Prescribe Them Cake (The Marie Antoinettes of Health Care)
Mort Zuckerman
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: Prescribe Them Cake (The Marie Antoinettes of Health Care)
Date: Jul 21, 2009 5:27 PM
ARTICLE BELOW
It's simple. The USDOJ won't investigate, despite having
Wendell Potter spell it out for them: BigInsurance is defrauding
Uncle Sam by being involved in "guidelines" on the diagnoses of
diseases. Whence, upon becoming disabled from the likes
of Borreliosis (a huge epidemic if you include 90% of Fibromyalgia
and Chronic Fatigue, Half of all Loud Gehrig's Disease cases in
America, at least a third of MS cases, a significant portion of
Vaccines-Induced Autism, etc, the last of which is likeliest
a function of the combination of fungal antigen induced immune
suppression plus hypervaccination), BigInsurance claims "this
patient has 'CRAZY,' or 'CRAZY PARENT POISONING OR
SHAKING THEIR BABIES' and we, the BigIns, don't pay
for 'CRAZY.'"
http://www.actionlyme.org/MUNCHAUSENS.htm
All of the evidence that Kaiser-Permanente is directly involved
in the Lyme crymes, and what John J. Connolly *published* about
how MDs groups are just going to have to get used to the idea
that BigInsurance is taking over medicine," is still in the USA
(US Attorney's Orifice) in Corrupticut, since 2003:
http://www.actionlyme.org/USDOJ_COMPLAINT_RICO.htm
So, this is a criminal matter, one which Grassley would be interested
in, were he to learn that not only are we paying for an incompetent
FDA, NIH, and CDC, but we're paying an incompetent USDOJ
for no services.
This is a CRIMINAL RICO matter, because of all the stalking
and harassment:
http://www.actionlyme.org/PresPam14.htm
Once you see that ^^^, you'll understand why McSweegan is going
off the deep end lately. People are catching on to what his
role was from the beginning- He and his ALDF.com gang were
using the NIH grant funding system as their personal free
Venture Cap bank, while working for the other Venture Caps
of the ALDF.com, which you can see on their tax form:
http://www.actionlyme.org/ALDF_BOARD.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/GOLDWATER_LETTER.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/CONNOLLY_FISH_WEINSTEIN.htm
Then the harassment makes it CRIMINAL RICO, just
like a regular mafia gang.
The problem is the USDOJ. They refuse to do their
jobs and protect us from corporate crime.
If it's about me, if it's about they don't believe me,
then I wonder how I have these records from the
State of Corrupticut and the CDC from before
Lara was born or even conceived:
http://www.actionlyme.org/Schoen.htm
Lara was born July 13, 1991, making her exactly
25 months when she was tested, a month after me,
and she had 7 of those LATE IGG BANDS that
only show up after "months or years":
http://www.actionlyme.org/PHILLIPS_JE_PERVERT.htm
If it is about whether or not Sex Cures All Diseases,
then you can read Phillips' notes there and see that
I gave him all this information (lab data about me and the
kids having congenital Lyme) right in the beginning,
yet he insisted I was hurtin for penises, and the rest
of the world needed me to cure them of insufficient
penis activity:
http://www.actionlyme.org/andersonpenisbiter.htm
There's the data ^^^.
What it *says,* is that *I* am not the liar around here.
Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org
========================================
http://www.counterpunch.org/brasch07212009.html
Prescribe Them Cake
The Marie Antoinettes of Health Care
By WALTER BRASCH
Marie Antoinette, contrary to popular opinion, never said a solution
for the starving masses of revolutionary France in the late 18th
century was, "Let them eat cake." But, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa)
apparently said something close to it.
At a public meeting, one of Grassley's constituents asked him, “Why is
your insurance so much cheaper than my insurance and so much better
than my insurance?” He then asked, "How come I can’t have the same
thing you have?” Grassley's response was a flip, “You can. Just go
work for the federal government.” Grassley, who opposes universal
health care, is happy with health care programs paid for with tax
dollars and available for every member of Congress, all Congressional
staffers, everyone in the executive and judicial branches, and the
military and their families. He doesn't even oppose Social Security
and Medicare. He just doesn't want the masses to have the same quality
of medical care that Senators have.
In response, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), who has led the fight
for universal health care for more than four decades, writing for the
July 27 issue of Newsweek, argues that "quality care shouldn't depend
on your financial resources, or the type of job you have, or the
medical condition you face. Every American should be able to get the
same treatment that U.S. senators are entitled to."
The liberals, and most Democrats, are outraged that 46–48 million
American citizens still don't have health care coverage, and millions
more have such minimal coverage that they often decline to get medical
help when necessary. About 62 percent of all bankruptcies are the
result of extraordinary medical costs, according to a report to be
published in the August issue of The American Journal of Medicine. Of
those who declared bankruptcy because of medical bills, "78 percent of
them had health insurance, but many of them were bankrupted anyway
because there were gaps in their coverage like co-payments and
deductibles and uncovered services," Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, the
study's senior author, told CNN. "Other people had private insurance
but got so sick that they lost their job and lost their insurance,"
she said.
Liberals complain that the problem has become even more acute during
the Recession when every day about 12,000 workers are losing health
insurance, either because of forced layoffs or because a company cuts
back on its insurance coverage for its workers. They question why the
same drugs sold in Canada are significantly less expensive than ones
sold in the U.S., and why the conservatives have blocked all attempts
for Americans to go to Canada to buy the less expensive drugs. The
liberals also point to a scientific study by the Commonwealth Fund
that concluded, "Despite having the most costly health system in the
world, the United States consistently underperforms on most dimensions
of performance, relative to other countries." That study also
concluded that the U.S. "fails to achieve better health outcomes than
the other countries [Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the
United Kingdom], and as shown in the earlier [studies], the U.S. is
last on dimensions of access, patient safety, efficiency, and equity."
Of the top 50 economies in the world, only the U.S. doesn't have
universal health coverage.
Two major competing plans—Single Payer and Public Option— are proposed
to alleviate the problems of health care coverage. Under the Single
Payer health care system, there would be one program, similar to
Medicare but with all citizens covered. Although President Obama, as a
senator, advocated the Single Payer system, he now believes the best
proposal is the Public Option. The Public Option plan allows more than
80 million workers to keep or change their insurance coverage, buy
into the government-run public plan, or go uninsured. The Public
Option plan would protect the insurance industry, while reducing
costs; the Single Payer system would threaten the industry, and
relegate it to providing only supplemental or special needs insurance.
The Public Option plan allows workers and employers to keep their own
insurance or to enroll in the government insurance; there would be no
choice in Single Payer system. Advocates of the Single Payer system
argue that by enrolling all citizens into one system, costs would be
significantly less because of the ability to negotiate with the health
care industry and the probable reduction in administrative costs. The
Public Option would also influence drug companies and health care
providers, but the result could be less reduction than under the
Single Payer system. Both Single Payer and Public Option plans
eliminate or significantly reduce deductibles and co-pays.
The conservatives, and most Republicans, don't buy into either plan.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R–S.C.) explained one of the major reasons why
conservatives will do everything they can to block health care reform.
DeMint told about 100 leaders of Conservatives for Patients Rights,
July 17, "If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his
Waterloo. It will break him." Of course, DeMint may be an unofficial
paid puppet for the parts of the health care industry that doesn't
want reform. During the past five years, DeMint received $2,917,870 in
campaign contributions from the health care industry, according
official campaign reports published by OpenSecrets.com. Michael
Steele, chair of the Republican National Committee, agrees with
DeMint's "analysis" of what defeating health care reform can do to the
Obama presidency. “I think that’s a good way to put it," he told
reporters at the National Press Club, July 20. For his part, Newt
Gingrich, former Speaker of the House and possible Republican
candidate for president, gleefully claimed on talk radio that health
care reform "could be the bill that drags his whole presidency down
and they look back on it and suddenly the whole thing is unraveled."
Disregarding the absurdity of Republican statements that place
partisan politics above health care reform, the conservatives have
other issues. They complain they don't want government running any
part of anything, especially health care. They ignore provisions of
proposed Single Payer legislation that remove the middle-men insurance
companies. They claim that no bureaucrat should step between a
physician and a patient. Of course, they don't mind that private
enterprise, in the guise of the megagoliath insurance and drug
industries, do that all the time.
The conservatives argue that competition between insurance companies
keeps costs low, but they ignore a study published in the prestigious
New England Journal of Medicine that concluded that about 30 percent
of all health care costs are for overhead expenses, including
executive bonuses and aggressive advertising and marketing campaigns
by drug and insurance companies. They disregard the reality that
patients and their physicians, dentists, optometrists, and other
health care providers will determine the best treatments, and not an
insurance clerk reading myriad pages of rules and regulations
established by—who else?—insurance companies. They ignore the fact
that universal health care coverage would reduce "cherry picking," the
enrollment of only healthy persons in order to "maximize profits." The
Public Option plan allows insurance companies to continue to "cherry
pick," but has provisions for those who are denied coverage to enroll
in the Public Option plan. Under the Single Payer system, there would
be no denial because of pre-existing conditions. Conservatives falsely
claim there won’t be any choice when government takes over health
care, but disregard the reality that under both plans Americans can
still choose whoever they wish to be their health care providers. But
if the conservatives want to push what they call the terror of "no
choice," let them realize that even with excellent private insurance,
patients currently have no choice in some situations. Those who go to
an emergency room already have no choice of personnel. Except in the
smaller hospitals, hospitalized patients, no matter how admitted,
usually receive care from anonymous residents and hospitalists who are
neither the patient's primary care physician nor the patient's own
specialists.
In yet another attempt to scare the working class, the conservatives
tell the masses that government-run health care will be as much a
boondoggle as the Post Office. But, while every organization has
myriad problems, six days a week a member of the working class, a
letter carrier, comes to almost every house or business in America and
cheerfully delivers the mail on time, stopping occasionally from 10-
mile routes to chat.
Conservatives claim that a universal health care system will cost $1
trillion, overlooking a reality that health care costs are currently
about $2.2 trillion a year. They conveniently forget that George W.
Bush, with the approval of a lame Congress, ran up far more than $1
trillion in debt during his two terms and that the cost of the
unnecessary war in Iraq, begun by a jingoistic president and vice-
president who lied to the people, will easily cost more than $1
trillion.
Nevertheless, the conservatives are right about two issues. They are
right that the proposed Public Option plan doesn't specify which taxes
are to be raised or what would be required for both individuals or
businesses to become part of a national insurance plan. However,
proposals for the Single Payer system, such as one proposed in
Pennsylvania, will impose a 3 percent personal income tax; each
business would pay 10%, significantly lower than what most businesses
that insure their workers currently pay. Additional revenue would be
from existing programs, including Medicaid.
Conservatives also are right that there will be some fraud and the
cost will probably be far greater than the projections, something that
is part of almost every large private business and government-run
programs. However, the conservatives conveniently ignore the reality
that the Bush–Cheney Administration, again with little Congressional
concern, handed out innumerable multi-million dollar no-bid contracts,
often to their friends and business associates, and did little to
investigate cost over-runs, wasteful spending, and fraud.
Although President Obama is firm that there would be no additional tax
for persons making less than $250,000 a year, conservatives are
worried that the government will increase taxes for anyone making a
net of $1 million a year or more. Apparently, impoverished
conservatives and their conservative representatives must protect
millionaires from harm.
About six of every ten Americans, according to a CBS News/New York
Times poll in February 2009 say they want the government to provide
universal health care coverage. Groups as diverse as the AFL–CIO, the
AARP, and the American College of Physicians want universal health
care coverage. According to a study published in the Annals of
Internal Medicine, only one-third of physicians oppose universal
health care coverage.
"America's health care system," said Walter Cronkite in 1993, "is
neither healthy, caring, nor a system." Nothing has changed since
then.
Sen. Grassley has no worries about health care coverage. Under a quasi-
socialist system for all three branches of government, including the
military, he gets the best medical, dental, and optometric care in the
country. As for the rest, like his conservative colleagues, Sen.
Grassley believes that cake is the best medicine for those without
adequate coverage.
Walter M. Brasch is a university professor of journalism, award-
winning social issues columnist, and the author of 17 books. His
current book is Sinking the Ship of State: The Presidency of George W.
Bush. You may contact him through his website, www.walterbrasch.com.
Assisting on this column were Rosie Skomitz, Ron Stouffer, and
Rosemary R. Brasch
"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci