Tag Archives: Healthcare

Welcome to Post Office Health Care

America’s health-care system has problems — all traceable to government intervention — but it could be worse. And if the so-called reform emerging in Congress is enacted, it will be worse.

The nub of the plan is that everyone must have health insurance and that all but the smallest employers should provide it. If someone doesn’t have coverage, he’ll be penalized. Low-income people will be subsidized by the taxpayers. Government will determine what’s covered, which will set off a lobbying frenzy by providers of “indispensable” services and products. (This already goes on in the states, where “mandated benefits” include coverage for drug and alcoholism treatment, in vitro fertilization, and other less-than-widely-used services.) So people will be forced to have coverage they may not want.

Insurers will not be able to deny coverage or charge higher premiums to people already ill, that is, with so-called pre-existing conditions. The mandate to insure everyone and charge the same price regardless of health means that some will be forced to subsidize others. People of whatever income level whose insurance premiums would have been lower without the mandate will have to spend more because risk-based premiums will be illegal. That is not insurance; it’s welfare. (Read more from campaignforliberty.com)

Does the Vaccine Matter?

Here is a fantastic article about the Vaccine controversy, emailed to me by the infamous Esoteridactyl:

To further protect the populace, the federal government has spent upwards of $3billion stockpiling millions of doses of antiviral drugs like Tamiflu—which are being used both to prevent swine flu and to treat those who fall ill.

But what if everything we think we know about fighting influenza is wrong? What if flu vaccines do not protect people from dying—particularly the elderly, who account for 90 percent of deaths from seasonal flu? And what if the expensive antiviral drugs that the government has stockpiled over the past few years also have little, if any, power to reduce the number of people who die or are hospitalized? The U.S. government—with the support of leaders in the public-health and medical communities—has put its faith in the power of vaccines and antiviral drugs to limit the spread and lethality of swine flu. Other plans to contain the pandemic seem anemic by comparison. Yet some top flu researchers are deeply skeptical of both flu vaccines and antivirals. Like the engineers who warned for years about the levees of New Orleans, these experts caution that our defenses may be flawed, and quite possibly useless against a truly lethal flu. And that unless we are willing to ask fundamental questions about the science behind flu vaccines and antiviral drugs, we could find ourselves, in a bad epidemic, as helpless as the citizens of New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.

. . . .

We think we have the flu anytime we fall ill with an ailment that brings on headache, malaise, fever, coughing, sneezing, and that achy feeling as if we’ve been sleeping on a bed of rocks, but researchers have found that at most half, and perhaps as few as 7 or 8 percent, of such cases are actually caused by an influenza virus in any given year. More than 200 known viruses and other pathogens can cause the suite of symptoms known as “influenza-like illness”; respiratory syncytial virus, bocavirus, coronavirus, and rhinovirus are just a few of the bugs that can make a person feel rotten. And depending on the season, in up to two-thirds of the cases of flu-like illness, no cause at all can be found.

. . . .

The worst flu pandemic in recorded history was the “Spanish flu” of 1918–19, at the end of World WarI. A third of the world’s population was infected, with at least 40million and perhaps as many as 100million people dying—more than were killed in World Wars I and II combined.

. . . .

Public-health officials consider vaccine their most formidable defense against the pandemic—indeed, against any flu—and on the surface, their faith seems justified. . . . But while vaccines for, say, whooping cough and polio clearly and dramatically reduced death rates from those diseases, the impact of flu vaccine has been harder to determine.

. . . .

study after study has found that people who get a flu shot in the fall are about half as likely to die that winter—from any cause—as people who do not. . . . “For a vaccine to reduce mortality by 50 percent and up to 90 percent in some studies means it has to prevent deaths not just from influenza, but also from falls, fires, heart disease, strokes, and car accidents. That’s not a vaccine, that’s a miracle.” . . . “People told me, ‘No good can come of [asking] this,’” she says. “‘Potentially a lot of bad could happen’ for me professionally by raising any criticism that might dissuade people from getting vaccinated, because of course, ‘We know that vaccine works.’ This was the prevailing wisdom.”

. . . .

To test their thesis, Jackson and her colleagues combed through eight years of medical data on more than 72,000 people 65 and older. They looked at who got flu shots and who didn’t. Then they examined which group’s members were more likely to die of any cause when it was not flu season. . . . healthy people chose to get the vaccine, while the “frail elderly” didn’t or couldn’t. In fact, the healthy-user effect explained the entire benefit that other researchers were attributing to flu vaccine, suggesting that the vaccine itself might not reduce mortality at all.

. . . .

Jackson’s papers were turned down for publication in the top-ranked medical journals. One flu expert who reviewed her studies for the Journal of the American Medical Association wrote, “To accept these results would be to say that the earth is flat!”

. . . .

The history of flu vaccination suggests other reasons to doubt claims that it dramatically reduces mortality. In 2004, for example, vaccine production fell behind, causing a 40 percent drop in immunization rates. Yet mortality did not rise. In addition, vaccine “mismatches” occurred in 1968 and 1997: in both years, the vaccine that had been produced in the summer protected against one set of viruses, but come winter, a different set was circulating. In effect, nobody was vaccinated. Yet death rates from all causes, including flu and the various illnesses it can exacerbate, did not budge. Sumit Majumdar, a physician and researcher at the University of Alberta, in Canada, offers another historical observation: rising rates of vaccination of the elderly over the past two decades have not coincided with a lower overall mortality rate. In 1989, only 15 percent of people over age 65 in the U.S. and Canada were vaccinated against flu. Today, more than 65 percent are immunized. Yet death rates among the elderly during flu season have increased rather than decreased.

. . . .

The CDC recommends the use of two drugs against H1N1: oseltamivir and zanamivir, better known by their brand names, Tamiflu and Relenza, which together form the second pillar of the government’s anti-pandemic-flu strategy. Public-health officials at the state and local levels are also recommending the drugs. Guidelines issued by the New York City Department of Health, says Newman, “encourage us to give a prescription to just about every patient with the sniffles,” a practice that some experts worry will quickly lead to resistant strains of the virus . . . (Read more from theatlantic.com)

H1N1 & the Vaccines

The internet has been simply abuzz about H1N1 and vaccines.

* It’s government pandering to the medical industrial complex. (Yes, I’ve repeated this myself.)
* It’s a de-population program.
* It’s a bio-weapon.
* Vaccines are essential.
* Vaccines are bullshit.

My favorite single reflection came from Ron Paul: The vaccine fiasco is a demonstration of how government doesn’t work. In New York, people who don’t want the vaccine are being forced by government to take it, while elsewhere people who want it can’t get it because there are shortages.

Here’s a collection of stories about the vaccine and H1N1 which I found interesting:

A brief conversation with a vaccine manufacturer:

***

Dr. Lorraine Day on government hype, the dangers of vaccines, and pharmaceutical companies.

See also criticism of Dr. Day.

***

Goldman Sachs Received H1N1 Vaccine Before Several Hospitals (GS) (Read more from businessinsider.com)

Isn’t that special!

***

Council on Foreign Relations discusses anti-vaccine movement & how to sell the vaccine to the public. They suggest faking a shortage of the vaccine to create panic.

Right or wrong, one thing I hate about these people is the way they assume my health together with everybody else’s is their business.

***

My favorite video, and, I think, the most damaging to vaccine proponents is this affiliate CBS video with exposes how H1N1 is being massively misdiagnosed, and the CDC is dragging its feet in admitting it.

Operation Health Freedom

I’m extremely impressed with this video series from the Campaign for Liberty. I learned something from every single one of the videos:

Optometrist & Senatorial candidate Rand Paul. Who are the uninsured?

British MEP Daniel Hannan talks about the National Health Service (NHS):

Peter Schiff on taxes, incentive, & free markets in healthcare:

Judge Andrew Napolitano on the regulation of interstate commerce & healthcare:

Economist Tom Woods and life before Medicare/Medicaid and its effect on society.

Ron Paul on Healthcare & government competition

by Ron Paul

Last Saturday many concerned Americans watched in horror as the House passed the healthcare reform bill. If this bill makes it through the Senate, it would massively overhaul the way healthcare is delivered in this country. Today, obviously, we don’t have a perfect system, but this legislation takes all the mistakes we are making with healthcare and makes them worse. Most of what is wrong with healthcare stems from decades of government intervention and the resulting unintended consequences.

But the government’s prescription for the ills caused by intervention is always more intervention. We see this not only in healthcare policy, but also in foreign policy, in economic policy, and in monetary policy – basically, in all areas of public policy. It was even claimed that the House bill would increase competition in healthcare, and thereby improve the private sector’s business model for insurance.

