I wore this hat out in public and about 21 people said I love your hat and about 12 people said how the hell can you wear a hat like that. I’m pretty sure most Americans can’t read lol

Filed under: General Problems | 4 Comments »

https://youtu.be/JDVT-8tUfiE

https://youtu.be/JDVT-8tUfiE

Filed under: General Problems | 4 Comments »

Here are two different scientific opinions/studies on the source of COVID-19 …  One stating that it is a man-made variant and the other stating that it is natural mutation.  Maybe we need to do like Real Clear Politics does…. creates a poll of the average of all the various political polls that are taken. We collect all the various opinions from various scientists and/or scientific studies and if one of the conflicting theories has more opinions… we chose that as “scientific proof”.   Dr Fauci is now 79 y/o… should his many years as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases   give some added credibility to his opinion.  After all he has held that position since 1984 – he goes back to Reagan days.  Or is he taking the safe route… since he is 79 y/o and doesn’t want to have a “stain” on his reputation at the end of his career, because at some later date his opinion is proved to be wrong ?  So he makes statements such as there is no double blind clinical study to prove that something does or doesn’t work.. Such a study will take 10-15 yr and we will most likely be long gone before such a study can be done.  So he can neither be right nor wrong if he pushes for a study to prove a certain action based on some unproved hypothesis.  “We must do what science says to do”… is such a simplistic statement, but who in their right mind … would use that logic to make decisions what could affect – possibly good or bad – 300 + million in our country.   Making the correct decision could be done just as easily as flipping a coin.

Chinese virologist claims she has proof COVID-19 was made in Wuhan lab

https://nypost.com/2020/09/11/chinese-virologist-says-she-has-proof-covid-19-was-made-in-wuhan-lab/

The new coronavirus was not man-made, study shows

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/the-new-coronavirus-was-not-genetically-engineered-study-shows

Filed under: General Problems | 4 Comments »

Joe Biden claims that he is going to only raise taxes on people with over $400,000 .. apparently to help pay for his proposed “medicare for all”…

But according to this, there is only 32,000 families that makes > $400,000….  as a nation we spend abt $10,000/person/yr for medical care…. meaning  no premiums, no deductible, no copay would cost us abt $3.2 TRILLION/yr for this program.  That amount of money is equal to our entire Federal taxes cash flow and we are currently – and for the past 11 yrs – have been spending a EXTRA TRILLION/YR.

So those people who make > $400,000/yr would only have to pay $10 million/yr each to pay for the medicare for all programs.

But he has also stated that he is going to rescind all the Trump tax cuts… so everyone who got a tax break from those new tax rates …. they will go away… so is that RAISING TAXES ON EVERYONE ?

It is claimed that abt 50% of all families PAY NO FEDERAL INCOME TAXES…

Having health insurance and getting adequate healthcare services are not the same… just ask a lot of chronic pain pts that have health insurance but can’t find a prescriber that will treat their pain and/or their insurance will not pay for their meds and/or will limit on how many doses that they will pay for each day.

Of course, > 50% of all physicians are >55 y/o… and many of them will just elect to retire … leaving most pt care to ARNP, PA, NP – middle level practitioners.

Most likely, Joe will go back to what he knows best – ACA – where we were promised that every family would save $2500, but only those who were poor enough to qualify for “financial assistance” and put on a Medicaid program… was able to save money…  every one else got their premiums to double or triple and deductibles went up to $10,000/person/yr…. and everyone got limited choices of hospitals and practitioners

Because,,  ACA was basically two parts – state Medicaid programs & private insurance – and a lot of Medicaid programs have been “farmed out” to private insurance (HMO).

All anyone has to look towards as a template as to what a “national insurance” could be is the VA prgm and Medicare Advantage prgms … enough said.

Remember the “open mike moment” with Joe whispering in Obama’s ear when they were announcing implementation of ACA …” this is a BIG F….ING Deal”

Filed under: General Problems | 2 Comments »

On average we have 7500 people  DIED EVERY DAY… so at 6 months since “they” have start counting  COVID-19 deaths abt the first of March… in a six month period…  we will have 1,365,000 deaths from ALL CAUSES.

Does anyone – except me – believe that they should be reporting the total number of deaths – FROM ALL CAUSES..

What if it was reported that all deaths in this period were about the same as the average year… wouldn’t that suggest that the COVID-19 has really not been that lethal ?  But they don’t report those numbers.

Of course, in a typical 6 month period abt 250,000 people will die from the use/abuse of tobacco/Nicotine…. no daily death count kept on those numbers.

It has been reported that as high as 220,000 deaths in a 6 month period from MEDICAL ERRORS.  https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/22/medical-errors-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-america.html

Does ALL DEATHS MATTER ?

Filed under: General Problems | 3 Comments »

Brandeis University’s Dr. Andrew Kolodny is wrong … dangerously damn wrong about the opioid crisis and epidemic!

https://opioidmakersnotcauseofopioidcrisis.weebly.com/debunking-brandeis-dr-andrew-kolodny.html

• Joel Shapiro <jrs_14618@yahoo.com>
  To:president@brandeis.edu
  Cc:winship@brandeis.edu,horgan@brandeis.edu,davweil@brandeis.edu,msurchin@goodmans.ca,editor@PainNewsNetwork.org
  Jan 31 at 11:52 AM
• Attention Brandeis University President Dr. Ron Liebowitz et al. – Re: Exposing Your Vile Opioid Policy Research Collaborative (OPRC) Think Tank …Does my accusation right away appear just pure rhetoric without substance and corroboration; thus not worthy of your response?
• Straight away I’m telling you sir if you’re even reading even this far into my Email letter here to you; you could not … NOT be more mistaken! Aye, perhaps on seeing the preceding subject you just nonchalantly moved my Email to you here to your trash bin.
• Perhaps after my posting of my Email to you here to you on my webpage at the URL link below has garnered enough interest and support from the public; especially the (soon enough to be) pain afflicted public and you heard tell of me; Joel Shapiro and my SearchSpecifics app you thought you’d check it out for yourself. And so here you are:
• https://opioidmakersnotcauseofopioidcrisis.weebly.com/debunking-brandeis-dr-andrew-kolodny.html
• Then perhaps if you are indeed reading this document you have no intention or inclination of formally responding to it; just like you didn’t to the 60 patient advocates and health care professionals that include board certified M.D.’s who called on you to fire your Dr. Andrew Kolodny. You obviously unquestionably support and endorse him and he thrives under your watch. You have his back:
• https://www.painnewsnetwork.org/stories/2017/10/3/patient-advocates-call-on-brandeis-to-fire-kolodny
• So yes, I’m the one who created the SearchSpecifics app that will keep exposing your and by extension Brandeis University’s support and endorsement of your/its pet Opioid Policy Research Collaborative (OPRC)  project; headed up by your one favored Dr. Andrew Kolodny.
• I intend my expose’ of you, Brandeis, and your OPRC for the dangerous fraud, hoax and farce that it is in an ongoing systematic, precise and categorical effort. My expose’ will include valid, robust references from every nook, corner and crevice of the Internet; the likes of which you’ve never seen before.
• If per chance you’ve heard of “Google Alert” any comparison of its Internet perspective to those of my SearchSpecifics app is only marginal at best. My SearchSpecifics completes Internet perspectives that Google Alert only primitively initiates. In fact, I can readily integrate Google Alert into my SearchSpecifics app. Only then will Google Alert truly achieve its full potential.  
• To realize your PhD in Geography from Columbia University in 1985, attending other universities and institutions of higher learning along the way and ultimately becoming president of Brandeis University I’m assuming a few things … that is putting aside what they say about “assume” for a few minutes.
• Firstly, I assume you must have some capacity when presented with new ideas and concepts, you at least get the gist without needing much in the way of further details and elaboration. For instance I have no doubt you got the gist of the petition to fire Dr. Kolodny:
• Secondly, I assume in your experience you have learned that at times advice and information originating from “folks from the field” i.e. myself with only a high school diploma and some college can be every bit as valid and substantial as those with formal university degrees.
• Sometimes, I admit few and far between, “the field” can be much wiser and correct than those holding degrees and prominent positions. I contend your Dr. Kolodny is a quintessential example of just such a case.
• Thirdly and perhaps most importantly; I certainly assume you’ll agree for the opioid crisis or for that matter any crisis that has life and death ramifications to be solved, or if not possible at least contained; only the current best, most corroborated, validated, verified and vetted information and data should be considered.
• That’s only less than half of the full equation. The other is all of the information, data, facts and figures must be interpreted in the correct light; contexts, perspectives and proportionalities.
• I could have stated my third assumption here much more succinctly; but I purposely did not.  
  Obviously information and data in their own right don’t solve or best mitigate tremendous social problems and crises such as the opioid epidemic. Rather, correctly interpreting all facets of a serious issue or crisis does. This should be an unquestionable given and not open for debate.
• For a prestigious institution such as Brandeis to continue to endorse the thoroughly disproved and refuted contentions, ideas and opinions by Dr. Kolodny merely to save face and prestige and/or achieve a desired effect or objective under invalid premises ESPECIALLY makes you complicit to the danger to society that he is!
• Obviously you can see I’m not mincing words here and I stand by them with tremendous robust substance and veracity at my, and now your, easy reference.
