[“Liberal”] Kapur’s argument amounts to the following: Democrats passed a law that had and still has insufficient public support (points 1 and 4), that cannot achieve its goals without unconstitutional means (point 2), that did not allocate the necessary resources to accomplish its objectives (point 3), and that lacks and still lacks even minimal support across the political aisle (all four points).
That sounds very much like the conservative critique of ObamaCare. At this point it’s fair to say that ObamaCare opponents have won the argument. Of course, since supporters won the political battle three years ago (and Obama won re-election), this monstrosity is now the law of the land, ensuring that both sides’ victories will have been Pyrrhic.
It has become very clear to everyone involved who is analytical and not ideological that the rational strategy, for both large and small firms, is to cease providing health care insurance to employees.
No company wants to admit that they are considering eliminating health insurance as an option, or be the first one to drop their health insurance plan, but once a competitor does so, the preference cascade will begin. The clear sentiment is “We will not be the first one to drop our health insurance plan, but we would be a close second.”
The coming preference cascade for employer group health plans is what the Democrats fear the most, because Obamacare was sold to the masses as “if you like your health insurance plan, you can keep it.”
Which was always a lie, of course.
I think the Democrats will be reaping a whirlwind in the next two election cycles.
It isn’t hard to see why nobody is clamoring to take a job that offers low pay and lots of regulations and will make everyone in the country hate you.
But it’s been clear from the beginning that this is the kind of thing you get with a massive, centralized health care “fix” like Obamacare: 15 unhappy people in a room making enormously important but impossible to predict decisions affecting a broad and diverse industry (not to mention the lives and health of millions). It’s hard to imagine a centralized approach getting all the nuances of health care right—and we certainly haven’t stumbled onto the miracle cure here.
The human body’s immune systems protect us from harmful substances. But the body often rejects conventional antibiotics. But the new materials can work because they change themselves once they come into contact with water in the body or on its surface. The material self-assembles into a new polymer structure that is electrostatically attracted to the bacteria membranes (it’s like putting oil and water together). The polymers then break through the cell membranes, destroying the cell. The bacteria, which have amazing adaptive capabilities, can’t adapt to this kind of physical attack.
It works because cells have a natural electric charge. The polymers are drawn only to infected areas. Other antimicrobial materials aren’t biodegradable, but these new materials are made of simple organic molecules. That means they can naturally exit the body, in contrast to other medicines that gather in the body and cause side effects. That means it isn’t likely to cause skin irritation or other problems.
The polymers also swell into a gel form that doctors can easily manipulate. Hedrick said they can do so because of a “molecular zipper effect.” That is, the polymers interlock in the same way that zipper teeth do. When you move them around, they simply re-zip into a form that is deadly to bacteria.
The hydrogel has another interesting property. It can attack whole colonies of bacteria, particularly if it is injected directly into the region of an infection. These bacteria collections, known as biofilms, can be like the coatings of film on your teeth, germs on touchscreens, or growths on medical devices. The hydrogel penetrates the film and disrupts it.
“We can kill 100 percent of the bacteria and reduce the likelihood of a recurrence,” Hedrick said.
Now, if they could just come up with something similar for virii.