FACE BOOK… banned this post… because it was against their community standards.

 Apparently FB’s community standards are getting more and more strange… The only think that they have found an objection to is that the WORD SUICIDE appeared in the text… Of course, they would be taking the word out of context. Apparently their AI program is like a DI (DUMB INTELLIGENCE)

 

Pts/prescribers need to start doing CYP-450 and PGx testing.. that will demonstrate – via DNA testing – how fast a opiate metabolizer the pt is and what opiates is the best for the pt – these DNA testing. Use the attached chart – effects on pts’ comorbidity issues by under/untreated pain. APPEAL…APPEAL… APPEAL denials… show the insurance company where under treating pain is going to cost them more money treating pts comorbidity issue as they worsen. Use this process https://www.pharmaciststeve.com/?p=35002 warn the insurance/PBM, prescriber if under/untreated pain cause harm to the pt – per the chart… then those entity may have some financial liabilities… pt dies from stroke or commits suicide… they have been warned and once warned and they don’t change their denials… they have been warned about their direct/informed contribution to the bad pt outcomes

The ONLY Thing that CVS Management Fears – Strong and Sustained Negative Publicity!

The ONLY Thing that CVS Management Fears – Strong and Sustained Negative Publicity!

https://pharmacistactivist.com/2021/July_2021.shtml

The CVS Underground

CVS has enough wealth that it can buy almost any company it wants (e.g., Caremark, Omnicare, Aetna), settle every lawsuit arising from medication errors out of court, terminate many pharmacists and other employees by alleging they violated a policy, and require its pharmacists and other employees to function in understaffed, stressful, and error-prone workplace conditions.

CVS can usually prevent widespread awareness of harmful and sometimes fatal medication errors, as well as unjustified/retaliatory terminations of employees who voice concerns, by offering confidential settlement agreements to the victims of errors and management failures. It does this to avoid negative publicity that would likely be occurring every day because it would result in a loss of customers/revenue and a loss in its stock values.

I will quickly acknowledge that my strong and repeated criticisms of CVS have had absolutely no influence on the decisions and actions of CVS management. Even Ellen Gabler’s three excellent investigative reports in The New York Times (NYT; Jan. 31, 2020, Feb. 21, 2020, July 16, 2020) that exposed the errors and horrible working conditions at CVS and certain other chain stores had limited influence, notwithstanding a readership of many millions.. However, the NYT coverage did elicit a response from the highest level of CVS denying certain concerns and reiterating its big lie that the safety of its customers is its highest priority. But even though the situations described in the NYT reports were shocking, the attention of the public and regulators rapidly diminished in the face of the avalanche of media coverage of the presidential elections and the COVID-19 pandemic. What CVS management fears most is strong and sustained negative publicity, and the recognition of this is increasing the size and activity of the CVS Underground of current and recent CVS employees. Almost all of these individuals must remain anonymous because of the likelihood of retaliation/termination. However, they can provide information to members of the media and individuals such as myself who can disseminate the horror stories and protect the identity of our sources.

Many have experienced or are otherwise aware of CVS errors or its harassment of its pharmacists and other employees. These should be documented and provided to a newspaper or television news reporter. Although members of the media must be able to communicate with and confirm the credibility of the individual who is the source of information, most will protect the confidentiality of their sources. If there is concern that CVS management could identify a current employee as the source of the information and retaliate, the specific incident could be described in a general manner that would protect the identity of the individual involved. Patient safety and employee well-being are in jeopardy, and the following are continuing examples that have been provided to me by current and former CVS employees.

