Catherine J. Frompovich
March 10, 2017
Taking ‘kickbacks’ from an industry one is a professional in, or involved with, has been classified in several ways. The insurance industry calls it “rebating” . Kickbacks also have been defined as “bribery” . There’s an online site about “kickbacks in U.S. history” wherein the Cornhusker Kickback is mentioned. That ‘affair’ involved congressional Democrats not having enough votes for ObamaCare to pass. According to that website, Democratic Senator Ben Nelson’s vote supposedly was bought in exchange for some “pork” for his home state of Nebraska. However, that ‘pork pie’ did not go over well, so the final upshot from congressional haggling was that all states would receive the same perks as Nebraska.
Nevertheless, how many healthcare consumers are aware their medical doctors also take kickbacks or get perks from Big Pharma? Medical Press published the article “What’s the real extent of industry payments to doctors?”, which ought to enlighten patients and consumers as to why they may be taking so many prescription drugs and why parents are bombarded with mandatory vaccines for their children or else become ‘divorced’ from their family doctor’s practice.
A survey was taken with the results published in the Journal of Internal Medicine. That survey, according to Medical Press, indicates “more than three in every five Americans see a doctor who receives some form of payment from industry.” 
One of the provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka ObamaCare, was that pharmaceuticals and medical devices manufacturers must report gifts and payments made to healthcare providers, which is publicly available on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ Open Payments website.
That survey claims 65 percent of respondents visited a practitioner who took payments or kickbacks.
A 2016 survey regarding payments to dermatologists published in JAMA Dermatology [October 5, 2016. DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.3037] indicates 8,333 dermatologists received 208,613 payments totaling $34 Million in 2014 .
The top 15 companies were all pharmaceutical manufacturers and they paid dermatologists $28.7 million, which was 81 percent of the total amount disbursed, according to the study. 
So how much do you think was paid to pediatricians, the medical professionals who push vaccines and vaccinations on infants, toddlers, teens and their parents? According to Clinical Pediatrics:
Between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2014, 35 697 pediatricians received payments amounting to $30,031,960. [That’s million!]
General pediatricians received the majority of payments (71%). Median payment was $15 (interquartile range = $12-$24), mostly in the form of noncash items and services (84%). Significant diversity was observed in median payments among specialty providers. In conclusion, 42% of US pediatricians received industry payments in 2014.
That’s over $30 MILLION given to 35,697 pediatricians. Let’s do some math. $30,031,960 divided by 35,697 equals an average of $841.30, not $12 to $24!
Another way of doing the math is 35,697 multiplied by $24 [the highest payment in the $12-$24 range] equals $856,728; not $30 Million plus! Is there a discrepancy variance of $29,175,232, or is my calculator wrong?
What’s going on; is someone messing with the math?
Well baby visits certainly seem profitable for pediatricians—doesn’t that seem so? Those visits are the unfortunate times when pediatricians administer up to nine vaccines at once to infants weighing less than 25 pounds during one office visit. Outrageous! That practice ought to be considered medical malpractice, especially injecting so many neurotoxic chemicals into a defenseless child whose immune system, for all intents and purposes, is harmed—or ‘castrated’ by all the toxins injected. Isn’t that chemical child abuse? Where’s legislation to deal with medical-toxic-vaccine  child abuse?
We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.
It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.
David Rockefeller, 1991 Bilderberg Meeting, Baden, Germany
CDC’s Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary