Health Care News Podcast

You may want to rethink checking that box making you an organ donor. Unlike tissue donation, organs often need to be harvested from a live person in order to be viable for a transplant. Heidi Klessig, M.D., retired anesthesiologist, pain management specialist, and co-founder of respectforhumanlife.com, highlights how hospitals have harvested organs from live patients for the last few years. This procedure makes the person brain dead and then resuscitates their heart to keep blood flowing to the organs. According to Klessig, this goes against the Uniform Definition of Death Act (UDODA).

UDODA, passed in 1981, states that to declare someone legally dead, there must be irreversible cessation of cardiopulmonary function or irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem. These determinations are to be made in accordance with accepted medical standards, but hospitals can never be 100 percent sure.  Klessig says there are many cases where people have been resuscitated and survived 10 minutes after the heart stopped beating, but a transplant team may begin the harvest of organs in a matter of minutes.

The procedure is banned in Australia and the American College of Physicians has asked for a pause until legal and ethical issues can be ironed out. Yet, hospitals have been vigorously pushing the procedure to increase the supply of organs which require a patient to be alive before they can be harvested.

She also discusses:

• How hospitals can take your live organs if you are incapacitated, no family can be reached, and they determine your condition is “irreversible,” which Klessig says, “is terrifying because their interest lies in what money can be made from your organs, not what is in your best interest.” Organs can be worth about $5 million to transplant centers.  The only way to prevent this is by carrying a card: https://halovoice.org/wp-content/uploads/donor_refusal_card.pdf
   
• How putting all resources into “live organ harvesting” has nearly eliminated research and development of alternatives to people with failing organs
   
• Ethical donations (tissue after death, kidney or lobe of liver from healthy donors)

Many people think the field of eugenics disappeared after the Nazi’s were defeated in WWII. But eugenics, a controversial program to perfect the human race, exists in various forms in modern times. Robert Graboyes, economist, journalist, consultant at RFG Counterpoint, decided to write about the topic. Graboyes was also a panelist that covered the topic in a webinar hosted by The Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism.

Eugenics has a long history going back way before the Nazi’s practiced it in World War Two. It really got its origins in Victorian England and it got some cover because it was associated with an emerging field at the time, statistics. Graboyes said it entered the U.S. before the Nazi’s came into power and practitioners at first, and in a much more gruesome way. Euthanasia was too controversial, so sterilization of was the weapon of choice and the practice continued well into the 20^th century when it was discovered prisons were sterilizing people who were incarcerated. Graboyes also discusses the expansion of euthanasia in Canada and even in the U.S. He discusses whether it could be used for nefarious purposes.

The FDA recently gave emergency use authorization (EUA) to the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine. Unlike the vaccines Americans received as a result of Operation Warp Speed, Novavax is not an mRNA vaccine. It was bypassed for EUA early in the pandemic because of a decision to put all resources into mRNA vaccines as it was thought this provided the best approach to get a vaccine out quickly.

Our guest today, Raymond March, a research fellow for the Independent Institute and assistant professor of agribusiness and applied economics at North Dakota State University, says this was a costly mistake. In an op-ed, March explains why it took so long for the U.S. to get access to the Novavax vaccine. March discusses Novavax’s different technology, the history of protein-based vaccines, and the dangers in using a one-size-fits-all approach when dealing with a public health threat. 
 

Novavax Authorization: https://ir.novavax.com/2022-10-19-U-S-FDA-Grants-Emergency-Use-Authorization-for-Novavax-COVID-19-Vaccine,-Adjuvanted-as-a-Booster-for-Adults

Op-ed: https://blog.independent.org/2022/08/12/take-so-long-novavax-vaccine/

Poverty is no longer a requirement to qualify for long-term care under Medicaid. An entire industry has cropped up over the years instructing families on how to maximize Medicaid’s loose financial guidelines.  While families save a bundle of money by having the government now pay for this care, the system has had a negative impact on the long-term care market. Reimbursement rates under Medicaid do not cover the actual cost of care which impacts quality and supply.  Families no longer save for long term care knowing that Medicaid can come to the rescue.  Stephen Moses, president of the Center for Long-Term Care Reform, has studied long-term care for decades. He joins the show to discuss the first segment of his new report with the Paragon Institute, ”Long Term Care: The Problem.”

Read the report: https://paragoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/202208_Moses_LongTermCareTheProblem_FINAL_2.pdf

Seventy percent of people who reach age 65 today will require a severe need for long-term care. Long-term care provides medical and social services for those who are unable to care for themselves. 48 percent will receive paid care.  The need spikes after age 85. In ten years, the baby boomers will reach that threshold, causing demand for long-term care to soar.  Due to the loose financial guidelines, even well-off families can qualify for Medicaid coverage. This market manipulation crowds out private long-term care services. Our guest, Stephen Moses is about to release part two of a report which covers the solutions to this Medicaid problem.  His hope is that a new Congress will be open to better alternatives that improve care at more affordable prices.

In the interview, Moses discusses:

1.  How easy is it to get Medicaid to pay for long-term care?

2. How has this compromised the quality of long-term care over the decades?

3. Who will need long term care? Can any of us live independently until we die?

4. Baby boomers…most are now 65…what kind of pressure will that put on long-term care and Medicaid in 10, 20, and 30 years from now?

5. What about counting on family members to care for you? How about covering your care with your own wealth and investments?

President Biden told 60 Minutes in October that COVID-19 was essentially over. If that's true, why is he still lobbying Congress for billions of dollars in more COVID-19 relief? Biden also extended the emergency declaration another 90 days, further going against his stated position. Dr. Chad Savage, founder, Your Choice Direct Care, thinks the spending is not only unhealthy for the American economy, but “unnecessary, harmful, and blind to Americans’ real needs and problems.

Savage says there is plenty of COVID-19 relief money unspent, just sitting on the sidelines. As a physician, Savage worries how more government spending will drive inflation further, increasing costs for working families. COVID is now becoming an excuse for Congress to continue its spending binge.

Savage wrote about COVID-19 relief spending in an op-ed in Real Clear Health this summer.  He also discussed the emergency declaration extension, now scheduled to end in December. Savage covers opportunity costs involved when funds are directed to COVID-19 versus where our health care priorities should be.

Real Clear Health Op-Ed: https://www.realclearhealth.com/articles/2022/07/06/dont_buy_into_the_covid_relief_spending_spree_111363.html

Late this summer, CVS fired a nurse practitioner for refusing to prescribe ‘Plan B’ ‘Morning After’ pills at the “Minute Clinic” where she had worked for 2 ½ years. CVS had been aware of Paige Casey’s religious objections to prescribing the abortifacients, exempted her from doing so, and even gave her favorable job reviews. In August, CVS changed its mind and told Casey she would no longer be given an exemption. Casey is suing CVS and is being represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom.

Increasingly, health care professionals are being reprimanded, attacked and even fired for refusing to perform procedures that violate their religious convictions. It is not clear why CVS changed its position this summer regarding Casey. Interestingly, the MinuteClinic where Casey worked is located in Virginia where there are conscience protections in the law. CVS has stated it did not believe the “Morning After” bills are abortifacients but contraception. Kevin Theriot, an attorney with the Alliance Defending Freedom, discusses the facts of the case, the arguments, how the Dobbs decision comes into play, how there will likely be more cases similar to this, and the possibility that the issue could end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Alliance Defending Freedom: https://adflegal.org/paige-casey

Increasingly, the private component of Medicare, Medicare Advantage (MA), is coming under attack. The latest salvo was a front-page article on October 8, 2022 in the New York Times, titled “The Cash Monster Was Insatiable – How Insurers Exploited Medicare for Billions.” The article claims “most large insurers in the program have been accused in court of fraud.” Today’s guest, John C. Goodman, points out that the “fraud” insurers are accused of is not the typical fraud seen in Sixty Minutes exposes in which the perpetrators are sent to prison. Rather, the “fraud” alleged often involves the risk payments MA plans receive for taking care of sicker enrollees. Goodman says MA attacks are no accident. There is a huge force against privatization in Medicare by the government, politicians and the corporate media. Goodman discusses why MA is the better alternative for both enrollee and taxpayers.

On his health care blog, Goodman posted a rebuttal to the NY Times article on the day it was published. In the blog post, “Another Hit Job on MA Plans,” Goodman explains why risk payments are not overpayments, and certainly are not something that constitute fraud. Goodman points out in the podcast that some of the accusations come from whistleblowers who may receive rewards for their claims. Traditional fee-for-service Medicare has long been victimized by fraudsters and is rife with waste. Goodman points out MA plans, because they are private, have an incentive not to waste money. Medicare Advantage is the only system in the health care market that actually competes to take care of sick people.

New York Times Article: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/08/upshot/medicare-advantage-fraud-allegations.html

John Goodman Article: https://www.goodmanhealthblog.org/another-hit-job-on-ma-plans/

Can we trust doctors today to act in our best interest? Joel Hirschhorn, editor of the Pandemic Blunder Newsletter and author of Pandemic Blunder, returns to the podcast to discuss how the corporate takeover of healthcare is impacting patient care. This reached a pinnacle during the pandemic when doctors pushed investigational vaccines, discredited alternative therapies, and supported measures such as masks, lockdowns, and mandates which have done little to stop COVID-19. Hirschhorn reminds listeners that COVID is NOT over. People are still dying from the virus, and some continue to have side effects. Hirschhorn presents a list of questions patients should ask doctors next time the issue of COVID is discussed.

Hirschhorn’s list of questions: https://joelshirschhorn.substack.com/p/most-physicians-are-ignorant-cowards?utm_source=email

About today’s guest: Joel Hirschhorn is the editor of the Pandemic Blunder Newsletter, and author of the book Pandemic Blunder. He has been working tirelessly on the issue of the pandemic since the onset and was one of the earliest voices to ring the alarm bell on the “new age” in health care in which the bio-pharma industrial complex has taken control. As a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, he directed a medical research program between the colleges of engineering and medicine. As a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, he directed major studies on health-related subjects. Hirschhorn has testified at over 50 U.S. Senate and House hearings and authored hundreds of articles and op-eds in major newspapers. He served as an executive volunteer at a major hospital for more than 10 years. Finally, he is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and America’s Frontline Doctors.

Topics of discussion:

1. Has the relationship between doctor and patient changed over the years and why?

2. For most of us, COVID seems like history. Are doctors still bringing it up and recommending COVID shots?

3. Questions patients should ask if the subject of COVID comes up and their doctor says “get the vaccine.”

4. What letter did Hirschhorn receive from a doctor that prompted him to draft these patient questions?

5. Could this same scenario happen with a different virus? 

6. Should wearing a mask in a doctor’s office, a practice we never did years ago, be a red flag to a patient?

On September 14, Sen. Rand Paul grilled Dr. Anthony Fauci on royalty payments government scientists receive from private third-party entities. The non-profit watchdog,  Open the Books has been relentlessly investigating these private royalty payments because the public has been drastically impacted by public health guidance.  Adam Andrezejewski, CEO and founder of Open the Books, says it is important to understand how government health agencies make their decisions when decision makers have personal wealth gains on the line. He believes the payments over the past ten years come close to $400 million.  Fauci announced he is retiring from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in December, but Andrezejewski believes he will still have much influence in the loop between regulators and pharma.

Open the Books has been investigating Fauci and the NIH regarding his salary and retirement package as well as the hundreds of media appearances during the pandemic. Now the group, through FOIA is trying to get the names, amounts and payers of royalty payments government scientist get from private companies if their research is eventually licensed by a private company.

Discussed during the 20-minute podcast:

1.  Should this be a bi-partisan concern?

2.  What about Fauci’s point that guidance, vaccine approval came from non-NIH agencies?

3. Why Open the Books got interested in probing royalty payments

4. How the payments work. Shouldn’t these royalty payments go back to taxpayers for funding the salaries of the researchers? (Federal law allows the payments)

5. How forthcoming has NIH been on document requests?

6. Does Fauci get royalty payments?  Where will Fauci go after he retires from NIH in December? Andrezewjewski speculates

Useful links:

REP. MOOLENAAR, U.S. House Appropriations hearing: 
https://www.openthebooks.com/nih-acting-director-admits-royalty-payments-have-appearance-of-conflict-of-interest/

Homeland Security Government Accountability Committee Letter To NIH: https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/dr-rand-paul-and-hsgac-republicans-send-letter-acting-director-nih-requesting-information

SB 107 would allow California to become a “sanctuary state” for a parent and minor to pursue gender altering surgery and care against the wishes of another parent.  AB 2098 redefines the meaning of “unprofessional conduct” to now included the dissemination of COVID-19 misinformation or disinformation.  Physicians and Surgeons could potentially lose their license if found to be in violation. Singleton discusses the ramifications of these bills and how variations could spread to other states.

Singleton and Schieber discuss:
1.  Who will determine what  COVID  “misinformation” is
2.  The possibility that a  physician could lose their medical license over COVID misinformation?
3. Will this chase doctors out of state?
4. Could Anthony Fauci be in violation given his flipflopping on COVID -19?
5.  What could happen if SB 107 is signed into law?
6. Will the constitutionality of this law likely be challenged in court?
7. What would happen if a minor runs away to CA and seek emancipation? 
8.  How these policies could spread to other states


Check out more of Dr. Marilyn Singleton’s work on her website.