Dr. James Lyons-Weiler: Public Health Has a Plan B
AS ONE WHO UNDERSTANDS complex dynamic systems, and is admittedly puzzled by the death of bioethics in the United States over the last decade, and as one with first-hand direct experience witnessing the pressures placed on biomedical researchers that place bottom-line concerns over health outcomes, in honor of those individuals in medicine and public health who have stayed the course and not sold out, I am pleased to propose a new approach to Public Health in one of my two latest peer-reviewed publications. It is a blueprint for reason-based, reality-based public health and a return to the public good model of medical practice.
Due to suppression, please share this across diverse social media platforms and by email. Take it to those who say they represent you. We must succeed.
Lyons-Weiler, J. 2020. Plan B Public Health Infrastructure and Operations
Oversight Reform for America. Intl J Vacc Theor, Pract, Research 1(2):283-294.
Click here to read Lyons-Weiler, J. 2020. Plan B Public Health Infrastructure and Operations Oversight Reform for America. Intl J Vacc Theor, Pract, Research 1(2):283-294.
In Plan B is this:
"Under Plan B, 80 independent research organizations, all funded directly by the US Senate, geographically located across the United States, would establish a broad base of expertise and provide a full compendium of cultural representation on priority issues of public health."
I can tell you this--my two senators epitomize ignorance which may be incurable and for that reason Plan B is DOA (not to mention that Pharma will never allow this).
I appreciate JLW's effort. Its a great chronology at how we have stepped onto a dystopian treadmill. We are all on our own but part of a growing tribe. We must work together protectively, to assure our rights to be healthy.
That's the bottom line.
Posted by: michael | January 08, 2021 at 03:43 PM
I agree with Laura and Gary.
"Public health" is an insidious term, which smuggles in the notion that government is inherently responsible for inserting itself into situations which might have an adverse effect on the health of many people.
Are there situations that could adversely affect the health of many people, including epidemics, air and water pollution, and (to a greatly underappreciated extent), electromagnetic pollution? Yes.
But this doesn't mean that any of these situations call for, much less require, proactive government activity.
Coordinated action is sometimes needed, but it must be organized by people who are genuinely concerned about potential health threats and who have the trust and support of their fellow citizens.
What is needed from government? Only to provide justice through its court system, by assigning liability to those who have endangered us.
Posted by: David Weiner | January 08, 2021 at 06:43 AM
WELLCOME TO THE LAND OF NO COVID 19.....
Sub-sahara Africa. A land where everyone takes hydroxychloroquine and IVERMECTIN. And have been doing so for many years. A land with the lowest Covid 19 cases ON THE PLANET. Yet, "scientists" are puzzled by this.....Well, it ain't ROCKET SCIENCE.
4:07 - 4:12 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSL7sqOudoE&feature=youtu.be
QUESTION: Does Sub-sahara Africa have the lowest Covid 19 rate?
ARE STUDIES BEING DONE ON THIS TOPIC?
ANSWER: Kinda. But as usual, WELLCOME overlooks the OBVIOUS. They target hydroxychloroquine but somehow "overlook" the Ivermectin Connection. (Not to be confused with the Rainbow Connection) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS3Lkc6Gzlk
SECOND CLUE: Major Clinical Trial in Sub-Saharan Africa (ANTICOV) to Study Hydroxychloroquine & Other Repurposed Treatments Targeting Early Onset COVID-19
NOV 27, 2020 https://trialsitenews.com/major-clinical-trial-in-sub-saharan-africa-anticov-to-study-hydroxychloroquine-other-repurposed-treatments-targeting-early-onset-covid-19/
"As mentioned previously, the ANTICOV study will occur only in Sub-Saharan nations that to date have very low rates of COVID-19 infection." "Interestingly, despite the accumulating evidence for the use of ivermectin, at least for research purposes, there is no mention of this drug already widely in use in Africa to address parasitic-based illness. However, ivermectin is an anti-parasitic drug and that category is identified as a potential class of drug used.
No other drugs are named by DNDi; "
SOMEDAY WE'LL FIND IT, THE IVERMECTIN CONNECTION,
FOR CITIZENS AND DREAMERS AND ME.....
Posted by: Emmaphiladelphia | January 07, 2021 at 11:17 PM
Laura: Exactly my point of view. There is no such thing as "public health," only individual health, and that comes from clean air and water, high-quality food, and good social relationships. Air quality is better than it was 50-60 years ago; water is better or worse depending on location; wholesome food has been under attack since about the mid-20th Century; social relationships have been damaged and destroyed over this past horrid year. All the relationships I built over thirty years with the farmers at our farmer's market are defunct because they (management, not the farmers) are mask Nazis (masks and face-shields required since April), and I refuse. Haven't worn one since a July essential doctor's appointment. I've cancelled two doctor's appointments since then, since they won't compromise (my dentist does, though!). All the stores I used to shop at are mask Nazis, too. Only Walmart ignores my free American face, so they get all my shopping. The only saving grace from this clown show is that the ranks of anti-vaxxers have grown massively. Anti-vaxxer is a term I embrace because I oppose all forms of quackery and all forms of tyranny.
Posted by: Gary Ogden | January 07, 2021 at 09:36 PM
What is “public health”?
There is public sanitation, and proper protection and maintenance of public resources, but with regard to health, I have come to the conclusion that there is only “individual health”.
I have also come to the conclusion that that which is called “public health” in today’s world can be defined as: widespread, large-scale, devastating iatrogenic harm, caused by a whole slew of people who are called, and who consider themselves, “experts”, despite much evidence to the contrary, which results in costs of all sorts that are catastrophic to individuals, families, schools, communities, our economy, and our nation.
The only time I use the phrase “public health” is to explain that it is used to promote fear, propaganda, and ill-gained profits...and that it results in ill health, disability, infertility, and premature death.
Posted by: Laura Hayes | January 07, 2021 at 06:10 PM
Benedetta: No. You just gotta be thirty years old (Article I, section 3, paragraph 3). You can be a complete moron like Mitch McConnell and spend decades there.
Posted by: Gary Ogden | January 07, 2021 at 06:01 PM
I've only yet read a bit, but delineating Reiss's piece lauding regulatory capture, the neverending revolving door, the dearth of independent press, and targeted publication retractions has me looking forward to the rest.
Posted by: greyone | January 07, 2021 at 02:29 PM
We share with whom?
Mitch McConnell? Waste of my time. How does one run for Senate? Do they have to be a lawyer?
Posted by: Benedetta | January 07, 2021 at 11:39 AM