Wednesday, July 19, 2017

FIXING HEALTH CARE

The answer to the health debacle created by Obama, Pelosi and their minions is: expand Medicaid, expand Medicare and provide a minimum level of guidance to the private sector to create useful health insurance plans. The rest will work itself out. A close read of Obamacare's original legislation displays with certainty it was more about the redistribution of wealth than improving Americans' health care. Mark Davis author of Obamacare Dead on Arrival, A Prescription for Disaster.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

There is a Devil in Our Soup


There is a Devil in Our Soup

Far from a rational approach to the spread of nuclear weapons America in recent years has tiptoed around this issue. With extreme poor judgment the Obama Administration sanctioned Iran’s nuclear program with financial incentives beyond the ken of most people. Rogue states live in the shadows spreading their venom whenever and wherever they can. More recently North Korea has been testing missiles over inhabited territories which have the potential to carry the ultimate bombs. Nuclear armed rogue nations will use these weapons. It is just a matter of time. Extensive diplomacy continually fails when hate filled minds are the end receptors of these dialogues. To stop these Devils from releasing their venoms will require  antidotes more severe than most would care to envision. What do you believe is the correct approach to challenge this evil?

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Overzealous Medical Boards


Overzealous Medical Boards

Medical Boards have gone beyond policing of physicians to unconscionable intrusion into medical practice. Complexity of administrative law governing physician licensing and subsequent maintenance of licensure requires a knowledge beyond the ken of most physicians. Medical Boards employ their own attorneys and or utilize those from the Attorney General’s Office in the state from which medical licenses are derived. Without knowing the intricacy of medical board regulatory function a physician has no chance of obtaining an impartial hearing. Fair and balanced should not be expected from adversarial government entities. Medical Boards across the country have garnered more power as physicians blindly kowtowed to each and every edict they generated. Medical Societies, with few exceptions, no longer protect the flock that pay their way. Social and economic impact from a negative Board maneuvers against a physician can be devastating. Therefore the proper push back is a moral imperative.

As a former practicing physician I have seen the lengths a state board will go to prove a lie against you is true. Standards of Care may not be as standard as those empowered by us want you to believe. Through the use of hired guns, also called medical vigilantes, medical boards can make a case where none exists. Administrative courts, where your supposed impartial hearing is to take place, are nothing more than biased forums to cement the outcome the Medical Board is seeking. In the event a hearing goes your way most Boards have the right to flip the positive court outcome against you. The latter statement is factually true as this author has experienced. Medical Boards have moved far afield from their original intent. These administrative entities are self-serving meaning sanctioning is their reason for existence. By sanctioning as many physicians as possible the public perception is they are doing a fine job. Boards have forgotten physicians have rights too. Yet these entities cherry pick regulations to effectuate the preconceived outcome they want. Do not go before a Board or a Court without “appropriate” counsel. The end result could be devastating to your career.
Mark Davis MD platomd@gmail.com   medicalboardusa.com

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

Do Republicans really vote against their constituents’ interests?

Commentary by James Shott


It is not news – not even fake news – that the political Right and the political Left do not see things the same way; they are different, just as men and women are. The Left frequently sees things as problems that the Right does not regard as problems, and vice versa. And even when the two sides agree that something is a problem, they have different ways of addressing it. The gulf between the two factions is wider today than ever before.

The idea that Republican voters sometimes/often vote against their own interests is a Democrat talking point, and was the subject of a New York Times podcast that was discussed in a National Review online article by senior writer David French recently. The podcast host, Times managing editor Michael Barbaro, interviewed domestic-affairs correspondent Sheryl Gay Stolberg, who cited the situation in the state of Kentucky, one of the states that suffered mightily when the War on Coal put enough people out of work to run Kentucky’s coal jobs to their lowest level in 118 years.

The out-of-work miners, forced onto Medicaid by the War on Coal, benefited greatly from Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion, Stolberg said, “yet, its Republican senators are leading the charge for Obamacare repeal, including for Medicaid reform. How can that be?”

