The Most Ridiculous Headline I’ve Read On Covid: New study blames VAXXED deaths on the UNVAXXED…because they cause anxiety. Seriously.

I mean, the headline says it all really. First, take it because it is safe and effective. Then, it was a pandemic of the unvaxxed. Stop blaming those of us educated enough not to get jabbed for your problems. I knew they were lying from the beginning about the mRNA lie.

I didn’t make anyone get jabbed. My position is everyone has to decide for themselves. The facts are coming out now, along with the consequences, but they were there the whole time.

A study published in August in the Journal of BioMedicine actually claims in its abstract:

Fear mongering and misinformation being peddled by people with no scientific training to terrorise people into staying unvaccinated is not just causing people to remain susceptible to viral outbreaks, but could also be causing more side effects seen in the vaccination process. This brief review will offer data that may demonstrate that misinformation perpetuated by the anti-vaccination movement may be causing more deaths and side effects from any vaccine.

Yes, apparently all those people suddenly dropping dead of heart attacks and strokes are being stressed into it by us anti-vaxxers warning them about heart attacks and strokes.

Now, if you’re thinking that’s the most ridiculous thing you’ve ever heard…well, you’re wrong. He’s done the research:

A mini review of published literature has been conducted and found that mental stress clearly causes vasoconstriction and arterial constriction of the blood vessels. Therefore, if subjects are panicked, concerned, stressed or scared of the vaccination, their arteries will constrict and become smaller in and around the time of receiving the vaccine.

See, they’re not dying because the vaccine gave them a heart attack…they’re dying because they were afraid it might.

Read the rest here, that’s all I could take, courtesy of Vlad Tepes, a blog you should follow

Supression of Hydroxycloriquine Began Before Covid, But It was Safe And Worked Against Covid – Part Deux

First, it would have saved a year and hundreds of thousands of lives. It would have eliminated the need for the mRNA jab.

What frosts my ass is that doctors went along with it because their licenses were threatened. They knew it would pass and a little rebellion would have held up the Hippocratic Oath.

Study: Hydroxychloroquine Works Against Covid

And therein lies the problem. If you have a cure, you don’t need and Emergency Authorization for a jab that didn’t prevent catching or transmitting Covid to others. (Oh, and Ivermectin did too).

There are a lot of people that should be tried for murder or the prevention of healing through medicine.

This explanation is a little tough without a chemistry degree, but the average civilian can get the drift that it worked and would have saved more lives. I wouldn’t have killed those dying of Myocarditis and the upcoming diseases like SADS.

Results

Inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 entry by anesthetic compounds

In order to test a membrane-disruptive mechanism for HCQ inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 viral entry, we compared HCQ to anesthetics (tetracaine and propofol) which are known to be membrane-disruptive. HEK293T cells overexpressing ACE2 were infected with a retrovirus pseudotyped with the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (SARS2-PV). A segment of the spike protein binds to ACE2 and recapitulates viral entry47,48. A luciferase encoded in the pseudotyped virus is then used to quantitate viral entry (Fig. 1b–d).

Treatments with HCQ, tetracaine, and propofol all robustly reduced SARS2-PV entry into HEK293T cells overexpressing ACE2 (Fig. 1b). The cells were first treated with drugs (50 µM) for 1 h, then the drugs were removed. After the treatment and subsequent drug removal, SARS2-PV was applied such that the virus was never exposed to the drugs, thus avoiding potential direct effects of cholesterol on the viron. HCQ had the greatest effect on viral inhibition with almost a 90% reduction in SARS2-PV luciferase activity (Fig. 1b).

The study is linked above, but given that they all lied (see a post or two below) and the pattern appears.

Vitamin D Protects Against Covid: A Study That Proved What A Lot Of Us Instinctively Knew

A total of 72 observational studies, covering 1,976,099 patients, met the criteria for inclusion. Compared to those with sufficient vitamin D, the odds of developing COVID-19 among those with deficient or insufficient vitamin D levels were 1.46 times higher.

Their risk of severe disease was also 1.9 times higher, and their risk of death 2.07 times higher. One potential drawback was that all studies ranked “high” for risk of bias. The studies also differed in their definitions of severe illness and vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency, making absolute comparisons difficult.

