We can Handle the Truth, and Multiple Versions Thereof

For John, BLUF:  As people become more and more protective of their own truth, including quashing other views, we become less and less free citizens, exercising our rights thereof.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Courage to Follow the Evidence on Transgender Care

From The Old Gray Lady, by Opinion Columnist David Brooks, April 18, 2024.

Here is the lede plus one:

Hilary Cass is the kind of hero the world needs today.  She has entered one of the most toxic debates in our culture: how the medical community should respond to the growing numbers of young people who seek gender transition through medical treatments, including puberty blockers and hormone therapies.  This month, after more than three years of research, Cass, a pediatrician, produced a report, commissioned by the National Health Service in England, that is remarkable for its empathy for people on all sides of this issue, for its humility in the face of complex social trends we don’t understand and for its intellectual integrity as we try to figure out which treatments actually work to serve those patients who are in distress.  With incredible courage, she shows that careful scholarship can cut through debates that have been marked by vituperation and intimidation and possibly reset them on more rational grounds.

Cass, a past president of Britain’s Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, is clear about the mission of her report:  “This review is not about defining what it means to be trans, nor is it about undermining the validity of trans identities, challenging the right of people to express themselves or rolling back on people’s rights to health care.  It is about what the health care approach should be, and how best to help the growing number of children and young people who are looking for support from the N.H.S. in relation to their gender identity.”

This issue begins with a mystery.  For reasons that are not clear, the number of adolescents who have sought to medically change their sex has been skyrocketing in recent years, though the overall number remains very small.  For reasons that are also not clear, adolescents who were assigned female at birth are driving this trend, whereas before the late 2000s, it was mostly adolescents who were assigned male at birth who sought these treatments.

Doctors and researchers have proposed various theories to try to explain these trends.  One is that greater social acceptance of trans people has enabled people to seek these therapies.  Another is that teenagers are being influenced by the popularity of searching and experimenting around identity.  A third is that the rise of teen mental health issues may be contributing to gender dysphoria.  In her report, Cass is skeptical of broad generalizations in the absence of clear evidence; these are individual children and adolescents who take their own routes to who they are.

Some activists and medical practitioners on the left have come to see the surge in requests for medical transitioning as a piece of the new civil rights issue of our time — offering recognition to people of all gender identities.  Transition through medical interventions was embraced by providers in the United States and Europe after a pair of small Dutch studies showed that such treatment improved patients’ well-being.  But a 2022 Reuters investigation found that some American clinics were quite aggressive with treatment:  None of the 18 U.S. clinics that Reuters looked at performed long assessments on their patients, and some prescribed puberty blockers on the first visit.

Unfortunately, some researchers who questioned the Dutch approach were viciously attacked.  This year, Sallie Baxendale, a professor of clinical neuropsychology at the University College London, published a review of studies looking at the impact of puberty blockers on brain development and concluded that “critical questions” about the therapy remain unanswered.  She was immediately attacked.  She recently told The Guardian, “I’ve been accused of being an anti-trans activist, and that now comes up on Google and is never going to go away.”

I see this article as having two main issues.

One issue is transgenderism.  I think Dr Cass is right to suggest go slow for gender dysphoria for young people.  If you are 23 or older I figure you are mature enough to make your own choices.  Before then it is child abuse.  (I would have said 21, but my co-host this morning said the age was 25 for full brain development.  She is a teacher of special needs children and a member of our School Committee.)

But, at another level transgenderism is abusive of those who are not.  Some day in the future this might not be true, but today it just throws more of a burden on women who are cis-women.  To sustain our population they, today, must produce 2.1 children.  In this generation my Middle Brother and Wife have one, my Youngest Brother and Wife three and Martha and myself three.  Seven.  Divided by 3 is 2.33.  We produced a surplus.  For my kids, three, two and four.  Nine.  Divided by three is 3.0.  A surplus.  But, if my Daughter had been transgender, then two and four, for six, divided by thee and you get 2.0.  Someone else has to make up that deficiency. Do the work others won't (can’t).  Which is why we need immigration, since they can do the work female US Citizens can’t or won’t.  Don’t blame me.  Blame nature and nature’s God.

As for the point, about scientific research, I think that we are in a period where it is not respected.  I liked the mention of British philosopher and mathematician William Kingdon Clifford.  Columnist Brooks throws shade at Republicans in this arena, but I think that is too narrow a view.  Look at COVID-19.  Any research that flowed differently from the views of Dr Anthony Fauci or Dr Birx was suppressed.  Look at either the Great Barrington Declaration or Ivermectin.  Or Mr Berliner, formerly of NPR.  We need more dialogue, more people challenging the conventional wisdom.  This morning I had a Democratic State Rep, at the end of a televised interview, asked me, given my views, why I am a Republican.  I took that as a genuine complement.  A diversity of views and an openness to discuss them is important to our progress as a society.

Hat tip to my Middle Brother.

Regards  —  Cliff

Going Mask Free

For John, BLUF:  The COVID Pandemic seems to be winding down.  On Monday,10 April, President Biden signed an act ending our three year national emergency.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Experts call for end of universal masking in hospitals, clinics

From United Press International, by Health Reporter Dennis Thompson, 19 April 2023, 12:04 PM.

Here is the lede plus three:

Healthcare facilities remain one of the last places left in the United States with COVID-era mask requirements still in effect.

It's time for that to end, experts say.

A prestigious collection of infection disease experts and epidemiologists say universal masking requirements in healthcare settings should be lifted, according to a commentary they published Tuesday in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

COVID-19 has reached the point where it should be managed in a way similar to how other respiratory viruses are handled in hospitals, doctor's offices and long-term care facilities, the editorial argues.

So, when is this change of policy coming to the Merrimack Valley?

Or is it already here, in a practical way, given the mandated use by patients of the Blue Mask of Death?♠

In my case, being "elderly", I should still wear my mask in the hospital, although now I may be free to wear a KN-95.  I wear my mask when I go up for Communion, or when I think I will be in another crowded place.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  I would like to thank Mr John McDonough for the education that caused me to switch over to the KN-95 Mask for my normal usage.

Helping Others While Ignoring Our Own

For John, BLUF:  The US Veterans Administration already has a mixed review, based on what Veterans I know have to say.  This will only make it worse.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Mayorkas looks to divert VA funding to illegal immigrants

From Hot Air, by Reporter JAZZ SHAW, 29 April 2022 9:36 AM ET.

Here is the lede plus three:

When Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas recently unveiled his “six pillar plan” for dealing with the crisis on our southern border, he certainly didn’t mention this truly awful idea.  During his recent testimony before Congress, Mayorkas slipped in one option that Joe Biden is reportedly considering.  In order to provide better care for the tens of thousands of illegal aliens streaming across the border, the White House is looking at the possibility of diverting funding from the Veterans Administration for that situation.  Additionally, some of the doctors and nurses tasked with caring for our veterans could be reassigned to providing care for the illegals.  Our colleague Spencer Brown at Townhall has the details.

During his recent testimony before Congress, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas informed lawmakers that the Biden administration was considering diverting resources from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to deal with Biden’s border debacle.  This includes not just funding but also VA nurses and doctors who are tasked with caring for America’s veterans, and who may now be sent to care for illegal immigrants.

It’s a ludicrous idea and a terrible decision that Biden seems ready to make. Veterans’ health care has struggled in the past — notably during the last time Biden was in the White House as Vice President in the Obama administration.

America’s veterans deserve the best possible care as a small benefit in return for their service to our country and defense of our freedom.  But Biden thinks those who care for veterans can just be shuffled around as his administration flails about trying to handle the border crisis his policies created.

To be clear, any Cartel summgled human being who falls off our Southern Border Wall and breaks a leg, pelvis or skull, deserves medical care.  As does any other Illegal Immigrant.  They are our fellow human beings, found on the road to Jericho, or anywhere else.  But so are our Veterans, who should not be abandoned in the rush to help others.

Perhaps, if Congress can not stop this action, the solution will be for those Veterans denied service by the VA to gather on our Southern Border and create a human shield, preventing illegal immigrants from entering our nation without the proper paperwork in hand.

It would appear we need more creative ways of helping those who flee their own homes, hoping to reach a land flowing with milk and honey.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Spreading the COVID Vaccine

For John, BLUF:  Immunity from COVID-19 needs immunization across the Globe,  Everyone is depending on the United States to make it happen.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

U.S. to share up to 60 million vaccine doses amid pressure to aid desperate countries

From The Wash Post, by Reporters Tyler Pager, Annie Linskey and Emily Rauhala, 26 April 2021, 7:45 p.m. EDT.

And, The Wall Street Journal is like it:

U.S. to Share AstraZeneca Covid-19 Vaccine Doses With World

Biden administration is facing growing pressure to share shots with developing countries

Here is the lede, plus two, from The Wash Post:

The United States will share up to 60 million doses of the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine with other countries, the White House said Monday, as the Biden administration faces growing pressure to help vaccinate the global population and cases spike around the world.

The move comes as India in particular faces an increasingly dire situation, with its health system showing signs of collapse — adding to the sense of urgent global need.  The AstraZeneca vaccine, which is not authorized for use in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration, will be shipped out once it clears federal safety reviews, officials said.

The White House took pains to stress that the move will not affect the United States’ internal vaccination drive.  “We do not need to use AstraZeneca in our fight against covid,” press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters, noting that the domestic U.S. push relies on vaccines made by other companies.

The Whie House is walking a tricky line.  On the one hand there is real need for COVID-19 help for other nations across the Globe.  On the other hand, the Citizenry of These United States do not wish to feel they are being placed second in line.  I think up to this point the Biden Administration is walking that line well.♠

So far, so good.

However, India alone is 1.35 billion people.  It is going to take a lot more than 60 million doses, as many as those are.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Thanks in part to then President Trump's Operation WARP SPEED.

Adjusting As We Learn

For John, BLUF:  We still don't fully understand COVID-19, and thus are current actions may, as we learn more, turn out to be wrong.  In the mean time wear your mask and keep your distance and wash your hands frequently.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

A Failed Experiment

Here is the sub-headline:

The lockdowns must end.

From City Journal, by Reporter John Tierney, 7 October 2020.

Here is the lede plus two:

Lockdowns are typically portrayed as prudent precautions against Covid-19, but they are surely the most risky experiment ever conducted on the public.  From the start, researchers have warned that lockdowns could prove far deadlier than the coronavirus.  People who lose their jobs or businesses are more prone to fatal drug overdoses and suicide, and evidence already exists that many more will die from cancer, heart disease, pneumonia, and tuberculosis and other diseases because the lockdown prevented their ailments from being diagnosed early and treated properly.

Yet politicians and public-health officials conducting this unprecedented experiment have paid little attention to these risks.  In their initial rush to lock down society, they insisted that there was no time for such analysis—and besides, these were just temporary measures to “flatten the curve” so as not to overwhelm hospitals.  But since that danger passed, the lockdown enforcers have found one reason after another to persevere with closures, bans, quarantines, curfews, and other mandates.  Anthony Fauci, the White House advisor, recently said that even if a vaccine arrives soon, he does not expect a return to normality before late next year.

He and politicians like New York governor Andrew Cuomo and British prime minister Boris Johnson profess to be following “the science,” but no ethical scientist would conduct such a risky experiment without carefully considering the dangers and monitoring the results.  After doing so, a group of leading researchers this week called for an end to the experiment.  In a joint statement, the Great Barrington Declaration, they predicted that continued lockdowns will lead to “excess mortality in years to come” and warned of “irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.”

This is a "big hand/little map" approach to the disease.  It is about saving lives by focusing on many causes of death, and not just COVID-19.

Here is a good summation:

Early in the pandemic, Scott Atlas at the Hoover Institution and researchers at Swansea University independently calculated that the lockdowns would ultimately cost more years of life than Covid-19 in the United States and Britain, and the toll seems certain to be worse in poor countries

This broader picture would be a hard sell in the best of times, but at our current political impasse it will be even harder.  Maybe, as John says, it will all clear up after the voting on 3 November.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Swedish Model for COVID-19

For John, BLUF:  This is a deeper look at COVID-19 in Sweden.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Stockholm City's Elderly Care and Covid19:  Interview with Barbro Karlsson

From SSRN, by Ms Charlotta Stern, Stockholm University - Institute for Social Research. and Mr Daniel B. Klein, George Mason University - Department of Economics; George Mason University - Mercatus Center, 24 May 2020.

Here is the abstract:

Upwards of 70 percent of the Covid19 death toll in Sweden has been people in elderly care services (as of mid-May 2020).  We summarize the Covid19 tragedy in elderly care in Sweden, particularly in the City of Stockholm.  We explain the institutional structure of elderly care administration and service provision.  Those who died of Covid19 in Stockholm’s nursing homes had a life-remaining median somewhere in the range of 5 to 9 months.  Having contextualized the Covid19 problem in City of Stockholm, we present an interview of Barbro Karlsson, who works at the administrative heart of the Stockholm elderly care system.  Her institutional knowledge and sentiment offer great insight into the concrete problems and challenges.  There are really two sides to the elderly care Covid19 challenge:  The vulnerability and frailty of those in nursing homes and the problem of nosocomial infection—that is, infection caused by contact with others involved in the elderly care experience.  The problem calls for targeted solutions by those close to the vulnerable individuals.

We owe it to ourselves to look deeper into this problem.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Comparing Health Care Systems

For John, BLUF:  It is still early days in the Coronavirus Pandemic and no hard and fast conclusions should be drawn.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

In response to Worldometer Confirmed Cases and Deaths by Country, Territory, or Conveyance, which shows:

NATION	Cases per 1 Mil	Deaths per 1 Mil
US	315	5
Sweden	304	10

Someone on the Internet wrote:

Maybe Bernie’s right—Sweden is always doing better than us.

For my Brother Lance, that is sarcasm on the part of the writer.

Regards  —  Cliff

Triage in a Time of Pandemic

For John, BLUF:  When medical capabilities run short, some will get support and some won't.  The question is the rules to be followed.  For example, Italy saying no medical support to those 60 and over, seems to be arbitrary and wrong.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Ethicists, lawyers see dangers in rationing of scarce health resources

From The Boston Pilot, by Ms Nancy Frazier O'Brien, 25 March 2020.

Here is the lede plus four:

Catholic ethicists and legal experts are sounding the alarm that the scarcity of resources such as ventilators and hospital beds during the current coronavirus pandemic could prompt health care decisions based only on age and disability -- and in some cases already is.

Decisions on life-saving care based solely on those criteria are unjust, discriminatory and a violation of federal civil rights law, they say.

One of the strongest and most persistent voices has been that of Charles Camosy, an associate professor of theological and social ethics at Fordham University in New York, one of the hardest-hit U.S. cities.

"It should not be up to physicians to decide whose subjective quality of life deserves to be prolonged," he wrote in a March 19 opinion piece in the New York Post.  "If rationing arrives, we must stand up unambiguously for the marginalized and vulnerable."

He was especially critical of the Italian government for reportedly recommending that health care resources be rationed by age and limited to those who "could enjoy the largest number of life-years saved."  Italy has had nearly 70,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and more than 6,800 deaths as of March 25.

A short article with a lot of food for thought.

Regards  —  Cliff

Italy Fails to Cope

For John, BLUF:  Italy is showing what happens when you have weak health care and then you get a pandemic.  The example floating around is if the virus victims doubles daily, seven days before it hits 100%, it is less than 1%.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Elderly Will Be Denied Intensive Care as Coronavirus Overwhelms Italy's National Health System, Experts Warn

From PJ Media, by Reporter Paula Bolyard, 12 March 2020.

Here is the lede plus three:

Health officials in Italy have issued guidelines for rationing care as hospitals there struggle to keep up with the surge of patients infected with the coronavirus.  Doctors are being told that they'll likely need to deny care to senior citizens and those with other health conditions as the virus explodes across the nation.

Italy has been rocked by the still not-well-understood COVID-29 (sic), with more than 1,200 confirmed cases and 827 deaths—second only to China—and 16 million residents currently under quarantine.

An article published by the Italian College of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (translated here by Yascha Mounk) warns that "It may be necessary to establish criteria of access to intensive care not just on the basis of clinical appropriateness but inspired by the most consensual criteria regarding distributive justice and the appropriate allocation of limited health resources."  The report goes on to recommend rationing care to certain populations.

Rationing health care is nothing new in Italy and in fact has become an "established trend" in recent years amid an ongoing economic crisis that has strained government resources, including the government-run healthcare system.

I am guessing Italy is not one of those European nations Senator Bernie Sanders looks up to as an example of universal medical care.

Pr Reporter Tim Pearce, at The Washington Examiner, ‘Not a single EU country’ responded to Italian plea for help with coronavirus.  I hope President Trump is aware of this and doing something to help Italy, so they know WE haven't forgotten them.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Let us hope things turn the corner on this, and soon.  Regards  —  Cliff

Heath Care Right

For John, BLUF:  The term "right to health care" gets bandied about, but without analysis.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Is health care a human right?  No.

From Pastor Don's Blog, by Pastor Don, 3 March 2020, first written in 2009.

Here is the lede plus three:

I first wrote this in 2009, but it seems relevant to today as well; I have updated it.

Is health care a human right, as the United Methodist Church says?  I don't see how.  Human rights, as Americans have always understood them (beginning with Thomas Jefferson and the other Founders) are a fact of nature that cannot be rescinded by human beings.  Rights are immutable, indeed, unalienable ("Not to be separated, given away, or taken away" Dictionary.com, as Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence.)  As a precursor to his Declaration theology that unalienable human rights are a endowment by God, Jefferson wrote in his pre-revolution essay, Summary View of the Rights of British America, "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time.  The hand of force may disjoin, but cannot destroy them."

Since his day, and certainly preceding it, the historic American understanding of human rights is the exercise of individual freedom, especially in the political realm, for both public and personal good.  We have historically never understood our rights as encompassing access to services or commodities.

Rights are inherent in each individual equally, they are not divisible.  Take the Declaration's famous insistence that among human rights is "the pursuit of happiness."  Note that it is the pursuit of happiness that is a right, not the achievement of it.  Nor is one person more entitled to pursue happiness than another, no matter one’s station in life.  Besides, happiness (what Jefferson meant was not happiness as we use the word today, but a state of contentment in life and possessions) is not something that can be given us, it is something we have to create.

This is a long blog post.  But worth the read.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

For John, BLUF:  .  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Socialized Medicine Killed Princess Diana, Surgeon Tells CPAC

From PJ Media, by Mr Matt Margolis, 27 February 2020.

Here is the lede plus eight:

Congressman Steve Scalise introduced a panel discussion called “Prescription for Failure:  The Ills of Socialized Medicine" at CPAC on Thursday.  He established what was at stake in 2020:  “2020 will be a contrast election,” he said, between Trump’s freedom agenda or socialism.

“You don’t want socialism, you surely don’t want socialized medicine,” he said.  “Tens of thousands of Canadians come to America for life-saving treatment.  Do you see Americans going to Canada for life-saving treatment?” he asked rhetorically.

“Healthcare is only one example of what’s at stake in this election,” he said, before concluding that individual freedom will win out in 2020 and predicted that Republicans will keep the Senate and win back the House.

Author Dr. David Schneider, an orthopedic surgeon from Colorado, explained how with socialized medicine, wait times for care “are disastrous.”  In Canada, the wait time to see a specialist is two years, and then another two years to get the procedure.

“People in this country would go crazy if you were told you had to wait four months,” he said.

Then he explained how Princess Diana would be alive today, if not for socialized medicine.  “Princess Diana was in the car accident in France,” he explained.  “They actually don’t have any trauma specialists in France.”

“For the first hour after that accident, she was still in that tunnel,” he continued.  “And after an hour, they took her to a nearby hospital and she was alive for another three hours and they couldn’t control the bleeding from her pulmonary artery.”

Schneider explained that “there were no trauma-trained people there.”

He continued, “I really believe, knowing what I know about her care and comparing it to what Congressman Scalise had, Princess Diana would have lived had that accident happened here in America.”

This is a fine kettle of fish.  I must admit that I have had questions about Senator Sander's plan for health care. For instance, as health care consumption increases, where are the trained medical professionals coming from?♠  Then there is the question of the money to pay for it.  For example, the first year we can do a wealth tax, but then that large amount of wealth is no longer in private hands, it having been confiscated by the Government.  You can't confiscated wealth twice.  A new source of revenue will be needed.

Good luck to us.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  RAND Corporation did a study that concluded that when you make health care free the demand goes up.  This is not from the additional people picked up but rather from those already with health care who increase the consumption of health care.

National Health Service to Teach Manners

For John, BLUF:  Once the bureaucrats have established they can ration service based on behavior, they won't sto p  The best of British luck to us.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

NHS staff can refuse to treat racist or sexist patients under new rules

Here is the sub-headline:

The NHS will soon bar discriminatory patients from non-critical care - powers that currently only cover aggression or violence.

From Sky News by News Reporter Ms Clare Sibthorpe, 18 February 2020.

Here is the lede plus four:

Sexist and racist patients could be barred from non-emergency care at NHS trusts, under new rules to be enforced from April.

Currently, staff can refuse to treat non-critical patients who are verbally aggressive or physically violent towards them.

But these protections will extend to any harassment, bullying or discrimination, including homophobic, sexist or racist remarks.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock wrote to all NHS staff on Tuesday to announce stronger measures to investigate abuse and harassment towards staff, saying "no act of violence or abuse is minor".

"Being assaulted or abused is not part of the job," he said.

I like it.  Take people when they are highly stressed and hold them to their best tea party behavior.  That will work out well.

I wonder if Mr Matt Hancock has re-education camps in mind?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Rights and Responsibilities

For John, BLUF:  Maturity is awarded at age 16, for driving, but 21 for owning a gun.  We are told the human brain is not fully developed until age 24.  Imposing life-forming decisions at age 8 seems to not be consistent with our evolving culture.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Medical Expert:  Doctors Are Actually Giving Trans Kids a Disease, It's Child Abuse

From Pajama Media, by Reporter Tyler O'Neil, 25 August 2019.

Here is the lede plus one:

Children as young as 8 years old are being given untested experimental drugs to verify their gender identity. Activists argue that these drugs are essential for the health of kids who identify as transgender, and many in the medical establishment increasingly agree. Nevertheless, a dissenting endocrinologist explained to PJ Media that these drugs actually give children a disease that could cause heart and bone problems and stunt brain growth, and condemned the transgender "treatments" often carried out on children as "child abuse."

If a girl child identifies as a boy, she may be given so-called "puberty-blockers" to prevent her from going through the natural human process of development. In some cases, she would then be given testosterone in an attempt to make her become a man. The effects of these hormones are not fully known, but some negative side effects have been widely reported.

"I call it a development blocker — it’s actually causing a disease," Dr. Michael Laidlaw, an endocrinologist associated with Sutter Roseville Medical Center in Rocklin, Calif., told PJ Media. The disease in question is hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. It occurs when the brain fails to send the right signal to the gonads to make the hormones necessary for development.

I expect most people of my age remember Christine Jorgensen.  Sexual transition is not new.  This is America in the 21st Century.  Adults can be whatever they want.

The question is, at what age is an individual old enough to give informed consent to a transition in their gender identification?  I suspect it isn't 8, and maybe not 18.  Such a change, perhaps not easily reversible, needs to be carefully considered.  Otherwise, it is child abuse.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Mass Murder

For John, BLUF:  Do we do a good job of identifying the real threats?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Yet another medical serial killer

Here is the sub-headline:

Niels Högel:  German ex-nurse admits killing 100 patients

From Samizdata, Natalie Solent, of Essex, 30 October 2018.

Here is the lede plus a little bit:

A hundred victims, and it is not even the BBC’s top story.

Towards the end of the last century I visited a very nice elderly couple, the husband of whom was a retired doctor. I noticed a flyer or newsletter sitting on their kitchen table with a heading something like “Doctors against gun violence”. At that time Dr Harold Shipman had fairly recently been arrested and the sheer number of his victims – more than two hundred – was beginning to emerge. I could not help thinking that, given that the number of people Shipman had killed by medical means exceeded by a great margin the death toll of the two largest shooting mass murders that had then occurred in the UK, Dunblane and Hungerford, maybe there was scope for a rival pamphlet called “Gun owners against medical violence”. The thought remained unspoken, of course, and a good thing too.

I wonder what Mass Aaorney General Maura Healey thinks about this?  Should we be treating medical tools like we do the right to bear arms?

Regards  —  Cliff

The Cost of Single Payer Health Care

For John, BLUF:  We have to be careful and ask about the second and third order effects.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

ObamaCare Is Robbing Medicaid’s Sickest Patients

Here is the sub-headline:

The law’s incentives push states to spend more on new enrollees, and less on the disabled and ill.

This morning, on City Life, a Candidate for the Democratic Nomination for the Third Congressional District (3CD) suggested that single payer, modeled on Medicare, was the solution to our health care problems.  This article raises some concerns about that belief.  The problem is, once we go down that path, how do we walk back if we find it unsatisfactory?

From The Wall Street Journal, by Ms Allysia Finley, 25 July 2018.

Here is the lede plus four:

ObamaCare made it more difficult for health insurers to turn a profit on individual plans, since it prohibited them from charging consumers more based on their medical risks.  But the law also created a huge growth opportunity for insurers: Medicaid.

Over the past decade, federal and state spending on Medicaid has nearly doubled to $570 billion—roughly as much as the revenues of United Health, CVS, Anthem, Aetna and Humana put together.  California alone will spend nearly $100 billion on Medicaid this year.

The Medicaid rolls predictably swelled during the Great Recession as people lost jobs and left the workforce.  But many never returned to work.  ObamaCare gave states the option, starting in 2014, to expand Medicaid eligibility to able-bodied people earning up to 133% of the poverty line.  The feds promised to pick up nearly all the costs.

Two-thirds of states have cashed in on this “free” government lunch. Between 2008 and 2016, Medicaid enrollment nationwide rose 24 million to a total of 71 million, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.  By comparison, only five million more Americans signed up for plans on the private individual market.

Struggling to manage this Medicaid surge, states have increasingly come to rely on private health insurers.  About 270 “managed-care organizations” administer half of federal Medicaid dollars.  Under these arrangements, insurers are paid a capitated rate—that is, a flat monthly payment per enrollee, set to reflect what actuaries estimate will be the average cost to provide covered services.  Unlike on the ObamaCare exchanges, insurers are paid higher “premiums” for covering sicker patients.

The long term danger is that the Government will decide that certain people are consuming a disproportionate amount of resources and thus the Government will cut off their medical attention, thus allowing them to die, or perhaps even hasten that death.  This would be analogous to the German Aktion T4 Program, which operated from 1939 to 1945 and killed some 300,000 people, outside those killed in the Holocaust.  This program contributed to the German War Effort by freeing up medical resources for wounded Service members.

I am with the late Germany Bishop, Clemens August Graf von Galen, who publicly opposed this program.  It wasn't right then and wouldn't be right today.

As a side matter, health care is not a human right.  Human rights are against the Government and what it can do to deprive one of God given rights.  Health care is something that the Government provides, or one provides for oneself, perhaps by insurance.  The place where rights come in is if the Government prevents you having health care, and thus depriving you of life (liberty and the pursuit of happiness).

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Public Health in the UK

For John, BLUF:  Maggie Thatcher noted that, with socialism, you eventually run out of other peoples' money.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The NHS is our religion: it’s the only thing that saves it from the Tories

Acronym Alert:  NHS is Britain's National Health Service (Socialist Medicine).

Here is the sub-headline:

Public support remains passionate, allowing our health service to fend off attempts to undermine its core purpose

From The Guardian, by Ms Polly Toynbee, 3 July 2018.

Ms Toynbee is my favorite Labour Columnist.

Here is the lede:

lorious celebrations for this week’s NHS 70th birthday mark the proudest social democratic moment of our history.  The Labour party descended on Tredegar, Nye Bevan’s birthplace, to march through the streets to brass bands, and London marched too.  Everything lyrically expressed in Danny Boyle’s Olympic ceremony, with its 300 glowing NHS beds filled with bouncing children, is emotionally reprised in this reminder of our better selves.

Aneurin Bevan was a Welshman and a Labour Member of Parliament.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Pope Says No

For John, BLUF:  Forty percent of the Commonwealth budget is for health care.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Pope: Abortion is a ‘white glove’ equivalent to Nazi crimes

This is an AP Story in The New York Post, on 17 June 2018.

Here is the lede plus five:

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis denounced abortion on Saturday as the “white glove” equivalent of the Nazi-era eugenics program and urged families to accept the children that God gives them.