The answer to that question comes from the different ways of looking at the world and at life from opposite sides of the political spectrum.

Which of the following sets of ideas do you most closely observe?
1. The nuclear family is an antique idea, traditional ideas of morality and culture are holding us back, sexual autonomy is a virtue, and we just can’t get by without government “help.”
2. First, we graduate from high school, get a job to sustain ourselves, get married, and then have children and raise a family.

If you chose 1, you likely lean toward the political Left; if you chose 2, you likely lean toward the political Right. These different views of how to live our lives define why Republicans vote against what seem to be their interests.

“Now, between the two parties, which one has centered its appeal around married parents with kids and which party has doubled down on single moms,” French asks? “Even worse, the Democrats’ far-left base has intentionally attacked the nuclear family as archaic and patriarchal. It has celebrated sexual autonomy as a cardinal virtue. Then, when faced with the fractured families that result, it says, ‘Here, let the government help,’” he writes.

How does this relate to Kentucky’s Republican Senators? They are voting on their ideas of what makes America great, and according to French, those interests “depend on the complex interplay between our faith, our families, and our communities.” It’s all about core values.

New York Times columnist David Brooks traces these values back to American frontier towns, where life was “fragile, perilous, lonely and remorseless,” where a “single slip could produce disaster,” and as a result the frontier folk learned to practice “self-restraint, temperance, self-control and strictness of conscience.”

Those values are at the heart of the American experience of carving a powerful and free republic out of a wilderness, a nation that has as a result led the world for decades. They reflect the Biblical values brought here and cultivated during America’s first turbulent and troubled decades, and which formed the basis of the government created following the “Colexit” of the Colonies from Mother England’s repressive grasp.

Republicans, or at least those who are true conservatives, honor the ideals of freedom, personal responsibility, self-reliance, and limited government, and to a less-than-perfect degree – but a far-greater degree than those who call themselves liberals, progressives, or socialists – try to live by these values.

Kentucky’s Republican Senators dislike the government’s solution to the problem that the government itself created when it over-regulated nearly everything, and so they see a vote against maintaining this absurdity as a virtuous one. They prefer a system freeing Americans to make their own decisions about healthcare and health insurance without the one-size-fits-nobody concept that the Democrats created that we commonly call Obamacare.

Their vote seemingly punishes those they should most want to help: their constituents and supporters. But the bigger picture shows instead the desire to free their constituents from the damaging big government policies that put them on the government dole. The want to create an environment where they can find another job that can sustain them above the poverty line, and off of Medicaid.

Republicans want to do away with this Democrat-created problem. Their fundamental goal is to free Americans from this horrible, failed big government mechanism. Its aim was to ultimately create a single-payer, totally government-controlled healthcare system that would mirror the British system. You know the one: it recently took control of decisions on seriously ill infant Charlie Gard’s care away from his parents, and effectively ordered the Charlie’s death.

That case demonstrates precisely how government-run healthcare can, and likely will, degenerate into a system where government makes decisions about who lives and dies. And that explains why Republicans seem to vote against their constituents’ interests.

Friday, July 07, 2017

From Entitlement to Intolerance to Expectation


From Entitlement to Intolerance to Expectation

      Until recently I thought there was a specter of hope in the entitlement community where they would see the proverbial writing on the wall. Freebies may be coming to an end, as they know them. The welfare set has become too emboldened recently as though society owes them for past grievances. Collectively we owe them nothing. Through protest, violence, misrepresentation of facts and finally murder their words and deeds speak for themselves. In certain quarters the latter elements are actually forgiven and or given a pass.

