Preventing The Next Medical Stupidity
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Login or register to improve your experience
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.


Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in securities or firms mentioned and have no duty to disclose same.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2023-01-17 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in States , 506 references Ignore this thread
Preventing The Next Medical Stupidity
[Comments enabled]

If you haven't read my long-standing legislation to resolve the medical mess go read it here.

That's the latest revision dating to 2017; an earlier revision was included in Leverage.

None that exactly zero of this has been put forward by our Federal Government, despite it being fact that CMS, "Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services", is the single largest element of the Government and responsible for far more spending than our deficit.  It also is expanding at a higher rate than GDP and has been for decades with no actual attempt to rein that in by either political party.  These facts mean that it will be the reason there is eventually a default, if there is one, and the reason there is a collapse in both the government and medical system when that occurs, and it will occur with certainty if this trajectory is not halted and in fact reversed.

I fully understand that this is the "third rail" of American politics, and it doesn't require you to touch it to get BBQd; it is in fact one of the oldest partisan claims made by the left that the GOP intends to kill Granny by starving her to death or throwing her down the stairs, usually depicted as Granny in a wheelchair for more dramatic effect.

Expecting the Federal Government to take this on is, at this point, probably a lost cause.  The people will not demand it of their Representatives in sufficient quantity and there's always something "more important" to be addressed, whether its some "equity" claim or cutting taxes.  Never mind skyrocketing inflation and 30%+ shortfalls on electrical generation after you cater to the Green initiative coming out of DC, or, for that matter, a NOTAM system (for pilots) that apparently was considered "not safety-critical" (it isn't, directly, but you can't without having that data legally so "its not safety" is simply because if it doesn't work you don't fly at all.)  Pete and rest of the crazies in DC didn't bother thinking about that, of course.

No, let's focus on the state level because it is there that all medical licensing happens, and thus it is there we can push much of this back.  Not all of it, mind you, but most of it.

Incidentally the states can immediately implement the level pricing requirements in that above-cited article, so leaning on them to do so would be a good idea too.  How?  Simple: All states issue business licenses and in the medical field they also issue credentials without which you cannot operate in the profession.  Indeed in most states, including Tennessee, it is unlawful to practice medicine without a license, and each person upon which one does so is a separate offense.  Therefore the states can absolutely enforce the level pricing mandates in my proposed legislation by tying said licensure of both facilities and persons to them doing so.  The states have near-plenary authority in this regard particularly when their actions implicate the rights of their citizens, and in this case that is absolutely true, particularly given price-fixing and monopolist practices, as declared unlawful in 15 USC Chapter 1, also are mirrored in state legal codes for conduct entirely within a state.

Further, state-level consumer protection and privacy laws can impose an absolute requirement that medical records are the sole property of the individual and that any use by any third party is subject to the personal acquiescence of said person and may not be transferred without their explicit consent.  This does not forbid the Obamacare mandate for electronic records but it would immediately prevent the retention, sharing or transfer of same beyond the person's personal control.  Prior to EMR you could literally walk out of the doctor's office with your file; we must restore that and restore your ownership of your medical history.

We should also consider expanding the general pushback we saw with alleged "vaccines."  I will argue that no vaccine should be able to be mandated for anyone, at any time, under any circumstance and the right of bodily autonomy to refuse should be ensconced into State Constitutions. This does not interfere with a State's right to quarantine someone who is actually infectious for the duration of that period of time; said power is separate and already present in State legal codes.  At the same time I would forbid at state level, and punish same as a criminal felony of intentional great bodily harm the labeling of anything a "vaccine" unless it induces sterile, stable and durable immunity to the disease in question, and the combining of that which is a vaccine with that which is not results in the entire preparation losing said claim.

Another change, and one that does come into play, is to mandate that no actual vaccine which has a boosting requirement during one's life to maintain protection, such as tetanus, may be offered at all unless you can obtain it separately at a reasonable price compared to that when compounded with anything else.

We used to call the annual flu inoculation "the flu shot" for this reason; it does not induce stable, sterile and durable immunity.  It does, in some cases, reduce the risk of acquiring the flu or its severity but it does not prevent getting or transmitting influenza.  By definition leading people to believe they're "safe" from getting and transmitting a disease when they're not puts other people at risk and is fraud -- not just upon the person who gets the inoculation but against society generally because they are led to believe they are safe when others have taken it and that is not true.

That doesn't mean that "shots" cannot be offered (e.g. the flu shot); they can provided they're truthfully marketed and no statement or implication is made that they induce sterile and stable immunity.

At the same time I would fully support the state supplying at no charge to any resident any actual vaccine they wish, to be administered at any county public health department with no questions asked and an explicit bar on referral to any agency.  Yes, this means anyone including those who are here illegally.

Why "no mandate" even for things like MMR (measles, mumps and rubella)?  Because if anyone who wants them can have them at no cost to them and no risk of their information being exposed, since its "no questions asked" then anyone who chooses not to take them accepts the risk of the bad outcome if they get the disease.  If the vaccine actually works then if you take it you're protected.  If it turns out they don't work and we've been sold a bill of goods and the reason for the decline to near-zero for, as an example, measles isn't actually the vaccine but simply because that virus is disfavored in a reasonably-sanitary and developed world then that should be increasingly and immediately apparent.

Never mind that we have millions of people who have unlawfully come into the United States who have not been required to present evidence of having taken any vaccinations whatsoever to enter.  It is ridiculously inappropriate to demand something when it comes to health of citizens you will not impose on those with no right of entry into the United States in the first place.  Improving their coverage with actual vaccines is a good thing from a public health perspective particularly considering that those people almost-never have any sort of private health cost coverage and thus their illnesses, if they're severe enough to require medical attention will wind up being paid for by the taxpayer anyway.

(For the record: I have no reason to believe that's its the case that most of the "common" vaccines are ineffective, and from my work the math on the MMR vaccine, which I have done from published data, is that its a better gamble than the disease.  Not completely safe -- nothing is -- but its safer than getting the measles and not by a little either.)

So let's take this fight to the states and get these changes ensconced into law.  The various state medical boards can whine all they want but since the state can both remove these requirements and demand that medical license holders act in accordance with said mandates the power to both levy the regulation and enforce it is not only in the same place and thus they can be forced to accept these changes the regulatory muscle is closer to the people -- which is how and where it should be.

Go to responses (registration required to post)

Comments on Preventing The Next Medical Stupidity
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Page 1 of 3  First123Last
Roskosb 8 posts, incept 2009-02-12
2023-01-17 08:39:25

This is good stuff, but I fear there is a rather sizable loop hole that has already been exploited, thus likely to be exploited again.

The federal government used is power over it's vendors to force mandates. Any vendor that does any sort of business, or plans to do business, with the fed government was looped in and forced to mandate vaccination or face loosing their vendor status immediately. They worded it in such a way that even those of us that don't work in the part of the company that does business with the fed government were also included in the mandate... same for those of us who work remotely, with no physical contact with other employees or customers.

Crazy stuff, but they did it, and did it long enough before any sort of litigation put a hold on it that lots of people were affected, either having to quit or take the jab.

Next time they will just change a few words around to dodge any litigation in flight and start all over again.
Jesjohn94 1k posts, incept 2019-05-07
2023-01-17 08:39:25

What is really pathetic about healthcare spending is USA spends roughly double what Europe spends. Approx $12k vs $6k per capita. Does all this money lead to better outcomes? NOPE. Just a couple of the most important. Life expectancy is lower and child mortality is higher.
Rangeishot 2k posts, incept 2021-11-18
2023-01-17 08:39:25

Meanwhile, one third of the population will be on Medicaid come March (scroll down a bit for the forecast countdown)...

Welcome to TF: The "T" stands for "Thoughtcrime"
Olddad 219 posts, incept 2019-08-22
2023-01-17 08:59:39

Force doctors to accept flat pricing plans via state licensing laws and I'd bet you could hear the sucking sound as they flee that state.

Tickerguy 192k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2023-01-17 09:00:15

Meh @Olddad. Oh, would they try that? Sure. They might. But the ones that flee are probably the ones you WANT to flee.

The difference between "kill" and "murder" is that murder, as a subset of kill, is undeserved by the deceased.
Djsnola 330 posts, incept 2009-03-16
2023-01-17 09:11:12

Maybe a way to get around the fleeing of doctors is that the legislation can be passed in such a way that it doesnt kick in until a set number of states or proportion of total us population passes similar legislation?
Tickerguy 192k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2023-01-17 09:12:47

Naw, you let 'em flee. The optics on that get them hunted down and slaughtered by the residents if they do it; there's no way to spin "soak the private party dude with no insurance who incidentally is probably poor too" that doesn't end up with stretched necks.

