-Ongoing refinement and elucidation of this proposal will now proceed as a series of letters to Mr. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Each new letter will post in front of the original proposal for approximately one week, and then be shifted below the original proposal where the letters can be read in temporal sequence. Because of space limitations on this platform, the oldest letters are being removed as new ones are added. The texts of those older letters are available on request by PM through the Peopleâs Mandate facebook Page.
01-24-25 (delayed in posting until 02-05-25 because of the subcommittee confirmation hearings for Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services)
Dear Mr. Kennedy, (and President Trump, I hope? -as I am certain the Peopleâs Mandate will become both your greatest legacy),
This is probably a good point to pause in my discussion of the concerns I have about excess and inappropriate prescription of anti-cancer medications, other treatments, questionable diagnostics, and multiple levels of financial interference with people receiving the best possible medical help. There is a need to state categorically, I am in no way attempting to imply cancer is not a very real, serious, ugly, and often deadly disease, because it absolutely is.
But what has become state-of-the-art and often âroutineâ cancer treatment in this country is also serious, ugly, and often deadly. We must return to a reasonable standard of assessing risk vs. benefit, for the afflicted individual, on an individual basis, when considering any treatment modality. This must be considered when the treatment has the potential to inflict at least as much (or more) present and future harm, and loss of life, or the stripping of any reasonable quality of life, as the diagnosed disease. We also have to approach something so serious as potential cancer with due diligence, and be honest about the quality and reliability of that diagnosis.
The patient is owed being made fully and truthfully aware of all known potential side-effects and after-effects of any treatment as opposed to the likely outcome of their diagnosed disease if left untreated. In the case of alternative treatment(s) being available, the patient should be advised of it/them, and the legitimate risk versus benefit of the alternative(s) must be made known to the patient. *(please see 1 below). Finally, doctors need to be adequately trained in what they do not know, and be able to discuss this in a forthright manner with the patient.
This is the basis of âinformed consentâ not just in America, but internationally. Full and truthful disclosure about individual patient intervention has been a standard of medical practice ever since at least the end of WWII, when the atrocities of abuse and outright torture, claiming to be âscientific studyâ and âmedical treatment,â that had taken place in the Nazi death camps, were revealed to the general public at the trials in Nuremburg.
There is no medical, scientific, financial, or moral justification for doing otherwise, or offering anything less than fully informed consent with regard to intervention on the sovereign territory that is any unique individual human beingâs body.
Two letters ago, I took you through the peculiar circumstances of my referral to a hematologist/oncologist for long-standing symptoms I felt strongly needed to be seen by an orthopedic or neurological specialist. I went on to describe what I can view only as the unconscionable attempt on the part of a Dr. Khan at Geisinger, Danville, PA to scare me into requesting chemotherapy, immediately, for a bone marrow cancer he claimed I had a â1% chanceâ of developing.
I walked out of that appointment in disbelief, a little bit terrified, and a little bit enraged. The terror part of possibly having cancer, most people can understand. I write about the anger part, for the sake of every human being in this country. As a practicing medical doctor, albeit of a different sort, I could not imagine anyone practicing medicine in the 21st century being cavalier about administering the highly toxic, severe and immediate illness-inducing, body and mind destructive class of pharmaceuticals known generally as chemotherapy, without being absolutely sure a patient was legitimately suffering from the disease purported to be targeted by such treatment. Yet, all indications were that was what Dr. Khan intended to do to me, with the further insult he had been attempting to scare me, based on the flimsiest of diagnostic evidence, into requesting such treatment. Part of the fraud game was to get me to tell him what I wanted in an effort to save my own life*.* Such a request, recorded in a medical record, would relieve him (and his malpractice insurance carrier) of all liability for any harm I would suffer, including death, from this nightmarish class of drugs.
I went over and over every detail of the appointment and all that had led up to it. All that had led up to it included, for me, a lifetime of studying the subject of cancer and the many ways medically-minded people (up until recently, nearly all of them men) have tried to fight and defeat it down through the ages. Therein, to me, lies problem number one. One of the things many, if not most people do not understand is, cancer is a normal biological process that has become out-of-control. âFightingâ it, in many ways, does not work because such an effort becomes a battle with oneself, an internal, âcivil warâ if you will. Yet this concept of targeting part of oneself as âthe enemyâ persists because it is the framework that has been adopted for use against diseases in general, especially in this country, since roughly the mid-twentieth century.
The American public needs to be reeducated about cancer, Mr. Kennedy. What weâve been taught by first, television dramatic efforts, and more recently major pushes with television marketing*(please see 2 below) followed by now, Google U., about medicine/medical care has become increa$ingly di$torted. Much, if not most of what is being taught about cancer these days is almost always as much in the interest of the people offering treatment for sale making a buck, and wanting to be âheroesâ who save lives, as it is about the patients being told they need this treatment to have any hope of staying alive. Too much of high drama medicine in this country is about the doctors conducting it, not the patients whom those doctors are meant to be serving.
Patients have been indoctrinated, and are often further bullied and badgered at the point of service, to believe cancer treatment systems and the hospitals offering such services are above reproach and thus never to be second-guessed or questioned. Sadly, this is often just plain wrong on multiple levels.
Lesson number one in the re-education course: Cancer is not a disease you âcatchâ from someone else, like a cold, or the flu, or Covid, or strep, or a dozen other known, infectious, often airborne in transmission, diseases. Cancer almost never comes from a single error in eating something contaminated such as Salmonella in the chicken salad at a picnic, or by drinking water containing the Giardia protozoan, or getting cut accidentally by something sharp that has had contact with the soil where tetanus bacteria reside, or even being bitten by an animal that is, itself, infected with rabies. The vomiting, diarrhea, fever, weakness, sweats, disorientation, chills, cramping, headache, and other traumaâŚor even death, that can come from all of these disease agents, -WHICH IS OFTEN PREVENTABLE, OR POTENTIALLY PREVENTABLE, WITH A VACCINE-, and many more like them, largely have nothing to do with this âdiseaseâ called cancer.
Even other, âbattle with oneselfâ symptoms like the itch from touching poison ivy, or the sneezing and tearing and asthma spawned by hay fever and allergies, or the GI tract discomfort of Crohnâs disease or ulcerative colitis donât signal cancer, because cancer, as a normal process turned abnormal, as a different kind of auto-immune problem, is silent, at the start.
Cancer is stealth in its approach because a cancer cell, at first, is indistinguishable from the other cells around it. A cancerous cellâs behavior is the only thing that eventually gives cancer away as being âdifferentâ to someone trying to make a diagnosis.
It doesnât matter which body system has been affected by cancer, if a doctor or pathologist identifies cells growing out of the limits of what is determined to be normal, growing âout of control,â if you will, the tissues containing those cells will be labeled as diseased, and possibly/potentially cancerous. Once I came to understand the science behind this, Iâd thought often about it as being a disservice to use the big, scary, âCâ-word to describe what are effectively dozens of different diseases, with very different prognoses, depending on where, in the body, the abnormal behavior is taking place.
Instead, because of the fear-mongering of profit-driven, instead of patient-focused, medicine, the word, âCancer,â has become singularly synonymous in most peopleâs minds with âa death sentence.â*(please see 3 below
People are being led by the cancer industry to believe that if they have cancer anywhere, they are in need of immediate, aggressive and powerful treatmentâŚagainst themselves. This need simply isnât true in far too many cases, most notably when cancer, or at least a few stealth cells acting abnormally, is identified at that very early stage. Using this fear to manipulate and scare people into requesting treatment, because of the toxicity of most cancer treatments, is fraught with the potential for far more harm to come from treating than might have happened if nothing had been done. Such a situation should, instead, be monitored closely +/- adding a far less toxic, alternative treatment in adjunct. I tend to think of this as approaching the conflict with the Peace Treaty in hand, negating the need to ever have things break to the point of all-out war.
A âwait and see,â with vigilance, approach, however, has become grounds for malpractice lawsuits in this country because of insurance companies who donât want to pay for âdo-nothingâ check-ups and non-FDA-approved treatment, if any. We could do without lawyers who convince juries any doctor who doesnât jump on any hint of the big âCâ with the biggest bombs and the most bullets is incompetent. We should perhaps be looking at legislation or sanctioning to address the effective practice of medicine by persons holding a law license. Those who are well-educated in human-created law +/- the teachings of mass-media marketing, but who lack any discernable degree from a college teaching biological science, or anything related to the art of caring and help-giving whatsoever, have no business being the primary teachers of the public about all things medical. Medicine is both a science and an art; we need to be reminded of, and remember that, Mr. Kennedy.
Itâs a frightening thing to think about, Mr. Kennedy, but my own, well-informed speculation, based on my own experience with our current cancer treatment system (*in a chronically economically-depressed area of the country) has been to wonder how many of the people who have undergone chemo in this country, and become well again, i.e. the cancer treatment success percentageâhave blessedly âgotten their lives backâ in spite of their chemotherapy, not because of it. Again, forgive me if I sound like I am overstating the obvious, but I must point out how this kind of âsuccess,â is not âsaving lives,â but rather only serves to fan the flames on the more, more, more, stronger, sooner, permanently until you finally die from it, cancer treatment holocau$t.
Risk vs. benefit used to be the gold standard for the decision to proceed with medical intervention in America. It derived directly from the ancient wisdom of the Hippocratic oath which admonished doctors to, at the very least, do no harmâŚ
We need to be reminded of, and remember this, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. President. Until next time, I bid you Grace
In Peace and Health,
Lise Lund VMD
*1- Study of alternative, sometimes ancient or so-called folk-lore remedies used to be a large focus for NIH and other taxpayer-funded research. This was before Dr. Fauci and his ilk came to town. It was before drug companies came to effectively own a huge swath of the federal government by way of their lobbying efforts and Big Pharma support of the campaigns of specific members of Congress and/or their political party. Publicly-funded research, back in the days Iâm talking about, when this government was still âof the People, by the People, and FOR the Peopleâ [my emphasis, obviously] looked into things like ancient remedies and folk-lore medicine because for-profit drug companies, were ânot interestedâ in treatment modalities which had little potential, because they could not be patented, to be highly profitable.
*2- In the 1970s, we became one of the only two countries on the face of the earth to allow television advertising of prescription drugs directly to consumers. -Part of the beginning of the late, âGreatâ United States?
*3- Direct quote from a current television commercial being broadcast regularly right now, brought to you by the American Cancer Society, asking for donations.
original proposal:
Healing America starts here. This policy provides Health Help funding for EVERYONE, equitably, in a uniquely American, permanent, way, requiring no new taxes, ever. This will be cross-posted to the economy category at some point because the biggest problem with our healthcare system is how we are paying (too much) for it in the face of massively declining public health, especially among our children, i.e. what is being done with the money weâre throwing at healthcare in this country clearly isnât working despite ongoing marketing (not medical) efforts attempting to convince everyone it is.
With healthcare now costing roughly a fifth of the GDP, American life-expectancy is going down, chronic illness is epidemic, and, because of corporate capture, The People cannot trust federal agencies which were supposed to monitor and regulate to prevent this human rights catastrophe born of:
-greed
-massive miseducation of the American public via the media marketing machine
-highly improper LEGAL intervention into American MEDICAL matters
With a much-needed, simple change to campaign finance law, and a small change in federal business tax code for advertising expenses, this country can have fully-funded permanently, high-quality health help for everyone paid for by our politics and the excess profits of our most successful businesses, not our taxes.
I urge every American to think about this as the new âAmerican Dream.â Health before Wealth. Letâs get the horse back out in front of the cart where s/he belongs. Itâs the only way American wealth can do anyone any good.
This is an equitable plan that treats every individual equallyâas provided for in the ârightâ to Life in our founding documents and, unlike the current system, does not discriminate, often egregiously, based on economic or employment status, age, gender, level of incarceration, or any other usual and/or peculiarly American biometric or financial qualifier.
This national policy gets medical money OUT of the hands of lobbyists and spending-addicted Washington, permanently, returning possession of it, as well as responsibility for it to âthe People,â in perpetuity, so it cannot be stolen from future generations by turning it into war machine, and other reckless, irrational, and irresponsible debt. Simultaneously, all Americans, are gently reminded on a regular basis that health is, first and foremost, an individual, personal and private, priority and responsibility.
Meanwhile, this Peopleâs Mandate stabilizes the overall economy by having the state banking system, only, hold money intended for medical care, if and when needed, on behalf of The People. These holdings, as accumulated, are kept temporarily, for no longer than one year in state banks under a National Health Savings Account (NHSA) at the end of which there is equitable distribution into individual Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) secured under the private control of The People. HSAs will earn significant interest until such funds are used to pay the actual hands-on professionals and support staff who provide health help to patients, and to periodically upgrade health help infrastructure.
Financial medical resources will never again be depleted by upper level corporate greed or âshareholderâ payout profits. The Health Savings Account Trust Fund will never be robbed, such as is done now to nearly all medical money, routinely, by claiming such theft to be simply âbusiness as usual.â We, the People, will prevent this by:
Having the Justice Department help US make the unnecessary, always health-interfering, so-called health insurance system go away. It is an easy argument âhealthâ is not an insurable commodity, economically or legally. Therefore it is an equally easy argument purveyors of health insurance are conducting fraud, and have been for a very long time.
making sure, with Justice Department and Treasury back-up, politicians with no medical education, qualifications, knowledge or common sense cannot pander for votes with other peoplesâ medical dollars,
eliminating other corporate leeches on medical money via individual control over where it is spent/who receives it, and demanding that truthful education about health (so education devoid of profit motive) is offered to every American from childhood onward by way of a complete revamping of educational priorities for this nation.
State banks with a proven track record of responsible lending and consistent depositor yields, only, will handle that amount of money set aside for health needs (as noted, currently a fifth of GDP) every year, so the federally-chartered banking (some say âloan sharkâ) system cannot squander it in bad loans, including many health-leveraged ones, while VPs directing or making most of those bad (often also based on criminal fraud) loans are never disciplined or fired as they steal most of whatever is left for themselves, and then go running to Washington for yet another âbail-out.â
This is also COMPLETELY NON-PARTISAN, and so, stable, not subject to massive distortion and changes in prioritization every four to eight years (something that should NEVER happen to something so critical as health help) in the face of ridiculous, and often corrupt, political party haggling and destructiveness (what has become our ongoing, never-ending, Second Civil War).
Hereâs the basic plan:
The Peopleâs Mandate demands $0.50 of every dollar donated to any political campaign or purpose (including PACs, Direct party donations, local mayoral races, etc. any money directed to buy political influence of any kind), anywhere in the USA be immediately diverted to a National Health Savings account, held under the auspices of state banks, only, where it accumulates interest.
On a designated day in late November of each year (the Wednesday before Thanksgiving would be ideal) this money is re-distributed to the individual health savings accounts of all Americans. The individual accounts can only be debited by a medical provider designated by the individual patient who holds the account to pay medical bills, or more usually, to pay direct, local insurance between the doctor and hospital the patient intends to use when they need medical care.
The Washington 2.0, giant, so-called âhealth insuranceâ greed corporations, which provide absolutely no medical services whatsoever, and steal in the form of premiums, more than $0.50 of every healthcare dollar to serve themselves and their non-patient shareholders, while interfering with almost everyoneâs ability to get the care, tests and procedures they need, are phased out and go away, permanently. Their assets will be immediately liquidated and disbursed by paying shareholders off at 50% of current value as an endpointâthe stocks become worthless after that, and there will no longer be Wall Street trading in other peopleâs lives, ever. The remainder will be distributed to state banks on a per capita basis to become the first distribution to the national health savings account. If employers want to contribute to employee healthcare, they do it by contributing directly to individual employeesâ health savings accounts. It remains a tax-deductible, for the employer, expense, but they no longer buy a corporate policy (which further enriches those who are not sick or injured) because those no longer exist, and never will again.
Political money is well tracked and not tax-deductible. It is a huge vat of funding never before considered to be partially utilized to secure national healthcare. It should be. Given the inordinate amount of money spent on American politics, which increases constantly, and the fact healthcare has been at or near the top of the list of voter concerns constantly for more than thirty years, itâs pathetic, and an American embarrassment, and disgrace, it isnât. If political donors have extra money they can afford to give away to buy political influence, they have money they can afford to give to securing national healthcare for everyone.
Imagine, EVERY CANDIDATE IN EVERY ELECTION, AND EVERYONE WHO WORKED FOR THEM OR SUPPORTED THEM, can feel proud on election day, no matter who wins, because they have made a massive effort that benefits ALL of America, already, before anyone takes office.
This process is completely non-partisan since it comes from both sides. No matter what happens in any given election cycle, national healthcare becomes more secured, especially so every four years during a Presidential cycle. Any politician who leaves office automatically donates anything left in their âwar chestâ to the national health savings account. They canât redirect it to their replacement or back to the party. Term limits would vastly increase the national health savings account reserve.
There are other finer points and details, but this is the basis for a completely tax-free, uniquely American way of funding healthcare for all, permanently, and keeping decisions about medical care where they belong, between the patient, and his or her doctor and preferred hospital.
First Amendment.
This is the piece that will clinch the Mandate.
There was some flack, back at the beginning, about whether or not 50% of all the money used to buy political influence in this country would be enough money to fully fund healthcare. It definitely wonât fully fund profit-driven healthcare, because all the money in the world isnât enough to satisfy that greed monster. Weâve been proving that for many years now as Americans shovel more and more dollars, a larger and larger percentage of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) into the health system, AND LIFE EXPECTANCY FOR AMERICANS IS GOING DOWN!!!
Much of profit-driven healthcare could, should, and would be dismantled under the Peopleâs Mandate. But unless and until that happens (this is capitalist America, after all), and since we know how power-hungry too many political people are, how much they lie and cheat and steal, and We the People are forever at risk because they also make their own rules (and break them with no accountability) there will be one more addition to the Peopleâs Mandate.
Advertising is a flexible expenditure for businesses. Itâs not a necessity. A business can continue operating without spending a nickel on advertising. Successful businesses, though, tend to spend quite a bit on it. So, the First Amendment to the Peopleâs Mandate is as follows:
Henceforward it will be mandated that every business in America, including so-called non-profits (most of which havenât really been non-profit for decades, e.g. hospital systems, pet charities, âcausesâ of all kinds), no exceptions, will, upon the filing of their federal AND state income taxes, send proof to the IRS and state revenue authorities (a receipt from the state bank that received it) 10% of that amount deducted under Advertising on the businessâs tax return went to the national health savings account. (e.g. if a business buys a $10 ad, they simultaneously put a dollar in the National HSAâheld by the state bank in the businessâs jurisdiction).
In other words, 10% of all the advertising budgets for all the businesses in America will henceforward, off the top, go toward securing individual national health. Just like the 50% of all political budgets, this money will be held in trust in the state bank of their particular jurisdiction, to be distributed to individual health savings accounts of all Americans on that designated day in November of each year.
This is totally do-able. All it takes is the will of the People to do it.
Further elaboration on policy details based on feedback from a variety of sources will continue as a series of letters to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the presumptive incoming Secretary of Health and Human Services for the United States of America.
*This policy will be elaborated upon in future posts that will appear as additional discussions with Mr. Kennedy about the problematic current American healthcare system.
[November 5, 2024 election day letter has been removed. associated links RIGHT TO MATERNAL/FETAL HEALTHCARE & EDUCATION to stabilize the abortion issue - #187 by PeoplesMandate RIGHT TO MATERNAL/FETAL HEALTHCARE & EDUCATION to stabilize the abortion issue - #203 by PeoplesMandate RIGHT TO MATERNAL/FETAL HEALTHCARE & EDUCATION to stabilize the abortion issue - #209 by PeoplesMandate RIGHT TO MATERNAL/FETAL HEALTHCARE & EDUCATION to stabilize the abortion issue - #199 by PeoplesMandate 1 Economics for the people - #42 by FreedomLife Redirecting⌠Comments - In Bipartisan Panel, Kennedy Offers Solutions for Americaâs Chronic Disease Epidemic 1 ]
The Christmas Day letter 12-25-24 has been removed.
01-08-2025
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
This comes to you from a place of profound concern for the health of every individual in this nation. Please accept the following as my unique perspective on the overall medical system serving this country.
Americans have been taught to have a blind faith in our healthcare, that is, sadly, no longer warranted. For a very long time, this countryâs magnates of corporate medicine, along with the entirety of health insurance have increasingly prioritized profits being paid to already-wealthy people (e.g. CFOs, CEOs, upper administrative personnel in management and business offices, shareholders, etc.) who are not sick or injured, over medical dollars being used to create an optimum outcome and thus, hopefully, a sustained good health future for patients who are currently suffering ill-health. These are unacceptable priorities for a health help system.
As you well know, we grow more unhealthy as a nation with each passing year. We have a declining quality of life as well as length of life. I contend, and will use my own health history to illustrate, a profit-driven health help system and declining health are cause and effect. We have an inherent conflict of interest, and a travesty of prioritization because of it. Medical education via mass media marketing and advertising means mass mis-education. Real preventive practices are available to anyone for the choosingâe.g. exercise, better dietary selections, attention to emotional need, time management so as to include adequate sleep and restâthese last being two distinct and different needs, whether this is recognized generally or not. In other words, the most important fundamentals of prevention are broad-based, and do not come in pill form, or out of the end of a hypodermic needle.
In addition to being misled about what actually constitutes good prevention, we have been lied to, in various ways, about alternative, less expensive, and usually far less toxic and damaging treatment modalitiesâincluding when to say, âNOââTen years ago I declined cancer treatment for a cancer diagnosis I was convinced was not valid. If my deep concerns about this somewhat unnerving episode come across as irate at times, I do apologize, but given our current situation, perhaps my intermittent outrage and frustration are justified.
So, for the sake of this nation and all of its people, especially our children, I see a need to begin by telling you some specifics about my experiences with the cancer treatment system in this country. I do this from the knowledge, background information, and perspective of:
-
a licensed and practicing medical doctor
-
a highly trained and vastly experienced woman biological scientist with a sub-specialty in criminal investigations and the judicial process because of, and as a part of, my work in medicine
-
a patient directed to the cancer system as the first priority in response to my presenting complaints, in February 2014, of:
severe, chronic (constant, with varying intensity, for then just over four yearsâ duration) pain in my right(R) leg and lower back (which intermittently, and with increasing frequency over time, became intense to the point of life-threatening)
chronic debilitating pain in my left(L) ankle
steadily decreasing ability to walk or stand for more than a few moments
and a numbing neuropathy in my left(L) hand which was resolving
Again, I must emphasize, with these symptoms, this set of clues, I was sent to an oncologist/hematologist for investigation of what might be the underlying cause of my suffering. I hope that specialty as a first consult for such a case sounds peculiar to you, because it should.
Despite enormous monetary investment and tens of thousands of dedicated people doing the actual hands-on work, marketing âhealthâ as if it is a capitalist commodity, able to be mass-produced and offered for sale, is failing US. [Case, Anne and Angus Deaton. Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism. Princeton University Press, 2020]
The following additional details from my individual case story are very pertinent to illustrating several of the massive general problems with our overall medical system:
In January of 2010, in the course of a routine exam, I was kicked by a dangerous horse being housed by incompetent handlers running a rescue. The blow from this kick landed against my lower back and over my R hip and buttock and launched me 10-15 feet across the barn. I got up and walked away from the incident, but I began to have ever-increasing pain. For financial reasons (felony theft and fraud committed against me), I was not able to seek medical attention.
Finally, in 2014, I acquired health insurance coverage again, and was able to see a doctor. I was charted as suffering from âdegenerative arthritis of lumbar spine, cervical neuropathy, fatigue.â No further explanations/suggestions for treatment were offered, but routine, preliminary blood tests had been ordered, so I assumed Iâd receive the doctorâs full assessment, explanation, and direction once those results became available.
At 11pm that same night, I received a phone message from the doctorâs office telling me he had ordered an additional, special blood test. They were advising I should check with my insurance about whether or not that test was covered. It was. I looked up the reason for that particular test. It was used in the diagnosis of multiple myelomaâa bone marrow cancer. I was distressed, to say the least, but also became suspicious about why on earth my presenting complaints of protracted unbearable orthopedic pain following a traumatic orthopedic injury event was being viewed as a likely oncologic condition.
The special test came back several days later with âIgA kappa gammopathy ââpresentââ as its resultâno numbers, no range of normal/abnormal, no explanation of the test, just âpresent.â
In addition to the excruciating pain I was in day and night, I began to experience that special form of terror known only to people who have been told, âYou have cancer.ââŚ
Until next time, Mr. Kennedy,
Lise Lund VMD
01-12-2025
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
When last I wrote to you, I described how, in the summer of 2014, I was led to believe I had been diagnosed with multiple myeloma, a bone marrow cancer, based on a single, non-numerical, blood test result.
I had been living in extraordinary pain since 2010, working, and paying taxes through my small business all that time. But I had been unable to consult with a medical doctor about my condition due to not having access to medical care services, through no fault of my own, for financial reasons. I feel I must advise, Mr. Kennedy, the oft-referenced âsafety netâ of free medical help being available to those of US with no, or inadequate (e.g. a high-deductible policy, including one issued under the ACA) health insurance is a myth for most of US who are working taxpayers who come to find themselves in immediate need of medical care.
Iâd acquired health insurance, finally, through a negotiated, verbal, special contract with one of my larger veterinary practice clients (the Lycoming County SPCA), in December of 2013, and had been seen at my PCPâs office in February of 2014, and then again in August when there had been no improvement in my condition (as expected).
When I contacted my doctorâs office after receiving that highly disturbing blood test result of âpresent,â I was advised a referral had been made, and I was to see a Dr. Sharif Khan, a specialist in hematology and oncology, at the Knapper Clinic, Geisinger, on October 27, 2014.
At that appointment, where I faced both Dr. Khan and his Physicianâs Assistant, Dave [not his real name], I found Dr. Khan to be somewhat top-down domineering toward me. I suspected strongly this was due to, for reasons I wonât go into at length here, the fact I am a woman. He also had an air of a used car salesman who likes to use fear tactics as part of his sales pitch. He kept repeating that the blood test result Iâve already mentioned indicated I had, âa 1% chance of developing multiple myeloma.â I presume he expected a pronounced fear response from me, given that information, especially since I am a womanâŚas would/had happen/ed with most other women to whom he delivered such news? And perhaps he expected me to hold back tears as I asked what needed to be done to try to stop the cancer? âŚand how soon could we start? I can only speculate, because it became increasingly obvious, he wasnât quite sure what to do or say in response to the reaction he did get from me.
The â1%â part was new information. I informed him of my professional occupation, and began to ask questions about that particular blood testâŚquestions that, he, a âspecialistâ in hematology, could, or would, not answer. These were basic information inquiries that should have been able to be responded to, and discussed, by any college sophomore who had completed an entry-level, undergraduate biology course in immunology with an eye on going to medical school. I wasnât asking about prognosis or treatment, or even cancer at that point, just basic science. I wanted more specifics about the subclass of IgA antibody that had been found to be in excess in my blood because I knew I had an occupational exposure that might cause a completely benign elevation in circulating IgA.
After about the third or fourth time he said I had, âa 1% chance of developing multiple myeloma,â in answer to each of my various, different questions, and my looking at him with an attitude of, âSo what? I could probably have a 1% chance of getting hit by a car if I made a habit of crossing busy intersections in my current state of being barely able to walk,â Dr. Khan made some excuse for having to leave the exam room for a little while, indicating he would leave me with Dave, who was going to do a physical exam.
Dave listened to my heart and lungs with a stethoscope. Iâm sure he took my blood pressure, and he palpated my cranial lymph nodes. He may have even looked inside my mouth with a tongue depressor. He said nothing indicating he found any abnormalities. It was obvious he was just going through the motions. The blood pressure, especially, was largely meaningless under the circumstances of Dr. Khan having just deliveredâŚor having just tried to deliver, the idea I had cancer. Dave made me feel like he was concerned about me as a patient. But I also sensed there was something else going on, that there was a reason heâd been left to deal with me when I had pretty obviously not given Dr. Khan the reactions he expectedâŚand wantedâŚso he could start administering chemo. Chemo, on which he profits, directly from the drug company which produces it, as the ordering doctorâone of the most obscene conflict$ of intere$t in American medical care. This country has a terrible problem, Mr. Kennedy, of putting wealth before health.
Once upon a time in this country, a doctor could lose his or her medical license for taking kickbacks from a pharmaceuticalâs producer. Itâs why prescriptions were filled at a pharmacy independent of the medical doctorâs office. Corporate medicine has changed all of that. Itâs been standard operating procedure in cancer treatment for years for doctors diagnosing cancer to benefit financially from then ordering the specific drug to be given to the patient to treat itâalways the newest, and so, supposedly âbest,â and, of course, still-on-patent and most expensive oneâand PS, if Iâm interpreting current commercial television advertisements and internet ordering standards correctly, this is now happening with most, if not all drugs. American medical doctors have been being trained to be drug pushers for decades. Those who refuse to comply are either starved out financially, or have their licenses threatened by lawsuits from attorneys who believe the newest and most expensive drug is always the ârightâ one, and who are very good at convincing juries of the same.
Back to my story. I was distressed about what had just happened with Dr. Khan. Earlier that day, waiting for the appointment to begin in a waiting room full of bald, pasty and pale-skinned, obviously very sick and debilitated people, some of them actually lying on a gurney with IV drips hanging had been more than a little unsettling.
I could not believe, now that I finally had health insurance, I was seeing an oncologist. I had been waiting for four years, ever since I was kicked by that horse, to see an orthopedic surgeon, possibly in consultation with a neurologist, about the excruciating pain in my legs and my incrementally losing the ability to stand and walk.
I finally broke the silence with Dave by saying, âHeâs going to need a whole lot more evidence than a single lousy blood test to convince me I need to start undergoing chemo. Everyone Iâve ever known who did, died.â
Dave looked at me and said, âWell, some of the newer treatments are having success.â
Iâm sure the look on my face suggested, âReally? I bet you have a bridge in Brooklyn youâre offering for sale, too, to âcureâ my cancer.â
At that point, Dave decided suddenly he needed to leave the exam room, too.
I sat there, alone, for five to ten minutes.
Next, Dr. Khan came back into the room followed by Dave. Dr. Khan was very brusque as he said, âWe need to take some x-rays. And you need to have more blood drawn, but it is too early to re-test your IgA since it has only been three months since the original result.â I had already had a half dozen tubes of blood pulled from my arm earlier that day. I had been told to arrive a half hour early for the appointment because this would need to be done. My suspicion and skepticism kept expanding.
After the first attempt to discuss subclasses of IgA with Dr. Khan, I was dubious, but I decided to offer him the rest of what was on my mind about my individual condition. I explained that, in the course of my veterinary work I routinely administered an intranasal flu vaccine to my equine patients. I explained that most horses are not particularly fond of having something spritzed up their nose, and they often do a very good job of snorting some of the liquid vaccine back out just as fast and into the veterinarianâs face. Dr. Khanâs blank stare and what struck me as impatient agitation made me suspect he had zero familiarity with intranasal vaccinesâand zero interest in horses or any medical comparisons between non-human species and human medicine. -Please see *1 below
Given my earlier attempt to discuss IgA subclasses with Dr. Khan, I felt it necessary to point out an intranasal vaccine is meant to stimulate specifically production of IgA antibody (the kind that is produced on mucous membranes as opposed to IgG which is the kind that circulates in the blood and is the primary antibody type produced by the body in response to an injected vaccine).
As I said this, Dr. Khan had ceased to look me in the eye such as he had when telling me about the 1% chance of developing multiple myeloma. His hands were shaking a bit, holding the orders for more blood testing and radiographs for me. Still looking down, his only response to what Iâd told him was, âBut it still wouldnât be monoclonal.â
I have to admit, that slowed me down for a moment, but when I thought about it for a few more minutes, my conclusion was, âWhy wouldnât it be? The modified-live, equine intranasal flu vaccine was/is produced in a laboratory. The antibody produced in response was going to be specific to whatever inactivated strain of equine influenza virus was used to make the vaccine, i.e. there is no constant strain variation in an inactivated virus such as is known to happen with the naturally-occurring, so-called âwild typeâ virusâwhy flu preventive has always been called a flu shot, not a flu vaccine, and must be taken annually. Strain variation means the virus is always one step ahead of the vaccine manufacturers, finding a new way to make people sick. Please see *2 below
Dr. Khan was swift to capitalize on my pause over the question of my excess circulating IgA being monoclonal. He ended any further discussion right then and handed me my marching orders.
I was sent to the blood lab first. The phlebotomist raised an eyebrow over the fact I was there again. She asked gently if I was going to be OK; she had a whole lot more tubes to fill this time (and knew Iâd sat for quite a few already earlier that day). She said something about she did not understand why they hadnât ordered all of it in the first place. I told her it was a long story, and to go ahead and stick me again.
Down in radiology, people were lined up out into the hallway. Dr. Khan must have had some pull as an oncologist ordering stat X-rays because I was escorted quickly to the head of the line. I felt badly for all the people there with real problems that needed a radiographic diagnostic. Dr. Khan had ordered a bone surveyâmultiple views of skull, cervical spine, thoracic spine, lumbosacral spine, chest, humeri, pelvis, and femurs. Iâm sure I glowed in the dark for a week afterward.
I had another wave of compassion pass over me as I walked past all those deathly-ill-looking people in the waiting room when I exited the clinic. My mind was racing between whether or not Iâd just signed my own death warrant by declining chemotherapy this doctor seemed sure I needed; and questioning how many of those poor people hadnât had a provable case of cancer, either, before they got theirs, because they didnât know as much about their condition and test results as I did about mine. The latter was unthinkable, but so was the idea of having the toxic waste that is chemotherapy flooded into my veins if I didnât actually need it.
Until next time Mr. Kennedy,
Peace, Lise.
*1 The human version of the intranasal vaccination product I was talking about had been developed a few years [circa 2003] after the original equine one gained approval and came on the market. The for-human-use product was produced because of the phenomenal success achieved industry-wide, in competition horses, with equine intra-nasal flu, dramatically reducing the incidence of not just equine influenza, but other, common, serious, contagious respiratory diseases, as well. The human FDA-approved product had become a standard in many pediatriciansâ offices because children usually tolerated a spritz up their nose more readily than a shot. The intranasal route of inoculation had since been utilized with the same level of success as the horses in other species, perhaps most notably in the control of kennel cough in concentrated, and constantly changing and comingling populations of dogs. When I first saw this research, done right here, in the U.S.A., and the spectacular results achieved in live, control-matched (inoculated horses versus uninoculated horses intentionally exposed to clouds of live virus) studies, I knew intranasal vaccination against viral respiratory diseases could and should be for 21st century health what antibiotics were against bacterial infections for health help in the 20th century. Even though I wonât live to see/hear it, I still believe this will become the medical miracle upon which health news reporters will be expounding as America turns the calendar page to enter the 2100s.
*2 A human being, including a veterinarian, will not contract the disease and become ill from the equine influenza virus, but the human immune system does not know that, and so, will still see the equine influenza modified-live vaccine as a potential threat to the upper respiratory tract and lungs, and will, upon encountering it in the eyes and nose of a vet who has just had a horse snort it back at him/her, begin to produce specific antibodyâin this case IgA first and mostâin response, to try to neutralize what that human immune system sees as an invading, infectious disease âthreat.â At the same time, this building of antibody troops, will also trigger a high-alert signal to the immune system âspecial ops,â independent, non-specific âsniperâ cells (e.g. killer T-cells) whose job it is to take out any invading organism that might be trying to set up a base of operations that will make its host sick. In other words, because of the intranasal route of vaccination, an intranasal flu prevention product has the potential to provide significant protection against other respiratory diseases such as COVID, or other viral or bacterial colds.
01-21-25 the day after Inauguration Day
Dear Mr. Kennedy, and if you will, it would be wonderful if President Trump could join US for this one,
Hello sirs, on this first full day of the new Trump Administration. I look forward to Mr. Kennedyâs confirmation to be our next Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.
I watched some of the celebrations last night expressing so many high hopes for our return to âGreatnessâ as a nation. At the second inaugural ball, I heard President Trump declare, âOur People are our Greatest asset.â I contend to you, Mr. Kennedy, and to you, President Trump, the single most important thing this country can do to âMake America Great Againâ is to implement a permanent federal policy of âHealth before Wealth.â Described below is a Peopleâs Mandate. This proposal has been written, specifically, to help protect our âGreatest asset,â especially our children, in perpetuity.
One of the most corrupted, i.e. habitually wealth before health, factions of American medicine is the cancer industry. This, as the priority of an entire, large branch of specifically American medicine is due in no small part to the efforts at fundraising which go on in the name of cancer in this countryâbecause we are a nation which, unlike just about every other sovereignty on this planet, regardless of political ideology, provides NO integrated and cooperative, equitably available and accessible, nationalized health help to its citizens.
So many lives are lost to cancer. Rich/poor; young/old/everyone in between; urban/rural/suburban; female/male; challenged/gifted/those under most of the Bell curve; and people of every skin shadeâno demographics are exempt. It is a disease that affects everyone, sooner or later, one way or another.
Cancer treatment in America has become enshrined to the point of being nothing short of a belief system about cancer, much of which is inaccurate. Many of the inaccuracies have been perpetuated, expanded and exploited to then justify the lengthy courses of expensive drugs, radical surgeries, and other toxic modalities used to treat cancerâŚwhile the truth about where cancer comes from, how it starts, and what is the best approach to early intervention is ignored. Weâve lost the proper focus on prevention because the people âfightingâ cancer, in âthe war on cancerâ we declared decades ago, are making a whole lot of money doing so by way of our equally mis-focused, profit-driven healthcare system. There is an inherent conflict-of-interest in having those who are making enormous amounts of money from having others engage in war, often being heralded as âheroesâ as they do so, also be the ones in charge of ending war.
As an American-born woman, who has spent her continuously-working, graduate school-educated adult life at or below the peculiarity that is the modern America poverty line, I need to make both of you aware of an underlying resentment in this country on the part of much of the lower ~97% economically that is critical to this discussion. A muttering I hear often, much more frequently from women than from men, is, âThey donât want a cure for cancer.â
And while begging both your pardon, I feel it is essential to add, the number one cancer theyâeven in 2025, most of the âtheyâ still being men*â***donât ever want to âcure,â is breast cancer. Weâre using a decades old, medical early detection model that, besides being quite costly but only somewhat effective, might also be driving the development of breast tumors in a significant number of women who undergo the usual second step of that detection system. This is unacceptable given that breast cancer is the number one most common cancer of all, and it affects women at least a hundred times more frequently, and more often at a younger age (before 50) than men. I request that both of you keep this in mind, always, throughout the entirety of the rest of my discussion of concerns we have, as a country, about human health, and the best things we can do as a UNITED America to provide health help to those who need it.
You will recall Mr. Kennedy I have significant experience with criminal investigations, in particular with fraud cases, in addition to being a veterinary medical doctor and a life-long student of biological science. I can tell you with no uncertainty, sir, this mystique, this âreligionâ if you will, that has been built up around an increasing segment of what is claimed to be âlife-savingâ medical care aimed at âcuring cancerâ is largely unfounded and grossly misguided medically, financially, scientifically, and morally.
This starts with how, too many 21st century doctors are being taught to identify potential cancer patients, and the economic incentives they have to conclude a cancer diagnosis quickly, and initiate treatment. And, unfortunately, it ends with a carefully cultivated set of beliefs, too often established by lawyers and other people with very limited (and/or distorted) medical knowledge âpresent company excepted, Mr. Kennedy. There is a lot of passion, and there are strong opinions coming out of this questionable bank of knowledge. We combine them with a very American mindset on the part of almost everyone that more, and stronger, is always better; that doing something, immediately, is always better than remaining mindful and watchful while waiting, patiently; that engaging disease in an attempt to be rid of it always needs to be a âfightâ; and that when treatment fails, and someone dies, someone involved in the treatment probably didnât do it soon enough, or give the âright,â or the âbest,â treatmentâŚwhich, to someone with such a mindset, is almost always the newest, strongest, and most expensive kind of treatment.
In the words of the late, great Johnny Carson, âWrongo buffalo breath,â on nearly every point.
Until next time, sirs, I bid you Peace.
Sincerely, Lise Lund VMD