What’s wrong with this picture?

Question:

What is the fastest growing market for cosmetic surgery in men…for the second year running?

Hint:

What is the #1 cosmetic surgery performed on women?

That’s easy, breast enlargement.

Any guesses for the men?

Sadly, and unfortunately, way too graphically…it is male breast reduction.

This bizarre and unnatural dichotomy of breast reduction in men and breast enlargement in women reminds me of joke told by comedian Stephen Rice.

“I bought a humidifier and a de-humidifier and I put them both in a room, closed the door, and let them fight it out.”

I wonder how that would work?

In any event, is any of this aesthetic surgery really practicing medicine?

Professor Pasachoff is a skeptic, as am I…to the extent that one of my guiding precepts is: ‘the quality of your life and your understanding of the world will be determined by the quality of the questions that you ask.’

I suspect that Professor Pasachoff and I would agree on many things, specifically that critical thinking seems to be underutilized, at best, and undermined, at worst, in our society.

But, he and I are at odds when he targets chiropractic in his skepticism. He crossed the line from skepticism/doubt into dogmatism with his label of pseudo-science. So, how do I, as a chiropractor and a skeptic, reconcile this? Quite simply, I welcome Professor Pasachoff’s skepticism, questions and scrutiny, as I do that of my patients. I would ask him what personal research he has done to make this broad denouncement? Or, in this instance, might he be wanting in critical thinking skills?

There is a plethora of scientific evidence supporting both the physiological effects and efficacy of chiropractic adjustments for the treatment of acute neck and low back pain of mechanical origin.

In fact, in 1989, the US government established the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research “to enhance the quality, appropriateness, and effectiveness of health care services and access to these services.” Because of the prevalence, the first guideline developed was for the treatment of acute low back pain. “This guideline was developed by an independent multidisciplinary panel of private-sector clinicians and other experts convened by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR). The panel employed explicit, science-based methods and expert clinical judgment to develop specific statements on acute low back problems in adults.”

The panel concluded: “Surgery has been found to be helpful in only 1 in 100 cases of (all) low back problems. In some people, surgery can even cause more problems.” Furthermore, scientific, evidence-based research supported only three “Proven Treatments” for acute low back problems: NSAIDS (oral anti-inflammatories), the use of ice or heat and, remarkably…42 studies supported the use of (chiropractic) spinal manipulation of the low back.

Were these guidelines implemented? No! Why? Because citing the efficacy of conservative approaches and recommending non-surgical treatments for low back pain, drove back surgeons wild. They organized and lobbied congress and effectively stripped the AHCPR of its power, halting the development of all future guidelines. Incidentally, the number of spinal fusions continued to rise dramatically, over 127 percent between 1997 and 2004.

Perhaps Professor Pasachoff’s skepticism would be better directed at the machinations of the medical-pharmaceutical industrial complex. After all, in terms of risks verses benefits, the risks and deaths associated with medical/pharmaceutical care far exceed those of any he labeled as pseudo-science. Why aim so low?

It has been estimated that only 15% of what doctors do is backed by the type of hard scientific evidence Professor Pasachoff seeks: ie: that ‘there is little to no evidence that many widely used treatments and procedures actually work better than various cheaper alternatives.”

While there is significant evidence that corporate-backed science has infiltrated and undermined virtually all aspects of medical research for the purpose of marketing drugs.

In September of 2001 the editors of 12 of the world’s most prestigious medical journals issued an unprecedented and chilling alarm titled: Sponsorship, Authorship and Accountability. They wrote: “We are concerned that the current intellectual environment in which clinical research is conceived, study subjects are recruited and the data analyzed and reported (or, not reported) may threaten scientific objectivity…In light of that truth, the use of clinical trials primarily for marketing makes a mockery of clinical investigation and is a misuse of a powerful tool.”

In a world where medical journals have become an extension of pharmaceutical companys’ marketing strategies, skepticism, critical thinking and questioning are not only important, they can save your life.

The Supreme Court decision this past week is the antithesis of campaign finance reform. It expands, exponentially, corporate influence and power.

In 2000, the US Supreme Court’s unilateral anointment of George W. Bush as President of the United States, legitimized and secured a coup d’etat, that signaled the corporate takeover of America.

Last week the same Supreme Corporate Counsel unabashedly made public their inextricable links and allegiance to corporate America in a decision that is a crushing blow to democracy and the American people. The US Supreme Corporate Court is in session.

This decision allows for unlimited funding for political advertising and marketing by corporations, both in support and opposition to, individual politicians (current, or campaigning) and policies. Their timing and intent to influence the upcoming mid-term elections is transparent.

It is not hard, nor farfetched, to imagine an American political landscape of corporate-funded, sponsored and elected politicians, passing corporate-friendly legislation. It will be, in fact, just an accelerated evolution of what already exists.

The Corporate Executive Branch (President & CEO) meets behind closed doors to broker deals with corporations, ensuring that no programs or initiatives will, in any way, interfere with corporate profits or growth. At the same time, they explore ways to secure and expand corporate interests, at home and abroad, both covertly and overtly (wars).

The Corporate Legislative Branch (the Board of Directors), guided by their corporate sponsors, writes the laws and secures taxpayer funding effecting policies that maximize corporate benefits and interests.

The US Supreme Corporate Court oversees and rules on the corporate laws of the land.

Wake up America! The government is no longer doing the work of the people, but rather the bidding of corporations. Our docility, aided and abetted by our profligate greed and consumerism, has enabled the transition from democracy to corporatocracy.

We have given away our governance, and with it we have surrendered our power, our security, our wealth and the future of our children and grandchildren.

Of this I am certain, the fix will NOT come from our corrupt corporate controlled government.

Reclaiming and restoring our democracy, a government of the people, by the people and for the people, will demand that we unite, as a people, in our vision, cause and efforts (vis a vis: the Vietnam War & Civil Rights Movements) to oppose the expanding power and oppression of the corporations.

Until then:

I pledge resistance to the flag

Of the United Corporations of America

And to the corrupt government for which it stands

One nation, under-educated

With insecurity, inequality and injustice for all.

(Democracy: RIP Jan. 2010)

sew the seeds of civil disobedience now.

No Stone Left Unturned

One of the biggest indicators of how much we need health care reform is the extent and costs of the battle that the special interests of the medical-pharmaceutical-industrial complex are waging to kill it.

Theirs’ is a well financed, coordinated, no-holds-barred war, leaving no stone un-turned in their efforts to influence the minds, opinions and votes of politicians and the public.

The extent to which they will go, and the strategies which they employ, know no bounds and exceed the imagination of a trusting, misinformed and distracted public.

Case in point:

Health Insurers Caught Paying Facebook Gamers Virtual Currency To Oppose Reform Bill

(click the above link and then their link to gethealthreformright.org)

As the article says: in a process called ‘astro-turfing,’ or in this instance more appropriately called ‘virtual astro-turfing’, corporations like the insurance industry, or organizations like ‘think-tanks,’ etc., create FAKE (virtual) grassroots movements by paying people to act like political supporters. In this case, it isn’t even real money. It is ‘virtual currency!’

Could it get any more insidious or cynical? If this doesn’t exemplify the extent and depths to which they will go…and doesn’t frighten you…I don’t know what will. What else are they doing below the radar of the public at large?

And, could the public knee-jerk response to virtual crumbs (for an inane computer game, of all things) in exchange for their vote (contrary to their own best interests) be any more pathetic?

If you are not ACTIVELY working to enact health care reform (or reform in other major areas: financial, environmental, etc), you should be.

Once again, it reminds me of Hillel’s aphorism: (on personal responsibility)

IF NOT ME, THEN WHO?

IF NOT NOW, THEN WHEN?

Sow the seeds of civil disobedience now!

That Was Then:

Republican President Nixon told a press conference in July of 1969: “We face a massive crisis in health care. Unless action is taken within the next two or three years….we will have a breakdown in our medical system.” An article in Fortune magazine at the time, titled “$60 billion crisis” warned that the American health care system stood “on the brink of crisis.” That was when the national health bill was a mere $60 billion. Even so, skyrocketing medical costs were pricing health care out of reach to most Americans, and medical bankruptcies were on the rise.

At the same time (1970’s) articles were revealing that for all the investment in technology, hospitals, medical specialties and sub-specialties, medical-related expenses, etc. health care in America was not as good as health care in most other industrialized countries; i.e.: America had higher rates of infant mortality and lower life expectancy.

And This Is Now:

A Democratic President, Barack Obama, called “health care reform the single most important thing we can do for America’s long-term fiscal health. That is a fact.”

What was $60 billion ($1900/second) in health care costs in 1970 ballooned into $230 billion by 1980, $2.6 trillion by 2006 and is anticipated to reach $ 4.3 trillion ($139,000/second) by 2017. The consequences are already catastrophic.

In addition, things have only gotten worse:

More than 50% of all personal bankruptcies are related to medical bills. Every 30 seconds in the United States, someone files for bankruptcy in the aftermath of a serious health problem

The only solution:

For decades, Congress has consistently failed to take any effective actions to restrain the uncontrolled and runaway costs of medical care.

The ONLY solution is for Congress to break the virtual monopoly that the insurance-pharmaceutical-medical industrial complex has on health care delivery and re-imbursement.