Archive for the ‘health care’ Category
ObamaCare DRECK(tm)
5 November 2013Coming to You Soon as “Soma”
13 March 2012According to The Daily Beast, there’s now a pill to cure racism.
…Writing in the medical journal Psychopharmacology, British investigators found that a veteran heart and blood pressure pill, propranolol, which acts to lower our fight-or-flight response to anything by dialing down adrenaline production, reduced “implicit racial bias” significantly. They ran their study in 36 white 22-year-old volunteers and distinguished implicit associations from explicit racial prejudice. … (H/T: JCM)
While some question whether or not thirty-six people is enough of a sample size to make such an announcement (it’s not), I have to question the fact that only white people were included in the sample. Apparently, the “implicit racial bias” of the investigators, who might want to consider taking some of their own medicine, is that only white people can be racist. Physicians, heal thyselves.
An Alien Chest Burster? The Vulcan Death Grip? You’re Covered.
16 September 2011Under Obama, government regulations (and regulators) have skyrocketed. Want to see some of what your children’s, grandchildren’s, and great-grandchildren’s taxes are paying for?
Wall Street Journal — Today, hospitals and doctors use a system of about 18,000 codes to describe medical services in bills they send to insurers. Apparently, that doesn’t allow for quite enough nuance. A new federally mandated version will expand the number to around 140,000—adding codes that describe precisely what bone was broken, or which artery is receiving a stent. It will also have a code for recording that a patient’s injury occurred in a chicken coop… There are codes for injuries in opera houses, art galleries, squash courts, and nine locations in and around a mobile home… Billing experts who translate doctors’ work into codes are gearing up to start using the new system in two years. … R46.1 is “bizarre personal appearance” while R46.0 is “very low level of personal hygiene.” It’s not clear how many klutzes want to notify their insurers that a doctor visit was a W22.02XA, “walked into lamppost, initial encounter” (or, for that matter, a W22.02XD, “walked into lamppost, subsequent encounter”). …
And who can deny that Democrats are the party of scienciousness and futurity when ObamaCare is getting ready to bill you for accidents involving spacecraft? Go to that link and check out some searches on different keywords. There are nine different codes for injuries caused by turtles (no word on whether or not those are the mutant ninja variety).
UPDATE: What? There are no codes for injuries from moose? But a Møøse once bit my sister! Mynd you, møøse bites Kan be pretty nasti…
Old News, Unless You Only Watch the MSM
1 August 2011Pajamas Media — Sophisticated stem cell medicine — in which a patient’s own fatty tissue is harvested and processed for the patient’s own adult (autologous) stem cells, then reinjected for regenerative healing — is available in the United States and Canada, but only for animals. Elsewhere in the world — the Regenerative Medicine Institute at Tijuana’s impressive Hospital Angeles, for example, just 20 minutes outside San Diego — adult stem cells have been shown to have remarkable efficacy in treating a variety of diseases. … the MSM carefully avoids the subject of stem cells — unless, that is, you’re talking embryonic stem cells. These are the controversial cells, harvested from dead human fetuses, that most people presume to be the foundation of all cell medicine. For the MSM, embryonic stem cells are not voodoo nonsense; they are cool, cutting-edge, sexy. They are headline-grabbers. They have the highly mediagenic property of “pluripotency” — the ability to morph into any type of cell in the body. But adult stem cells are proven more effective and less risky than embryonic cells. Yet only embryonic stem cells and their supporters merit coverage in the MSM, despite the fact that fetal cells do not perform successfully in clinical trials.
I’ve seen this reported a number of times over a number of years: The only stem cells that regularly show any promise are adult stem cells (which can be harvested from fat), but the only stem cells that the media (and the government pork-barrel spenders) show any interest in are embryonic stem cells harvested from aborted fetuses. That above the referenced article doesn’t really speculate deeply on the cause of this dishonest discrepancy, but it’s fairly obvious that the obsession with embryonic stem cells is based at least in part of justifying the continued availability of abortion on demand in America, with government funding. And if they can convince the public that they stand to reap personally benefit from the endless health benefits from endless abortions, then with any luck the voters will be swayed away from pro-life policies and politicians. When the subject of stem cell research comes it, it’s surprising (OK, not really) how many people are unaware that there even exist other types of stem cell research about from the embryonic type, much less the fact that the other types of research are the ones actually showing promise. But then again, it should be fairly obvious to anyone who spared the time to rub two brain cells together that, if embryonic stem cell research were the gold mine that everyone claimed it was, then it wouldn’t need massive government subsidies. People would be lining up to invest in it.
But, maybe someday after adult stem cell research reaches its potential, it may actually gain some acknowledgement for its successes (while the government-funded embryonic boondoggles continue to waste money with little result), we can all go down to the nearest Red Cross center to donate a pint of fat in order to provide the stem cells to cure our fellow citizens. Given how much liposuction is done on the stars in Hollywood, they might actually (for the first time in decades) actually be doing something to contribute to society in a positive way.
Yes, We’re Serious
14 December 2010Last year, Nancy Pelosi was asked by CNSNews.com, “Where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?” Her response was a repeated, incredulous “Are you serious?” Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, later added that “You can put this on the record. That is not a serious question.” She was far from the only Democrat who openly didn’t worry about the Constitution or thought that it was wrong, denied that there were any restrictions upon what the federal government could do, or admitted that the Democrats “make up the rules as they go along“.
Well, guess what: A federal judge in Virginia ruled Monday that a key provision of the nation’s sweeping health-care overhaul is unconstitutional, the most significant legal setback so far for President Obama’s signature domestic initiative. (H/T: Weasel Zippers) It turns out that the Constitution does matter, it does say what it clearly appears to say, and there are people who still care about it. Obviously, it ain’t over until it (and/or the other state suits) reach the Supreme Court; but remember, if even part of ObamaCare is ruled unconstitutional, the whole thing might collapse since the three zillion pages of legislation apparently don’t include the standard severability clause.