Never mind that when the cost of medical care collapses in your state the instant rush in from every business in the nation will be beyond your wildest dreams.

The difference between "kill" and "murder" is that murder, as a subset of kill, is undeserved by the deceased.
Tsdj86 52 posts, incept 2022-12-06
2023-01-17 10:04:17

It will never happen, ever, until a national bankruptcy event forces the issue.

The nations political class want votes and need contributions. The status quo must be maintained to keep the medical graft machine running at all costs.

The doctors are even worse, they want this medical thievery with outrageous fee's and bloated overhead to continue as they would fight tooth and nail to keep the status quo.

Most States political bodies are filled with progressive leftist cowards/tyrants and useless conservatives, they don't want less medical costs, expenditures or coverage, they want more.

The nations civilian population is too stupid and uninformed to know it needs to be done. Compounding the national tragedy is that the average person knows virtually nothing about the basic workings of anything to do with finances, national debt, or grotesque medical expenditure outlays.

In short, the national number crunchers know this is going to end in a national financial nuclear blast. But no one with the balls/power to change these facts are going to rock the boat.

They are riding this to ZERO!
Iou 1k posts, incept 2009-03-16
2023-01-17 10:20:51

Speaking of fleeing: I'll be fleeing from my state if it doesn't implement this to one that does. The money I will save will be well worth the move.

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies
Whitehat 11k posts, incept 2017-06-27
2023-01-17 10:20:58

Excellent piece, would only add one thing regarding vaccines and suggest an edit.

All vaccines are forbidden to only be produced or administered in only combined form, and that individual doses of separate vaccines are required to be available at facilities and private concerns where multiple disease vaccines are offered.

We could probably go further at the state level in terms of medical treatment and vaccine injury made public and available along with liability provisions to remove the government contracted service and product manufacturing becoming some sort of same harbor for outdated, low bidder and lost cost manufacturing where improvements would of course be avoided by said contracted service and product providers.

smiley Je souhaite

Quod tu es, ego fui, quod ego sum, tu eris
Veeger 1k posts, incept 2013-02-13
2023-01-17 10:21:11


They are riding this to ZERO!

Apparently... we all are.

I suspect nothing will change until the Tree of Liberty gets 'watered'...

I remember the Diamond Princess.

Slowly at first, then all of a sudden.
Nocomment 46 posts, incept 2019-09-04
2023-01-17 10:24:27

Or, go tactical right away, just don't ever give blood, and tell them that you will again when you trust them to stick a needle in your arm. I'm sure this would get some response, and when they complain, tell them TGFT before or after looking in a mirror for ten minutes. Morning rant off.
Tickerguy 192k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2023-01-17 10:25:06

@Whitehat added that with one qualifier -- the ban itself would be on anything that requires a "boost" or re-use to maintain protection during one's life (e.g. tetanus.)

The difference between "kill" and "murder" is that murder, as a subset of kill, is undeserved by the deceased.
Nocomment 46 posts, incept 2019-09-04
2023-01-17 10:43:28

Double oh Seven is arguing for the creation of aristocrats at the state level. I mention this because sooner or later I intended to bring this subject up.
Tickerguy 192k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2023-01-17 10:43:46


The difference between "kill" and "murder" is that murder, as a subset of kill, is undeserved by the deceased.
Smooth 132 posts, incept 2020-03-26
2023-01-17 11:07:43

I want to see a randomized controlled trial of the flu shot for any year.

My hunch is that it offers no benefit whatever.

My vitamin D is optimized and I haven't had the flu or a flu shot in 20 years.
Whitehat 11k posts, incept 2017-06-27
2023-01-17 11:32:54

@Tickerguy -- just to see if we are on the same page, would like to know if your qualifier also accepts that initial or anything else for that matter is also available and required to be in individual vaccines, i.e. the MMR cannot be the only option instead of a parent deciding that each vaccine of that combination is given separately and on chosen time schedule if any or all for that matter.

This is the only way to determine safety and efficacy over the long term. The individual choices and permutations of accept, reject and how will provide much more accurate data than we have now. In other words, the consequences require that the choices be possible, and they teach us much more.

smiley Je souhaite

Quod tu es, ego fui, quod ego sum, tu eris
Tickerguy 192k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2023-01-17 11:33:55

Yep. But starting with "that which is not one and done" is a good place to start and which then can prove the others.

The difference between "kill" and "murder" is that murder, as a subset of kill, is undeserved by the deceased.
Whitehat 11k posts, incept 2017-06-27
2023-01-17 12:09:11

ok Karl, i can see it that way. Works for me.

smiley Je souhaite

Quod tu es, ego fui, quod ego sum, tu eris
Donaldc 44 posts, incept 2008-03-18
2023-01-17 12:09:20

Flu shot... if interested, here are the CDC's own conclusions on the 21-22 performance of the treatment. Some key conclusions...
* 20212022 influenza vaccination provided low to non-significant protection against predominant influenza A/H3N2 illness of varying severity
* 11% (95%CI: -19, 33) against adult hospitalizations (IVY)
Notice that the 11% value is for 18 and older. That same metric for 65 and older is Negative 3 (-3). So you would recommend the shot for elderly, why?
Chemman 333 posts, incept 2021-05-03
2023-01-17 12:09:37

@smooth: If you look at ILI (Influenza Like Illnesses) data which is what the CDC actually collects you'll find that only 17 - 20% of actual laboratory testing comes back positive for a Type A or B influenza virus. Most ILI's are caused by other viral families some of which have never been identified.
Jesjohn94 1k posts, incept 2019-05-07
2023-01-17 13:14:08

@Donaldc They recommend the flu shot regardless as otherwise it will generate hesitancy to ever take it. The same reason they justify the death jab despite it not working and Omicron variant basically not killing anyone. Yes they still continue the BS about dying with Covid trying to scare people into getting jabbed.
Margbp 138 posts, incept 2021-12-02
2023-01-17 14:09:29

I went into Sam's Club pharmacy to get my mom's meds the other day. And the pharmacist helped me instead of a tech and immediately started on me about getting the flu shot. I said I wasn't interested. Tells me flu is supposed to be bad this season.(Seriously am I suppose to slap my forehead and say by golly good thing you mentioned it otherwise I wouldn't have thought to get it!!) She persisted and told me a lot of people had been in with sore throats. (What?? In this day in age?? They came in? They could have the coof!! Lol) I said no again and she says rather quietly "well, I guess so far the flu hasn't been bad".

Maybe next time I might ask her professional opinion on coinciditist.

I once read years ago that white women with insurance had higher c-section rates than minorities with no insurance. The minorities didn't experience higher fetal or maternal mortalities. They just labored longer.

I know of situations where the medical professional was told the expenses would be out of pocket and suddenly he becomes interested in a cautious approach or decides he doesn't really need all those tests to make a diagnosis.

I don't anticipate the medical industry will come to a screeching halt or blow up dramatically. I think it will just wither away as people are told certain services are limited or no longer available. Then people will just stop asking.

What I can't understand is how people believe a pill they put in their mouth will fix them but the junk they put in their mouth has no effect.

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his desires depend upon his not understanding it.
~Upton Sinclair slightly paraphrased
Oldchemist 39 posts, incept 2022-05-31
2023-01-17 14:22:47

Here is an example of the mess the medical system is in and the stress and BS caused by the system.

I have a high deductible ($2500) health plan and need a CT scan. I cannot get a price for what I have to pay - it certainly wont hit the deductible. Ive been on the phone for several hours with both the hospital and my insurance company. No one will give me a price in spite of the law that requires it. The hospital points at the insurance co and the insurance co point at the hospital. The nearest I can tell its between $1300 and $2000.

The hospital has a prepay plan where insurance isn't billed. The cost is $500. The sorry thing if I go that route is that it will not count towards my deductible even if I file the claim. Insurance says it will apply to the out of network deductible even though the hospital is in network. The reason for this, I was told by the insurance co, is that the hospital doesnt file the claim directly so it is out of network.

This is pure insanity.

On another note I lost insurance a couple of years ago right before I had a doctor telemedicine call for a script refill. The insurance co paid $80 for previous visits. My un-insured 5 minute phone call was $350 and the doctors office would not budge on price an accept the former $80 fee. I didnt pay and they sent me fo claims and reported it to the credit bureaus. Doctors are nothing but thieves.
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Page 1 of 3  First123Last