• I fear congress and other government entities may write policy based on one of your Dr. Kolodny’s more notable pieces of severely flawed logic and mis/disinformation titled “The Opioid Epidemic In 6 Charts” that is pervading the Internet with webpage after webpage referencing it:
•  http://theconversation.com/the-opioid-epidemic-in-6-charts-81601
• Lawmakers undoubtedly (will) love his piece of opioid crisis excrement as it bends opioid facts and figures just right to invalidly justify and substantiate their already established sentiments. He like author Sam Quinones vilifies and demonizes the “Big Pharma” industry in general and the opioid contingent of it in particular.
• If you (ever) have the inclination, please refer to Mr. Quinones’ subpage I dedicated to him like here to your Dr. Kolodny:
• https://opioidmakersnotcauseofopioidcrisis.weebly.com/disputing-quinones.html
• The opioid crisis has made possible a trendy new bipartisan vote getting machine with Big Pharma such an easy, undeserving scapegoat.
• It’s a win-win situation for you Dr. Liebowitz, Brandeis University, by extension Dr. Kolodny and lawmakers. You/Brandeis and Dr. Kolodny get to bask in your undeserved, unfounded glow of increased notoriety and prestige while lawmakers get to bask in their sanctimonious self-righteous glow their (mis)conceptions having been substantiated by such (dubious) highly regarded authorities.
• The losers are the American public who have to deal with the hideous consequences of an eternal opioid crisis only getting worse by the day and optimum pain relief being set back by years due to bad policy based on invalid, incorrect insights and perceptions by the power that be.
• Never (you) mind that literally every point and conjecture made by Dr. Kolodny in his “Opioid Described In 6 Charts ” is thoroughly debunked in Josh Bloom’s:
• https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/10/12/opioid-epidemic-6-charts-designed-deceive-you-11935
• which has nowhere near the Internet footprint or presence of Dr. Kolodny’s flagship piece of hubris.
• But I’m going to try change all of that. I will now explain how by way of the common description so that “a fifth grader can understand it” and I’m continuing on with more of my assumptions.
• With my name being Joel Shapiro I assume you take me for being Jewish which I just happen to be. Brandeis is a Jewish Institution, no assumption there:
• http://www.brandeis.edu/about/jewish-roots.html
• and I’m assuming you’re at least of Jewish heritage. In fact I’ll bet my house on this one.
• Collectively of all the peoples in the world; Jews whether religious or secular should have special insight and understanding of the consequences when unfounded, disproved notions and concepts are permitted to propagate, grow, fester and evolve.
• With respect to us Jews, Gypsies and other racial and cultural minorities it was the widely held belief we were subhuman especially subscribed to by Adolph Hitler that laid the foundation for the highly efficient German extermination machine more commonly known as concentration camps.
• I assume you know these sentiments based on total fallacies still exist today. Need I go on Dr. Liebowitz? Do you get the gist of what I’m trying to convey here. I assume you do.
• So, how do I effectively legally tear down the vast inaccurate, invalid opioid policy “platform” that Dr. Kolodny has established, you/Brandeis endorse and which I consider such a threat to society?
  Well it’s going to be a daunting task
• Via my SearchSpecifics apps I can readily see Dr. Kolodny’s purposeful misconceptions, data skewing and mis/disinformation to suit his own purposes and objectives endorsed by you and Brandeis University are firmly entrenched and established on the Internet.
• It’s easy to see why and where he’s so innocently revered and embraced by so many.
• If I’m going to be effective in bringing down Dr. Kolodny’s invalid ironclad, armored plated Internet presence or footprint fortified by your seemingly unconditional support and encouragement Dr. Liebowitz; it’ll have than just a couple more web pages of mine exposing Dr. Kolodny for the fraud that he is.
• My new one or two webpages would undoubtedly just become lost in the bowels of the Internet right next to the aforementioned call for you fire Dr.Kolodny and the excellent point by point “6 Charts Designed To Deceive You” expose of Kolodny by Josh Bloom.
• The inherent problem I’m trying to address is if one is to read about and consider the case against Dr. Kolodny with your unbridled support of him, (s)he has to proactively find and bring up these webpages and documents.
• Also finding webpages and online critical of Dr. Kolodny does nothing for me and others to find and perhaps reach out to his supporters to set them straight. This is an entirely different challenge.
• Furthermore, “old school” Google searching using for example “Kolodny Andrew fraud” as my search terms will not give me an immediate birds’ eye view perspective of his overall Internet presence or footprint. And then, even with that realized I’ve no indictors which of the many web web pages returned likely better to examine before others.
• In a nutshell what I wanted was just a basic Internet profile app based on search engine (Google) results but a very flexible advanced one that I can easily tweak to my own very specialized filtering and categorization specifications.
• After a couple days of intense Internet searching for such a program or app, I couldn’t find any program or app that even remotely met my requirements. So like Newton and Leibniz who simultaneously invented the Calculus because the math at the time wasn’t sufficiently advanced to describe systems in a state of flux, I set about to creating my own app which would instantly allow me to see the extent of someone’s or something’s Internet footprint or presence and more.
• While my solution i.e. my SearchSpecifics app in its latest revision today functions better than I envisioned it would at the beginning; it will be a lifetime work in progress for me.
• Following in more detail is my unique Internet profile solution. Perhaps you have no interest in the more specific (no pun intended) details how I intend to uniquely and comprehensively expose Dr. Kolodny for the fraud and charlatan that he is and your endorsement of him … but then again you just might.
• To do this I need an example subject and (why not?) I’m going to use Dr. Kolodny.
  Picture I have a list of 255 assorted names (proper, general, trade etc.), terms and regular words I feel are associated with Dr. Kolodny Let’s call my list a “keyword list” thus however all entries are (un)related as they indeed may be; each entry of the list is another keyword.
• Now if my objective is to see which of the entries of my keyword list is present on a given webpage or online doc, or in another less useful reverse context; not present … right away I can see that simple “old school Googling” is not going to do the trick.
• Even if I perform multiple Google searches using a few terms that are but variations on a theme or one grand Google search with very complex search parameters using something called logical operators, it’s not going to get me the instantaneous overall perspective I’m looking for.
• Perhaps here you might want to interject: “Old school Googling has done just fine for me Mr. Shapiro I don’t need your app!” Well, I’ve heard this tune before. How do you conduct a one-pass Google search for all of them practical maximum of the 255 keywords in your list? Google doesn’t allow you that much room. And then how do you get that instantaneous overall perspective?
• I’d like to say my solution I’ve come up with; my SearchSpecifics app is the ultimate solution for what I had in mind, but rather it’s “a” very good one perfectly functioning realizing everything I envisioned from the start and more.
• So here’s the nitty-gritty of my SearchSpecifics without getting into its many neat nuances, subtleties and multilingual aspects.  If it seems irrelevant and even useless to you at first glance, just give it time. It might be an “acquired taste” for you.
• Firstly what I do is make the search engine (Google) search teams as simple as possible. Because “Kolodny” is such a unique name, the results of just using it should essentially be the same as “Andrew Kolodny” and this is indeed the case.
  Taking into consideration how many people with this surname and same respective fame or Internet presence as your Dr. Kolodny? Not many, and in this particular case virtually none.
• A better search than “Andrew Kolodny” is “Kolodny Andrew” which is exactly what I did for his Internet profile because Google gives preference and/or precedence to its search terms reading left to right.
• When Google performs its search on: “Kolodny Andrew” it first returns all the web pages and online docs that pertain to Andrew Kolodny (of Brandeis University) nobody else until all of the Kolodny references Google can find are exhausted. Then “just Andrew” results are returned on the coattails of the “Kolodny” primary search term.
• Obviously web pages/online docs that support Dr. Kolodny, deride him or are neutral are all in the mix of Google search return.
• To realize these distinctions SearchSpecifics “processes” each of the webpages and online docs returned by Google in the order they are received and brings them up in the background. The text of each webpage or online doc is compared or matched 1:1 with the entries of the keyword list.
• With a little or a lot of additional programming depending on my objective, the criteria for what constitutes a match can be very complex. While this is outside the scope of this document it still bears mentioning how much more powerful this aspect of makes SearchSpecifics.
• In the “off-the-shelf” SearchSpecifics which I’m only referring to in this document, when there is at least one match of any keyword in the text of a webpage or online document it’s URL link is posted to the SearchSpecifics “Main Dump” output file. Where there are multiple keywords matches they are listed in alphabetical order along with their respective “instance counts”.
• Here’s a perfect example:
• https://heller.brandeis.edu/facguide/person.html%3femplid%3dfed1af017db070b94ce59c13714f1e7970a787ad
  |addiction|latin-1|1|addiction|ENGLISH: en|
  |Administration|latin-1|2|Administration|ENGLISH: en|
  |Andrew|latin-1|4|Andrew|ENGLISH: en|
  |Brandeis|latin-1|74|Brandeis|ENGLISH: en|
  |Center|latin-1|4|Center|ENGLISH: en|
  |Chair|latin-1|1|Chair|ENGLISH: en|
  |co-director|latin-1|1|co-director|ENGLISH: en|
  |director|latin-1|4|director|ENGLISH: en|
  |Drug|latin-1|1|Drug|ENGLISH: en|
  |executive|latin-1|8|executive|ENGLISH: en|
  |Health|latin-1|9|Health|ENGLISH: en|
  |Heller|latin-1|91|Heller|ENGLISH: en|
  |heroin|latin-1|1|heroin|ENGLISH: en|
  |House|latin-1|1|House|ENGLISH: en|
  |Kolodny|latin-1|8|Kolodny|ENGLISH: en|
  |LinkedIn|latin-1|3|LinkedIn|ENGLISH: en|
  |List|latin-1|3|List|ENGLISH: en|
  |Maimonides|latin-1|1|Maimonides|ENGLISH: en|
  |Management|latin-1|8|Management|ENGLISH: en|
  |Medical|latin-1|2|Medical|ENGLISH: en|
  |national|latin-1|21|national|ENGLISH: en|
  |News|latin-1|25|News|ENGLISH: en|
  |Opioid|latin-1|4|Opioid|ENGLISH: en|
  |Phoenix|latin-1|1|Phoenix|ENGLISH: en|
  |Physicians|latin-1|5|Physicians|ENGLISH: en|
  |Policy|latin-1|14|Policy|ENGLISH: en|
  |Prescribing|latin-1|2|Prescribing|ENGLISH: en|
  |PROP|latin-1|2|PROP|ENGLISH: en|
  |Psychiatry|latin-1|1|Psychiatry|ENGLISH: en|
  |request|latin-1|2|request|ENGLISH: en|
  |Responsible|latin-1|1|Responsible|ENGLISH: en|
  |Ron|latin-1|6|Ron|ENGLISH: en|
  |School|latin-1|12|School|ENGLISH: en|
  |Social|latin-1|14|Social|ENGLISH: en|
  |Twitter|latin-1|9|Twitter|ENGLISH: en|
  |University|latin-1|6|University|ENGLISH: en|
  |YouTube|latin-1|3|YouTube|ENGLISH: en|
   
  At the end of the Main Dump which as the name implies is SearchSpecifics, primary output file, all of the webpages and online docs that were processed are listed by just their URL links. Importantly this listing is in order that Google generated them is listed; -not- in alphabetical order as the matching keywords.  
• I consider the Main Dump to be the lowest entity that constitutes a “SearchSpecifics profile”. Any “adjunct” file that enhances a SearchSpecifics profile is derived from the Main Dump.
• For only English SearchSpecifics profiles which currently is the only language I’m entertaining with respect to the opioid issue … a very special Excel file is generated which I call an “Inference Matrix”. Much more..
• Through it Dr. Liebowitz, I can immediately see where Brandeis University is mentioned in Dr. Kolodny’s profile in much more than just the mundane context of him being listed as a Brandeis staffer.
• What SearchSpecifics does after creating the Main Dump is take all of the entries of the keyword list and make each an Excel spreadsheet column header (Row 1). Every column is dedicated to a different keyword.
  Each subsequent row under Row 1 is respectively dedicated or assigned to the webpage or online document again, in the order each is generated by Google in its search results.
• You can see now where 255 is such a special number of for keywords. That is the maximum number of columns in a standard .xls spreadsheet minus one. In this context or perspective instead of the keywords being listed under the “header” of a URL link as in , the URL link is listed under the header of a keyword.
• The perspective provided by the Inference Matrix is much more powerful and enlightening than that of the Main Dump’s. From my simple Kolodny Andrew Google search there’s obviously going to be webpages and docs returned by Google that contain the word university in general and Brandeis in particular.
• As you look down the Brandeis keyword column you can see how soon when “Brandeis” makes its first appearance. If you consider the Brandeis column in totality, from this perspective you can get a sense or feel of Brandeis’ overall, but not specific importance of Brandeis to Dr. Kolodny’s life.
• Obviously, the more instances of webpage or online doc URL links appearing in the Brandeis column, the more solid and reliable your inference that Brandeis is an important aspect of Dr. Kolodny’s life and/or career will be.
• But, however large the number of the URL links in the Brandeis column may be, only taking “Brandeis” into consideration is of really limited value. Just the presence of “Brandeis” any one given or particular row i.e. webpage or online document gives you no context. There’s no indication if Brandeis is being cast in an (un)favorable or neutral light. You can’t tell.
• To get this perspective you have to look across the row and observe at what other keywords from the list are also present on that particular webpage or doc. One possible pertinent keyword with respect to Dr. Kolodny is the word “charts”. One of Dr. Kolodny’s more notable disinformation pieces on the opioid crisis is his aforementioned and unfortunately widely accepted “The Opioid Epidemic In 6 Charts”.
• But “charts” is also used in webpages meant to rebuke and debunk him as in the aforementioned article “6 Charts Designed To Deceive You” by Josh Bloom. While “charts” may be more useful in other contexts here the keywords “Bloom” and “Deceive” are two much more decisive for inferring that the webpage or document is going to be negatively critical of Dr. Kolodny. Josh Bloom is a known critic and debunker of Dr. Kolodny.
• With the negative aspect of the webpage or document once firmly established, further negative inference(s) can be made with respect to Brandeis for supporting such a charlatan.
• Dr. Liebowitz, if you’re still with me and haven’t cast me/my Email to you here aside long ago; I think, I assume you get the gist, the crux of what my SearchSpecifics app is about at this juncture.
  But I can still see where you could be undecided about its value of providing a unique picture scope and breadth of Dr.
• Kolodny’s purposeful skewing of opioid data that’s totally debunked As I said before; it’s an acquired taste.
  So with this assumption I leave with a couple tidbits how to get most out my SearchSpecifics app, a few extra assorted thoughts and my totally honest above-board offer to you. In my life threatening cancer situation I’ve no time for playing little mind games with you.
• 1.) If your objective is realize that picture-perfect profile fully supporting Dr. Kolodny or for that matter any person or subject with no hints of negativity or doubt; logically you want especially the family names or surnames of ONLY his ardent supporters and disciples in the keyword list. In this genre or context of course you’d like to see the presence of “Brandeis”.
• In compiling your ardent Kolodny supporter keyword list, where you just may want include yourself up to the current 255 entry limit for an Inference Matrix; a limit that will be moot in the near future as I will explain shortly, consider the how rare or distinct a given surname is.
• For common surnames like Smith, Jones etc. it’s wise to also include the first name for better distinction. You can also throw in some “warm and fuzzy” regular words like “expert” [sic], “authority” [sic] ad nauseum.
• The current maximum of 255 keywords at first glance appear more than enough but you’ll find all of the valuable “keyword slots” have a habit of filling up fast. The decision to keep one keyword candidate over another where you’d really like to include both often is not an easy one.
• OK There! If you’ve very carefully curated your keyword list in the figurative equivalent of Pollyanna wearing rose colored glasses; your SearchSpecifics profile may well indeed only shed a positive light on Dr. Kolodny, you and/or Brandeis.
• But maybe a few negative webpages will slip in. The same is true on the other side of a fence but with nowhere near the damaging equivalent order of magnitude. Again to avoid this you I can only emphasize you don’t want to mistakenly include the names of any detractors, debunkers or critics in your keyword list. Some examples of these are: Bloom or any one of the cosigners of the aforementioned “fire Kolodny petition” that was sent to you.
• If per chance coincidentally a (Kolodny) detractor and supporter should have the same last name I would highly advise omitting common last name from the keyword list; no matter how fervent and unconditional the Kolodny supporter, disciple or defender may be.
  From my experience with my SearchSpecifics app it takes only a few negative webpages to put some really bad karma on an otherwise perfect Pollyanna Brandeis-Kolodny mutual admiration lovefest profile.
• 2.) If you’re a regular user of Excel it may have occurred to you in reading this document the 255 column maximum I’ve oft been referring to up to this juncture is long outdated; kind of like the “oft” I’m using in this sentence instead of “often”. But if I am going to use “oft”, the context in which I just did is the most valid and appropriate. Go Google.
• https://www.dailywritingtips.com/oft-often-and-oftentimes/My objective here is not go off on some obscure tangential grammatical discourse but rather give you yet another example I know where I’m coming from, I know what I’m talking about without being a man of letters and degrees.
  Anyway, 255 just happens to be 2 to the power of 8 -1. At the time I started programming my SearchSpecifics this was the maximum columns a Microsoft spreadsheet (.xls) could have minus one (256 – 1).
• In the interim with exponential advances in technology, memory and hard drive space Microsoft came out with a much more advanced spreadsheet over its predecessor with a .xlsx file extension now having a maximum of 2 to the power of 14 – 1 or 16,383 columns. Of course by extension  this is/will be the new SearchSpecifics maximum keyword limit!
• With a maximum of 16,383 keywords, now the decision to in/exclude a given keyword really becomes moot for all practical purposes! I’m intently “retooling” my SearchSpecifics to accommodate this increased capacity. Unfortunately this retooling is more than editing a couple lines of Python computer programming code.
• With my touting of SearchSpecifics app my reputation, my claim to fame so to speak is being correct to the minutest detail for many things. For those of you who are very well versed in using Excel spreadsheets the “actual” maximum of columns for .xls and .xlsx spreadsheets are respectively 256 and 16,384.
• For reasons I won’t go into here I really need the “extra” column to conveniently generate my spreadsheet Inference Matrices. Sometimes for convenience, I knowingly incorrectly state 255 and 16343 as Excel column maximums.
• If you think you got a “gotcha” on me, you didn’t. And if you’re accusing me of promulgating incorrect information on an innocent, unsuspecting public knowing better … well mea culpa on this one!
• 3.) While I’m on the topic admitting things Dr. Liebowitz, I want to emphasize yes, where I’ve indeed addressed this Email letter directly to you, it is for all intents and purposes for the detractors and critics of your Dr. Kolodny for whom you’ve provided safe haven in the form of credence and undeserved respectability via your/Brandeis’ endorsement that has an esteemed reputation of higher learning.
• I intend to dismantle this Kolodny facade and you endorsement of it until the end of my days, using every ounce of energy I have left in my cancer ridden, pain wracked body and providing material support (un)knowingly along the way to my kindred spirits who share the same sentiments as I.
• My Email letter here to you will become the initial content of the special subpage I’ve just established totally devoted to rebuking, refuting and debunking your most dangerous Dr. Kolodny. Here’s the URL link to it:
• https://opioidmakersnotcauseofopioidcrisis.weebly.com/debunking-brandeis-dr-andrew-kolodny.html
