Back to Basics

When The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and all other media in America begin to devote lots of space and time to the subject of bed bugs, you know America has a real pest problem.

Uniquely, I know a lot of pest control professionals because I have worked closely with the industry for a quarter century providing public relations services.

So let me say that I have the ANSWER to the nation’s plague of bed bugs.

It’s called PESTICIDES.

Not just any pesticides, but specifically the ones that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has successfully banned or forced pesticide manufacturers to stop registering or manufacturing because of the cost involved.

The truth you will never read elsewhere is that there are pesticides that will rid the nation of this massive bed bug population explosion and they will do so rapidly. Can you imagine an end to the current bed bug infestations just about everywhere in say, a month?

The problem is that the pesticides I have in mind are not available because the EPA has removed them from use by either pest control professionals or consumers. Meanwhile, pest control professionals are doing everything they can with the methods available to them, all the time being called unreliable or worse. The options they have at their disposal are few and usually expensive.

“Don’t let the bedbugs bite” is no longer a fashionable good-night wish for Big Apple kids, even in the city’s high-rent districts and posh hotels. Growing infestations of the ravenous bloodsuckers have New Yorkers annoyed, anguished, angry about officialdom’s inadequate responses, and “itching” for answers.

Instead, their Bedbug Advisory Board recommends a bedbug team and educational website. Residents, it advises, should monitor and report infestations. Use blowdryers to flush out (maybe 5% of) the bugs, then sweep them into a plastic bag and dispose properly. Throw away (thousands of dollars worth of) infested clothing, bedding, carpeting and furniture.

Hire (expensive) professionals who (may) have insecticides that (may) eradicate the pests – and hope you don’t get scammed. Don’t use “risky” pesticides yourself. Follow guideline for donating potentially infested furnishings, and be wary of bedbug risks from donated furniture and mattresses.

New Yorkers want real solutions, including affordable insecticides that work. Fear and loathing, from decades of chemophobic indoctrination, are slowly giving way to a healthy renewed recognition that the risk of not using chemicals can be greater than the risk of using them (carefully). Eco-myths are being replaced with more informed discussions about alleged effects of DDT and other pesticides on humans and wildlife.

Thankfully, bedbugs have not been linked to disease – except sometimes severe emotional distress associated with obstinate infestations, incessant itching, and pathetic “proactive” advice, rules and “solutions” right out of Saturday Night Live.

It is hellish for people who must live with bedbugs, and can’t afford professional eradication like what Hilton Hotels or Mayor Bloomberg might hire. But imagine what it’s like for two billion people who live 24/7/365 with insects that definitely are responsible for disease: malarial mosquitoes.

Malaria infects over 300 million people annually. For weeks or months on end, it renders them unable to work, attend school or care for their families – and far more susceptible to death from tuberculosis, dysentery, HIV/AIDS, malnutrition and other diseases that still stalk their impoverished lands.

Not a day goes by without our being told that something is going to kill us. Much of what kills people is genetic; little time bombs in our DNA that determine the state of our health.

Anyone who reads the daily obituaries knows that Americans are living longer than any previous generation. Most of the population is dying of nothing more sinister than old age.

The diseases that kill Americans have been quantified and known for decades. At the top of the list is heart disease, followed by a variety of different kinds of cancers. Third in line are strokes. Chronic lower respiratory diseases such as asthma are next, but nothing more than accidents kill as many people.

The remaining factors include diabetes, Alzheimer’s, pneumonia, nephritis (kidney diseases), and septicemia, a disease of the blood.

What do Americans really die from? Genetic dispositions to illness. Accidents. Poor diets. And bad lifestyle choices that include smoking, drinking, and taking illegal drugs.

With the exception of asthma that affects about seven percent of the population none of this has anything to do with air quality. Indeed, the causes of asthma remain somewhat shrouded in mystery even if the symptoms do not.

None of this empirical knowledge and data has the slightest effect, however, on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the American Lung Association that profits greatly from any claims about air quality. Both are inclined to making wild claims.

Under the title of Public Health & Workforce Development are a number of grants, scholarships and other programs, providing training, services and a whole new array of studies relating to health care – a lot of money being spent to support the expansion of government, special interests, illegal immigrants and labor unions, but little to help solve the health care issues.

The first expansion is the establishment of the Public Health Investment Fund, which requires deposits from the revenues of the Treasury in the amount of $88,700,000,000 over 10 years. This money is authorized to be appropriated by the Committee on Appropriations of the House and Senate for carrying out the activities under the designated public health provisions. These areas include Community Health Centers, National Health Service Corps Program, National Health Service Corps Scholarship and Loan Repayment Programs, Primary Care Loan Funds, Primary Care Education Programs, Nursing Workforce Development, The National Center for Health Statistics and the Agency For Healthcare Research and Quality.

