About Traditional Health Care

The medical standard of care for a most medical conditions is a legal definition which prevents liability based on legal criteria set by a service community.  Within that community the standard of care is a collaborative definition that “reasonable prudence” in delivery of technology to an individual.

The sole goal of the standard of care is the “avoidance of negligence“.  Sadly the standard of care legal model has been distorted to limit advancement of quality of service in healthcare.   Health care professionals are unable to advancement because individuals acting outside “accepted standard” may be considered negligent.

The “regulatory approval process” has become facade for anticompetitive market control which bars disruptive technology from gaining regulatory approval.  This situation is due to nepotism in the FDA is funded by, and run by the pharmaceutical industry.  Everybody knows it.

A defacto vulnerability arises the dominant  progress because with a duty of care are legally discouraged from innovation.  This concept pattern has undermined advancement in health care because it prohibits the most qualified individuals from contributing to the advancement of the science of health care out of fear of litigation, or license revocation.

The defacto standards in health care degenerated the notion of chronic disease.  Widespread adoption of palliative care absolved the traditional health care community of the legal, but not ethical responsibility to treat cause.

It also supercharged the revenue potential from chronic disease by eliminating the need to deliver curative care. Treatment forever is a long term revenue stream; curing a condition stops the revenue.

This revenue model caused a core conflict of interest in with corporate health care providers – who as corporations, have charter responsibility to make money — not to cure people.

Word Games

The health care provider community shifted standards from cure to treatment enabled by the popular acceptance of  chronic disease, and the notion of  incurable.

The broad acceptance that a condition is incurable, the more foolish it is to try to cure it.  Therefore anybody foolish enough to try to cure something  is delusional and therefore must be negligent.

If they are foolish enough to say they can cure something, they are making a claim.  To make a claim, they must obtain approval from a regulatory agency, which has a defacto charge to protect the their primary funding sources, the pharmaceutical industry.

This situation violates a variety of ethical considerations, and insults public trust – and deserves no further comment.

As a result a language has evolved:

• Disease – a proprietary symptom set that results in a treatment
• Treatment – a process to control the symptoms of a disease
• Cure – An impossible goal for any disease
• Claim – A statement of benefit disallowed without regulatory agency approval;
• Approval – A grant of right which will be declined due to conflict of interest of the grantor.