Lefties at NYT decry for-profit health care institutions

Health Care and Pursuit of Profit Make a Poor Mix – NYTimes.com.

If you’re feeling bulimic today, you can read (above) a leftist, Eduardo Porter, telling us that profit and health care don’t mix.

Health care professionals are supposed to do their work for free.   Profit is evil and the motivation for making money should not have any association with health care. How this leftie  expects to attract people to incur huge educational debt, and enter  into a very difficult field to work for nothing, is anyone’s guess.

There’s a claim in the NYT article  that a health care institution which switches from non-profit to for-profit is more likely to experience patient  deaths over subsequent two years.   The cited study admits that the shock of switching management and workers, and a myriad of other factors  could have much more to do with this effect than the mere acquisition of a profit motive. In fact, the effect of the staffing changes, and the patient mortality rate recedes after the initial shock of change.  This is a strong indicator that the mere profitability has nothing to do with the mortality rate, and that the shock of reorganization and personnel changes has everything to do with it.  The initial pressures of an institution to sell out to private investors is also discussed in the original study as a major factor.

The NYT also cites a 30 year old study of an unmentioned number of Southern Wisconsin nursing homes, and implied from the invisible data that for-profit institutions used higher doses of sedatives in their patients than the non-profits.

That the New York Times would try to convince you that health care workers and institutions should provide services for free, or at cost, is no surprise. That they would extrapolate the study results from religious affiliated non-profits, and pretend that government-run institutions would operate similarly is similarly  not a surprise.

It would, however, be a huge shock and surprise to see the leftie press calling for ABORTIONISTS to provide their services at cost, and take no profits.   There’s a fortune in abortion, and this is true for Planned Parenthood, which is excused from taxes as a supposed non-profit  (though it does make and report profit), as well as the multitudinous for-profit abortion industries. See an example of Planned Parenthood’s form 990.  Don’t ever hold your breath waiting for abortionists to be held to the same standards as real  health care providers.

You will NEVER hear a cry from the New York Times that Universities should cease to take profits,  or stop  paying their instructors and administrators well over the salaries and benefits of equally educated private sector employees.  You will never hear them ask that the salaries and benefits  of public school teachers be reduced to that of similarly educated private sector employees.

Those involved in furthering the agenda of the left will continue to reap profits and rewards well above the national average with the blessings of their media machine.  However, they won’t be satisfied until the rest of us, who provide essential goods and services, are working and living as slaves.

For NYT, Evaluating Birth Control Mechanisms is Classed as POLITICAL SCIENCE

Science at Issue in Debate on Morning-After Pill – NYTimes.com.

Pharmer is immensely amused by the NYT Political Science article purporting that Plan B, levonorgestrel (a progestin – synthetic progesterone analog) delays ovulation but has no effect upon post fertilization mechanisms. This claim certainly has a relationship to political ideology, but not to pharmacological science.

There is the suggestion that Plan B can operate to impede ovulation even when taken 72 hours after intercourse.

The usual life of sperm is 48 hours, and The usual lifespan of secondary oocytes (eggs) is 1 day. The most fertile time for a woman is the day of, and the day after ovulation.

Laughably entertaining is the suggestion that there is no time for levonorgestrel to affect thickness or receptivity of the uterine lining, but there is time for it to always work by delaying ovulation. Scroll back up to the lifespan of the gametes and THEN ponder that it takes about 7 days for the early human embryo to travel down the fallopian tubes into the uterus and implant in the uterine lining.

Seven days is not long enough for the morning after pill to affect feedback inhibition, transport, endometrial tissue, and implantation processes, yet 48 hours is claimed to be long enough to exert a perfect 100 percent mechanism for delaying ovulation so that sperm and ‘egg’ don’t meet.  (Remember when a woman is most fertile, the day of and the day after ovulation?)   It’s pathetic when leftist ideology replaces scientific analysis and inquiry in such a blatantly obvious manner.

James Trussell (population controller of Princeton) has changed his tune about the efficacy of Plan B. Now he wants to say that the pill is ridiculously ineffective, so that condoms, rhythm, and withdrawal are far superior in efficacy as birth control. This is what he needs to admit in order to claim that the Plan B doesn’t work if a woman has ovulated.

Progesterone hormones have multiple mechanisms of action. Progesterone receptors are found in various tissues, and their preponderance and activity undergo cyclic changes. These hormones largely affect gene expression. These effects are not instantaneous. The physiological effects of progestins on reproduction vary with the timing of their use. The morning after pill’s modes of action will vary depending on when in the cycle and how long after intercourse they are used.

One cannot prescribe progestins to patients to mitigate hypermenorrhea (excessive bleeding), and at the same time claim that they don’t affect the uterine lining.

Progestins given on a scheduled basis fail to prevent ovulation in about half of patients. This has been attached to the labeling of progestin only pills, which have been used to control excessive bleeding, as well as to prevent pregnancy.

Plan B is a progestin. Ella is a selective progesterone receptor blocker (like mifepristone, RU456). Each one will affect the reproductive processes in different, dose dependent and time dependent ways. Political Science author Pam Belluck needs to consider the drugs separately when attempting to evaluate them mechanistically.

Plan B, levonorgestrel, like ALL hormones, operates on many physiological processes, by many different means.

If the leftists ever manage to develop effective birth control drugs which operate ONLY by preventing the union of sperm and egg, we may proceed with the constitutional amendments to accurately define human life with no further impediments.

More at Jill Stanek’s place. and right HERE.

Your Boycott of the New York Times is Working

Belt tightening at the New York Times has caused a reduction in the pension plans which are being offered.

Here’s a video of employees at the New York Times complaining about the fallout from pushing their leftist agenda. Call a Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaambulance!!

Keep up the boycotts. Don’t click the ads if you find yourself at leftie media sites.

Pamela Geller catches NYT Anti Catholic Bias

The atheist group, Freedom from Religion, was able to run an Anti-Catholic ad in the New York Times last week. Pamela Geller designed an analogous anti-Islam ad based on the first ad, and predictably the NYT has refused to run it. Their reason is that the Muslims do not have an edict to turn the other cheek like Christians do. What they tell us is that they’re worried about security of the U.S. troops. You can see the two ads side by side HERE
Geller states that her ad was designed specifically to reveal bias, and points out that the New York Times was not worried about the security of U.S. forces overseas when it published extensively on Abu Ghraib.

Pharmer suspects that the New York Times editors are protecting themselves, not the troops. They rely heavily on Christians to turn the other cheek. What might appear to be a their bias towards Islam is really physical cowardice, rather than a true ideological preference for that religion. Both Catholicism and Islam are far too restrictive for their lifestyles.

Unsigned NYT Editorial Wanders from Birth Control to Sonograms

Birth Control and Reproductive Rights – NYTimes.com.

Some anonymous leftie at the New York Times praises Obama’s decision to trample on the human rights of religiously affiliated health care employers.   The article wanders from this to weeping about those who oppose being made to pay for the recreational drugs and abortions desired by others.

Yes, birth control pills, when used for that purpose are recreational drugs,  and almost all abortions are recreational procedures.   They are optional, and support the  pursuit of  sex  as a mini-vacation, purely for the fun of it.

This short editorial covers a lot of territory, moving next to  the  Texas rule  mandating sonograms before abortions  (allowing detection of ectopic pregnancies, and permitting more safety for the woman.)  This regulation  does not mandate that a woman be shown her sonogram, but does require  that  basic information be offered to her  in order to support  informed consent for the abortion procedure.

It is vastly amusing to see a leftist decrying “intrusion into the doctor patient relationship”.  Medicare, medicaid and thousands of health care regulations are all about government standing between the patient and the physician.  The vast majority of this intrusion has been at the behest of the leftists.   One measure to provide for patient safety and informed consent  with respect to abortion causes these same people to go ballistic.

New York Times Reporter, Natasha Lennard Outs Herself As an Occupy Supporter and Planner

New Video Reveals: New York Times Reporter Natasha Lennard Is #OccupyWallStreet Activist, Supporter – Big Journalism.

Breitbart features an unedited video of a panel discussion and planning session among anarchists and other far lefties of the Occupy Movement.

NYT reporter Natasha Lennard, a featured speaking panelist at  the presentation,  seems to fully understand that some of the Occupy movement’s  activities are not legal.

Will the New York Times respond to the fact that one of their reporters who covers the Occupy protests is also a planner and participant?    Perhaps this will be found to be an acceptible form of MAKING news.



Fear of Libel Lawsuits Spreads in the Media

Doonesbury pulled from Chicago Tribune this week – chicagotribune.com.

Doonesbury is a  newspaper comic strip which still appears in the Chicago Tribune – except this week it’s being excluded.

There is Palin-o-phobia, because Sarah is a private citizen and can sue for libel now.  The old and moldy comic strip broached the topics found in the latest Palin slamming book penned by the pervert, who rented the house next door to the ex-gov  in Wasilla.

There is such fear among the media elites (after combing Sarah’s emails and finding no titillating elements), that they won’t even give the pervert’s book a favorable review.   Even the New York Times  panned it.

Why did Palin delay announcing whether or not she would run for president?    It has mitigated the behavior of  the press to  a significant degree.


Paul Krugman Acknowledges the Truth of DEATH PANELS

Remember when the lefties screamed about Palin’s use of the word Death panels, to describe the government choosing who and who would not get medical treatment?

Well,  they forgot about that, and here you see the esteemed New York Times operative, Paul Krugman acknowledging Sarah Palin’s pinpoint accuracy.

KRUGMAN:  They should have said, “Okay, look, Medicare is going to have to decide what it’s going to pay for. And at least for starters, it’s going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all.” In other words, it should have endorsed the panel that was part of the health care reform.  If the commission isn’t even brave enough to take on the death panels people, then it’s doing no good at all. ……………..

No. Some years down the pike we’re gonna get the real solution, which is gonna be a combination of death panels and sales taxes.  It’s going to be that we’re actually gonna take Medicare under control and we’re gonna have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT.

New York Times plagiarism… another one bites the dust

New York Times reporter accused of plagiarism resigns: NYT.

One  can avoid this problem if one  uses quote marks and a link, or reference.   It’s really very easy.

A person who doesn’t understand the subject of his writing, however, such as the reporter for a leftie paper, trying to write about economics, might have to use quotes so extensively that it chops up his article.

It would require significant comprehension of financial matters to shift around the language conveying Wall Street news,  and that could be far beyond the abilities of most college grads these days.

So there you have it.   Former NYT  financial ‘jounrnalist’ ,  Zachary Kouwe might turn up in some new location as……. perhaps a food and entertainment reporter.

Biden NYT Aneurysm scam linked on Google

I sent this to Drudge report already. But I would also like to record it on my private blog.
new york times page shows 1988 ap article about Biden’s second aneurysm. 20 year difference!

Giuliani was right. Biden is gone.
“Well, I’ll tell you, if I were Joe Biden, I’d want to get that V.P. thing in writing.”

Why does a 2008 NYT Times page show a May 4 1988 article about Biden’s old Aneurysm?

Go look at it before it disappears. When it does, no problem. I took a screen shot. I will ask for that to be published.

Will there be an investigation? A similar thing causes a run on AIRLINE STOCK. Billions!