“The moral test of a government is how it treats those who are at the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadow of life, the sick and the needy, and the handicapped.” – Hubert Humphrey
passionate pachyderms
Pharmacist Steve steve@steveariens.com 502.938.2414
Under the U.S. Constitution, the federal government has jurisdiction over only three crimes: treason, counterfeiting, and piracy,
writes Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) General Counsel Andrew Schlafly in the summer issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. “The Founders would be shocked at the degree to which the federal government is pursuing prosecutions of physicians and others, and the tactics employed to attain convictions.”
The federal court system lacks the checks and balances that exist in the state systems, and federal prosecutors command almost unlimited resources. Unlike in state courts, where there is a reasonable chance of acquittal, federal courts acquit on all counts in less than one percent of cases that are prosecuted. Conviction on only one of dozens or hundreds of counts that prosecutors pile on results in the same sentence—often decades in prison. That is why most defendants plead guilty to get a much shorter sentence, even if they are innocent. And not a few commit suicide, Schlafly writes.
Tricks that prosecutors use include statements designed to inflame or manipulate an average person, Schlafly notes. For example, as in a recent case of Dr. Eugene Gosy, a prominent pain-management specialist in New York, they may tell the public about the doctor’s expensive cars, or trips abroad, or colleagues that pleaded guilty. They emphasize the total amount of alleged false claims, without mentioning that these may have constituted less than 1 percent of billings submitted over 5 years.
Prosecutors grab more headlines by bringing down a respected member of the community than by prosecuting real criminals, Schlafly states.
Prosecutors have no accountability for the devastating effect on the community when its “number 1 prescriber” can no longer treat patients. The indictment of Dr. Gosy stranded 8,000 to 10,000 patients in urgent need of pain medication, causing what county health commissioner Gale R. Burstein called “a public health crisis.” Schlafly observed that “other physicians are obviously terrified to treat [these patients] with the threat of decades in prison hanging over them if they do.”
“What isn’t grabbing headlines are the doctors who quietly stop prescribing pain medicine or stop treating government-insured patients, as the rules for prescribing and billing become ever more complicated, and the penalties ever more draconian,” comments AAPS executive director Jane Orient, M.D. “Those who remain in practice need to become more aware of prosecutorial traps.”
FDA Bureaucrat Brags On Blocking Physicians Prescribing Hydroxychloroqine in Early COVID-19
By Elizabeth Lee Vliet, M.D.
How could a cheap, effective drug, FDA-approved and in use worldwide since 1955, suddenly be restricted for outpatient use by American physicians? On March 28, 2020, as physicians worldwide were seeing striking success using hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19, the FDA erected bureaucratic barriers.
Rick Bright, Ph.D., is an FDA bureaucrat, vaccine researcher, and was appointed by President Obama on November 15, 2016 to head BARDA (Biomedical Advance Research and Development Authority, a sub-agency of the FDA). In an unprecedented move, Bright expanded his power and claimed credit for being the person imposing his will on all of us.
Meanwhile, he promoted both remdesivir, a never-approved experimental antiviral in development by Gilead Sciences, and a vaccine for COVID-19. Early effective use of the older, safe, and available hydroxychloroquine, whose patents had expired decades ago, would decrease demand for these new products.
Rick Bright’s dictatorial decree restricts the use of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) from the National Strategic Stockpile in COVID-19 to hospitalized patients only. States are using Bright’s fiat to impose broad restrictions limiting the drugs’ availability for physicians to use for outpatients to help them recover without hospitalization.
In other countries, early use in outpatients is changing the life-and-death equation by reducing severity and spread of illness, greatly reducing the need for hospitalization and ventilators and markedly reducing deaths.
By his own admission, Rick Bright, who is not a physician, knowingly and unilaterally countermanded Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar, Admiral Giroir in charge of Public Health Service and the President of the United States, who had directed BARDA to establish a Nationwide Expanded Access Investigational New Drug (“IND”) protocol for chloroquine, which would provide significantly greater outpatient access for the drug than would an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Unlike an EUA, a Nationwide Expanded Access IND protocol would make the drug available for the treatment of COVID-19 outside a hospital setting at physicians’ medical discretion based on patients’ needs.
How does one non-physician bureaucrat have such power with impunity? How can one person brag about blocking physicians’ attempt to reduce hospitalization and deaths during a national emergency?
It is a falsehood to say that the administration promoted HCQ as a “panacea” or that this medicine “clearly lacks scientific merit.” Both statements are contradicted by video recordings of Presidential briefings, by NIH/CDC studies going back 15 years, and by U.S. and worldwide clinical outcomes studies in COVID-19.
It is unprecedented to restrict physicians from prescribing FDA-approved drugs for a newly discovered use—“off-label.” This is contrary to FDA regulations in place since World War II.
Basic science studies published in 2005 from our own CDC and NIH showed clearly that CQ and HCQ work early in SARS-CoV to block viral entry and multiplication, and suggested that they would not work as well in late-stage disease when the viral load had become huge. When SARS-CoV-1 waned and disappeared by late 2003, the drugs were not submitted for FDA-approval for this coronavirus.
In 2019, when Chinese doctors recognized the deadly impact of SARS-CoV-2, they began trying known and available anti-viral medicines, especially CQ and HCQ, based on 15-year-old studies. They shared information with South Korea, India, Turkey, Iran, and several other countries, who also began quickly and successfully using CQ and HCQ, alone or with azithromycin. Later, Brazil, Israel, Costa Rica, Australia, and others followed, with good results .
Based on these initial clinical reports, President Trump said, at an early press briefing, that CQ and HCQ “offered hope.”
More studies have replicated these findings. HCQ given within the first week of symptoms, especially with zinc, can prevent the virus from entering your body’s cells and taking over, much like people use locks and alarms to stop burglaries. Waiting until you are in the ICU is like installing home locks and alarm system after burglars have invaded, vandalized your home, and stolen all your valuables. The drugs cannot reliably undo the damage from the exaggerated immune response, or cytokine storm, triggered by COVID-19.
Examples from the world data on May 18, 2020, which is updated daily, show how Third-World countries are faring far better than the U.S., where entrenched bureaucrats, governors, and medical and pharmacy boards are interfering with physicians’ medical decisions.
Country
# of cases
# of deaths
Deaths/million
Use of HCQ
India
101,261
3,164
2.0
Early and prophylactic
Costa Rica
866
10
2.0
Early and prophylactic
Australia
7,068
99
4.0
Early and prophylactic
South Korea
11,078
263
5.0
Early and prophylactic
Argentina
8,371
382
8.0
Early and prophylactic
Turkey
150,593
4171
50.0
Early and prophylactic
Israel
16,643
276
32.0
Early and prophylactic use
Brazil
255,368
16,853
79.0
Early, some prophylactic use
U.S.
1,550,294
91,981
278.0
Late, in hospitalized patients
Instead of orchestrating a war on HCQ, the media should be asking key questions, such as:
How does ONE person, by his own admission, block directives from his superiors to expand availability of HCQ for outpatients and nursing home patients in the U.S.?
What is the cost in lives and economic damage resulting from one person’s decision to restrict physicians’ independent medical decision-making?
How many nursing home deaths could have been prevented if physicians had been allowed early access to HCQ?
Why are U.S. doctors and nurses prevented from using HCQ prophylactically when workers in China, South Korea, India, Brazil, Argentina, Israel, Australia, Turkey, France, and other countries can be protected?
Why does the U.S. with its a much more sophisticated medical infrastructure have a much higher mortality rate than poor countries?
Bright’s disastrous bureaucratic decision may well be remembered as one of the worst preventable medical tragedies in our time. Never again should one government employee be allowed unrestrained power without oversight, and allowed to make a sweeping order interfering with the prescribing authority of front-line physicians trying to save lives.
CVS Health announced in a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar on Tuesday that the company will return roughly $43.3 million it received in payments through the CARES Act Provider Relief Fund.
“As you know, CVS Health did not solicit these funds but received them as part of an automatic distribution by the Department of Health and Human Services,” CVS President & CEO Larry Merlo wrote. “We have made the decision to return the funds and forgo participation in subsequent disbursements.”
Merlo hopes returning the funds will allow HHS to provide additional support to other providers facing “significant financial challenges” as a result of the coronavirus pandemic.
“In my view, returning these funds is part of CVS Health’s overall plan to do everything we can to help the communities we serve respond to the pandemic,” Merlo added. “We look forward to our continued partnership.”
Larry Merlo, CEO of CVS, speaks about the coronavirus in the Rose Garden of the White House, Monday, April 27, 2020, in Washington, as President Donald Trump listens. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
Merlo said CVS plans to establish an additional 1,000 COVID-19 testing sites at select CVS Pharmacy drive-thru locations by the end of May.
“Recognizing that underserved communities are disproportionately affected by the virus, more than half of those sites will serve communities with the greatest need as measured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index,” Merlo added.
Cars idle in line as patients wait to self-take a COVID-19 virus test at a drive-thru for the CVS Pharmacy in Danvers, Mass., Friday, May 15, 2020. CVS has expanded its testing sites. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)
CVS will also waive deductibles and cost-sharing for telemedicine visits and inpatient admissions for treatment of COVID-19 or health complications associated with the virus. The company recently waived out-of-pocket costs for in-network primary care visits for Medicare Advantage members through Sept. 30.
I thought that the CARES program was for small businesses ? Since when does a publicly traded company with a market value of 530 BILLION dollars could be classified as a SMALL BUSINESS ? Maybe the CFO thought that there would be so many applications that their claim for 43 million would just be lost in the avalanche of applications. According that this https://www1.salary.com/CVS-HEALTH-CORP-Executive-Salaries.html that money would have paid CVS’ President Larry Merlo’s salary wage package for about TWO YEARS..
The Chronic Pain Patient Community led by video producer Passionate Pachyderms fires it’s first shot accross the bow in their battle to regain adequate appropriate treatment for all those suffering debilitating Chronic Pain. Grab the tissues, turn up the sound, and get ready for something truly amazingly done.
Each individual pictured is a Chronic/Intractable Pain Patient who represents 450,000 Chronic/Intractable Pain Patients suffering the effects of this crisis. They are unable to obtain appropriate adequate care and/or the long term pain medication they require to function from day to day or have any quality of life.
These Americans are pictured on both their worst days, (which make up the majority of their lives) and on their rare good days, (in most cases before their medications were severely tapered or stopped completely) leaving them in endless cycles of miserably painful days that give way to sleepless and tormented nights. WE ARE THE FACES OF PAIN.
Prior to 2020 our Part D prgm was Silver Scripts … and the PBM was Caremark… and all are part of CVS Health..
Before 2020, the Part D prgms did not have a annual deductible, but in 2020 with our new Part D prgm Humana has a $435 annual deductible, and most/all Part D prgms have a annual deductible.
I looked back to see what we were charged out of pocket cost for the same prescriptions. Barb has already reached met her $435 deductible so I am trying to compare apples to apples.. The difference in monthly premiums is Humana is about $2.00/month more.
For 5 prescriptions filled after deductible met total out of pocket costs goes as follows:
Silver Scripts Humana
$934.54 $99.81
This is an example of how PBM’s are gouging (stealing) money from pts. All prescriptions were filled at the same independent pharmacy.
Here is a recent article about a whistle blower claims that Caremark (part of CVS Health) is defrauding Medicare Part D on prescription prices
Our experience would suggest that there could be some validity to this whistle blower’s allegations. For the first quarter of 2020 CVS Health reported a increase in total revenue by 8% and net profit up 43%. For a mature company (CVS was founded in 1963), it is very unusual – and certainly no where near the norm – for such companies to be able to produce a five fold increase in net profit over the increase of gross revenue. When open enrollment period opens on Oct 15, 2020, those people currently enrolled in a Silver Scripts prgm might want to use the Medicare website ( https://www.medicare.gov/plan-compare/#/?lang=en ) to compare what their out of pocket costs could be with other part D providers
URGENTLY LOOKING FOR FORMER WALMART PHARMACISTS & PHARM TECHS
Lawyers involved in the Opioid Litigation are urgently looking to get background and perspective assistance from former Walmart Pharmacists & Pharm Techs. The questions relate to how Walmart institutionally dealt with questionable prescriptions or prescribers. It is imperative that they get the facts correct and need help.
Please contact either attorney Chuck Gabriel (Chalmers & Adams, LLC), 678.735.5907 or email at CDGabriel@CPBLawGroup.com or attorney Kyle Oxford (BurnsCharest LLP), 504.799.2846 or email at koxford@burnscharest.com.
Call me if you have any questions – Mobile is best number
I have spoke with an attorney from this firm behind this several times and I asked him about confidentially of those who contact them and this is his reply:
“I cannot absolutely guarantee confidentiality, so I won’t promise it… in very rare, but some, circumstances, Attorney Work Product such as investigative interviews can be ordered disclosed – I won’t promise something I cannot deliver with certainty.
That said, the assurance that we are looking for background and perspective assistance rather than witnesses and testimony ought to provide some assurance. “
We have used the same Vet clinic for the last 30 yrs +/-. Cuddles is our third Shih Tzu and she is now 10 y/o. It use to be that senior dogs got ANNUAL Senior Wellness Exams, now they are pushing SEMI-ANNUAL Senior Wellness Exams and since emails or “free” as opposed to mailing at least a postcard. That being said, I find it interesting that the vet is looking to provide PAIN MANAGEMENT for our senior dogs.
I wonder if us mere Homo sapiens could legally get our classification changed to Canis lupus familiaris so that we could see a Vet to get pain management ?
Dear BARBARA/STEVE,
CUDDLES is due for their Senior Wellness Exam. By sharing life and love with you, your pet has given you a precious gift. Now that your pet is “senior,” you have the opportunity to give something in return: the special care that makes their golden years happy and healthy. Request an appointment below!
Good senior pet health care requires attention to several factors:
Diet and weight management
Joint health
Cancer screening
Heart disease screening
Dental maintenance
Diabetes screening
Function of thyroid, kidneys, and liver
Eye and vision health
Pain management
Regular exams and testing allow us to determine what is normal for your pet. Many conditions if diagnosed early can be successfully managed leading to better outcomes for your pet and reduced treatment costs for you.
During your senior wellness appointment, our veterinarians recommend:
Complete physical exam – evaluates the heart, lungs, eyes, ears, abdomen, joints and skin
Urinalysis – detects ph balance, urine crystals, signs of urinary tract infection or bladder cancer
Intestinal parasite exam – Check for worms
Vaccinations
Heartworm test – check for fatal heartworms
Early Detection Tests – evaluates liver, kidneys, thyroid, blood sugar, blood cell and platelet count
After the examination and laboratory testing, we will report the results and make our recommendations to you to help keep CUDDLES healthy and happy!
The heralded model United Kingdom experts have largely used to guide their coronavirus policies is “totally unreliable,” according to experts.
The criticisms follow a series of policy turnabouts, including Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s decision to extend the national lockdown. The United States also used the model, which predicted upwards of 2.2 million deaths in the US without proper action. The prediction helped influence the White House to adopt a more serious approach to the pandemic.
Experts have derided the coding from Professor Neil Ferguson, warning that it is a “buggy mess that looks more like a bowl of angel hair pasta than a finely tuned piece of programming.”
“In our commercial reality, we would fire anyone for developing code like this and any business that relied on it to produce software for sale would likely go bust,” David Richards, co-founder of British data technology company WANdisco, told the Daily Telegraph.
Ferguson, the virus modeler from Imperial College London and a scientific adviser to the government, warned on March 16 that 500,000 people could die from the pandemic without significant action. Prime Minister Boris Johnson responded by imposing a national lockdown, which has only been loosened within the last week.
The Imperial model works by using code to simulate transport links, population size, social networks and healthcare provisions to predict how coronavirus would spread. Researchers released the code behind it, which developers have criticized as being unreadable.
Scientists from the University of Edinburgh have further claimed that it is impossible to reproduce the same results from the same data using the model. The team got different results when they used different machines, and even different results from the same machines.
“There appears to be a bug in either the creation or re-use of the network file. If we attempt two completely identical runs, only varying in that the second should use the network file produced by the first, the results are quite different,” the Edinburgh researchers wrote on the Github file.
A fix was provided, but it was the first of many bugs found within the program.
“Models must be capable of passing the basic scientific test of producing the same results given the same initial set of parameters…otherwise, there is simply no way of knowing whether they will be reliable,” said Michael Bonsall, Professor of Mathematical Biology at Oxford University.
A spokesperson for the Imperial College COVID19 Response Team said: “The U.K. Government has never relied on a single disease model to inform decision-making. As has been repeatedly stated, decision-making around lockdown was based on a consensus view of the scientific evidence, including several modelling studies by different academic groups.”
“Epidemiology is not a branch of computer science and the conclusions around lockdown rely not on any mathematical model but on the scientific consensus that COVID-19 is a highly transmissible virus with an infection fatality ratio exceeding 0.5pc in the UK.”
As of Saturday, the United Kingdom has confirmed 241,455 cases of coronavirus, behind only the U.S. and Russia; and 34,546 deaths, behind the U.S.
Ferguson himself resigned from his advisory role earlier this month after reports emerged that he defied his own lockdown advice by letting his married lover visit him on two occasions.
WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has issued an alert listing safety tips employers can follow to help protect retail pharmacy workers from exposure to the coronavirus.
Safety measures for retail pharmacies include:
Encourage customers to submit prescriptions online or by phone. Allow customers to provide their insurance information verbally or virtually (e.g., through mobile apps or the pharmacy’s website);
Increase the use of self-serve checkouts to minimize worker interaction with customers;
Frequently clean and disinfect checkout and customer service counters;
Install clear plastic barriers between workers and customers at order/pickup counters;
Use signage and floor markers to keep waiting customers at least 6 feet from the counter, other customers and pharmacy staff; and
Encourage workers to report any safety and health concerns. It is illegal to retaliate against workers for reporting illnesses or for reporting unsafe or unhealthful working conditions.
The new alert is available for download in English and Spanish.
The alert is the latest effort by OSHA to educate and protect America’s workers and employers during the coronavirus pandemic. OSHA has also published Guidance on Preparing Workplaces for COVID-19, a document aimed at helping workers and employers learn about ways to protect themselves and their workplaces during the ongoing pandemic.
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to help ensure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit www.osha.gov.
The mission of the Department of Labor is to foster, promote and develop the welfare of the wage earners, job seekers and retirees of the United States; improve working conditions; advance opportunities for profitable employment; and assure work-related benefits and rights. If an employer denies equal opportunities, it’s important to take action. Contacting an employment lawyer can help you understand your rights and options, ensuring fair treatment and access to opportunities for all workers.
Agency
Occupational Safety & Health Administration
Date
May 14, 2020
Release Number
20-856-NAT
Contact: Department of Labor National Contact Center
First, Blaylock says, there is no scientific evidence that masks are effective against COVID-19 transmission. Pro-science people should care about this.
As for the scientific support for the use of face mask, a recent careful examination of the literature, in which 17 of the best studies were analyzed, concluded that, “ None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”Keep in mind, no studies have been done to demonstrate that either a cloth mask or the N95 mask has any effect on transmission of the COVID-19 virus. Any recommendations, therefore, have to be based on studies of influenza virus transmission. And, as you have seen, there is no conclusive evidence of their efficiency in controlling flu virus transmission.
It is also instructive to know that until recently, the CDC did not recommend wearing a face mask or covering of any kind, unless a person was known to be infected, that is, until recently. Non-infected people need not wear a mask. When a person has TB we have them wear a mask, not the entire community of non-infected. The recommendations by the CDC and the WHO are not based on any studies of this virus and have never been used to contain any other virus pandemic or epidemic in history.
Beyond the lack of scientific data to support wearing a mask as a deterrent to a virus, Blaylock says the more pressing concern is what can and will happen to the wearer.
Now that we have established that there is no scientific evidence necessitating the wearing of a face mask for prevention, are there dangers to wearing a face mask, especially for long periods? Several studies have indeed found significant problems with wearing such a mask. This can vary from headaches, to increased airway resistance, carbon dioxide accumulation, to hypoxia, all the way to serious life-threatening complications.
There are studies to back that claim up.
In one such study, researchers surveyed 212 healthcare workers (47 males and 165 females) asking about presence of headaches with N95 mask use, duration of the headaches, type of headaches and if the person had preexisting headaches.
They found that about a third of the workers developed headaches with use of the mask, most had preexisting headaches that were worsened by the mask wearing, and 60% required pain medications for relief. As to the cause of the headaches, while straps and pressure from the mask could be causative, the bulk of the evidence points toward hypoxia and/or hypercapnia as the cause.
That is, a reduction in blood oxygenation (hypoxia) or an elevation in blood C02 (hypercapnia). It is known that the N95 mask, if worn for hours, can reduce blood oxygenation as much as 20%, which can lead to a loss of consciousness, as happened to the hapless fellow driving around alone in his car wearing an N95 mask, causing him to pass out, and to crash his car and sustain injuries.
I am sure that we have several cases of elderly individuals or any person with poor lung function passing out, hitting their head. This, of course, can lead to death.
A more recent study involving 159 healthcare workers aged 21 to 35 years of age found that 81% developed headaches from wearing a face mask.Some had pre-existing headaches that were precipitated by the masks. All felt like the headaches affected their work performance.
Blaylock says studies have also shown that face masks impair oxygen intake dramatically, potentially leading to serious problems.
The importance of these findings is that a drop in oxygen levels (hypoxia) is associated with an impairment in immunity. Studies have shown that hypoxia can inhibit the type of main immune cells used to fight viral infections called the CD4+ T-lymphocyte.
This occurs because the hypoxia increases the level of a compound called hypoxia inducible factor-1 (HIF-1), which inhibits T-lymphocytes and stimulates a powerful immune inhibitor cell called the Tregs. . This sets the stage for contracting any infection, including COVID-19 and making the consequences of that infection much graver. In essence, your mask may very well put you at an increased risk of infections and if so, having a much worse outcome.
In other words, if you wear a face mask and contract some sickness, you will not be able to fight it off as effectively as if you had normal blood oxygen levels. The mask could make you sicker. It could also create a “deadly cytokine storm” in some.
There is another danger to wearing these masks on a daily basis, especially if worn for several hours. When a person is infected with a respiratory virus, they will expel some of the virus with each breath.
If they are wearing a mask, especially an N95 mask or other tightly fitting mask, they will be constantly rebreathing the viruses, raising the concentration of the virus in the lungs and the nasal passages. We know that people who have the worst reactions to the coronavirus have the highest concentrations of the virus early on. And this leads to the deadly cytokine storm in a selected number.
How about cancer, heart attacks, and strokes? Blaylock says face masks can make all of those conditions worse.
People with cancer, especially if the cancer has spread, will be at a further risk from prolonged hypoxia as the cancer grows best in a microenvironment that is low in oxygen. Low oxygen also promotes inflammation which can promote the growth, invasion and spread of cancers. Repeated episodes of hypoxia has been proposed as a significant factor in atherosclerosis and hence increases all cardiovascular (heart attacks) and cerebrovascular (strokes) diseases.
If that’s not bad enough, how would you like COVID-19 in your brain?
It gets even more frightening. Newer evidence suggests that in some cases the virus can enter the brain. In most instances it enters the brain by way of the olfactory nerves (smell nerves), which connect directly with the area of the brain dealing with recent memory and memory consolidation. By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain.
Why is it that we only listen to dire predictions from Dr. Fauci and we don’t consult other experts in the field of medicine? Is Anthony Fauci the only qualified person to talk about this virus? Furthermore, if he is, he agrees with Dr. Blaylock that only sick people should wear them and he said so on 60 Minutes. So why aren’t we listening to him?
Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can keep telling the truth about China and the virus they unleashed on the world? Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code WUHAN to get 25% off your VIP membership.
When we had our independent pharmacy, we developed a very large home medical equipment business which included a couple of hundred home oxygen pt. If a pt switched from a nasal cannula to a oxygen mask.. it was necessary to increase their oxygen from from the normal 2 LPM up to 5-6 LPM.. so that the mask was being “flushed out” of the exhaled carbon dioxide with each exhaled breath.
Failing to increase the oxygen flow when a pt switched to a mask, resulting in the pt inhaling some carbon dioxide.. which is heavier that ambient air and would settle in the bottom of the lungs and block the lung’s alveoli where oxygen is absorbed by the lungs from the ambient air and the pt’s oxygen saturation in the blood drops. Resulting in increased hypoxia.
There has been studies of people wearing some form of “mask” for extended periods are experiencing some degree of hypoxia, which can cause certain bodily function to deteriorate.