College and universities have become the newest battleground to spew hatred from those who condemn work and scholarship. Diminished standards placed these radicals in institutions which formerly would have rejected them. Coincident with their intolerance to other subsets of civil society a truly emboldened crowd has manifest an unheard of anger towards those who keep us safe. Calling for the annihilation of police steps over any line that can be drawn. Time has come to resurrect policies that have a measured approach in silencing this hideous rhetoric. What should our approach be to these malevolent attitudes and actions? Mark Davis   

Friday, June 02, 2017

UnMasking the Maryland Board of Physicians


Unmasking of the Maryland Board of Physicians





Maryland Board of Physicians is managed by attorneys not physicians. This Board’s constituent members, physicians, are incidental to the administrative efforts and processes of this Board. Language descriptive to the type of people who partake in this Board’s management would be inappropriate in this article. Needless to state they are the bottom of the barrel. On or about 1992 the medical license of Mark Davis MD was revoked. The circumstances of this revocation were based on frivolous and illicit actions by this Board. An article is posted at:       https://onandoffthehill.com/2017/05/04/corruption-entrenched-in-marylands-highest-legal-circles/  describing their illicit actions along with supportive documents. Yes, Soviet style justice is practiced at the highest levels in Maryland. Reading further one will see how criminal they are.  



After being viciously debased in the media by former Maryland Attorney General J. Joseph Curran and the Board of Physicians with claims of poor patient care, that never occurred, Dr. Davis filed an unprecedented lawsuit. This case was filed on or about 1994 at the Anne Arundel County Maryland Circuit Court. As the plaintiff in the case, who represented himself, the court was uninterested in his legal filing and dispensed with the case quickly, though each and every fact stated was verifiable. All the defendants were given immunity and the case was dismissed. The Anne Arundel case and its appeal to the Court Special Appeals (in full) are both located at the link below this article to substantiate the factual nature of Dr. Davis’ assertions.



In 1994 Case number 1819, September Term was to be heard by a 3 judge panel in the Court of Special Appeals. The Appellant, Mark Davis MD who brought this case, was approached in the outer area of the courtroom by 2 members of the Maryland Attorney General’s Office. The exchange of verbiage that occurred was both illuminating and extremely outside normal legal processes. These 2 men prostituted themselves by stating in the event Dr. Davis dropped this case, before it was heard by the Court, the Maryland Attorney General’s Office would enable him to have his medical license reinstated. Dr. Davis’, who was representing himself, considered the offer and accepted it in good faith. Sadly this faith was misplaced. In the event this case was heard by the Court a scandal of extreme proportions would have rocked the state and potentially the State of Maryland would have had to pay out millions in retribution to those who were falsely accused. Worse the people of the State of Maryland would have found out how corrupt their Attorney General was. The profound level of deception, misrepresentation and misuse of government office was beyond belief. After Dr. Davis dropped the case he was invited to appear before the Maryland Medical Board to have his medical license reinstated.



In 1995 Dr. Mark Davis represented himself before 15 members of the Maryland Board of Physicians (now the Board has 21 members). Board members asked several questions yet avoided others which were more important. Dr. Davis told them there were no medical malpractice cases filed against him, the other physician staff members, the auxiliary staff or the nursing home where the so-called horrific patient care “never” took place. Dozens of medical records had been requested by attorneys. The nursing home had an umbrella malpractice insurance policy with maximum coverage. Each physician had maximum coverage for that time period (1989-1990). If you are suspicious that a false action occurred against Dr. Davis, you are correct. Quizzically none of the 15 members of the Board or Board’s assigned lawyers discussed any aspect of the Court of Special Appeals’ case. The 1995 Board knew they had been misled and had made a huge mistake against Dr. Davis. The good doctor was told to leave the room. Approximately 1 hour later he was called and told his license was reinstated unanimously by Board membership. In the event you believe this was a wrong made right, it wasn’t. Instead the Board through its attack dog, the Maryland Attorney General’s Office, had ulterior motives.



