Incentives for Doctors for Vaccinating Thier Patients? In Search of Hard Evidence.

[Sjgray]

I've heard several times over the past year, that doctors may be receiving some kind of incentive for administering the COVID vaccine. I became especially ially alarmed when my own doctor would refuse to listen to reason and insisted that the vaccines were safe and deductive.

I'm now on the hunt for any hard evidence that this type of incentive exists.

Please chime in if you have any info.

 

[jmparret]

This is a good quest.

 

[Peatness]

GPs to be paid between £15 to £30 per booster jab administered as roll-out ramps up

Amanda Pritchard said the NHS will ensure GPs are properly rewarded for their efforts

inews.co.uk

Most, if not all, medical schools are funded by big pharma. This is a world wide issue

Big pharma pours millions into medical schools — here’s how it can impact education - National | Globalnews.ca

The opioid crisis has highlighted the power of drug manufacturers when it comes to swaying physicians' prescribing habits, but exposure to industry starts much earlier on.

globalnews.ca

Clinical trials are tainted too

Big Pharma & Clinical Trials - Funding, Influence & Corruption

Big Pharma pays for the majority of clinical trials, and some experts believe companies may influence trial results by putting profits before people.

www.drugwatch.com

Who governs the medical schools? The London School of Tropical Medicine, for instance, has an interesting list of influential people on it's list of councils including persons from google and the Wellcome trust

Council | LSHTM

The Council is the governing body of LSHTM and has overall responsibility for its operational and strategic management.The Council delegates a number of management responsibilities to Council committees.Council members fulfil their roles in accordance with the constitutional document of this...

www.lshtm.ac.uk

 

[Perry Staltic]

I've heard several times over the past year, that doctors may be receiving some kind of incentive for administering the COVID vaccine. I became especially ially alarmed when my own doctor would refuse to listen to reason and insisted that the vaccines were safe and deductive.

I'm now on the hunt for any hard evidence that this type of incentive exists.

Please chime in if you have any info.

why don't you post what you've found so far? thx

 

[sunny]

This is the forum you found in your search for that info, with your new membership on December 29, 2021?

 

[Don]

I would say their livelihood. after spending all that time and $ for their indoctrination sorry i mean education, they cant turn back and have no choice but to go along for the ride.
sorry i know this isnt helpful..................

 

[Grapelander]

HOSPITALS’ INCENTIVE PAYMENTS FOR COVID-19
The CARES Act provides incentives for hospitals to use treatments dictated solely by the federal government under the auspices of the NIH. These “bounties” must paid back if not “earned” by making the COVID-19 diagnosis and following the COVID-19 protocol.

The hospital payments include:

• A “free” required PCR test in the Emergency Room or upon admission for every patient, with government-paid fee to hospital.
• Added bonus payment for each positive COVID-19 diagnosis.
• Another bonus for a COVID-19 admission to the hospital.
• A 20 percent “boost” bonus payment from Medicare on the entire hospital bill for use of remdesivir instead of medicines such as Ivermectin.
• Another and larger bonus payment to the hospital if a COVID-19 patient is mechanically ventilated.
• More money to the hospital if cause of death is listed as COVID-19, even if patient did not die directly of COVID-19.
• A COVID-19 diagnosis also provides extra payments to coroners.

CMS implemented “value-based” payment programs that track data such as how many workers at a healthcare facility receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Now we see why many hospitals implemented COVID-19 vaccine mandates. They are paid more.

Outside hospitals, physician MIPS quality metrics link doctors’ income to performance-based pay for treating patients with COVID-19 EUA drugs. Failure to report information to CMS can cost the physician 4% of reimbursement.

Because of obfuscation with medical coding and legal jargon, we cannot be certain of the actual amount each hospital receives per COVID-19 patient. But Attorney Thomas Renz and CMS whistleblowers have calculated a total payment of at least $100,000 per patient.

