Fair Hospital.  What power this one nurse must have, I guess the well over 30% of eligible nurses that signed decertification cards meant nothing, it was all that one nurse’s fault.  And this morning we learned that Hahnemann Hospital (another victim of the nefarious Tenet/CNA neutrality agreement) had rejected the union.  The CNA had such access to the RNs at Hahnemann that nurses that opposed the CNA had to get the NLRB to intervene just so they could get a meeting room in the bowels of the hospital and finally a table in the cafeteria (shortly before election day) and the union spokespeople whined that this was unfair.
So if our network of nurses, and me, in particular can help our fellow nurses when confronted with such behavior and that makes us professional nursing union busters in the eyes of the union then I guess that’s a cross we’ll just have to bear.  I see it as the desperate actions of an organization that knows that people have begun to look behind the curtain that is the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee and they don’t like what they see.  The more they howl about RNs empowering each other the more I know that I’m their bête noire and that’s a role I think I shall relish.
Geneviève Clavreul RN Ph.D is President and Founder of the National Nurses Professional Association.  She also blogs at The Nurse Unchained.
Published
by
admin
on July 13, 2009
in Geneviève Clavreul RN PhD, Healthcare, Opinion and Reform
. 0 Comments

Pharmaceutical Giant Charge Critics with Genocide

When the survival of South Africa’s (SA) mining industry now appears to hinge on their ability to blame their laborers’ costly mine-related lung diseases on irresponsible sex, the financial connections between South Africa’s mining industry, government regulators and university researchers is becoming clear.

Because strategic mining operations depend upon our ability to cheaply mine defense materials like gold, platinum and uranium, the US government shares a powerful incentive to promote the “irresponsible sex/HIV” mythology rather than support the historical claims against the SA mining industry.

The latest evidence comes from Farber lawsuit defendant James J. Murtagh MD who recently posted this email about possible criminal prosecution of the so-called AIDS denialists:

Starling new evidence that AIDS denialist Peter Duesberg and his supporters may be liable for vast human tragedy. I hope that other denialists including Gil and Ullberg will read this carefully. I hope Gil and his gang will repent. Time may already have run out.

Attached to Murtagh’s email was this commentary by AIDS Truther Nathan Geffen, which reads in part:

From 1999 to 2007, (Thabo) Mbeki and his Minister of Health Manto Tshabalala-Msimang obstructed and then undermined the implementation of highly active ARV treatment (HAART) and prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV in the public health system. Two studies, conducted independently of each other, conservatively calculated that over 300,000 people died because of Mbeki’s AIDS denialist policies.

Edward Mabunda was one of them. These studies could not account for additional deaths due to the promotion of quackery, often with the health minister’s support. They also did not consider the number of infections that occurred because of the confusion generated by the insipid state-funded prevention campaign and the messages by some outspoken Mbeki supporters dismissing the link between sex and HIV infection. The Mbeki era also fostered a profound mistrust of scientific medicine, the consequences of which also cannot be quantified.

What, if any, repercussions should be there for those responsible for this tragedy?

Geffen ponders various possible criminal charges and venues citing studies, all written by South African researchers who just happen to also be directly or indirectly funded by the SA mining industry, US pharmaceutical companies, investors and/or consultants to those industries. Some of those reports are published by the National Institutes of Health.

As I described last month, RMIT professor Jock McCulloch used portions of the Leon Commission Report (1995) to explain the incestuous relationships between the SA mining industry and research community which:

… shared the same research focus and a common source of funding through mine revenue. They also shared the same personnel, as key researchers moved between one sector and the other. The same men served on state commissions and departmental committees, and represented the Chamber at public inquiries. That made it difficult for an individual to confront the mining houses over the dust hazard…

While the slippery relationships between the genocidal post-Apartheid groups AIDS Truth, Treatment Action Campaign and the pharmaceutical industry and investors were exposed last month, Murtagh’s latest email and Geffen’s report produce one more financial/pharmaceutical connection.

The report footer indicates that it was published by the newly created Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiancy Syndrome (JAIDS.org), which is managed by co-Editors in Chief William Blattner (who just happens to be the co-founder of Robert Gallo’s Institute of Human Virology) and acclaimed AIDS researcher David Ho.

The website’s domain name registrant is the international investment powerhouse Wolters Kluwers, which generated ~$5 billion in 2008.

According to WK’s 2008 Annual Report:

Wolters Kluwer had 2008 annual revenues of €3.4 billion, employs approximately 20,000 people worldwide, and maintains operations in over 35 countries across Europe, North America, Asia Pacific, and Latin America…

The division is organized into four market-centered business units – Pharma Solutions, Medical Research, Professional & Education, and Clinical Solutions – to serve the information needs of its customers.

Their product Pharma Solutions:

… provides a wide range of data and analytic capabilities, marketing and publication services, business intelligence products, and diversified consulting services to support life science professionals and the pharmaceutical industry, from drug discovery through distribution, as well as government agencies and other healthcare sectors…

… The unit was awarded multi-year pharmaceutical data contracts, including a long-term agreement with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)… and a multi-year partnership with Bristol-Myers Squibb to provide Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) - compliant prescription sales data to measure business efficiency, control costs, and determine sales force effectiveness.

Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) is the manufacturer of  Sustiva (Efavirenz), which is so highly addictive that African children are now smoking it like crack.  Sustiva’s addiction-withdrawal syndrome also appears to produce symptoms that AIDS clinicians identify as the onset of AIDS.

Because BMS faces significant liability regarding the Sustiva snafu, they have good reason to partner with a damage-control publishing company like WK and children of Apartheid like Nathan Geffen who, with the assistance of very creative legal counsel (probably from WK), threatens real scientists like Peter Duesberg with false charges of genocide.

As an investigator, Geffen’s commentary appears to be one more propaganda piece that fits well with the genocidal post-Apartheid organizations that exploit Africa’s cheap black labor force for mining operations, leaving them with mining diseases, false HIV diagnoses and highly addictive and deadly AIDS drugs.

It is also possible that Geffen’s propaganda is the beginning of fabricated documentary evidence that Murtagh and his co-defendants may try to use to defend themselves from Ms. Farber’s lawsuit - even as they try to distance themselves from him.

Either way, Bristol-Myers Squibb has much to explain.

Published
by
admin
on July 8, 2009
in Africa, Clark Baker, Corruption, HIV/AIDS, Opinion and Pharmaceutical
. 0 Comments