SOCIALIZED MEDICINE PROMOTES SICKNESS & DEATH - Doctor Capitalism
Dr. Capitalism's prescription is: Capitalism Heals, Socialism Kills! http://rexcurry.net/doctor-capitalism-dr-capitalism-heals-socialism-kills.gif  Dr. Capitalism - Capitalism Heals, Socialism Kills! Doctor Capitalism fights socialized medicine.

Please consult all of Dr. Capitalism's healthcare advisories:
Dr. Capitalism also prescribes "Healthcare is not a right" at http://rexcurry.net/doctor2.html
"Socialized Medicine is explained" at http://rexcurry.net/doctor3.html
and take as needed "Socialized medicine promotes sickness and death" at http://rexcurry.net/doctor.html

Dr. Capitalism writes in with tips on how to obtain health tests done without having to pay a doctor to authorize it - an enslaving practice - go to HealthCheckUSA http://www.healthcheckusa.com/  HealthCheck offers tests without a prescription that are not available at other places like QuesTest http://www.questest.com/ch/minihome/Home.jsp  That doesn't mean QuesTest, or another testing lab, isn't of use — their PSA test (no doctor needed) costs less than it does through HealthCheckUSA. If you want to test your hormone levels see ZRT Laboratory http://www.salivatest.com/  ZRT offers saliva and blood spot tests that don't require "permission" from a doctor. The saliva tests cost much less than the blood tests offered by HealthCheckUSA. With HealthCheckUSA, after selecting and paying for the test, you will be sent to a local clinic or hospital to have the blood drawn. The results will be sent by mail and/or fax. Then you need to make up your mind whether you can act on those results, or if you need professional help. That is the sort of freedom that everyone should have.

The U.S. Healthcare Certificate of Need Sourcebook is proof of America's nightmare of socialized medicine. Certificates of Need (CONs) are discussed below. Stop socialized medicine!  DR. CAPITALISM'S WARNING: Before reading this page, keep your tranqs and heart medicine handy.

DR. CAPITALISM

Dr. Rex Curry is known as "Dr. Capitalism" because of his work to end socialized medicine in the United States and worldwide. But the real Dr. Capitalism is a healthcare professional who remains anonymous while advising Dr. Curry about libertarian trends in medicine.

A great T-shirt recently viewed states on the front "Capitalism Heals" and on the back "Socialism Kills."  A similar sign says "Capitalism Heals, Socialism Kills!" http://rexcurry.net/doctor-capitalism-dr-capitalism-heals-socialism-kills.gif

Every individual's health is his or her personal responsibility. We should be free to do what we think is necessary to take care of ourselves without interference from anyone. The businesses mentioned at Dr. Capitalism's web site help toward that end. That is right and good.

It is the sort of freedom that everyone should have. It is enraging to see that the medical profession in concert with the state often prevents economic freedom in medicine.

***************

HPV vaccine is an example of the need to remove government from medicine. The Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccine

Governor Rick Perry should be investigated for bribery and criminal conduct. Greedy socialism. He issues executive orders acts like a dictator. He should have ended his comment with a Nazi salute.  It is called the slut vaccine because Rick Perry is a slut and a whore.

He can inject the girls while they chant the Pledge of Allegiance.

Why not make the flu vaccine mandatory for adults every year?

The Food and Drug Administration approved the HPV vaccine last year for girls and women from 9 to 26 after studies indicated that it was extremely effective against infection by four of the dozens of strains of HPV, including the ones responsible for most cases of cervical and anal cancer. Why did he wait until 14, and not order it at 9 or younger?

Some religious folks object and argue that the vaccine promotes promiscuity? Does the vaccine promote promiscuity? Government schools promote promiscuity. They are so bad and boring that anyone would be driven to drink, drugs and sex through boredom and hopelessness. It is the Soviet effect. It is another reason to end government schools. 

The Republican-socialist might acheive the opposite of his intention because the vaccine does not prevent all HPV, therefore, if more sex occurs as a result of the vaccine, then more HPV might occur, and therefore more cervical cancer. It could also cause a lot more of many other diseases and problems.

Must end the FDA

Must end government schools

To the question "will you encourage your children to take it?" an intelligent parent will respond "Not at this time. We will wait for more information and more results."

Socialized medicine is not planned parenthood. It is a plan to replace parenthood. Government schools are a plan to replace parenthood.

Take your children out of government schools and away from republican-socialists like Rick Perry.

Remove your children from government schools. Save them from socialized medicine and Nazi style aggression.
 
*****************

Doctor Capitalism writes to http://rexcurry.net in response to an article about long lines for so-called "free" flu shots from the government, that prove socialism is destroying medicine in the U.S.A. (As elsewhere).

Here are Doctor Capitalism’s comments:
Hey, we're just lucky that flu shots are still VOLUNTARY.  I'm shocked that the government hasn't made them mandatory for Medicare and Medicaid recipients.  As you know, many vaccines now are compulsory for school attendance.  Flu will be next.
 
One area the author didn't mention is the mystery surrounding why the Fujian strain was left out of this year's vaccine.  It's becoming the predominant strain.  Why didn't the CDC recognize that and include it?  There's a bigger story there.
 
For your information, health departments aren't required to give free shots. Some charge $15 for flu and $20 for pneumonia.  They are turned down every day by patients who have high risk chronic diseases and don't think $15 is worth it.  For some of these patients, it could save them a trip to the hospital, which would cost thousands.  The difference is the $15 is out of their own pocket and they would be a charity case if they were admitted for a severe complication of the flu at the hospital.
 
Speaking of so-called “free” health care, I also see every day a few patients who seem to have very minor cold symptoms that could be easily treated by over the counter remedies and who insist on being evaluated in the clinic.  I wouldn't dream of seeking medical care if similarly afflicted, but I guess I can feel good about it because they're wasting my time and not the emergency room’s time.  I'm saving the government lots of money on that one.  

yours in liberty,
Doctor Capitalism
*******************

Two patients limp into two different American healthcare businesses with the same complaint. Both have trouble walking and appear to require a hip replacement.
The first patient is examined within the hour, is x-rayed the same day and has a time booked for surgery the following week. The second sees the family doctor after waiting a week for an appointment, then waits eighteen weeks to see a specialist, then gets an x-ray, which isn't reviewed for another month and finally has his surgery scheduled for 6 months from then. Why the different treatment for the two patients?
The first is a dog at a veterinarian.....
The second is a human on medicare.

**************************

The U.S. Healthcare Certificate of Need Sourcebook
By Robert James Cimasi, ASA, CBA, AVA, FCBI, CM&A, CMP
1587982757 - Paperback - 512 pages   US $199.95

Certificate of Need (CON) has had a broad impact on healthcare providers and markets for over three decades. As the bibliographies and other resources in this book illustrate, there is a large amount of literature documenting CON regulation over the years. This work is the result of over two years of dedicated, focused research resulting in a comprehensive reference manual and sourcebook encompassing the statutory, regulatory, administrative, and legal aspects CON regulation from its inception in the late 1960s to the present.

The U.S. Healthcare Certificate of Need Sourcebook provides detailed descriptions, on a state-by-state basis, of CON regulatory requirements, including application thresholds and utilization data.  The book is supplemented with numerous appendices.

The U.S. Healthcare Certificate of Need Sourcebook is comprehensive in its treatment CON, which is a growing and increasingly contentious, political, and legal healthcare nightmare.

As a young attorney in the general counsel’s office of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services during the late 1970s, the author first learned of the federal government’s quixotic efforts to rein in the rapid growth of healthcare to Americans. With its confusing acronyms and labyrinth of regulatory protocols, the Certificate of Need (CON) program became his ticket out of government service into the private practice of law. Indeed, for much of the next ten years the author was in the middle of a fierce battle between luddite regulators and helpful healthcare providers fighting for economic freedom but stymied by the government’s franchise bureaucracy.




Unlike CPR (cardio pulmonary resuscitation), robotically chanting the Pledge of Allegiance is something that U.S. Children must learn in government schools (socialist schools). http://rexcurry.net/pledge2.html
OUR DISEASED DEMOCRACY
by Lady Liberty

Last week was a tough one for a couple of my friends. One of them was diagnosed with breast cancer. She had to have immediate surgery to remove the originating tumor, and she's now waiting to hear a recommended course of treatment dependent on the results of tests to determine the cancer's spread. As of today, her prognosis is reasonably good. In the most awful of coincidences, another friend was diagnosed with lung cancer just two days later. Her prognosis is less favorable. Though she's already commenced with chemotherapy treatments, surgery isn't an option because the cancer cells have already spread beyond her lungs and into her liver and her bones.

It's an unreasonable but inevitable fact that most of us, on hearing such news, begin to question all sorts of perfectly benign symptoms we feel or see in our own bodies. Is that stomach twinge indigestion or something worse? Is that chest pain a pulled muscle or a damaged heart making its presence felt? Is that funny looking spot on our leg just a spider vein or the outcroppings of some more malevolent growth? The positive aspect of all this is, of course, that we may actually find a genuine problem at an early and eminently treatable stage as a result of our temporary paranoia.

Most of us know that, if cancer is caught early, the treatment need not cause too much suffering. Lumpectomies, for example, are far less invasive and are often just as effective for the treatment of small and contained breast cancer masses as are the more disfiguring mastectomies. But having a breast removed or a colostomy, however traumatic, seems small potatoes in comparison to the inevitable alternatives! Chemotherapy might make you terribly sick and negatively impact your appearance temporarily (I can't think of a single woman I know who wouldn't be truly devastated at the thought of losing her hair), but again, the price pales in comparison to what will ensue without the treatment. Radiation isn't much fun, either, I'm told. But again, weigh the alternatives and radiation suddenly seems a perfectly acceptable option.

The point of all this is actually a fairly simple one: You do what you can to prevent the problem. But if the problem occurs, you deal with it as aggressively as need be to save your life or, if that's not possible, to give you the best quality of life for as long as possible before the end.

In the most simplistic of terms, many forms of cancer are simply collections (usually called tumors) of cancerous cells that grow together and then extend tendrils and migrating cells to invade and infect other areas of the body. If the cancers are diagnosed while they're still contained collections of cells, simple removal is often enough to effect a cure. But if the tendrils are winding about other parts and pieces of the body in complex networks of disease, and if cells have wondered off to infect distant organs, the treatment has to get more drastic. That doesn't necessarily mean the patient will die, but it does mean that the fight to live will be more difficult, more involved, and almost certainly engender more suffering along the way.

Of all the things that can be done to prevent cancer, though, and of all the things that might be employed toward a cure, there's one overriding factor. That, of course, is the will of the patient. Just as it takes willpower to quit smoking, it takes willpower to to tolerate the treatment for lung cancer. And more than that, it takes a will to live for any treatment to reach its full potential. We've all heard heard stories of those who might have survived what others did, but who succumbed in large part because of their own fears and the certainty of failure. We've all heard about those who doctors say should have died but who instead survived and thrived because they simply refused to lay down and give up.

If you've got medical problems or know somebody who does, I'm really not the person who ought to be giving you advice. I'm a fine cheerleader, but no kind of diagnostician or treatment guru. But the problems we have in our country today is another story. Where those are concerned, I do have a little advice, and that advice relates all too closely with the subject at hand.

You see, there's a cancer in this country. The primary malignant tumor is centered in a place called Washington, DC. Just like cancer, it's comprised of those who have little in common with the rest of the body, but who never-the-less insist on running things their way and who employ out-of-control growth to achieve their ends. The sickness has spread everywhere as the cancer of government has sent its tendrils into places the Constitution never intended. There's an alphabet agency for almost every possible arena of oversight, and there are regulations for just about every eventuality. These tendrils ensure that everyone everywhere is thoroughly enmeshed in bureaucracy.

With the tendrils of bureaucracy spreading far and wide as they have, little cells here and there have dispersed and started new cancerous colonies. They've alighted in places like New York and Los Angeles. They've spread their disease to the Pacific Northwest and to the Gulf Coast. They've replaced other healthier cells in cities large and small across the country. Thanks to Washington's insatiable demand for funds to maintain its parasitic presence, we now see smaller venues emulating the larger with such things as eminent domain for monetary gain and seizure of property from those merely arrested, conviction be damned.

State governments are now so strangled by federal tentacles that they're thoroughly cowed by the mere threat of withdrawn federal highway funds, and are quite literally unable to see to their own citizens in the event of an emergency (I'm thinking, of course, of the debacle of New Orleans during and after Hurricane Katrina when state and local politicians drew almost as much heat as FEMA did for the lack of forethought concerning evacuations and disaster relief caused, in large part, by the fact that everything had to be routed through far too many channels).

Politicians lie, cheat, and steal, and yet somehow remain in office. They actively make exceptions to the idea of unalienable rights. And it's their actions that enable the cancer to continue to grow, and grow, and grow while the country - and freedom - gets sicker and sicker. But as metastasized as the government cancer may be, there's still some hope.

We, as individuals, might consider ourselves to be similar to the white blood cells our bodies use to fight off infection and other untoward invaders. We can write and call our politicians. We can write and call each other. Certainly, we can just plain refuse to cooperate. We can go to town council meetings and speak up when we see wrongdoing. And while our individual actions might not do a whole lot to cure or even appreciably shrink the cancer tumors, we can at the very least and even on the federal level have some small effect on the speed of its growth.

We, as groups, might call ourselves chemotherapy of a kind. Our collective efforts via boycotts, protest marches, petitions, and political action committees can make a real point with both the rest of the public and in local, state, and federal office buildings. The government cancer is already so bad that I don't expect grassroots chemotherapy to be any kind of a cure, but it sure as all get-out can start to shrink the tumors!

We, as voters, can be likened to radiation treatment. Radiation is nasty, nasty stuff unless it's aimed right where it needs to be. And then, while it sometimes causes peripheral burns, it also does quite a job on cancerous tissues. Voters can do exactly the same thing. We can obliterate some of the worst "seeds" of the disease by voting against the most sickening issues, and by voting the most malignant politicians right out of office. (By the same token, when voters aren't "aimed" properly, we can elect more really bad politicians and endorse more really bad regulations and programs. We ought to be more careful about that. Those getting burned will end up being you and yours sooner or later, probably sooner!)

Finally, we, as a whole, can act as surgeons. If the cancer is bad enough - and you had better bet that it is - we can act en masse to remove some of the worst of the cancer. We can refuse to cooperate with onerous programs like REAL ID. We can undermine every invasive program the TSA tries to implement by refusing to fly until the programs are targeted where they need to be instead of at us all. We can join the Minutemen and either actively help to patrol our vulnerable borders, or offer donations and other support to help those who can and are willing to do so. The opportunities to hack away at government largeness and largesse are many. Pick one (or several) and start slicing.

None of these things, though - not our bodies' natural defenses nor any outside treatment we might care to employ - will do much to mitigate or cure our medical problem if we have the wrong attitude. The same holds true for political activism, whether our gestures are large or small. In fact, right now, the activism of many Americans is most likely to be non-existent. There are far too many people who don't do much of anything because they're convinced that it just doesn't matter. They believe that, no matter what they do, freedom and democracy (such as it is) are already on the way out in this country.

I can't argue with those people in their belief that things are bad. The government cancer has clearly grown to a very, very dangerous extent. It's entirely possible that they're right, that there is no cure and that liberty is effectively doomed. But if the battle were on a smaller front, say in your own body, would you be so eager to simply give up and wait to die? I would hope not! I would hope that you'd fight until the end. I would hope that you'd not give up until you'd quite literally explored and exercised every option, and that you'd even hope for miracles in the knowledge that they do, albeit rarely, occur.

I think that, like me, you would fight, and you'd fight hard. That's as it should be. Life is, after all, sweet. But what is life without liberty? Can you honestly sit back and willingly do nothing to save, or at least prolong, liberty? Yes, there may be pain and sacrifice. But the sooner we get started, the sooner we can cure ourselves of the government cancer, or shrink it, or stave off its perhaps inevitable conclusion. And we can all remember that, while rare, miracles do occur. That this country exists at all is proof of that, and what happened once can happen again if only we've the courage to truly believe it.

For the record, both of the women I mention here are determined to fight. It will not likely be easy for either of them. Despite their most valiant efforts, it's possible that they will fail. But if they don't even try, the outcome isn't possible or even probable. It's certain. As a country, we're facing something more similar than I suspect we'd care to admit. I'd like to think that, singly or collectively, we've got the courage of my two friends to fight for something of such great value, too. Don't we?

We want regulation! It makes us safer!
VIN SUPRYNOWICZ  Oct. 26, 2008

You're a doctor. You need to bring in $3,000 apiece for your most common procedure. But Medicare and Medicaid -- which pay for about half your patients -- have just told you they're only going to pay you one-third of what they're billed. What do you do? You don't need to be a CPA to know the answer is to start billing everyone $4,500 for your procedure. The half of your patients who pay full price thus pay $1,500 extra, covering the shortfall for each Medicare/Medicaid-covered procedure.

Now the tricky question: If someone who's not on Medicaid or Medicare visits your medical office to have this procedure done, and promptly pays his or her $4,500 in full, how much has he paid you this year?

And the answer is: $6,000. Those who are not on Medicare or Medicaid are known as "taxpayers." Where do you think Medicare/Medicaid got the $1,500 to pay for the welfare patient? The taxpayer pays $4,500 for his own procedure, and then an extral $1,500 in taxes to fund someone else's.

For all those who have written in insisting that we need government to pay our medical bills because they're so high, let's keep this simple:

Medical bills are really high because the government promises to pay most of them, the same way government-backed "college loans" have driven up the cost of college, by allowing colleges to charge you whatever you can afford plus whatever the government will loan.

Perhaps it's still technically a minority of Americans who are currently "covered" by Medicare and Medicaid. But since the old and the poor (the latter often skimping on health maintenance and prevention) use the most medicine and medical care, the majority of medical costs are covered and "paid for" by these two socialist programs.

Some say as much as two thirds.

If we switched over to "cash only" medicine tomorrow -- no government or even private insurance payments allowed -- what do you suppose would happen to medical costs?

Remember, the doctor who's been accustomed to billing $4,500 for a procedure really only gets $1,500 from Medicare/Medicaid, a scheme that's already jacked up your cost by 50 percent.

Of that $1,500, another $500 (and that may be understated) goes to pay doctors' non-medical office staff who negotiate bills and payments with the private and government "insurance" firms.

So the doc who "billed" $4,500 expected to get about half that. The rest is only "in there" to buy off this unholy private-public "insurance" bureaucracy.

If he could fire all those non-medical "billing" people in his office, and if the doctor could again assume most patients might pay the full amount billed on a timely basis, he or she could drop many posted charges from $4,500 to $2,500 or even $2,000 overnight.

And what if that still didn't produce enough business? Could our M.D. somehow manage to drop that price again, to $1,500, advertising "Lowest rates in town"? In a true free market, he'd have to. Streamline his costs of "regulatory compliance," and he could probably do even better.

Not only that, in a "cash" environment, conversations might be heard in the examining room which are virtually unknown today. Conversations starting with:

"There are three ways we can handle this problem. The middle course will cost $500 and probably not do much good, which means you'll just have to come back for the $5,000 'third-choice' procedure, anyway. But first we may want to try something real simple that'll take a few weeks but will only cost you 50 bucks ..."

Or: "There are three medicines I can give you for this. The first two were recently patented and would cost you $500 a month. On the other hand, there's an old generic drug that'll probably do just as well or better for five bucks a month. Want to try that first?"

Doctors long ago fell out of the habit of discussing things this way. It sounds "unprofessional." But it's no more "unprofessional" than a roofer telling you about how he can try to repair your chimney flashing before you go to the expense of replacing your entire roof. The difference is that roofers know you're likely to contact someone else if they get too arrogant and don't tell you all your options.

As medicine has gotten better, some new treatments have been introduced which are just plain more expensive. But a true free market always works to reduce such costs. Compare the inflation-adjusted price of a color TV today to one in 1963.

Government, on the other hand, pays on a "cost-plus" basis. Far from creating pressure to make things cheaper, this creates an incentive to jack prices up, which is why taxpayers pay 20 bucks when a candy-striper brings a Medicare patient two aspirin in the hospital.

If government had undertaken to start buying us "free" color TVs in 1963, they'd still be clunky 300-pound "console' models and they'd now cost $12,000 apiece.

No, from regulation designed to limit entry into the field, to licensing, to government socialist "insurance" schemes, it's primarily government meddling that has made a nightmare of our medical costs. So now we're prepared to believe the politicians when they tell us the solution is not a return to the unregulated, pre-1916 market in medicine, but rather ... more government meddling, by the same people who have been "fixing" the banking industry since 1913?

And to those who say, "That's unthinkable! Snake oil and charlatans! We want regulation! It makes us feel safe!" -- First, licensing and regulation are protection rackets. They keep supply down and prices up. If regulation guarantees our safety, why can't we sue the regulators when the doctors they "regulate" screw up?

But second, answer me this, just once:

America was supposed to be made up of 13 -- now 50 -- sovereign states, little greenhouses free to try all different ways of doing things. I'd gladly move to the one state -- one out of 50 -- where medical liberty is restored, providing it also imposed no state income tax, no helmet or seatbelt or anti-smoking or "endangered species" or "global warming" or rural "speed limit" laws, that it "allowed" incandescent lightbulbs and full-sized rifle magazines and full-sized toilet tanks and encouraged the private ownership of machine guns.

Which state is that? If there are a couple million of us who want to try it another way, why can't we have just one state to call our own? We're even willing to settle in the most inhospitable, God-forsaken desert you've got.

If you liked all the taxes and regulations back in California or Illinois or New York or wherever you came from, why did you come here?

Do you know the meaning of the word "hubris"? Has it never occurred to you that the miners and ranchers who were already living in Nevada might have set things up just right for conditions here, and that you might want to check with them before you blithely insist on changing things in America's last endangered refuge of freedom to be just like that decaying, jobless hellhole you ran away from?


Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Review-Journal and author of "The Black Arrow." See http://www.vinsuprynowicz.com/ and http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/vin/.

http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/33323839.html


Libertarianism & Safety Regulations http://rexcurry.net/commentary/safetyregs.html

Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire http://rexcurry.net/shirtwaist.html

STOP NATIONAL SOCIALIST HEALTHCARE and the doctors who are the actual chiefs of staff at the hospitals
socialized medicine problems definitions - Josef Stalin, Chairman Mao, Adolf Hitler fascism
Socialized medicine problems in America and the world: Josef Stalin, Chairman Mao, Adolf Hitler http://rexcurry.net/socialists8b.jpg Doctor Socialism

Nazi salute http://ftp.ij.net/rex/nazi%20salute%204.jpg

Swastika http://ftp.ij.net/rex/swastika3swastika.jpg

Pledge of Allegiance http://ftp.ij.net/rex/pledge-allegiance-pledge-allegiance2.jpg

Alien hand syndrome neurological disorder Dr. Strangelove

Alien hand syndrome is an unusual neurological disorder, also known as "Dr. Strangelove syndrome," whereby one of the sufferer's hands does things against his/her will and against his/her better judgment.

Alien hand syndrome typically results from damage to the brain. Other related conditions are foreign accent syndrome (in which people sound like they have a German accent or other foreign accent when they didn't have one before) and landmark agnosia (in which people become unfamiliar with large objects in familiar areas).

The fictional character Dr. Strangelove had the inability to prevent his hand from making an early American salute (later known as a Nazi salute).



sitemeter