On or about June of 2001 Dr. Davis received a subpoena for medical records. This was immediately after Dr. Davis’ 5 year supervised probation by the Board was completed.  Ten charts requested were immediately sent to the quality assurance section of the Board. This was the beginning of a decade long assault on Dr. Davis’ medical license. After a series of legal encounters and the Medical Board’s disregard for its own written rules Dr. Davis received a document that accused him of violating the Medical Practices Act. Dr. Davis was being charged nearly 6 years after the initial request for medical records, though resolution usually occurs within one year by regulation. The charging document was a series of false allegations, innuendos and misrepresentations written by Robert Gilbert from the Maryland Attorney General’s Office.  Five charts were cited by two physician medical record reviewers in the document. Surprisingly one of the reviewers chosen by Mr. Gilbert, who was chief of a medical department at a local hospital, stated Dr. Davis did not transgress any standards of care. The second physician, Ira Kaplan, was engaged to review medical records from a company that Dr. Davis had sued nearly a decade before. Was this a coincidence, absolutely not.                                



To abbreviate this portion of the story Dr. Kaplan was not an expert in “diet medications” on which the charges was based though the judge reviewing the case accepted him as one. Dr. Kaplan’s only claim for being a medical records reviewer, in this case, was his background in Internal Medicine. Dr. Kaplan’s lack of knowledge of diet medications was obvious when he was cross examined. He might as well have been a carpenter. The Administrative Court found for Dr. Davis in the “majority”, though he was not allowed to present evidence, documents and bring in expert or patient witnesses (see forthcoming e-book Anatomy of a Medical License Revocation). The Board turned the administrative judge’s opinion around 180 degrees and gave Dr. Davis a 3 year revocation though Board members never heard the case directly themselves. After requesting reinstatement from the Board in a hearing during December 2016 they turned down his application. Additionally the Order from Board noted they would not entertain any further reinstatement applications. This case scenario sounds unbelievable yet it happened here in Maryland. This infamous case will be laid out in detail in the aforementioned e-book presently being written. One additional point is a Public Information Request was placed with the Board for all documents, recordings and paperwork related to the December 2016 hearing. The Board outright refused this request, hid behind regulations as the reason to refuse the request and then told Dr. Davis to seek judicial recourse knowing the courts generally side with Maryland Administrative entities. If they are innocent of collusion and corruption why hide information related to this request? It is ironic that the Board hides behind their regulatory authority to protect themselves yet they did not follow the same regulations in Dr. Davis’ case.



The Maryland Board of Physicians, it chief executive Christine Farrelly along with a member of the Maryland Attorney General’s Office Robert Gilbert should be investigated for the following; filing a false charging document, obstructing due process, violating the rights of a physician, violating written physician Board  regulations, lying to judicial officers and revoking a physician’s license based on zilch. Please review the attached document at the link noted below. Please allow a few seconds for this site to open. These are the documents that Maryland’s Attorney General J. Joseph Curran did not want the media to see.

 



Mark Davis MD, platomd@gmail.com                                
https://onandoffthehillcom.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/1994-court-of-special-appeals.pdf

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

Donald Trump versus the Snake of Eden


With the artful movements of the snake in Eden former President Obama is bringing his venomous tones against Trump to whomever will listen. Charged with a single minded crusade to disrupt Trump, hence democracy, Obama’s deranged mind believes disorder and chaos work better in a world full of hate and religious intolerance. The inconvenience of order does not play well with someone who failed, in 8 years, to do little more than feed the coffers of his personal flock. Obama’s derangement does not stop at the frontiers of his mind it has infected many others. Slime never rises above the level in which it moves. Obama’s is exploiting his former position as he did when he held the presidency.  In neither case did it help the little girl with the lemonade stand on the corner or her father struggling to make the rent. When the political dust falls Trump will stand tall as history writes of a former President who was a shadow of the man who replaced him. God speed to Donald Trump for taking on the snake of Eden’s failures. Mark Davis MD. platomd@gmail.com speaker, media consultant, author and a true patriot.