Filed under: Bureaucracy, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Free Markets, Freedom, Health Care, Junk Science, Politics, Progressives, Progressivism, Regulation | Tags: Dr. Wesley J. Smith, Non-Beneficial Treatment, Unaccountable Bureaucrats
The headline at National Review for an article by Wesley J. Smith reads “Keeping Patient Alive Can Be ‘Non-beneficial Treatment.'”
The medical bureaucrats and technocrats are changing the meaning of definitions and terms to permit health care rationing and coerced withdrawal of care.
This is the “futile care” controversy, sometimes called “inappropriate care,” or in my parlance, “futile care theory.”
The idea is that when a doctor or bioethics committee believes the patient’s life not worth sustaining based on their values about quality of life or cost, wanted treatment — even that requested in an advance directive — can be unilaterally refused.
Futile care is akin to a restaurant posting a sign stating, “We reserve the right to refuse service.”
The International Journal for Quality in Healthcare is doing the hard Left’s politically correct trick of changing the language to fit their desired goal. The goal is essentially to get rid of expensive treatments for those whose illness is not expected to result in improvement in quality of life. In such cases the technocrats, bureaucrats, hospitalists and other doctors and bioethicists will decide if it is “non-beneficial treatment (NBT).” Keeping the patient alive because the patient wants to be kept alive has no part in the discussion. The bureaucrats are redefining the core purpose of medicine. And of course there will be an acronym to further disguise what they’re up to.
You have perhaps noticed that one state after another is attempting to pass “Assisted Suicide” laws. They usually succeed by suggesting that you, old and feeble, and suffering from dreadful pain, with no hope might want to end your misery by getting your doctor to kill you. That will help get rid of some whose expectations don’t involve improvement in their quality of life, but adding on a bunch of bureaucrats to make those decisions brings back memories of Logan’s Run, or Solyunt Green. They don’t make movies like that anymore —uncomfortably close to reality, not the politically correct party line.
Anyone who isn’t frightened by the prospect of technocrats, bureaucrats, hospitalists and other doctors, and bioethicists — strangers to the patient — deciding that continuing to live is non-beneficial hasn’t thought the question through.
In Britain, the National Health Service (NHS) has been accused of denying elderly patients food and water to help them die more quickly, but the NHS is socialized medicine.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economics, Economy, Environment, Global Warming, Junk Science, Politics, Progressivism, Regulation, Unemployment | Tags: EPA Administrator McCarthy, Hearing: Ensuring Sound Science at the EPA, House Science Committee
The U.S. Department of Energy says the the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, will reduce economic growth, increase the cost of electricity, and result in almost 400,000 lost jobs over the next 15 years.
Testifying before the House Science Committee, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy says that the Obama Administration’s Department of Energy is wrong and “what they claim is exactly opposite of what we believe will happen based on our independent analysis.” Based on Ms. McCarthy’s record over the years it is highly unlikely that the EPA is correct on anything beyond their grasp for power and control for their agency.
CONGRESSMAN LAMAR SMITH: “The non-partisan Energy Information Administration at the Department of Energy has found that the Clean Power Plan will reduce economic growth, increase electricity costs, and result in almost 400,000 jobs lost over the next 15 years; and all this is with very little impact on climate change itself. So why has the Obama Administration imposed this regulation on the American people?”
Administrator McCarthy said she hadn’t read this report, but she’d be happy to take a look. Which sounds remarkably like her past testimony in any of the cases in which she was called to testify, by I may be mistaken.
CONGRESSMAN SMITH: “It’s nice to have the Administration at war with itself.”
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Canada, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Energy, Environment, Junk Science, Mexico, National Security, News of the Weird, Politics, Progressives, Progressivism, Regulation, Science/Technology, The United States | Tags: Energy Lunacy, Fascist Fantasies, Not in Touch With Reality
The Democrat’s Convention platform is slowly being revealed, unprobable bit by bit. It will include a plan to get the United States completely off of fossil fuels by 2050. Oh dear. Not going to happen. Who writes these talking points? Doesn’t anyone ever check in with reality?
President Barack Obama met at a “Three Amigos” summit in Ottawa this week with Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada and President Enrique Peña Nieto of Mexico. The three NAFTA partners will pledge that in less than 10 years, half of North America’s energy will come from “clean” sources. The administration patted itself on the back and called it “ambitious.” How about “improbable” or “a joke?”
The U.S. accounts for three quarters of the energy produced by the three countries., so living up to the agreement falls on the U.S. According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration, so-called “clean energy”— nuclear, hydro electric, solar, wind, biomass makes up a total of less than one-fifth of U.S. energy production.
Nuclear accounts for around 8% of all clean energy, and California plans to shut down Diablo Canyon, their last nuke, which produces two times more energy than all of California’s solar arrays put together. The environmentalists who are energy-literate are beginning to understand that only nuclear power is currently capable of generating significant amounts of baseload electricity. The first new nuclear plant is starting up in Tennessee with environmental support. Biomass accounts for 4%, solar and wind put together only 3% of our energy needs and hydroelectric a little more than 2%. Environmentalists oppose hydro, because they don’t like damming up rivers, and most of the good spots are already taken.
Even if they went whole hog for Nuclear energy, it wouldn’t make any difference over the next decade.The permitting, construction and approval steps alone would take more than 9 years. Obama said he was sure that some 15 year-old was working on a new energy source in his bedroom, or perhaps it was his garage.
But that leaves wind, solar and biomass. Production levels from these sources would have to increase by something like 470% in nine years to add up to half of the nation’s energy production. Well, maybe everyone will have forgotten his silly pledge in 9 years. Keep trying, maybe you’ll find something to claim as a legacy.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Domestic Policy, Environment, Global Warming, Heartwarming, History, Humor, Junk Science | Tags: Al Gore Cllimate Scientist, Climate Loons, US Fish and Wildlife
(From Mark J. Perry at AEI)
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Domestic Policy, Environment, Global Warming, Humor, Junk Science, Politics | Tags: Carlsbad Caverns National Park, The Obama Family, Yosemite National Park
On Father’s Day, many families want to do something special for Dad. Those who planned a trip for the day to Yosemite National Park, were out of luck. The Park was closed to visitors most of Father’s Day. The presidential family arrived and departed from a Yosemite meadow on a Marine One helicopter. The entourage arrived in a 40 car motorcade. The visit was covered with more pictures by Britain’s Daily Mail. The British seem to be highly amused by America’s presidential motorcades and elaborate scheduled events.
Roads in the park and the entrances and exits were shut down for hours. Visitors already at the park found their movements restricted and even hiking trails were Restricted. The lower Yosemite Falls was closed to the public. He made a speech (to his entourage, Park Rangers? ) to tout his administration’s environmental record and to warn Americans about the danger of climate change.
The biggest challenge we are going to face in protecting this place and places like it is climate change. Make no mistake, climate change is no longer a threat it is a reality.
It has been warm over the last few weeks, and Obama was sure that the meadow where they landed was drying out because of global warming. Melting snowpack has the falls in the park at their fullest. “Fires are raging across the west right now … all while it’s still really early in the season.” he said, but climate change has nothing to do with wildfire. But then the president is still warning that Manhattan would be “underwater”unless action is taken on climate change.
Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) whose district includes Yosemite, had a classic rejoinder:
With his comments about global warming, I would point out that if his speech had been given on this very spot 12,000 years ago we would be under a 3,000-foot sheet of ice. So global warming has been going on for a long time, long before the invention of the SUV.
Yosemite is a deservedly popular national park with over a million visitors every year and has many of the problems of a big city. President Bush avoided visiting popular venues while he was president, and was roundly criticized when he did not land in New Orleans during Katrina — which he did because he knew how disruptive a presidential visit is and didn’t want to mess up the rescue efforts. Is the Secret Service overdoing the motorcades and opulence of a presidential visit ? I don’t know, it seems excessive, but we want our president protected. Presidential motorcades disrupt traffic for hours, wherever they go, but part of that is the press.
The first family did Carlsbad Caverns in New Mexico on Friday, which is also something special to see.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Economy, Freedom, Junk Science, Law, Politics, Progressivism, The United States | Tags: An Attack From the Left, Bill Whittle, Transgendered Bathrooms
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Democrat Corruption, Energy, Free Markets, Freedom, Global Warming, Junk Science, News the Media Doesn't Want You to Hear, Politics, Science/Technology | Tags: Patrick Michaels & David Wojick, Roy Spencer PhD, The Climate Models
We are so in love with our computers and what they can do, that we often forget what they cannot do. G.I.G.O.— garbage in garbage out. The climate models on which the panic about global warming depends are only very partly based on science. The models themselves aren’t science. There are some scientific facts that are known and accepted. Once you get beyond that small amount — all is based on modelling. That means you take the known, add some approximations, some guesswork, and your favorite theory and you get a model of the earth’s climate, that may have little to do with the real world.
“Patrick Michaels and David E. Wojick wrote last week in a Cato at Liberty blog post that modelling completely dominates climate change research” What that means is that climate change science is only about 4% of the whole, and not all climate science is about climate change. They are putting their faith in math calculations rather than scientific observation. The energy and the resources are directed to improving the models, which have a remarkable record of being consistently wrong.They cannot even accurately predict the climate that has already happened.
We have very little understanding of the action of the clouds, though they clearly effect climate. The heat that the models have predicted has not arrived. In science, there are questions, and a hypothesis is developed, then tested through repeated experimentation.” The federal government has spent billions —close to $100 billion since fiscal 2012 —on “science” that is undergirded by failed models.” The models were unable to predict the greening of the world caused by slight increases in CO2. Most of the money goes to improving and upgrading the models, and what most climate scientists will consider improved models to be those that predict greater amounts of warming.
For a more authoritative explanation of Global Warming go here.