Thursday, January 6, 2022

1/6/2021 - A Date That Will Live Forever In Infamy, No Matter The Right's Efforts To Memory -Hole It

  


"Jan. 6 is not in the past; it is every day.

It is regular citizens who threaten election officials and other public servants, who ask, “When can we use the guns?” and who vow to murder politicians who dare to vote their conscience.  

In short the Republic faces an existential threat from a movement that is openly contemptuous of democracy and has shown that it is willing to use violence to achieve its ends. No self-governing society can survive such a threat by denying that it exists. Rather, survival depends on looking back and forward at the same time.   Truly grappling with the threat ahead means taking full account of the terror of that day a year ago."   - NY Times Editorial, 'Every Day Is Jan. 6 Now',  Sunday, January 3

"America has not come together to defend its democracy; it has only split further apart. Lies and disinformation spread by the former president have so permeated the political ecosphere that nearly universal outrage has reverted to separate blue and red realities." -  Peter Baker, 'A Year Later Jan. 6 Becomes Just Another Wedge In A Divided Nation', NY Times today

"For the first time, I’ve begun to understand the plight of German Jews in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Some concluded that this time was different and acted accordingly, often by leaving the country. But most could not take the worst case seriously, or even conceive of it. We’ve seen bad times before, they thought, and we’ve always managed to get through them. Surely our friends and neighbors won’t believe unscrupulous demagogues. We’re all good Germans, aren’t we?"-  William Galston, WSJ, 'What If It Can Happen Here?', p. A13, 

"The right has doggedly resisted the idea of holding accountable the man — Trump — who called the rioters together, who exhorted them like Vince Lombardi in a pregame speech and aimed them like a gun at the heart of American democracy. This refusal to impose consequences, combined with the passage of laws designed to restrict Democratic-leaning voters’ access to the polls and the installation of Trump loyalists in positions of authority over state elections strongly suggests that the events of Jan. 6 will ultimately prove to be not an isolated event, but a dress rehearsal for something far worse.  Because you see, they “love” America so. Oh, and their votes were “stolen.”

On this first anniversary, it seems appropriate — indeed, necessary — to call that claim out for the despicable crock it is." - Leonard Pitts Jr.,  The Miami Herald, Jan. 5, 'Jan. 6 Rioters Do Not Love America, They Hate And Fear The America We're Becoming'


We now know (WaPo, Jan. 2nd)  that a Trump-incited traitor named Robert Palmer cheered on the violence at the Capitol on this date last year, even as his master sat watching it from a 55 in. TV in the White House, just outside the Oval Office. 

“I’m just so ashamed that I was a part of that,” Palmer told U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Dec. 17 before she gave him the longest prison term for any rioter so far.  

The question is why aren't the other rabble getting similar sentences, and why aren't the vile honchos who planned it - including Trump, Mark Meadows, Jeffrey Clarke and Jim Jordan,  being held to account. 

Instead of calling a halt to the treasonous violence, Trump relished it, enjoyed what his brain-fucked mob was doing in his name - after swallowing the Big Lie.  This is the cockroach that the Repuke cult now can't wait to return to power, after they've spent the past year memory- holing the event to the point nearly 40 percent of Americans think we need to "move on."  

No we do not! We need to absorb and process the worst sedition and rebellion since the Civil War and the most violent Capitol attack since the War of 1812.  Those maggots tried to burn our democracy, our Republic to the ground using a pretext the 2020 election was "stolen".  All of which has been totally skewered in a new book 'The Steal', by Mark Bowden and Matthew Teague, e.g.


The facts released in this welcome (and overdue)  book showed how the attempted Trump coup was much more detailed and complex than most have been led to believe.  Indeed, the authors make a strong case that the effort was merely a dry run for what to expect in 2024.  As to the actual violence that unfolded, which the authors (on ALL In Tuesday night)  described as a parallel ploy while the real subversion was going on behind closed doors, anyone paying close attention could see the buildup to violence from even before the 2020 election to its aftermath months later, and the unending lies spewed by Trump and his sycophants.  

Indeed, writing a post on January 5th I actually had warned about a likely "shitshow" on  the 6th, e.g.

 The Trump-motivated traitors who stormed the Capitol this day one year ago want to smother the magnitude of their atrocity in euphemisms ("patriotic protest") and obfuscation, deflection ("It was Antifa",  "It was an FBI false flag").  But the Right's own celebrities and hacks on FOX (Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham) were themselves panicked by what was going on, proving they grasped the significance of the abomination underway. See e.g. this clip of the released Hannity texts from All In Tuesday night:

Newly Released Texts By The 1/6 Committee Deeply Implicate Hannity In The Insurrection's Planning - YouTube


Thus, the informed citizen, the real patriot who knows our real Constitution , knows these lying, obfuscating renegades- like Tucker Carlson-  were really out to destroy this nation and still are. And this is why  their deplorable cult can never be allowed to have power handed to them again.  But how to stop the slow motion coup when:

- Some 47% of Republicans describe the attack on Congress as an act of patriotism.

- 56% say the attackers were “defending freedom.”

- Forty percent of Republicans believe that violence against the government is sometimes justified, a view shared by 23% of Democrats and 41% of independents.

- Sen. Joe Manchin doesn't believe preserving democracy is worth it, given he's not willing to even make a minor change to the filibuster, i.e. requiring at least 41 Senators to show up to block legislation as opposed to having 60 show up to support it.

Manchin's  stonewalling on filibuster reform - to get the Voting Rights Bill passed -  may mark the epitaph for this nation as a democratic Republic.  This is no exaggeration. Author Ruth Ben-Ghiat ('Strongmen: From Mussolini to the Present') pointed out on ALL In Tuesday night that the playbook of authoritarian fascists (like Viktor Orban of Hungary, "head of Axis 2.0" ) is exactly "a checklist of what the GOP aspires to."  In her words, "he's domesticated the media, and we don't hear about people being poisoned - like Putin - but he uses a tremendous amount of pressure, economic and other, to make people's lives difficult if they don't cooperate." 

Most importantly, Orban "doesn't ban elections but he fixes them".   He "controls the judiciary, the electoral apparatus, so the results are the ones needed to stay in power.  This sounds very familiar because it is just what the GOP wants to do in this country."

This is exactly true. How so?  Over the past year Republican lawmakers in 41 states have relentlessly been trying to advance the ultimate goals of the authoritarian- obsessed insurrectionists by fixing future elections.  Not by breaking laws but by making them, including making it as difficult as possible for minorities to cast ballots, and even to outlaw mail ballots except under the most extreme circumstances.  

Hundreds of sham bills have been proposed and nearly three dozen laws passed which even empower state legislatures to overturn the will of their voters and sabotage their own elections.  This according to a running tally by a consortium of pro-democracy organizations. It is literally a ticking time bomb ready to go off and blow our democracy to hell.  

It's bad enough that cynical legislative pretexts are being employed to pass laws to destroy fair voting-   especially if Manchin doesn't act to protect the franchise - as Ruth Ben-Ghiat ('Strongmen') warned two nights ago.  But even worse is how those voters not in the Reep cult are being bamboozled - especially about the economy- which may lead them to vote in Reep authoritarians in the midterms.    Columnist Dana Milbank writing in The Washington Post barely 5 days ago sounded the alarm on this:

The economy is going gangbusters, yet Americans express a gloom not matched by economic reality – or by their own spending behaviors. Polls and consumer-confidence indices show an economic pessimism as grim as when millions lost jobs in the pandemic shutdown. This is, in large part, because disinformation has prevailed. Partisanship long colored economic views, but now Republicans, in addition to occupying a parallel political reality, are expanding an alternate economic universe.

A Gallup poll last week corroborated Milbank's take. It found that Americans' confidence in the economy dropped to where it was in April, 2020, at the beginning of the pandemic when nationwide shutdowns brought us into a recession.  This is crazy.  But the reason is, like with the Covid blarney from Tucker Carlson, too many are getting their news from the least factual sources - mainly FOX.  This prompted Milbank to write:

"In post-truth America, the economy is just another target for fakery."

The tragedy is that this fakery, like so many other versions (Covid, the lie  Trump won), could lead us into the rabbit hole of an authoritarian state much like Viktor Orban's Hungary. (Which we beheld close up when we visited Budapest in 2015.)

 Given this,  our own voters need to be smarter and not fall for one or more of the conspiracy ideations Trump and his cabal have used to destroy minds and undermine our electoral system. Conspiracy nonsense  and asinine lies that include:

- The insurrectionists are really "patriots" and those arrested are "political prisoners" being mistreated.

- Trump didn't really encourage or incite the rabble to insurrection and sedition.

- The insurrectionists weren't violent, rather they "could have been tourists" according to Reeptardo Rep. Adam Clyde (GA)

Voters, especially independents, also need to be more perspicacious and not be lulled by watching what they fancy as  "entertaining" news sources -  low on truth, high on baseless conspiracies and propaganda.  Like Tucker Carlson's show.   

That is one reason we faithfully follow Chris Hayes and Rachel Maddow on MSNBC - which we highly suggest any other readers do as well.  Leave FOX, Tucker Carlson, Hannity, Laura Ingraham and the other lying hacks to the gullible and low IQ segment. We need truthtellers now not mendacious monsters trying to tear the nation into pieces with their propaganda and lies.

The attempted overthrow of our government by these seditious right wing extremists  was largely driven by the belief that a racist loser and narcissist psychopath was a "great man" -  vastly more qualified than Joe Biden.  This is aberrant brain- rotting toxic tripe. Trump is a lowlife guttersnipe goon unfit to even be a shithouse rat exterminator. His energy feeds solely on the cruelty he elicits and his forlorn knuckle dragger base demands.  Read Adam Serwer's excellent analysis in 'The Cruelty Is The Point'.  I.e.. that cruelty had become the core element of Trumpism — whose single point of coherence seemed to be “owning the libs”. 

All the above translates into a wakeup call for millions ahead of the midterms.  To wit, the entire constellation of odious, seditious actions by Trump and his fecal tribe  needs to be burned into the memory of every person of decency. That event one year ago must never, ever be forgotten no matter how much the Reep reprobates try to whitewash it, flush it from collective national memory or remake the insurrectionist traitors as "patriots".

 Further, real Americans have a moral responsibility to be awake and alert enough to not let it happen again, including by gaining insights into HOW our government and nation was nearly taken in an actual legal coup - apart form the violent effort, e.g.

'Slow-Motion Insurrection': How GOP Seizes Election Power | Georgia News | US News

In the months since the insurrection, even as the FOX maggots  (like Tucker Carlson) have mocked and derided those who experienced it, Senators and representatives have chronicled the trauma of Jan. 6, recalling how they cowered behind seats in the House chamber and barricaded themselves in offices as Trump acolytes pounded on doors and shouted threats of violence.   

This also explains why so many are quitting Capitol jobs in droves, terrified of a repeat with even worse psychotics to come.  They also are terrified too many fellow citizens will let their guard down and be taken in by lies and propaganda to put these feral swine back into power again.  

As for today's commemorations of Jan. 6 don't look for the Repukes to hold any. Why would they? They want the event permanently memory-holed as an insurrection, the better to grab power again in the midterms - hoping enough Americans look the other way.

 AG Merrick Garland proclaimed yesterday:

 "The Justice Department is committed to holding all January 6th perpetrators at any level accountable- whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy."

But as Rachel Maddow rightly asked last night:

"People otherwise responsible for the assault on the Capitol?  Or does he mean people otherwise responsible for the assault on our democracy as in the election and its results? The effort to falsify those results and thereby seize power?"

These are critical questions, since the latter is exactly the Orban template in Hungary which the GOP wants to fulfill in the next 3 years.  If Garland is only prepared to go after the lower level rabble - and higher level rabble in the actual assault - then we are no better off than before January 6th.  As one commentator quoted last night put it bluntly: 

"The continued defiance by Trump and his allies is forcing Garland to make a decision faced by none of his predecessors: whether to prosecute a former president who tried to subvert an election and may do so again,"

Indeed, and last night in an MSNBC interview Capitol officer Michael Dunn made it clear he wants prosecutions all the way to the top. Will Garland act, or will he punt, leaving our democracy at risk?  We will soon see! 

In the meantime other critical steps are needed including congress redoing the Electoral Count Act which remains an open invitation to mischief. Thus, right now, a majority in both chambers can conceivably overturn an election (Electoral college result) already certified, if enough alternate state electors are approved.  This is what the Reep House & Senate scum (like Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz)  tried to pull off on January 6th while their lower level rabble were wreaking havoc on the Capitol.

We cannot let this happen again! To that end only scorn must be heaped on a media source,  WSJ - editorial today ('Democracy Isn't Dying')-  claiming: "Jan. 6 was a riot not an insurrection") that attempts to muddy the perceptual waters for the political gain of its ideological fellow travelers - the GOP traitors.


See Also:

by Robert Reich | January 6, 2022 - 8:11am | permalink

And:

by Heather Digby Parton | January 6, 2022 - 8:45am | permalink


And:

by Thom Hartmann | January 6, 2022 - 8:31am | permalink

by James A. Piazza | January 5, 2022 - 7:59am | permalink

And:

by Alex Henderson | January 5, 2022 - 8:35am | permalink

And:

by Thom Hartmann | January 1, 2022 - 7:05am | permalink

— from The Hartmann Report

Excerpt:

When fascism reared its ugly head in Europe and Japan in the 1920s, it signaled a coming war. As a newer and slicker form of that despotism rises here in America, it may well bring the same type of crisis.

We stand on the threshold of momentous change in this nation. While it’s rarely discussed in this frame, the next two elections will almost certainly determine what form of government we’ll have for at least a generation.

Will America become more free and democratic, or will we devolve into a 21st century form of Trumpy fascism?

And:

Opinion | Will Donald Trump Get Away With Inciting an Insurrection? - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

Excerpt:

Mr. Garland’s success depends on ensuring that the rule of law endures. That means dissuading future coup plotters by holding the leaders of the insurrection fully accountable for their attempt to overthrow the government. But he cannot do so without a robust criminal investigation of those at the top, from the people who planned, assisted or funded the attempt to overturn the Electoral College vote to those who organized or encouraged the mob attack on the Capitol. To begin with, he might focus on Mark Meadows, Steve Bannon, Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman and even Donald Trump — all of whom were involved, in one way or another, in the events leading up to the attack.

Almost a year after the insurrection, we have yet to see any clear indicators that such an investigation is underway, raising the alarming possibility that this administration may never bring charges against those ultimately responsible for the attack.

And:

by Amanda Marcotte | December 15, 2021 - 8:57am | permalink

And:

by Will Bunch | December 17, 2021 - 8:07am | permalink

And:

by Cody Fenwick | December 14, 2021 - 8:56am | permalink

Wednesday, January 5, 2022

How Academic Paper Overload Makes Innovative (And Substantial) Research Harder To Recognize

 Physics Today editor Charles Day makes valid points in his recent editorial, 'It's All Too Much' (Vol. 74, No. 12, December, p. 8) when he cites the research of Johan Chu of Northwestern University and James Evans of the University of Chicago in October.  Their published analysis of bibliometric data drawn from 10 broad fields in science, medicine, engineering, and mathematics, e.g.

J. S. G. Chu, J. A. Evans, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2021636118 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2021636118

Featured a main conclusion that is sobering: As the number of papers in a field increases, researchers find it harder to recognize innovative work. Progress seems to be slowing.

I don't know why this should be surprising, given I had earlier cited one 2007 study, showing that half of academic papers are read only by their authors and journal editors.  Even more sobering, the authors found that 90 percent of papers published are never even cited by other researchers. Again, this isn't surprising. and let's also bear in mind that papers are of unequal quality - also many of lesser quality due to the "publish or perish" pressure. 
This mandate means professors will churn out papers merely to meet the quota mandates of their institutions, and may not have anything genuinely novel to report. Hence, the low quality, also the evident lack of recognition of innovative work.  There are only so many "new" things science - even physics - can excavate and process in a given year.  So when some 1.9 million (estimated) research papers are published a year  one must consider the reality of redundancy.  
This over production has led Chu and Evans to present a plausible hypothesis. Rather than evaluate new papers on their individual merits, researchers increasingly resort to comparing them with existing paradigms. Further,  they note that when new papers are published at a high rate, truly novel ideas struggle to prevail—let alone be noticed—over the flood of competitors. It is the old problem of noise overwhelming the signal, and let's be frank - of the estimated 1.9 million yearly published research papers (in 25,000 journals)  probably 75% are noise, not signal.  By which I mean a significant novel discovery, or finding. 
One strength of Chu and Evans’s paper - as noted by Day -  is that they used their hypothesis to make six predictions, all of which are statistically testable, i.e. by looking for correlations. Their predictions are, to quote the paper,
1) New citations will be more likely to cite the most-cited papers rather than less-cited papers; 
2) The list of most-cited papers will change little year to year—the canon ossifies; 
3) The probability a new paper eventually becomes canon will drop; 
4) New papers that do rise into the ranks of those most cited will not do so through gradual, cumulative processes of diffusion; 
5) The proportion of newly published papers developing existing scientific ideas will increase and the proportion disrupting existing ideas will decrease; and 
6) The probability of a new paper becoming highly disruptive will decline.
As Prof. Day points out citations are straightforward to count, so it makes sense to use them in the testing. . To characterize a paper’s "canonicity, disruptiveness, and diffusibility", Chu and Evans also developed statistical measures. In all, they examined 1.8 billion citations of 90 million papers published from 1960 to 2014. Each of their six predictions was affirmed by a significant correlation.  So we have excess publication, way too much, as the editorial header makes clear. 
What to do about it?
Day writes: "Telling physicists to publish less, publishers to stop launching new journals, and editors to reject more papers are all illiberal restrictions on freedom of expression."
But I disagree. If a tidal wave of research papers is swamping the ability of the given scientific community to take time to process the work, then  where is the benefit?  If most papers are read only by the immediate authors and editors, what's the point?  It appears more an exercise in academic vanity and meeting a mandate to publish in order to remain viable at a given institution. If 25 authors need to contribute to one paper (as is happening more and more) to get credit for research at an institution, do they all get equal credit for a citation?
Don't take my word for insisting there is excess, even in premier journals. Check out the 10 -day cycles of contributions to The Astrophysical Journal issue in the link below.  Then ask yourself just how many will read even one of the papers before the next batch becomes available (in the ensuing issue) for the next ten days (go to the top and click on 'next issue'):
If anyone tells me the particular astrophysicist - even in that specialty area -  is reading all of the relevant papers, I'd day they are inhabiting fantasy land.  Even Day admits most papers are not being judged on individual merit, and that's just in physics.  What about mathematics, biochemistry, anthropology, geology, psychology etc. ?
Even if you are unable to grasp the content in the specific papers from the link above, it is instructive to peruse the span of topics just from this single issue and I encourage readers to continue looking at the subsequent issues - asking how many of those papers might actually be read and understood. Say to warrant citation.
 I do agree with Day that scientists need a better way to evaluate a paper's  novelty. As he writes:  "Whoever develops one would earn scientists’ gratitude. They might even become rich."  
Maybe, but I doubt it.

See Also:

Tuesday, January 4, 2022

Even With Largest Cost Of Living Allowance In Decades, Neither Social Security Or Medicare Are "Entitlements"

 

Seniors march to demand passage of Medicare

Drumbeats in the corporo-media (e.g. WSJ, today, p. A17, 'Entitlements Always Grow and Grow'), if they are sustained long enough, can easily brainwash too many into believing them.  One such example is that Medicare (and Social Security) are "entitlements."  Of course this is abject nonsense, and this is despite the fact the Social Security cost of living allowance (COLA) for this year is the largest (5.9%)  since 1982.   This reflects the higher inflation this year and also higher medical costs.   

But for beneficiaries this "raise" will be diminished by an even larger cost increase in Medicare Part B - which covers physician visits and other outpatient care.   That cost will soar by 14.55% and that increase is deducted from one's monthly Social Security.  

These figures just barely touch on the challenges facing more than 55.5 million Americans, which will include higher out of pocket costs (especially for dental work, eye exams,  glasses) as well as higher copayments, higher deductibles and higher drug costs (for the Medicare Part D drug plans).   To fix ideas, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation the most recent available data showed out of pocket spending of $6,150 a year for citizens on Medicare.-  with more than one-third spending 20% of their per capita income on health care costs.

  Interestingly, that is almost what we laid out last year  - for dental cleanings, fillings, crowns, x-rays, eye exams and new glasses.  Planning for a 30-year retirement?  Do the math, and factor in at least 10 % inflation per year. That is how much extra money you are going to need to sock away to cover that out of pocket spending.  Think you might be able to ignore some of the costs?  Think again! Such high medical costs are not just a financial issue but can lead to denial of access for treatment, poor health and even premature death.

That was the lot of too many seniors before Medicare became law in 1966, and only after a savage battle with the AMA - which saw it as "socialized medicine" and an inroad for communism into the country.  One of the chief propaganda spokespersons was Ronnie Reagan pumping his effluent in spot ads on TV in the early 60s.  The AMA also organized women into "coffee klatches" -  complete with talking point tool kits - in an effort called 'Operation Coffee Cup'-   to address the "grave threat of socialized medicine".  

What did seniors have before Medicare? A law called Kerr-Mills, which focused on  dispensing state aid (not federal) to  2.4 million elderly on state welfare rolls. The amount of medical aid determined by each state, usually in the form of a yearly stipend. This was out of 14 million Social Security beneficiaries.  It was estimated at the time that 10 million of these seniors could have used some kind of further health assistance.  But if they needed it they would have had to depend on charity or the good nature of neighbors and family to help.  It was Medicare which finally broke the chains of this charity dependence.

But today we find Medicare becoming insolvent, largely thanks to the parasitical presence of "Medicare Advantage".  Most people are unaware that this program is not government -supported but rather implemented through expensive private plans.  As described by blogger David Lindorff, e.g.

Medicare Advantage is No Advantage :

Under Medicare Advantage, the Medicare recipient opts to buy a private (for-profit or not-for-profit) insurance package, sometimes for a little more money, and sometimes for no money beyond the amount already being paid to the government for Medicare Part B. That private plan will then cover the costs of hospital and out-patient care as well as drugs. But not for all the costs. Many plans exclude certain procedures and since virtually all MA plans are “managed care” insurance, subscribers need to get approved by a gatekeeper primary care physician who is in the plan’s network before they can go to a specialist. And even then, the specialist they go to, as well as the primary care gatekeeper physician, has to be someone who is in the plan that you have enrolled in. For many people who live in more rural or even in medically underserved urban areas even in the cities and suburbs, this can cause big problems. There may not even be a needed specialist, or the one or ones who are in the plan may be fully booked for months.

With traditional government Medicare, a patient can go to virtually any doctor and any specialist physician and Medicare pays the cost, minus a co-pay.

When it comes to Medicare Part D, the prescription drug plan, things are not much better for current recipients given the cost of many meds is sky high.  My youngest brother Mike's lot of 15 meds, for example, came to over $2,200 a month. Fortunately, as a vet, he benefited from the VA bargaining for the lowest prices - else he'd have gone into the proverbial poorhouse.  Not all Medicare seniors are that lucky so often have to split their pills into fractions to make them last so they can afford the next set. Or trade their nutrition for meds, a harsh choice.

One simple solution would be to allow Medicare to bargain for the lowest drug prices like the VA does.   Indeed,  Biden's 'Build Back Better' bill - which Manchin and Sinema are now blocking (under the guise of further negotiating) would allow Medicare to negotiate prices with drug companies for some high cost drugs under Part D, starting in 2025.  It would also cap out of pocket Part D costs at $2,000 a year.  Both these aspects are desperately needed now by millions of seniors who, failing the bill's passage - will again have to depend on charity (going to food banks) or the good graces of family.

When you hear anything about the "big haul" U.S. seniors are getting with the increased cost of living allowance this month, be sure to howl with derisive laughter.  Then ask the particular dunderhead if s/he even knows the difference between Medicare and Medicare Advantage!

See Also:

The “Medicare Advantage” Plan to Kill Real Medicare
Thom Hartmann's picture
Article Tools
E-mail | Print
Comments (2)

Excerpt:

In 2003, George W Bush set up the destruction and privatization of Medicare. The end of “real Medicare” is getting closer every day, and Congress and Medicare’s administrators are doing nothing.

Last Friday the Centers for Medicare Services (CMS) announced a 14.5% increase in Medicare Part B premiums, raising the monthly payments by the lowest-income Medicare recipients from $148.50 a month to $170.10 a month next year.

If you’re trying to live on the bottom rung of Social Security (about $365/month), that’s consequential. People with Medigap policies are also seeing their policy price rises announced this month.

Two months ago I wrote about the Medicare Advantage Scam and how it can screw consumers. This price hike, though, raises the larger issue of what’s happening to Medicare itself and whether the entire system may be out of business in a few years, in part because our government is being robbed blind by all these so-called “Advantage” plans.

It all began with George W. Bush, who’d spent most of his life openly and proudly campaigning to privatize Medicare and Social Security.

In 2003 Congress and the Bush administration rolled out a privatization option, allowing private for-profit insurance companies to sell policies branded as “Medicare Advantage” to gullible seniors who think they’re buying the actual Medicare Parts A and B. As a result, today companies eager to rip off seniors are flooding the market, particularly with TV advertising.

As I note in considerable detail in The Hidden History of American Healthcare: Why Sickness Bankrupts You and Makes Others Insanely Rich, Medicare Advantage is hurting traditional Medicare, because that system is paying the insurance companies, in most cases, far more than it would be paying to simply cover the costs of its regular Medicare recipients.

Monday, January 3, 2022

The Start Of A New Health Battle For 2022 - Against Diabetes

 

                               My late younger brother, Johnny, about 5 weeks before he died owing to cardiac complications arising from his diabetes. Note his closed eyes. He'd been dealing with blindness from diabetic retinopathy.


As the latest a1c test result delivered the news:  a reading of 6.5% and the referring physician's warning of "diabetes onset", the blood drained from Janice's face and mine.  We had received the script test results a day before Christmas Eve when a dear friend was about to deliver her regular Xmas gift: a delicious home made apple pie. (For which we had already purchased the vanilla ice cream to have with it.)  But this sudden and undesirable news meant the holiday fare planned  would have to be radically changed.  

The preferred way to screen for diabetes  is with the a1c  blood test.  This can often be easily done with just a fingerstick in the dr's office but I had it done in early December as part of a panel of unrelated tests (requested by my urologist) which included: PSA, hematocrit and testosterone.   Just as well as I found the hematocrit (marking degree of blood clotting) had gone down to 54% from 63% (near stroke level), and the testosterone had gone up to 203 from 110.  The PSA remained about the same at 8.3.   (Actually up a bit, 0.3 ng/dl  - likely from the slight increase in testosterone - which is the main fuel for prostate cancer.)

To fix ideas, the a1c measures   the percentage of hemoglobin in your blood that carries glucose. The higher the amount of glucose in the blood the higher the a1c percentage.  A normal a1c measurement is less than 5.7% - while an a1c of 5.7% - 6.4 is regarded as prediabetes,    An a1c of 6.5% or higher usually means diabetes, so I am right on the cusp of the disease, if indeed a 2nd test confirms it.

The main takeaway and primary positive from the a1c is that generally TWO tests are needed to confirm it.  Hence, the urologist has scheduled a new year appt. for Feb. 22nd at which time we will go over the existing tests and I will also get another a1c.  This will give me two months to see about changing the verdict, which I suspect might have been excessively high from the get go (up from 5.8 in May)

In the meantime I am going to assume the single test is accurate, especially as I've not had the best eating habits the past 4 months (including partaking of Janice's pandemic baking!),

 As I've written in previous posts, diabetes runs in my family:  my beloved maternal grandmother died from it, and all 3 younger brothers battled it using a battery of meds (e.g. Metformin) as well as insulin injections.  My youngest brother, Mike, needed 3 different meds to control his numbers and one VA doc conjectured this may have led to his liver cancer - that finally killed him in June, 2018.   My middle brother John (see photo) , was dogged with diabetes for years, finally ending up with blindness from diabetic retinopathy then cardiac problems, and finally kidney failure and brain death on May 6, 2013.  

My own plan to combat the disease - if indeed I am on the cusp of it- is to first increase my walking to 150 mins. a week, from the current 65-70.  Next, I have totally cut out the 'Farmhouse'  bagels from Einstein Bros. Bagels (right down the road) three times a week. They are terrific but loaded with 680 calories of which 32 g are fat, and 64 g carbohydrate.  Thus, a total of over 2,000 extra calories have now been excised  of which 196 g comes from carbs - one of the main culprits fueling diabetes.   

In place of the farmhouse bagels for breakfast I am now having two scrambled eggs with Maitake mushrooms, with two lean turkey sausages. Oh, and a small orange.  Roughly half the calories of the bagel and zero carbs. (Apart from the 40 or so from the orange.)

Of course, the other part of this is that Janice will have to cut back on all her pandemic  baking (pies, cranberry scones, blueberry muffins, strudel, cakes etc.) which has happily occupied her during the last two years.  Also, we had our friend make us just a "mini" apple pie this time (6 inch dia. instead of 14 inch) and with half  the sugar.

Historically, there have been  two approaches to measuring a1c. One approach is to separate A1c from other hemoglobin fractions and includes methods such as chromatography and electrophoresis. The other approach targets a1c as an antigen using methods such as immunochemistry.

Within this context, the four most commonly used methods to measure A1c are ion-exchange  high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), boronate affinity HPLC, immunoassay, and enzymatic assays.  Alas, the variety of assays and methods used to measure a1c have led to a lack of standardization, which has limited the ability to reliably compare treatments across clinical practices.  One hopes this will soon improve and one way may be by reporting test results in both systems, i.e. both as a percent of glucose- bearing hemoglobin in blood and via International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) - derived SI units (millimoles of a1c per mole of HbA)  Fortunately there is a "master" regression equation available for converting values between the two systems.  Notably, the IFCC and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) supports using both systems.  

I definitely agree.

Diabetes, given the havoc it can wreak on nearly every organ - while also being an insidious killer - is nothing to play around with.  It is also exploding in this country as poor eating choices abound.  Given the cost of the drug insulin has also exploded, becoming a type II diabetic is definitely something to avoid.  If a test - even one-  indicates it,  that means doing all in one's power to control it.  Something my brother Johnny learned too late.

See Also:

 https://www.webmd.com/diabetes/guide/understanding-diabetes-symptoms




Friday, December 31, 2021

Solutions To Plasma Physics Problems For Radio Astronomy (3)

 1) Evaluate the Alfven velocity for the solar photosphere given:

r  =  2.0  x  10 -4   kg  m-3

B o  =  0.1  Webers  m -2

And   m =  m o    the magnetic permeability in vacuo

Solution:

m =  m o   =  4p  x  10 -7  hm-1

The Alfven velocity:

v =    B o / Ã–(mr)  

v =   

 (0.1 Wb  m -2) / Ã–(4p  x  10 -4  hm-1)(2.0  x  10 -4   kg  m-3)  

v =  6.3 x  10 3  ms-1  =    6.3  km/ sec


2) Re-evaluate to estimate r for the solar corona at about 1 solar radius above the photosphere, if  v »   2.0  x  10 8   m s-1

Solution:

Use algebra to make r  the subject:

r  =   B o 2 / m o  V 2        

Then, on substituting the values of parameters:

r  =   (0.1Wb  m -2) 2 / (4p  x  10 -4  hm-1)(2.0  x  10 8 ms-1) 2 

r  =  1.9  x  10 -13   kg  m-3