From the CVS underground

    1. “I will remember the day forever. It was in March 2020. Store management and support staff marched to the edge of the pharmacy and started taping off for social distancing. Sheets were handed to the pharmacy staff with orders to wipe down the counters and credit card touch pads. We were instructed to do this hourly and sign the sheet when this hourly task was completed. This program lasted for maybe a day at my store. Later masks were handed out and we were told to wear them until further notice. Employee temperature checks were also ordered for the beginning of shifts. I had my temperature taken only once since March 2020. It gets worse. A more aggressive phone call program started. We began to make calls on prescriptions that had refills left and needed to be filled. We also started offering free delivery through the USPS. Actually they were mailed and not hand delivered as the CVS television ads showed. I have become aware of prescriptions left in customers’ mailboxes when the temperature was about 100°. CVS also wants us to mail out some prescriptions for which a copay is not needed. Some of these prescriptions had been in the waiting bin for days, and patients did not respond to our phone messages. As a pharmacist, I know that prescriptions for certain medications were not or no longer needed if they were not picked up in a timely fashion. However, CVS mailed them and got paid for them.When COVID vaccinations became available CVS appeared to be prepared with plenty of pharmacists and support staff to direct traffic in stores. This went great. We even had extra people in the pharmacy to help us with the normal workflow. During this period we were instructed to promote our other immunizations like tetanus, shingles, pneumonia. Quotas were then established for each store. More pressure for all of us. Confusion resulted as patients asked, ‘why more vaccinations? We are only here for COVID shots.’

      The demand for shots has diminished and so has the staffing for the COVID clinics in the stores. Pressure has increased for pharmacists to step up and give the shots as part of the workflow of filling prescriptions. We do not have the personnel to watch the patient for the 15 minutes after the shot. Once again, CVS fails to provide services that the U.S. is paying us to do. This is dangerous. CVS is placing its customers at risk but I need my job and there are no other positions for pharmacists in my area.”

 

    1. “I worked at Omnicare. The job was terrible, management was terrible, but my hours were regular and it paid the bills. A lot of us had complaints but we had no idea what was about to come our way.Omnicare started laying off thousands of employees across the nation. They laid off people who had been loyal employees for the company for over 20 years. Rumors began to circulate that they were preparing to sell the company. In a short time, it was announced that Omnicare had been acquired by CVS Health. From there, things only went further downhill. Management was given a ‘scheduling tool’ that changed the schedules and shift times for everyone. Everyone was required to be available 24 hours a day and no one was guaranteed a regular schedule of any kind. These and other changes they were making were of the highest level of idiocy.CVS continued to change policies and made several more rounds of layoffs. Work conditions and relations with management got so bad that a lot of people left. Departments in this large-scale pharmacy had been decimated. Meanwhile, management had taken on new contracts with nursing homes and increased the workload by at least 50%. This only worsened the situation.

      Techs began to speak up about it. They felt they could trust me to back them up and, on at least 3 occasions, I was asked to be a witness to the official complaint to management. I am not one to sit back and watch bullying happen, and that is exactly what management was doing. I went with the technicians to their meetings with management and every time I was sent out of the room by management, and someone else (usually FROM management) was brought in to be the official ‘witness.’ So basically, complaints about a bully management team were being met with more bullying. I made no secret of my dislike for the new changes and the ways the techs were being treated, and the news made its way to the bullies in the offices.

      I was eventually terminated for a technician failing to deliver an intravenous medication to a facility. This happened after my shift had ended, and I was not in the building. Still, I had been the last pharmacist to work on the IV order, and management held me responsible and deemed it ‘extreme negligence.’ It was clearly retaliation, but because I was so fed up with the company, I just left. I have many other horrible stories about that place. There was another incident that happened to me which I could have sued over, but I didn’t because I wanted to give management the benefit of the doubt. Never again!

      I stay in touch with a friend who is part of the management team. It has lost almost 70% of its business and had to cut hours and staff back even further. All because CVS would not hire enough staff to cover the workload. Our ‘profession’ is doomed if it isn’t reclaimed by the pharmacists themselves, but it’s not looking good.”

 

    1. A long-term CVS pharmacist was terminated after she voiced concerns that there was not compliance with DEA regulations, as well as concerns about other situations and policies. Following her termination she sued CVS alleging retaliation and other issues. She was offered a settlement but declined it, and the litigation continues. CVS must have great concerns regarding this situation as it already has used two law firms and multiple attorneys.

 

  1. “My long-term CVS employment was terminated shortly after I turned 60. The only other pharmacist who was ‘laid off’ was about the same age. I had to fight for several months to get my stock purchase money.”

