Desperate Greek citizens are ‘intentionally infecting themselves with HIV’ to qualify for state benefits

December 24, 2013
Desperate Greek citizens are intentionally infecting themselves with the HIV, in a bid to qualify for benefits which are given to sufferers of the killer virus, a report has claimed.
A World Health Organization report has revealed what it calls a ‘significant rise’ in the number of sufferers between 2007 and 2009, when the European financial crisis brought the country’s economy to its knees.
The number of reported new infections then continued to soar, from 22 in 2010 to 245 in 2011, according to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.
Shockingly, the research said around half of new cases could be self-inflicted by drug addicts who want to cash in on welfare handouts.
In Greece, HIV carriers are entitled to a state benefit of 700 Euros per month as well as access to drug substitution programmes which can help battle the illness.
A European Union-funded injection site, the first of its kind in Greece, has also been opened in a run-down part of central Athens in October this year.
Addicts are paid small sums of money for visiting the facility and providing data for anonymous surveys, as well as returning to pick up their HIV test results.
The WHO report cited a piece of work by the country’s Mental Health Research Institute in 2011 which noted ‘the well-founded suspicion’ that some problem drug users ‘are intentionally infected with HIV, because of the benefit that are entitled to approximately 1,400 euros every two months.’
The claims show the shocking effect of the Greek fiscal meltdown which is filtering down from big business and banks to ordinary citizens
Austerity measures imposed by the Greece since their economic crisis have caused disturbances in country. But drug experts have urged the government not to impose cuts on drugs benefits, saying removing support networks could make matters worse
Thomas Kattau, a Council of Europe official said: ‘There are alarming figures in Greece. So I think it’s very important that vulnerable people are targeted for treatment.’
Kattau said program like the injection-zone had been regarded as successful in Germany, the Netherlands and other European countries, as well as Canada.
He added: ‘The experience in those countries shows they don’t use to the money to buy drugs, but things like hygiene products. So it puts them on a road to recovery.
‘In the end the goal is to stop the spread of HIV-Aids. Every euro invested into drug treatment is an investment to public health and public safety.

Arrest for “HIPAA Violation” Based on Citizen’s Recording of Encounter Between Police and Another Citizen

January 10, 2013

That’s what the St. Paul Pioneer Press reports:

Andrew Henderson watched as Ramsey County sheriff’s deputies frisked a bloody-faced man outside his Little Canada apartment building. Paramedics then loaded the man, a stranger to Henderson, into an ambulance.
Henderson, 28, took out his small handheld video camera and began recording…. [A] deputy, Jacqueline Muellner, approached him and snatched the camera from his hand, Henderson said. “We’ll just take this for evidence,” Muellner said. Their voices were recorded on Henderson’s cellphone as they spoke, and Henderson provided a copy of the audio file to the Pioneer Press. “If I end up on YouTube, I’m gonna be upset.” …
Randy Gustafson, spokesman for the Ramsey County sheriff’s office … said, “It is not our policy to take video cameras. It is everybody’s right to (record) … What happens out in public happens out in public.”
One exception might be when a law enforcement officer decides that the recording is needed for evidence, he said. In that case, the officer would generally send the file to investigators and return the camera on the spot, Gustafson said….
A week later, Henderson was charged with obstruction of legal process and disorderly conduct, both misdemeanors. He had been filming from about 30 feet away, he said….
The deputy wrote on the citation, “While handling a medical/check the welfare (call), (Henderson) was filming it. Data privacy HIPAA violation. Refused to identify self. Had to stop dealing with sit(uation) to deal w/Henderson.” …
The allegation that his recording of the incident violated HIPAA, or the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, is nonsense, said Jennifer Granick, a specialist on privacy issues at Stanford University Law School.
The rule deals with how health care providers handle consumers’ health information.
“There’s nothing in HIPAA that prevents someone who’s not subject to HIPAA from taking photographs on the public streets,” Granick said. “HIPAA has absolutely nothing to say about that.”

When Henderson tried to get back the camera, another deputy refused to release it, and said (Henderson also recorded this), “I think that what (the deputies) felt was you were interfering with someone’s privacy that was having a medical mental health breakdown. They felt like you were being a ‘buttinski’ by getting that camera in there and partially recording what was going on in a situation that you were not directly involved in.” Somehow the recording on the camera also vanished, though there’s a dispute over how that happened.
It seems to me that there’s no legal basis for this prosecution, or for the seizure of the camera — Minnesota apparently doesn’t have any ban on such recordings, and in any event it seems likely that there’s a First Amendment right to record such police-citizen interactions in public places. (See Glik v. Cunniffe and ACLU v. Alvarez for cases recognizing such a right, in closely related contexts.) Nor can the police step in and punish the photographers in the name of protecting people’s privacy, just as the government may not stop TV stations from recording news footage in public place in the name of protecting people’s privacy.
Thanks to Christopher Rohrbacher for the pointer.


renowned socialist & opponent of private health care Gerry Adams flies to USA for operation in top private clinic.

January 8, 2013
Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams has been accused of being “incredibly hypocritical” for choosing private medical care in the US, despite criticising private healthcare in the Republic and Northern Ireland.

72 year old Man dies after doc takes lunch break during kidney op // Swedish Socialist Medicine: What Obama wants for us

September 6, 2012

  Swede

I’m thankful that my father who voted for Obama and has said at times that there is nothing wrong with Socialism, also lives in America. The problem is that he is a very knowledgeable teacher, but his knowledge is limited to things he knows about and he is arrogant. He thinks he understands economics. He doesn’t. I can’t find work with Obama in office and he attacks me for it. He blames the Republicans. I kept on telling him not to drive. He took it as a personal attack. My mother told him not to drive. He took that as a personal attack. Then one day he rented FIAT (a company allowed to buy Chrystler by the Obama admin) and it’s modern dashboard and he got into a terrible auto accident. He thinks the accident could of happened to anyone, but like usual he just doesn’t want to admit that his knowledge is limited to Shakespeare and Theatre. Sometimes very smart people… like say the Linguist Noam Chomsky for example, Think their expertise gives them wisdom beyond their knowledge. The doctor who operated on my father said he was difficult. I’m not surprised. I love my father, but when it comes to economics, jobs and being a doctor… he doesn’t know a thing. Thank G-d they put him to sleep in America and not in Sweden where he thinks he’d get taken care of better.

(news@thelocal.se)(thelocal.se )(h/t @CapFlowWatch) A 72-year-old man having a tumour removed from his kidney died after the chief anesthetist and nurse took a lunch break in the middle of the surgery. The incident, which took place at the Lidköping hospital, has prompted stinging criticism from Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen).
The 72-year-old went under anesthetic at 10.45am on the day of the operation, which took place in January 2011.
At noon sharp, the head anesthetist left the operating room to go for lunch. Fifteen minutes later, the head nurse anesthetist also left the patient and went for lunch.
No other anesthetist was called in to take over responsibility for the doctor who was on his lunch break.
And while another nurse was brought in to cover for the nurse anesthetist, the nurse who arrived came from the orthopedic ward and wasn’t familiar with the respirator to which the 72-year-old was attached.
Suddenly, the patient started hemorrhaging and his blood pressure started to drop, sparking a “chaotic” situation.
As the patient’s condition became critical shortly before 1pm, the substitute nurse tried desperately to reach the lunching anesthetist, but to no avail.
When the doctor and the primary nurse anesthetist returned to the operating room, they discovered that the patient’s respirator had been turned off, leaving him without oxygen for approximately eight minutes.
Despite immediately starting resuscitation efforts, doctors were unable to revive the man, who had suffered irreparable brain damage and died several weeks later.
The man’s daughter subsequently reported the incident to the health board, which on Tuesday issued a harsh critique of the hospital’s procedures.
“The operational planning, which allowed for the responsible doctor and nurse to take lunch breaks at the same time without any other doctor taking responsibility for the patient, entails taking an unacceptable risk,” the agency wrote in its findings.
The agency also found fault with the fact that the doctor wasn’t reachable by phone, as well as with the decision to hand responsibility for a high-risk patient with a single nurse who lacked sufficient knowledge of the equipment in use during the operation.
“The National Board of Health and Welfare finds, however, that the operation’s lack of organization as well as the chaotic situation which occurred was the underlying causes behind the misjudgments and insufficient care,” the agency wrote.


Illegal immigrants in Spain to lose right to government-subsidized public healthcare

September 3, 2012
(Eye) No freebies for illegals.

(Guardian) About 150,000 immigrants living in Spain will lose their right to public health services on Saturday as the recession-hit country tries to save money. But doctors warn that excluding immigrants from the health system will have a wider impact on ordinary Spaniards’ health.
The move by Mariano Rajoy’s conservative People’s party government has provoked anger among doctors and some regional governments that deliver public health to Spaniards.
Amnesty International and other NGOs have accused the government of breaking international agreements by excluding a significant section of the population – immigrants without proper residence permits – from public healthcare.
More…

go figure


Here’s The Clearest Proof Yet That Young People Are Getting Screwed In This Economy

May 14, 2012
Media_httpstatic6busi_dnjok
…Only those Age 65 or older
did not see decreases in the percentage share of employed in the change
from November 2006 to November 2011,
which is interesting because that age cohort mainly covers the so-called “Silent Generation” –
the generation that immediately preceded the Baby Boomers.
chart
…Second chart shows the difference between

November 2006 and
November 2011’s
employment to population ratio
for each age grouping:

(Business Insider) The next most affected in the U.S. job market are those between Age 30 and Age 55, which includes roughly half of the Baby Boom generation. These individuals have primarily been hurt by the loss of jobs during the recession, with many of these jobs being lost from the Manufacturing and Trade and Transportation sectors of the U.S. economy during the large-scale automotive industry failures of late 2008 and early 2009. But the age groups that have been the least affected are those over the age of 55. Here, the older half of the Baby Boom generation has seen little impact on their overall employment representation within their generation, while the older Silent Generation, which includes those over Age 65 in 2011, has actually seen their percentage of employed members in the U.S. workforce increase. Clearly, something has caused employers to strongly favor these individuals over all younger individuals in the five years from November 2006 to November 2011… When that kind of distortion exists, you can almost bank money that a perverse incentive for employers is at work – one where there are real world rewards and penalties driving the decisions for a very large number of employers. And because it would seem that a very large number of employers would appear to have acted the same way, you can almost be certain that the federal government is ultimately behind the observed distortion, which in this case, would seem to involve some very pronounced age discrimination… We find then that the young are indeed being discriminated against in the U.S. job market and that the federal government is indeed behind the perverse incentives promoting this kind of age discrimination, as the members of the Silent Generation and the older Baby Boomers are indeed being strongly favored by U.S. employers, most likely because of the economic distortions it is creating within the U.S. job market through its Medicare health insurance program. The only problem for the younger workers being hurt in this situation is that because it is the federal government that has created the incentive to discriminate against them, only it can act to end the bias that it has succeeded in institutionalizing. Unfortunately for us all, the leaders of that government currently have no intention of ending this kind of age-based job discrimination anytime soon! (MORE)

…Of course the LIBERAL response will be Universal Healthcare, but socialism suffers from prejudices against the young who would be perceived as less worthy… not to mention there would be poor quality healthcare to begin with. The only fair system would be to deny free healthcare to everyone and let a competitive market keep rates down.


CBO report says Obamacare to cost $1.76 trillion over 10 years, not $940 billion

March 14, 2012

(EYE)(Hypnogoria: HYPNOBOBS 57 – Twice The Price!)

The bill would not have passed if the numbers were not juggled to keep it under the trillion mark. It’s fraud. Blatant deception on the cost in order to get the votes.
They also just disclosed that at least 6 million people will lose their employer provided health coverage… and not the “1 million” claimed when all this was in the works.
But that’s not important. Rush Limbaugh called some woman a slut.

(Washington Examiner) President Obama’s national health care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released today by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.
Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation, the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014, so it would appear cheaper under the CBO’s standard ten-year budget window and, at least on paper, meet Obama’s pledge that the legislation would cost “around $900 billion over 10 years.” When the final CBO score came out before passage, critics noted that the true 10 year cost would be far higher than advertised once projections accounted for full implementation.
Today, the CBO released new projections from 2013 extending through 2022, and the results are as critics expected: the ten-year cost of the law’s core provisions to expand health insurance coverage has now ballooned to $1.76 trillion. That’s because we now have estimates for Obamacare’s first nine years of full implementation, rather than the mere six when it was signed into law. Only next year will we get a true ten-year cost estimate, if the law isn’t overturned by the Supreme Court or repealed by then. Given that in 2022, the last year available, the gross cost of the coverage expansions are $265 billion, we’re likely looking at about $2 trillion over the first decade, or more than double what Obama advertised.

that’s twice the price and one tenth of the operating budget of our government