Many people have chronic conditions and most are treatable or under control. I have had chronic kidney problems for the last 13 years, common enough and the drugs I take, and my diet keep it under control.
I do not believe in conspiracy theories about Big Pharma, generally. I know that is not what you are saying, but while Big Pharma is a capitalist invention, and they can be selective in what they work on, my experience is that all Pharma and all Medical Research places do outstanding work keeping people well.
Trump is hard to trust, and while he says things that may sound appealing, he has never gone against any large corporation, and it just does not sound to me like this would ever happen.
All that said, even though I have no like for anything out of Scotch College, I hope they find that wonder drug that solves your chronic problem. It is not like I care, more like if you go, then it is one less antagonist on BBlitz who makes me laugh with their inane postsā¦
In Australia, Ministers have come into portfolios without specific education in the area, but have been mostly competent, at time successful. Iām thinking of our most recent Health Ministers ( as well as some of our Treasurers).
The worry is draining the swamp of expertise . Senior level bureaucratic appointments have always been subject to Ministerial decision, but if Trump reforms of the public sector take it further down the line, the relevant Minister can be captured by snake oil salesmen. Government grants for funding of private sector research could be primarily assessed on a transactional basis.
There will be further disarray if the relevant statutory bodies such as FDA or CDC are dismantled or politicised. The American shining light will be extinguished , with other western countries scrambling to de risk from our reliance on US expertise.
( This , at a time when our own review of the Covid pandemic recommends the equivalent of the CDC)
So some of the environmental solutions to chronic diseases and the emerging fertility epidemic that are showing signs of being research proven (not there yet though) include:
reducing the use of hydrocarbons for heating and cooking, particularly in homes
reducing hydrocarbon based emissions from vehicles
reducing the use of glyphosate in food production
reducing the use of hormones in meat production
reducing plastic waste
reducing the prevalence of petrochemicals in food, food storage and cosmetics, particularly BPAs and phthalates
I donāt have an issue with any of those things in principle but the chances of a republican government doing anything about any of those is zero.
The chance of Trump doing any of those things is less than zero.
Iāll add that having RFK there will shine a light on lot of these things for the broader population but it will be at the cost of evidence based approaches to medical research which have unfortunately proven him wrong on several occasions. MMR vaccine link to autism being the most obvious example, but there are plenty.
Fortunately we still have local and European institutions that will continue to do the great work that they have done to advance medical care and put names on chronic conditions that are in the process of being solved but are not there yet.
My recollection is that during the pandemic Trump sought to personally profit by recommending things that he had a business interest in (donāt recall details, wonāt be spending time checking). So we have an example of his behaviour from last time. Donāt see how it will be different this time. He probably sees how profitable pharmaceuticals are and wants to get in on it.
Itās the 24th of November 2024. The russo-Ukraine war is ongoing.
Putin even recently launched an ICBM with dummy warheads at Dnipro just to make point.
I want to know: Why hasnāt he stopped the war yet?
All these laudable goals require increased regulation, a strong EPA, and increased cost on businesses who have gotten very comfortable the way things are.
The Republican platform is entirely based around cutting regulation, reducing cost on businesses (they can go ham with executive salary costs, mind you) and destroying the EPA. None of this is compatible with any of the big target goals now being trumpeted.
(My personal theory is that this is one of the reasons so many Republicans and right-wingers in general are climate change deniers. Theyāre ideologically opposed to regulation, AGW is a problem that can only be solved with regulation, therefore AGW must be forcibly defined as not being a problem so peopleās comfy worldviews can remain intact)
Trumpās alway been about the big announcement and no or botched followthrough though. Space Force, the border wall, fkg everything. Remember when, pre-2016 election, he said he was going to bring peace to the middle east because he knew how to make a deal? Yeah, howās THAT one getting on? But thereās always some new Springfield residents excited about his promise to build the monorailā¦
The problem that chronic illness would cause Trump the most concern is the cost to provide remaining lifetime medical care. So most likely his ultimate decision will be to cut federal funding of medical support for chronically ill people and with the money saved he can give a tax cut to the rich.
Or the Greedy Old Paedophile party could bring in Soylent green. Makes money for bidness, eliminates most health care costs, so can give even bigger tax cuts to the rich.
USDA has the Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) providing benefits to low income workers. USDA has an overall Federal Nutrition Service for the administration of 16 nutrition programs.
The Food Stamps program also has a nutrition education component, co funded by the States and Feds.
The Washington swamp, which enables the disposal of US agricultural produce.
The moderate Republicans in Congress appear to have prevented the Gaetz appointment without having to put it to a vote.
Watch this space on Republican voting as the others go through Congress.