  • Since December 2021, four large systematic meta-analyses have been published, looking at either vitamin D levels, supplementation or both. In all cases, the data consistently show that low vitamin D levels raise your risk of COVID while higher baseline levels and/or supplementation lowers all risks by 1.5 to three times
  • In the first of these four meta-analyses, the odds of developing COVID-19 among those with deficient or insufficient vitamin D levels were 1.46 times higher than those with sufficient vitamin D. Their risk of severe disease was also 1.9 times higher, and their risk of death 2.07 times higher
  • In the second study, the odds of ICU admission based on vitamin D status were 2.63 times higher among those with severe vitamin D deficiency, 2.16 times higher among those with deficiency, and 2.83 times higher among those with insufficient levels. Mortality was also much higher in all patients with low levels
  • In the third analysis, only 12.19% of COVID patients who received vitamin D required ICU admission, compared to 26.27% of those who did not get vitamin D
  • The fourth and most recent analysis found “significant associations of vitamin D supplementation with COVID-19, encompassing risks of disease worsening and mortality,” especially in seasons characterized by vitamin D deficiency and in patients with mild to moderate infection

Read the whole thing here. I didn’t do the study, but I know I’ve seen enough corroborating evidence that I’ve been taking it since I first heard of Covid.

One last nugget to send you over for the rest….

Therapeutic Role of Vitamin D in COVID

In the first of these four meta-analyses, “Prognostic and Therapeutic Role of Vitamin D in COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,”3 published December 11, 2021, the researchers sought to determine “the association between vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency and susceptibility to COVID-19, its severity, mortality and role of vitamin D in its treatment.”

A total of 72 observational studies, covering 1,976,099 patients, met the criteria for inclusion. Compared to those with sufficient vitamin D, the odds of developing COVID-19 among those with deficient or insufficient vitamin D levels were 1.46 times higher.

Their risk of severe disease was also 1.9 times higher, and their risk of death 2.07 times higher. One potential drawback was that all studies ranked “high” for risk of bias. The studies also differed in their definitions of severe illness and vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency, making absolute comparisons difficult. That said, the authors concluded.

Why did the doctors recommend the jab instead of a cure? Of course I know to save their jobs because it sure as shooting wasn’t about science.

Some Good News, Ivermectin Is Useful In All Stages Of Covid

Of course it is. It always was. It doesn’t make vaxx money though, nor does it allow governments to pass crappy laws and control the population with fear and scare tactics. It is good to know that you can prevent it or be cured if you catch it.

Well, here it is. Decide for yourselves if you want myocarditis or thrombosis from the jab, or protection from Covid. You can order it from Amazon last time I checked.

Don’t believe the MSM, the government, Fauci, Gates, NIH, WHO, CDC, Fake book, Social Media, Google, Big Pharma or anyone else who stands to make money off of this.

Story begins here:

When it comes to the treatment of COVID-19, many Western nations have been hobbled by the politicization of medicine. Throughout 2020, media and many public health experts warned against the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), despite the fact that many practicing doctors were praising its ability to save patients. Most have been silenced through online censorship. Some even lost their jobs for the “sin” of publicly sharing their successes with the drug.

Another decades-old antiparasitic drug that may be even more useful than HCQ is ivermectin. Like HCQ, ivermectin is on the World Health Organization’s list of essential drugs, but its benefits are also being ignored by public health officials and buried by mainstream media.

Ivermectin is a heartworm medication that has been shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro. In the U.S., the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) has been calling for widespread adoption of Ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-19.

In the video above, Dr. John Campbell interviews Dr. Tess Lawrie about the drug and its use against COVID-19. Lawrie is a medical doctor and Ph.D. researcher who has done a lot of work in South Africa.

She’s also the director of Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd., which is based in the U.K., and she helped organize the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) panel and the International Ivermectin for COVID Conference, held April 24, 2021.

Ivermectin Useful in All Stages of COVID

What makes ivermectin particularly useful in COVID-19 is the fact that it works both in the initial viral phase of the illness, when antivirals are required, as well as the inflammatory stage, when the viral load drops off and anti-inflammatories become necessary.

According to Dr. Surya Kant, a medical doctor in India who has written a white paper on ivermectin, the drug reduces replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus by several thousand times. Kant’s paper led several Indian provinces to start using ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and as treatment for COVID-19 in the summer of 2020.

