rConstitution.us
latest  boundaries  about

COVIDcare Is Obamacare

Obamacare used new law to limit healthcare affordability, innovation-driven quality, and availability. COVIDcare used existing law to further limit healthcare.

James Anthony
March 11, 2022

Legacy USA healthcare, Obamacare, and COVIDcare have cumulatively socialized away the actions that free people take to put scarce resources to their most-valuable uses.

To see how this crony socialism differs from freedom, think about how healthcare works when you are free.

Best Care

You learn from health reporters that a new respiratory virus from China is spreading to the place where you live and the places where you work. The reporters highlight that, as usual [1], the risks of death, disability, or serious illness are negligible except for people who are very old or who have very-weak circulation or immune systems.

Your personal health consultants stay alert to all kinds of health measures, even those that have barely been studied, and they have kept you up-to-date about what immune-strengthening care has shown the strongest effects: sleep [2], vitamin D [3], raised body temperature [4], BCG vaccine for tuberculosis [5], vitamin C [6], and forest aroma [7].

Your risks are negligible, and you routinely benefit from sleep, vitamin D, and vitamin C, so you don’t make any changes there.

You’re in the middle of a challenging project at work so you’d like to stay at peak health, so you confirm that you have on hand enough ivermectin [8]. You don’t plan to take your ivermectin preventively this time, because that would minimize how much natural immunity you would build up. But you do plan to take your ivermectin if you develop symptoms or if you test positive.

You’re also wanting to see your grandmother who’s getting very old and weak, so on your next weekly shopping trip you buy the products you want, over the counter. You buy a fast home test for the virus that’s already in stores, so you can test yourself minutes before you visit. You also buy some ivermectin and some hydroxychloroquine and zinc [9] that your grandmother can take all at the same time [10] to robustly kill off every bit of virus if she develops symptoms.

Your grandmother doesn’t need to take any other precautions for now, and almost certainly won’t need to see a consultant in person or go to a health facility. If she develops symptoms, her consultant would be quickly available for a video call. If she needs supplies, you or vendors would deliver her some budesonide [11], a new inexpensive blood-oxygen monitor, oxygen, and various other products that the consultant might recommend or that you or she might learn about yourselves.

Government-Limited Care

Legacy USA healthcare, in contrast, didn’t guide health reporters with relevant data the way meteorology guides weather reporters.

Personal health consultants were limited to government-licensed doctors and nurses, typically from cartelized schools [12]. Health consultations were focused not on boosting wellness but on mitigating illnesses.

Preventive use of antivirals to safeguard wellness was unheard-of. Drugs and tests had to be initially approved by the FDA for sale [13]. The FDA demanded many particularly-costly development tests [14], and delayed approvals by years, which deprived people of treatments. Usage information had to be approved by the FDA. All new drugs and many old-standby drugs had to be prescribed and dispensed by government-licensed providers following government-supervised procedures.

Telemedicine was unheard-of.

Home monitoring of blood oxygen was unheard-of. Oxygen supplementation for acute illnesses was done only in hospitals.

Hospitals needed government permits to open [15] and government approvals to stay open.

The IRS incentivized employers to fund health-payment / insurance companies. HHS controlled analogously-structured Medicare and Medicaid programs for elderly people and for the poorest people, who together suffered from substantial amounts of illnesses.

Compared to best care, legacy USA healthcare limited affordability, innovation-driven quality, and availability.

Obamacare retained all the same old incentives to not save up reserves and to not innovate to care for people with costly illnesses [16], and used even-more force to socialize the same-old ever-inflating costs onto relatively-healthier people.

Obamacare pushed consolidation of consultants and hospitals into bigger, more-bureaucratic organizations [17]. These big producers were more-readily controlled by big governments and big government-crony health-payment / insurance companies.

The whole lot of them—the big governments, the big government-crony health-payment / insurance companies, the big government-crony pharma companies, and the bigger producers—were even-less responsive to customers. They performed even worse under the same-old politically-driven legacy incentives to overprovide wasteful, costly touch-labor and tests to the relatively healthy, to underprovide efficient preventive care to those at risk, and to underprovide needed treatment to those with illnesses.

Given even-less control by customers, the whole lot of them were even-less innovative.

Compared to legacy USA healthcare, Obamacare further reduced affordability [18], innovation-driven quality [19], and availability.

COVIDcare advanced telemedicine.

But COVIDcare also put the existing controls to further use, on net producing substantial further limitations.

All state and many local legislatures delegated unconstitutional, unrepublican emergency powers [20], and all executives who were given the chance unconstitutionally accepted these powers.

Some executives used every means they could to empty hospital beds by coercing unsuitable nursing homes to admit infectious patients [21].

Government people in the FDA, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the National Institutes of Health, the CDC, Medicare and Medicaid, the VA, and state governments launched various brazen attacks on the use of the generic antivirals hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin against the new virus, and on the use of new fast in-home tests.

Government-crony researchers, without explaining why, misapplied the generic antivirals by using them only in the most-disadvantageous stages of the disease, and by using hydroxychloroquine only without the required supplemental zinc [9].

Government propagandists assailed hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as poisoning risks, and separately assailed ivermectin as horse dewormer, implying that ivermectin isn’t also safe for humans and isn’t also an antiviral [22].

Many state boards threatened doctors who might prescribe these generic antivirals for the new virus, and threatened pharmacists who might fill prescriptions of these for COVID-19. No state boards threatened hospital or pharmacy-chain administrators for practicing medicine without a license when the administrators overrode treating clinicians who included hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin in their treatment of patients.

The FDA didn’t study or approve these new uses for the existing drugs, and approved very-few new drugs. Other than monoclonal antibodies, all these new drugs had serious, frequent side effects. All these new drugs also were notably high-priced [23].

The FDA, without adequately explaining why, attacked the supplement NAC [24]. NAC had begun to be recognized as reducing the oxidative stress that tears up the inner walls of patients’ blood vessels, which creates debris that produces microclotting and clotting throughout patients’ circulatory systems, for example extensively in the blood vessels in patients’ lungs.

The big government-crony clinics and hospitals were strongly disincentivized from using effective existing drugs and supplements, and never developed effective treatment protocols [25].

Providers long were only allowed to use tests that took days to provide results and that routinely indicated false positives. Providers long were told to withhold the test data that quantified patients’ viral loads, which were what determined both patients’ infectiousness [26] and patients’ risk of serious disease.

Congresspeople removed nearly-all liability for vaccines [27]. Next the national government’s Operation Warp Speed funded development of genetic vaccines. All Operation Warp Speed crony producers proposed, and the government supervisors greenlit, vaccines that relied on introducing into patients’ bodies the spike proteins that cause COVID-19 disease and associated deaths, chronic illnesses, and acute illnesses. Unprecedented, grossly-unacceptable numbers of vaccine-associated deaths and serious side injuries were painstakingly reported. But no state prosecutors brought criminal cases against the national-government supervisors or the vaccine producers.

HHS bought and controlled the distribution of many fast tests [28], monoclonal antibodies, and vaccines. After the monoclonal antibodies proved lifesaving, HHS and some state governments reacted as quickly as they could by instituting racial criteria to deny treatment to many whites.

Compared to Obamacare, COVIDcare further limited affordability, innovation-driven quality, and availability.

Stop Doing Harm

How did we get here?

Doctors organized to institute curricula. Doctors and hospitals organized to get paid by subscription. Government people were there to help.

National-government people used fictional meatpacking practices [29], a single toxic formulation [30], and a single hard-to-test side effect [31] to create and repeatedly ratchet up the FDA.

National-government people controlled wages during World War II but didn’t control tax-free healthcare benefits, and employees were in scarce supply. This incentivized employers to build up the government-crony health-payment / insurance industry.

Habitual gross violation of the Constitution [32], together with compounding growth and affluence [33], enabled government people to successively create Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, and COVIDcare.

At each stage, the people involved were convinced they were doing good, were unreflective about unintended consequences, and just responded to the incentives immediately around them—which, as it happened, just encouraged them to press on with doing what they already favored doing.

The government people were certain that government action was best. This was only human nature.

The government people benefitted when there was less innovation, because then there were fewer visible errors for which they would be blamed. This was only human nature.

The government cronies just responded to incentives. This was only human nature.

As time marched on, new people entering the system had their hands full just learning the challenging, changing body of knowledge required to care for lives, and these new people just lived within the environments they inherited and learned to function there. This was only human nature.

Incrementally, slowly, the healthcare producers’ key customers [34] started being the governments and stopped being the people who received care.

The fatal flaw was allowing law [35] to be used to block customers from choosing their care themselves. This was possible because government people didn’t use their constitutional powers against others in government to limit governments [36]. The root cause of this was that since 1894 [37], both major parties have been majority Progressive [38].

COVIDcare, along with its destructiveness, also brought a blessing—it grabs attention, makes people determine to understand what happened and why, and makes people determine to prevent all of that from ever happening again.

Free people will buy far-better care for themselves, once they get the chance. First, government people must make other government people stop doing harm.