It is fascinating that politicians would use the language of the free market in this way to justify more corporatism. This demonstrates a couple of things. One, that politicians truly do not understand the very basic tenets of a free market. By definition, a free market is free from government intervention. But once a little intervention is accepted as legitimate, politicians will blame the problems created by their intervention on the free market and present themselves as saviors that must intervene even more.

It also demonstrates that politicians know that Americans still believe the free market is a good thing. People know and understand that competition among businesses is better for the consumer than a monopoly. However, competition between a private business and a government or government-favored entity is not real competition.

Healthcare provision seeks to embrace prayer treatments

When government taxes us and flips the bill on our behalf, impossibly controversial questions like what is medicine, when does life begin or what is marriage, become monumentally significant and a firestorm of lobbying, pandering and corruption ensues.

When we get to keep our money and pursue our own happiness, opposing views can co-exist peacefully.

Reporting from Washington – Backed by some of the most powerful members of the Senate, a little-noticed provision in the healthcare overhaul bill would require insurers to consider covering Christian Science prayer treatments as medical expenses. (Read more from latimes.com)

IJ challenges bone marrow compensation ban!

You get up to five years in prison for compensating a bone marrow donor. In the IJ’s argument in the videos below, they make a point to distinguish bone marrow donors from kidney donors. They are working toward a limited goal, and have a reason for setting a limited goal. Philosophically (and constitutionally) there is no reason for the government to make compensation illegal for ANY organ or tissue donation.

Every year, 80,000 people in the U.S. need a kidney donation. 20,000 are available. Why not legalize compensation?

Every year, 1,000 Americans die because they cannot find a matching bone marrow donor. Minorities are hit especially hard. Common sense suggests that offering modest incentives to attract more bone marrow donors would be worth pursuing, but federal law makes that a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

That is why on October 28, 2009, adults with deadly blood diseases, the parents of sick children, a California nonprofit and a world-renowned medical doctor who specializes in bone marrow research joined with the Institute for Justice to launch a legal fight against the U.S. Attorney General to put an end to a ban on offering compensation for bone marrow donors.

click here for more on the case
click here to read more about the superheroes at the Institute for Justice

Press conference:

Q&A:

The Great Flu Charade – un-constitutional mandatory vaccinations

I know bullshit when I see it. Consider CNN’s bias, accusatory coverage of a healthcare worker who doesn’t want government-mandated injections:

I have the very strong impression that the annual government-media blitz about flu is nothing but pandering to the medical industrial complex. Somebody is making a killing off the millions of flu shots our government is increasingly requiring people to take.

Prison Planet: Vaccine revolt! Swine flu vaccine support crumbles as flimsy rationale for H1N1 shots becomes apparent

Judge Andrew Napolitano on the constitution perspective on this issue:

Ha! Doctor tells it like it is. (don’t expect him to be invited back):

N.J. Mandatory Flu Shots for Preschoolers Cause Outrage

U.S. military troops will begin getting required swine flu shots in the next week to 10 days

Obama to require everyone to get THREE flu shots (more media scare tactics):

A chink in the armor: CBS: Swine Flu Cases Overestimated? (CBS !?)

Flu Vaccine Brainwashing In Prime Time ABC Show

Nurses got sick from the “swine flu” vaccine in Sweden • UPDATE – 1 suspected death Annika Linde, director of The Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control (SMI) manages to spin this into something positive by stating “The vaccine has more side effects than the normal flu vaccine. It is a sign that proves that it gives an effective protection.”

Doctors in Berlin refuse to give “swine flu” jab

Big pharma, government officials and media collude in “biggest profiteering scheme” ever, reports Evelyn Pringle

Here are excerpts from an article on lewrockwell.com:

With a Consumer Reports poll showing nearly 2/3rds of U.S. parents will hold off on having their children vaccinated with the H1N1 late-2009 season flu vaccine, health authorities are likely to resort to scare tactics as they have in past years to induce parents into having their children vaccinated.

. . . .

The U.S. government has ordered 250 million doses of the H1N1 late-2009 flu strain vaccine from five suppliers: MedImmune, a unit of AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis (France), Australia’s CSL, GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis. In past years the CDC ordered over 100 million doses of the seasonal flu vaccine.

Recognizing resistance to flu vaccination, flu shots are not just being offered at clinics this year. There is coercion at schools, hospitals and workplaces to undergo flu vaccination. The military must take the vaccine.

Reported cases of the flu are likely to be on the upswing as human immunity declines with the seasonal tilt of the Earth away from the sun in northern latitudes, thus reducing intensity of vitamin D-producing solar ultraviolet-B radiation. Despite doing the obvious – promoting vitamin D supplements – vaccines are forced onto the public.

. . . .

According to package inserts, none of the current vaccines approved by the FDA have been tested for use among pregnant females or in children below the age of 2 for Medimmune Flumist®, or for injectable vaccines, not below age 18 for CSL (Australia) vaccine; not below age 4 for Novartis (UK-USA) vaccine; not below 6 months of age for Sanofi Pasteur (France) vaccine. However, these vaccines are being widely promoted for use among pregnant women and very young infants.

. . . .

In another misdirection, the Centers for Disease Control continues to advise the public to undergo vaccination for the seasonal flu in addition to the novel H1N1 late-2009 season triple reassortant flu. However, according to the CDC’s own website, 99% of all influenza A viruses currently in circulation (late September 2009) are the late-2009 H1N1 viruses. The seasonal flu strains have virtually disappeared. Seasonal flu shots would be superfluous and even problematic.

Dr. Racaniello asks: “Why would anyone consider receiving this vaccine?” Yet this is being promoted by the CDC and this recommendation is being parroted by the news media.

. . . .

The news media is aiding and abetting the flu hysteria, dramatizing every flu-related death even when there has been no laboratory confirmation that the H1N1 flu strain was involved, and serves as a free publicity agent for vaccine makers. Behind the scenes there must be mumblings to news reporters they are not to print or air negative reports that would cause the public to lose confidence in the nation’s vaccination program.

An ABC News report cites US health officials as saying low vaccination rates “could have dire consequences,” despite the fact this flu outbreak has produced fewer deaths than the typical seasonal flu and did not result in abnormal mortality as it swept through South America during its summer flu season there.

Complicity between vaccine makers, public health authorities and the news media maintains undeserved public confidence in a flu vaccination program that often only offers side effects and no disease prevention or reduction in mortality.

. . . .

Lack of evidence of effectiveness

While older adults are at the greatest risk for dying from the flu, surprisingly there is only one randomized controlled study among older persons (60 years and up) which reported a 33% reduction in flu-like illness and a 56% reduction in circulating viral count. But this means the vaccine was ineffective in most people in regard to preventing symptoms. [Journal American Medical Assn 1994; 272:1661–1665]

Centers for Disease Control officials concede the ability of flu vaccines to generate sufficient antibodies and effectively reduce symptoms and prevent death is only about 30–50% among currently licensed vaccines. [Current Topics Microbiology Immunology 2009; 333:413–29]

Data collected over 33 flu seasons shows flu vaccination reduced the death rate substantially less than expected. [Journal American Medical Assn 2003; 289: 179–86; Archives Internal Medicine 2005; 165: 265–72]

But news reporters must put a positive face on flu vaccination, despite evidence to the contrary.

Mismatched vaccines

Another major problem is that the flu viruses in the vaccines often do not match the flu viruses in circulation in the population. [Vaccine 2008; 26 (Supplement 4): D5–D9]

For example, in 2007 the trivalent flu vaccine (contained 3 strains of the flu) was only 40% protective due to mismatched flu strains. [Cleve Clin J Med. 2008 Dec; 75(12):865–70] The percentage of viruses that were matched to vaccine strains was 5% (3 of 62) in 2004–2005, 5% (2 of 42) in 2005–2006, and 91% (85 of 93) in 2006–2007. [J Infect Dis. 2009 Jan 15; 199(2):159–67]

In the 8 years spanning 1998–2005, flu vaccine mismatch occurred in 4 of those years including both the 2003–04 and 2004–05 consecutive seasons. The nation had no protection beyond natural immunity in many recent flu seasons. Due to flu strain mismatch, 84% of the vaccinees over 75 years of age who received the flu vaccine in 1997–98 were not protected against infection. [J. Medical Virology 61:94–99, 2000] The public is never alerted to this.

A major review encompassing 64 published studies which evaluated the ability of flu vaccines to reduce symptoms or viral count showed overall effectiveness of just 23% during seasons when the flu strain in the vaccine matched the virus in circulation within the population. Effectiveness did not differ from years when vaccines were mismatched. [Lancet 2005; 366:1165–1174]

In the end, the question of whether or not to get a flu shot should be made by patients consulting with their doctors, not by government.