47 million still without health care coverage.
Still at war!
Country still torn by discontent.
Happy New Year for all.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
AllMedicinesArePoison, the press is noticing.
I've already given several lectures regarding the book.So far, I've been interviewed on 7 radio stations in the US and Canada.I may be on the Rachel Raye show early next year. Dr. Harriet Hill has published a detailed review and critic of the book.
I wrote this book because of the sad state of the health care industry in this Country. I believe that my 60 years serving our health care system has provided me with the knowledge of what's broken and how it can be fixed. The alternative medicine advocates are right when they state that all medicines are poison, but those poisons have life-saving usefulness when prescribed by doctors. Doctors are trained to weigh the risks versus the values.
But Medicines are only one part of the health care system. The book discusses many other elements of our health care system. These elements include hospitals, drug research, manufacturing and advertising, insurance coverage, government oversight, the under-insured or uninsured population and why medical care in the U. S. is twice as expensive here, than it is in the rest of the industrialized world.
You don't have to agree, but you should be aware of the issues.
MHK, MPH, MD
I wrote this book because of the sad state of the health care industry in this Country. I believe that my 60 years serving our health care system has provided me with the knowledge of what's broken and how it can be fixed. The alternative medicine advocates are right when they state that all medicines are poison, but those poisons have life-saving usefulness when prescribed by doctors. Doctors are trained to weigh the risks versus the values.
But Medicines are only one part of the health care system. The book discusses many other elements of our health care system. These elements include hospitals, drug research, manufacturing and advertising, insurance coverage, government oversight, the under-insured or uninsured population and why medical care in the U. S. is twice as expensive here, than it is in the rest of the industrialized world.
You don't have to agree, but you should be aware of the issues.
MHK, MPH, MD
The Website for my new book is now available.
My book "All Medicines Are Poison!" is now available on my website, www.allmedicinesarepoison.com.
Please visit and click on the "order" button to get it in your choice of paperback or hardbound.
Please visit and click on the "order" button to get it in your choice of paperback or hardbound.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
To N.Y. Times: The death of Michael Jackson.
I'm certain that everyone who reads my letter to the N. Y. Times already knows about Michael Jackson's death. I don't mention it in the letter to the Times, but I believe I know why he died. I've written a book, soon to be available, entitled "All Medicines Are Poison." Although the book discusses many aspects of the American health care system, the main theme is that doctors must proceed with every prescription they write after evaluating the risks. Benefits must outweigh risks.
I knew some members of the Jackson family and share their grief. A 50 year old man is a little more than middle aged. He should experience a full life. Michael had much to offer--it will never be seen.
The death of Michael Jackson had special meaning to me, not only because the world prematurely lost a great talent, but also because I knew members of his family. As a physician, I attended his grandmother until she expired. I also took care of several members of the family including his mother. She is a lovely woman and I sense her grief because of Michael’s death. I never attended Michael, but I met him once when I had hospitalized his grandmother. We had him wear a scrub suit, mask and surgical hat so that he could visit his grandmother without being recognized by his many admirers.
At this point the doctors at UCLA are unsure of what caused Michael’s death; apparently the autopsy was unrevealing. Perhaps the toxicology studies will give us an answer; he had been taking medicines and all medicines are poison. A doctor must weigh the benefits to be achieved, versus the potential risks before prescribing anything. I was fortunate to watch a TV interview of Dr. Deepak Chopra, who knew Michael well. He and I disagree on some aspects of practicing medicine, but I respect his viewpoints and I believe that he and I would agree on the cause of Michael’s death. I’m sure that he would also agree that a doctor should not only take care of patients, but also care about them.
Dr. Kirschner is a retired family physician. He continues to volunteer in community-based health related programs and is active on several biomedical ethics committees.
Melvin H Kirschner, MPH, MD
I'm certain that everyone who reads my letter to the N. Y. Times already knows about Michael Jackson's death. I don't mention it in the letter to the Times, but I believe I know why he died. I've written a book, soon to be available, entitled "All Medicines Are Poison." Although the book discusses many aspects of the American health care system, the main theme is that doctors must proceed with every prescription they write after evaluating the risks. Benefits must outweigh risks.
I knew some members of the Jackson family and share their grief. A 50 year old man is a little more than middle aged. He should experience a full life. Michael had much to offer--it will never be seen.
The death of Michael Jackson had special meaning to me, not only because the world prematurely lost a great talent, but also because I knew members of his family. As a physician, I attended his grandmother until she expired. I also took care of several members of the family including his mother. She is a lovely woman and I sense her grief because of Michael’s death. I never attended Michael, but I met him once when I had hospitalized his grandmother. We had him wear a scrub suit, mask and surgical hat so that he could visit his grandmother without being recognized by his many admirers.
At this point the doctors at UCLA are unsure of what caused Michael’s death; apparently the autopsy was unrevealing. Perhaps the toxicology studies will give us an answer; he had been taking medicines and all medicines are poison. A doctor must weigh the benefits to be achieved, versus the potential risks before prescribing anything. I was fortunate to watch a TV interview of Dr. Deepak Chopra, who knew Michael well. He and I disagree on some aspects of practicing medicine, but I respect his viewpoints and I believe that he and I would agree on the cause of Michael’s death. I’m sure that he would also agree that a doctor should not only take care of patients, but also care about them.
Dr. Kirschner is a retired family physician. He continues to volunteer in community-based health related programs and is active on several biomedical ethics committees.