What does this mean for your health and safety as a patient in the hospital?

 

[Grapelander]

ACIP Members Who Voted to Jab Your Young Children — and Their Big Ties to Big Pharma
James Loehr
James Loehr, M.D. ([email protected]) owns Cayuga Family Medicine in Ithaca, New York. According to CDC, for 30 years Loehr has counseled patients “every day on the benefits of vaccines.” Loehr was a member of ACIP’s influenza working group for more than 10 years.

In 2015, Loehr authored an article with detailed instructions telling physicians how to “minimize costs and maximize reimbursement” to “make immunizations profitable.”

Describing how Cayuga Family Medicine “enjoys steady revenue from immunizations, with vaccine reimbursement sometimes exceeding that for the rest of the visit,” Loehr outlined a series of strategies to improve a practice’s financial viability through vaccination, including becoming a “savvy vaccine shopper,” taking advantage of manufacturer discounts and doing “a bit of additional work” when coding for the service to obtain extra reimbursement for “brief counseling” and multiple vaccine components.

At an October ACIP meeting focused on Moderna boosters that was, according to Stat, driven by a “sense of the inevitability of [the] outcome,” Loehr stated, “There are probably many people who are going to get a Moderna booster who don’t need it. However, given the situation that we’ve already approved a Pfizer [booster] and there are enough people who are looking for a booster, I am inclined, reluctantly, to just go ahead and recommend a similar pattern for the Moderna booster.”

Loehr was similarly wishy-washy the previous month when he stated, “I … feel that we’re getting too much ahead of ourselves and that we have too much hope on the line with these boosters.”

He then added, “However, having said that, we shouldn’t let the perfect be in the way of the good. And if we can do a little bit of good by giving boosters to people over 65 I’m in favor of that.”

Loehr is a past Vaccine Fellow of the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP). Speaking for AAFP, Loehr has noted that the medical trade group “does not support nonmedical immunization exemption policies.” AAFP does support COVID-19 vaccine mandates for health and long-term care workers, and last August, it also started lobbying FDA to authorize the vaccines for children under age 12.

Also of note:

• Like most of his ACIP peers, Loehr promotes himself as an expert on “strategies for addressing and overcoming vaccine hesitancy,” stating that “most patients…are not truly resistant to immunization” but just want “clarification and reassurance.”

 

[aaronkelman]

In Canada, specifically Ontario you can look up the OHIP codes. I believe it starts at around $140 and goes upwards depending on circumstances. This compared to around $45-60 for a regular visit. When you start stacking the billing codes it begins to add up very quickly especially for a busy office. Never mind the additional compensation for Pharm.

 

[Grapelander]

I think we also need to consider the payoffs at the top - NIH are allowed to make money off patents funded by public research.
Book: On The Take - How Medicine's Complicity With Big Business Can Endanger Your Health Jerome Kassirer MD ( 2004)

I was greatly surprised at David Willman’s expose in the Los Angeles Times about major conflicts of interest among some of the most prestigious scientists at the NIH. In an investigation that took five years, Willman discovered that in 1995 Varmus had quietly rescinded the policy that barred institute directors from accepting consulting fees and payments of stock from companies. Thereafter scientists could develop financial relations with industry as long as they received permission from their supervisors; permission was generally given. In addition, most of the financial arrangements were kept secret.

Willman discovered not only that some scientists had lucrative financial arrangements, receiving up to $600,000 over a ten-year period, but also that some were in a decision-making role that could affect the company’s welfare, a direct conflict of interest. He found, for example, that Dr. Stephen Katz, director of the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases, had collected $140,000 from Advanced Tissue Sciences, which itself had received $1.5 million in grants from Katz’s institute before going bankrupt. Willman reported that Dr. Thomas Kindt, director of research at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases had been paid $63,000 in consulting fees by Innovir Laboratories and was named an inventor on one of Innovir’s patents. Willman also reported that Dr. Ronald Germain, deputy director of the NIH’s Laboratory of Immunology, had taken fees “from a company collaborating formally with his laboratory.” Several of the top NIH scientists had consulted with a number of outside companies. In each instance, the scientists had received permission from their supervisors. Many had received permission from Dr. Ruth Kirschstein, then acting director of the NIH. When these revelations were published, Dr. Kirschstein opined that none of the arrangements had compromised the public interest because NIH scientists and directors are “highly ethical people with enormous integrity.