To make these programs even more appealing is the stipulation that “Amounts appropriated under this section, and outlays flowing from such appropriations, shall not be taken into account for purposes of any budget enforcement procedures including allocations under section 302(a) and (b) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act and budget solutions for fiscal years during which appropriations are made from the fund.” More spending without any concern for balancing the budget or controlling the country’s deficit. We don’t have it, but let’s spend it!

The first program – Community Health Centers – will obtain increased funding in the amount of $38,800,000,000.

The National Health Service Corps is being amended allowing the Secretary to issue waivers to individuals who enter into a contract for obligated service to pay for their education. It further raises the loan repayment amount from $35,000 to $50,000 and will be adjusted thereafter to reflect inflation. Additional appropriated funds for this program are $796,000,000 over the next 10 years. Additional funding is authorized in the amount of $3,171,000,000 over 10 years to cover the National Health Corps Scholarship and Loan Repayment Programs.

The Frontline Health Providers Loan Repayment Program will be established to address unmet health care needs in certain areas, populations, or facilities as designated by the Secretary. Individuals participating in this program must agree to serve for a period of 2 years in a health professional needs area specified in the program. This program has a clause that if there are an insufficient number of applicants for the program, then all excess funds from the program will be transferred to the National Health Service Corps to recruit more people to take advantage of this fund.

The Secretary shall establish a primary care training and capacity building program consisting of grants and contracts to plan, develop, operate or participate in accredited professional training in the field of family medicine, general internal medicine, general pediatrics or geriatrics. Funds for this program are from the Public Health Investment Fund in the amount of $3,023,000,000 for 10 years and will include the following:

• Capacity Building in Primary Care – grants to specialties of family medicine, general internal medicine, general pediatrics or geriatrics, with preference given to entities that train individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds.
• Training of Medical Residents in Community-Based Setting – a program established for the training of medical residents in community-based settings, with preferences given to entities that support teaching programs addressing the health care needs of vulnerable populations or are a Federally qualified health center or rural health clinic, as well as preference to those training individuals from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged background.

• Training for General, Pediatric or Public Health Dentists and Dental Hygienists – grants and contracts to plan, develop, operate or participate in an accredited professional training program or oral health professionals, with preference given to individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds.

Grants for Health Professionals Education – Advanced Education Nursing Grants is being amended, including increases in dollar amounts for the Nurse Faculty Loan Program. Funding for this program is $1, 450,000,000 over 10 years.

The debates over healthcare reform with regard to senior coverage is very disturbing. It is incomprehensible to even think there is debate over providing medical care based on an age vs. productivity model. To the younger generations who are not concerned about this topic, you just might want to take notice. You too will be the seniors and will be facing the same, if not worse, scenario. What may be of even more concern is that if the government can determine your medical care on this basis what might be next?

One has to acknowledge that as we age we generally require more medical care. That care costs money. However, the seniors you are trying to deprive of care have worked all their lives and have paid into a system that promised to take care of them after they retired. They didn’t have a choice in this system and they paid in, with the government taking more and more of their paycheck every year. They paid so their parents and grandparents would be cared for. They paid so they would receive care. Now their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren are turning their backs on them! HOW DARE YOU!

Perhaps they should have been, or should now start being, as selfish as you are. Instead of putting money into a system that wants to now reject them, they should have been putting that money into their own personal medical accounts that could only be used for them. Instead of spending their money in this country so you can keep your jobs, they should be saving all they can so they can go elsewhere to get the medical treatments they need. Many already have the means to do just that, so if the democratic party bill passes you will soon be complaining that the only the “rich” can get care because they can pay for it somewhere else. That may be a true fact, but you wanted it that way!

Who decides what is no longer productive? Is it age alone, the amount or your income, or some other arbitrary meter? My parents are in their 70’s and are still working and contributing to society. In fact, my father has spent the last 3 years overseeing the building of their new church and he did it with NO compensation. Would you be willing to give up 3 years of your life to do charity work without receiving a dime? If he could have been paid he would have earned quite a respectable income for those 3 years.

Although I am currently not employed, I babysit my granddaughter so my daughter and work, that was my choice. Is that not contributing to the income pool? She is allowed to keep her hard-earned income rather than spending it all in daycare expenses. If she has to spend all her paycheck to cover daycare expenses then she drops out of the workforce further reducing the income pool and becomes part of the welfare pool, draining the system even more. I know many grandmothers who are watching grandchildren so their children can either finish school or work. Who is to say that these contributions make you “at risk” for receiving medical treatment?

Where does the income productivity factor end? The criminals currently serving lifetime sentences – they will never be a productive income source and are only a drain on the system – do we just instill the death penalty for all life sentences?

How about the people on disability? Because they are disabled they cannot contribute to the income chain and are draining the medical system because of care they might need. Do we deny them medical treatment too?