HOW POWER CORRUPTS: THE DEVASTATING TRUTH ABOUT THE OBAMA HEALTHCARE PLAN, PART TWO
November 30th, 2009 admin Leave a comment Go to comments
By Jon Rappoport
http://www.insolutions.info/
http://www.nomorefakenews.com/
http://www.pandemicfluonline.com/

Why is the Obama legislation double-barreled? Why does it offer both a private and public option?

Why are we hearing relatively few howls of protest from the private insurance industry?

What happened to the Democrats’ single-payer program, in which Medicare would be expanded to include all Americans under one roof?

The answers to these questions yield up the same result: the private insurance mammoth so far supports the Obama Plan. The private (and possibly the public) option will be priced by the insurance companies, to ensure profits, and since all 300 million Americans will be forced to sign on to one option or the other, these insurance companies will handle some of the large spillover. New customers.

In other words, the Obama Plan is a government-corporate partnership from top to bottom. It always was.

The insurance companies agreed to call in their markers on Congressional legislators and get the necessary votes to pass the Plan.

The die is not yet cast. But that’s the strategy.

Think of the amount of force present in this arrangement. Insurance giants, pharmaceutical corporations, the federal government—all working together to control medical treatment for Americans. And the hidden secret is: many of these treatments are fraught with danger. They injure people. They kill them. 225,000 of them a year.

All this power funnels down into the doctor’s office where the patient is handed his diagnosis and drug prescription.

As I presented in Part 1, here is the breakdown of medically-caused deaths in the US:

Each year in the US there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer.

Source: July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?”

If the Obama healthcare plan passes into law, there will be a gaggle of vultures descending on the decaying landscape.


Pharmaceutical creatures will be the most powerful of the invaders.

To understand their influence: Consider these winged goblins’ entrance into the arena of psychiatric practice. Thirty-five years ago, the whole profession was sinking under the waves. Americans were showing less and less interest in what psychiatry had to offer.

The psychiatric journals were going broke. Even the funding for conferences was drying up.

There was one unlikely upside. The “discovery” and definition of mental disorders had no true scientific foundation. Definitive biological tests for psychiatric conditions didn’t exist. These mental disorders were named and labeled by committees, which met and discussed lists of symptoms (behaviors) and hashed out conclusions.

There was a holy text, the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual), and the ruling committees engraved new mental disorders and their descriptions on stone tablets.

Into this ludicrous situation flew and flapped the pharmaceutical industry. It saw the possibilities. Markets could be created. For each new invented and labeled mental condition, there would be a new market. It was that simple.

Since no diagnostic tests were necessary, since none existed, the arbitrary nature of the whole game was a magnificent boon.

The psychiatrists would roll out new disorders, and the drug companies would supply the drugs.

So pharma essentially made a pact. It would resuscitate psychiatry with money. It would fund conferences and back the professional journals. It would help re-float the whole profession.

And that is exactly what happened. Outlandish PR was launched to explain that many millions of Americans were suffering from undiagnosed psychiatric disorders.

Talk therapy was no longer the preferred route for alleviating or curing these disorders. No, all mental conditions, across the board and without exception, were said to result from brain malfunction. Voila. It was a chemistry problem—and researchers were on the case.

Their answers naturally led to chemical (drug) strategies.

Studies which called into the question the safety of the drugs were shunted into the background.

Politicians were enlisted in the PR campaign. The humanitarian levers were pulled. “We can’t let so many Americans live in silence with their mental disorders. Drug treatment is available. The breakthroughs are extraordinary. Today, we are seeing miracles. It’s science at work.”

Dissenters from within the psychiatric profession, people who saw through this ruse, were attacked. They were called Neanderthals. They were banished from the top journals. Anyone who suggested that unhappy and troubled patients might really need nutritional help, or might be experiencing problems associated with myriad chemicals in processed foods, or might need a way to realize they were uniquely themselves in a society increasingly bent on conformity—this was slammed as scientific nonsense, clap-trap, idiocy of the first order.

Instead, millions of children were really suffering from a deficit of Ritalin. Millions of Americans were suffering from a deficit of Prozac or Depakote.

The job description of psychiatrists changed. Talk in the office with patients was, at best, about confirming a list of symptoms/behaviors and writing drug prescriptions.

The new alliance between the American Psychiatric Association and the pharmaceutical companies was strong.

This is how vultures operate when they see an opportunity.

And now, as the Obama bill creeps forward toward a vote, the opportunities abound. Americans under the compulsory umbrella would be “served” by a wide-ranging medical panel. The panel, over time, would determine which diseases and disorders would be covered by insurance, and which would not.

But where does that stop? A patient under the Plan is told by his doctor that he has a mental disorder. A diagnosis is made. A drug is prescribed. Can the patient refuse?

Of course he can. At first.

But what about ten years, 20 years up the road? Do you seriously think pharma and organized psychiatry are going to curtail their efforts at the golden gate?

If the insurance is compulsory, the treatment at some point is going to be compulsory.

Oh, it’ll be a struggle to enact such draconian rules, but the chances of success, when the government is the ruling entity, will dramatically increase.

And when drugs are involved, and when the prescribed treatment is compulsory or coerced through pressure, the drugs’ dangerous effects are ignored, because the treatment cannot be refused. Do you believe the government is going to assume and admit liability for a damaging drug the patient must take?

The pharmaceutical companies will have a field day.

Take a case described by psychiatrist, Peter Breggin, in his landmark 1991 classic, Toxic Psychiatry. A young patient, Roberta, had been treated with a host of so-called major tranquilizers [AKA neuroleptics]. Peer-reviewed published studies support the use of these drugs: Haldol, Mellaril, Prolixin, Thorazine.

Breggin writes: “Roberta was a college student, getting good grades, mostly A’s, when she first became depressed and sought psychiatric help at the recommendation of her university health service. She was eighteen at the time, bright and well motivated, and a very good candidate for psychotherapy. She was going through a sophomore-year identity crisis about dating men, succeeding in school, and planning a future. She could have thrived with a sensitive therapist who had an awareness of women’s issues.

“Instead of moral support and insight, her doctor gave her Haldol. Over the next four years, six different physicians watched her deteriorate neurologically without warning her or her family about tardive dyskinesia [motor brain damage] and without making the [tardive dyskinesia] diagnosis, even when she was overtly twitching in her arms and legs. Instead they switched her from one neuroleptic to another, including Navane, Stelazine, and Thorazine. Eventually a rehabilitation therapist became concerned enough to send her to a general physician, who made the diagnosis. By then she was permanently physically disabled, with a loss of 30 percent of her IQ.

“…my medical evaluation described her condition: Roberta is a grossly disfigured and severely disabled human being who can no longer control her body. She suffers from extreme writhing movements and spasms involving the face, head, neck, shoulders, limbs, extremities, torso, and back—nearly the entire body. She had difficulty standing, sitting, or lying down, and the difficulties worsen as she attempts to carry out voluntary actions. At one point she could not prevent her head from banging against nearby furniture. She could hold a cup to her lip only with great difficulty. Even her respiratory movements are seriously afflicted so that her speech comes out in grunts and gasps amid spasms of her respiratory muscles…Roberta may improve somewhat after several months off the neuroleptic drugs, but she will never again have anything remotely resembling a normal life.”

Under a government no-way-out Plan, it could start this way:

Patient: “Doctor, I really don’t think I want to take this medicine.”

Doctor: “Believe me, I understand your apprehension. But it’s a good drug, and we’ll be monitoring the effects all the way.”

Patient: “I know, but still…I’ve read about the side effects.”

Doctor: “I’m starting you out on a small dose. You tell me if you’re uncomfortable.”

Patient: “I’m not sure…”

Doctor: “Listen. Perhaps you don’t understand what’s happening here. You’re covered. You have insurance under the Government Plan. Now, if you decline treatment, what are we supposed to do? You want the coverage, but you don’t want the treatment. It’s like saying you want to buy the car, but you don’t want to drive it.”

Or the doctor might say, “I’m seeing fifty patients a day. They want my help. I’m giving them the best available medical advice in the world, based on the best science we have. Don’t you want to take advantage of that?”

Many variations on the same theme.

“I’m telling you, you need chemotherapy right away. We can’t wait. This is your optimal chance for survival.”

Pressure.

“As I’m sure you’re aware, there is a list of patients on the Government Plan who refuse treatment. I don’t think you want to be on that refusenik list. It’ll mean your waiting times for appointments will stretch out. You’ll go to the back of the line. We have to serve the people who are willing to take advantage of what we give.”

The road continues through twists and turns until treatment is compulsory. If you’re under the Plan, you take your medicine. You don’t ask about the science. You don’t demand evidence the drugs are safe. You don’t discuss other options. You don’t buck the system. The system is huge. Everyone says it is there for your own good. It’s based on a fundamental humanitarianism. Share and care.

“I see on your chart you’ve refused three vaccines in the last six years. You have two children. You tried to obtain a waiver for them so they don’t have to receive vaccinations. I’ve notified Child Protective Services. I’m sorry, but we can’t allow this to go on. I know you don’t want CPS to take your children from the house. What parent would? But if we can’t reach an understanding here, you’re going to encounter serious trouble.”

Let’s imagine a doctor is handling a cancer patient, a young boy, whose mother is quite educated.

The mother says, “Doctor, are you familiar with the work of Ulrich Abel? A German biostatistician. Very fine international reputation. In 1990, after reviewing thousands of studies on chemotherapy, he came to a conclusion. Here is the quote. ‘Success of most chemotherapies is appalling…There is no scientific evidence for its ability to extend in any appreciable way the lives of patients suffering from the most common organic cancer…Chemotherapy for malignancies too advanced for surgery, which accounts for 80% of all cancers, is a scientific wasteland.’”

The doctor smiles and says, “We’ve heard all the objections. But chemotherapy is your son’s best option, I assure you.”

“I know you assure me, but I’m presenting evidence that contradicts your opinion, Doctor.”

“Madam, this situation is far more complex than you realize. Believe me, I’ve looked at all the possibilities. You’re not a physician. Cancer is my specialty. You boy needs chemo, and he needs it now.”

“Doctor, I’m going to decline.”

“It’s not that easy, I’m afraid. In the old days, you could take this case to court. Lawyers could argue both sides before a judge. But now, under the Government Plan, we have the right to insist on treatment. We’re not trying to be coercive. We’re only concerned with the best interests of the patients. That’s why the Plan exists.”

“Doctor, chemo will not extend my son’s life. And it will make him suffer terribly.”

“It’s our best hope, and I’m going to go ahead with it. I’ll note your objections. I’m happy to have you meet with one of our counselors. Perhaps she can alleviate your concerns. That’s all I can do.”

This is where the rubber will meet the road, and the powers-that-be will dictate the results. The science doesn’t matter. Even pointing out a number of qualified studies that indicate a specific medical treatment is ineffective and dangerous won’t save the day.

To some, all this sounds like a paranoid fantasy. But only the most naïve imagine that an enormous increase in centralized power will somehow enhance personal freedom or maintain it in its present state. The major players want more. They always want more. And a struggle along the road to compulsory treatment is not a great price for them to pay. They’re willing. They have the time and the means and the power and the connections. They see the goal. They see the rewards.

We may want to extend the benefit of the doubt to those who say they are looking out for our best interests, but then we are the fantasizers. We are the fools. More power means more control. It always does.

What is starting out now as a “public option” in the Healthcare Plan is the wedge in the door. If joining the Plan, in one form or another, is no longer a choice, then someone has just gained the power that formerly resided in us.

What do you think will happen to the whole issue of medical liability under the Obama Plan? What will eventually happen to a private citizen who tries to sue a drug company, doctor, or hospital for damages?

“You say this drug injured your health in a permanent way? Go home. There is no case. The Plan is the best structure we have. Occasionally, a mistake occurs, but we all have to live with that. If we permit huge lawsuits to move forward, we won’t be able to pay for the Plan anymore. Greatest good for the greatest number of people is the watchword.”

So the freedom to obtain justice, too, will disappear in time as well. (It already has, in so-called pandemic seasons, as drug companies promise delivery of vaccines to governments if and only if no liability is attached when a patient is injured by the vaccine.)

* * *

Who benefits from all this? Obviously, Big Pharma. Compulsory or coerced drug treatment for all Americans, in every area of medical practice; greater and greater legal protection against claims for damage; an insider’s place at the table where an official panel decides what diseases and disorders and drug treatments will be covered and paid for under the Government Plan.

Instead of having to swoop down on a whole profession, like psychiatry, and bankroll it, the pharmaceutical industry can rely on the federal government to carry the burden.

I cited above the quintessential study that established a death toll of 106,000 Americans, every year, as the direct result of FDA-approved, correctly prescribed medicines.

Under the Obama Plan, and its succeeding incarnations, Big Pharma will be slipping out from beneath that shadow of liability, as it walks, hand in hand with its partner, the federal government of the United States, into the sunrise of official absolution.

JON RAPPOPORT �
http://www.insolutions.info/
http://www.nomorefakenews.com/
http://www.pandemicfluonline.com/