Asked to share

Chinese whistleblower virologist comes forward on COVID-19

The OVERLORDS at FACEBOOK and YOUTUBE keep taking this down…

Medical/health information surrounding Covid 19

As COVID-19 cases began to overwhelm hospitals in the United States, state and local governments enacted public health orders in order to slow the rate of infection. These measures have ranged from stay-at-home orders and mask mandates to business closures and bans on large gatherings. All in all, 42 states issued stay-at-home orders for their residents.1 Yet despite the broad public support for such public health orders, businesses and religious groups have brought multiple lawsuits in response.2 Most of these challenges have either contended that the regulating body does not have authority to issue the order, that the order was discriminatory, or that the order constituted a regulatory taking. Moreover, these challenges largely have been partisan in nature rather than in the interest of public health. The legal validity of these orders is also supported by a long history of precedent showing that policing powers reside with the state, with courts consistently ruling that these powers include instituting protections during public health emergencies, learn more about COVID legal battles in Texas.

The COVID-19 pandemic is not over.3 In fact, as states have begun to lift public health orders, rates of coronavirus cases have started to rise.4 As a result, many local and state leaders have begun reinstituting some public health orders, likely increasing the number of legal challenges that will be filed in the courts.5 In order to ensure the safety of Americans, it is critical that courts follow the law and not succumb to partisan political arguments that are at odds with case law and scientific reality. However, it is also important for courts to be attentive to the potential for states to abuse their broad emergency authorities—especially with an election looming.

Supreme Court precedent regarding states’ police powers

The U.S. Supreme Court has given states wide latitude in terms of their police powers, which provide state and local governments the authority to take action against impending threats to the safety of the public.6 Generally, the government must first declare an emergency.7 Once an emergency is declared, state and local governments have the ability to issue orders to protect public health and the power to restrain certain liberties.8

The 1824 Supreme Court case Gibbons v. Ogden distinguished between the authority given to the federal government and the authority of the state, holding that police powers largely belong to the state.9 Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Marshall stated that these powers included the ability to impose isolation and quarantine orders.10 Almost a century later, in 1905, the court weighed in on the state’s authority to impose public health orders in the case Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which concerned a law mandating smallpox vaccinations.11 The question for the court in this case was whether the state had the authority to issue such a mandate under the 14th Amendment.12 The court stated that it did, finding that a “community has the right to protect itself against an epidemic of disease which threatens the safety of its members.”13

Jacobson remains the principal case setting the legal standard for states’ police powers and has been cited to uphold public health orders in many of the cases described later in this issue brief. However, the ruling does not give states carte blanche when enacting public health orders, as they are not allowed to exercise their power in an “arbitrary” or “unreasonable manner.”14

FDA is not in a position to “regulate the practice of medicine

While Stephen Hahn says the FDA is not in a position to “regulate the practice of medicine,” a group of researchers oppose doctors prescribing the anti-malarial drug for COVID.

The Hill: FDA Chief: Hydroxychloroquine Use A Decision Between Doctor And Patient 
Stephen Hahn, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), on Thursday declined to take a definitive stance on whether people should take hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for the coronavirus,

instead saying that decision should be made between a doctor and a patient.

“We had data that when this drug was combined with others, there was some risk associated with that. But the question you’re asking me is a decision between a doctor and a patient,” Hahn said on NBC’s “Today” show. (Axelrod, 7/30)

CNN: Hydroxychloroquine: Researchers Publish Scathing Critique Of Henry Ford Study Touted By The White House 
Researchers on Wednesday published scathing critiques of a study President Trump repeatedly touted on Twitter. That study, published earlier this month in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, claimed to show that hydroxychloroquine saved lives. President Trump tweeted about it enthusiastically. (Cohen, 7/31)

Kaiser Health News and Politifact HealthCheck: Don’t Fall For This Video: Hydroxychloroquine Is Not A COVID-19 Cure 
Millions of people, including the president of the United States, have seen or shared a video in which a doctor falsely claims there is a cure for the coronavirus, and it’s a medley starring hydroxychloroquine. The video shows several doctors in white coats giving a press conference outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. It persists on social media despite bans from Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, and it was published by Breitbart, a conservative news site. (Funke, 7/31)

Also —

The Hill: Ohio Pharmacy Board Backtracks, Withdraws Rule Barring Use Of Hydroxychloroquine To Treat Coronavirus
The State of Ohio Board of Pharmacy on Thursday withdrew a rule that would have barred pharmacists, licensed distributors of drugs and medical institutions from prescribing the controversial anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine to treat or prevent the novel coronavirus after Gov. Mike DeWine (R) voiced concerns. The state pharmacy board said in a memo on Wednesday that the rule would, in general, prohibit the use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19… But the rule quickly met with pushback from DeWine (R), who urged the state board to reconsider the decision the day it went into effect. (Wise, 7/30)

If the FDA does not have the authority to regulate the practice of medicine… DOES THE DEA LACK THAT SAME AUTHORITY ?

 

those hearing aids needs to have their batteries replaced regularly

In the rear view mirror: hindsight is 20/20

My blog – this blog – is now in its NINTH YEAR and trying to put things into perspective that is a similar time frame that I spent going thru HIGH SCHOOL and COLLEGE. Going from grade school to becoming a licensed Pharmacist  would suggest is a substantial amount of progress and advancement.

During a similar time frame I opened or expanded several successful businesses.

Generally, the best way for an individual or entity/group to reach/accomplish a goal is to have a dedicated organized plan  along with a adequate number of knowledgeable people who will work toward the goal on a consistent basis, or some will just either pray and figure that someone else will make it happen or just rely on “dumb luck”.

Since 2012 … there has been 5 different Congressional sessions and two different Presidents one from each party. The Republicans have had the majority in both the Senate and the House the majority of the time and only ONE SESSION where both the Senate and the House had the majority of both houses and was the same party as our President – first two years of Trump’s presidency.

In looking at what has happened in/around the chronic pain community during the same time frame.  Advocates have come and gone, the National Pain Report is now gone, one of the national non-profit advocate had some “issues” and the then president was booted out.

How many more FB pages devoted to something going on in/around pain have been created… but it would seem that the numbers have exploded.  I don’t think that any one could come up with a accurate number.  Has to be in the THOUSANDS.

The vast majority of those FB pages are “closed”, “private” or some other visibility restriction placed on them..   Meaning that NOTHING could go viral from a post in one of those FB pages.  Could that be part of the reason that seemingly the vast majority of the community have no idea what is going on in/around the community?

Most everyone recognizes that there is a substantial amount of infighting and disagreement.  This is not something that has happened overnight and it seems to only be getting worse.

There is claimed that there are 100 million chronic pain pts and some 25-35 million within that number are considered dealing with intractable chronic pain – needing some pain mitigating therapy 24/7.  Some want to readily blame President Trump for the current problems.  Yet what political party was in the majority when the decade of pain law expired in 2009 and there was no interest in renewing it ?  What political party was in the majority when the DEA cut opiate pharma production limits by about 50% over several years ?  What political party was in the majority when the CDC published their Opiate dosing guidelines in 2016 ? Has the presumed Democratic Presidential candidate came out and made a statement for or against chronic pain pts getting adequate therapy and/or the DEA continuing to raid prescribers’ offices and shutting them down over mostly fabricated or exaggerated facts ?

Imagine if early in 2019 had come together and got 1% of the community to donate $10/month to a non profit that would be hiring a law firm, PR firm, Lobbyist firm.  That would generate 10 million/month cash flow to a  “war chest”.  At this point in time those professional could be approaching the upper echelon of those two political campaigns with the facts that they represent 100 million chronic painers and that they are looking for a candidate who will support getting the DEA out of prescribers’ offices…

If Trump wanted those 100 million votes the community needs an executive order to put a muzzle on the DEA BEFORE NOV 3rd or those 100 million votes will be given to Biden.  Generally it only takes about 65 million total votes to win the presidency.  In reality, the community could determine who gets elected to just about any office at any level from city/county/state/nationally. Remember, abt 85% of Congress is up for re-election every two years and abt 98% will get re-elected regardless what they do or don’t do or promise to get done and never does or does just the opposite of what they promised.

But because of the on going infighting and disunity within the community … that boat has already sailed for this election year.

Do I believe that anything will change within the community ?  Not really, IMO, all too many are willing to compromise and unify as long as others are willing to compromise to their opinion(s) and unify under their “organizational umbrella “

Let’s hope that as the stronger advocates “thrown in the towel” and just walk away – out of frustration – the last advocate standing has the entire community’s best interest in mind

Pennsylvania uses ‘weighted lottery’ to distribute lifesaving remdesivir in favor of low-income patients

Pennsylvania uses ‘weighted lottery’ to distribute lifesaving remdesivir in favor of low-income patients

https://www.foxnews.com/media/pa-hospitals-use-weighted-lottery-to-distribute-lifesaving-remdesivir-in-favor-of-low-income-patients

South Carolina doctor says they will also use a similar system if faced with shortages

The antiviral drug remdisivir has been effective in treating COVID-19, reducing risk of death for severely ill patients by 62 percent. It is also scarce, leaving a number of states in fear of running out as coronavirus cases continue to rise across the country.

As a solution to this problem, Pennsylvania is encouraging healthcare providers to use a “weighted lottery” system to decide which patients are treated with this lifesaving drug and who goes without. Instead of medical need being the deciding factor of who receives a drug, this lottery is weighted in favor of those who sit lower on the socioeconomic spectrum.

Betsy McCaughey, former lieutenant governor of New York and chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths, is concerned that this move is not being given proper attention and could have huge implications for the health care system moving forward.

“They’ve decided to do some social engineering and tilt the scales and make sure that the drug goes to people who live in low-income areas in preference to patients, maybe in the same ICU with the same medical problems, who live in a nicer neighborhood,” McCaughey told Fox News.

McCaughey says this sort of “redistributive medicine” could have serious ramifications if adopted by more states and in more areas of health care. Hospitals face drug shortages all the time, like the widely used vincristine for childhood cancer. McCaughey worries that if this sort of tipping of the scales becomes normal practice it is the middle class who will suffer.

“I don’t think we should be rationing scarce medical resources against the middle class. We’ve got to treat everybody the same. They’re starting with remdesivir but this is only the beginning,” she said.

The rationale behind this new system is to “redress inequities that make health and safety less accessible to disadvantaged groups,” says the Pennsylvania Department of Health. “One strategy to accomplish this is to use a metric like the Area Deprivation Index to identify patients from disadvantaged communities, then give them somewhat increased chances to receive treatment in a weighted lottery,” according to their website.

Pennsylvania is not alone in this social justice push to ration drugs away from the middle class.

According to Dr. Dee Ford, who was on a panel of ethicists and medical experts who developed an “ethically principled” process to distribute the initial supply of remdesivir in South Carolina, the state would also adopt a similar system if faced with shortages.

While the general public is in favor of medical treatment being given to those most in need and using a blind lottery system, McCaughey believes academics are using the pandemic as an opportunity to push a “redistributionist agenda.”

“It’s time for the public to discuss this and speak out for fairness in medicine. It’s such a serious issue that it should be discussed by everybody, not just behind the closed doors of an academic discussion,” said McCaughey.

The Pennsylvania Department of Health responded to Fox New’s request for comment by saying they have distributed six shipments of remdesivir to acute health care facilities and have “devised a formula to ensure equitable allocation [of remdesivir] to all acute care health care facilities.” In their statement they also say a ‘”weighted lottery” is an inaccurate name for this formula, however, the term is used on their website.

“Additionally, the Department of Human Services, Department of Health and PA Emergency Management Agency, along with a number of other stakeholder groups, developed a system of set recommendations for how the hospitals can allocate RDV. These recommendations are available for use by all hospitals, and promote equal access to this treatment based on clinical judgment. While utilization of these guidelines is completely optional and up to the facility and the individual health care provider, we emphasize the need to make treatment accessible to all who can best benefit from its use,” the statement continued.

Rapp Report: The Prosecution of Doctors and Propaganda Campaign

The Prosecution of Doctors and Propaganda Campaign

https://therappreportpodcast.podbean.com/e/e18-the-prosecution-of-doctors-and-propaganda-campaign/

In this episode we discuss the witch hunt against pain doctors in the United States, particularly that of Dr. Steven Henson of Wichita, Kansas, who is now serving a life sentence. We also discuss the propaganda campaign being used against doctors and pain patients that fuels this opioid hysteria.

 

Rite Aid deployed facial recognition systems in hundreds of U.S. stores

Rite Aid deployed facial recognition systems in hundreds of U.S. stores

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-riteaid-software/

In the hearts of New York and metro Los Angeles, Rite Aid installed facial recognition technology in largely lower-income, non-white neighborhoods, Reuters found. Among the technology the U.S. retailer used: a state-of-the-art system from a company with links to China and its authoritarian government.

Filed

Over about eight years, the American drugstore chain Rite Aid Corp quietly added facial recognition systems to 200 stores across the United States, in one of the largest rollouts of such technology among retailers in the country, a Reuters investigation found.

In the hearts of New York and metro Los Angeles, Rite Aid deployed the technology in largely lower-income, non-white neighborhoods, according to a Reuters analysis. And for more than a year, the retailer used state-of-the-art facial recognition technology from a company with links to China and its authoritarian government.

In telephone and email exchanges with Reuters since February, Rite Aid confirmed the existence and breadth of its facial recognition program. The retailer defended the technology’s use, saying it had nothing to do with race and was intended to deter theft and protect staff and customers from violence. Reuters found no evidence that Rite Aid’s data was sent to China.

Last week, however, after Reuters sent its findings to the retailer, Rite Aid said it had quit using its facial recognition software. It later said all the cameras had been turned off.

“This decision was in part based on a larger industry conversation,” the company told Reuters in a statement, adding that “other large technology companies seem to be scaling back or rethinking their efforts around facial recognition given increasing uncertainty around the technology’s utility.”

Reuters pieced together how the company’s initiative evolved, how the software has been used and how a recent vendor was linked to China, drawing on thousands of pages of internal documents from Rite Aid and its suppliers, as well as direct observations during store visits by Reuters journalists and interviews with more than 40 people familiar with the systems’ deployment. Most current and former employees spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they feared jeopardizing their careers.

While Rite Aid declined to disclose which locations used the technology, Reuters found facial recognition cameras at 33 of the 75 Rite Aid shops in Manhattan and the central Los Angeles metropolitan area during one or more visits from October through July.

The cameras were easily recognizable, hanging from the ceiling on poles near store entrances and in cosmetics aisles. Most were about half a foot long, rectangular and labeled either by their model, “iHD23,” or by a serial number including the vendor’s initials, “DC.” In a few stores, security personnel – known as loss prevention or asset protection agents – showed Reuters how they worked.

The cameras matched facial images of customers entering a store to those of people Rite Aid previously observed engaging in potential criminal activity, causing an alert to be sent to security agents’ smartphones. Agents then reviewed the match for accuracy and could tell the customer to leave.

Rite Aid told Reuters in a February statement that customers had been apprised of the technology through “signage” at the shops, as well as in a written policy posted this year on its website. Reporters found no notice of the surveillance in more than a third of the stores it visited with the facial recognition cameras.

Among the 75 stores Reuters visited, those in areas that were poorer or less white were much more likely to have the equipment, the news agency’s statistical analysis found.

Stores in more impoverished areas were nearly three times as likely as those in richer areas to have facial recognition cameras. Seventeen of 25 stores in poorer areas had the systems. In wealthier areas, it was 10 of 40. (Ten of the stores were in areas whose wealth status was not clear. Six of those stores had the equipment.)

In areas where people of color, including Black or Latino residents, made up the largest racial or ethnic group, Reuters found that stores were more than three times as likely to have the technology.

The Reuters findings illustrate “the dire need for a national conversation about privacy, consumer education, transparency, and the need to safeguard the Constitutional rights of Americans,” said Carolyn Maloney, the Democratic chairwoman of the House oversight committee, which has held hearings on the use of facial recognition technology.

Rite Aid said the rollout was “data-driven,” based on stores’ theft histories, local and national crime data and site infrastructure.

Cathy Langley, Rite Aid’s vice president of asset protection, said earlier this year that facial recognition – which she referred to as “feature matching” – resulted in less violence and organized crime in the company’s stores. Last week, however, Rite Aid said its new leadership team was reviewing practices across the company, and “this was one of a number of programs that was terminated.”

‘Orwellian surveillance’

Facial recognition technology has become highly controversial in the United States as its use has expanded in both the public and private sectors, including by law enforcement and retailers. Civil liberties advocates warn it can lead to harassment of innocent individuals, arbitrary and discriminatory arrests, infringements of privacy rights and chilled personal expression.

Adding to these concerns, recent research by a U.S. government institute showed that algorithms that underpin the technology erred more often when subjects had darker skin tones.

Facial recognition systems are largely unregulated in the United States, despite disclosure or consent requirements, or limits on government use, in several states, including California, Washington, Texas and Illinois. Some cities, including San Francisco, ban municipal officials from using them. In general, the technology makes photos and videos more readily searchable, allowing retailers almost instantaneous facial comparisons within and across stores.

Among the systems used by Rite Aid was one from DeepCam LLC, which worked with a firm in China whose largest outside investor is a Chinese government fund. Some security experts said any program with connections to China was troubling because it could open the door to aggressive surveillance in the United States more typical of an autocratic state.

U.S. Senator Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican and acting chair of the U.S. Senate’s intelligence committee, told Reuters in a statement that the Rite Aid system’s potential link to China was “outrageous.” “The Chinese Communist Party’s buildup of its Orwellian surveillance state is alarming, and China’s efforts to export its surveillance state to collect data in America would be an unacceptable, serious threat,” he said.

The security specialists expressed concern that information gathered by a China-linked company could ultimately land in that government’s hands, helping Beijing refine its facial recognition technology globally and monitor people in ways that violate American standards of privacy.

“If it goes back to China, there are no rules,” said James Lewis, the Technology Policy Program director at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Asked for comment, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said: “These are unfounded smears and rumors.”

‘A promising new tool’

Rite Aid, afflicted with financial losses in recent years, is not the only retailer to adopt or explore facial recognition technology.

Two years ago, the Loss Prevention Research Council, a coalition founded by retailers to test anti-crime techniques, called facial recognition “a promising new tool” worthy of evaluation.

“There are a handful of retailers that have made the decision, ‘Look, we need to leverage tech to sell more and lose less,” said council director Read Hayes. Rite Aid’s program was one of the largest, if not the largest, in retail, Hayes said. The Camp Hill, Pennsylvania-based company operates about 2,400 stores around the country.

The Home Depot Inc said it had been testing facial recognition to reduce shoplifting in at least one of its stores but stopped the trial this year. A smaller rival, Menards, piloted systems in at least 10 locations as of early 2019, a person familiar with that effort said.

Walmart Inc has also tried out facial recognition in a handful of stores, said two sources with knowledge of the tests. Walmart and Menards had no comment.

Using facial recognition to approach people who previously have committed “dishonest acts” in a store before they do so again is less dangerous for staff, said Rite Aid’s former vice president of asset protection, Bob Oberosler, who made the decision to deploy an early facial recognition system at Rite Aid. That way, “there was significantly less need for law enforcement involvement,” he said.

‘Tougher’ neighborhoods

In interviews, 10 current and former Rite Aid loss prevention agents told Reuters that the system they initially used in stores was from a company called FaceFirst, which has been backed by U.S. investment firms.

It regularly misidentified people, all 10 of them said.

“It doesn’t pick up Black people well,” one loss prevention staffer said last year while using FaceFirst at a Rite Aid in an African-American neighborhood of Detroit. “If your eyes are the same way, or if you’re wearing your headband like another person is wearing a headband, you’re going to get a hit.”

FaceFirst’s chief executive, Peter Trepp, said facial recognition generally works well irrespective of skin tone, an issue he said the industry addressed years ago. He declined to talk about Rite Aid, saying he would not discuss any possible clients.

Rite Aid originally piloted FaceFirst at its store on West 3rd Street and South Vermont Avenue in Los Angeles, a largely Asian and Latino neighborhood, around 2012.