Melvin H Kirschner, MPH, MD
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Private Health Plan vs. Public Option
People who write OP-ED pieces and present opinions on radio and TV, are certainly entitled to their opinions, but too often what they say is not the whole truth. As a senior who has Medicare coverage and has needed to use it many times in the last few years, I could not afford those illnesses without it. As a family doctor for 47 years how much sicker and more expensive to care for, than any other group. The benefits of Medicare are that no 65 or older is rejected and everyone gets the same coverage. Our entire population needs than type of coverage.
The authors of the N.Y. Times 6/25 OP-ED “The Only Public Health We Need,” speak out of both sides of their mouths. On the one hand, they favor giving “private insurers the incentive to provide cheaper, better care.“ On the other hand they advocate “a public plan that will impose a stern and lasting discipline on our insurance market.“
The private health insurance companies know that they cannot compete with a public option and still be profitable. A pubic plan will put them out of business. How many seniors select a private primary health plan over the single payer Medicare?
The people who require the most health care, are already covered by Medicare. If every resident of this Country had Medicare coverage, they would be less of a financial burden than what our government spends on Medicare for our seniors only,
Melvin H Kirschner, MPH, MD
The authors of the N.Y. Times 6/25 OP-ED “The Only Public Health We Need,” speak out of both sides of their mouths. On the one hand, they favor giving “private insurers the incentive to provide cheaper, better care.“ On the other hand they advocate “a public plan that will impose a stern and lasting discipline on our insurance market.“
The private health insurance companies know that they cannot compete with a public option and still be profitable. A pubic plan will put them out of business. How many seniors select a private primary health plan over the single payer Medicare?
The people who require the most health care, are already covered by Medicare. If every resident of this Country had Medicare coverage, they would be less of a financial burden than what our government spends on Medicare for our seniors only,
Melvin H Kirschner, MPH, MD
Sunday, June 21, 2009
TIMES POLL
I wrote this piece to illustrate what the majority of our citizens want, but will not get. Money talks, and politicians are willing to listen even when it's not in the best interest of their constituancy. Not what our founding fathers intended when they created this Country.
The N Y Times printed an article entitled, “Poll Finds Wide Support for Idea Of Government-Run Health Plan.” The poll was conducted with 895 randomly selected adults throughout the United States. The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so everyone could have health insurance. A government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers was favored. When asked which party was more likely to improve health care 57% of Democrats and one in four Republicans, said the Democrats would do better.
It’s obvious that the majority of the citizens of our Country want the single-payer or pubic option health coverage. This is a “Country of, by and for the people.” So why are we not getting our way? The answer is obvious. The health insurance and pharmaceutical industries give a lot of money to the legislators' re-election coffers. It’s time to start throwing those people out office or limiting them to two terms. We did that to the presidency, and it worked!
Melvin H Kirschner, MPH, MD
The N Y Times printed an article entitled, “Poll Finds Wide Support for Idea Of Government-Run Health Plan.” The poll was conducted with 895 randomly selected adults throughout the United States. The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so everyone could have health insurance. A government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers was favored. When asked which party was more likely to improve health care 57% of Democrats and one in four Republicans, said the Democrats would do better.
It’s obvious that the majority of the citizens of our Country want the single-payer or pubic option health coverage. This is a “Country of, by and for the people.” So why are we not getting our way? The answer is obvious. The health insurance and pharmaceutical industries give a lot of money to the legislators' re-election coffers. It’s time to start throwing those people out office or limiting them to two terms. We did that to the presidency, and it worked!
Melvin H Kirschner, MPH, MD
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Hidden agendas regarding health care
Over 50% of the population and caregivers of the United States are in favor of single-payer health care. They have no hidden agendas. They are aware that Medicare, a single-payer system for the seniors age 65 and older, has been successful. The senior population is the sickest segment of our population and requires the most care. Since the creation of the Medicare program our seniors are in better health and living longer.
It’s clearly evident that all those who oppose the single payer system, or even a public health care option, have a hidden agenda. This may be reduced profit and executive salaries for the for-profit private health insurance companies who are well aware that they can’t compete with a public health care option. They keep inventing and loudly publicizing reasons why single-payer is a bad choice. They point out long delays for care in Counties that have health care for all. This is only true for elective procedures and things of the kind. Urgent or emergent illnesses are treated promptly and the patient isn’t facing bankruptcy because of what it cost.
The private, for-profit insurers frighten patients by claiming that a public plan would not cover many procedures and treatments. They are careful not to mention private plan practices such as rescission, retroactive denials, the multiple differences in rules and coverage from pla
n to plan, plus the limitation of hospitals, doctors and other providers who will accept the plan as the payer. Medicare has one set of rules, almost everyone is eligible for coverage, most providers accept Medicare fees and no one is permitted to charge more than Medicare allows.
Those who oppose single-payer complain that single payer will cost trillions of dollars, especially if everyone is covered. The seniors are the sickest and most expensive patients in our Country. If the entire under age 65 people in our Country were covered, the cost of their care would probably not equal what we are spending for the seniors alone.
Taking all of these so-called facts into account, it becomes obvious which group has a hidden agenda that causes them to say almost anything to prevent a single payer or public health care option. It’s Profits ahead of health.
Melvin H Kirschner, MPH, MD
Dr. Kirschner is a retired Family physician. He still volunteers for numerous health related community programs and several biomedical ethics committees.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)