References

  1. Anthony, James. “Best Practices for Recovering from Novel Virus Infections.” rConstitution.us, 30 May 2021, rconstitution.us/best-practices-for-recovering-from-novel-virus-infections/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  2. Cohen, Sheldon, et al. “Sleep Habits and Susceptibility to the Common Cold.” Archives of Internal Medicine, vol. 169, no. 1, 2009, pp. 62-7.
  3. Sabetta, James R., et al. “Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and the Incidence of Acute Viral Respiratory Tract Infections in Healthy Adults.” PLoS ONE, vol. 5, no. 6, 2010, e11088.
  4. Evans, Sharon S., et al. “Fever and the Thermal Regulation of Immunity: The Immune System Feels the Heat.” Nature Reviews | Immunology, vol. 15, no. 6, 2015, pp. 335-49.
  5. Seheult, Roger. “Coronavirus Pandemic Update 43: Shortages, Immunity, & Can a TB Vaccine (BCG) Help Prevent COVID-19?” YouTube, uploaded by MedCram – Medical Lectures Explained CLEARLY, 24 Mar. 2020, www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqKwAIIy-Mo&t=24s. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  6. Hemilä, Harri, and Elizabeth Chalker. “Vitamin C Can Shorten the Length of Stay in the ICU: A Meta-Analysis.” Nutrients, vol. 11, no. 4, 2019, 708.
  7. Seheult, Roger. “Coronavirus Pandemic Update 56: What is “Forest Bathing” & Can It Boost Immunity Against Viruses?” YouTube, uploaded by MedCram – Medical Lectures Explained CLEARLY, 15 Apr. 2020, www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgDjVEpEOdQ. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  8. Kory, Pierre, et al. “Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19.” OSF Preprints, 15 Jan. 2021, osf.io/wx3zn/?fbclid=IwAR1D8zI_SzOtaFAOG840QYFfdtvjcNxtd38-ej-hG_uj_RBIbkKYwCHnUbQ. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  9. Anthony, James. “Hydroxychloroquine, Used Early, Is the Most-Effective COVID-19 Treatment, and Is Likely Much Better Given Supplemental Zinc.” rConstitution.us, 30 July 2020, rconstitution.us/hydroxychloroquine-used-early-is-the-most-effective-covid-19-treatment-and-is-likely-much-better-given-supplemental-zinc/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  10. McCullough, Peter A., et al. “Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Infection.” The American Journal of Medicine, 134, no. 1, Jan. 2020, pp. 16-22.
  11. Heinen, Natalie, et al. “Antiviral Effect of Budesonide against SARS-CoV-2.” Viruses, vol. 13, no. 7, 20 July 2021, article 1411.
  12. Friday, Lee. “The Problem with Government Licensing Schemes.” Mises Wire, 20 June 2018, mises.org/wire/problem-government-licensing-schemes. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  13. Gieringer, Dale H. “The Safety and Efficacy of New Drug Approval.” Cato Journal, vol. 5, no. 1, Spring/Summer 1985, pp. 177-201.
  14. Shorter, Edward. “Looking Backwards: A Possible New Path for Drug Discovery in Psychopharmacology.” Nature Reviews | Drug Discovery, vol. 1, no. 12, Dec. 2002, pp. 1003-6.
  15. Grassmueck, Georg. “How the Covid Crisis Exposed the Absurdity of ‘Certificates of Need.’” Mises Wire, 26 Jan. 2021, mises.org/wire/how-covid-crisis-exposed-absurdity-certificates-need. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  16. Goodman, John C. Priceless: Curing the Healthcare Crisis. The Independent Institute, 2012.
  17. Kocher, Bob. “How I Was Wrong about ObamaCare.” Wall Street Journal, 31 July 2016, www.wsj.com/articles/i-was-wrong-about-obamacare-1469997311. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  18. Haislmaier, Edmund, and Abigail Slagle. “Obamacare Has Doubled the Cost of Individual Health Insurance.” The Heritage Foundation | Issue Brief, no. 6068, 21 Mar. 2021, www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/report/obamacare-has-doubled-the-cost-individual-health-insurance. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  19. Cannon, Michael F. “Is Obamacare Harming Quality? (Part 1).” Health Affairs Forefront, 4 Jan. 2018, www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/forefront.20180103.261091/full/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  20. Anthony, James. “If You Won’t Repeal Emergency Powers, You Might Be a RINO.” rConstitution.us, 5 Mar. 2021, rconstitution.us/if-you-wont-repeal-emergency-powers-you-might-be-a-rino/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  21. Anthony, James. “COVID Spiking of New York Nursing Homes Is a Feature, Not a Bug, of Progressivism.” rConstitution.us, 26 Feb. 2021, rconstitution.us/covid-spiking-of-new-york-nursing-homes-is-a-feature-not-a-bug-of-progressivism/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  22. Anthony, James. “Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, Fast Tests Suppressed. Attorneys General Can Fight Back.” rConstitution.us, 22 Oct. 2021, rconstitution.us/ivermectin-hydroxychloroquine-fast-tests-suppressed-attorneys-general-can-fight-back/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  23. Horowitz, Daniel. “The Indefensible Approval of Pfizer and Merck Drugs Compared to the Snubbing of Ivermectin.” Blaze Media, 22 Dec. 2021, www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-the-indefensible-approval-of-pfizer-and-merck-drugs-compared-to-the-snubbing-of-ivermectin. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  24. Goldman, Erik. “NAC Supplements Face Ban Unless FDA Reverses Course.” Holistic Primary Care, 18 Dec. 2021, holisticprimarycare.net/topics/news-policy-a-economics/nac-supplements-face-ban-unless-fda-reverses-course/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  25. McCullough, Peter. “The Inexplicable Suppression of Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, and Other COVID-19 Treatments.” EpochTV | American Thought Leaders, interview by Jan Jekielek, 30 Dec. 2021, www.theepochtimes.com/dr-peter-mccullough-the-inexplicable-suppression-of-hydroxychloroquine-ivermectin-and-other-covid-19-treatments-part-1_4186432.html. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  26. Larremore, Daniel B., et al. “Test Sensitivity Is Secondary to Frequency and Turnaround Time for COVID-19 Surveillance.” MedRxiv, 8 Sep. 2020, www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.22.20136309v2.full.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  27. Anthony, James. “Solving the Perfect Vaccine Killing.” rConstitution.us, 11 Feb. 2022, rconstitution.us/solving-the-perfect-vaccine-killing/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  28. Anthony, James. “Government Agencies Are Holding Back ‘Fast Tests’ that Could Be Saving Lives.” Foundation for Economic Education, 19 Sep. 2020, fee.org/articles/government-agencies-are-holding-back-fast-tests-that-could-be-saving-lives/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  29. James, John, et al. “Meat Packing.” Mises Wiki, 6 Nov. 2014, wiki.mises.org/wiki/Meat_packing. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  30. Ballentine, Carol. “Taste of Raspberries, Taste of Death: The 1937 Elixir Sulfanilamide Incident.” FDA Consumer, June 1981, www.fda.gov/about-fda/histories-product-regulation/sulfanilamide-disaster. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  31. Vargesson, Neil. “Thalidomide Embryopathy: An Enigmatic Challenge.” ISRN Developmental Biology, vol. 2013, 31 Oct. 2013, article 241016.
  32. Diamond, Martin. “The Forgotten Doctrine of Enumerated Powers.” Publius, vol. 6, no. 4, Autumn 1976, pp. 187-93.
  33. Peltzman, Sam. Regulation and the Natural Progress of Opulence. AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, 2005.
  34. Anthony, James. “Who Decides: Cronies, or Customers?” rConstitution.us, 28 May 2021, rconstitution.us/who-decides-cronies-or-customers/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.
  35. Bastiat, Frederic. The Law. 1850. Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007.
  36. Anthony, James. The Constitution Needs a Good Party: Good Government Comes from Good Boundaries. Neuwoehner Press, 2018.
  37. Rothbard, Murray N. The Progressive Era. Edited by Patrick Newman, Mises Institute, 2017, pp. 163–97.
  38. Anthony, James. “Votes Matter When a Party Requires Good Voting Scores.” rConstitution.us, 6 Nov. 2020, rconstitution.us/votes-matter-when-a-party-requires-good-voting-scores/. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.

James Anthony is the author of The Constitution Needs a Good Party and rConstitution Papers, has written in The Federalist, American Thinker, Foundation for Economic Education, and American Greatness, and publishes rConstitution.us. Mr. Anthony is an experienced chemical engineer with a master’s in mechanical engineering.

Commenting

  1. Be respectful.
  2. Say what you mean. 
    Provide data. Don’t say something’s wrong without providing data. Do explain what’s right and provide data. It’s been said that often differences in opinion between smart people are differences in data, and the guy with the best data wins.  link  But when a writer provides data, the writer and the readers all win. Don’t leave readers guessing unless they go to links or references. 
  3. Credit sources
    Provide links or references to credit data sources and to offer leads.