 

[Grapelander]

Doctors Prescribe More of a Drug If They Receive Money from a Pharma Company Tied to It

Doctors who receive money from drugmakers related to a specific drug prescribe that drug more heavily than doctors without such financial ties, a new ProPublica analysis found. The pattern is consistent for almost all of the most widely prescribed brand-name drugs in Medicare, including drugs that treat diabetes, asthma and more. The financial interactions include payments for delivering promotional talks, consulting and receiving sponsored meals and travel.

We studied the 50 most-prescribed brand-name drugs in Medicare for which drugmakers had made payments to doctors in 2016. The drugs include treatments for diabetes, asthma, high cholesterol, hypertension, glaucoma and more. Among our findings:

• Of those 50 drugs, 38 cost more than $1,000 per year.
• For 32, at least 10% of doctors prescribing the drug received payments tied to the drug from the company that made it.
• For 46 of the drugs in 2016, doctors who received payments for the drug prescribed more of it compared with doctors who did not.
• On average, doctors who received payments prescribed 58% more of that drug than doctors who did not.

 

[Grapelander]

Video: Find out how much your doctor or hospital is being paid by big pharma here is how to do it

https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/

Search for payments made by drug and medical device companies to physicians and teaching hospitals.
Open Payments data is from January 2014 through December 2020. See our about page for more information.

On January 21, 2022 the Open Payments data was refreshed. The refreshed data reflects changes that took place since the June 2021 data publication. To learn more about the Open Payments program including reporting and publication information, visit cms.gov/openpayments.

On January 1, 2021, the program expanded to include five additional provider types: physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified registered nurse anesthetists and anesthesiologist assistants, and certified nurse-midwives.

Program Year 2021 will be the first data set that the newly added covered recipients will be included in. This will publish in June 2022!

 

[Peatness]

Pharmaceutical companies' payments to healthcare professionals

Table 1. Centralised databases of transfers-of-value information


1.Belgium

Be Transparent register

2.Czech Republic

The EFPIA Disclosure Code and the Transparent Cooperation initiative. Association of Innovative Pharmaceutical Industry (AIFP):

3.Denmark

List of pharmacists, doctors, nurses and dentists affiliated with companies.

List of persons receiving financial support from companies for professionally relevant activities abroad or international professionally relevant congresses and conferences in Denmark.

4.France

Health transparency database

5.Netherlands

Transparency register

6.Portugal

Transparency and Advertising platform

7.Romania

National Agency for Medicines and Medical Devices

8.United Kingdom

Disclosure UK

9. USA

Open Payments

What is Open Payments? | CMS

www.cms.gov

View: https://medium.com/u4-anti-corruption-resource-centre/pharmaceutical-payments-to-healthcare-professionals-55f1e0a5445b

 

[Grapelander]

 

[Grapelander]

article: How Fact-Finding Fauci Led To My Cancellation At Forbes - The inside story of how it happened. Adam Andrzejewski

The controversy surrounding Dr. Fauci’s finances reached a fever pitch in January of this year, and my column at Forbes was right in the middle of it.

In the Senate hearing on January 11, 2022, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), cited my Forbes article in his questioning of Dr. Fauci’s salary and his financial disclosures. First, Fauci claimed his financials were “public knowledge,” then, the hot mic caught the doctor calling the senator a “moron.” It was Fauci’s code red moment and one of the top national news stories of the day.

As reported by The Washington Post, when Fauci went back to NIH, he admitted, “Maybe the senator has a point. Maybe my financial investments, though disclosed and available, should be much easier to see.” In fact, Fauci’s financials were not available and I had firsthand knowledge.

Immediately, I published the evidence behind the lack of transparency at Forbes on January 12: No Fauci’s Records Aren’t Available. Why Won’t NIH Immediately Release Them? During an entire year, NIH had refused to produce Fauci’s job contract, job description, non-disclosure agreement, conflict of interest, financial disclosures, ethics agreements, and royalties subject to our OpenTheBooks FOIA request. In October 2021, we sued NIH with Judicial Watch and we still hadn’t received the 1,200 pages promised by the agency.

On January 12, Sen. Marshall wrote a demand letter to NIH for Dr. Fauci’s unredacted ethics/financial disclosures. In the letter, Marshall included footnotes that referenced my Fauci-Forbes columns.

On Friday, January 14 at 5:00 pm ET, NIH produced Fauci’s unredacted ethics/financial disclosures from 2019 and 2020 subject to Sen. Marshall’s demand letter.The 2020 disclosures had never been released and only heavily redacted 2019 disclosures were previously released.

Working through the night, I dug through the 178 pages of disclosure and published the breaking investigation at Forbes on Saturday, January 15 at 3:03 pm ET, Disclosures Show Dr. Fauci’s Household Made $1.7 Million In 2020, Including Income, Royalties, Travel Perks And Investment Gains.

Our findings included:

• Net worth: The Fauci household net worth exceeded $10.4 million.
• Earnings and gains: Salaries, benefits, royalties, investment gains in the Fauci household exceeded $1.7 million in 2020.
• Fauci’s wife: Christine Grady, the chief bioethicist at NIH made $234,284 in 2020.
• Royalties: Fauci made between $100,000 and $1 million as an editor and board member of McGraw-Hill.
• Awards: In 2021, Fauci was awarded a $1 million prize for “speaking truth to power” from the Dan David Foundation in Israel.

These were newsy findings.

 

[Grapelander]

Nonprofit Watchdog Uncovers $350 Million In Secret Payments To Fauci, Collins, Others At NIH | ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

“We believe there is an unholy conflict of interest inherent at NIH,” he said. “Consider the fact that each year, NIH doles out $32 billion in grants to approximately 56,000 grantees. Now we know that over an 11-year period, there is going to be approximately $350 million flowing the other way from third-party payers, many of which receive NIH grants, and those payments are flowing back to NIH scientists and leadership.”

 

[Grapelander]

"COVID-19 Pills" Cause Deadly Relapses and Supercharge Mutations. U.S. Approves Remdesevir for Babies - Global Research

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version). To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here. Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and...

www.globalresearch.ca

So far, all of the drugs developed against COVID-19 have been disastrous in one way or another. Remdesivir, for example, which to this day is the primary COVID drug approved for use in U.S. hospitals,1 routinely causes severe organ damage and, often, death.

Despite its horrible track record, the U.S. government actually pays hospitals a 20% upcharge for sticking to the remdesivir protocol, plus an additional bonus. Hospitals must also use remdesivir if they want liability protection.

Incentives like these have turned U.S. hospitals into veritable death traps, as more effective and far safer drugs are not allowed, and hospitals are essentially forced to follow the recommendations of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As reported by Forbes science reporter JV Chamary back in January 2021, in an article titled, “The Strange Story of Remdesivir, a COVID Drug That Doesn’t Work”.

 

[Grapelander]

Post Media Misinformation and Lies Here

View: https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1535021430764609539

raypeatforum.com

 

[Grapelander]

This is exactly why we have inflation - they printed money like a crackhead.

HE'S PAID $6 MILLION TO VIOLATE YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS​

CITY OF LOS ANGELES EMPLOYEES: Meet the Man who is Persecuting you

 

[Peatful]