Francis spoke off-the-cuff to a meeting of an Italian family association, ditching his prepared remarks to speak from the heart about families and the trials they undergo.  He lamented how some couples choose not to have any children, while others resort to pre-natal testing to see if their baby has any malformations or genetic problems.

“The first proposal in such a case is, ‘Do we get rid of it?'” Francis said.  “The murder of children. To have an easy life, they get rid of an innocent.”

Francis recalled that as a child he was horrified to hear stories from his teacher about children “thrown from the mountain” if they were born with malformations.

“Today we do the same thing,” he said.

“Last century, the whole world was scandalized by what the Nazis did to purify the race.  Today, we do the same thing but with white gloves,” Francis said.

And, as the cost of medical care continues to rise, we will go from the "right to die" to the "duty to die".

The Pope is right here.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Who Advocates For The Patient?

For John, BLUF:  This is a disgrace.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Why Washington is one of the worst places to be black and pregnant

From The Wash Post, by Ms Theresa Vargas, a Columnist, 16 June 2018.

Here are two key paragraphs:

But here is what we already know:  Nationally, black babies are more than twice as likely as white babies to die, and black women are more than three times as likely to die of pregnancy-related causes as white women.

The District’s maternal mortality rate is more than double the nation’s, and among the maternal deaths recorded between 2014 and 2016 in Washington, 75 percent were of African American women.  Infants in predominantly black Southeast Washington have been found to die at nearly 10 times the rate of those in wealthier and whiter Northwest Washington.

I would like to see the statistics for Washington Northeast, as a comparison.  If the Columnist is correct, they would be between NW and SE.  The Southwest numbers are probably too small to fit into the discussion.

There is no doubt that this represents a failure to provide proper health care, both in DC and across the nation.  And while I can see it being partly due to a lack of understanding on the part of patients and their family and friends, I also see it as a crying need for the medical community to compensate.

And, this isn't a secret.  While I have seen indications of this from time to time, this is a strong confirmation.  What have the health care professionals been doing for the last 50 years?

One thing this does point up is the need for people in hospitals and even those visiting doctors, to have strong advocates with them, advocates to ask the questions that need to be asked to avoid a simple, but wrong, medical solution resulting in death or disability.  One of the many good things my wife does is perform as a health care advocate for others, asking questions, checking things on the World Wide Web, and making suggestions.  Advocating.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

CNN, Keeper of Secrets

For John, BLUF:  Standards?  I don't think they have any standards.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

CNN Fights to Keep Editorial Guidelines Secret amid Lawsuit over Ethical Breach

From Pajama Media, by Mr Chris Queen, 8 May 2018.

Here are the first three paragraphs:

Our modern news media thrives on transparency.  The freedom and openness of information helps the media do their job. That's a fact that I can vouch for as a writer.

It stands to reason that media outlets would have the same transparency standards as the entities they cover, wouldn't it? Print and web outlets generally make their editorial guidelines public.  When it comes to broadcast media, that's another story.

CNN is at the center of a lawsuit involving their ethics and standards.  In 2015, the network aired a report investigating the mortality rate of babies at St. Mary's Medical Center in Florida.  The piece eviscerated the pediatric cardiac surgery program at the hospital, which terminated the program shortly afterward.

With all the leaking we see in the Sieve one would think the news agencies themselves would follow suit.  Apparently not.

Regards  —  Cliff

National Health Service Fail

For John, BLUF:  It isn't quite the T-4 Program, but once the medical bureaucrats decide nothing can be done, then nothing will be done.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Sixteen Democratic Senators Are Questioned On Socialized Healthcare After Alfie Evans And Go Completely Silent

From Red State, by Brandon Morse, 2 May 2018.

Here is the start of the article:

The evils of socialized medicine were on full display during the few days the world watched Alfie Evans suffer to death at the hands of the British government’s National Healthcare System (NHS).

After his death, the Daily Signal decided to get the comments of the 15 Democratic senators currently co-sponsoring the “Medicare for All Act of 2017,” spearheaded by Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

According to the Daily Signal, what they got in return was an eerie silence from the Democrats who apparently decided to go dark after the world watched their beloved system of choice fail so spectacularly:

I am not saying we don't need reform.  I am saying that the idea of Single Payer means that we will have more medical tourism, but overall choice will be reduced for the broad expanse of the population.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff