Saturday, January 27, 2018

PATIENTS DYING IN CORRIDORS OF BRITAIN'S SOCIALIZED HEALTH SYSTEM




“Patients dying in hospital corridors.” So went the headline which appeared on the BBC’s website last week, detailing the newest outrages which have emerged from Britain’s crisis-beset healthcare system. This most recent revelation came as a result of an open letter sent to the prime minister by 68 senior doctors, offering details of the inhuman conditions which have become common in the National Health Service’s hospitals.

The letter, which collected statistics from NHS hospitals in England and Wales, found that in December alone over 300,000 patients were
made to wait in emergency rooms for more than four hours before being seen, with thousands more suffering long waits in ambulances before even being allowed into the emergency room. The letter further noted that it had become “routine” for patients to be left on gurneys in corridors for as long as 12 hours before being offered proper beds, with many of them eventually being put into makeshift wards hastily constructed in side-rooms. In addition to this, it was revealed that around 120 patients per day are being attended to in corridors and waiting rooms, with many being made to undergo humiliating treatments in the public areas of hospitals, and some even dying prematurely as a result. One patient reported that, having gone to the emergency room with a gynecological problem which had left her in severe pain and bleeding, a lack of treatment rooms led hospital staff to examine her in a busy corridor, in full view of other patients.

While it’s tempting to believe that these extreme cases must be a rare occurrence, the fact is that such horror stories have become increasingly the norm for a socialised healthcare system that seems to be in a permanent state of crisis. Indeed, as the NHS entered the first week of 2018, over 97% of its trusts in England were reporting levels of overcrowding so severe as to be “unsafe.”

Almost as predictable as the regular emergence of new stories of this kind is the equally unwavering refusal of British commentators to consider that the state-run monopoly structure of the system itself might be to blame. Many, including the prime minister herself, have pointed to the spike in seasonal illnesses such as the flu at this time of year, to distract from the more fundamental flaws of the system. However, officials from Public Health England recently went so far as to openly dismiss this as a major cause of the current healthcare crisis, clarifying that current levels of hospital admissions due to the flu are “certainly not unprecedented.” The aging of the population, and local councils’ failure to provide more non-hospital care have also been blamed.

By far the most commonly suggested remedy, however, is simply to inject more taxpayers’ money into this failing system. Indeed, the belief that Britain’s perpetual healthcare crisis is solely the result of funding cuts by miserly Conservative politicians is so widespread that it is almost never challenged, least of all by the trusted experts within the system itself, many of whom stand to benefit from increased funding.

However, the popular caricature of the NHS as suffering from chronic underfunding is simply a myth. In fact, even when adjusting for inflation, it is clear that government funding to the NHS has been increasing at an extraordinary rate since the turn of the millennium, much more quickly than during the early years which its supporters look back on so fondly.


Indeed, under the Conservative government of 2015–16, almost 30% of Britain’s public services budget was spent on its monopoly healthcare system, compared with around 11% in the NHS’s first decade.

One commonly heard soundbite from supporters of the current system is that the Conservatives have allowed healthcare spending to slump to historically low levels; all it would take to return the NHS to the levels of success it supposedly previously enjoyed would be to increase its funding back to the same level it previously enjoyed, or so they say.  However, to believe such a statement one would have to make two separate misinterpretations of the statistics, both so basic that they would strike shame into even the dullest high school math students: firstly, it is not the absolute amount of spending on the NHS which has fallen under the Conservative-led governments of 2010–18, but merely the rate at which spending is continuing to increase, even when adjusting for inflation. Second, the only reason that the rate of increase seems to have fallen is because of how disproportionately high it had been been under the infamously spendthrift Labour governments of 1997–2010.

Not only is the NHS not underfunded, but it suffers from dismally low efficiency in terms of healthcare bang per buck compared with similarly developed countries. This suggests that no matter how much its funding is increased, the current set-up is prone to chronically waste that money away.

To overcome these problems, reforms to the fundamental nature of the system itself are desperately needed, to increase the economic freedom of healthcare providers in the UK as well as the freedom of choice of consumers. In short, as long as British healthcare is organised as a taxpayer-funded state monopoly it will continue to fail, just as the other nationalised monopolies of the 1970s failed. To get to a point where the British public would even consider reforms of that kind, however, would require the breaking of a taboo that has defined the past 70 years of British politics.

George Pickering is the Almoayyad Fellow in Residence at the Mises Institute this summer, and is a student of economic history at the London School of Economics.

The above originally appeared at Mises.org.


Sunday, January 21, 2018

CANADIAN WAIT TIME TO SEE A NEUROLOGIST: 4.5 YEARS

Saturday, January 20, 2018

STATE LICENSURE: "IF YOU CONTROL WHO PRACTICES THE PROFESSION, YOU CONTROL HOW IT'S PRACTICED"




Wow!  At the 7:10 mark, Anahad O'Connor's NYT's September 12, 2016 article on how the sugar industry shifted the blame on bad health to fat.  They paid off researchers to downplay the link between sugar and heart disease.  According to Greg Glassman, owner of CrossFit, says that the ACSM, American College of Sports Medicine, has influential ties to Coca Cola who has influence on university studies and reports about the "not so bad" effects of sugar or transfer the culprit on heart disease to fat.  

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

"MRI REVEALED SURGEON HAD LEFT A SCALPEL IN [ARMY VETERAN'S] ABDOMEN 4 YEARS EARLIER"

I find this to be absolutely incredible.  What, the surgeon completes an exhaustive surgery, leaves a scalpel in someone's gut, turns and walks to wash up after telling his staff to "Okay, stitch him up"?  Is that how it went down?  

Some surgeries are necessary, no doubt.  But I wonder how many you could avoid if you maintained a broad spectrum of vital nutrient compounds, day after day, meal after meal?  I wonder.  Check out what happened to veteran, Glen Turner, and then check out the products at the bottom of this post.  Thanks for reading.


HARTFORD, Conn. - An Army veteran says an MRI revealed that a surgeon had left a scalpel in his abdomen four years earlier.
Glenford Turner, 61, of Bridgeport, went to the West Haven VA with abdominal pain last April when the surprising discovery was made, according to his lawyer. Turner required surgery to remove the scalpel, and last week filed suit against the Veterans Administration.
"Xrays revealed the presence of an abandoned scalpel inside Mr. Turner's body. Doctors confirmed that is was the scalpel knife used during Turner's radical prostatectomy - performed four years earlier at the West Haven VA," attorney Joel Faxon of New Haven said in a statement Monday announcing the lawsuit.
Administrators at the VA Connecticut Healthcare's West Haven campus could not be reached Monday, which was a federal holiday.
In the lawsuit, Turner says he underwent a robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy at the West Haven VA on Aug. 30, 2013. He returned to the VA hospital on March 29, 2017, for an MRI after complaining of dizziness and long-term abdominal pain, Faxon said.
"The imaging study was abruptly halted when Mr. Turner began to experience severe, worsened abdominal pain," and subsequent X-rays revealed the scalpel, Faxon said.
The instrument was removed in an operation in April 2017.
Faxon described the incident as "an incomprehensible level of incompetence." The suit seeks unspecified compensatory damages, and claims Turner suffered pain, additional surgery, hospitalization, prolonged rehabilitation, medical expenses and lost work time.
U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut called the allegations "egregious" and said he's asking the VA for a detailed explanation of what happened.
Visit The Hartford Courant (Hartford, Conn.) at www.courant.com
Stay healthy, my friends with these and this

Sunday, January 14, 2018

TOXINS IN WATER SUPPLIES ARE ASSESSED INDIVIDUALLY, NOT IN TOTAL AND NOT OVER A LIFETIME

A friend of mine loves to complain about how the free market allows bad players and profit-seeking outfits to do whatever they please with regard to their product or service and hide much of the truth about these through clever advertisement or outright omission.  This is a fact of life, and one reason why online journalists are a source of valuable facts and information.  I try.  But the free market also makes us smarter.  We learn pretty quick what is good, bad, and absolutely ugly.  And once we know, we can abstain from a product or a service or even a person.  This is the virtue of a free market--it makes consumers smarter.  
Take water, for example.  We drink bottled water to avoid excess copper or rust or chlorine.  Or so we think.  Until we learn that municipal water supplies in one city are bottled and shipped for sale in other cities without batting an eye at the contaminants in the water.  People learn.  We adjust.  Sometimes too late, after we get sick, not Montezuma's Revenge sick, but a low-grade health sick, like fatigue.  And only to find out later that some other chemical has found its nefarious way into our water supply.  Find ways of shortening that learning curve.  But we need water as toxic as it might be.  There are remedies, however, that I point to below, ones that comes from the premiere nutritional compound guy, Bill Sardi.  But first, this report by Matt Agorist from Natural Blaze.  

We've known about the deliberate and legal poisoning of the water supply by cities and counties with flouride, but radioactive isotopes?  That's new.  Government agencies cooking the books?  That's not new.  But it seems that all reports about heavy chemicals in the water are problematic since the reports tend to focus on a single chemical and fail to look at the accumulative effect from decades of a combination of metals.  However, this fact is not overlooked by Bill Sardi.
ACCUMULATED/COMBINED HAZARD OVER TIME  
However, one of the problems with assessment of toxins in drinking water supplies is that they are considered individually, not in total, and not over a lifetime.
Metallic mineral accumulation can produce adverse effects in biology.  For example, the accumulation of chromium VI in plants has been shown to inhibit the production of chlorophyll. [Chemosphere Oct 2000] 
The accumulated heavy metals burden (chromium, cadmium, lead and arsenic) in drinking water in Bangladesh exceeds safe limits. [Environmental Nanotechnology, Monitoring & Management May 2016]  One study in Pakistan reveals chromium VI sample of 1.313 milligrams per liter of water but total of all minerals tested (cadmium, lead, nickel, zinc, iron, copper and chromium VI) amounted to 4.214 milligrams per liter. [Journal Pharmaceutical Sciences & Research 2015] 
Some heavy metals can be stored in organs like the liver and brain where they accumulate and wreak havoc later in life.  Chromium VI accumulates in all organs in laboratory mice. [Toxicological Profile for Chromium
The combined accumulation of heavy metals (antimony, arsenic, bismuth, cadmium, cerium, chromium, cobalt, copper, gallium, gold, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, platinum, silver, tellurium, thallium, tin, uranium, vanadium, and zinc, 23 total) in the human body over time is a cause for concern.  [Interdisciplinary Toxicology June 2014; International Journal Physical Sciences 2007]
Fish consumption is the greatest contributor to total heavy metal accumulation in the human body.  [International Research Journal Public Environmental Health July 2014]
Most heavy metals accumulate in the liver, kidney and gills of fish where they can cause functional disturbances. [Soil & Water Pollution Monitoring 2006]  
In fact, the gradual lifetime accumulation of metallic minerals after full growth is achieved in males and with the cessation of menstruation in females is postulated the chief accelerator of aging itself. [Knowledge of HealthLongevinex.comResveratrol News]  
Bottom line, the potential health hazard posed by chromium VI in drinking water is overstated.  The total accumulated metallic mineral load over a lifetime needs to be considered in the maintenance of human health.  It is best for adults to include mineral controlling molecules in their diets and food supplements to slow or reverse aging.  Some food supplements provide an array of these metal chelators. [Longevinex]
It is funny how most of us believe that much of what we take to be the free market in groceries and food is literally killing us, and government is the faithful handmaiden in seeing this result brought to its fruition.  
By Matt Agorist from the Natural Blaze.  
Matt Agorist alerts us to a damning report that effects 170 million Americans.
A damning report from the Environmental Working Group has just revealed that drinking water for more than 170 million Americans in all 50 states contains radioactive elements that are shown to cause cancer. Not only does the report expose the deadly levels of radiation but it also shows that officials have been actively covering it up.
The investigations looked at tests from 22,000 utilities in all 50 states between 2010 to 2015.  He points out that only a small percentage of water supplies exceeded toxic levels, but that their standards or legal radiation limits are "more than 40 years old."  So, what, he's calling for government upgrades?  Good luck.  The tests, however, when measurd by the more stringent standards set in Caliornia back in 2006 that "nearly 100 percent of tested water supplies failed," making places like "Flint, Michigan look like child’s play."  
Omitting what the percentage is, Matt Agorist acknowledges that “Most radioactive elements in tap water come from natural sources, but that doesn’t take away the need to protect people through stronger standards and better water treatment,” said Olga Naidenko, Ph.D., EWG’s senior science advisor for children’s environmental health."  I am not saying that this is not serious, but maybe there are bigger fish to fry, particularly when I read in the very next paragraph that "The problem is only getting worse, too."  How can it get worse than radiation?  When it comes to political appointees, which regrettably is what his article to turns to.  Politics, which is so fashionable these days, effectively discredits his message.  
EWG reports, the government has long kown about this problem and has covered it up by fudging the numbers. Now, one of the people who admitted to fudging the numbers has just been nominated to head the White House Council on Environmental Quality, or CEQ. 
The nominee, Kathleen Hartnett White, admitted in a 2011 investigation by Houston’s KHOU-TV that if utility tests found radiation levels over the EPA limit, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality would subtract the test’s margin of error to make it appear the water met federal standards. In some cases, this meant that Texans whose tap water posed the extraordinarily elevated lifetime cancer risk of 1 in 400 were not informed of the danger.
So, what, Argonist's article is about government incompetence?  Okay, then what is the solution?  You got it: a different government appointment. 
AGORIST CHASES POLITICS; DROPS HEALTH CONCERNS              Matt Agorist's concern is less about radiation or water contaminants than it is about partisan appointees.  And that all we need to do is rely on a more effective federal government agent, and certainly not one who seems to have political connections, to fix the problem for us 170 million Americans.  But has government ever been a solution to any of our problems?  There was Erin Brokovich who found poisonous contaminants in Hinkley, California's water supply.  There is the ongoing, rarely-to-be-challenged fluoride medicated water in municipal supplies across the country.  There is an issue with lead, with Chromium VI, and others.  Perhaps if we were to grade government protection or monitoring of our water supply, it would earn an epic fail.  But which chemical is the most toxic and the one we should look to avoid against all others?  Chlorine, according to Bill Sardi.  
Is tap water safe to drink?  Well, yes, kinda.  Tap water has measured levels of arsenic, lead, mercury, nickel, other heavy metals, pharmaceutical drugs, and other industrial chemicals including perchlorate (rocket fuel). In fact, analysis of 59 small streams in the U.S. found the anti-diabetic drug metformin in almost all of them even though only trace amounts were found. [Daily Mail UK Oct 3, 2016]
One of the most toxic chemicals known, chlorine, is added to water to kill off pathogenic bacteria, fungi and amoeba.  Without chlorinated water, diseases like dysentery, cholera and typhoid ran rampant in populations.  Water chlorination is one of the great advances in public hygiene.  However, chlorinated water does increase the lifetime risk of developing bladder and rectal cancer, where it pools into greater concentrations. [Scientific American]
And there is this, "Long-term exposure to chlorinated drinking water (30-40 years) increases the risk of colon cancer."


Water is important, no doubt.  In fact, when it comes to colon cancer, water is decisive in fending off that disease.  
Drinking water reduces the risk of colon cancer in men. Men who consume the most water have a 92% lower risk of rectal cancer compared to men who drink less water.
Drink water, but avoid chlorine, long-term consumption of chlorine.  As to Chromium VI and chlorine, there are nutritional remedies--vitamin C, N-acetyl cysteine, reserveratrol, and garlic.  Include these in your diet.  
The major dietary antioxidant that counters chromium VI toxicity is vitamin C.  Vitamin C reduces 90% of the oxidative threat posed by chromium VI.  [Carcinogenesis 1992]  The published reports validating the effectiveness of vitamin C in reduction of abolishment of DNA damage caused by chromium VI is abundant. [Environmental Health PerspectivesSept 1994; Journal Applied Toxicology Nov 2005;Molecular Medicine Reports July 2013]
N-acetyl cysteine (NAC), available as a dietary supplement, is well established as an antidote to chromium VI poisoning. [Journal Pharmaceutical Biomedical Analysis Jan 2016; PLoS One Sept 2014; Free Radical Medicine Biology Dec 2013]
The red wine molecule resveratrol is also cited as a molecule that protects against chromium VI toxicity by activation of internal enzymatic antioxidants in the body (glutathione, catalase, superoxide dismutase). [Toxicology Applied Pharmacology 2016]
Garlic ingestion is an well-documented approach to negating the toxic effects of chromium VI. [Journal Basic Clinical Physiology & Pharmacology 2009; Journal Applied Toxicology Oct 2008]  The key molecule in garlic is allicin [International Journal Environmental Research Public Health Sept 2008], which is easily destroyed by stomach acid unless a garlic clove is crushed prior to ingestion allowing an enzyme (alliinase) to yield allicin, or by consumption of a unique alkalinized garlic pill that assuredly produces allicin. [Garlinex]