The fraud begins with the name itself. This is not affordable healthcare. This is unaffordable healthcare, for individuals and the nation.
Despite political assurances to the contrary, a lack of healthcare coverage has not caused the American public’s health to rank the lowest among all industrialized nations in the world.
What has caused this is three decades worth of non-stop, and increasing— Democrat and Republican supported— derelict product safety regulations, which have allowed hazardous industry products, from cell phones and their wireless antenna systems to genetic modified foods and pharmaceuticals, increasing unregulated exposure into market. To pose an ever escalating risk to the public’s health, and leading to unprecedented increases in cancers, fetal abnormalities like autism, and brain disorders like Alzheimer’s.
And no universal healthcare laws are going to make one dent in this problem because the source of the problem— unregulated product safety protection from hazardous industry products— is not being addressed by any universal healthcare coverage laws.
A focus on healthcare coverage, as an alleged answer to the American public’s increasing ill health, only acts as a distraction and a cover to keep criticism away from the current system of allowing unregulated hazardous industry products into the market, which are causing the lion’s share of the nation’s ill health problems.
And despite the massive public relations campaign to the contrary— that a lack of healthcare insurance is allegedly what is causing the nation's increasing ill health— led by the Democrats, who believe their party's point of view is the only point of view worth listening to, and if challenged, must only be challenged by a rabid, right-wing Republican opinion, this kind of public relations distortion is, but another, fraud. And, it is disenfranchising a large, and growing, segment of health conscious Americans, who have no political allegiance, whatsoever. As is supported by the very low voter turnout during elections.
This entire healthcare debate should never have been about what Democrats or Republicans want. Because both political parties are completely out of touch with what produces sickness, and what prevents it.
What the healthcare debate should be about are facts. And ignorance of the facts that cause ill health are, in one form or another, only helping to sustain the status quo system of allowing product safety non-regulation to continue, which is all but guaranteeing the public will become increasingly sick— no matter what kind of health insurance they have, or are forced to subsidize.
For the past 30 years, the American public has been subjected to nothing short of unchecked ignorance, to flat out corruption from a succession of lawyer/businessmen presidents and congressional representatives who know virtually nothing about human health.
These public representatives, who set the nation’s public policies, have increasingly supported industry product safety deregulation policies willing to sacrifice the public’s health to protect the profits generated by a litany of hazardous corporate products and industries— with the high-tech electronics industry, and its virtually unregulated range of wireless products, heading the list.
For the simple reason that support of a corporate agenda— not regulating corporate products to save high-end corporate and Wall Street profits— ultimately benefits the politicians, because their political campaigns and careers are bankrolled by corporate donations.
And the corporate impact doesn’t stop here. The regulatory agencies in this country that ultimately set the standards for product safety regulations, from the EPA to the FDA to the FCC (which regulates microwave signaling for cell phone and other wireless sources), are controlled by political and industry influence, and are willing to place those influences over the protection of the public’s health, for which these public tax-supported agencies were designed, by law, to serve.
So unless the corporate stranglehold in this country is broken— beginning at the regulatory personnel level— by wrestling away political and industry control of these critically important regulatory positions and filling them, instead, by open voting from the scientific community— the public can have all the healthcare insurance and coverage in the world, and their health is still going to continue to plummet.
And changing the present, industry and politically controlled, health regulatory system may not be as out of reach as it now seems.
Currently, there are a little over 200 million Americans over the age of 18.
If, for example, 1% (1 out of 100) would organize into a public interest group (an American reform movement) to fight for non-political/non-industry influenced product safety regulatory overhaul, and if that organized 2 million Americans would donate only $10 to $20 a year to such an organization— that would procure a yearly budget of $20 to $40 million. From which could be funded scientific research on product safety hazards that U.S. regulatory agencies (including the National Institutes of Health which funds the major amount of research in the U.S.) won’t fund, and the hiring of the top lawyers in the country to present uncorrupted scientific evidence to fight for the public’s rights to truly protect their health, by forcing non-corrupted product safety regulatory reform. This would be real health insurance.
But if the citizenry of this country can't even get it enough together to organize 1%, or one half of 1%, or one quarter of 1% (500,000)— while 3 or 4 million can figure out how to watch the David Letterman or the Jay Leno Show every night— then the public had better get very used to the corporate agenda increasingly running their lives. And in the area of health, this means the abnormal— cancers, fetal abnormalities, neurological problems— increasingly becoming the “normal.”
(For a more in depth opinion on breaking the corporate influence at the regulatory level, by organizing pubic support outside the system, see also: “Antibiotic Abuse Part 4, Fixing the corrupt U.S. regulatory system” at: http://www.examiner.com/article/antibiotic-misuse-part-4-fixing-the-corrupt-u-s-regulatory-system)
How out of touch are politicians on the subject of health, and what keeps Americans allegedly healthy?
The U.S public spends the most on healthcare of any other industrialized nation, yet has the worst health of any industrialized nation. This is not a healthcare access problem.
The U.S. public consumes, incredibly, one half of the $600 billion in pharmaceutical drugs sold per year around the world. This is not a pharmaceutical access problem.
A situation created, in great part, by the Clinton Administration, which passed legislation in 1997 that, for the first time, allowed the pharmaceutical industry to advertise its drugs on television, directly to the consumer. Placing the United Sates, alone with New Zealand, as the only two industrialized nations to allow this.
In addition, the pharmaceutical industry bankrolls the FDA with roughly $600 million per year to finance the FDA’s "new drug review boards" that decide what new drugs will be released into the market (an amount that is set to increase to $1 billion in 2013).
The result of a program created by the Clinton Administration in 1992— the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA)— that was specifically designed to speed up the release of drugs into the market, without any consideration for the compromised public safety hazards that would follow..
But apparently no one in Congress believes this blatant conflict of interest, which directly puts the public's safety at risk by compromising the safety of drugs being released into the market, is a problem that connects to the public's increasingly poor health.
Apparently the U.S. Congress only selectively reads the facts. Perhaps they overlooked this one.
The cost of pharmaceutical health damages alone, per year, to the American consumer, is over $130 billion, and rising. See also: “Product safety regulations could cut health costs by $1 TRILLION per year, Pt 2” at: http://www.examiner.com/article/product-safety-regulations-could-cut-health-costs-by-1-trillion-per-year-pt-2-1
But Barak Obama, a lawyer who knows virtually nothing about human health, and who is spoon-fed the pharmaceutical and American medical version of healthcare needs, doesn't think the public is getting enough drugs.
In 2012, Barak Obama signed an executive order to REDUCE regulatory oversight at the FDA, to INCREASE the release of more drugs into the already saturated market. Stating that the need for pharmaceutical drugs outweighs the need for "time-consuming" regulatory testing to determine if the drugs are indeed safe enough for public consumption— siding with the profits of Wall Street and market concerns over those of the public's health.
Barak Obama also doesn’t get the genetic modified food problem, as it pertains to increasing multiple health risks among the American public.
In 2012 Obama signed the Monsanto Protection Act, which allows the Monsanto Company— makers of Dioxin, Agent Orange, Bovine Growth Hormone— to promote and sell its genetic modified chemicals and food products with no regulatory oversight, i.e. no labels, etc.
This "law" also protects the Monsanto Company’s genetic modified food products from any eventual future lawsuits, on health hazard grounds. A "law" designed to protect the profits of Monsanto’s GMO foods, not the health of the American public, and signed by a president who is allegedly so concerned about the state of the American public’s health.
Apparently Barak Obama, and the rest of the supporters of the Monsanto Protection Act, selectively forgot to reveal to the public in their press release of the signing of the "Act," of the number of countries that currently ban Monsanto genetic modified foods, as a direct result of decades worth of internationally published scientific research that has catalogued the extensive health risks associated with these products: from cancers to fetal abnormalities.
A partial list of those countries include: France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Greece, Hungary, Russia, South America and New Zealand. For a full list and one of a series of excellent short articles covering Monsanto's policies and the media blackout surrounding the genetic modified products issue, see journalist and activist, Merlyn Seeley’s: “March Against Monsanto worldwide event makes history.” http://www.examiner.com/article/march-against-monsanto-worldwide-event-makes-history
And this, Obama signed, 2012 Monsanto immunity protection law is virtually identical to the one Bill Clinton and Al Gore’s passed for the Telecom industry in 1996.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 gave the Telecom industry the green light to immediately install hundreds of thousands of cell phone antenna and wireless towers across the country— a number that has now increased into the millions— without any concern for the health damages that would follow, by 24-hour, low-level, non-thermal, chronic, microwave exposure damage. Ignoring decades of evidence documented in international scientific research— and ignored by U.S. health regulatory agencies— associating increased health risks for cancers and fetal abnormalities, chronic disease complications, to a wide range of neurological problems.
One health aftereffect of Telecom deregulation bill
What’s one of the health aftereffects of this corporate, high-tech electronics protection act that has made Wall Street $billions?
The autism rate rose 17% during the period from 1997 to 2008, when cell phones became increasingly popular as a result of widespread cellular tower construction. And the autism rate has kept right on rising, with each successive and more powerful wireless platform introduced into the market.
Before the mass introduction of computers in the 1980s (and the introduction of chronic, near level, manmade, electromagnetic radiation (EMR) exposure on a national scale) autism was a rare condition of 2 to 5 in 10,000 births in the 1960s and the1970s. Today, in 2013, it is now identified in 1 in 88, to 1 in 50 births.
The medical community’s explanation for this, over 4,000% outrageous increase in autism since the 1960s? They’ve just become better at screening and identifying the condition. Basically the same snow job lie they give to virtually every other abnormal rise in disease conditions today.
But of course, no one in the healthcare industry would dare to make the connection of autism to increased exposure of pregnant mothers to increased microwave, and other manmade electromagnetic radiation (EMR) signaling, penetrating the mother’s body, including her abdomen, and her fetus.
Particularly since this is the only major, widespread environmental exposure change that has occurred among the population since the 1980s, and which has kept parallel pace with the steady rise of autism.
Even though it is a fact that direct and indirect exposure to low-level manmade EMR sources has long been associated with depressing the function of the thyroid gland. And low circulating thyroid hormone in pregnant women has been recently linked to at least a 4-fold increased risk for the development of autism, documented in a recent Dutch study published in the international scientific journal, Annals of Neurology (August 2013).
And the direct link of manmade EMR exposure (which acts as a foreign impact on human biology) to autism is also ignored.
Even though low-level manmade EMR exposure can also disrupt the extremely sensitive embryonic cell line development of the fetus, by disturbing infinitely sensitive chemical/electrical communications between cells required for correct cell differentiation. And if these exposures occur at a time when the fetal brain is developing, future adult anatomical areas of the brain (nerve cell clusters) may not correctly develop, as has been documented since the 1990s— though again, ignored by U.S. health regulatory agencies. See also: "The Early Origins of Autism" by Patricia M. Rodier and published in the February 2000 issue of Scientific American.
While U.S. researchers, funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and publishing in the (Journal of the American Medical Association) JAMA Pediatrics , also in August of 2013, have tried to downplay any environmental (manmade EMR, pharmaceutical, chemical exposures) associations with autism in the early brain development of the fetus, by designing a research study that distracts the focus to supposedly faulty labor problems during birth— when the problem occurs 8 months earlier.
Once again, covering for the trillion-dollar grossing telecom, computer and pharmaceutical industries, whose hazardous, unregulated products can adversely affect the fetus in the highly vulnerable early weeks and months of fetal organ development.
For a further overview of the autism problem, as it connects to unregulated, hazardous industry product exposure, including the mercury vapor released from a broken compact fluorescent light (CFL), and an explanation of how low thyroid hormone increases the risk for autism, see also the “autism” section in: “Product Safety Regulations could cut healthcare costs by $1TRILLION per year, Pt 1” at: http://www.examiner.com/article/product-safety-regulations-could-cut-health-costs-by-1-trillion-per-year-pt-1
Continuing to ignore admitted adverse health effects from wireless exposures
Just like the Monsanto Protection Act, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 also protected the telecommunications industry from being sued by citizens for any future health problems that would ensue from the public being increasingly exposed to its millions of cell phone/wireless cell towers and antenna systems.
Yet during the 1996 telecom protection bill’s enthusiastic passage, there was curiously no questions raised from members of Congress, or the U.S. media, as to why such a clause— that protects the telecom industry from health-related lawsuits (introduced by Senator John McCain)— would need to be attached to such a bill— if cell phone/wireless low-level microwave radiation was apparently as harmless as the telecommunication industry and the U.S. healthcare industry, including the American Cancer Society, were all saying it was. And continue to this day to say it is.
Despite the fact that after decades of inaction the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2011 was finally forced to classify cell phone and other forms of wireless radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation as possible carcinogens, (itself fraudulently downplayed), in the same class as lead, diesel fuel, methlymecury compounds and pesticides. A cancer classification resulting from overwhelming evidence provided to the scientific and medical community over the past several decades.
And a decision completely downplayed and minimized in importance by the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) — an industry apologist health regulatory agency that the U.S. public has been wrongly assuming— for about 30 years— has any interest in preventing cancer.
Meanwhile, the World Health Organization’s “possible carcinogen” label for manmade EMR was stalled for decades at WHO as a result of like-minded corporate-connected scientists, such as Michael Repacholi— who chaired the WHO research project on electromagnetic fields and health from the early 1990 to the mid-2000s, while protecting the interests of the Telecom and the Electrical Power Industry, despite Repochili’s own experiments in the early 1990s having shown DNA damage by low-level EMR exposure. And, as expected, upon leaving his post at WHO in the mid-2000s, Repacholi became an industry consultant for the very EMR industries that he had allegedly been “regulating for the public's safety.”
Protecting the Genetic Modified industry at the FDA level
It should also never be forgotten that Bill Clinton was responsible for placing Michael Taylor, a decades long corporate lawyer with direct ties to the Monsanto Company, in a key, inside regulatory position as the Deputy Commissioner for Policy at the FDA during the early 1990s.
Taylor oversaw the formation of the Genetic Modified Organism (GMO) policies at the FDA, including the widespread distribution of Bovine Growth Hormone in dairy cows, and wrote the GRAS laws (Generally Regarded As Safe) that alleged that genetically modified foods are no different than natural foods, which remains in place to this day.
And who did Barak Obama tap to head the FDA when he was elected in 2008? Michael Taylor. First as a "senior advisor," then shortly thereafter, promoted to the FDA's top regulatory position of Deputy Commissioner of Foods. Just like his predecessor, Bill Clinton.
For a more in depth look at the current GMO problems and health hazards, including its political support, see also the article: "FDA/Monsanto Fraud: No labels for Genetic Engineered (GMO) Foods" at: http://www.examiner.com/article/fda-monsanto-fraud-no-labels-for-genetic-engineered-gmo-foods
A healthcare coverage plan designed for economists, not the public’s health
What has been conveniently ignored by Barak Obama, and the rest of our “public’s representatives” in Washington, is the reality that an economy increasingly committed to high-tech development— which is inherently foreign to human biology and its functions— has been causing the most severe, and the most devastating, of the health problems now afflicting the U.S. population. Not a lack of healthcare coverage.
Currently, the U.S. healthcare industry is the fastest and largest growing industry in the country. It doesn’t take an economic genius to deduce that this is about as critical an indictment of the economic path the country is going on as one can make. Unless of course the economic plan is to decimate the health of the American public while at the same time, allegedly, sustain its productivity.
The only explanation for the attitude of those in power condoning the widespread allowance of the public to become increasingly sick, is that they are looking only at the short term mega-profits that are coming in from the high-tech industry. And have accepted an ends justifies the means economic “free market” (corporate deregulation) agenda, where illness and death are accepted as abstract "market risk" notations in somebody’s economic debit book, in somebody’s economic “think tank” in Washington. While they erroneously believe that the healthcare industry will magically mop up the created health problems that will inevitably follow in the wake of their current economic plan.
The problem, for them, and the public buying into this "free market" deregulation farce, is that the healthcare industry cannot keep up with, treat, or cure the public’s ever escalating ill health as a result of such irresponsible economic planning. And no amount of additional healthcare coverage is going to change that.
What lawyers and economists in Washington don't get is that to have any kind of real, sustainable economic future, you have to begin by making sure your products and your product development are biologically safe from the start. And not consider this absolutely critical part of the economic equation as a footnote, or a trivial afterthought.
Already the cost of the healthcare has reached the outrageous and criminally irresponsible level of $2.5 trillion per year. And the costs will only continue to rise, since no one is willing to reign in the extensive corporate influence and agendas that are directly driving them.
Responsible regulation of hazardous industry/commercial products could cut this number by at least 50%. For a breakdown of the current, major disease conditions comprising this $2.5 trillion healthcare yearly expenditure, see the two-part series: “Product Safety Regulations could cut healthcare costs by $1TRILLION per year.”
But if responsible safety regulations were to be introduced, then CEOs and Wall Street investors would not be able to make their tens of millions to hundreds of millions in take-home salaries—per year. And the politicians that support them would have their political campaign coffers depleted, respectively. Forcing the politicians to actually have to earn their votes from the voters, by actually coming up with intelligent problem solving plans and solutions, instead of empty-headed political slight-of-hand sales slogans.
What are the some of these products that are causing the worst impact on the public’s health?
They range from high-tech electronic products: emitting completely foreign to human biology, manmade electromagnetic radiation frequencies capable of penetrating skin, muscle, fat and bone, and altering the critical electrical fields of molecules and their associated chemical reactions dependent upon them, with the potential to adversely impact every aspect of the cell, up to and including the DNA, to genetic modification of foods and drugs: creating a vast range of cellular and organ system problems, also by their abnormal impact on normal biological systems that were never designed to recognize or utilize them, to the newly developing and completely unregulated nanotechnology: disturbing innate molecular principles and relationships at the billionth of the gram level that have been in place in all life forms from the start of evolution, and eliciting the expected widespread health hazards as a result, which have already been reported in the very limited amount of studies that have been allowed funding.
And then there are the new energy supply technologies seeking alternatives to traditional fossil fuels, such as “fracking” for natural gas exploration that uses hazardous chemicals under high water pressure for hydraulic fracturing of deep underground shale deposits containing oil, which pollutes the air and groundwater supplies with carcinogens, while disturbing underground structures leading to increased road and land and underground piping damage, to increased earthquake potentials, to wind turbine mass installations to generate electricity, which emit high and dangerous levels of manmade electromagnetic radiation into the surrounding ground that travels to nearby communities and enters homes, schools and business through unprotected underground water piping and electrical wiring, to adversely affect residents’ health via "dirty electricity" hazards, in addition to the extensive noise pollution generated. (The same “dirty electricity” hazards, via ground currents to surrounding housing structures, also exist with cell towers.)
These are the high-tech industries that the United States is banking its future on, and which have been progressively decimating the health and the economic stability of the society they are allegedly designed to sustain.
The common denominator? Non-existent to derelict to uncoordinated, ineffectual and incompetent, safety regulations allowing new technologies to rush ahead creating unchecked public health hazards, then the registering of shock when the resulting healthcare costs escalate beyond control.
Healthcare insurance premiums will continue to rise, not fall.
Meanwhile, the cavalier assurances offered up by the Obama administration that healthcare insurance rates will come down as corporate competition increases is but one more fraud.
This is not automobile insurance we are talking about. This is healthcare insurance, whose rates are directly tied into the cost of providing healthcare to those that are sick.
And if illness rates continue to soar, which they will since the sources of illness in this country are not being addressed, then the healthcare insurance premium rates will also continue to soar to cover those costs. It’s simple math. Not complicated graduate-degree economic theory.
Not only do the vast majority of U.S. politicians not get the health aspect of the healthcare problem, they don’t even get the economic aspect of the problem, as it concerns the average American’s pocketbook.
Take this writer. I have not had healthcare insurance for the past 25 years. In that period I have seen a doctor five or six times, to set a broken bone, a few stitches, a couple of check-ups. The cost? Around $1,000, which I paid in full. If I had been forced to pay a monthly premium, as dictated by the Affordable Care Act, I would have had to have paid, at minimum, about $150 a month, or about $1,800 a year. And over 25 years that would have come to around $45,000. Of that, at least $44,000 would have just been handed over to the healthcare industry, to indirectly support an unregulated (for product safety) economic system that is making the American public sick, and which has no interest at all at keeping them healthy.
Not offering rebates as an incentive to keep healthy is one of the most corrupt aspects of the “Affordable” Care Act.
No rebate provisions are offered in the Affordable Care Act, as common sense incentives for the public to try and stay healthy, to not unnecessarily access the healthcare system. Real, serious, rebates of 75% to 80% on insurance premiums should be offered to encourage the public to engage in sensible disease prevention: like eating as much natural foods as possible, getting moderate exercise and staying away from over-exposure to unregulated hazardous products— including pharmaceutical drugs, which the Affordable Care Act encourages the public to increase taking to allegedly improve their health.
But the U.S, healthcare system has no intention of offering up real preventative health measures, because it can’t make one thin dime on these common sense, and highly effective, methods of keeping the public healthy. (Just as the U.S. healthcare system can’t make one thin dime off the public until they become sick— that is until the Affordable Care Act).
The only prevention the U.S. healthcare can offer up is the obvious, idiot-proof suggestion that it is not a good idea to smoke or be overweight, and to suggest costly, and in some cases, dangerous, medical screenings for serious diseases, like cancers.
What’s the problem here? Focusing on medical screenings, as a major tool for disease prevention, implies that serious diseases, like cancer, are to be expected, and should be considered inevitable, and the only way to prevent them from developing is to catch them early.
This concept is TOTALLY FALSE, and completely negates the entire point of human biology and its million-year-old evolved immune system that was designed, specifically, to keep the body free of serious life-threatening diseases, for the body’s entire, or near entire, lifespan. (Excepting of course, real, serious, genetic problems that surface at birth.)
And select cultures all across the world are testament to this. They do not access healthcare services, and they not get any of the serious disease conditions that afflict Americans, and they live well into their nineties. And this has nothing to do with “special genetics” (special protective DNA). Because when members of these cultures adopt American/modern chemical-laced eating habits and/or high-tech electronics exposure, etc., their rates of disease begin to rise accordingly.
Here’s a news flash for the members of Congress mulling over basic healthcare concepts. The human body was not designed over the course of about a million years so it could wait around for doctors to show up to make it healthy. It was designed to stay healthy. Incredible, but true.
And that also includes the capacity for developing cancer, which has also been designed for the same amount of time to kill its host. If— IF, the host is exposed to an uninhabitable environment. The exact kind of deregulated, hazardous product environment that U.S. economists and Wall Street investors are promoting and encouraging.
Epitomizing the disconnect, and disinterest, of the current system to prevent cancer— immediately following the CBS 60 Minutes October 12th, 2013 broadcast episode featuring a 15-year-old’s devised screening test for a protein elevated in the early stages of pancreatic cancer, was a Phizer pharmaceutical advertisement for the drug, Xeljanz, which paid for the advertising costs for the 60 Minutes 15-minute report on a cancer screening technique.
This genetic modified drug (produced using recombinant DNA technology), and currently banned in Europe because of its health hazards, is designed to treat rheumatoid arthritis, or commonly known as joint pain, usually a result of overexertion, or a lifetime of use of the joints (seen predominantly in the elderly, except in the past several decades.) The drug works by depressing the body’s immune system. And, of course, one of the side effects, clearly stated in the pharmaceutical ad, is the development of multiple types of cancers, as well as other very serious health risks.
So again, the advertisement for this drug, which admits to increasing the risk of developing multiple cancers in patients taking it, immediately followed a 60 Minutes segment praising the “genius” of an early detection screening procedure for cancer.
Common sense health coverage needs
Obviously, everyone in this country, from birth to probably the age 21 should have access to, and be covered by, truly affordable/sliding economic scale healthcare coverage that covers childhood through adolescent and young adult health problems.
And anyone with a pre-existing health condition, should also be required to receive affordable/sliding economic scale healthcare coverage to try and treat their conditions, which have almost invariably been caused by a corrupted U.S. health regulatory system that has allowed the conditions to develop in the first place— by not having responsibly regulated hazardous industry products which were likely the cause.
In addition, anyone who is born with a genetic problem, leading to compromised health, should also be required by law to be able to attain affordable/sliding economic scale healthcare coverage, for the same reason as pre-existing conditions— that the vast majority of genetic problems are likely caused by derelict hazardous product safety regulation exposures.
But after the age of 21 (without any pre-existing health problems), the public should be on its own. To choose, or not to choose.
Any healthcare coverage should only be on a voluntary basis, with, still, affordable/sliding economic scale options, which include significant rebate incentives for staying healthy, and emphasizing basic accident coverage.
The public should be more than welcome to access their choice of conventional or non-conventional medical services, even if the conventional treatments of drugs and surgeries more often than not will create more health hazards to the patient than the original conditions they are intending to treat.
No adult should be forced to buy healthcare insurance coverage to allegedly keep healthy. This kind of forced healthcare coverage is exactly what it sounds like— nothing short of extortion, to support a system that is broken, and which is using public subsidizes to continue to function in its broken and increasingly hazardous manner.
A “fraud-able” Care Act
Currently, if an individual does not buy healthcare insurance in 2014, he or she will be fined $95 or 1% of their income, with that penalty increasing to $695 in 2016, or 2.5% of their income. And these penalty fees will continue to rise, yearly, since the same principles apply to them as to healthcare premiums. You don’t address the source of the problem, the problem only increases, along with the cost to address it.
Additionally, those who are offered financial exemptions from the Affordable Care Act include those whose religious beliefs conflict with the offered healthcare coverage. Or in other words, irrational and fantasy- based thinking (depending on a sliding scale of the nature of the religious belief) continues to be rewarded, while rational and factual-based thinking is penalized.
And while the U.S. Supreme Court may have upheld the "legality" of the Affordable Care Act, by only a 5-4 decision, it should be noted that not one of these Judges has one iota of knowledge about human health, and what makes the public healthy, or unhealthy. And subsequently, in this situation, the Supreme Court’s “stamp of approval” is worthless.
The last time the Supreme Court voted on another highly significant health issue, they also got it blatantly wrong. And the public has been paying for it ever since— unless you are a corporation looking to avoid accountability for the health hazards of your products.
Twenty years ago, in 1993, the Supreme Court issued the “Daubert Rules,” largely as a result of being pressured by the “free enterprise” legal group, the Atlantic Legal Foundation. This law foundation boasts members such as Henry Kissinger, Dick Chaney, and Harvard Physicist, Richard Wilson, who has denied any adverse impact of manmade EMR on the public’s health for decades, and who is also the founder of the “Society for Risk Analysis” whose goal is to make sure corporate products are given the broadest leeway in regards to health regulations so their respective industries can procure the greatest profits, while pubic injury and death are relegated to acceptable market risks.
The Daubert Rules— created after two boys were born without developed arms after their pregnant mothers took the drug, Bendectin, a close derivative of Thalidomide, and who won their case for damages against the drug company that damaged them in the lower court, but which was overturned when it was appealed to a higher court (as a result of Atlantic Legal Foundation pressure), and which eventually made it to the Supreme Court— allows state and federal judges, who know nothing about human health, to decide before the trial begins what scientific evidence will be allowed as evidence in the case, or to make the decision themselves to throw out the case before it even gets to trial. In of course the nation that tells everyone across the world how democracy and free speech is supposed to work.
Before this corporate friendly Supreme Court decision, juries composed of something called American citizens decided what was valid scientific evidence, after hearing arguments presented to them from plaintiffs and defendants.
Now product injury and death cases are heavily favored for the interests of industry profits over the public’s safety. So in addition to lax to non-existent product safety regulations before hazardous products are allowed into the market, this Supreme Court sanctioned “health legislation” all but insures the public’s health will increasingly be put in jeopardy, since it completes the circle of cradle to grave protection of corporate accountability.
And finally, you don’t rush ahead and ram an incompetent and fraudulent-filled healthcare coverage law down the public’s throat— as was done with the recent banning of perfectly safe and functioning standard incandescent light bulbs and replace them with billions of multiple biologically hazardous compact fluorescent lights (CFLs), under an equally fraudulent, energy saving distortion argument— just so you can satisfy the self-absorbed legacy needs of a president and his political party.
The public’s health is about the public’s health needs, not a president’s ego-driven political needs, nor the misdirected thinking of an uninformed and biologically uneducated supporting mob— no matter what their size or other intellectual qualifications— who are blatantly missing the point of what keeps people healthy, including themselves.