Kaiser nervous about "Under Our Skin"

[Mort Zuckerman]

To: bpc...@norwichdiocese.net, scientifi...@ostp.gov,
pkru...@princeton.edu, Stanle...@fiu.edu,
emcsw...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@po.state.ct.us, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, brans...@comcast.net,
vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us, freet...@charter.net,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, govern...@po.state.ct.us,
attorney...@po.state.ct.us, randall...@usdoj.gov,
Robert....@yale.edu, edi...@greenwich-post.com,
harol...@yale.edu, sedm...@nswbc.org, rrmcg...@aol.com
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, sidney_b...@yahoo.com,
criminal...@usdoj.gov, karla.d...@usdoj.gov,
christophe...@usdoj.gov, richar...@yale.edu,
harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu, inq...@aldf.com,
ly...@idsociety.org, meganm...@theatlantic.com,
bob.d...@latimes.com

Subject: Kaiser nervous about "Under Our Skin"

Date: Jul 2, 2009 5:08 AM

ARTICLE BELOW

Kaiser is nervous, obviously, because they're attacking the
integrity of the Under Our Skin filmmakers, in the exact
same way Kaiser@NYMC, et al, attacked Joe Burrascano,
et al, by claiming there is a financial interest (in attacking
Kaiser, et al).

Well, we're ready for the "unscientific" attacks to come next.
See
http://www.ActionLyme.org
on the Infamous No-Work-Non-Scientist at the NIH.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.diseases.lyme/browse_frm/thread/87640d534c586115/c5e50e5b067b2565?lnk=gst&q=Ed+did+say+%22Buzz-off+Karen.%22+Not+very+mature&rnum=1#c5e50e5b067b2565
(Sweeg says I'm not a scientist, and CRAZY, too
to be saying all these true and scientific things about
"Lyme Disease" and LYMErix.)

Kaiser-Permanente was central to the establishment
of the ALDF.com RICO cabal at the financially floundering
New York Medical College in 1990, less than a year after
the publication of the TERRIFYING Infectious Diseases Society
of America's 1989, "Reviews of Infectious Diseases" Special
Supplement 6 on Lyme and Spirochetal Diseases, where we
learned Lyme was "chronic, treatment failed in half the cases
and the treatment endpoint was unknown"
http://www.actionlyme.org/CHP_9_IDSA_REVIEWS.htm

Kaiser freaked out in 1989 because they thought they might be
paying 200,000 thousand dollars per year per patient. Lyme is
more expensive than AIDS to treat.

The obvious smoking gun was what the president of the
College did after Kaiser took over: John J. Connolly started
his own company called CastleConnolly.com, which is
a front for Kaiser, and he published that "MD groups were
just going to have to get used to the idea that BigInsurance
is taking over medicine" - a document still in the US Attorney's
Orifice in New Haven, Corrupticut, with the rest of the RICO
and my FALSE ARREST data (as I was reporting the criminal
behavior of AAG Jessica Gaucvin and duh rest of duh DCF
tards to the USDOJ at the same time:
http://www.actionlyme.org/USDOJ_COMPLAINT_RICO.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/Schoen.htm
(^^ Congenitally infected children)

Well, they're clearly running scared and we're not even
done indicting them yet. We're going to prove the crooks
knew LYMErix was more than a problem in Western
Blot reading:
http://groups.google.com/group/scilyme2/browse_thread/thread/36e656b247b69fcd?hl=en#
And that that's why the crooks stalked and harassed us
and had us falsely arrested for TERRORISM:
http://www.actionlyme.org/GAUVIN_DEATH_PENALTY.htm

I FOI'D all of Gauvin's email from Yale and the NIH as
regards myself, but naturally that lying crazy whore refused
(illegally) to turn it over, while at the same time, stealing the
AG's CC'd RICO mail right off of his desk:
http://www.actionlyme.org/BLUMENTHALS_MAIL_STOLEN_BY_JESSICA_GAUVIN.htm


AH-YES, we're gonna prove they knew LYMErix
was a problem and that it caused something like
what IDSA had already defined as CHRONIC LYME.

(Coming very soon to an ActionLyme Science Home
PC Theatre near you!)


Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org

===========================

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2009/July/02/Documentaries.aspx
New Kind of Film Noir: Health Care

* Print
* Share
* Email

Topics: Delivery of Care, Health Costs, Health Reform, Health
Disparities

Jul 02, 2009
A half-hour into “Money-Driven Medicine,” a new documentary that
skewers the U.S. health care system for its insensitivity toward
patients and excessive spending, a father talks about the doctors who
treated his toddler for leukemia.

As melancholy music plays in the background and photographs of his
bald daughter flash across the screen, the father says that two years
of chemotherapy failed to stop his daughter’s cancer. But when he
balked at recommendations for additional painful treatment, they
threatened to sue him.

The emotionally charged vignette is typical of a handful of
provocative health care-focused documentaries circulating amid the
increasingly contentious debate in Washington over how to fix the
health care system. While lawmakers are targeting rising costs and
growing numbers of uninsured as the major problems, the film makers
offer a darker, more conspiratorial view: Powerful vested interests
lusting for profits are responsible for the country’s medical malaise.

One film, “Food, Inc.,” targets the food industry for the nation’s
explosion of obesity. Another, “Under Our Skin,” details an alleged
conspiracy by insurers and physicians to downplay the severity of Lyme
disease. A third, “Unnatural Causes,” pinpoints poverty in a class-
stratified society as root cause of illness.

