Psych! AMA Ha$ Another 'Opinion' on Who-How-Should-Pay-for-WE-DON'T-KNOW (ROTFL)
Mort Zuckerman
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,
fr...@nytimes.com, dpr...@stmartin.edu
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
Subject: Psych! AMA Ha$ Another 'Opinion' on Who-How-Should-Pay-for-WE-
DON'T-KNOW (ROTFL)
Date: Dec 13, 2009 12:11 AM
ARTICLE BELOW ON AMA's "OPINION" about
the new subtraction from age-of-eligibility
for Medicare under Dems' bill
--------------------------------------
Oh, that's too funny for words.
AMA once again shows they aren't about health
or care.
Welp, we obviously don't need them.
They never took a stand on the Great Imitator(s).
The CDC performed the Tuskegee Bad Blood experiment...
but I don't recall the AMA ever asking what the results
of that, um, experiment-being-repeated-in-Lyme-Crymeland
were.
Likewise, the HIV vaccine trials were stopped
because the Lyme vaccine as an HIV vaccine
didn't work. Who solved THAT medical mystery?
Big Pharma? AMA? CDC? NIH?
The CT AG, (as in, *NOT* an "MD") *sued* this
criminal gang because OspA, the HIV vaccine,
caused the same chronic diseases set syndrome
[ALS, MS, Cancer, pseudocancer, Chronic Epstein
Barr (AKA CFIDS), systemic fungal infections,
stealth fungal (mycoplasmal) infections of the blood
(requires the 'DANGEROUSLY INTELLIGENT UNABOMBER
CHEMIST' LISA MASTERSON 'Dark Field' microscopy
methods).
OspA caused the "Chronic Lyme" syndromes outcomes.
http://www.actionlyme.org/Pam3Cys_Version15.htm
OspA, itself, was the Third Great Imitator, or
as Dottie Heffron calls it, the Greatest Imitator:
http://www.lymecryme.com/rich_text_21.html
That's why IDSA is so freaken hysterical about
denying what Chronic Lyme actually is. OspA,
their HIV-Lyme-Tuberculosis Pam3Cys "vaccine,"
did the same damage the HIV-Tuberculosis non-vaccines
did.
One week in March of 2008, over a 100 people
from the NIH came to my website, to see the
Pam3Cys immunosuppression data:
http://www.actionlyme.org/PAM3CYS_IMMUNE_SUPPRESSION.htm
The HIV-LYMErix trials were stopped. They
produced the same outcomes as the failed
Tb and Lyme vaccines caused. They *ALL* MADE
ALL THE INFECTIONS WORSE:
http://www.actionlyme.org/FUNGAL_VACCINES.htm
What the hell do we need the AMA for?
Even the newspapers revealed all the conflicts
of interest between MDs and BigPharma. AMA
never checked into it, despite JAMA being
their own "journal."
*NOW* the newspapers reveal "POOR KIDS GET MORE
ANTIPSYCHOTICS"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/12/health/12medicaid.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=antipsychotics&st=cse
Yeah, we know. Most of them are DCF kidnappees,
http://www.actionlyme.org/DCF_GRADUATARDS_SPEAK.htm
who then end up as Juvey- and Adult- Jail Fodder
http://www.actionlyme.org/BRAINLESS_BUREAUCRATS.htm
per the DCF-Rowlandgate Jail-Jenerating Formulary.
Yeah, we know. We 'been tawkin aboudit for years:
http://www.actionlyme.org/Psychiatric_MumboJumbo.wmv
Tom McGlashan over there at Yale was using these
http://www.actionlyme.org/DIABOLICAL_PERVERSION_PSYCHOANALYSIS.htm
DCF kidnappees as psychotropic drug guinea pigs.
NOW WE LEARN that these brain-disablers, in addition
to the TRAUMA of REMOVAL FROM PARENTS (same class
of kids McGlashan brain-damages) results in "learning
disabilities" (think: "End up in jail"):
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/12/09/ptsd.brain.kids.memory/
"Post Traumatic Stress Harms Kids Brains"
Ya think? Kids could be too traumatized to
learn? 'Too afraid of what will happen to them
next after being shoveled around by DCF like so
much fertilizer? Where they learn to believe
they're the commodity - the sh*t - the fertilizer
for more DCF- and prison-guard- unions nepotism
DCF thinks they are? (Cannibalism)
DCF tells them, "Oh, your parents are awful
They don't love you."
