MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘nursing homes’

The Family Fades as Governments Subsidize Daycares and Nursing Homes | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on January 9, 2021

What is so harmful about using taxes to fund these services? Some families who would prefer to take care of their children and elderly parents themselves in their own homes are stripped of the resources they would have used to do so, as these resources are taxed away to pay for daycare and nursing home subsidies, government schools, etc.

In effect, those who want to take care of their families are forced to pay twice to do so, first for the subsidies they’re not using and second to take care of their families themselves. When families are taxed but outsourcing family obligations is subsidized, there will be more of the latter, and the family bond will dissolve.

https://mises.org/wire/family-fades-governments-subsidize-daycares-and-nursing-homes

Gor Mkrtchian

Human life is given meaning and sustenance by various forms of community: the church, the nuclear family, the extended family, fraternal organizations, businesses, etc. But as the state has grown, civil society has shrunk.

The state over the centuries has absorbed an increasing share of the resources, functions, and moral authority of these other institutions. In countries where the state succeeds in finally absorbing competing institutions, the result is totalitarianism.

One striking example of how the state has encroached on the domain of civil society in general and the family in particular is the care of the young and the old. Through its financing of daycares, K-12 schools, and nursing homes (among other options) the state gradually encroaches on what were once integral functions of the family. It inserts itself as a wedge between children, the elderly, and the rest of the family.

By supplanting the family in caring for the young and the old, not only does the state increase the role it plays in society here and now, it also erodes the competency of the family in the long term. By performing these functions in place of the family, the ability of the family to perform its former responsibilities atrophies and withers.

An institution, through long neglect of once essential functions, loses the knowledge and ability to perform these functions, and even the belief that this function belongs to its sphere. Care of the young and elderly gradually become accepted not as the role of the extended family but as one shared between the family and the state. And where the state gains a foothold, it rarely ever voluntarily relinquishes influence, but rather continues to grow.

A Look at The Tentacles

When I think of government-provided daycare, I think of difficult-to-fire DMV employees entrusted with dozens of strangers’ six-month-old babies.

The Bolsheviks actively saw state-provided childcare as a way of destroying the traditional family. A 1974 New York Times article tells the story of working mother Zoya Idenko:

Under the highly subsidized Soviet day care system, Mrs. Idenko pays a modest 10.50 rubles ($13.86) per month—about one‐tenth of her pay—for six days a week of child care. She drops h,er [sic] boy off at about 8 A.M. and picks him up at 7 P.M. He gets three meals and a snack daily. Child‐rearing, [sic] never had much attraction for Mrs. Idenko. “I went back to work three months after my son was born,” she said. “I could have waited a year legally and still kept my job, but it was difficult for me to bring up the baby and I wanted to get out of the house. My mother‐inlaw [sic] lives with us and she took care of him.

Whether Idenko was truly as cavalier toward her motherly duties as this quote suggests or needed to return to work out of material necessity is unclear. Thankfully, in this story there is a remnant of the extended family in Idenko’s mother-in-law, who stepped in and gave the child some filial attention. 

The US follows in the footsteps of its defeated rival. For fiscal year 2020, $5.826 billion was devoted to funding the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG). The recent CARES Act allocated another $3.5 billion for the CCDBG, which “provides subsidies to assist low-income families in obtaining child care so that parents can work or participate in education or training activities.” Of course, the largest government daycare program is the public K-12 school system.

Naturally, the situation is even worse in France, where the state provides 80 percent of the funding for the childcare system, in which “From the age of 2½ months to 3 years a child can be placed in a crèche.” These “crèches” are various types of childcare facilities that are found in “All cities, towns and some villages” and operate eleven hours daily.

The Elderly

About 1.3 million Americans live in nursing homes rather than with their families. In fiscal year 2010, 66.6 percent of the $207.9 billion of spending on long-term care expenditures came from the government.

This includes government spending on nursing homes, as well as funding for other types of long-term care like home health services. However, even when the state uses taxes to hire a healthcare worker to provide assistance within the home, this still helps to replace the family in providing this assistance.

In other countries, the state does even more to force resources away from the family and into nursing homes and other forms of state provision for the elderly. In Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg, the state uses taxes to fund universal long-term care.

The Vampirism of Double Taxation

What is so harmful about using taxes to fund these services? Some families who would prefer to take care of their children and elderly parents themselves in their own homes are stripped of the resources they would have used to do so, as these resources are taxed away to pay for daycare and nursing home subsidies, government schools, etc.

In effect, those who want to take care of their families are forced to pay twice to do so, first for the subsidies they’re not using and second to take care of their families themselves. When families are taxed but outsourcing family obligations is subsidized, there will be more of the latter, and the family bond will dissolve.

What about the Poor?

When the state pours resources into an output, it hasn’t summoned these resources ex nihilo. It’s taken these resources from society, and so the employers, family members, and charities that would have ushered the poor into the middle class are all left less able to do so. The state takes from the left pocket of society and gives to the right pocket, minus the share that covers the salaries of the bureaucrats who arrange the transfer and whatever is lost through fraud, corruption, and incompetence.

When it comes to efficiently serving the poor, civil society makes the state look like a slow-motion train wreck:

on average, 70 cents of each dollar budgeted for government assistance goes not to the poor, but to the members of the welfare bureaucracy and others serving the poor….In contrast, administrative and other operating costs in private charities absorb, on average, only one-third or less of each dollar donated, leaving the other two-thirds (or more) to be delivered to recipients.

The Policy Answer and the Local Answer

The decline of the family is caused in part by the state and in part by much deeper issues. Half of the solution is to work to end state subsidies for the replacement and dissolution of the family. The other half is to not wait for this to come about, but rather to fight now in our own lives and take care of those closest to us, despite the obstacles. Author:

Gor Mkrtchian

Gor Mkrtchian is a research assistant at the Free Market Institute and a PhD student in the Department of Political Science at Texas Tech University. He received a BA in political science and theater studies from Yale University.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Political insider explains voter fraud with mail-in ballots

Posted by M. C. on September 27, 2020

https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/

By Jon Levine

A top Democratic operative says voter fraud, especially with mail-in ballots, is no myth. And he knows this because he’s been doing it, on a grand scale, for decades.

Mail-in ballots have become the latest flashpoint in the 2020 elections. While President Trump and the GOP warn of widespread manipulation of the absentee vote that will swell with COVID polling restrictions, many Democrats and their media allies have dismissed such concerns as unfounded.

But the political insider, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he fears prosecution, said fraud is more the rule than the exception. His dirty work has taken him through the weeds of municipal and federal elections in Paterson, Atlantic City, Camden, Newark, Hoboken and Hudson County and his fingerprints can be found in local legislative, mayoral and congressional races across the Garden State. Some of the biggest names and highest office holders in New Jersey have benefited from his tricks, according to campaign records The Post reviewed.

“An election that is swayed by 500 votes, 1,000 votes — it can make a difference,” the tipster said. “It could be enough to flip states.”

The whisteblower — whose identity, rap sheet and long history working as a consultant to various campaigns were confirmed by The Post — says he not only changed ballots himself over the years, but led teams of fraudsters and mentored at least 20 operatives in New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania — a critical 2020 swing state.

mail1
 

“There is no race in New Jersey — from city council to United States Senate — that we haven’t worked on,” the tipster said. “I worked on a fire commissioner’s race in Burlington County. The smaller the race, the easier it is to do.”

A Bernie Sanders die-hard with no horse in the presidential race, he said he felt compelled to come forward in the hope that states would act now to fix the glaring security problems present in mail-in ballots.

“This is a real thing,” he said. “And there is going to be a f–king war coming November 3rd over this stuff … If they knew how the sausage was made, they could fix it.”

Mail-in voting can be complicated — tough enough that 84,000 New Yorkers had their mailed votes thrown out in the June 23 Democratic presidential primary for incorrectly filling them out.

But for political pros, they’re a piece of cake. In New Jersey, for example, it begins with a blank mail-in ballot delivered to a registered voter in a large envelope. Inside the packet is a return envelope, a “certificate of mail in voter” which the voter must sign, and the ballot itself.

That’s when the election-rigger springs into action.

Phony ballots 

The ballot has no specific security features — like a stamp or a watermark — so the insider said he would just make his own ballots.

“I just put [the ballot] through the copy machine and it comes out the same way,” the insider said.

But the return envelopes are “more secure than the ballot. You could never recreate the envelope,” he said. So they had to be collected from real voters.

mail5
 

He would have his operatives fan out, going house to house, convincing voters to let them mail completed ballots on their behalf as a public service. The fraudster and his minions would then take the sealed envelopes home and hold them over boiling water.

“You have to steam it to loosen the glue,” said the insider.

He then would remove the real ballot, place the counterfeit ballot inside the signed certificate, and reseal the envelope.

“Five minutes per ballot tops,” said the insider.

The insider said he took care not to stuff the fake ballots into just a few public mailboxes, but sprinkle them around town. That way he avoided the attention that foiled a sloppy voter-fraud operation in a Paterson, NJ, city council race this year, where 900 ballots were found in just three mailboxes.

“If they had spread them in all different mailboxes, nothing would have happened,” the insider said.

Inside jobs

The tipster said sometimes postal employees are in on the scam.

“You have a postman who is a rabid anti-Trump guy and he’s working in Bedminster or some Republican stronghold … He can take those [filled-out] ballots, and knowing 95% are going to a Republican, he can just throw those in the garbage.” Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

COVID-19 and the 1918-20 ‘Spanish’ Flu, a ‘Progressive’ Century Apart – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 18, 2020

Along with counting people who actually die from the virus, officials will also count people with the virus as a Covid death but who die from something else. Last month Washington state revised its Covid death numbers downward when it was revealed that anyone who died for any reason who also had coronavirus was listed as a “Covid-19 death,” even if the cause of death had nothing to do with Covid-19. Some hospitals have put Covid-19 on death certificates as the cause of death without a Covid test ever being done. It is a true fact that authorities have overcounted Covid-19 deaths.

One observer, Jim Quinn, puts it this way: “This nasty virus, supposedly let loose from a Wuhan biolab, is less deadly than the annual flu among those under 65 years old and more deadly when purposely introduced into nursing homes by politicians.”

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/donald-w-miller-jr-md/covid-19-and-the-1918-20-spanish-flu-a-progressive-century-apart/

By

This article is taken from a talk I gave on August 16, 2020 at the 38th Annual Meeting of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness in Las Vegas. I compare the two pandemics and touch upon the ‘Progressive’ Century that separates them. With Covid-19 and its sequelae we live in challenging times that call for disaster preparedness. The text includes some of the slides I used for this talk.

The Covid-19 pandemic has been compared with 1918-1920 ‘Spanish’ flu a century ago. I will address this and compare their respective Mortality, Lockdowns (or lack thereof), Treatment, and subsequent Depressions. And finally, with Covid our Brave New World.

Professionally, I have maintained a long-term interest in viruses, vaccines, HIV-AIDS, and vitamin D and have written articles and given talks on these subjects, including one on HIV-AIDS at the 33rd Doctors for Disaster Preparedness meeting in Ontario, CA. Most are on LewRockwell.com and are grouped by subject on my website DonaldMiller.com.

Mortality

More than 30 million Americans had the ‘Spanish’ Flu in a  population of 105 million, and with 675,000 deaths, a 2.3% fatality rate.

“Fast forward” to today. The Director-General of the UN’s World Health Organization, Tedros Ghebreyesus, is an Ethiopian politician and the first non-physician to head this body. He declared early on that Covid-19 has a 3.4% mortality rate.  With a rate this high Covid could kill many millions of people worldwide.

This spawned a global panic. The Director-General, however, left out people who became infected with this virus but do not get sick and were not tested. Up to 80% of people who test positive for Covid have no symptoms or only have mild ones imitating a cold. Counting them would make the mortality rate for Covid-19 substantially lower.

1918-20 ‘Spanish’ flu:

The 1918-20 influenza pandemic killed between 15 and 100 million people worldwide, 0.8% to 5.6% in a population of 1.8 billion. Now, with the population 7.8 billion, a pandemic of comparable lethality could kill between 60 to 430 million people.

The “Spanish” flu started in Kansas. It spread in 3 main waves. The first one, from March to June 1918, was relatively mild. Soldiers called it “the 3-day flu.” It was seldom fatal, with a mortality rate near 0.5% (5 deaths in a thousand cases), close to that of seasonal flu. The second wave, from August to December was more lethal. One observer noted, “While the first wave of flu in 1918 was relatively nonlethal, the second made up for it in spades.” Two million American soldiers were shipped to Europe to fight in World War I. More died from the flu than in battle.

The Spanish flu targeted healthy young adults, people between age 20 and 40.

The nations fighting in World War I censored any mention of this influenza pandemic, which laid waste to both sides. Spain stayed neutral and did not censor its newspapers. They reported it and thus came the name “Spanish flu.”

COVID-19:

SARS-CoV-2 (Systemic Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2), the virus that causes Covid-19 is one of some seven coronaviruses that infect humans. Several of them cause the common cold. SARS-CoV[-1] and MERS-CoV (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus) are two that kill people. The 2002 SARS epidemic caused 774 deaths and the 2015 MERS one, 866 deaths. They did not come in waves, and the current coronavirus will likely not have a more severe second wave either.

The best source on accurate and unbiased facts about Covid-19 is the independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit research group Swiss Policy Research. It publishes frequently updated extensive Covid facts in 25 languages.

Elderly people are the high-risk group with Covid-19, especially those with pre-existing conditions like obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. The average age of Covid deaths is 82 in the U.S., 86 in Sweden. People under age 50 have a close to zero risk of dying from Covid. Ones between infancy and age 19 have a 10 times greater chance of perishing in a car accident than dying from an infection caused by this coronavirus.

Most healthy older adults without pre-existing medical conditions do well and have immune systems strong enough to handle the virus.

The jury is still out on whether SARS-CoV-2 is bioengineered and if the Biosafety Level 4 laboratory in Wuhan, China did indeed release it, presumably by accident. In any event, it is not lethal enough qualify as a bioweapon.

Migrating water birds spread the Spanish flu virus to humans.

The Diamond Princess and Overall Covid Lethality:

Over the holidays my wife and I took a two-week cruise to Hawaii on the Star Princess, sister ship to the Diamond Princess, from Los Angeles and returning there on January 4. The Diamond Princess finished a roundtrip 15-day tour of Southeast Asia on February 2, from Japan. It had 2,666 passengers (median age 69) and 1,045 crew (with a median age of 36), totaling 3,711 people onboard. Some passengers tested positive for Covid on the cruise, and Japanese authorities quarantined the ship when it docked back at Yokohama—its passengers for up to three weeks and crew, four weeks.

Health workers tested almost everyone on board for Covid in this “ship laboratory” and found that 712 (19%) were infected—567 passengers (21%) and 145 crew members (13.8%). There were 14 deaths (0.4%), only in passengers over age 70.

Swiss Policy Research cites an increasing number of studies showing that the overall lethality of Covid-19 is between 0.1% and 0.4%, considerably lower than initially thought. Likewise, the CDC now estimates that the Covid-19 death rate is 0.2 to 0.4% (2 to 4 deaths in 1,000 people), like the seasonal flu.

And then there is New York City, with a Covid mortality rate averaging 7.6% in its boroughs, substantially higher than Covid fatality rates other cities, like the five largest ones in Texas that average 1.6%.

Along with counting people who actually die from the virus, officials will also count people with the virus as a Covid death but who die from something else. Last month Washington state revised its Covid death numbers downward when it was revealed that anyone who died for any reason who also had coronavirus was listed as a “Covid-19 death,” even if the cause of death had nothing to do with Covid-19. Some hospitals have put Covid-19 on death certificates as the cause of death without a Covid test ever being done. It is a true fact that authorities have overcounted Covid-19 deaths.

Up to 80% of people with Covid remain asymptomatic or have symptoms that mimic a common cold and escape getting tested. Keeping them out of the equation makes the case fatality rate falsely high.

Governors Forcing Covid Patients into Nursing Homes:

One percent of Americans live in nursing homes, but they account for more than 40% of all Covid deaths. In Canada, 80% of Covid deaths have come from nursing homes.

Under an Executive Order that Governor Cuomo signed on March 25, he had 6,300 Covid infected patients shipped to Nursing Homes in NY state. Families were prohibited from visiting their loved ones and checking up on them. On April 23 when nursing homes objected to his plan of prohibiting them from screening for COVID-19, he said that they “don’t have a right to object” and, “That is the rule and that is the regulation and they have to comply with that.” (He rescinded these orders on May 10.) This helps explain why New York City has such a high Covid mortality rate compared with other cities.

Four other governors shown above (all Democrats) also placed Covid-infected patients in nursing homes.  Social media has called this a “boomer remover.”

One observer, Jim Quinn, puts it this way: “This nasty virus, supposedly let loose from a Wuhan biolab, is less deadly than the annual flu among those under 65 years old and more deadly when purposely introduced into nursing homes by politicians.”

Lockdown

Computer models in the UK and one funded by Bill Gates at the University of Washington greatly overpredicted the number of deaths Covid-19 would cause, both forecasting that more than two million Americans would die. This prompted government officials across the country (and worldwide) to shut down the economy and order people to stay at home, without considering its ethical and economic implications.

And then there is social distancing. There is no medical or scientific evidence, however, that justifies this.

Adverse consequences on human health and behavior from lockdowns and social isolation include domestic violence, child abuse, suicide, other potentially fatal medical conditions going untreated, deaths from drug overdoses, civil unrest, and a substantial rise in shootings and crimes. These consequences of lockdowns have yet to be fully reckoned with and measured. They will clearly surpass Covid deaths.

In an interview with Dr. Joseph Mercola, Barbara Loe Fisher declares:

“The authoritarian lockdown approach by governments to the coronavirus pandemic has been framed as a choice between safety and liberty … Public health officials have persuaded lawmakers to divide the American people into two classes: those who are considered “essential” and allowed to continue working and those who are considered “nonessential” and barred from earning a living.

Small businesses and services judged to be ‘nonessential’ have been forced to close their doors … while, paradoxically, everyone is free to roam through grocery stores, drug stores and big box stores like Walmart, Target, and Home Depot, owned by big corporations … What we have allowed to be done in the name of public health has no parallel in American history or human history.”

Face Masks:

Face masks do not work for respiratory viruses. SARS-CoV-2 is 0.125 micrometers (microns) in diameter. The openings in N95 masks are 0.3 micrometers in diameter.

Randomized controlled studies show no significant reduction in virus transmission and do not support edicts to wear masks. Plus, face masks are dehumanizing. They represent submission to authority and are a sign of obedience. Masks can impair breathing, cause hypoxia, a lowered oxygen content in the blood, and hypercapnia, increased carbon dioxide levels that can cause headaches and fainting spells.

Hours spent wearing an N95 mask can decrease blood oxygenation by 20% and cause loss of consciousness. A man in New Jersey driving his car while wearing this mask passed out from a lack of oxygen and crashed into a pole.

Even the New England Journal of Medicine admits, “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection… In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”

I say this having worn a face mask daily for 40 years in my work as a heart surgeon. A new one each day.

Treatment 

Vaccine

There were no vaccines for the Spanish flu, but vaccine companies a century later are working nonstop to develop one for Covid-19.

Human trials to confidently establish a vaccine’s efficacy and safety, however, take time, from 18 months up to 5 years. And 93% of vaccine trials fail.

Vaccines for flu viruses have a checkered history. Public health officials had to recall the one made for the 1976 Swine flu when it was found to cause Guillain-Barré Syndrome—immune system damage with slowly progressive paralysis.

Vaccine officials promoted the vaccine Pandemix for the 2009 Swine flu and fast-tracked it without the requisite clinical trials. This vaccine caused narcolepsy—difficulty sleeping at night associated with night terrors, hallucination, and mental health problems, mainly in children.

Pharmaceutical Agents:

The Trump-attacking media chastised President Trump for promoting the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19. An increasing number of studies, however, show that hydroxychloroquine does work. The drug must be started early and given at the right dose (400mg a day), not when the disease is far advanced and using doses 5x normal (2,000 mg), as studies that show no benefit do.

Remdesivir, given intravenously, provides only a marginal benefit and is not worth its $3,000 cost. Sixty 200 mg tablets of hydroxychloroquine cost $20.

Natural Remedies:

One technique for dealing with the Spanish flu a century ago, little known today, is fresh air. Medics then found that severely ill flu patients nursed outdoors recovered better that those treated indoors.

It turns out that outdoor air contains antimicrobial hydroxyl radicals generated from the interaction of sunlight with ozone in the air that are a natural disinfectant.

Sunlight itself is germicidal. Its UV rays kill viruses in the air, and its UVB rays synthesize vitamin D in the skin. Heat, >80.6º F, also kills coronaviruses.

Vitamin D:

See the rest here

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Narrative Pandemic – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 10, 2020

PA makes no bones about this. If one is found to have been exposed to a CVirus patient or exhibits symptoms, one is counted as a “case” with no testing.

“The city [New York] has added more than 3,700 additional people who were presumed to have died of the coronavirus but had never tested positive. …The C.D.C., in its guidance to local governments, has recommended that cases of “assumed” coronavirus infection be noted on death certificates since before New York City recorded its first death on March 14. –N.Y.C. Death Toll Soars Past 10,000 in Revised Virus Count – The New York Times [emphasis added]

Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. –MN Senator and Dr. Reveals HHS Document Coached Him on How to Overcount COVID-19 Cases

… and from Trump-team star and “scarf lady” Dr. Deborah Birx – – –

“We’ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality.”…”If someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death,” Birx said. –Dr. Birx Confirms Anyone Who Dies WITH Coronavirus, Regardless of Any Underlying Health Condition, is Being Counted as a COVID-19 Death “?

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/l-reichard-white/the-narrative-pandemic/

By

OK, I don’t like conspiracy theories and if people were always open and above-board in what they’re doing and told the truth, we would have enterprise facts instead of conspiracy theories.

As far as COVID-19, well, I want to give the establishment a plausible excuse, so maybe they did what they did because they just wanted to save us from ourselves. But – – –

In a previous article, “Truth, Conspiracy, or SNAFU —YOU Decide“, we established that, violating this science – – –

“…the mistake is being made worldwide to report virus-related deaths as soon as it is established that the virus was present at the time of death — regardless of other factors. This violates a basic principle of infectiology: only when it is certain that an agent has played a significant role in the disease or death may [that] diagnosis be made. ” –thoroughly credentialed infectiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi in his letter to German Prime Minister, Angela Merkel

– – – the CDC/WHO amalgam seriously exaggerated the number of deaths blamed on COVID-19 by the simple expedient of jiggering their own long-established reporting guidelines. Violating the above science, “it” told the entire world-wide medical establishment to illegitimatly list anyone dying as a COVID-19 death soley because assumed, presumed, probable, suspected or tested COVID-19 was present, resulting in these confessions – – –

The city [New York] has added more than 3,700 additional people who were presumed to have died of the coronavirus but had never tested positive. …The C.D.C., in its guidance to local governments, has recommended that cases of “assumed” coronavirus infection be noted on death certificates since before New York City recorded its first death on March 14. –N.Y.C. Death Toll Soars Past 10,000 in Revised Virus Count – The New York Times [emphasis added]

Dr. Scott Jensen, a Minnesota physician and Republican state senator said he received a 7-page document coaching him to fill out death certificates with a COVID-19 diagnosis without a lab test to confirm the patient actually had the virus. –MN Senator and Dr. Reveals HHS Document Coached Him on How to Overcount COVID-19 Cases

… and from Trump-team star and “scarf lady” Dr. Deborah Birx – – –

“We’ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality.”…”If someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death,” Birx said. –Dr. Birx Confirms Anyone Who Dies WITH Coronavirus, Regardless of Any Underlying Health Condition, is Being Counted as a COVID-19 Death

… and from Italy – – –

“The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus.” –Professor Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health, telegraph.co.uk

And we have these estimates of how exaggerated the official jiggered COVID-19 death numbers are as a result – – –

More than 60% of fatalities of people suspected of having contracted Covid-19 [in Russia] are not classified as coronavirus deaths because they occurred ‘from clearly other causes“… “autopsies are performed in all suspected cases.–Bloomberg

Those “clearly other causes” are things like stroke, heart attack, etc. and are usually called “pre-morbidities” or “co-morbidities.

On re-evaluation by the [Italian] National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of [coronavirus] death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus” [Professor Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health] says. –telegraph.co.uk     

“Had the CDC used its industry standard, Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003, as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years, the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2% lower than it currently is.” and a tip-o-the-hat to Jon Rappaport

In other words, CDC, for the first and only time in 17 years, broke with the ages-old scientific Koch infectiology tradition and, violating its own rules, told the entire world-wide medical establishment to illegitimatly list anyone dying with — not from — assumed, presumed, probable, etc. COVID-19 as a COVID-19 death. The result is an approximately 10x (10 times) exaggeration of the actual COVID-19 deaths.

Doctors Birx and Fauci — particularly Dr.Fauci having been in the infectious disease business for most of his career — simply cannot claim to be ignorant of this blatantly dishonest and over-the-top exaggeration. Why are they knowingly presiding over this grotesque scientific aberration instead of exposing it?

So it’s completely clear, it’s not the virus pandemic we have to worry about, it’s the Narrative Pandemic.

Still, while the statistical truism that “correlation does not imply causation” obviously applies, if COVID-19 isn’t responsible, why does it keep mysteriously showing up correlated with all these co-morbidities, cases and deaths?

The biggest and most obvious part of the answer is that the C.D.C.-W.H.O. guidelines specifically instructed the world-wide medical establishment to illegitimately create that correlation with incorrect and misleading record keeping and reporting. And in some cases, gave cash incentives for doing it.

In fact, as John Rappoport hypothesizes, there’s an outside possibility that the dangers of COVID-19 may be mostly a statistical artifact produced by the fake statistics connecting it to the real killers, the co-morbidities.

Why would the world-wide elitist establishment do that?

Well, to give them at least a limited-hang-out excuse, they might claim they were afraid “we” wouldn’t take their warnings seriously if they didn’t wildly exaggerate things.

On the other hand, there’s the suggestion that this was their answer — for those willing to kill hundreds of millions, mostly by starvation — to perceived over-population and CO˛ emissions.

And of course, there’s always SNAFU – – –

For perspective, what would happen if the world-wide health establishment had exactly followed those same illegitimate C.D.C./W.H.O. reporting guidelines for COVID-19 deaths but were told to apply them to anyone dying WITH the common cold instead?

Just as the fake numbers tell us we’re having a COVID-19 pandemic, the fake numbers would tell us we’re having a Common Cold pandemic instead.

And the narrative would look something like this – – –

Trump-team star Birx would say, …”If someone dies with the common cold, we are counting that as a common cold death.

Prof. Ricciardi would say, “…all the people who die in hospitals with the common cold are deemed to be dying of the common cold.

And Dr. Jensen — and a bunch of other doctors — would recognize that something is seriously wrong pointing out “a common cold” diagnosis instead of a COVID-19 diagnosis in that 7-page document.

Suddenly the number of folks with “Common Cold” on their death certificates begins to balloon and is reported — except approximately 90% of them are dying from “clearly other causes,” those “pre-morbidities” or “co-morbidities,” remember.

Folks would say, “Look at all the people dying WITH the common cold. That must be what’s killing them.” And, “What do you mean the common cold isn’t that serious, people are dying!” And they’d say, “What do you mean it isn’t the cold that’s killing them — just look at the statistics!! They all have colds!!

And just as with COVID-19, there would be all sorts of serious diseases and their serious symptoms correlated with the common cold meme by the dishonest record keeping: Pneumonia, heart attack, stroke, kidney failure, etc., but those aren’t from the cold or COVID-19, present or not. They’re the co-morbidities that are doing the killing.

Except maybe folks wouldn’t believe you because most folks have actually had common colds. So maybe you add “novel” to “common cold virus” and hype the heck out of that meme.

You could substitute any common malady for “common cold,” and, using the same dishonest CDC/WHO reporting ploy, you’d get a “pandemic” as the result.

Yes, it’s THAT simple. AND that stupid.

So the New York Times article would read, “The C.D.C., in its guidance to local governments, has recommended ‘that cases of ‘assumed’ common cold infection be noted on death certificates since before New York City recorded its first death on March 14,” and we’d be off to the Common Cold Pandemic races instead of the COVID-19 Pandemic races — complete with masks, social distancing, lock-downs and economy destruction!

Yeeeeee-hawwwww!

There is one other intriguing possibility in the form of two “co-morbidities” that are rarely recognized and almost never mentioned because it’s more convenient — and “politick” — to blame them on COVID-19.

The first is “politician.” No, I’m not kidding.

Keep in mind that approximately half of all world-wide deaths blamed on COVID-19 happened in extended care facilities.

What’s that have to do with “politician” as a co-morbidity?

See, New York governor Cuomo insisted on putting known COVID-19 patients in personal care-homes amongst the vulnerable elderly. Like this:

[New York] Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo continued to defend his decision to place recovering COVID-19 patients into nursing homes, even though it brought him some “political heat,” he admitted on Sunday. Cuomo defends decision to put COVID-19 patients in nursing homes | Newsday

New Jersey governor Phil Murphy emulated Cuomo and Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf did the same, leading to this question at one of Wolf’s media events:

~”70% of COVID-19 fatalities in Pennsylvania are from nursing homes and personal care homes. What are your plans to deal with this?” –question to Rachel Levine, PA Sec. of Health, Chanel 4 news, Tuesday, May 12, 2020 2:24 PM,.

The same really stupid policy — unless it was intended to get rid of a lot of older folks who were draining government coffers — was encouraged by a Ł1,000 bounty in the UK and has been laid at BoJo’s (Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s) feet – – –

UK Council gave care homes Ł1000 as ‘cash incentive’ to take in Covid patients.

Hence “Politician” as a co-morbidity. Does this help explain the care-home death toll in the rest of the world too?

The second rarely mentioned co-morbidity is “hospital.

You enter a hospital with one malady but die from an in-hospital screw-up of some sort or a disease you get while there instead. That’s called iatrogenic death. If it doesn’t kill you, it’s an iatrogenic illness.

Even before this COVID-19 fiasco, hospital” was the third leading cause of death in the U.S.

In an article the FTC coerced him into taking down — Dr. David Brownstein, MD explained that “Hospitals receive …up to $13,000 from the Government for an admission diagnosis of COVID,” and “if the patient is ventilated, they receive up to $39,000.

I can guarantee you that hospital administrators are running around telling every physician and resident physician to diagnosis COVID at the first cough or sneeze,” Dr. Brownstein suggests.

So, besides possibly treating folks for COVID-19 instead of for the co-morbidities they were there for, in addition — maybe to get the bounty — did they also hospitalize some who, fearing for their lives because of the narrative, wouldn’t have otherwise been hospitalized? If so, this would needlessly expose them to “hospital.”

Were there additional COVID-19-fiasco-related hospital screw-ups and deaths?

Here’s a clue – – –

~”If you were ventilated at the beginning of the pandemic, you had an 80 or 90 percent chance of dying, now you have an 80% chance of recovering.” –Dr. William Haseltine, President, Access Health International, Author “A Family Guide to Covid,” Bloomberg, Tuesday, June 16, 2020 2:50 PM

Accepting Dr. Haseltine’s numbers and doing the math, at the beginning of the “pandemic,” at least eight of ten ventilated patients died when, by best practices later on, only two of ten died. That means that six of ten early-on ventilated patients didn’t die of COVID-19 — or whatever — they died because they were ventilated and/or incorrectly ventilated, classic cases of iatrogenic death.

How many death certificates do you suppose actually reported it that way?

And how many folks were put on ventilators, partially at least to collect that $39,000? Does that implicate “politician” as a co-morbibity again?

Further, instead of ventilation, “best practices” in large numbers of patients was actually a practice called proning, much safer with better outcomes than ventilating but without the $39,000 and so far practiced in only a few hospitals.

Factoring that oversight into the death figures would obviously increase the iatrogenic — and overall — “hospital” (as opposed to COVID-19) co-morbidity death toll. Maybe someone will eventually do the research and math to get a solid figure.

Were there still other political and medical system screw-ups that ended up with COVID-19 on the death certificate instead?

Three whistle-blowing nurses verify over-ventilation — and bring a few other troubling modern hospital issues to light here: Misconduct in NY hospitals–three nurses speak out!

Most troubling is the apparent consensus among those nurses that when you go into a hospital, “pandemic” or not, you should take an “advocate” with you.

So care-home deaths due to politicians housing COVID-19 patients in them, unnecessary bounty-driven hospitalizations that ended in death, ventialting patients rather than proning them and ventilating patients outside of later-discovered best practices added to all those other co-morbidities reflexively blamed on the virus would all reduce the approximately 10% of deaths more honestly blamed on COVID-19 and not explained by the other more main-stream co-morbidities. How much of that 10% do they explain?

So, hard as it is for some to believe, the take-away is that about 90% of the official deaths blamed on COVID-19 — probably more — are fake news, and so is the so-called “pandemic.

It is in fact, a pandemic created by fake numbers and narrative, not by a virus — so we might want to call it a “Narrative-created Pandemic” — and keep a wary eye out for any nefarious follow-ups.

HERE For updates, additions, comments, and corrections.

AND, “Like,” “Tweet,” and otherwise, pass this along!

L. Reichard White [send him mail] taught physics, designed and built a house, ran for Nevada State Senate, served two terms on the Libertarian National Committee, managed a theater company, etc. For the next few decades, he supported his writing habit by beating casinos at their own games. His hobby, though, is explaining things he wishes someone had explained to him. You can find a few of his other explanations listed here.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Cuomo Blames Nursing Homes for Following His Covid-19 Order That Killed Patients – After Removing It From Website – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 16, 2020

More worried about his reputation than causing the deaths of thousands.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/07/no_author/cuomo-blames-nursing-homes-for-following-his-covid-19-order-that-killed-patients-after-removing-it-from-website/

RT News

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has stealthily attempted to rewrite history, deleting his controversial order requiring nursing homes to admit Covid-19 patients from the state health website and blaming facilities for obeying it.

After being lambasted in the press for the March 25 executive order that forced New York elder care facilities to accept patients infected with the highly contagious virus, Cuomo attempted to blame the nursing homes for not disobeying his orders during a Wednesday press conference.

The obligation is on the nursing home to say, ‘I can’t take a Covid-positive person,’” the governor insisted. “If they said ‘I can’t take the person,’ they can’t take the person! So that’s how it works.”

The coronavirus has cut a devastating swath through New York’s nursing homes, killing more than 5,800 people in long-term care facilities since the pandemic began – nearly a fifth of the state’s Covid-19 deaths so far, according to AP statistics compiled on Thursday. The policy ultimately sent over 4,500 recovering coronavirus patients to nursing homes, which Cuomo himself called “the optimum feeding ground for this virus.”

But the executive order itself leaves little room for disobedience, reading (in underlined text, no less), “No resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to the [Nursing Home] solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19.” Elsewhere in the document, facilities are advised they “must comply with the expedited receipt of residents returning from hospitals” so long as they’ve been deemed medically stable – no excuses allowed. Facilities aren’t even permitted to test incoming patients.

But that same order, titled “Advisory: Hospital Discharges and Admissions to Nursing Homes,” was apparently removed from the New York healthcare website early this month, according to Fox News, which discovered its absence on Tuesday. Unfortunately for Cuomo’s revisionism, it’s still available in the Wayback Machine. The governor issued a revised directive on May 10, barring hospitals from sending patients back to nursing homes unless they tested negative for the virus. However, his communications director denied the more recent order represented a “reversal” of the old one so much as “build[ing] on” it.

By Saturday, however, Cuomo was blaming the Trump administration for the ill-advised Covid-19 mandate, declaring New York was merely “following the president’s agencies’ guidance” and “follow[ing] what the Republican Administration said to do.” While the governor’s office claimed he was referring to a March directive from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, that order merely required nursing homes to “admit any individuals that they would normally admit to their facility, including…from hospitals where a case of Covid-19 was present” and even advised setting aside a unit to quarantine patients returning from hospitals – a safety measure notably missing from Cuomo’s executive order.

The New York governor’s handling of the nursing home situation has gotten decidedly mixed reviews, with a recent poll showing just 44 percent of state voters approve of the job he’s done managing the virus in state elder care facilities – while 48 percent give him a thumbs-down. Published Wednesday, the Siena College poll reveals a predictable partisan split, with 54 percent of Democrats approving of how he’s managed the nursing home problem as opposed to 55 percent of Republicans disapproving. Independents were the most vehement in their disdain, with 61 percent viewing his response negatively.

Cuomo’s overall approval ratings have also slipped since the early days of the pandemic, when he won over Democrats by taking an oppositional stance to President Donald Trump. Approval for his handling of the outbreak in general sits at 76 percent for May, down from 84 percent last month, while his overall job approval rating has slid to 63 percent from 71 percent in April.

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

How We Might Respond to a Pandemic Were Society Not So Dominated by the State | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on May 28, 2020

Health systems, in contrast, have a vested interest in managing a disease outbreak as efficiently and as effectively as possible. For one thing, they are at risk of going bankrupt and ceasing to operate, unlike governments. Who would have guessed six months ago that in the middle of a pandemic hospitals around the country would be at risk of closing down due to being unable to treat any patients?

By May 7, the head of the UPMC’s emergency medicine division, Dr. Don Yealy, flat out contradicted the Pennsylvania health secretary and stated that it was acceptable for people to visit with family for Mother’s Day. Yealy stated that given what is known about the virus now, the fact that it bears almost no risk to the vast majority of the population, and the need to reduce the harmful health effects stemming from the shutdown, “we are ready for a smart reopening of society.”

https://mises.org/wire/how-we-might-respond-pandemic-were-society-not-so-dominated-state?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=65eb457df8-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-65eb457df8-228343965

“There are no libertarians in an epidemic” crowed Atlantic reporter Peter Nicholas back on March 10, as he listed the numerous economic interventions the Trump administration was undertaking in the wake of the mounting COVID-19 crisis. This intervention, Nicholas declared, just goes to show you that whatever antigovernment talk one might talk, government intervention in the economy is “nothing new and, as may well prove the case this time around, it’s often necessary.” Setting aside the fact that it is simply absurd to refer to Donald Trump as being a libertarian, numerous commentators have pointed out that far from there being no libertarians during a crisis, all levels of government have been on a mad dash to slash meaningless regulations and rules that are simply getting in the way of the response.

But beyond such obvious problems with claiming that there are no libertarians in a pandemic, many people are quick to argue that the state has no choice but to get involved in solving all the world’s problems, especially during a crisis like the current pandemic because no other institutions in society have the power to do so.

Although, yes, the state currently enjoys a vastly unbalanced share of the power within a society, such an arrangement is not in any way preordained, and the assumption that it must be so betrays a narrowness of vision and a lack of historical knowledge. History is filled with examples where the balance of social power has been weighted in favor of other institutions in society, such as the Catholic Church during certain periods of European history or what sociologist Carle Zimmerman calls the trustee form of family, in which the extended clan wields the most power. Power has waxed and waned between various poles within society throughout history, and it is a mistake to assume that the arrangement we are living under is how life has always been and will be.

The state currently has so much of the power in society, simply because it has purposely sucked it up and taken it at the expense of everything else. The great American classical liberal Albert J. Nock began his classic work Our Enemy the State by declaring that “If we look beneath the surface of our public affairs, we can discern one fundamental fact, namely: a great redistribution of power between society and the State. This is the fact that interests the student of civilization.”

Keeping this in mind, one must ask how a society in which social power is more balanced between the various institutions and groups that comprise it would react to a pandemic, in contrast to our current society in which so much power is concentrated in the state.

One of the most obvious differences is that health systems would play a much larger role in public health planning. In the current crisis, state bureaucrats are making recommendations and issuing orders and regulations to the healthcare system. Yet healthcare systems are, perhaps next to victims and their families, the institutions most affected by the outbreak of disease, not the mayor, governor, or federal government.

Under the current state-dominated system, bad incentives abound. Politicians and bureaucrats are always incentivized toward appearing to be doing something. They face little risk in going too far, as long as they can give press conferences and blab on and on about all the steps they are taking to fix the situation. The policies’ actual consequences are irrelevant.

Health systems, in contrast, have a vested interest in managing a disease outbreak as efficiently and as effectively as possible. For one thing, they are at risk of going bankrupt and ceasing to operate, unlike governments. Who would have guessed six months ago that in the middle of a pandemic hospitals around the country would be at risk of closing down due to being unable to treat any patients? Under a system in which social power is balanced harmoniously throughout society, institutions that have the correct incentive structure will be able to carry out necessary social functions, rather than being shunted aside by the state.

In my own hometown of Pittsburgh, one of the main health systems, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), which is also the largest employer in the state, has maintained a distinctly different tone from the state government’s throughout the crisis. Due to the fact that it has maintained a significant amount of social power (thanks to its size and its billions of dollars in revenue), the UMPC has been able to chart its own course, to a certain extent. In doing so it has provided insight into what a nonstate response to a pandemic might look like.

When the Harvard Global Health Insitute released a study on March 17 predicting a nigh apocalyptic disaster for western Pennsylvania, with hospital bed and ICU capacity overwhelmed by over 1,000 percent in some scenarios, the UPMC expressed no worry at all about its hospital capacity, and in contrast to the panic at the time stated, “We anticipate that most patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 will not need to be admitted and will recover at home.”

The UPMC continued elective surgeries for some time after the governor ordered such procedures to cease, stating that there were many procedures that could not be delayed. Then, after ceasing for a few weeks, they released a statement on April 22 saying that the UPMC would be resuming elective surgeries and simply informing the state government of the decision and moved ahead. By May 7, the head of the UPMC’s emergency medicine division, Dr. Don Yealy, flat out contradicted the Pennsylvania health secretary and stated that it was acceptable for people to visit with family for Mother’s Day. Yealy stated that given what is known about the virus now, the fact that it bears almost no risk to the vast majority of the population, and the need to reduce the harmful health effects stemming from the shutdown, “we are ready for a smart reopening of society.”

Yealy also noted during the press conference that as of May 7 there had not been any positive cases of the virus in any of the UPMC senior communities due to the safeguards they had in place. This is noteworthy in light of the fact that in Pennsylvania nearly 70 percent of the virus deaths have been in nursing homes and that the state government has done a disastrous job of protecting care home residents, going so far as to mandate that nursing homes keep admitting new patients, including people who tested positive for the virus.

No one can predict with any certainty exactly what the picture would look like if the state did not control so much social power. No doubt existing health systems owe some of their current form to the conditions the state has created. But the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center serves as an example of an alternative pole of social power that has done things differently from what the state has mandated and in doing so has demonstrated a better understanding of the tradeoffs involved in mitigating disease and an all-around sounder approach than the state Department of Health’s.

How would nursing homes have responded if there weren’t a government health bureaucracy issuing guidance, but instead local health systems such as the UPMC were issuing the guidance? What actions would mayors and administrators have taken if they had received guidance from experts with skin in the game rather than state bureaucrats? Further understanding of such possibilities and alternative social arrangements may prove to be a fruitful field of study in the years ahead.

New diseases will undoubtedly continue to trouble humanity, and as the carnage of the state’s attempt to deal with this outbreak makes clear, the cost of leaving such power in its hands is astronomically high. The classical liberal tradition is not blinded by the power of the state and is therefore uniquely capable of envisioning alternative social arrangements that could avert the recurrence of such a large-scale catastrophe the next time a new pathogen arrives. It is imperative for it to do so.

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Covid: Genocide of the Old and Sick? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 27, 2020

Harsh

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/05/daniel-mcadams/covid-killing-fields-of-the-old-and-sick/

By

Ron Paul Institute

Percent of Covid deaths who were in nursing homes

Dear Friends of the Ron Paul Institute:

The numbers are sickening and impossible to ignore. Throughout the United States the Coronavirus “pandemic” looks more and more like a war on the elderly and sick than a mysterious new virus that was so dangerous and unknown that the entire country (with notable exceptions – South Dakota for example) had to be completely locked down tighter than Guantanamo Bay.

Nationwide, 42 percent of the Covid-19 death toll was comprised of Americans who were confined to live-in care facilities. While at first it was easy to simply gasp at a disease so cruel that it seemed to target older people, now that the smoke has cleared it is becoming painfully – and criminally – obvious that the virus had some very powerful human enablers.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who has shamelessly used the coronavirus crisis to puff up his national political profile, ordered the elderly hospitalized with Covid back to their nursing homes where they could spread the virus like so many Typhoid Marys. Amid calls for a Federal probe into Cuomo’s callous and deadly decision to rip elderly patients from their hospital beds and send them back to cramped senior facilities, Cuomo demurs, blaming…you guessed it: Trump!

In Pennsylvania a particularly cruel (and unelected) creature, Rachel Levine, in charge of the state’s Covid policy oversaw a virus outbreak that claimed the elderly in care facilities as 70 percent of the entire state’s death toll. Astonishing! A real genocide of the old. Of course before she ordered those elderly hospitalized with Covid back to their care facilities to infect and kill others she moved her own mother out of the facilities and into a hotel.

Under the Mussolini of Michigan, the Covid-ravaged elderly were also returned to their care facilities where they could infect and kill their housemates. Governor Gretchen Whitmer seemed to actually gain pleasure from destroying untold lives with her strict lockdown orders, stooping so low as to strip a 77 year old barber of his license for daring to open his shop against her will as he faced starvation. She loved pushing around working people, who were nearly immune to the virus. But when it came to actually protecting the vulnerable layers of society, she was AWOL.

These shameful policies were followed in many states and while at first when little was known about the outbreak, there might be some room for acceptable error. But as it became clear the demographics of who were most vulnerable, it has become indefensible to focus all resources on shutting down restaurants, bars, churches, mom and pop shops, schools while ignoring that the virus preyed almost exclusively on the old and sick. Yes, shut down elementary schools where virtually no one fell victim, but throw open the doors to the old folks home where the virus raged like a tsunami. Brilliant move.

Coincidence? We should not discount the possibility that sheer government incompetence is responsible for this massive failure and resulting senior killing fields. Maybe there is more to it. The sanctity of life in the United States has been degraded for years, including via a foreign policy that considers half a million dead Iraqi children “worth it” to undermine Saddam Hussein’s rule. A foreign policy that doesn’t blink when an estimated 40,000 Venezuelan civilians die from US sanctions. A foreign policy that has spend the past nine years arming literal Islamist terrorists to overthrow the secular rule of Syria’s Assad with hundreds of thousands dead in the process and nary a notice in the US mainstream media.

When one embraces the idea that it’s OK to kill millions overseas to maintain a US global empire that only enriches the Beltway military-industrial-Congressional-media-think tank complex, it is not a far leap to embrace the idea that seniors are expendable. When some lives are not considered worth saving – from pre-cradle to grave – it is a slippery slope to view others also not worth saving.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

PA Gov. Tom Wolf Signals He’s Open to Federal Investigation into Nursing Homes

Posted by M. C. on May 19, 2020

Governor Tommy must have received his medical training the same place as Cuomo.

Masks? Some are just more equal...

Levine admitted last week that he removed his mother from a nursing home during the pandemic.

“My mother requested, and my sister and I as her children complied to move her to another location during the Covid-19 outbreak,” Levine explained. “My mother is 95 years old. She is very intelligent and more than competent to make her own decisions.”

Wolf hired the wrong Levine.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/19/pa-gov-tom-wolf-signals-hes-open-to-federal-investigation-into-nursing-homes/

by Hannah Bleau

Gov. Tom Wolf speaks at a news conference in his Capitol offices as he unveils a $1.1 billion package intended to help eliminate lead and asbestos contamination in Pennsylvania's schools, homes, day care facilities and public water systems, Wednesday, Jan. 29, 2020 in Harrisburg, Pa. Looking on are Democratic state …

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf (D) on Monday signaled that he is open to a federal investigation into his administration’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak in nursing homes, as they comprise the majority of coronavirus deaths in the state…

Be seeing you

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Andrew Cuomo: ‘Nobody’ Should Be Prosecuted for NY Virus Deaths

Posted by M. C. on May 18, 2020

Especially the governor of the US COVID death capital.

One key criticism is that New York took weeks after the first known care home outbreaks to begin publicly reporting the number of deaths in individual homes — and still doesn’t report the number of cases.

Isn’t it a criticism of China that they hid the numbers?

At least Cuomo got to throw his weight around and talk tough for a while. I think that is his favorite thing to do.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/18/andrew-cuomo-nobody-should-be-prosecuted-for-ny-virus-deaths/

…Cuomo has garnered blowback for a now-reversed March 25 directive regarding nursing homes, which reads: “No resident [of a nursing home] shall be denied re-admission or admission to the NH [nursing home] solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19. NHs are prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident who is determined medically stable to be tested for COVID-19 prior to admission or readmission.”

To date, at least 4,800 residents have died in New York nursing homes between March 1 and May 1, according to figures from Cuomo officials.

Cuomo faced criticism at a recent briefing for saying that providing masks and gowns to nursing homes is “not our job” because the homes are privately owned.

“It was such an insensitive thing to say,” said state Assemblyman Ron Kim, a Queens Democrat who noted that it wasn’t until just this past week that New York and neighboring states announced a plan to combine forces to buy protective gear and medical supplies for nursing homes.

“If we had focused on that early on,” he said, “we could have saved a lot of lives.”…

One key criticism is that New York took weeks after the first known care home outbreaks to begin publicly reporting the number of deaths in individual homes — and still doesn’t report the number of cases. By the time New York began disclosing the deaths in the middle of last month, the state had several major outbreaks with at least 40 deaths each, most of which were a surprise to the surrounding communities and even some family members.

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

How New York Turned Nursing Homes Into ‘Slaughter Houses’

Posted by M. C. on May 17, 2020

This presumption may stem from another kind of conceit: the dictatorial arrogance on display when Cuomo indignantly insisted that unquestioning compliance was the only appropriate response to his mandate.

Tragically, that conceit was quite literally fatal for many of the most vulnerable members of society.

How New York Turned Nursing Homes Into ‘Slaughter Houses’

by

At an April 23 press conference, Gov. Andrew Cuomo sounded indignant when a reporter asked if anyone had objected to New York’s policy of forcing nursing homes to admit recently discharged COVID-19 patients.

“They don’t have the right to object,” Cuomo answered before the reporter finished his question. “That is the rule, and that is the regulation, and they have to comply with it.”

New York isn’t the only state to adopt a policy ordering long-term care facilities to admit COVID-19-infected patients discharged from hospitals. New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California—three states also hit particularly hard by the novel coronavirus—passed similar policies to free up hospital beds to make room for sicker patients.

The practice is coming under increased scrutiny by health experts and family members of deceased patients who say the orders needlessly put the most susceptible populations at risk.

“The whole thing has just been handled awfully … by everybody in regard to nursing homes,” said Kathleen Cole, a nurse who recently lost her 89-year-old mother who lived at Ferncliff Nursing Home in Rhinebeck, New York. “It’s like a slaughterhouse at these places.”

Cole, who shared her story with the Bucks County Courier Timestold the paper her mother, Dolores McGoldrick, became infected with COVID-19 on April 2 after Ferncliff re-admitted a resident who had been discharged in late March. Two weeks later her mother, a former school teacher, was dead.

McGoldrick is one of nearly five thousand COVID-19 victims who died in New York nursing homes, according to new figures from The New York Times. New York’s high nursing home death toll is not an outlier. California recently released data showing that some 40 percent of California’s COVID-19 fatalities have come from eldercare homes. In Pennsylvania, nursing homes account for 65 percent of COVID-19 deaths. Both states, like New York, had orders in place that required nursing homes to admit recently released COVID-19 patients.

These results are not surprising to some. Health experts and trade associations had warned early on that forcing nursing homes to take on newly discharged COVID-19 patients was a recipe for disaster, noting that such facilities didn’t have the ability to properly quarantine the infected.

“This approach will introduce the highly contagious virus into more nursing homes. There will be more hospitalizations for nursing home residents who need ventilator care and ultimately, a higher number of deaths. Issuing such an order is a mistake and there is a better solution,” American Health Care Association President and CEO Mark Parkinson announced in March after New York’s order went into effect.

David Grabowski, a professor of health policy at Harvard Medical School, sounded incredulous when asked about the policy.

“Nursing homes are working so hard to keep the virus out, and now we’re going to be introducing new COVID-positive patients?” Grabowski told NBC.

Richard Mollot, executive director of the Long Term Care Community Coalition in New York, echoed that sentiment.

“To have a mandate that nursing homes accept COVID-19 patients has put many people in grave danger,” Mollot told the Bucks County Courier Times.

The question, of course, is why states began ordering nursing homes to take in COVID-19 infected residents. The one thing we know of COVID-19, and have known from the beginning, is that the virus is particularly deadly for the elderly and people with compromised immune systems.

State leaders will have to answer that question themselves. But one answer might be that central planning is inherently irrational.

The Nobel Prize-winning economist F.A. Hayek observed that the problem with trying to centrally plan economies and other complex social orders is that central planners cannot possibly access, comprehend, and weigh the vast amount of information relevant to their sweeping decisions.

The only way to cope with this “knowledge problem” is by bringing to bear the special knowledge that each individual has about the matters he or she is intimately familiar with. And that can only happen through decentralized processes, like the market price system.

This lesson has been lost on many, but particularly so on politicians and bureaucrats who imagine they possess the knowledge to design a more perfect social order. As Hayek famously explained in The Fatal Conceit:

The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design. To the naive mind that can conceive of order only as the product of deliberate arrangement, it may seem absurd that in complex conditions order, and adaptation to the unknown, can be achieved more effectively by decentralizing decisions and that a division of authority will actually extend the possibility of overall order. Yet that decentralization actually leads to more information being taken into account.

This is why individuals are more competent decision-makers about their own affairs than governments. For this reason, a society that removes decision-making from individuals and places it in the hands of central planners invites disorder and endangerment, the economist Thomas Sowell has observed.

“It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong,” wrote Sowell.

Media were quick to describe the nursing home tragedy as a “market failure,” pointing out that 70 percent of nursing homes in the US are for-profit. This is hardly a market failure, however. Long-term care facilities saw the danger and warned public officials what would happen.

What were they told?

“That is the rule, and that is the regulation,” Cuomo told them, “and they have to comply with it.”

Gov. Cuomo and other officials responsible for these policies are guilty of Hayek’s fatal conceit. In their hubris, they presumed to know enough to centrally plan a complex society’s response to a complex pandemic, and to know more than individuals with local knowledge, industry expertise, and skin in the game, like the elder care experts and businesspeople who tried to warn policymakers about the disastrous effects the policy would have.

This presumption may stem from another kind of conceit: the dictatorial arrogance on display when Cuomo indignantly insisted that unquestioning compliance was the only appropriate response to his mandate.

Tragically, that conceit was quite literally fatal for many of the most vulnerable members of society.

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »