It appears the feds are requiring all Medicare and Medicaid providers to have their staffs fully vaccinated. That would be a pretty strong incentive for the hospitals and clinics to require vaccination - especially if they have known this was coming down the pike prior to the great dictator's announcement.
Funny, I actually knew Eugene's dad Vladimir V. He was way ahead of the game (mid 80's) in security software with those annoying questions like what's the middle name of your aunt's brother. Vesoft. Here's a funny story, VV had just gotten his US driver's license and I was riding with him to a customer and every time he stopped at a stop sign, he would blow the horn. I asked him why was he doing that? He replied that's what he was taught in the class and being from USSR, you don't disobey the rules.
Right. But why haven't the hospital associations challenged this in court? It's not like they don't have the money. Here are some questions Malone asks today:
<i>"Why is the USA requiring vaccination for all with an outdated vax, when many have already been infected, recovered, developed natural immunity?". Stop. Think. Why the censorship? Why the mandates? Why the constant propaganda push?
Why has virtually every single medical professional organization in the USA come out against early outpatient treatment of COVID-19? Particularly when "rogue" physicians who practice early treatment have outstanding results?
Why did you see an enormous synchronized push by media and government to label Ivermectin as an unsafe horse medicine when both assertions are clearly false? And why did so many buy into that media theme (meme)?</i>
There must be more than a stick. There must be humongous carrot.
Could well be. I do wonder, however, about most doctors' seeming fear of even acknowledging early IVM, HCQ, or other treatment options much less prescribing them. Somewhere I think I read about the PREP act liability waivers , and how if hospitals or doctors deviate from that act's "covered countermeasures" they waive their liability for COVID treatment entirely. So if a doctor were to subject his employer to liability for all results of the COVID vaccines it administers, that would be a pretty good reason for the employer to threaten the doctor with loss of job or worse. And that in turn would certainly influence the Doctor. Anyway I could be dreaming about this - it is tough to get old and start losing your memory. I'm going to have to try to find this info.
It appears that the Prep Act had been amended such that private hospitals and entities were covered in their actions taken with c19 patients and relieved of all liability as long as they were prescribing 'Covered Countermeasures'. ie. NIH approved medications. This may be why hospitals are refusing to use effective COVID treatments like vitamin D, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, etc.
"The Secretary amends Section VI to make explicit that Section VI covers all qualified pandemic and epidemic products under the PREP Act.
Section VII. Limitations on Distribution
The Secretary may specify that liability protections are in effect only for Covered Countermeasures obtained through a particular means of distribution. The Declaration previously stated that liability immunity is afforded to Covered Persons only for Recommended Activities related to (a) present or future federal contracts, cooperative agreements, grants, other transactions, interagency agreements, or memoranda of understanding or other federal agreements; or (b) activities authorized in accordance with the public health and medical response of the Authority Having Jurisdiction to prescribe, administer, deliver, distribute, or dispense the Covered Countermeasures following a declaration of an emergency.
COVID-19 is an unprecedented global challenge that requires a whole-of-nation response that utilizes federal-, state-, and local- distribution channels as well as private-distribution channels. Given the broad scale of this pandemic, the Secretary amends the Declaration to extend PREP Act coverage to additional private-distribution channels, as set forth below.
The amended Section VII adds that PREP Act liability protections also extend to Covered Persons for Recommended Activities that are related to any Covered Countermeasure that is:
licensed, approved, cleared, or authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (or that is permitted to be used under an Investigational New Drug Application or an Investigational Device Exemption) under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act or Public Health Service (PHS) Act to treat, diagnose, cure, prevent, mitigate or limit the harm from COVID–19, or the transmission of SARS–CoV–2 or a virus mutating therefrom;"
There you have it. Follow our rules and keep full immunity plus get paid bonuses. Ignore at your on peril.
"Pressure mounts to suppress prescriptions while recently an association of powerful medical boards, that is the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), declared that any physician that these boards deems to be spreading “misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine” can be penalized with either a suspension or revocation of their medical license. Now the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM), the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) and the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) formally support FSMB’s stance in a show of unity. In a recent press release, the tripartite communication to those doctors they oversee is clear: share information with a patient deemed to be “misinformation” and risk your license to practice medicine. Or, put another way, you can only talk about the vaccine in the way agreed upon by the current consensus of interests, e.g., federal health agencies and regulators, POTUS, industry and select ac.."
Definitely. I've read about the FSMB a bit. I suspect heavy political activism involved in leadership, with hope of plum appointments in Federal bureaucracy or state bureaucracy.
Also, "the feds" must refer to specific agencies and people within those agencies. Both the agencies and the agency heads are getting their marching orders from others. IMO, anyway, this is too big and too legally questionable for faceless bureaucrats to decide on their own. Also, it requires synchronization among agencies. There's a bigger story here.
"Who pressured these medical centers into doing this? The pressure is coming from somewhere, and it has to be significant pressure. I can’t imagine any medical center terminating 350 difficult-to-impossible to replace employees without very real pressure and without first seeking legal advice."
The AMA is the organization pressuring the hospitals. I read this several days ago, but I can't think of where I read it.
No doubt. But, then, who's pressuring the AMA. Legally this makes no sense at all, so someone is telling them they're be covered. But I don't think that's going to work in the long run because they're losing control of the narrative,.
OT: Thank you for moving to Substack, Mark. For some reason, Blogger would not allow me to comment. I used to post under "Anne Sherman" on the old site. Glad to rejoin the mih community!
Mark, here may be part of the answer, at least, for your question as referenced by Anne K below:
https://reason.com/volokh/2021/09/12/can-the-federal-government-require-vaccination-of-health-care-workers/
It appears the feds are requiring all Medicare and Medicaid providers to have their staffs fully vaccinated. That would be a pretty strong incentive for the hospitals and clinics to require vaccination - especially if they have known this was coming down the pike prior to the great dictator's announcement.
Worth noting, the folks at Volokh have been pretty good for years, e.g. on Horowitz vs. Comey.
Funny, I actually knew Eugene's dad Vladimir V. He was way ahead of the game (mid 80's) in security software with those annoying questions like what's the middle name of your aunt's brother. Vesoft. Here's a funny story, VV had just gotten his US driver's license and I was riding with him to a customer and every time he stopped at a stop sign, he would blow the horn. I asked him why was he doing that? He replied that's what he was taught in the class and being from USSR, you don't disobey the rules.
Right. But why haven't the hospital associations challenged this in court? It's not like they don't have the money. Here are some questions Malone asks today:
<i>"Why is the USA requiring vaccination for all with an outdated vax, when many have already been infected, recovered, developed natural immunity?". Stop. Think. Why the censorship? Why the mandates? Why the constant propaganda push?
Why has virtually every single medical professional organization in the USA come out against early outpatient treatment of COVID-19? Particularly when "rogue" physicians who practice early treatment have outstanding results?
Why did you see an enormous synchronized push by media and government to label Ivermectin as an unsafe horse medicine when both assertions are clearly false? And why did so many buy into that media theme (meme)?</i>
There must be more than a stick. There must be humongous carrot.
Could well be. I do wonder, however, about most doctors' seeming fear of even acknowledging early IVM, HCQ, or other treatment options much less prescribing them. Somewhere I think I read about the PREP act liability waivers , and how if hospitals or doctors deviate from that act's "covered countermeasures" they waive their liability for COVID treatment entirely. So if a doctor were to subject his employer to liability for all results of the COVID vaccines it administers, that would be a pretty good reason for the employer to threaten the doctor with loss of job or worse. And that in turn would certainly influence the Doctor. Anyway I could be dreaming about this - it is tough to get old and start losing your memory. I'm going to have to try to find this info.
Here's the Prep act info.
http://www.kathydopp.info/COVIDinfo/Vaccines/HealthAgencyPharmaCorruption
It appears that the Prep Act had been amended such that private hospitals and entities were covered in their actions taken with c19 patients and relieved of all liability as long as they were prescribing 'Covered Countermeasures'. ie. NIH approved medications. This may be why hospitals are refusing to use effective COVID treatments like vitamin D, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, etc.
https://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/legal/prepact/Pages/4-PREP-Act.aspx
Section VI. Covered Countermeasures
"The Secretary amends Section VI to make explicit that Section VI covers all qualified pandemic and epidemic products under the PREP Act.
Section VII. Limitations on Distribution
The Secretary may specify that liability protections are in effect only for Covered Countermeasures obtained through a particular means of distribution. The Declaration previously stated that liability immunity is afforded to Covered Persons only for Recommended Activities related to (a) present or future federal contracts, cooperative agreements, grants, other transactions, interagency agreements, or memoranda of understanding or other federal agreements; or (b) activities authorized in accordance with the public health and medical response of the Authority Having Jurisdiction to prescribe, administer, deliver, distribute, or dispense the Covered Countermeasures following a declaration of an emergency.
COVID-19 is an unprecedented global challenge that requires a whole-of-nation response that utilizes federal-, state-, and local- distribution channels as well as private-distribution channels. Given the broad scale of this pandemic, the Secretary amends the Declaration to extend PREP Act coverage to additional private-distribution channels, as set forth below.
The amended Section VII adds that PREP Act liability protections also extend to Covered Persons for Recommended Activities that are related to any Covered Countermeasure that is:
licensed, approved, cleared, or authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (or that is permitted to be used under an Investigational New Drug Application or an Investigational Device Exemption) under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act or Public Health Service (PHS) Act to treat, diagnose, cure, prevent, mitigate or limit the harm from COVID–19, or the transmission of SARS–CoV–2 or a virus mutating therefrom;"
There you have it. Follow our rules and keep full immunity plus get paid bonuses. Ignore at your on peril.
BTW, the paper by docs4covidethics was terrific.
Thanks very much, MikeyinFL! I appreciate the information as well as knowing I didn't dream this up :)
I knew I had it, but had to sift through what seems like hundreds of links I saved under the category "Covid".
I hear ya.
This is probably part of it. H/T Doc Malone.
https://trialsitenews.com/prominent-medical-boards-message-to-physicians-keep-quiet-on-covid-19-vaccine-or-risk-loss-of-licensure-economic-livelihood/
"Pressure mounts to suppress prescriptions while recently an association of powerful medical boards, that is the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), declared that any physician that these boards deems to be spreading “misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine” can be penalized with either a suspension or revocation of their medical license. Now the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM), the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) and the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) formally support FSMB’s stance in a show of unity. In a recent press release, the tripartite communication to those doctors they oversee is clear: share information with a patient deemed to be “misinformation” and risk your license to practice medicine. Or, put another way, you can only talk about the vaccine in the way agreed upon by the current consensus of interests, e.g., federal health agencies and regulators, POTUS, industry and select ac.."
Definitely. I've read about the FSMB a bit. I suspect heavy political activism involved in leadership, with hope of plum appointments in Federal bureaucracy or state bureaucracy.
Also, "the feds" must refer to specific agencies and people within those agencies. Both the agencies and the agency heads are getting their marching orders from others. IMO, anyway, this is too big and too legally questionable for faceless bureaucrats to decide on their own. Also, it requires synchronization among agencies. There's a bigger story here.
Indeed. We do not have all the pieces.
"Who pressured these medical centers into doing this? The pressure is coming from somewhere, and it has to be significant pressure. I can’t imagine any medical center terminating 350 difficult-to-impossible to replace employees without very real pressure and without first seeking legal advice."
The AMA is the organization pressuring the hospitals. I read this several days ago, but I can't think of where I read it.
No doubt. But, then, who's pressuring the AMA. Legally this makes no sense at all, so someone is telling them they're be covered. But I don't think that's going to work in the long run because they're losing control of the narrative,.
CDC, NIH, HHS Secretary or all of the above at the behest of The Big Guy/his handlers/Obama?
OT: Thank you for moving to Substack, Mark. For some reason, Blogger would not allow me to comment. I used to post under "Anne Sherman" on the old site. Glad to rejoin the mih community!
From Dennnger today, at https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=3705489 :
"You won't be able to see or read /NAD if you're not signed on, effective some time this coming week."
This, after Twatter suspended him for a week, for writing "Get nuked, *******." to the ChiComs, about their threats vs. Taiwan.