• As Dr. Kolodny’s Internet presence expands and his supporters and advocates become known, they too will become uniquely categorized as part of his ominous overall Internet footprint/presence and easily referenced.
• 4.) And now I leave you with one final point or thought over and above most, if not all I’ve related so far that involves my “above board offer” I mentioned I was going to you make to you earlier.
• There is one area, context or venue where the bending information, data, facts and figures to suit a particular perspective and convince a special group of people to subscribe to it isn’t only accepted by society but endorsed!
• Obviously you know what I’m referring to; that venue being a court of law, the fact “benders” or “skewers” being legal prosecutors and defenders and the specialized group of course being a jury.
• In this specific context or paradigm you have immediate debate and give and take better known as cross-examination and testimony duly recorded for posterity by a court reporter.
• If (a) very sharp and astute defense attorney(s) present a very good defense ultimately freeing say a serial sexual predator and murderer on an obscure legal technicality and in his unfair and unjust but technically legal freedom the killer quickly goes out and kills again … indeed society in general and the new victim’s family in particular has been wronged.
• But at the terrible expense of the death of a person, the best legal system in the world which is that of the United States becomes stronger. The deadly legal loophole can be studied in retrospect by legal scholars from precise court testimony and patched that never another killer will be set free by that loophole which doesn’t exist anymore.
• This is not the case with the Brandeis endorsed Dr. Andrew Kolodny when he released his flagship “6 Charts That Describe The Opioid Crisis” document.
• Furthermore, neither he, you or Brandeis decided to take it upon yourselves to set up a forum to discuss the veracity of his contentions and conclusions especially in light they’re being severely challenged and correct perspectives on the opioid are a matter of life and death.
• I’m emphatically NOT being over-dramatic here simply for effect.
• So the debunked and invalidated tenets of Dr. Kolodny continue to flourish and propagate to all corners of the world unabated, unimpeded and unchallenged at Internet warp speed.
• Within this instantaneous global dissemination there’s a good chance that many who make policy from local to federal government legislating and other institutions innocently and ignorantly take him at his skewed perspective word without question. All that needs to be done is look the M.D. not board certified which doesn’t show after his name and Brandeis’ fine reputation.
• Do you see how dangerous this is? I assume you do. I kind of alluded to this previously in my letter here to you but I wanted to emphasize it as a closing thought.
• Dr. Liebowitz it’s obvious you, your Brandeis University and of course Dr. Kolodny who is being cc’d  in directly has no intention or inclination of providing a forum to provide a point by point discourse and debate.
• So I tell you what … in keeping with my vow of being totally fair and above board, if you, Dr. Kolodny or any of your staff wish to respond that the contentions in his “6 Charts That Describe The Opioid Crisis” are indeed valid and meritorious,
• I will post it on my webpage in a subpage all of its own pristinely verbatim, unabridged and uncommented.
• While the premise of my webpage is obviously on the whole against or antagonistic of the tenets of Dr. Kolodny, AT LEAST I’m providing a true venue for discourse and debate.
• There are corners of my webpage I can set aside where people can make their case again, unimpeded and absolutely verbatim with NO outside objections or commentary by myself or anybody else in that particular space.
• I vigorously contend I take my responsibility to be a guardian of this principle VERY seriously if you or Dr. Kolodny would like to take me up on my offer.
• I only hope you take as seriously the notion that information, ideas and contentions endorsed by Brandeis be as correct, valid and corroborated as possible as I make my preceding offer to you truly in good faith.
• After my closing salutation below that includes my contact information that is a part of the body of this letter you will find my SearchSpecifics Internet profiles of Dr. Kolodny. Notice your name and Brandeis is firmly embedded in the keyword list. Just as the computer you buy is literally outdated as soon as you walk out of the store, so are these profiles that are figuratively but not actually just snapshots of a moment in time.
• The only “true” SearchSpecifics profile are ones being conducted in an ongoing basis with a fluid, flexible keyword list. One last time I assume you get the gist.
• Thank you for your interest and consideration. I welcome and look forward to your correspondence.
• Best regards,
• Joel R ShapiroJoel Shapiro
  Rochester, New York 14618

