Original Opinion piece by USA Today
This posting will be the first of two I’ll be writing related to this USA Today opinion piece printed in the Gazette. As you might suspect, it will be covering questions the “200,000 souls” might be asking that weren’t covered.
“Why were Covid-19 positive patients sent to our nursing home?”:
Five states in particular, including New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Michigan and California are reported to have required nursing homes to accept patients that were suspected of having or had tested positive for the Covid-19 virus. In New York’s case, the governor still required nursing homes to accept them, even after the nursing home industry objected saying they weren’t able to properly handle those patients and protect their resident’s safety. At least four of those states had a high percentage of their Covid-19 deaths from nursing homes. Many of those deaths occurred in the nursing homes, but others were transferred to hospitals where they died. So the exact number who died from these directives is unknown. Inquiries have been opened up to look into this issue. I suspect that at least some of those who died in nursing homes in those states might be asking “Would I still be alive if Covid-19 positive patients hadn’t been admitted to my nursing home?” Answering questions arising from this might give us insight into the motivation, but it will do little to ease the minds of those souls who died as a result.
“Why wasn’t I treated with a Hydroxychloride regiment?”
President Trump was highly criticized for taking a regiment including hydroxychloride as a preventive against the Covid-19 virus. At the same time, Detroit’s Henry Ford Hospital was using it to help protect frontline staff. Many doctors in private practice were also using it as a treatment for their Covid-19 virus patients and reporting very positive results. Just one story relayed by Fox News’ Medical Director, Dr. Seigel, related to how his father had recovered from the virus after receiving a Hydroxycloride regiment and recovered despite having been gravely ill. More reports from around the world are coming in how patients have responded positively once treated with it. I can only imagine that some of the “200,000 souls” who were denied the treatment might be asking “Is it possible I would still be alive if I had been treated with Hydroxychloride?” and “Why wasn’t I allowed to make the decision?”
USA Today states “Much of the blame lies at the hands of an astonishingly incompetent and politically motivated Trump administration…”. They then go on to blame many in the public “…manipulated by news organizations that profit from reinforcing people’s ill-informed opinions.” How true that statement is. But I suspect USA Today wasn’t commenting on their reporting. But maybe it is a case of “the Pot calling the kettle a very dark shade of gray“?
Note: In 1983 a prospective payment system was introduced into the Medicare program. Prior to that hospitals were reimbursed “cost” of caring for Medicare patients as determined by an annual cost report. A key component of the new program was the implementation of much tougher hospital admission criteria. This resulted in sicker patients remaining in nursing homes. However nursing homes weren’t necessarily prepared to keep those patients or properly reimbursed in order to increase the level of care available in their facilities. This has been an ongoing issue ever since.