In the video, Lawrie reviews the science behind her recommendation to use ivermectin. In summary:

  • A scientific review by Dr. Andrew Hill at Liverpool University, funded by the WHO and UNITAID and published January 18, 2021, found ivermectin reduced COVID-19 deaths by 75%. It also increased viral clearance. This finding was based on a review of six randomized, controlled trials involving a total of 1,255 patients.
  • Lawrie’s meta-analysis, published February 8, 2021, found a 68% reduction in deaths. Here, 13 studies were included in the analysis. This, she explains, is an underestimation of the beneficial effect, because they included a study in which the control arm was given HCQ.Since HCQ is an active treatment that has also been shown to have a positive impact on outcomes, it’s not surprising that this particular study did not rate ivermectin as better than the control treatment (which was HCQ).
  • Adding two new randomized controlled trials to her February analysis that included data on mortality, Lawrie published an updated analysis March 31, 2021, showing a 62% reduction in deaths.When four studies with high risk of bias were removed during a subsequent sensitivity analysis, they ended up with a 72% reduction in deaths. Sensitivity analyses are done to double-check and verify results.

Doctors Urge Acceptance of Ivermectin to Save Lives

As mentioned earlier, in the U.S., the FLCCC has also been calling for widespread adoption of ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-19.

FLCCC president Dr. Pierre Kory, former professor of medicine at St. Luke’s Aurora Medical Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, has testified to the benefits of ivermectin before a number of COVID-19 panels, including the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in December 2020, and the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel January 6, 2021. As noted by the FLCCC:

“The data shows the ability of the drug Ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, to keep those with early symptoms from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease, and even to help critically ill patients recover.

Dr. Kory testified that Ivermectin is effectively a ‘miracle drug’ against COVID-19 and called upon the government’s medical authorities … to urgently review the latest data and then issue guidelines for physicians, nurse-practitioners, and physician assistants to prescribe Ivermectin for COVID-19 …

… numerous clinical studies — including peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials — showed large magnitude benefits of Ivermectin in prophylaxis, early treatment and also in late-stage disease. Taken together … dozens of clinical trials that have now emerged from around the world are substantial enough to reliably assess clinical efficacy.

… data from 18 randomized controlled trials that included over 2,100 patients … demonstrated that Ivermectin produces faster viral clearance, faster time to hospital discharge, faster time to clinical recovery, and a 75% reduction in mortality rates.”

A one-page summary of the clinical trial evidence for Ivermectin can be downloaded from the FLCCC website. A more comprehensive, 31-page review of trials data has been published in the journal Frontiers of Pharmacology.

A listing of all the Ivermectin trials done to date, with links to the published studies, can be found on c19Ivermectin.com.

The FLCCC’s COVID-19 protocol was initially dubbed MATH+ (an acronym based on the key components of the treatment), but after several tweaks and updates, the prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment protocol is now known as I-MASK+ while the hospital treatment has been renamed I-MATH+, due to the addition of ivermectin.

The two protocols are available for download on the FLCCC Alliance website in multiple languages. The clinical and scientific rationale for the I-MATH+ hospital protocol has also been peer-reviewed and was published in the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine in mid-December 2020.

The International Ivermectin for COVID Conference

April 24 through 25, 2021, Lawrie hosted the first International Ivermectin for COVID Conference online. Twelve medical experts from around the world shared their knowledge during this conference, reviewing mechanism of action, protocols for prevention and treatment, including so-called long-hauler syndrome, research findings and real world data.

All of the lectures, which were recorded via Zoom, can be viewed on Bird-Group.org. In her closing address, Lawrie stated:

“The story of Ivermectin has highlighted that we are at a remarkable juncture in medical history. The tools that we use to heal and our connection with our patients are being systematically undermined by relentless disinformation.

The story of Ivermectin shows that we as a public have misplaced our trust in the authorities and have underestimated the extent to which money and power corrupts.

Had Ivermectin being employed in 2020 when medical colleagues around the world first alerted the authorities to its efficacy, millions of lives could have been saved, and the pandemic with all its associated suffering and loss brought to a rapid and timely end.

With politicians and other nonmedical individuals dictating to us what we are allowed to prescribe to the ill, we as doctors, have been put in a position such that our ability to uphold the Hippocratic oath is under attack.

During the conference, Lawrie proposed that doctors around the world join together to form a new people-centered World Health Organization. “Never before has our role as doctors been so important because never before have we become complicit in causing so much harm,” she said.

References

Antiviral Research June 2020; 178: 104787

FLCCC December 8, 2020

Medpage Today January 6, 2021

Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd

Trial Site News April 9, 2021

Indian Journal of Tuberculosis July 2020; 67(3): 448-451

Antiviral Research June 2020; 178: 104787

Financial Express April 14, 2021

The Blaze April 1, 2021

FLCCC December 8, 2020

Medpage Today January 6, 2021

FLCCC December 8, 2020

FLCCC January 7, 2021 Press Release (PDF)

Newswise December 8, 2020

FLCCC December 8, 2020

FLCCC January 7, 2021 Press Release (PDF)

FLCCC Summary of Clinical Trials Evidence for Ivermectin in COVID-19 (PDF)

Frontiers of Pharmacology 2020 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.643369

c19Ivermectin.com

FLCCC Alliance I-MASK+ Protocol

FLCCC MATH+ Hospital Protocol

FLCCC Alliance I-MASK+ Protocol

FLCCC MATH+ Hospital Protocol

Journal of Intensive Care Medicine December 15, 2020 DOI: 10.1177/0885066620973585

U.S. FDA March 5, 2021

Ivermectin for COVID Conference Speakers List

Bird-group.org Conference videos

The Desert Review May 6, 2021

Source: Epoch Times and the above links.

Aspirin, The New Ivermectin – Another Covid Cure Being Cancelled

Many Western countries decided that the world must be Vaxxed, ignoring the obvious that HCQ and Ivermectin stop and cure Covid. To do so, they made both a villain. They all but outlawed them for use against the CCP virus and told doctors that they would lose their licenses if they prescribed a medicine that would heal sick people.

Let’s not ignore the fact that around 200 members of Congress used Ivermectin to cure themselves, the epitome of hypocrisy.

Thank God for Joe Rogan who exposed the hypocrisy and the lies told by government and the MSM. He took the “horse de-wormer” and surprise, he beat Covid in 3 days.

It’s come to light that aspirin can assist in the cure of the CCP/Wuhan Kung Flu virus:

A paper in Anesthesia and Analgesia published last spring titled, “Aspirin use is associated with decreased mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, and in-hospital mortality in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019.”

This was a retrospective, observational study of adult patients admitted to multiple hospitals in the U.S. between March and July 2020, in the early days of COVID. The primary outcome addressed by the researchers from George Washington University was the need for mechanical ventilation, which then, and still now, carries an extremely high chance of never leaving the ICU alive.

This was not a gold standard randomized prospective clinical trial. That would not be feasible in this situation since study patients were already hospitalized and critically ill. Remember in the early days, one needed to be extremely ill before even being admitted to the hospital rather than being sent home until sick enough to return and go straight to the ICU.

The team investigated more than 400 COVID patients from hospitals across the United States who take aspirin unrelated to their COVID disease, and found that the treatment reduced the risk of several parameters by almost half: reaching mechanical ventilation by 44%, ICU admissions by 43%, and overall in-hospital mortality by 47%.

Although most patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) present with a mild upper respiratory tract infection and then recover, some infected patients develop pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, multi-organ failure, and death. Clues to the pathogenesis of severe COVID-19 may lie in the systemic inflammation and thrombosis observed in infected patients. We propose that severe COVID-19 is a microvascular disease in which coronavirus infection activates endothelial cells, triggering exocytosis, a rapid vascular response that drives microvascular inflammation and thrombosis.

HELP CURING THE VAX?

Aspirin Lowers Risk Of COVID: New Findings Support Preliminary Israeli Trial

The team investigated more than 400 COVID patients from hospitals across the United States who take aspirin unrelated to their COVID disease, and found that the treatment reduced the risk of several parameters by almost half: reaching mechanical ventilation by 44%, ICU admissions by 43%, and overall in-hospital mortality by 47%.

https://teamtuckercarlson.com/news/aspirin-lowers-risk-of-covid-new-findings-support-preliminary-israeli-trial/

Since aspirin helps those who have had strokes and heart attacks, it stands to reason that it would also help those who have contracted myocardial conditions and thrombosis caused by the jab.

But no, we can’t have that. It is against the diktat that everyone has to have the vax to be able to be able to function in society for everyday things like going to the store or flying. It doesn’t fit the narrative though.

ASPIRIN MUST BE BANNED IF IT WORKS

Aspirin is another potential therapeutic, along with hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, which is inexpensive, readily available, and relatively safe, and could save countless lives when used appropriately for COVID. An editorial in Anesthesia and Analgesia described aspirin for COVID as, “An old, low-cost therapy with a strong rationale.” And right on cue, it’s time for aspirin-bashing to commence.

Let’s not forget the obvious:

How did aspirin get its start? Over 3,500 years ago, willow bark, known as “nature’s aspirin,” was used as a painkiller and anti-pyretic by ancient Egyptians and Greeks, and in a chemical synthesis by a Bayer chemist in 1897.

HOW INTERESTING THAT NOW YOU SHOULDN’T TAKE IT FOR HEART ATTACKS OR STROKES

OTOH: Baby aspirin no longer recommended to prevent first heart attack in older adults, US task force says

People over the age of 60 should no longer consider taking a daily low-dose or baby aspirin to prevent a first heart attack or stroke, according to a draft recommendation issued by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Tuesday.

The announcement marks a change in the 2016 Task Force guidance that recommended aspirin therapy in certain men and women to lower cardiovascular risk. But more recent evidence suggests it also could cause harm, including bleeding in the stomach, intestines, and brain – a risk that increases with age and can be life-threatening.

https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/sites/default/files/file/supporting_documents/aspirin-cvd-prevention-final-rec-bulletin.pdf

This group is obviously one of the groups more likely to have more severe Covid reactions, those with a co-morbidity and over 60.

So.  Not long after it’s discovered that aspirin, one of the best-known and longest-around medications there is, can significantly help reduce infection rates, hospitalizations, deaths, etc., and now the “conventional wisdom” suddenly shifts to telling people to avoid it?  How… conveeeeeeeeenient.

I guess they don’t make enough money off of cheap and effective over the counter cures, nor do they achieve control over the masses.

Indonesia (Using Ivermectin) Covid Free vs. Singapore (Using the Vaxx) Spiking Cases of Covid

Here is Singapore, almost fully Vaxxed.

Image

Here is Indonesia –

After the government authorized the use of Ivermectin for COVID-19 patients, the number of cases significantly plummeted since July.

The data below proves that Ivermectin played a role on the steep decline of COVID-19 cases despite having a low vaccination rate.

Here is a link to the data and story.

Do the math. Understand what works. Make an intelligent decision on your path. At least ask why they are forcing the Vax on us.

You do you.

The Health Nazi’s Refuse Kidney Transplant Because of No Vaxx

What is the Hippocratic Oath?

Here is the first part:

 I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant: I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow. I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism. I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon’s knife or the chemist’s drug.

I guess it doesn’t apply if you don’t do what the Health SS says now.

DENVER (KDVR) — A patient on the kidney transplant list was moved to inactive status by UCHealth for not receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. Her living donor is also unvaccinated and UCHealth said both need to be vaccinated for the transplant process to continue. 

The letter Leilani Lutali received states: “The transplant team at University of Colorado Hospital has determined that it is necessary to place you inactive on the waiting list. You will be inactivated on the list for non-compliance by not receiving the COVID vaccine. You will have 30 days to begin the vaccination series. If your decision is to refuse COVID vaccination you will be removed from the kidney transplant list. You will continue to accrue waiting time, but you will not receive a kidney offer while listed inactive. Once you complete the COVID vaccination series you will be reactivated on the kidney transplant list pending any other changes in your health condition.”

The Actual Covid Cure – Hint, It’s not the VAX

The Big Pharma are greedy for money from new medicines. Big Government is using Covid for the Re-Set with socialism and to take power and Bill Gates and the WHO want depopulation. Big Tech is covering simple and cheap solutions like this from everyone they can.

India said eff-you and gave everyone this and Ivermectin and have killed Covid off where it is used.

Wake up and stop the madness.

Merck says experimental pill cuts worst effects of COVID-19

Here’s the article at the link but don’t bother. The real news is that Merck also invented and sells Ivermectin.

The story says it reduces hospitalization by 50%. That’s pretty good except that Ivermectin reduces it 100% if you look at the results of people taking it in India.

Why did they invent this pill? One, the vaxx isn’t working and kills people and two, Ivermectin is out of patent and there isn’t any money to be made.

It is experimental. The vaxx is still experimental and is still killing more people than Covid. I’m passing on this one.

Just give everyone the Ivermectin or HCQ and Covid is over. The problem for Big Pharma/Big Tech/Government is that their control and power grab would be over also.

Actual Covid Cure Developed, Awaiting Either Approval or Shut Out By TPTB

‘Life-saving’ nose spray that kills 99.9% of viruses begins production in Israel

Health Ministry-approved labeling says antiviral is effective within 2 minutes; can save many lives in countries without access to vaccines, says inventor

By Nathan Jeffay 22 March 2021, 1:06 pm

Gilly Regev, an Israeli-raised scientist who co-founded the company SaNOtize, uses the new nasal spray she developed

A nasal spray that will be marketed as capable of killing 99.9 percent of virus particles has started rolling off production lines in an Israeli factory.

The spray could have prevented much of the world’s COVID-19 infection, its inventor, Dr. Gilly Regev, told The Times of Israel.

Link here.


And more disturbing news is that I read there are HIV components in the mRNA vaccine.

Excerpt here:

So far, 18 sub-units of HIV1 have been found in the virus’ genetic code that cause the body to intentionally produce the HIV1 virus. “Could it give you HIV or AIDS? Nobody has the answer to that. Only time will tell; in years we will know. But you should know that there are people who tested positive for HIV after they got these vaccines… in Australia they tested positive. So this is something to be very concerned about.

There are cures out there now so why is there so much push for an unapproved jab? Your guess is as good as mine, but like Watergate, follow the money.

The State of Healthcare Firsthand, From the Doctor

I went to a hospital today to have a procedure done.  When the nurse apologized for the quantity of paperwork, I casually mentioned that things might become more complicated with Obamacare.
I was not ready for the answer.  Actually, being in a very socially liberal city and healthcare system, I thought I was going to hear support for the program.  I instead was told how government has corrupted the system, made it worse for both Doctors and patients and other horror stories.  I replied that the government has not helped healthcare in a long time to which the nurse responded that the decline of morals in our culture was the beginning of the problem.  How correct this nurse was.

Next, I met with the Doctor to go over what the procedure was going to entail.  I again mentioned whether the healthcare system was affecting his job.  Again I received a surprise answer.

The doctor told me of his passion for his practice all of his life.  He then told me that what is being done to us by Washington has him considering getting out.  He was honorable enough to not practice if he couldn’t do his best.  It was a John Galt conversation.  There are others like this doctor.  I’ve found that if you are contemplating your retirement in your mind, you are already in the process of retiring.

To a person, the hospital staff admitted that Washington and the damage they have done and are doing to our healthcare system makes it worse for patients and providers.  This is not a partisan statement for the record.

Let me point out that this was a highly successful practice with state of the art equipment and professional personnel making these perspicacious comments to me.

It was  clear that they wanted to help people and do their job, but our own government is in the way.  It seems obvious that they have overstepped their role in making sure that medicine is safe and lawful.

If I hadn’t heard it from the horse’s mouth, I wouldn’t have known.  I did go in looking for a cure, but I left with a dose of information.  It is easy to conclude that we need to fix or excise Washington from the healthcare system and put it back in the hands of the doctors.

Here is another story by a Doctor in a completely different area of the country from me that I read by chance on the same day as my procedure.

After 18 years in private practice, many good, some not, I am making a very big change.  I am leaving my practice.

No, this isn’t my ironic way of saying that I am going to change the way I see my practice; I am really quitting my job.  The stresses and pressures of our current health care system become heavier, and heavier, making it increasingly difficult to practice medicine in a way that I feel my patients deserve.  The rebellious innovator (who adopted EMR 16 years ago) in me looked for “outside the box” solutions to my problem, and found one that I think is worth the risk.  I will be starting a solo practice that does not file insurance, instead taking a monthly “subscription” fee, which gives patients access to me.

I must confess that there are still a lot of details I need to work out, and plan on sharing the process of working these details with colleagues, consultants, and most importantly, my future patients.

Here are my main frustrations with the health care system that drove me to this big change:

  1. I don’t feel like I can offer the level of care I want for my patients.  I am far too busy during the day to slow down and give people the time they deserve.  I have over 3000 patients in my practice, and most of them only come to me when there are problems, which bothers me because I’d rather work with them to prevent the problems in the first place.
  2. There’s a disconnect between my business and my mission.  I want to be a good doctor, but I also want to pay for my kids’ college tuition (and maybe get the windshield on the car fixed).  But the only way to make enough money is to see more patients in my office, making it hard to spend time with people in the office, or to handle problems on the phone.  I have done my best to walk the line between good care and good business, but I’ve grown weary under the burden of having to make this choice patient after patient.  Why is it that I would make more money if I was a bad doctor?  Why am I penalized for caring?
  3. The increased burden of non-patient issues added to the already difficult situation.  I have to comply with E/M coding for all of my notes.  I have to comply with “Meaningful Use” criteria for my EMR.  I have to practice defensive medicine to avoid lawsuits.  I have more and more paperwork, more drug formulary problems, more patients frustrated with consultants, and less time to do it all.  My previous post about burnout was a prelude to this one; it was time to do something about my burn out: to drop out.

Here are some things that are not reasons for my big change:

  1. I am not angry with my partners.  I have been frustrated that they didn’t see things as I did, but I realize that they are not restless for change like I am.  They do believe in me (and are doing their best to help me on this new venture), but they don’t want to ride shotgun while I drive to a location yet undisclosed.
  2. I am not upset about the ACA (Obamacare).  In truth, the changes primary care has seen have been more positive than negative.  The ACA also favors the type of practice I am planning on building, allowing businesses to contract directly with direct care practices along with a high-deductible insurance to meet the requirement to provide insurance.  Now, if I did think the government could fix healthcare I would probably not be making the changes I am.  But it’s the overall dysfunctional nature of Washington that quenches my hope for significant change, not the ACA.

What will my practice look like?  Here are the cornerstones on which I hope to build a new kind of practice.

  1. I want the cost to be reasonable.  Direct Care practices generally charge between $50 and $100 per patient per month for full access.  I don’t want to limit my care to the wealthy.  I want my practice to be part of a solution that will be able to expand around the country (as it has been doing).
  2. I want to keep my patient volume manageable.  I will limit the number of patients I have (1000 being the maximum, at the present time).  I want to go home each day feeling that I’ve done what I can to help all of my patients to be healthy.
  3. I want to keep people away from health care.  As strange as this may sound, the goal of most people is to spend less time dealing with their health, not more. I don’t want to make people wait in my office, I don’t want them to go to the ER when they don’t need to.  I also don’t want them going to specialists who don’t know why they were sent, getting duplicate tests they don’t need, being put on medications that don’t help, or getting sick from illnesses they were afraid to address.  I will use phones, online forms, text messages, house calls, or whatever other means I can use to keep people as people, not health care consumers.
  4. People need access to me.  I want them to be able to call me, text me, or send an email when they have questions, not afraid that I will withhold an answer and force them to come in to see me.  If someone is thinking about going to the ER, they should be able to see what I think.  Preventing a single ER visit will save thousands of dollars, and many unnecessary tests.
  5. Patients should own their medical records.  It is ridiculous (and horrible) how we treat patient records as the property of doctors and hospitals.  It’s like a bank saying they own your money, and will give you access to it for a fee.  I should be asking my patients for access to their records, not the reverse!  This means that patients will be maintaining these records, and I am working on a way to give incentive to do so.  Why should I always have to ask for people information to update my records, when I could just look at theirs?
  6. I want this to be a project built as a cooperative between me and my patients.  Do they have better ideas on how to do things?  They should tell me what works and what does not.  Perhaps I can meet my diabetics at a grocery store and have a dietician talk about buying food.  Perhaps I can bring a child psychologist in to talk about parenting.  I don’t know, and I don’t want to answer those questions until I hear from my patients.

This is the first of a whole bunch of posts on this subject.  My hope is that the dialog started by my big change (and those of other doctors) will have bigger effects on the whole health care scene.  Even if it doesn’t, however, I plan on having a practice where I can take better care of my patients while not getting burned out in the process.

Is this scary?  Heck yeah, it’s terrifying in many ways.  But the relief to be changing from being a nail, constantly pounded by an unreasonable system, to a hammer is enormous.

Neurological Self Test (If You Fear Alzheimers)

1- Find the C below.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

2- If you already found the C, now find the 6 below.

99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
69999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

3 – Now find the N below. It’s a little more difficult.

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMNMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

This is NOT a joke. If you were able to pass these 3 tests, you can cancel your annual visit to your neurologist. Your brain is great and you’re far from having a close relationship with Alzheimer.