Share your concerns with your local media and beyond. The Pharmacist Activist is only published once a month, but readers who are current or former employees of CVS can add their concerns in the media every day.

More potent than ipecac

As I was concluding this editorial I was made aware of a message, “CVS introduces new purpose statement.” The new statement is:
“Bringing our heart to every moment of your health”

I had an instant recall of a popular song that most readers are too young to have heard. It was a hit song from the 1950s by the Fontane sisters titled, “Hearts of Stone” that featured the line, “Hearts of stone will cause you pain.”

I went on the CVS website to learn more and found a longer statement that included “Our purpose,” “Our strategy,” “Our values,” and “The heart of health.” I urge you to read it but observe the following: WARNING: May cause violent emesis. Take the maximum dose of ondansetron before reading!

When I recovered, I thought of a possible “silver lining” that has inspired the first CONTEST in the history of The Pharmacist Activist. Current employees of CVS are eligible and should submit proposed revisions of the “Our purpose” and “Our values” sections of the CVS statement based on your experience and opinions regarding the realities of your CVS employment and CVS management. The prize is publication (anonymously) in a future issue, with the possibility of a second contest to put it to music as a theme song for the CVS Underground. Entries that include profanity, vulgarity, or blatant slander will not be considered. Submit your entry via email to danandsue3@verizon.net.

Daniel A. Hussar
danandsue3@verizon.net

When you rush a new medication thru the approval process – THIS IS WHAT YOU GET !

could this applied to denying pain management to a pt in an emergency dept ?

 

https://www.lac.org/assets/files/LAC-Report-Final-7.19.21.pdf

Today the Legal Action Center (LAC) released a report examining the legal obligations of hospitals to provide evidence-based and lifesaving care to emergency department patients with substance use disorders – specifically SUD diagnosis, administration of agonist medications, outpatient treatment referral facilitation and naloxone distribution or prescription.

As the primary point of access to the healthcare system for many patients with SUD, emergency departments have a critical role to play in delivering care that helps patients survive to access further treatment.

The LAC’s report concludes that any hospital that fails to provide appropriate care could face legal liability under four separate federal laws:
*Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA)
*Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
*Rehabilitation Act (RA)
*Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (Title VI)

Read the full report at:

https://lnkd.in/g6CYBbg

When a complex problem doesn’t have a simple solution -easiest thing to do is DO NOTHING ?

Revising the Opioid Guidelines

https://daily-remedy.com/revising-the-opioid-guidelines/

Nuance – if there is a single word that could describe the essence of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC) meeting last week which discussed revising the 2016 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) opioid prescribing guidelines – this would be it.

So if nuance is the word that defines the meeting, then we should inquire into the meaning of nuance. Since how people speak reflects how people think.

Nuance is defined as a subtle distinction or variation, but the manner in which it was applied during the meeting suggests a different definition – complex. So after nearly five years of debating the validity of the CDC guidelines, we arrive at where we began – the diagnosis and treatment of pain using opioids is complex, ‘requiring nuance’.

A phrase repeated ad nauseam during the meeting. But in referring to pain management as a fundamentally complex concept, one that requires nuance, were the committee members defining it appropriately, or simply side-stepping any definition at all?

This is the problem with nuance, just as it is the problem with complexity.

Often the conversation devolves into meaningless generalities rather than addressing the core issue at hand. To say something is complex often relies upon a broad definition, more conceptual than anything else.

And when it comes time to apply that definition within a specific context – or a specific application – the nuances give way to the concrete.

What is complex becomes simple.

This is a well known tendency. Largely responsible for why we landed here in the first place, needing to revise the guidelines at all. They were a poor approximation of all the complexity that goes into opioid prescribing.

The decision-making is complex, so we simplified it with guidelines. But in simplifying something complex, we find errors of approximation – manifesting as unintended consequences.

We knew this 2016 when we codified the guidelines. But from the manner in which committee members spoke, it appears as though we just now realized opioid prescribing is complex – or requiring nuance.

The circular logic was on full display throughout the meeting, and the logical fallacy might portend similar failings in the revised guidelines. Since how people think reflects how people act.

The tendency for people to speak complexly yet act with certain simplicity is the singular conceptual problem perpetuating the opioid epidemic. And explains why no guideline, no matter how well constructed, how well intentioned, can address the systemic root of the opioid epidemic.

The systemic root is epistemological, rooted in how we think, the thoughts we form. The guidelines should not try to codify decisions by their most apparent outcome, nor by the most obvious point of decision-making.

Rather the guidelines should emphasize particular patterns of thought, focusing on critical junctures of decision-making in which the balance of proper legal oversight balances alongside the protection of patient’s healthcare rights.

A balance not necessarily the same for every person, but one that should be pursued for every patient.

Maybe this is not quite a guideline. Maybe I too am side-stepping the issue, in favor of nuance.

Maybe that is what is ultimately needed.

Forgo the desire for revised guidelines in favor of a conceptual shift in how we think about opioid prescribing.

I was unlawfully convicted and sent to jail, only for my conviction to be reversed due to prosecutors cheating

Imagine that… a doctor getting CONVICTED because PROSECUTORS CHEATED.. they claim that justice is blind… but… she apparently has some other means of seeing what she wants to see and her “scale” is not always balanced.  It has been claimed that the DEA is more interested in using The Civil Asset Forfeiture Act to confiscate assets from practitioners, various reports put the annual dollar figure between 500 million to ONE BILLION+ .  It would appear that law firms don’t see a lot of money by helping prescribers setting up irrevocable trusts so that the DEA can’t have anything to confiscate. One would think that those prescribers that are employees of large hospital system would be interested in helping their employee prescribers to protect themselves by showing them this very simple legal trick.  Maybe they are more interested is just denying care to those who have a valid medical necessity for being prescribed controlled substances.

Maybe these large hospital corporations have some other agendas… those mid-level practitioners (ARNP, PA, NP) the hospital generally get paid by insurances abt 85% of what they get paid for a MD providing the same service, but it is unlikely that these mid-level practitioners get paid 85% of what MD’s get paid.. So fewer MD’s on the payroll and more mid-level practitioners could mean more $$$ to the hospital corporation ?

Mainstream media persecuting healthcare professionals

https://doctorsofcourage.org/mainstream-media-persecuting-healthcare-professionals/

Back when the attack on me started, I was like a frightened little puppy. Me, a guy that would call my parents when I was a teenager to tell them I wasn’t coming home that night. My dad knew were I was, and I was not partying with my friends. My dad would say to me the next morning when I came home, “what was her name, how long will this one last?”. My mom would just laugh, typical Hispanic family. That was our culture. Why did I do this? Despite growing up in a very violent environment, despite having to defend myself constantly, I have always believed in honesty and transparency. I always believed in the chain of command, and that even if rules didn’t make any sense to me, they existed for a reason. Even as a teenager, I understood the concept of the “greater good”. I would tell myself when this whole investigation started, that I must have done SOMETHING wrong. I would go through all the possible scenarios in my mind, but it just didn’t add up, The first clue that we may just be dealing with a very corrupt government, was when Guy McCartney, the DEA agent from West Virginia in charge of the investigation against me, confiscated 26 charts of patients who had died, whom he claimed died due to my prescribing of opiates. That same day, at least he was fair enough to give me a CD rom, which I still have that have. Drove home quickly that day, put the CD rom in my computer drive, and it turned out that not only had all these patients died of cancer, heart failure and had not been on opiates for over a year, but half of them were never on opiates or any type of controlled substance from me at all!

Many of you know the rest. I was unlawfully convicted and sent to jail, only for my conviction to be reversed due to prosecutors cheating.

That is when they woke up a sleeping giant, and I reverted back to my street mode. Immediately following my conviction, within 2 days my step daughter calls me and tells me not to listen to the news. They were tarnishing my name all over the Pittsburgh media. I was indicted for not kicking patients out, 5 in all for abnormal urine drug screens. The abnormalities were subtle, and in patients with severe life compromising and threatening conditions. CDC guidelines stated not to kick patients out on drug screens due to the high incidence of false negativity and positivity. Not mention that they are not quantitative. To make matters worst, the “mentioned” about 400 charts over time of people with abnormal drug screens, insinuating that I gave drugs to drug addicts. I got a CD rom of these patients as well. They were not as sick, so I stopped prescribing opiates to avoid trouble and sent them all to pain clinics. These were only seen once or twice. The prosecution under handedly did not mention this, and my attorney, naturally, blew this off. Yet, prosecutor, Sarah Wagner, criminalized it. What did the media say about me? They called in “illegal distribution”. My name was in press publications all over the country!!! Florida, Arizona, Texas…. When my conviction was reversed, the only publication that published this story was Reuters. I called the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Tribune review even the New York Times, and they blew me off, after unlawfully tarnishing my name.

The take home messages here is that the mainstream media is clearly behind this initiative to convict and incarcerate healthcare professions, even at a very steep price to patients with chronic medical conditions. Social media is the only publication the whole story. The government clearly hates social media, because government wants to control, as they control the mainstream media. Sadly for the government, some form of social media is the future of news, because the main stream media has lost all credibility. When I read about Doctors exchanging sex for drugs, distributing large amounts of opiates, not only due I take the news with a grain of salt now, but the general public, specially those that have been harmed by the governments and mains stream medias lies does as well. A virtual meeting that I, and many others specially patients had with the CDC was a major step forward. But evil is very strong. No doubt that those with bad intentions will fight back, and this was emphasized at this meeting. But, it is a balancing act and good ultimately triumphs for the continued advancement of our species. We just have to hang tight and fight on. The lies about this fake prescription opiate crisis are clear to the public now. Less than 3% of deaths, drugs abused were prescription all along. Not surprised.

About the Author Felix Brizuela

Born in Cuba, Felix moved to New Jersey when he was two years old. He played football and wrestled for Rutgers University. He graduated medical training at the now-named Rowan School of Osteopathic Medicine and did his residency in neurology. His medical practice was located in Morgantown, WV and Connellsville, PA. He has teaching experience, serving as department chair at Temple University and teaching attendant at the West Virginia school of Osteopathic Medicine. He has done investigative studies with epilepsy and multiple sclerosis and served as chief investigator for a study of postpolio syndrome and chronic fatigue. He was also a chief investigator in a study involving the use of intravenous gamma globin for the treatment of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, entitled “Ivig and cidp, dose matters”. The paper was presented at a poster presentation in France. He has lectured overseas on the topic of cidp and immune neuropathy.

Felix will be teaching various health topics through our DoC course network. If interested in learning more, sign up below for our newsletter.

 

COVID-19 “death counts”… facts & LIES

Biden EO: the Federal Government should pursue a comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all

Everyone seems to have a different definition of EQUITY and it is not necessarily the same as EQUALITY.  Does this EO from President Biden mean that everyone should have EQUAL ACCESS to medical care?  Not necessarily equal access to medical care that is paid for by someone else – like a national health insurance. When a product/service is provided at no charge..  it tends to be over utilized and rationing will quickly be implemented.

Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government/

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:  

Section 1.  Policy.  Equal opportunity is the bedrock of American democracy, and our diversity is one of our country’s greatest strengths.  But for too many, the American Dream remains out of reach.  Entrenched disparities in our laws and public policies, and in our public and private institutions, have often denied that equal opportunity to individuals and communities.  Our country faces converging economic, health, and climate crises that have exposed and exacerbated inequities, while a historic movement for justice has highlighted the unbearable human costs of systemic racism.  Our Nation deserves an ambitious whole-of-government equity agenda that matches the scale of the opportunities and challenges that we face.

It is therefore the policy of my Administration that the Federal Government should pursue a comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all, including people of color and others who have been historically under served, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality.  Affirmatively advancing equity, civil rights, racial justice, and equal opportunity is the responsibility of the whole of our Government.  Because advancing equity requires a systematic approach to embedding fairness in decision-making processes, executive departments and agencies (agencies) must recognize and work to redress inequities in their policies and programs that serve as barriers to equal opportunity.  

By advancing equity across the Federal Government, we can create opportunities for the improvement of communities that have been historically underserved, which benefits everyone.  For example, an analysis shows that closing racial gaps in wages, housing credit, lending opportunities, and access to higher education would amount to an additional $5 trillion in gross domestic product in the American economy over the next 5 years.  The Federal Government’s goal in advancing equity is to provide everyone with the opportunity to reach their full potential.  Consistent with these aims, each agency must assess whether, and to what extent, its programs and policies perpetuate systemic barriers to opportunities and benefits for people of color and other underserved groups.  Such assessments will better equip agencies to develop policies and programs that deliver resources and benefits equitably to all.  

Sec. 2.  Definitions.  For purposes of this order:  (a)  The term “equity” means the consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality. 

(b)  The term “underserved communities” refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life, as exemplified by the list in the preceding definition of “equity.”   

Sec. 3.  Role of the Domestic Policy Council.  The role of the White House Domestic Policy Council (DPC) is to coordinate the formulation and implementation of my Administration’s domestic policy objectives.  Consistent with this role, the DPC will coordinate efforts to embed equity principles, policies, and approaches across the Federal Government.  This will include efforts to remove systemic barriers to and provide equal access to opportunities and benefits, identify communities the Federal Government has underserved, and develop policies designed to advance equity for those communities.  The DPC-led interagency process will ensure that these efforts are made in coordination with the directors of the National Security Council and the National Economic Council.  

Sec. 4.  Identifying Methods to Assess Equity.  (a)  The Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) shall, in partnership with the heads of agencies, study methods for assessing whether agency policies and actions create or exacerbate barriers to full and equal participation by all eligible individuals.  The study should aim to identify the best methods, consistent with applicable law, to assist agencies in assessing equity with respect to race, ethnicity, religion, income, geography, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability.  

(b)  As part of this study, the Director of OMB shall consider whether to recommend that agencies employ pilot programs to test model assessment tools and assist agencies in doing so.  

(c)  Within 6 months of the date of this order, the Director of OMB shall deliver a report to the President describing the best practices identified by the study and, as appropriate, recommending approaches to expand use of those methods across the Federal Government.

Sec. 5.  Conducting an Equity Assessment in Federal Agencies.  The head of each agency, or designee, shall, in consultation with the Director of OMB, select certain of the agency’s programs and policies for a review that will assess whether underserved communities and their members face systemic barriers in accessing benefits and opportunities available pursuant to those policies and programs.  The head of each agency, or designee, shall conduct such review and within 200 days of the date of this order provide a report to the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy (APDP) reflecting findings on the following:  

(a)  Potential barriers that underserved communities and individuals may face to enrollment in and access to benefits and services in Federal programs; 

(b)  Potential barriers that underserved communities and individuals may face in taking advantage of agency procurement and contracting opportunities;

(c)  Whether new policies, regulations, or guidance documents may be necessary to advance equity in agency actions and programs; and

(d)  The operational status and level of institutional resources available to offices or divisions within the agency that are responsible for advancing civil rights or whose mandates specifically include serving underrepresented or disadvantaged communities.

Sec. 6.  Allocating Federal Resources to Advance Fairness and Opportunity.  The Federal Government should, consistent with applicable law, allocate resources to address the historic failure to invest sufficiently, justly, and equally in underserved communities, as well as individuals from those communities.  To this end:  

(a)  The Director of OMB shall identify opportunities to promote equity in the budget that the President submits to the Congress.

(b)  The Director of OMB shall, in coordination with the heads of agencies, study strategies, consistent with applicable law, for allocating Federal resources in a manner that increases investment in underserved communities, as well as individuals from those communities.  The Director of OMB shall report the findings of this study to the President.  

Sec. 7.  Promoting Equitable Delivery of Government Benefits and Equitable Opportunities.  Government programs are designed to serve all eligible individuals.  And Government contracting and procurement opportunities should be available on an equal basis to all eligible providers of goods and services.  To meet these objectives and to enhance compliance with existing civil rights laws:  

(a)  Within 1 year of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall consult with the APDP and the Director of OMB to produce a plan for addressing: 

(i)   any barriers to full and equal participation in programs identified pursuant to section 5(a) of this order; and 

(ii)  any barriers to full and equal participation in agency procurement and contracting opportunities identified pursuant to section 5(b) of this order.  

(b)  The Administrator of the U.S. Digital Service, the United States Chief Technology Officer, the Chief Information Officer of the United States, and the heads of other agencies, or their designees, shall take necessary actions, consistent with applicable law, to support agencies in developing such plans.

Sec. 8.  Engagement with Members of Underserved Communities.  In carrying out this order, agencies shall consult with members of communities that have been historically underrepresented in the Federal Government and underserved by, or subject to discrimination in, Federal policies and programs.  The head of each agency shall evaluate opportunities, consistent with applicable law, to increase coordination, communication, and engagement with community-based organizations and civil rights organizations.

Sec. 9.  Establishing an Equitable Data Working Group.  Many Federal datasets are not disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender, disability, income, veteran status, or other key demographic variables.  This lack of data has cascading effects and impedes efforts to measure and advance equity.  A first step to promoting equity in Government action is to gather the data necessary to inform that effort.  

(a)  Establishment.  There is hereby established an Interagency Working Group on Equitable Data (Data Working Group).

(b)  Membership.  

(i)    The Chief Statistician of the United States and the United States Chief Technology Officer shall serve as Co-Chairs of the Data Working Group and coordinate its work.  The Data Working Group shall include representatives of agencies as determined by the Co-Chairs to be necessary to complete the work of the Data Working Group, but at a minimum shall include the following officials, or their designees:  

(A)  the Director of OMB; 

(B)  the Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of the U.S. Census Bureau; 

(C)  the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers; 

(D)  the Chief Information Officer of the United States; 

(E)  the Secretary of the Treasury, through the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Tax Policy; 

(F)  the Chief Data Scientist of the United States; and

(G)  the Administrator of the U.S. Digital Service.

(ii)   The DPC shall work closely with the Co-Chairs of the Data Working Group and assist in the Data Working Group’s interagency coordination functions. 

(iii)  The Data Working Group shall consult with agencies to facilitate the sharing of information and best practices, consistent with applicable law.

(c)  Functions.  The Data Working Group shall:  

(i)   through consultation with agencies, study and provide recommendations to the APDP identifying inadequacies in existing Federal data collection programs, policies, and infrastructure across agencies, and strategies for addressing any deficiencies identified; and

(ii)  support agencies in implementing actions, consistent with applicable law and privacy interests, that expand and refine the data available to the Federal Government to measure equity and capture the diversity of the American people.

(d)  OMB shall provide administrative support for the Data Working Group, consistent with applicable law.

Sec. 10.  Revocation.  (a)  Executive Order 13950 of September 22, 2020 (Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping), is hereby revoked.

(b)  The heads of agencies covered by Executive Order 13950 shall review and identify proposed and existing agency actions related to or arising from Executive Order 13950.  The head of each agency shall, within 60 days of the date of this order, consider suspending, revising, or rescinding any such actions, including all agency actions to terminate or restrict contracts or grants pursuant to Executive Order 13950, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.

(c)  Executive Order 13958 of November 2, 2020 (Establishing the President’s Advisory 1776 Commission), is hereby revoked.

Sec. 11.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:  

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  Independent agencies are strongly encouraged to comply with the provisions of this order.

(d)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.

THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 20, 2021.

The FIVE FOX cable discussing the new CDC opiate crisis “death count” – listen to GUTFELD !

https://youtu.be/SLFqiS37rdQ?t=969

The top video is from youtube, but at times it states that it has been taken down… so the bottom video I saved it to my hard drive… so that no one can take it down.

when you get tired of being in “chains” try a independent pharmacy – dump the chain pharmacies