Then the kids say to themselves. "Oh, my parents
never loved me. Nobody loves me. I don't deserve
to be loved. There is something wrong with me.
I deserve this..."
Depression?
Despair?
Acting Out?
DCF *Creates* the Disorder, which then they DRUG
and Brain-Damage into Oblivion... and then into
the Adult Jails...
One third of DCF kidnappees end up in jail.
That is a *real,* DCF graduatard, US national
statistic. One third. In Corrupticut, that means
of the current 52,000 children who are in a state
of being kidnapped by DCF (out of 3.5 million people,
total State population), 13,000+ of them will
soon be in jails.
The kids can't learn. They're too traumatized
to sit still and read. They can't read. They
learn what they learn from the Street. 'From
other stupid DCF graduatard punks and gang members.
I see it every day. The result is right in
my freaken lap. I deal with this result every
freaken day of my life. These kids cannot
read and they cannot sit still, so they're always
looking for drugs. 'For a high. 'For a buzz.
'For something to *break.* Something to *smash*
to pieces so they can feel like a man at age
17 or 18-and-a-quarter...
Half the DCF graduatard kidnappee girls end up
as pregnant teenagers. They are looking for love.
Many times the 18-year-old+ kidnappees all
gang up together, party, do drugs... (like
DCF staff
http://www.actionlyme.org/RAGAGLIA_GRANDJURY_DETAILS.htm
the Whorey Glorey ^^ Hypocriticals, Inc)
...and commit crimes. Many, many of
them are now in jail, even for murder:
http://www.actionlyme.org/AMICUS_Figueroa_13_Feb_06.htm
That ^^^ girl was out looking for drugs and had
gotten them, when she stabbed a man in New Britain.
She had kept saying the whole time she was a DCF
kidnappee that "all she wanted was to go home and
see her mother."
Yale's Tom McGlashan finally says, "Um, We
psychiatrists have no idea, actually, what we're doing:"
http://www.actionlyme.org/MCGLASHAN_SAYS_PSYCHIATRISTS_BRAINLESS_NYT.html
"We psychiatrists have to start over at Square
One."
Yale's Psych Department head, Ben Bunney,
says, "My specialty is the brain damage caused by
psychotropics"
http://www.actionlyme.org/BUNNEY_YALE_BRAIN_DAMAGE.htm
["Yeah? Tell that to duh DCF. Apparently while you're
proclaiming that Rx drugs cause brain damage, DCF's
Patricia Leebens and Tom McGlashan in your same
effing retarded Psych Department aren't getting
the message... Oh. What am I saying. No one cares.
In fact, That's what DCF is for... so youz can
buy your Mercedes' and live in Woodbridge..."]
The whole world says and can see that mind-altering
substances CAUSE ALL KINDS OF *DISORDER,* whether
it's from Rx or from the Street. Mechanistically,
they are all IDENTICAL (neurotransmitters or receptor
blockers), except for lithium, which at low
concentrations is neuroprotective, and could in
fact be a remedy or a rescue for stroke (caused
by Lyme), or ALS (caused by Lyme), because, mechanistically
it competes for Ca (calcium) in calmodulin, changing
the osmotic potential of the cell membrane, rendering
it resistant to... you have heard it before re
the mechanisms of Pam3Cys immune wreckage ...
apoptosis or auto-kill or programmed cell death:
http://www.actionlyme.org/Pam3Cys_Version15.htm
But what does Lithium cost? 2 dollars a month?
Big Pharma won't hear of it.
Who the *FORK* needs the AMA?
Lyme and ALS:
http://www.actionlyme.org/ALSLYME47.htm
Half the ALS cases in New England are due
to Borreliosis- the kind that isn't Steere's
Bad Knees:
http://www.actionlyme.org/080430_RICO_CABAL_CAVES.htm
By ^^^ JJ Halperin, the Infamous-End-Runner-Around
the Blumenthal Lawsuit.
How did LYMErix get removed from the market?
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3680s2_11.pdf
"We believe these results do not show that the
vaccine is effective in preventing asymptomatic Lyme,
which SKB reports, but rather, that it is turning
asymptomatic Lyme cases into symptomatic ones.
"As a support group leader in Southeastern CT, I
have met -10 people, who found my name on the
internet, who had adverse-events and were ill, looking
for help. After learning more about these patients,
I found that all but one of these cases had previous
Lyme; and that one got theEry+hema Migrans rash during
the series of vaccination.
"NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON DID NOT HAVE OTHER
BANDS ON FOLLOW-UP WESTERN BLOT."
"It is because I have gotten-so many calls from
patients looking for help because of their
illness, that I am here today."--Myself to
the FDA Vaccine Committee, Jan, 2001
- - - - -
It is because none of MDs in America gave
enough of a sh*t to look at the Lyme and
LYMErix patients and the data.
The entire US Medical world has been turned
upside down and discovered to be like dry
rot, termites, water damage, bitter nuts and
rotten fruit... total rot and stinking
incompetence.
Worthless.
- - -
Good thing for Mother Nature and insulin,
and Mother Nature and tree bark (aspirin),
and the *accident* of molds (penicillin),
and Good Thing for Mother Nature and peach
pit (alkaloids and cancer chemotherapy agents),
because otherwise, what's a drug?
Who's an MD?
What's an MD?
"We don't know" any.
http://www.actionlyme.org/Donta.htm
"They don't know what Lyme disease is, but they know how to treat this
new We-Don't-Know disease, and, according to the ID Society, if you
don't recover from the IDSA treatment of We-Don't-Know disease, you
never had We-Don't-Know. (We know we don't have We-Don't-Know, we
know what we have: Lyme borreliosis. We don't know what We-Don't-
Know is, thanks to Mark Klempner and Allen Steere.)
"However, there are 2 things we do know- there was a vaccine for We-
Don't-Know, and there was also a 1989 ID Society Supplement published
specifically for these later-known-as We-Don't-Know diseases, which
was meant to be comprehensive coverage of the spirochetal soon-to-be
We-Don't-Know illnesses, and this was even supported by CDC staff."
- - -
We Don't Know why a bunch of brainless
automatons programmed by BigPharma and
BigInsurance would dare to have an opinion
on how-and-by-whom- what They-Don't-Know
should be paid for...
Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org
http://www.relapsingfever.org
=======================================
http://trueslant.com/rickungar/2009/12/11/the-ama-turns-tail-on-health-care-reform/
The AMA turns tail on health care reform
You knew it was only a matter of time.
On Tuesday, the Democrats revealed their latest effort to craft a
breakthrough in the health care reform fiasco. The centerpiece of the
new plan involves lowering the age of Medicare participation to 55.
Within hours, the American Medical Association was giving the proposal
the big thumbs down.
Here’s what AMA President, Dr. J. James Rohack, had to say on his
blog,
Now by considering to allow Baby Boomers to accelerate their entry
into the Medicare program by 10 years, we would add millions of more
patients to a program where it is difficult for a new enrollee to get
an appointment with a physician.
Yet some in the Senate must be assuming that the benefits of
providing coverage outweigh the risks of reduced access caused by
forcing more physicians to stop accepting Medicare patients because
payment rates are too low to keep their practices viable — they will
win in the court of public opinion by pointing to how many of the
uninsured now have coverage.
But coverage without access is not a goal the AMA can accept. We
know that will result in continued use of the default access to
emergency rooms, where medical conditions will need to be treated at
later stages with resulting increased cost due to the lack of access.
A better solution would be to deal with the uninsured under the age of
64 to allow the individual to buy into the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Program (FEHBP).
This is quite a statement.
The good doctor is complaining that lowering the age of eligibility
for Medicare will result in there being too many patients for the
system to handle. Call me crazy, but isn’t that the point of health
care reform – which the AMA has supported up until now? Isn’t the
whole idea to include more Americans who have been priced out of
access to the health care system? Is this the first time it is
occurring to Dr. Rohack that including more people in the system would
mean…more patients?
Or is it possible that Dr. Rohack is worrying that, as health care
reform gets closer to reality, the public is going to find out that
the AMA has played a major role in restricting the number of
physicians in the United States in the effort to limit competition and
keep prices higher?
We do have a physician shortage crisis and the AMA is largely to
blame. As we begin to see more people with access to the health care
system, Americans will begin to focus on the fact that while hundreds
of thousands of qualified candidates from American colleges have been
denied the opportunity to become physicians, we have far too few
doctors, particularly in vital ares of practice like primary care.
They will also begin to take more notice of the fact that our
hospitals and doctors’ offices are filled with foreign practitioners
who were afforded a medical education in their country. Please don’t
get me wrong – some of the finest, most brilliant physicians I know
have come from other countries to practice medicine in America and I’m
glad we have them. My point is that, given the shortage we are facing
in physicians, maybe we should give our own qualified candidates a
chance to fulfill their career objectives while filling the pipeline
with these badly needed professionals.
Even more curious is Rohack’s belief is that if we steer the 55+ crowd
towards private health insurance rather than into a Medicare program,
suddenly there will be enough physicians available to care for them
all. Why is that? Does he imagine that relying on private health
insurance for this demographic will continue to price enough people
out of the system to avoid crowding in physicians’ offices across
America? If this is what is on Rohack’s mind, he may very well be
right. But this hardly presents the image of the noble physician
dedicated to curing disease wherever it may be found. Instead, the
doctor appears ready to protect those already privileged with the
opportunity to see a doctor by telling those who are not that they
must continue to be excluded from medical care.
I hope this is not representative of who we have become in America.
If Rohack truly believes that bringing the 55 plusers into the system
via the FEHBP will serve to bring coverage to just as many who would
benefit under the Medicare approach, then I completely fail to see how
this meets his concern that there will be not be enough doctors to
service the newly covered.
If you add 5 million new participants into the system, whether by
lowering the age of Medicare eligibility or by making private
insurance more available in the way Dr. Rohack proposes, there are
still going to be 5 million more people in the system. So how does
this solve Rohack’s problem? Either way, 5 million more people are
going to want to see a doctor from time to time.
I think what is really troubling the doctor is the possibility of more
patients at a lower price. So, why not just say so and come up with a
proposal to deal with this?
By most accounts, when you take into consideration the much higher
overhead costs that attaches to private insurance coverage vs.
Medicare, the doctors end up netting somewhere between 5% and 10% less
on Medicare patients than those paying with private insurance. So, for
the 55-65 Medicare participants, let’s pay the doctors the difference
and pass that cost along to those who sign up for the expanded
Medicare program. Nobody expects the younger participants to pay the
same premium charges as the elderly. While the current estimates I
have seen on the younger participants in Medicare run at about $600 a
month, once the full reform bill ‘kicks in’, many of these people will
be entitled to subsidies, thus lowering their premium costs
dramatically. Further, the Senate Democrats are already looking at a
way to get the price down for those who cannot afford this rate during
the period before the reform program launches in 2013 or 2014. And
why not adjust premium rates based on income and other factors that
are relevant to one who is still in their producing years?
Also bear in mind that nobody is suggesting that 55+ workers who
receive health insurance through work are going to have to give up
their employer plans. In fact, it’s a pretty good bet that they will
be prohibited from doing so. And while the 55-64 Medicare participants
who do not receive coverage at work might pay a higher premium bill,
when compared to employer provided insurance, at least they will be
able to get coverage and not face private insurers who question the
physician’s every decision and seeks to deny the most expensive
procedures at the time a patient most needs it.
One point worth noting – the AMA speaks for a minority of doctors.
Most physicians I know are dedicated to treating as many patients as
they can reasonably manage while still delivering a high quality
service. While they like to earn a good living – and certainly deserve
to do so – they are, first and foremost, dedicated to their patients’
health. We should not allow the questionable perspective of Dr.
Rohack and the AMA to poison our attitudes towards physicians.
"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci