Posted in American Exceptionalism, American Independence, American Presidents, big government, Capers, Dependency, Entitlements, Free Society, government incompetence, Government Regulations, Government Spending, Influence peddling, Liberty, News From Washington, News From Washington, DC & Related Shenanigans, Philosophy, Policy Issues, Quotes from American Presidents, Representative Republic vs. Democracy, Rule of Law, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Security, Uncategorized

Will Democracy’s Myths Doom Liberty? | Mises Wire

“It is time to demystify democracy. The surest effect of exalting democracy is to make it easier for politicians to drag everyone else down. Until presidents and members of Congress begin to honor their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, they deserve all the distrust and disdain they receive. Americans need less faith in democracy and more faith in their own liberty.

The phrases which consecrate democracy seep into many Americans’ minds like buried hazardous waste.

If Joe Biden wins the presidential election, voters will be told that our political system is redeemed: the “will of the people” is now clear, Biden will rule with “the consent of the governed,” and Americans are obliged to again trust and obey the federal government. If Donald Trump is reelected, much of the same media will continue howling about imaginary Russian plots. But these notions remain dangerous delusions regardless of who is declared the winner on Election Day.

Americans are encouraged to believe that their vote on Election Day somehow miraculously guarantees that the subsequent ten thousand actions by the president, Congress, and federal agencies embody “the will of the people.” In reality, the more edicts a president issues, the less likely that his decrees will have any connection to popular preferences. It is even more doubtful that all the provisions of hefty legislative packages reflect majority support, considering the wheeling, dealing, and conniving prior to final passage. 

A 2017 survey by Rasmussen Reports found that only 23 percent of Americans believe that the federal government has “the consent of the governed.” Political consent is defined these days as rape was defined a generation or two ago: people consent to anything which they do not forcibly resist. 

Voters cannot complain about getting screwed after being enticed into a voting booth. Anyone who does not attempt to burn down city hall presumably consented to everything the mayor did. Anyone who does not jump the White House fence and try to storm into the Oval Office consents to all executive orders. Anyone who doesn’t firebomb the nearest federal office building consents to the latest edicts in the Federal Register. And if people do attack government facilities, then they are terrorists who can be justifiably killed or imprisoned forever.

In the short term, the most dangerous democratic delusion is that conducting an election makes government trustworthy again. 

When scandals erupt, citizens will be told to trust politically approved fixes to the system—even though most Washington reforms are like fighting crime by hiding the corpses of victims.

Until presidents and members of Congress begin to honor their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, they deserve all the distrust and disdain they receive. Americans need less faith in democracy and more faith in their own liberty.”

https://mises.org/wire/will-democracys-myths-doom-liberty

Posted in Capers, Free Society, Influence peddling, Liberty, Philosophy, Policy Issues, Rule of Law, Technology, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Security, Uncategorized

Meet NBC News’ Brandy Zadrozny – The Woman In Charge of Doxxing and Destroying Trump Supporters – Revolver

Zadrozny wrote a guide on how to unethically dox anonymous people online. Zadrozny appears to use paid, dark-data search engines to dox the personal information of anonymous Trump supporters online — obtaining property records, phone information, and even their Amazon wish lists.

“…Zadrozny is part of a press corps deployed to cover “misinformation, disinformation, and extremism” after the Internet fueled President Donald Trump’s win in 2016. This new journo beat was created to surveil, slander, and censor online voices that counter ruling class narratives.”

https://www.revolver.news/2020/10/brandy-zadrozny-dox-trump-supporters-glamorize-pedophiles/

Posted in Capers, Disease Prevention, FDA, Government Regulations, Patient Safety, Policy Issues, Protocols, Uncategorized

Stem cell clinics co-opt clinicaltrials.gov to push unproven therapies – STAT

When a judge ruled last week that the FDA could stop the work of U.S. Stem Cell, the firm’s trials remained on clinicaltrials.gov; the postings were no longer actively enlisting patients, but they didn’t mention that the company’s injections had blinded at least four people, either.

Nor did a listing of a completed study sponsored by Cell Surgical Network include any indication that the FDA is seeking an injunction against that company, too.

Nor did the five entriesfrom StemGenex say anywhere that regulators had found the clinic’s marketing to be illegal in 2018.

What worries bioethicists and biologists is not just the crossing of governmental wires. It’s also these companies’ co-opting of a taxpayer-funded database to market therapies without proof of safety or regulatory review. To let such dubious vendors post on a federal website, the critics say, is to lend them an air of legitimacy they don’t deserve.

https://www.statnews.com/2019/06/11/stem-cell-clinics-clinical-trials-dot-gov/

Posted in Capers, Disease Prevention, Education, Nutrition, outcomes, Patient Safety, Policy Issues, primary care

Stone-walling low-carb: DAA, APHA, and the Diet of Worms. | Richard David Feinman

“Our Gutenberg is, of course, the internet where technical and scientific writings, once the province of specialists, can now be viewed by many and where they can be discussed widely. Publishers of many journals try to maintain pay-walls in keeping with somebody’s observation that publishers’ function used to be to make new information available while now they work to make information unavailable.  (Many simultaneously cash in on open access which charges the authors outrageous fees). Whether the availability of scientific facts is out-weighted by proliferation of alternative facts is open to question but, on balance, we have a view, not only of the science, but of the inner workings of the health agencies that might otherwise be visible to only a few. And that’s how we have extensive access to the Fettke case and an associated Diet convened by the Australian Senate.

As reported by Marika Sboros, Fettke “cannot tell patients not to eat sugar. Why not? Because the country’s medical regulatory body, Australian Health Practitioners Regulatory Authority (AHPRA), says so….It has been investigating Fettke for more than two years now. That was after the first anonymous complaint from a DAA dietitian in 2014. Earlier this year,  AHPRA told Fettke to stop talking about nutrition until it had decided on a suitable sanction.” and — I’m not making this up — “informed Fettke that it was investigating him for ‘inappropriately reversing (a patient’s) type 2 diabetes…’”

Dr. Gary Fettke testified at an Australian Senate Inquiry on November 1. and just “by coincidence,” a few days later, the APHRA 2 1/2 year investigation came to an end and Fettke was told that he would be constrained from giving nutritional advice.  In the end, this did not sit well with the Senate which undertook further hearing interrogating Martin Fletcher, the CEO of APHRA.”

Our 2015 paper, Low-carbohydrate diets as the first approach in the treatment of diabetes. Review and evidence-base, summarized the clinical experience and the research results of the 26 authors. M…

Source: Stone-walling low-carb: DAA, APHA, and the Diet of Worms. | Richard David Feinman

Posted in American Presidents, big government, Capers, Economic Issues, Foreign policy, Free Society, government incompetence, Government Regulations, Government Spending, Keynesian Economics, Liberty, Progressivism, Quotes from American Presidents, Rule of Law, Tax Policy, Uncategorized

Bad Fiscal Policies Are a Worse Scandal Than the Panama Papers – Reason.com

ReasonPresident Barack Obama, on the other hand, recognizes that most of the activities reported in the stolen pages are legal. As such, he wants to do something that might be even more radical than what France has done. He proposes making it illegal to legally reduce one’s tax burden. Falling back on some generic and zero-sum concept of tax fairness, he told reporters that we “shouldn’t make it legal to engage in transactions just to avoid taxes” and that he wants to enforce “the basic principle of making sure everyone pays their fair share.”

No matter what paper you read or what program you listen to, this story is couched only in terms of a groundbreaking discovery that exposes how everyone and every company linked to an offshore account has run afoul of the legal system. Not true.

Source: Bad Fiscal Policies Are a Worse Scandal Than the Panama Papers – Reason.com

Posted in Capers, DC & Related Shenanigans, Economic Issues, Government Spending, Job loss, Policy Issues, Unemployment

Abbott and Costello’s take on unemployment? Its hilarious. | PJ Wilcox, Author | LinkedIn

abbott-and-costelloLet’s take a break from the Greek default saga for a day so we can prepare for the NFP number; the Non-Farm Payroll data. How many new hires are there? Are the data reliable? Man, who cares anyway.

Hopefully the following comedy will help assuage some recent angst so let’s have it.

Wait, “who’s on first” again?

COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America .

ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible Times. It’s 5.6%.

COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?

ABBOTT: No, that’s 23%.

COSTELLO: You just said 5.6%.

ABBOTT: 5.6% Unemployed.

COSTELLO: Right 5.6% out of work.

ABBOTT: No, that’s 23%.

via Abbott and Costello’s take on unemployment? Its hilarious. | PJ Wilcox, Author | LinkedIn.

Posted in Capers, Consumer-Driven Health Care, Disease Prevention, Education, Evidence-based Medicine, Influence peddling, Medical conditions and illness, Patient Safety, Quality, Unsettled Science

Why the “Food Babe” enrages scientists – Vox

151296637.0.0Hari is a former management consultant turned self-styled consumer activist who uses her blog to wage war on the toxins in our foods — from supposedly “hazardous chemicals” in pumpkin spice lattes to the genetically modified ingredients in grocery aisles. Here’s how the New York Times described her approach:

Sometimes she finds an ingredient, often an ugly-sounding chemical (propylene glycol, which she said was in beer), and finds a secondary industrial use (antifreeze) for it. (In this case, Ms. Hari actually confused her chemicals. Dr. David H. Gorski, a surgical oncologist who also has a degree in chemistry, wrote on Science-Based Medicine that the beer ingredient is propylene glycol alginate, which, despite its name, is not even close to propylene glycol, is not antifreeze and is derived from kelp.)

Hari then harnesses the power of her massive audience (known as the Food Babe Army) and online petitions to get food chains and manufacturers to stop using the ingredients she deems harmful, based on her pseudoscientific analyses. It doesn’t matter that what she says usually isn’t backed by research evidence, or that the chemicals she singles out pose no real danger to human health.

via Why the “Food Babe” enrages scientists – Vox.

Posted in Access to healthcare, Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare), Capers, Crony Capitalism, Economic Issues, Free-Market, Government Regulations, Influence peddling, Medical Costs, Patient Choice, Policy Issues

Removing state-based obstacles to affordable healthcare | TheHill

congress-blogThe negative effect of Certificate of Need laws on competition and the monopoly-like privileges they bestow have attracted the attention of the Justice Department and the FTC. These agencies strongly condemned certificate-of-need laws as recently as 2008, arguing that they ruin the market process while delivering the opposite of the benefits they were intended to promote. 

Above all else, the preponderance of evidence is that certificate-of-need laws do not fulfill any of their intended purposes. According to studies from the Mercatus center at George Mason University, they decrease the availability of medical resources, do not make care more accessible for underserved communities, and increase the costs of care by 13.6 percent per-capita in the states where they exist. If there is any substantial benefit associated with these regulations, such a benefit has yet to present itself. The negatives, on the other hand, are unmistakable.

via Removing state-based obstacles to affordable healthcare | TheHill.