THIS SETUP WITH DENTISTRY IS THE 'NEW ECONOMY' APPROACH TO ALL HEALTH CARE BEING DEVELOPED HERE IN MARYLAND BY JOHNS HOPKINS. THE UNDERSERVED HAVE FOR DECADES SAID THAT THEY WERE EXPERIMENTED ON AND INDEED, THE PRACTICE HAS BECOME SO WIDESPREAD AS TO BECOME IMPOSSIBLE TO HIDE. THESE HEALTH FRAUDS HAVE BEEN OCCURRING FOR DECADES AND THEY ARE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.
IN BALTIMORE I SPOKE OF MAYOR RAWLINGS-BLAKE AND 10,000 IMMIGRANT FAMILIES COMING TO THE REGION. I SPOKE OF HEALTH CARE AND TEACHING AS THE DRIVE FOR RECRUITMENT. THE 'KOOL SMILES' DENTISTRY CHAIN OWNED BY AN INVESTMENT BANKER IN SAN FRANCISCO APPEARS TO BE FULLY STAFFED BY IMMIGRANT DENTISTS.....VIET NAM, CAMBODIA, UKRAINE, ROMANIA, PHILLIPINES, ETC.......JUST AS THIS PUSH IN BALTIMORE, LED BY JOHNS HOPKINS HAS PLANNED. BRINGING YOUR 'TIRED AND HUNGRY' AS AN IMMIGRATION SLOGAN ALWAYS MEANT THAT A FAMILY WOULD COME TO AMERICA TO LEARN AND INTERGRATE INTO THE CULTURE AND BENEFIT FROM THE AMERICAN DREAM OF CLIMBING SOCIAL LADDERS. THESE PEOPLE ACCLIMATE FROM A THIRD WORLD CULTURE TO A FIRST WORLD CULTURE. WHAT THIS 'NEW ECONOMY' DOES IS BRING PROFESSIONALS FROM THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES.......FULL OF GRAFT, BRIBERY, FRAUD, AND NO HUMAN RIGHTS AND PLACES THEM IN POSITIONS LIKE THESE DENTISTS AND SOON TO BE DOCTORS AND TEACHERS WITH NO OVERSIGHT. ARE ALL IMMIGRANT LABOR GOING TO BE A DANGER TO THOSE THEY SERVE? OF COURSE NOT. AT A TIME WHEN SCOUNDRALS HAVE THE LEAD IN OUR GOVERNMENT, IT IS A GOOD FIT FOR THEM TO HAVE THIRD WORLD VALUES AT HAND.....BAD FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS TRYING TO SHAKE FREE OF THIS DEBAUCHED CULTURE.
IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO VOTE THESE INCUMBENTS OUT!!!!!!
THE BATTLE DRUMS ARE RUMBLING IN WASHINGTON AS THEY TELL THE PEOPLE THAT ENTITLEMENTS ARE JUST UNSUSTAINABLE AND WILL HAVE TO BE CUT.....CO-PAYS AND LESS BENEFIT....HIGHER AGE ELIGIBILITY.......JUST AS THEY ARE DOING WITH THE PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS. WE KNOW THAT FRAUD AND WASTE ARE THE PROBLEMS AND WE ARE NOT SEEING THIS AS THE PRIORITY FOR GOVERNMENTS AT ALL LEVELS; IN FACT THE NEGLECT IN OVERSIGHT IS GETTING WORSE. AUDITING ALL AGENCIES IN BALTIMORE WILL NOT HAPPEN SAYS RAWLINGS-BLAKE......THE TAX MONEY SPENT ON AUDITING NEEDS TO GO TOWARDS BUSINESS TAX CUTS. WELL, WE HAVE THE SAME PEOPLE, WHO OVER THESE FEW DECADES IN OFFICE COMMITTED THESE CRIMES, DETERMINED TO CONTINUE AND INSTITUTIONALIZE THIS THIRD WORLD VALUE.
THIS IS FRAUD IN 2005:
Medicare Fraud Settlement Causes Oncologists To Lose Income, USA Medical News Today
Article Date: 08 Dec 2005 - 10:00 PDT
Many oncologists will earn 30 to 50 percent less a year as a consequence of a $1.1 billion Medicare fraud settlement with two leading cancer drug manufacturers, according to a study in the Dec. 1 issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The study was led by Charles L. Bennett, M.D., professor of medicine, division of hematology/oncology, at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and an investigator at The Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University.
The cases centered around a major sales promotion effort by two pharmaceutical companies, AstraZeneca and TAP Pharmaceuticals, that encouraged urologists who received free drug samples to provide the samples to their Medicare-insured prostate cancer patients and to bill Medicare the $1,200 charge for the product.
Many urologists earned an extra $100,000 annually in income with this program, and some of the busier urologists earned over $1 million.
The TAP and AstraZeneca cases alleged that the spread between prices paid by physicians for cancer drugs and the amount reimbursed by Medicare and Medicaid ranged from 12 percent to 77 percent of the acquisition prices and was an important factor used in the marketing of the prostate cancer drugs.
TAP and AstraZeneca employees were alleged to refer to the spread between the physician's purchase price and the Medicare Average Wholesale Price reimbursement as the "return to practice" of "profit" that physicians could anticipate from buying their product.
Before 2005, Medicare reimbursement was based on Average Wholesale Price and included funds designed to cover the acquisition cost of cancer drugs plus administration-related overhead such as rent, personnel costs and bad debt.
In 2005, as a result of the settlements against the pharmaceutical companies, Medicare shifted to Average Sales Price-based reimbursement to address concerns that marketing incentives were driving pharmaceutical sales.
This change is expected to result in an 8 percent decrease in the mean revenue of oncologists and a decrease in physician reimbursement for cancer drugs.
Bennett's collaborators on this study include researchers from the Feinberg School; the Jesse Brown Veterans Affairs Center Lakeside; the Mid-West Center for Health Services and Policy Research; Rush Medical College; the University of Illinois at Chicago; Louisiana State University School of Medicine; Walter Reed Army Medical Center; and the Eastern Virginia Medical School.
YOUR ELECTED OFFICIAL IS TELLING YOU TO LITERALLY 'DROP DEAD' RATHER THAN ENFORCE RULE OF LAW. THE MONEY BROUGHT BACK FROM FRAUD WOULD GROW THE ECONOMY AND GOVERNMENT COFFERS.....FRAUD INVESTIGATION IS A GROWTH INDUSTRY! THERE SHOULD BE A BOOM IN PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT AT EVRY AGENCY IN OVERSIGHT AND INSPECTION AS WELL AS A BOOM IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT'S INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION UNITS. RECOVERING THE FRAUDULENT PROFITS PAYS FOR THIS -----IT IS NOT AN EXPENSE!
THIS IS FRAUD IN 2012:
July 3, 2012 6:49 PM
U.S. doctors buying unapproved drugs By Armen Keteyian Play CBS News Video (CBS News) A patient in a cancer clinic takes it on faith that he or she is getting the chemotherapy that their doctor prescribed. But it turns out many are injected with dubious concoctions no better than water. The Food and Drug Administration approves drugs sold in the United States, but some clinics are buying drugs from outside the country not approved by the FDA. CBS News, which has been investigating this trend, has this latest development.
This is what cancer drugs that are not approved for use in the U.S. look like: foreign labels with no stamp of approval from the federal Food and Drug Administration. They're illegal for doctors in the U.S. to prescribe.
"It could be deadly. It could be fatal," said one person who asked to be disguised. The person works at a medical clinic that purchased unapproved foreign cancer medications for years.
The clinic worker was asked when the drugs come through if she sees them with foreign writing on the packages.
"We have," said the person. "Turkey, Germany -- German language on the package. And it was questioned and told that everything was fine, that these were the exact same drugs."
But they weren't the exact same drugs. And we've learned the federal government has now identified at least 79 U.S. medical practices that purchased drugs from foreign or unlicensed suppliers.
The FDA says the medical practices put "patients at risk" by exposing them to drugs that could have been "fake," "contaminated," "ineffective" and "dangerous."
Here's what they are talking about: Last year, vials of the cancer drug Avastin began popping up in U.S. clinics. It turned out the vials were fake and had no Avastin in them at all.
When we investigated, we found the fake Avastin was sold by companies in the Barbados, the U.K., Denmark, Switzerland, and a company in a building in a gritty neighborhood outside Cairo, Egypt. This is exactly why it's against the law to import drugs the FDA has not approved."
Marvin Shepherd, president of the Partnership for Safe Medicines -- the leading national group fighting counterfeit drugs, said: "The doctors should not be buying unapproved foreign medications and they know it too. I mean quite often, in the Avastin case, one side of the label was in French and the other side of the package was in Arabic. That is not an approved label by FDA. It was an unapproved product."
The clinic employee says the motivating factor is money. Foreign drugs are cheaper than U.S. drugs. For example, a European version of Avastin could be as much as $600 less than the average U.S. manufacturer's price.
"People these days will do anything to make a buck," said the clinic employee."They don't care about the people who are sick and dying."
The FDA says one of the clinics that purchased unapproved drugs is in this building in Johnson City, Tennessee. According to court records, FDA investigators found some cancer drugs at the clinic last year were either "misbranded" or "unapproved" for use in the U.S.
The owner of the clinic, Dr. William Kincaid, declined our request for an interview. So we went to his home in Johnson City. The person at the door asked us to leave.
In a written statement, Dr. Kincaid's clinic said it "did nothing wrong," and because the "issue is currently under review by the FDA," the clinic "will defer further comment on the matter."
What's still unknown is how many patients nationwide received unapproved foreign cancer drugs from their doctors. And the FDA won't say if any doctors have been charged.
"I've seen when patients suffer," said the clinic employee. "They suffer enough when they get diagnosed, when they are initially told that they have cancer. This adds a level of anxiety now and I don't think any patient should be forced to deal with that."
As for what's being done to help prevent this problem, both the House and Senate recently passed bills broadly expanding the FDA's power to inspect these foreign manufacturing sites. The bills also sharply increased penalties for counterfeiting drugs from three years to 20 years in prison. These two bills will go into law sometime this fall.
© 2012 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.
BELOW IS A GOOD COMPARISON OF PLANS PUT FORWARD IN THE HEAT OF THE DEBT CEILING DEBATE LAST YEAR. IN ALL THESE CASES IT IS ASSUMED THAT MEDICARE IS UNSUSTAINABLE AND NEEDS TO BE CUT IN ANY NUMBER OF WAYS. NONE OF THE PROPOSALS ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE LOSS TO HEALTH CARE FRAUD IN THE TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVER A FEW DECADES IS THE PROBLEM AND RECOVERING THIS MONEY IS THE BIGGEST PART OF THE SOLUTION. MEDICAID IS ALREADY BEING SEVERELY CUT BY FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES.
Comparison of Medicare Provisions in Deficit and Debt Reduction Proposals
KAISER FAMILY FOUNDATION
In response to concern about the nation’s rising debt and deficit, and increasing apprehension about the federal budget, prominent leaders and various commissions have come forward with recommendations to strengthen the economy and bolster the nation’s fiscal health. These proposals include both tax increases and spending reductions in discretionary programs, including defense, and in mandatory programs, such as Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare.
Many of these proposals include recommendations to reduce the growth in Medicare spending over time. These proposals come on the heels of the enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 which slowed the growth in Medicare spending by more than $400 billion between 2010 and 2019 – reducing the
average annual growth rate from 6.8 percent to 5.9 percent during this 10-year period and extending the life of the Medicare Trust Fund by 8 years, to 2024. Yet, with Medicare spending at 15 percent of the federal budget in 2011, and projected to grow both as a share of the federal budget and the overall economy due to rising health costs and an aging population, additional measures to reduce Medicare spending are on the table once again.
This document provides a side-by-side comparison of the key Medicare changes that have been recommended as part of broad-based deficit- and debt-reduction packages, including:
• The President’s Plan for Economic Growth and Deficit Reduction, released by the Office of Management and Budget on September 19, 2011;
• The Senate “Gang of Six” proposal, as put forward by Senators Saxby Chambliss, Tom Coburn, Kent Conrad, Mike Crapo, Dick Durbin, and Mark Warner in
“A Bipartisan Plan to Reduce Our Nation’s Deficits – Executive Summary,” released July 19, 2011.
• The House Budget Committee’s Budget Resolution, as passed by the House of Representatives on April 15, 2011;
• The Administration’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, chaired by Erskine Bowles and former Senator Alan Simpson, based on
the report “The Moment of Truth,” released on December 1, 2010; and
• The Debt Reduction Task Force, chaired by Dr. Alice Rivlin and former Senator Peter Domenici, in their report “Restoring America’s Future,” released
November 17, 2010.
In addition, the appendix provides a summary of Medicare provisions included in deficit- and debt- reduction proposals released by the following individuals and organizations: American Enterprise Institute, Cato Institute, Center for American Progress, Senator Tom Coburn, Congressional Progressive Caucus, Dr. Bill Galston and Ms. Maya MacGuineas, Heritage Foundation, Institute for America’s Future, Senator Joseph Lieberman and Senator Coburn, Our Fiscal Security, Dr. Alice Rivlin and Representative Paul Ryan, Republican Study Committee, Roosevelt Institute Campus Network, and Representative Ryan.
Each proposal includes recommendations for reducing the growth in Medicare spending. Many proposals would cap the annual growth in Medicare expenditures and shift Medicare from what is now a “defined benefit” program to a “defined contribution” system. Other proposals would make one or more of the following changes:
strengthen the role of the new Independent Payment Advisory Board, restructure Medicare benefits and cost-sharing requirements, eliminate first-dollar coverage in Medigap policies, increase Medicare premiums, raise the age of Medicare eligibility beyond age 65, and reduce Medicare spending through changes to the Medicare
drug benefit. While several groups and individuals have offered proposals to reduce the deficit, proposals included in this side-by-side are those that include significant changes to the Medicare program.
A more detailed comparison of these proposals, based on recommendations issued to date, follows.
KAISER FAMILY FOUNDATION: Comparison of Medicare Provisions in Deficit and Debt Reduction Proposals (Last Modified: September 23, 2011) 7