U.S. Govt angry re inexpensive over the net   pharmaceuticals & informative human biology websites; that do not support "organized, licensed limited, access restricted, price fixed, healthcare in america". Those in control of the FDA, lobby supported congressmen, and  other freedom thiefs, are worried, citizen access will point to licensed medicine as lacking the ability to incorporate developing science in treatment of sick,  because allowing scientist to work on humans will diminish the money, power and control enjoyed for so long by members of organized medicine.  They must therefore control the media, the educational systems, the research funding, and the internet least freedom shall prevail and their pocket books shall diminish.

Human biology, not medicine or health care, is the root domain.  Organized medicine has wrongly, but until now, successfully defined, both "medicine" and "healthcare"as if they were root domains. This wrong has served them well, since it has prevented practioners of  science from  providing science to patients of medicine.  Organized medicine, like any mafia, has divided its profits by speciality (territory) among those it has approved for licensing and the states, like the soldiers of the mafia, have each been persuaded to enforce the territorial division of profits between the various members and elements of organized medicine?

For example, explain why killing tumors does not stop the growth of cancers within the individual!  40 years of gov   "tumor killing" research funding has denied sick people access to real science.  Cancer has a cause, and before it can be eradicated, its cause will need to be discovered.  Discovery is a business of science, not a profit center for medicine? 

The government premise that practitioners, equipment or chemicals used in human biology (or its very tiny subfield: medicine) are dangerous until proven safe is self serving.   That premise may have limited sick people's access to scientists, chemicals and machines that might have, saved their lives.  In all events, the hideous government "don't use until proven safe" premise has priced 44 million out of healthcare.  

Could real scientists have solved the problem of cancer had they been properly funded?  Did the universities succumb to the funding carrots, granting degrees for money, instead of concentrating brain power on basic research?   Did lobbies sway government to intentionally avoid finding a cure for cancer?   Why are things discovered or developed by government grant money allowed to be patented, things like life itself ?   Why only university graduates allowed to work on (treat, diagnose, study) humans?   Medicine is a very small part of human biology, but has by law, almost exclusive access to the cancer problem!  If you have cancer, you ask you physician to tell you what caused it "exactly" or for that matter, how he/she can cure it, or prevent its reoccurrence, in you.  Get a guarantee!  Don't accept ifs and maybes..its your life

Government has succeeded in limiting citizen access to human biology by calling it "medicine" and by placing many, many toll gates to limit those who wish to access it.  Already, 44,000,000 million are without medical insurance for lack of funds, and the requirements to get a license to provide a human biology service has been limited to "approved and licensed medicines", "approved and licensed practitioners", and "approved and licensed equipment", approved and licenced univeristy training" in ways that have made the costs go very high.  In unregulated industries, such as the computer, the costs have gone down and the technology has gotten progressively better.  Don't we need to deregulate human biology (even its tiny subpart: medicine)...but the big businesses that constitute "organized medicine" need governments in order for them to stay rich. 

Government, its attendant legislative lobbies, and its imposition of highly distributed regulatory agencys, each separately serving its "friends of governments(fogs): contributors to politicians, regulators themselves, provider corporations and practioners of the regulated professions"is an essential element of keeping poor people poor and rich people rich.   Government is good to its friends because it provides for them safe harbors from legal liabilities. "Fogs" are automatically the player called"the house" in the now popular regulatory game known as " Regulated Access (RA)".  To support the objective of regulating access, one needs  control over all players; those on both sides of the system (house vs. public).   The rule for regulating access  is to license the insiders and to charge the outsiders.   Hence,  practioners, providers, insurers, are each licenced by one or more government sponcered regulatory agencies, while all others players (patients) are made to pay for any access to the health care system. 

To play the game the house is pitted against the private citizen (patient).   Both sides start out with little money, but their is only one player who is the house and many players who are the patients.   The game is over when all of the non house players are either dead or broke.  If the house goes broke the government will antiup more money.  The game opens by licensing a credentialed practioner or a provider corporation to place a toll gate between the patient and to limit that patient's access to the services available in the system.  The toll gate keeper then surveys the relative ability of the person who requests access to the system (runs a credit check and determines the adequacy of insurance) and charges that player for his/her access to that part of the health care system for which the house member is eligible (licensed).  

Institutional training and exclusive 'graduate only licensing" has failed {40 years and no answers, not even a clue about what causes cancers}.  The MD training itself causes one mindedness, directs attentions, separates disciplines, encourages bureaucratism, and discriminates against free thinkers?  

Allow anyone to treat a patient?    No, first make them pass a standardized national examination, but not get a particular degree, just to take the test!   Who cares how or why they learned it?  Use unproven equipment or unproven drugs, yes, because the liability falls on the manufacturer unless a government protects that manufacturer from liability by issuing a license or a permit to manufactuer it?   That is one reason why "organized medicine" wants the government to approve things: it limits their liabilities and it that otherwise might be to limit competition.  

Is there a better way?  We think so, the medical equipment or pharmaceutical manufacturer files a notice with the government.  That notice is basically a notice to the government  of an intent to offer for sale a new chemical for a medical purpose or a new piece of equipment for a medical (human biology) use.   The government assigns to it a new product number and opens an website which tells everyone about the new product.   Each user of the new product must file an adverse report to the government and the government keeps up with the problems and notifies everyone if a problem surfaces which may affect persons using the technology.  IF no problem develop, the new technology is approved with researvation, if problems develop the new technology is approved with reservation, and the provider of the technology must therefore announce on the label  the  problems that have been reproted.

Use a chemical before clinical trials, why certainly, what do you think a clinical trial is?   With today's computers, if all persons who use chemicals or biological equipment were required to report a problem via internet or through the local drug store, then clinical trials would be cheap, fast and efficient and the manufacturer of a dangerous or non-performing drug/equipment would only have to pay the injured patient what it would have costs them anyway to do the clinical trial in the first place.   This would also cause most manufactures of chemicals/equipment to be very careful about selling them.

Its time for real scientists, to be allowed and funded, to solve the cancer problem, to bring the cost of medicine down and to increase citizen access to modern science.  That means scientists, not degreed bureaucrats (Ph.D., MD, RN, etc.) or clinicians but everyday people, working from home, small business based laboratories and internet linked.  Cut the bureaucratic silliness and let's make progress.  Access to "human bio-science" should be a human right, not a rich-kid privilege!  

Bureaucracy, as a form of government, has proven to be unconstitutional.  It serves to carve up our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms into slices of profit,  and in true feudal style,  bestows "bits of profit" lordships" on selected individuals, creating for them, from the rest of us, an unlimited pool of serfs.  Bureaucracy, is not representative government by the people, for the people!   In fact, bureaucracy is the enemy of freedom, because it is the army of the rich and powerful.   Bureaucracy, regulated access, licensure, degrees, secrets in the name of privacy and lobbied legislation are life threatening diseases to a patient in our current health care system. 

Lobbied Legislation is not the same as an unbiased vote of Elected Representives! Bureaucrats are not elected officials, they are the guestapo!  Universities and their degrees are gateways to piece of profit licensure, but not to freedom, fairness, or the intent of the constitution!