  Phone numbers in order of preference:

  (585) 255-0997 (Cell – Call anytime – best to reach me)

  (585) 473-7013 (Home – 9:30 to 22:00 EDT/EST)
  (585) 250-8053 (Home – 9:30 to 22:00 EDT/EST)

  jrs_14618@yahoo.com

Filed under: General Problems | 6 Comments »

Filed under: General Problems | 1 Comment »

https://www.omnipod.com/Omnipod-system

Filed under: General Problems | 2 Comments »

Filed under: General Problems | 3 Comments »

This probably will not work as the President believes because there are several middlemen between the manufacturer and the pt who gets/needs the medications.  Two of those middlemen are insurance companies and PBM (Prescription Benefit Managers). They – sometime arbitrarily decide which medications they will pay for and/or demand kickeback/rebates/discounts from the pharma in order for the pharma’s meds to be on their approved formulary. So if Trump tries to implement a “favored nation status” to determine prices..  All of those Medicare Advantage and Part D programs are your basic for profit companies.  If the pharmas are required to cut their price to these entities… and won’t be in the position to pay those kickback, discount, rebates to those middlemen… the middlemen will just raise the premiums that pts pay, increase deductibles, increase copays.

Remember what happened when President Obama got his ACA (Affordable Care Act) with promises of everyone saving $2500/yr in premiums and being able to keep your doctor. Most people who were not “poor enough” to qualify for financial assistance on ACA’s premiums… they saw their premiums DOUBLE OR TRIPLE and their annual deductibles being upwards of approaching $10,000/per/yr.  Pts were unlikely to use be able to use their favorite doc or hospital and or other healthcare providers that they had used in the past or prefer to use.  The insurance companies – those who provided care under the ACA just shifted costs to people they insured.

The other option is as contracts with other country’s national insurance programs… the pharma just raise their prices over there … so that the “favored nation price” in other countries will start to rise… So in the end…. people in other countries will end up paying more for the meds and so will Americans… may be less than they were first raised to, but still more than they use to pay…  The for profit insurance/pbm industry will get their monies and profits.

Here’s a peek at the White House’s unreleased drug-pricing order

https://www.modernhealthcare.com/politics-policy/heres-peek-white-houses-unreleased-drug-pricing-order

Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »