Do We need separation of medicine and state?
The federal government, in general, and the Food and Drug Administration, in particular, increasingly inject themselves into direct control of every medical practice. The FDA is aggressively moving past its sole jurisdiction over the approval of every medication and all medical equipment. It now seeks control of perhaps every procedure and treatment that your physician recommends.
The FDA issued a warning (i.e., threat) about the use of venal catheters as a result of a physician conducting a clinical trial for treatment of multiple sclerosis. After approving the safety and efficacy of the device, the FDA now requires that it approve every use by individual physicians.
The FDA sued a physician for leading-edge orthopedic treatment of joints that utilizes the patient's own stem cells, which are removed, cultivated and injected back into the patient's body. The FDA says that stem cells produced by your body are a chemical that it has the power to regulate. Your physician may not use them without FDA approval.
Is this really about the safety and efficacy of drugs – or a ferocious act by a massive and distant bureaucracy to protect its power and its territory?
There is no reference to federal control over such medical questions in the Constitution. The founders probably did not even consider government control of medicine a possibility – apart from their general concern about the ever-present threat of the Leviathan. They certainly understood and discussed the possibility of politicians bribing the public with their own money. They feared that would ruin the country and lead to dictatorship.
Government-run medical care leads to government control over our decisions about our care and – effectively, government ownership of our bodies.
"Free" government health care is a false promise and a poor excuse to abandon constitutional government and the freedom of citizens to make their own decisions
See Votes by State
News & Politics