SHOCK: Top House Democrat Says the Quiet Part Out Loud on Govt Shutdown: Families will “Suffer” But “It is One of the Few Leverage Times We Have”

Today is day 22 of the Schumer Shutdown.

The Schumer Shutdown began on October 1, and the Senate has voted 12 times – and failed 12 times – to reopen the government because Schumer wants to give illegal aliens healthcare.

Instead of working with Republicans to responsibly extend funding until November, Schumer and the Democrats chose a shutdown.

The House has been out of session for a month.

Layoffs of federal employees officially began a couple of weeks ago as the U.S. government shutdown entered another tense phase, according to Trump administration budget chief Russell Vought, who confirmed the sweeping reductions in a social media post.

President Trump on Tuesday held the line and said Republicans will not be “extorted” as the Democrats demand taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal aliens.

House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (MA) said the quiet part out loud on the Schumer Shutdown during an interview with Fox News Congress reporter Chad Pergram.

The interview with Katherine Clark was published by Fox News last week but it was making the rounds on Wednesday.

“Fighting for healthcare is our defining issue,” Clark said.

“The marketplace, the ACA marketplace, open enrollment takes place on Nov. 1,” Clark whined.

“People are receiving their premium notices that they’re going to go to that marketplace and say, ‘I can’t afford this.’ That is a real crisis for American families. And it drives up the cost of healthcare for every single person, no matter where you get your health insurance from,” she said.

Then Clark said the quiet part out loud.

“Shutdowns are terrible and, of course, there will be, you know, families that are going to suffer,” she said.

“We take that responsibility very seriously. But it is one of the few leverage items we have. It is an inflection point in this budget process where we have tried to get the Republicans to meet with us and prioritize the American people,” Clark said.

Keep reading

Scotland is getting sicker under the SNP as HALF of population now suffers from long term health problems

Scotland is getting sicker under the SNP as HALF of population now suffers from long term health problems

The Scottish Health Survey found a staggering 50 per cent of people reported a long-term condition last year, the highest since comparable studies began in 2003, when it was 41 per cent.

The prevalence of doctor-diagnosed diabetes also doubled over the same period.

Around 1 in 13 Scots now have the life-limiting condition.

A fifth of adults have ‘harmful’ alcohol intakes, and almost as many (18 per cent) have been diagnosed with asthma, up from 13 per cent in 2003 and another unwelcome record.

The Scottish Tories said the worsening picture threatened to ‘overwhelm’ an already over-stretched NHS.

Conservative health spokesman Dr Sandesh Gulhane said: ‘Scotland is getting sicker under the SNP.

‘Their failure to support our NHS and invest in preventative health means that Scots are the unhealthiest they’ve been since 2008.

‘On their watch, mental health issues are on the rise, harmful alcohol consumption remains dangerously high and the number of children at risk of obesity is at record levels.

‘This rising tide of poor health threatens to overwhelm our already overstretched NHS and cost taxpayers’ a fortune in the process.

‘SNP ministers need to act now to tackle this crisis by boosting GP numbers, focus on improving mental wellbeing, prioritising preventative health and cutting waste to ensure that Scots can access the healthcare they need.’

Published by the Scottish Government, the annual survey defines a long-term condition as ‘a physical or mental health condition or illness lasting or expected to last 12 months or more’.

Around four in five (81 per cent) of those living with a long-term condition say it limits their activities, with most citing problems with mobility (32 per cent), stamina, breathing and fatigue (28) and mental health (26).

The percentage of Scots with diagnosed diabetes has risen from 4 to 8 per cent since 2003, with most people affected by Type 2 diabetes, often associated with an unhealthy lifestyle.

The disease, caused by the body not making enough insulin to regulate blood sugar, can damage the heart, kidneys, eyes and feet if untreated and shorten life expectancy.

Keep reading

CNN’s Tapper: Dems Created Expiration Date for Obamacare Subsidies, Not GOP

On Friday’s broadcast of CNN’s “The Lead,” host Jake Tapper pushed back on Rep. Jamie Raskin’s (D-MD) claim that the expiration of Affordable Care Act subsidies that are at issue in the government shutdown is a Republican policy by noting that the expiration date for the Obamacare subsidies is something Democrats put in place, not the Republicans.

While discussing the expiration of the Affordable Care Act subsidies and the politics of the issue, Raskin said, “I have not heard any Democrats, none have said to me, oh, let’s just allow this terrible Republican policy to go forward so we can beat them on it next year.”

Tapper then said, “Congressman, you called it a terrible Republican policy. Democrats are the ones that put in this end date into these COVID-era Obamacare premium extensions, not Republicans. But, be that as it may, do you have the votes? If Speaker Johnson (R-LA) were to say, okay, fine, we’re going to have a vote on this tomorrow, have you and your Democratic colleagues lobbied five to ten Republicans in the House to support you so that if this were to come up for a vote, it would pass?”

Keep reading

A key psychiatric group censored our doctors for seeking to discuss the harm of child sex changes

You’d think child psychiatrists would want to help troubled children, and you’d be right. But the medical association that represents these doctors is suppressing open discussion of the best care for gender-distressed adolescents.

Respectful discourse among doctors regarding treatment of vulnerable children should trump emotions, personal opinions and politics. 

Yet our foiled attempt to invite physician input on gender interventions suggests that ideology is winning the day.

At first, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry approved a request by our organization, Do No Harm, to run a booth at its annual conference next week. But AACAP last month turned around and revoked that approval.

We simply wanted to give doctors a chance to discuss the dangers of transgender treatments for children, just as we did in May at the American Psychiatric Association conference.

These discussions are important because medical organizations like AACAP continue to trumpet support for gender interventions that mounting evidence shows are potentially harmful.

Meanwhile, the same organizations ignore the increasing number of patients who regret their transitions.

They offer no guidance on how to best treat those seeking to detransition, wean them off hormones or receive hormone replacement for surgically removed sex organs.

In fact, our health-care system treats patients who buck the gender-ideology narrative as nonexistent: The system has no diagnosis codes to allow for tracking and research of this poorly understood population.

They are a lost cohort with medical and psychological needs that have been shunned by the medical establishment.

And now we’ve been shunned too.

Keep reading

15 Democratic Governors Announce Health Alliance to Counter RFK Jr.

The Democratic governors of 14 states and the territory of Guam on Oct. 15 announced a new coalition they said will provide scientific information to counter Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

The Governors Public Health Alliance is aiming to boost coordination between states on public health guidance, preparing for emergencies, and detecting health threats. It plans to issue recommendations to the public on vaccines and other health topics, as the governors say guidance from the federal government can no longer be trusted.  

“We can no longer rely on the information coming out of Washington, DC, but our states are coming together to unequivocally state that science still matters,” Washington state Gov. Bob Ferguson said in a statement.

“While Donald Trump and RFK Jr. turn their backs on public health, governors are stepping up to make sure our residents have the health care they need and deserve,” Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey added.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) criticized the development.

“Democrat-led states that imposed unscientific school closures, toddler mask mandates, and vaccine passports during the COVID era are the ones who destroyed public trust in public health. Now, the same governors who eroded that trust are trying to reinvent public health under the guise of ‘coordination,’” Andrew Nixon, the communications director for the department, told The Epoch Times in an email.

“The Trump Administration and Secretary Kennedy are rebuilding that trust by grounding every policy in rigorous evidence and Gold Standard Science—not the failed politics of the pandemic.”

Among other HHS divisions, Kennedy oversees the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. His moves, including the removal of all members of the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel over conflicts of interest, have drawn criticism from Democrats.

The panel, now comprising experts selected by Kennedy, has advised the CDC to change recommendations for vaccines for COVID-19 and measles. The CDC recentlyaccepted the changes.

Some outside groups and coalitions have issued competing vaccination recommendations, including a western states alliance spearheaded by California. Multiple states have updated rules to let pharmacists prescribe vaccines not recommended by the CDC.

The governors’ coalition will build on those efforts by facilitating meetings with state officials, global health leaders, and other groups, according to GovAct, a nonprofit that describes itself as a nonpartisan initiative formed by governors. Other initiatives from the organization include the Reproductive Freedom Alliance, which is aimed at “protecting and expanding reproductive freedom,” including through expanded access to abortion.

All the governors that are part of the initiatives are Democrats, although GovAct’s advisory board features several former Republican governors, including former Montana Gov. Marc Racicot.

The governors in the public health alliance represent California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington state. Guam’s governor is also part of the group.

The alliance’s advisers include Dr. Mandy Cohen, who served as director of the CDC under President Joe Biden; Dr. Anne Zink, Alaska’s top medical officer from 2018 to 2024; and Dr. Raj Panjabi, a White House official during the Biden administration.

Keep reading

Public Health Destroyed Its Own Credibility Long Before RFK Jr. Arrived

“The actions of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are endangering the health of the nation,” declared six former U.S. surgeons general appointed by every Republican and Democratic president since George H.W. Bush in a Oct. 7 op-ed at The Washington Post. “The profound, immediate and unprecedented threat that Kennedy’s policies and positions pose to the nation’s health cannot be ignored,” the surgeons general declared. Whatever the merits of such criticisms of RFK, its alarmism is undermined by decades of the medical establishment wantonly kowtowing to harmful policies promoted by leftist ideologues.

It would be easier to countenance such admonitions if this isn’t precisely what the American medicine and scientific establishment has done when it comes to abortion, transgenderism, or the Covid pandemic.

The Conceit of Abortion as ‘Good Medical Practice

Though the American medical establishment was historically opposed to abortion, in 1970, the American Medical Association formally reversed its earlier position on abortion and voted in favor of legal abortion. Was this because of overwhelming evidence overturning scientific consensus regarding life in the womb being uniquely human, or analysis that abortions would not result in negative consequences for the women who underwent the procedures? Of course not.

Both simple logic and developments in scientific research are sufficient to know that life in the womb is human — with heartbeats beginning at the end of the fourth week of gestation — and thus deserving of legal protection. Arms, hands, fingers, feet, and toes are fully formed by week ten. And can we really believe that the medical establishment would think that a violent, invasive procedure that destroys a living organism inside a woman’s body, that her body is intimately united to and shares her DNA, would not in some sense harm that mother?

No, the medical establishment changed its position on abortion because of rising public pressure and social norms stemming from the sexual revolution. The feminist movement for female equality and empowerment demanded that women have more control over their bodies, enabling them to assume (and maintain) a competitive place in the workplace and attain more power in sexual relationships. Babies were (and remain) an obstacle to professional and personal development. Thus, suddenly, the AMA decided that “reproductive care is health care.”

This, despite the fact that a bevy of peer-reviewed quantitative analysis demonstrates that post-abortive women had an 81 percent higher risk of mental-health problems when compared with women who had not had an abortion, as authors Ryan T. Anderson and Alexandra DeSanctis have noted. Studies show that after an abortion, women suffer higher rates of anxiety disorders, alcohol abuse and suicidal behaviors, and marijuana abuse. And, obviously, abortions are catastrophic for the health and well-being of life in the womb. Nevertheless, the AMA to this day decrees that abortion is “good medical practice.”

Keep reading

The Death of Informed Consent

Through an open-records request, The New American has obtained documents that shed fresh light on the gravity of the decision in a landmark medical malpractice case — the only wrongful death jury trial in the country for a death officially declared to be caused by Covid. The decision in favor of the defense, handed down in June, should serve as a warning to us all.

Readers of The New American are already familiar with the story of Grace Schara, a Wisconsin teen with Down syndrome who lost her life in a Covid hospital in October, 2021. (Those new to the story can read about it here and can also access recordings of our livestream of the proceedings here.)

In short, the plaintiffs alleged that Grace died from intentional overdoses of sedative, benzodiazepine, and opioid medications, while the defense insisted that a SARS-CoV-2 infection ended her life.

Just days after the lawsuit ended, The New American interviewed Scott Schara, Grace’s dad, who said the outcome proves that informed consent, enshrined in the Nuremberg Code of 1947, is finished.

“Just by being in a hospital, you are giving implied consent,” he warned of the precedent this case sets. He said that the defense claimed, and the jury endorsed the idea, that the drugs in question were normal in an ICU, so no informed consent was necessary, nor did providers need bother to inform the family when Grace survived two drug overdoses early during her hospital stay. He also pointed out that the jury upheld defense witnesses who claimed that a “Do Not Intubate” order (DNI) is equivalent to a “Do Not Resuscitate” order (DNR), and that a doctor may unilaterally place either on a patient, also without informed consent.

Prior Complaints

However, before suing, Scott Schara filed a complaint with Wisconsin’s Department of Safety and Professional Services (DSPS), the state agency which oversees licensed professionals. It accused the physician who took care of Grace during the last two days of her life, Dr. Gavin Shokar, of “label[ing] the patient as DNR and overdos[ing] her on morphine.”

In order to obtain Shokar’s response to these charges, The New American requested the complete file pertaining to Grace’s DSPS case. We received some documents in late August, with only the patient’s name and certain private contact information redacted. However, the file merely included a reference to Scott’s complaint, a case which the agency closed on January 18, 2022 without investigation. We double-checked with DSPS, but the agency said it had nothing to add. (Interestingly, a second, unrelated complaint, filed in May 2023 against Shokar for “negligence/incompetence” and “unprofessional conduct” is listed among the documents received. DSPS reports the case as still open but offers no further details.)

Instead, the remainder of the 170 pages pertains to a complaint filed in July 2023, by Lorna Speid, Ph.D., a clinical pharmacist and president of the California-based drug development consultant, Speid & Associates.

In her initial letter to DSPS, she said she spent “many hours reviewing the medical notes and consulting with other experts in specialized fields” about Grace’s case.

Based on that collaborative analysis, she charged Shokar with “gross incompetence, gross negligence, medical malpractice, dishonesty and deliberate cause of death.” She called his actions deliberate “because the probability that one physician could make all these mistakes and errors, accidentally, is low. All reasonable physicians would know that the actions Dr. Shokar took would lead to the death of the patient.”

She also noted that “the degree and level of cruelty that Ms. [redacted] was subjected to was extraordinary, and repugnant.” According to Speid, part of that cruel treatment involved “recklessly falsif[ying] the medical records to insert a DO NOT RESCUSITATE [DNR] for a vulnerable patient, without the written and unequivocable consent of her parents/guardians,” and refusing to “administer NARCAN to reverse the Morphine overdose.” (Morphine is an opioid that Shokar ordered for Grace, and NARCAN is a brand name for the generic naloxone, an opioid reversal drug.)

Hollee McInnis was the registered nurse charged with Grace’s care on the last two days of the teen’s life, and about whom Speid filed a separate complaint with DSPS. Her report gives a play-by-play timeline of McInnis increasing a continuous infusion of Precedex (a sedative) throughout Grace’s last day on earth; Grace had survived two overdoses of this drug during the same hospital stay. The incidents are clearly documented in her medical record.

On top of that, McInnis piled three doses of the benzodiazepine lorazepam (two of which were given only three minutes apart), though this med is “contraindicated in patients in respiratory distress” (which McInnis recorded as Grace’s condition at the time). She then added a rapid intravenous (IV) push of morphine, which is also warned against for patients having difficulty breathing.

“There is no other explanation for a nurse with 20 years of experience, administering this cocktail of drugs.” Speid explained that it was instead McInnis’ duty to report Shokar for “inappropriate prescribing” and to “refuse to administer the drugs prescribed.”

Unfortunately, the doctor ordered, and the nurse delivered. Grace died a short time later.

Keep reading

What are Umbrella Therapies and Why Do We Never Hear About Them?

Since reality has an almost infinite degree of complexity, any framework we create to define it is doomed to be an oversimplification which excludes critical elements of the picture. However, rather than admit the shortcomings of any given model, that gap in understanding is typically bridged by forcefully asserting the validity of the chosen narrative and selectively focusing on the instances which affirm the validity of the model. Because of this (particularly within politics), you will frequently find a large number of people who are utterly convinced their side is 1000% correct despite another large contingent holding a diametrically opposing view of reality.

Likewise, in medicine, a similar politicization of truth will occur where people will believe their (or their tribe’s) chosen therapy is effective regardless of all evidence to the contrary, and likewise that it is safe regardless of how much evidence exists to the contrary. For example, while going through 54 forgotten news clips, in which, the news media (prior to being bought out by pharmaceutical industry) would routinely report on the dangers of vaccination, I came across this poignant quote from Barbara Loe Fisher:

What’s scientific about that assumption, that every time something bad happens after vaccination it’s a coincidence? That’s not science, that’s politics.

Note: after I originally sent that article out, I unearthed a large number of additional clips not present in the original that were subsequently added in (and you should watch here when you have the time too as they show vaccine injuries are very real and have been with us for decades).

When diagnosing patients, if one’s goal is to get the patient better (rather than just put a diagnostic label on them and the accompanying prescription) a few major challenges emerge:

•First, the same underlying issue can manifest quite differently from patient to patient (e.g., the inflammation and blood clotting created by the COVID vaccines gave rise to dozens of different symptom presentations).

•Second, very similar symptoms can be caused by different agents—particularly those which create systemic inflammation and blood flow obstructions (e.g., Lyme disease and mold toxicity are commonly confused with each other).

•Third, while certain things are more likely to trigger chronic illnesses, less frequent ones can as well (e.g., I’ve seen more cases than I can count where the underlying cause of a patient’s illness was missed by both conventional and integrative practitioners due to a more common cause of that cluster of symptoms being focused on).

•Fourth, the same disease process can interact very differently with different patients (either due to their constitution, co-existing health issues, or what stage of healing they are in), and as a result, the “correct” therapy for a disease may not always be the correct one for them (which amongst other things is why I try to always know multiple ways to treat each ailment I come across).

•Fifth, in many cases, patients respond differently to the same therapies due to their constitution (e.g., sensitive patients cannot handle stronger treatments many others do very well with).

Because of this, patients will frequently see numerous providers without having any significant improvement from any of what they’re told to do, and in many cases, they simply have to hope to have the luck to end up in the office of a doctor who’s preferred treatment modality happens to be what their body needs. However, as that is quite an unsatisfactory situation, it will normally be “addressed” by the treating physician adamantly insisting their diagnosis and treatment is correct, and then when treatment failures inevitably emerge, attributing the failure to the patient—in essence no different from the process we observe throughout the political system.

Keep reading

The Great Alzheimer’s Scam and The Proven Cures They’ve Buried for Billions

• Alzheimer’s disease is commonly thought to result from abnormal plaque buildup in the brain that gradually destroys brain tissue. As a result, almost all Alzheimer’s research has been directed toward eliminating amyloid, even after the basis for much of this work was shown to stem from fraudulent research.

•As such, despite decades of research and billions of dollars spent, this model has completely failed to produce useful results. The costly “groundbreaking” Alzheimer’s drugs only slightly slow dementia progression—at the expense of causing brain bleeding and swelling in over a quarter of those treated.

•In contrast, numerous affordable treatments have been developed for Alzheimer’s disease that target the root causes of the disorder, producing significant benefits at a fraction of the cost and without any toxicity.

•One neurologist, for example, proposed that amyloid serves a protective function in the brain and treats Alzheimer’s by identifying the underlying process causing dementia (which can often be diagnosed through symptoms). Remarkably, despite the method being proven in clinical research, awareness of it or the fact there are completely different types of “Alzheimer’s disease” which require different treatments remains almost nonexistent.

•Likewise, a strong case can be made that impaired cerebral circulation, along with impaired venous and lymphatic drainage, plays a pivotal role in Alzheimer’s disease.

•This article will review the common causes of cognitive impairment and dementia (e.g., cells becoming trapped in a shocked state where they no longer function) along with the forgotten treatments for neurodegenerative disorders—some of which, like DMSO, have extensive evidence supporting their use.

Keep reading

Democrats Are Holding The Government Hostage To Get Taxpayer-Funded Health Care For Illegals

Eight days into the government “shutdown,” Senate Democrats on Wednesday cast their sixth vote to keep the doors closed. They remain hellbent on their ransom demand to add another $1.5 trillion in spending, a big chunk of which would help pay for health insurance for illegal immigrants. They insist that’s not the case. 

They’re lying. And Americans know it. 

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey shows 49 percent of likely U.S. voters agree with White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who said: “Democrats shut down the government to give hundreds of billions of free healthcare to illegal aliens, including the millions of illegal aliens to whom [Joe] Biden [and the] Democrats gave illegal amnesty.” Nearly one-third of respondents (32%) strongly agree with Miller’s assessment. The poll found 44 percent disagree, 38 percent strongly. 

‘Reserved for Eligible Individuals’

Health policy expert Elle Minarik says Miller is “100 percent” correct. The Democrats’ ransom demand, Minarik  says, would repeal the health title of the One Big Beautiful Bill, now known as the Working Families Tax Cut ActSection 71109 of the package, passed earlier this year by the Republican-controlled congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump, ensures that “Medicaid funds are reserved for eligible individuals by ending federal funding when an individual’s citizenship or immigration status has not been verified.”

The Democrat proposal repeals that provision and others in the Big Beautiful Bill, provisions that secure Medicaid for those it was created for — the elderly, disabled, children and other American citizens truly in need. 

“It’s just proof that they do not even know what is in their own bill that they shut down the government over,” Minarik, program manager at Paragon Health Institute, told me Wednesday on the WHO Morning Show with Jeff Angelo in Des Moines. 

It shouldn’t come as a shock that Democrats don’t know or don’t understand what’s in their own spending bill. After all, then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi once said of the behemoth government health care bill known as Obamacare, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” 

Keep reading