This is part two of a two part series on pharmaceutical companies and their relationships with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Our focus is on the efficacy of prescription drugs as well as the cost for the consumer.
Jonathan Emord, attorney & author of The Rise of Tyranny and Dr. Charles B. Simone speak on the truth about the FDA. An enormous amount of marketing dollars are spent by pharmaceutical companies to market their drugs. Thus, patients learn to demand certain drugs from their doctors. The problem with this is that often times over-the-counter drugs (i.e. Aspirin) or nutrients (i.e. fish oil) will have the same effect on one’s lifespan as a prescription drug.
Jonathan Emord has defeated the FDA six times and is well-versed in the issues surrounding the corruption of the United States health care system. At the center of the FDA issue is that of accountability. The checks and balances that are in place for government are non-existent for the FDA. The FDA Commissioner has the authority to create law (regulations), enforce violations, and judge the violation. The Commissioner of any independent regulatory committee is virtually all-powerful. This means that 3/4 of the laws that are made are not made by representatives in Congress, but they are in fact made by unelected officials. And because of the controversial nature of the committee issues and the fragile nature of congressional elections, congressmen will avoid making the tough decisions and instead diplomatically mail a letter to the regulatory committee.
Another key component to concerns about the FDA is the way that economics play a role in FDA approvals and rejections. Simply put, the government has censored information for solely economic reasons. They further discuss the specifics of how and why they do this and the resulting effect on health care.
To learn more about censorship, Dr. Simone‘s website will provide more information. He will also provide you with the tools to show you what you can do as a consumer to make a difference in these issues.
***
04.05.09 – 1726
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Did you ever wonder whether the prescription drugs you pay so much for are really bargains and even more importantly, whether they’re safe? Many of us share this concern, especially since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is supposed to be the regulator which assures that drugs are both safe and effective.
Jonathan W. Emord , Dr. Charles Simone of the Simone Protected Cancer Center and author of Cancer and Nutrition is joined by , author of The Rise of Tyranny. In part one of a two part interview with Dennis C. McCuistion they discuss the effects of politics and bureaucracy on prescription drug costs and safety.
One would think that the FDA would be one of the least corrupt government agencies, as it’s dealing directly with the health and well-being of American citizens. Unfortunately, it has become increasingly well-known that what the FDA approves is often times based more on politics, bureaucracy and economics than health. The concern during recent years is that bureaucrats have been having an enormous amount of influence in what the FDA approves. In fact, the commissioner of the FDA has knowingly allowed unsafe drugs to enter the marketplace, in order to protect the proponents of those drugs so that they don’t suffer economic hardship.
Of the 19 industrialized countries, the United States is #1 in the amount of money we spend on health care and #19 in how much bang we get for our buck. The argument for the increased cost of prescription drugs is that it’s due to the FDA’s strict requirements on research. However, if you look at history you’ll find that members of the FDA have knowingly allowed harmful drugs to hit the market. Simone and Emord expound by giving several examples of times where the Commissioner of the FDA intentionally passed drugs that were undeniably confirmed to be dangerous. They went on to further site instances where the medical reviewers (with political managers above them) required well-respected scientists to rewrite their reports and threatened if they did not. Because of this type of treatment, scientists are required to spend more money to protect themselves, thus the cost of drugs increases.
***
03.29.09 – 1725
17% of our GDP is spent on health care, thus health care has gone from being a personal issue to a public policy debate. In this 20 year retrospective on this issue we feature various perspectives: liberal, conservative and libertarian.
Dr. Ed Annis on the Health Care Debate
In 1994 Dr. Ed Annis the author of Code Blue joined us with his views. Dr. Ed Annis had rebutted President John Kennedy on his platform on health care.
We asked him, “How did the national health care debate come about?”
Dr. Ed Annis responded, “Well there were philosophical flaws, politicians were biased and the media was belligerent… The problem is government not health care.” He addressed Medicare by saying, “People should be allowed to provide for themselves if they can.” Dr. Ed Annis stated that just because one has a birthday of 65 does not mean one is entitled. He then addressed permeation and gradualism.
Max Sawicky on Health Care as a National System
Dennis quoted Arthur Schlesinger, from The Partisan Review of 1947, on the transition to socialism. And we made the transition to Max Sawicky of the Economic Policy Institute who joined us in 1999. Max said, “I would move health care into a national system.” Max believes we can’t afford anything else. “If health care is made on the basis of profit- everyone is priced according to their worth.”
Dr. John Goodman on the “Bureaucratic Health Care System”
Dr. John Goodman, the father of medical savings accounts, joins us in 2010, and has this to say:
“We have a bureaucratic, dysfunctional health care system with perverse incentives… In 1993 Hilary Clinton, wanted to nationalize health care. She failed. Look at the “S Chip” program for children that ration health care, and the difficulty seeing doctors. Expenditures for health care have gone up from $500 billion in 1990 to $2 trillion today.”
Impact of Drugs on Society
From health care we go to drugs and their impact on society and our system overall. Jacob Sullum, Senior Editor of Reason Magazine, joins us in 2007 and comments on the direct correlation between prohibition and drugs. We hear from several voices on various sides of this issue. Philip Jordan, former director of the El Paso International Center, seemed to find a similarity between prohibition and drugs, even though the drug enforcement code Dennis reads says differently. Rusty White, a former prison guard says, “In a controlled environment like a prison, drugs still get in.”
From drug use to new cures and behaviors we visit with Dr. Kevin Gilliland, CEO of Innovations 360. “Drugs,” he says, “wreck a person’s self image. They rob you of your sense of self. Addiction is not a moral failing.”
On that same program in 2009, Christopher Kennedy Lawford joins us with his story of the genetic disease within his family, how as an adolescent he lived through the assassinations of two uncles, and he comments on the conditions within his family and how this led to a very troubled youth. He comments, “traumatized and troubled youth, sometimes turn to drugs or alcohol”. He says, “Drugs and alcohol gave me a way out. They saved my life.” Christopher Lawford Kennedy is now an activist, educating others on alcohol and drug abuse.
Health and Wellness
From drugs and dependence we go to health and wellness, with a look at a revolutionary new care, Hyperbaric Oxygen Treatment. Alene Creacy and her husband Bill join us with their story and the importance of this treatment. Claudine, a Canadian mother, talks about the process and how it has helped her sons, born with cerebral palsy. Claudine actually demonstrates the chamber and how the oxygen helps.
In terms of wellness, Dr. T. Colin Campbell joins us in 2009 to talk about good eating habits. Dr. T. Colin Campbell, author of The China Study, the most comprehensive nutritional study ever conducted, became a vegetarian as a result of his research. He shakes his head at the hosts’ eating habits and says, “no to sugar, no to burritos, but salsa isn’t bad. And chocolate, well, that’s a plant based food!”
***
#1819 – 04.08.10
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
The Constitution of the United States, as framed by our founding fathers, covers all aspects of society’s welfare, as it was then. Today, there are many who state that it needs to be changed in order to better reflect the needs of modern society, and that the Constitution needs to be reframed to cover situations our founding fathers had no way of predicting and anticipating.
Guests include:
- Allen Fishburn: Attorney at Law
- Robert D. Cohen: Attorney at Law: Cohen and Zwerner
- Thomas G. West, PhD: Professor of Politics, University of Dallas, Author of Vindicating the Founders
- Calvin C. Jillson, PhD: Author of Pursuing the American Dream, Department of Political Science Southern Methodist University
The Constitution’s basic premise begins with:
“We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The question asked in this program by host Dennis McCuistion is, “Does Our Constitution Still Matter?” To which each of our guests respond, “Absolutely.”
Regarding the Constitution, Robert Cohen says, “It is a living document and still very much alive. We’re not always looking back. We can challenge a law on constitutional grounds and we can give it true effectiveness”.
Allen Fishburn believes that the Constitution matters now more than ever. He states, “We would all do better if we studied what our founders had written. The scope is far broader than what we learned in our schools. And we don’t follow it as well as we should.”
Commerce Clause and Government Take Over of Health Care
The conversation focuses on Article 1; Section 8 the commerce clause and what justifies the takeover of government of our health care, based on what our Constitution states. They ask whether or not the government had the right to invoke the commerce. They state that the clause guarantees our rights. And that we need a more careful study of the document.
Taking Private Property to Encourage Private Lending in Private Sector
The guests discuss the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and that it authorized the Treasury to spend $700 billion on the Troubled Asset Relief Program. The first $350 billion was used to inject capital back into distressed banks. They differ as to whether government has the constitutional power to do this. A question was asked, “How does Congress get away with this?” It appears that Government is taking private property for the purpose of encouraging private lending to the private sector.
Cal Jillson points out that while they did do so- it worked and funds are coming back.
Tom West says, “No they didn’t follow the law as to what not to do with those assets, therefore doubly unlawful.”
Do the Ninth and Tenth Amendments Still Have Meaning?
The Ninth and Tenth amendments are also discussed and questioned as to whether they still have meaning. Do we just give them lip service or are we restating the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? They leave us with a reminder that it is the people who control government, the Constitution is a document for the people, and not for government’s use in controlling us.
***
1823 – 05.30.10
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Today’s news updates cover the oil spill, health care costs for employers rising, future of democrats due to health care reform and more.
BP Outlines Plan to Speed Up Oil Containment
As President Obama took his fourth trip to the Gulf Coast to survey oil spill damage, BP outlined a plan it said would speed up the containment effort so that more than 50,000 barrels a day can be pumped to the surface by the end of June.
The outline came after the Coast Guard on Friday demanded the company figure out ways to accelerate the process. The cap on the blown-out well is said to be capturing about 15,000 barrels a day — but plenty more is still leaking into the Gulf of Mexico.
Study: Blood Pressure Drugs Linked to Cancer
A drug commonly used to treat blood pressure, heart failure and diabetes-related kidney damage, was linked to a “modest” increased risk of cancer in a study published Monday.
The Lancet Oncology journal’s research on the use of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) found 7.2 percent of patients who took ARBs were given a new cancer diagnosis, compared to 6 percent of patients not treated with ARBs, over the same four-year period.
The U.S. study described the results as showing “ARBs are associated with a modestly increased risk of new cancer diagnosis,” and said the findings warrant further investigation.
Of the specific solid organ cancers examined, only instances of lung cancer were significantly higher in the patients assigned ARBs.
For the analysis, scientists used publicly available data from ARB studies conducted before November 2009 and fresh data on 61,590 new cancer patients and 93,515 cancer death victims.
Report: Employers to see 2011 medical costs jump
INDIANAPOLIS — Companies that offer employee health insurance expect another steep jump in medical costs next year, and more will ask workers to share a bigger chunk of the expense, according to a new PricewaterhouseCoopers report.
For the first time, most of the American workforce is expected to have health insurance deductibles of $400 or more, the consulting firm said in a report released to The Associated Press.
Deductibles are the annual amount a patient pays out of pocket for care before insurance coverage starts. They are generally separate from co-payments and coinsurance.
New Health Reform Campaign Puts Dem Candidates in a Tough Spot
Only a few months after the heated battles on Capitol Hill, it must have been quite a relief for President Obama to turn his focus to health care reform, however briefly, last week. After being pummeled by Republicans and cable talking heads over his response to the Gulf oil spill, spending a full hour talking to seniors about Medicare had to feel positively relaxing.
The town-hall meeting held June 8 included audiences in 100 locations across the country, connected via conference call to a senior center in Maryland where Obama and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius fielded questions about how the new health care law will affect their benefits.
Senior citizens are by far the biggest losers in health care reform. Consider that:
- More than half the cost of health care reform will be paid for by $523 billion of cuts in Medicare spending over the next ten years.
- Although there are some new benefits for seniors (mainly new drug coverage), the costs exceed the benefits by a factor of more than ten to one.
- As many as 8.5 million of the 11 million seniors in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans may lose their coverage, according to Medicare’s Chief Actuary.
- Those lucky enough to retain their MA coverage will face steep cuts in benefits or hefty increases in premiums or both.
- In addition to these direct costs there are indirect costs, including new taxes on drugs and medical devices. Although these taxes don’t single out senior citizens, who do you think are the heaviest users of wheelchairs, crutches, artificial joints, pacemakers, etc.?
- To make matters worse, severe rationing problems lie ahead, as 32 million newly insured people try to double their consumption of medical care under a reform bill that produces not one new doctor or nurse or other paramedical personnel. Because many of the newly insured will be in private plans paying market rates, they will be more attractive to doctors than Medicare enrollees paying about 20% to 30% less.
So how did this happen? Aren’t senior citizens supposed to be the most powerful voting bloc? Aren’t they supposed to be represented by the all-powerful AARP?
Unfortunately for seniors (and indeed all Medicare enrollees), AARP sold out its own members. Just as the AMA sold out the doctors and the labor unions sold out their own members, AARP signed on to legislation that helps AARP but hurts the millions of people who AARP claims to represent.
Continue reading about senior citizens and health care reform on John Goodman‘s blog.
Medical Underwriting: It’s Better than the Alternatives
Paul Krugman says the opposition to ObamaCare is conducting a campaign based on “blatant fear-mongering, unconstrained either by the facts or by any sense of decency.” The proponents’ case, by contrast, has been principled.
Hmmm…..Krugman and I must be listening to completely different sound bites. Over the past few weeks I can’t recall a single TV appearance by a proponent that did not involve an anecdotal horror story in which a hapless victim is abused by a mean insurance company. Is the purpose of these anecdotes to make us feel sympathy?… To get our checkbooks and make a contribution?… Or is the purpose to make us fear that we too could be abused?… In other words, to scare us??
[Interestingly, Krugman himself wrote a column only a few days earlier in which he based the entire argument for ObamaCare....on....on....you guessed it....a fear-mongering horror story! I'll let readers decide whether the delivery was "unconstrained by facts or any sense of decency." (David Henderson gives the rest of the story here.) Meanwhile, I predict that abuse of the sick by insurance companies will become more likely, not less likely under ObamaCare -- a subject I'll reserve for another day.]
Just how scared should we be? It’s been illegal to rescind a person’s insurance because of a change in health status since the passage of HIPAA in 1996. It’s also been illegal for any employer to discriminate against employees because of their health condition over the same period of time. So it’s only in the “individual market” (less than 10% of the total) that people get charged premiums which tend to reflect their expected health care costs.
Okay. So how well does the individual market work? Better than you might think. In his new book, Health Reform Without Side Effects (previously reviewed by me at the Health Affairs blog), Mark Pauly shows that the market works better than the health insurance exchanges ObamaCare would replace it with and better than the small group market that Obama would leave largely untouched. Moreover, with a few reasonable reforms, the individual market would work better still.
Continue Reading on John Goodman‘s Blog.
In today’s news update we are covering a few links related to the 2010 census, health care and Obama’s transparency pledge.
Obama taking health care push to Ohio
Washington (CNN) — President Obama heads to Ohio on Monday to push for a health care overhaul.
Obama is set to deliver an address on health insurance in Strongsville, outside Cleveland.
The president will spend time “going through why reform is important, going through what it will do the minute he signs the legislation on behalf of millions of Americans, discussing what happens, again, if we decide now is not the time,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said at a news briefing Friday.
A decennial tradition that dates back 220 years to the days of George Washington continues today when federal census forms start arriving at more than 120 million households across the United States.
But hanging over this 23rd U.S. census are concerns about a decline in participation.
While the U.S. census has always evoked some resentment toward the feds for poking their nose into people’s business, there’s a sense that America’s distrust of the government has reached greater heights and could contribute to poor census returns.
FOIA-request audit shows response to Obama transparency pledge is uneven
The Obama administration’s first year of efforts to improve access to government information has yielded mixed results, according to an audit of Freedom of Information Act requests set to be released Monday. The report by the National Security Archive at George Washington University comes at the start of Sunshine Week, the annual attempt by federal groups and news organizations to promote better access to government information.
In today’s news updates we provide links on health care, international women’s day and AIG sale to MetLife.
Obama to appeal for public support on health care
WASHINGTON — With the fate of his signature legislative initiative far from certain, President Barack Obama is taking his last-ditch push for health care reform on the road.
In a speech Monday in Philadelphia, Obama will try to persuade the public to back his plan to remake the nation’s health care system, while also urging uneasy lawmakers to cast a “final vote” for a massive reform bill in an election year.
Obama’s pitch in Philadelphia, along with a stop in St. Louis Wednesday, comes as the president begins an all-out effort to pass his health care proposals. Though his plan has received only modest public support, Obama has implored lawmakers to show political courage and not let a historic opportunity slip away.
World Marks International Women’s Day
(CNN) — The world marks International Women’s Day on Monday, an annual celebration that highlights their economic, political and social achievements.
“International Women’s Day is the story of ordinary women as makers of history; it is rooted in the centuries-old struggle of women to participate in society on an equal footing with men,” the United Nations says.
AIG in $15.5 billion unit sale to MetLife
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — AIG agreed Monday to sell its American Life Insurance Co. unit to MetLife Inc. for $15.5 billion in cash and stock, in beleaguered AIG’s second sale of an international unit in a week.
AIG said it will sell the unit, known as Alico, for $6.8 billion in cash and the remainder in MetLife equity. The deal leaves AIG as the second-largest shareholder of MetLife, with a stake of more than 20% in the company.
In today’s news we provide links to the White House social secretary’s departure, health care and the stock market.
NATIONAL NEWS
White House social secretary Rogers leaving: aide
Rogers is personally close to first lady Michelle Obama and is part of a group of Chicagoans who came to Washington with President Barack Obama.
The official had no further details on Rogers’ departure.
HEALTHCARE
Race to Pin Blame For Health Costs
A battle over who to blame for rising health-care costs is escalating, as groups seek to pin the problem on each other and say none of the health-care legislation under consideration does enough to solve it.
U.S. spending on health care reached $2.5 trillion in 2009, according to federal estimates. It is expected to jump to $4.5 trillion in 10 years.
Obama Shows Testy Side at Health Care Summit
Of all the hats President Obama tried on at Thursday’s seven-and-a-half-hour health care summit, it appeared the one he was most comfortable wearing was that of the prickly professor.
In between playing the roles of moderator and deal-maker, the president took several opportunities to dress down his classroom of Republican critics. Through a series of awkward clashes between him and the Republicans, the summit may have served more to portray Republicans as intransigents intent on stonewalling a bill no matter what, than it served to pave the way for a compromise.
US STOCK MARKET
US HOT STOCKS: CKE Restaurants, AIG, Gap, Athenahealth, DTS
U.S. stocks rose Friday, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 10 points to 10331, the Standard & Poor’s 500 rose 1.5 points to 1104 and the Nasdaq Composite Index increased 3.3 points to 2237. Among the companies whose shares are actively trading are CKE Restaurants Inc. (CKR), American International Group Inc. (AIG) and Gap Inc. (GPS).
Private-equity firm Thomas H. Lee Partners has agreed to take private CKE Restaurants (CKR, $11.13, +$2.22, +24.92%) for about $619 million, but the company will have six weeks to find a higher offer. The deal comes as the parent of the Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s fast-food chains has struggled, especially with Carl’s Jr. In the four weeks ended Jan. 25, same-store sales at Carl’s Jr. slid 9%. CKE has been averse to the deep discounting that some rivals have been doing to prevent sales declines. Rival restaurant owners Jack in the Box Inc. (JACK, $21.13, +$0.80, +3.94%) and Sonic Corp. (SONC, $8.49, +$0.15, +1.80%) also rose.