Each film has a strong point of view and makes only limited efforts to
present opposing viewpoints. None has created the buzz of Michael
Moore’s 2007 “Sicko,” which assailed the insurance industry and was
championed by advocates for government-run health care. Still, some of
the filmmakers hope to capitalize on, and perhaps influence, the
political debate raging on Capitol Hill and around the country.

As a critique of the current fee-for-service payment system, the
issues raised in "Money-Driven Medicine" have gotten some political
traction, partly because Obama’s budget director, Peter Orszag, has
talked up research from the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and
Clinical Practice that shows wide variation in how doctors practice
medicine. In some parts of the country, physicians perform far more
procedures and run up much bigger tabs without improving patients’
health.

“It's better than a power-point presentation,” says Maggie Mahar, who
wrote the book “Money-Driven Medicine” that the film is based on. “It
really could be useful as propaganda and I really hope people use it
as that.”

That kind of talk frustrates the targets of some of the films, who say
the movies make misleading, and at times, dangerous assertions.
Richard Lobb, a spokesman for the National Chicken Council, an
industry group, said in an interview that Food, Inc., “is a
documentary about the American food system the way ‘Raiders of the
Lost Ark’ was a documentary about archaeology.”

Food, Inc. is a cinematic version of the agribusiness critique
proffered by Eric Schlosser (“Fast Food Nation”) and Michael Pollan
(“The Omnivore’s Dilemma”). Made by Robert Kenner and Schlosser, it
portrays a network of corporations that, with the complicity of the
federal government’s chief regulators, has foisted cheaply produced
but unhealthy, corn-based food on the nation, causing diabetes,
obesity and bacterial outbreaks such as e. coli. The movie champions
local, organic farming, nutritional labels on restaurant menus and
stricter regulation of genetic engineering, industrial animal
factories and healthier eating.

Food manufacturers have set up their own Web site to dispute the film,
which they say unfairly smears the country’s food production
industry’s success in providing cheap and safe meals for millions of
people. “To suggest that everyone eat local, unless you live in the
Central Valley of California, doesn’t leave you with a lot of
options,” says Lobb.

Dr. John Halperin, a professor of neurology at Mount Sinai School of
Medicine in New York, lamented that the vantage of “Under Our Skin”
has gained some credence with Connecticut lawmakers. In June, Gov.
Jodi Rell signed legislation protecting doctors from being disciplined
for treating Lyme as a long-term disease—incidents of which are
detailed in the movie, which argues that Lyme disease has been
undertreated as a short-term illness rather than a long-term,
persistent infection, requiring extended doses of antibiotics.

“Because of the perspective pushed by this film, you have legislatures
like Connecticut’s saying it’s legitimate to treat these patients with
months and months of medication,” Halperin says.

A spokesman for the Infectious Disease Society of America, an
association of doctors, scientists and health care experts that is
criticized in the film, says long-term antibiotics is “a treatment
protocol that is dangerous to the patient and is not supported by
medical evidence.”

The filmmaker, Andy Abrahams Wilson, says his movie highlights a
broader problem in the health care system, in which the rules for
treatment of diseases are set by people who have financial stakes in
the issue.

“My hope is people don’t just think of this as an isolated situation
in terms of Lyme disease: it implicates our health care system in
general,” he says.

There's nothing wrong with the strong arguments in all of the films,
says Robert Thompson, a Syracuse University professor of popular
culture. He believes that the films’ biases are “a good and healthy
thing,” and adds, “We use our greatest dramatic story telling devices
for big explosive action adventures, and all of us, at some point,
probably wistfully dream of a utopian culture where we would use film
and television to talk abut important things.”

Some of the documentaries have appeared at film festivals, on
television, and in limited releases in theaters around the country.
Others have been distributed as teachers’ materials, shown at
universities and screened at small gatherings of activists and
discussion groups and on the Internet.

As part of their promotional campaigns, the filmmakers have
incorporated explicit calls to action. For instance, the makers of
“Food, Inc.” have put forth an agenda, “Hungry for Change,” that calls
for stronger laws to protect farm workers and discourages people from
eating meat or dining out.

Executive Producer Larry Adelman says the purpose of "Unnatural
Causes," is "to organize folks to get them eager to mobilize for
change.” The multi-part documentary, originally broadcast on PBS,
focuses on the social causes of sickness, including the stress from
poverty, environmental pollutants seeping through impoverished
neighborhoods and regimented low-level jobs. It also examines the
racial aspects of health, including the greater prevalence of diabetes
among Latinos and the fact that African-Americans are more likely to
get sick or die than whites from the same economic class. Adelman says
that more than 400 groups—including major unions, church groups and
local public health agencies—have screened the movie since then, and
PBS is re-broadcasting it this fall.

As the health care debate intensifies in Congress, films directly
commissioned by groups involved in the fight may end up overwhelming
independently made features. Already, activists with opposing views
have produced films. Conservatives for Patients’ Rights, a group
founded by former hospital executive Rick Scott, an opponent of
Democratic health care proposals, bought TV time in May to air its
documentary, "End of Patient's Rights - The Human Consequences of
Government-Run Health Care." The film features residents of Canada
and Britain decrying their experiences with state-provided health
care. Liberal activists demanded, without success, that the film be
pulled off the air.

Even before the 2008 election, Health Care for American Now, a liberal
group that favors health care changes along the lines recommended by
President Barack Obama, commissioned its own documentary. “Diagnosis:
Now” is filled with anecdotes of insurance companies refusing to
authorize tests and treatments and is by Robert Greenwald, who has
created documentaries critical of Fox News, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and
the Bush administration.



"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci