Reference my earlier commentary about the entire medical establishment (until recently) being completely wrong in their treatment of Ulcers — for over a hundred years. My point was to show that ALL the medical experts were wrong on this important national matter. The main reason why was that none of them had applied real Science (e.g., the Scientific Method) to their hypothesis on Ulcers.

The evidence indicates that essentially the same situation has happened several times before. A recent disturbing example is with COVID-19 — although in this case there were many medical practitioners who DID object to the wrong (i.e., unscientific) direction, that COVID-19 policies were going.

Some examples of COVID-19 medical mistakes made were (are):

Essentially nothing was said (much less emphasized) about the importance of people taking steps to optimize their health (maximizing their immunity). Clearly, those in better health to begin with who did catch COVID-19 would (by and large) end up with better outcomes than those who were in poorer health.

Taking Vitamin D is a good example. This was (is) an inexpensive preventative, with scientifically proven COVID benefits, and with almost zero downsides. EVERY person in the country should have had that info drilled into them…

Based on a subset of ALL the studies available (and not acknowledging the full list of related studies), the CDC took an unscientific position regarding COVID-19 Masks. This was especially problematic for children all day in school.

Scientific medical studies are generally focused on one (or both) of two main concerns: Effectiveness and Safety. When ALL the Mask studies are examined, and looked at from an objective (not political) perspective, a reasonable person would conclude that Masks are not Effective and are not Safe. To mandate an unsafe, ineffective treatment on a trusting public (esp. children) is simply atrocious.

Note: I purposefully did not update my 2022 Mask Report, so that you can see how the CDC continually modifies their web pages to adhere to political correctness. On the other hand, there is no apparent effort to update their web pages to reflect the latest scientific findings — unless it coincides with political correctness. For example, I found over a hundred studies on Masks back in 2022, and there are more now. The CDC should show a complete list of ALL Mask studies — but they do not.

To supposedly provide COVID-19 help sooner, significant scientific shortcuts were made from our traditional methodology of testing and producing treatments, etc.

It is understandable that emergencies might warrant some changes in procedures for approval of treatments (e.g., medications). HOWEVER, where shortcuts are made, our medical agencies (esp. the FDA) should publicly acknowledge that we have major gaps in the data. For example, the FDA should mandate that EUA Fact Sheets for Healthcare Providers (see this sample) should have a statement like this:

“This EUA was granted after a very limited scientific assessment of this product for this medical condition. As a result, the FDA has a low confidence level regarding the safety or efficacy of this product for this condition.” Currently, there is nothing like this warning.

Our government medical agencies dismissed scientifically-based COVID-19 therapies not coming from Big Pharma, as ineffective — with zero proof.

The classic example is Ivermectin. Medical agencies publicly ridiculed IVM as a horse treatment.

Again the criteria for approving any medical treatment are Safety and Efficacy. The evidence is that: 1) Ivermectin has been found to be one of the safest pharma-ceuticals on the planet, and 2) scientific studies have shown that IVM has early treatment effectiveness of 60±%! Consider how many hundreds of thousands (!) of American lives could have been saved if the medical establishment promoted and made available a 60% effective, safe, low-cost, early treatment option….

In late 2023 three courageous physicians sued the FDA regarding some of FDA’s unscientific and biased positions against Ivermectin, and WON! Kudos to them!

When Big Pharma finally did produce COVID-19 treatments (e.g., Paxlovid), all of a sudden the use of a treatment was now acceptable.

However scientific studies to date show that they were less safe and less effective than several treatments that the FDA did NOT approve (e.g., Vitamin D, IVM, and HCL. [E.g., compare Paxlovid’s 20%± effectiveness to the reported effectiveness of Vitamin D (60%±), IVM (61%±), and HCL (66%±).]

The FDA officially approved Remdesivir as a later-stage treatment for hospitalized patients — with insufficient scientific proof of safety or efficacy. The end result was predictably bad — zero percent effectiveness, plus serious safety risks!!!

We all make mistakes, even genuine scientists. That said, when new evidence is revealed, real scientists admit their errors and then go to great lengths to correct any public misconceptions that their prior bad actions contributed to.

However, rather than admit their mistake, the FDA STILL lists Remdesivir as an officially approved late treatment for COVID-19 patients. (For more info see here.)

There are more examples where the Medical Establishment replaced real Science with political science in their dealings with COVID-19 (e.g., the FDA [against their own advice [p 60]!] allows relative risk (not absolute risk) to be reported in the studies they are involved with [see here]) — but I try to keep my commentaries relatively short.

What about the experimental bio-chemical COVID injections? If you have absorbed the message in the above six points, it should be very clear that the FDA, etc. would not suddenly make a 180-degree turn regarding practicing real Science…

For another perspective on this disturbing situation, I strongly encourage you to watch a video of Dr. Scott Atlas (at least the first 10 minutes) — who was in the room when top-level decisions were being made on US COVID-19 policies…

All this boils down to two things we need to ensure that our children are properly taught in K-12 schools: 1) how to be Critical Thinkers, and 2) how to apply the traditional Scientific Method. By and large, neither of these is happening today!

©2024. John Droz, Jr. All rights reserved.

Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2024 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

Mental health is a critical aspect of overall well-being, particularly in the elderly population. As people age, they often face challenges such as cognitive decline, isolation, and changes in social dynamics. These factors make older people more vulnerable to mental health issues, which, in turn, can increase their susceptibility to scams. Understanding the connection between mental health and scam vulnerability is essential for protecting our elderly loved ones.

The Importance of Mental Health in Scam Prevention

Mental health conditions such as depression, anxiety, and dementia are prevalent among the elderly and can significantly impact their decision-making abilities. Depression and anxiety can lead to feelings of hopelessness or fear, making individuals more likely to respond to scams that offer a false sense of security or companionship. Dementia, conversely, impairs memory and judgment, making it difficult for individuals to recognize fraudulent activities.

Mental health professionals play a crucial role in identifying and addressing these issues. Regular mental health assessments can help detect early signs of cognitive decline or emotional distress, allowing for timely intervention. Improving mental health can enhance older adults’ ability to recognize and resist scams.

Common Scams Targeting the Older People

Scammers often target older people due to their perceived vulnerability. Some common scams include:

• Phishing Emails: Scammers send fraudulent emails that appear to be from legitimate organizations, tricking older people into revealing personal information or clicking on malicious links.
• Grandparent Scams: A scammer poses as a distressed grandchild, requesting money for an emergency. Driven by fear and concern, older adults may quickly send money without verifying the situation.
• Romance Scams: Scammers establish fake romantic relationships with lonely elderly individuals, eventually manipulating them into sending money.
• Telemarketing Fraud: Scammers use high-pressure sales tactics over the phone to convince elderly individuals to purchase unnecessary products or donate to fake charities.
• Investment Scams: Promising high returns with little risk, these scams exploit older people’s desire to secure their financial future, leading them to invest in fraudulent schemes.

These scams exploit older adults’ vulnerabilities, such as loneliness, fear, and cognitive decline, making it vital to raise awareness and provide protection.

Signs of Mental Health Decline and Scam Vulnerability

Recognizing early signs of mental health decline can help in identifying elderly individuals at risk of falling victim to scams. Some warning signs include:

• Changes in Behavior or Personality: Sudden mood swings, irritability, or confusion may indicate mental health issues.
• Difficulty Remembering Things: Frequent memory lapses, particularly concerning finances or personal details, can be red flags.
• Social Withdrawal: Isolation from family and friends may make the elderly more susceptible to scams, as they lack the support network to discuss suspicious activities.
• Increased Anxiety or Depression: Heightened feelings of anxiety or depression can cloud judgment and increase vulnerability to scams that prey on emotions.
• Unusual Spending Patterns: Sudden, unexplained transactions or investments may indicate that the older adult is being scammed.

These signs should prompt caregivers and loved ones to safeguard older people from scams proactively.

Strategies for Protecting the Elderly from Scams

Protecting older adults from scams requires a multifaceted approach that includes education, support, and vigilance. Here are some practical strategies:

• Educate Them About Common Scams: Regularly inform older people about the latest scams and how to identify them. This can be done through community programs, family discussions, or educational materials.
• Encourage Caution with Personal Information: Remind older people to be wary of sharing personal or financial information, especially over the phone or online.
• Help Develop a Support Network: Encourage older people to stay connected with friends, family, and community groups. A strong support network can provide advice and a second opinion on suspicious activities.
• Seek Professional Help for Mental Health Concerns: If there are signs of mental health decline, consult with a mental health professional for assessment and treatment.
• Monitor Financial Transactions: Regularly review financial statements for unusual transactions or patterns. This can help catch scams early and prevent further losses.

Open communication and trust between caregivers and older adults are vital to implementing these strategies effectively.

The Role of Mental Health Professionals and Attorneys

Mental health professionals and attorneys play crucial roles in protecting the elderly from scams. Mental health professionals can assess and address mental health concerns, improving the elderly’s ability to make sound decisions.

Attorneys can help safeguard older people’s assets by reviewing financial documents, providing legal advice, and, if necessary, filing for guardianship or conservatorship. This legal oversight can prevent scammers from exploiting older adults’ financial resources.

Protecting the elderly from scams is a collective responsibility that requires awareness, proactive measures, and support. Mental health awareness is vital to this effort, as it directly influences older people’s vulnerability to scams. By staying vigilant, educating our loved ones, and seeking professional help, we can safeguard older people from the growing threat of scams.

©2024. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

In one of Mark Twain’s masterpieces, Tom Sawyer and Becky Thatcher wandered deeper and deeper into a cavern, and got lost. It is much easier to penetrate deeply into such a labyrinth than it is to find the way out. Such appears to me to be the history of the plight of modern American medicine from about 1955 on.

By1955 wewere10yearspost-war,emerging from what seem now to be primitive medical practices. I would venture to say that most of what we know in science and medicine we have learned in the last 65 years or so. Our nation entered a long period of relative prosperity, and we far surpassed there’s to the world in medical and scientific research and practice.

But just as a stupid idea to enter a cavern with only a few candles can lead to disaster, so can a stupid or immoral idea in politics. Once we realize we are stuck in a figurative labyrinth, we are so lost that we do not even identify the decision(s) that led to it.

When “leaders” in prewar/wartime Germany came up with ideas for which they needed scientists, they used the scientists’ expertise to help them to destroy their nation, and to stain its name. The scientists became like zombies, acting in their own bodies, but controlled by outside, evil forces. The scientists abdicated their human responsibilities to these false leaders, and were complicit in their crimes.

Meanwhile in America, a disastrous immoral idea took hold. It shunted our founding principle aside in a malignantly insidious fashion. Our law contains no “duty to rescue” for a very good reason—it could and would totally drain citizens. If you see someone in need, and have something to give, you are perfectly free to give all you wish—but it is your decision, not a duty.

Until Franklin Delano Roosevelt, no American president dared to lay a claim on one citizen for some other favored citizen. A coup d’etat took place in the 1930s when the Constitution was traduced. Instead of the single category, “American citizen,” citizens were de facto divided into officially favored and disfavored groups. Some citizens were statutorily burdened with the duty to rescue others, not necessarily from disaster, but from responsibility for their own lives.

The Entitlement Labyrinth

Lyndon Baines Johnson went further down this path in 1965, when he bestowed Medicare/Medicaid on favored groups, thus relieving old people and poorer people from responsibility for their decisions about education, work, and health. Politicians who “give” things to citizen groups give other people’s things, not their own. With other people’s labor, and other people’s money, they give favors in exchange for votes. We live in a transfer society now, where government forcibly transfers some citizens’ property and the fruit of their labors to other people. Those other people are not necessarily even in need. Many of them are quite well off. To help the fleeced citizens accept this, politicians excite envy among groups.

Many of the politicians who currently practice the politics of envy are millionaires, but they engage in vilifying others who have done useful work, who created jobs and wealth, not to mention useful products and services, and who freely bestowed voluntary charity on others The politicians who do this may be trying to deflect envy, which they may fear might be directed toward themselves, onto the producers in the nation, such as . “corporations” and “doctors.”

When LBJ decided to make political hay by pretending to “save” the groups now called “seniors” and “the poor,” his chosen method enlisted physicians. Despite early resistance, due to recognition of the destruction socialized medicine would cause, physicians were nevertheless eventually seduced, just as scientists had been by other regimes. By the time many of us currently practicing medicine came of age, Medicare and Medicaid were firmly entrenched, and we were enrolled into them, barely knowing they existed, while we were in medical school.

The original Medicare/Medicaid legislation provided that there would never be interference in the practice of medicine. We were reassured that the programs would never cost more than $9billion a year, maximum. So much for predicting the future: the cost was up to $406billion in 2006. The sage, widely respected luminaries who came up with the $9 billion figure do not seem to have been acquainted with human nature.

In this process, true charity was greatly diminished. Why give to the needy when your labor and money are already being confiscated by government, which pretends to “take care of” so many needs and problems?

Wolf Crying

An interlocking chain of events ensued. As patients realized they could get medical care that was free to them, or almost free, they stepped up their use of the emergency room(ER), they went to physicians’ offices for ever slighter reasons, and they did such things as having their joints replaced not just to keep walking, but to keep playing tennis. All fine, except that the people burdened with the bills for their care might want time and money to play tennis and lead their own lives, with the money that they earned. It wasn’t just the spending. Once, if a person presented at the ER with, say, a headache, we could presume that there was a real problem: a headache out of the ordinary. No more. Since it costs many people little or nothing to come to the ER, they come in for the slightest of reasons. Maybe they could have taken some aspirin. But

maybe in the ER they can get Tylenol with codeine, which has a resale value, or maybe the headache is connected with family problems, and they can score some points against the other side by taking on the sick role.

Maybe they have just learned to be dependent. Maybe they don’t feel as important if they treat the headache themselves as they do if they “have to” go to the ER for it. So we are now faced with an influx of the mildly indisposed, “just wanted to be sure” people drowning out the truly sick, making decision-making much more complicated for the physician. There is a limit to how many people can get head CTs and MRIs. Also gone unremarked is the likelihood that physicians are not immune to the mindset induced by people crying “Wolf!” After a certain number of false-alarm headaches, the physician may be more likely to overlook, for example, a leaking berry aneurysm.

False Turns

Physicians, whose motto has been “First, do no harm,” at first resisted government interference in medicine, but eventually they saw no harm in making taxpayers pay the bills for the medical care their patients received. Naturally, the bills mounted.

As things got out of hand, the politicians got scared. Most of them are too cowardly to face reality. Instead of forthrightly stating that the Medicare/Medicaid system was out of control because there is no brake whatsoever on the medical desires of the population segments the system favors, they attacked the physicians and hospitals.

There was no appreciation of how much worse they could make the problem of giving people total personal discretion in spending their fellow taxpayers’ money by distorting medical care with perverse incentives.

The diagnosis-related group (DRG) system was imposed sometime in the 1980s to pay hospitals a flat rate per diagnosis, regardless of the actual cost of the care of the patient. It provided incentives to make hospital care more efficient—or at least speedier. Discharge planning became more important, with a kind of game to figure out the best (most remunerative) way of stating the diagnosis, and the quickest discharge, ready or not.

As John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis has pointed out, there is a tuning fork-shaped graph that results from tracking all the fixes government has tried. Without radical surgery on the entitlement system that bestows favors on some at the expense of others, tinkering with it can reset the point on the graph showing what our present spending is, but it has no effect on the growth rate.

When DRGs did not work, a big “waste, fraud and abuse” hunt was launched, with Medicare patients told their physicians might be committing fraud, and to look over their “Medicare Beneficiary Notices.”

In order to recover some money, the government now employs “bounty hunters”—people who get part of the loot when they “find” overcharges. Unlike defense contractors, physicians have no big money sluice for sliding cash to politicians, so we mean nothing to them.

With the burdens mounting, and fewer willing to carry them, politicians have decided—again without clearly stating their aims—that we need a huge influx of foreigners to shoulder the burden. And to meet the demand for taxpayer-funded medical services, physicians began using “physician extenders” (sounds like “hamburger helper,” doesn’t it?). Nurse practitioners, a new category, got into the act, supposedly to take care of the less sick, the worried well, the slightly indisposed. Of course, sometimes things did not work out that way. Sometimes the truly sick ended up with a nurse practitioner unable to handle the problem.

An explosion of “initiatives” has been designed to corral people, force vaccinations on their children, monitor their prescriptions, visit their babies at home, and have them beg for permission to take drugs that the government does not approve of.

Instead of studying diseases and therapeutics, physicians waste time learning “correct coding.” Not for their patients, but for the bureaucrats. Some physicians have retired early. Others have fled to an area not “covered”—especially cosmetic surgery—where there is freedom, but which removes them from the heavy lifting in medical care. Some just game the system, meeting absurdity with dishonesty. Some over-treat the patients paid for by government in order to make more money. Now that there is such an outcry about spiraling costs, some under-treat patients, because government has made it a money-losing proposition to treat Medicare and Medicaid patients, by paying less and less for that care.

Very few people saw where this path was leading, as they voted for politicians who promised to give them money taken from their fellow citizens. It supposedly represents some kind of pact between the generations, except that members of the younger generation never gave their permission. But now the giant Ponzi scheme is unraveling, and the nation is going bankrupt.

There’s no guarantee at all that the U.S. will not end up like a Third-World nation. As long as we do not recognize that medical care is not, and never can be, free of charge, people will continue to respond to perverse incentives, and never recognize that third-party control is the whole problem with our medical care. Things can get a lot worse than they are now. To some, the house of medicine may look fine, but it is like a house riddled with termites.

Away Out

But there is good news. We could fix things overnight, by seceding, dropping out of the system. Tom and Becky survived being lost in the cave because they saw a gleam of light, and found a way out. We can do the same. No need to retrace our steps in this Byzantine labyrinth of “compliance” and control. At some point, Medicare and Medicaid will implode, just as the U.S.S.R. did. When it happens, people will still need medical care.

In the meantime, every physician should think about a fallback plan for an alternate livelihood. We should be ready to be independent. We can grow food, modify a house for passive solar heat, install windmills, save money, invest in some other thing to learn or do to support ourselves, and take care of our patients without Big Brother in the room with us.

©2024. Tamzin A. Rosenwasser, M.D. All rights reserved.