Bachmann’s Bizarre Notions About Curing Disease

Michele Bachmann gave a thoroughly bizarre speech at CPAC, combining the paradise lost myth (that we allegedly cared about curing diseases in the 50s, but now we don’t) with blaming government regulation, without a shred of evidence, for not curing Alzheimer’s, juvenile diabetes and cancer.

She apparently thinks that we’re not trying to cure those diseases right now, and it’s the fault of the government. And now, a word from reality: The National Institute on Aging helps coordinate scientific research on Alzheimer’s disease. And President Obama has included requests for more than $150 million more in federal funding for Alzheimer’s research in his last two budgets proposals. And the FDA has actually loosened restrictions on clinical trials for Alzheimer’s studies.

The National Cancer Institute spends about $5 billion a year on cancer research and the stimulus bill in 2009 included an additional $1.3 billion in funding. President Obama has proposed increasing this to more than $6 billion a year, but so far Congress has not approved the increase. And the federal government spends about $2 billion a year on diabetes research.


  1. Reginald Selkirk says

    WTF is she talking about? The government does fund research into those diseases. It would be easier to do such research of the @#%^#*^ Tea Party wasn’t fucking with the budget.
    And since when are Republicans the party the cares about people?

  2. Doug Little says

    I’m sure that she was all for the ban on using stem cells in medical research, what a fucking hypocrite.

  3. says

    I think she’s saying that if government funding and FDA regulation weren’t artificially skewing the market, the private sector would have found a cure by now.

  4. says

    Yes, the government “funds” “research”. But the government can’t do anything right. All they do is take from the Makers and give it to those lazy universities, which both steals from the Private Market (which would be doing its own research if it wasn’t hobbled by both theft, called “taxation”, and the excessive burden of any regulation whatsoever, of government) and empowers pointy eggheads in their ivory towers.
    So, as you can see, Bachmann is correct.

  5. jnorris says

    The 2013 CPAC speakers list is all one needs to know about the Nov 2012 elections to diagnose why the GOP Tea Party lost the White House. Rep Michele Bachmann included, as last week’s speech showed.

  6. says

    Wasn’t it one of those drugs developed in the 50s that she claimed was causing autism? Because some stranger she met after a speech told her that vaccinations cause autism.
    I swear, if an actual thought ever entered her head it would explode due to the shock.

  7. Doug Little says

    She twice voted against the Stem Cell Research Act of 2007, which would have allowed the government funding of embryonic stem cell research.

    Representative Bachmann protested strongly against President Obama’s reversal of former President Bush’ ban on embryonic stem cell research.

    Yep, thought so.

  8. cswella says

    I thought she wanted the government to regulate vaccine shots out of existence? Consistency is lost upon them.

  9. says

    You people are making the mistake of assuming she is speaking in English. She is not. She is actually speaking a dialect of Old Norwegian still spoken in the Hennepin county region of the land the call Minnesota. It sound almost exactly like english but the meaning of the words are completely different. For example, to the untrained ear this speech sounds like an uneducated diatribe about health care. But to the trained ear, this is a lovely speech about how to make a delicious krumkake .

  10. raven says

    Life Expectancy is Up in USA by Almost 10 Years Over 1955 | Whole …
    www. wholehealthcenters. com/…/life-expectancy-is-up-in-usa-by-alm…

    Oct 4, 2008 – Life expectancy continues to rise in the United States! Now, a child born in 2005 can expect to live until almost 78 years. This continues the …

    Bachmann if wildly wrong as usual. US lifespans have increased 10 years since 1955.

    She is the poster person for fundie xian induced cognitive impairment. And the people who keep reelecting her.

  11. Ben P says

    I think she’s saying that if government funding and FDA regulation weren’t artificially skewing the market, the private sector would have found a cure by now.

    Usually I hear people blaming the pharmaceutical companies of not wanting to cure people.

    If unfettered by strict FDA regulations, pharmaceutical companies would probably

    (a) cut corners in finding actual cures
    (b) gleefully sell people non-cures while the real cures were being developed.

  12. garnetstar says

    There’s been big cuts in funding for basic scientific research for several decades, which the sequester has just made worse. Wingnuts disparage basic research as “curiosity-driven”, because basic research never uncovers fundamentals that are required to address practical problems, amirite?

  13. says

    Relaxed regulations are allowing quackery to flourish, just like in the “good” old days of snake oil salesmen. The free market doesn’t work without regulation because making money does not require a useful treatment. Look at Burzynski. Decades of bilking cancer patients and he still doesn’t have anything worth publishing in a reputable medical journal, only deceptive marketing for people made vulnerable to bad decisions by desperation.

    Also, I get this vibe that nuts like Bachmann treat science like in Civilization-type games, where breakthroughs will happen if you allocate a predetermined number of beaker icons to them. Science doesn’t work that way because we’re talking about the unknown. The only way to know how much research is needed is to have foreknowledge of the answers the research is looking for. We can make speculations about what would have sped up discoveries in the past through the powers of hindsight, but we’re talking about future discoveries that may not actually happen. We don’t have hindsight for that.

  14. says

    If only the government didn’t interfere, all psychotherapists would be curing homosexuality, just as therapists in her husband’s therapy practice have been doing for years. Maybe they’d even have a pill to cure it if the government didn’t regulate the drug industry.

  15. anubisprime says

    Doug Little @ 2

    Well hell yeah…it is beyond calculation what Shrub’s ban did for the suffering of spinal cord injuries, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, heart disease, hundreds of rare immune system and genetic disorders and more.

    But some commentators have suggested that had the ban not happened there would have been some significant progress by now in several maladies if not a view to actual cures…but that is as far as speculation can reasonably proceed.
    What is not speculation is that Bachmann and her ilk did the research absolutely no good whatsoever.
    I have no idea if she had any influence on the subject at the time or even voted against it…given what passes for her ideological kant I could not actually see her promoting it.

    But to pretend that the delay in development and progress is now the fault of a Democratic government that actually reversed the ban and is actively funding several lines of inquiry is typical of the brain rot and lying ability of the scientifically illiterate, and that describes Michelle to a tee so all in all… no surprises there then.

    That folk nod in sage agreement with her nonsense is the real mystery, that just cannot be accounted for…so dense it is a wonder they are all not sucked over the event horizon!

  16. Reginald Selkirk says

    Ace of Sevens #3: I think she’s saying that if government funding and FDA regulation weren’t artificially skewing the market, the private sector would have found a cure by now.

    If that’s what she’s saying, then she is clueless as to the usual division of labour between federally funded basic research and corporate funded product-oriented research. The latter is sometimes called translational research. But it should be obvious that if your party consistently cuts basic research, there will be less to translate to the marketplace. That makes about as much sense as those idiots who wanted to defund the National Weather Service to keep it from competing with for-profit weather outlets who use NWS forecasts as their bread and butter.

  17. Artor says

    If I recall, it was the rightwing, teabagging “small-gov’t” Xtians like Michelle who pushed through a ban on stem cell research, setting back work on cancer & Alzheimer’s research by decades.

  18. maudell says

    Clearly she hasn’t thought this one through. What if the cure causes mental retardation!? Obviously, the solution is to pray very, very hard. All day. I think she’s losing her once-stellar sense of morality.

  19. thebookofdave says

    It’s painful to witness such a horrible disease slowly take a person away, and feel so helpless to stop it.

    Wha…? You mean Bachmann was always like this? My bad. Apologies to actual victims, including 6th district residents of Minnesota.

  20. D. C. Sessions says

    I swear, if an actual thought ever entered her head it would

    cower gibbering in a corner, going mad from from exposure to its surroundings.

  21. says

    Okay, I have a question for MN’s 6th district:

    I get that you’re a majority republican district, but out of all of your residents, is this really the best you could do?

    Is there not one republican in your district with half a brain?

  22. dan4 says

    Good grief, no wonder that MB hasn’t gotten over 53% in four elections in a staunchly Republican district.

  23. Reginald Selkirk says

    maudell #21: Clearly she hasn’t thought this one through. What if the cure causes mental retardation!?

    Terrific! That’s what Republicans call “growing the base.”

  24. ambulocetacean says

    Bachmann has a point. As Sarah Palin pointed out, it’s just silly for taxpayer-funded scientists to be playing with fruit flies when there are more important things to be done. Like the hands-on research that Bachmann’s husband conducts.


    Sure, it would be great to have cures for all those stubborn diseases she mentions. But it seems to me that the best thing Congress could to improve American life expectancy is to establish a public health system of the kind that exists everywhere else in the developed world. Where people don’t have to suffer and die from treatable conditions and diseases because they can actually afford to go to the doctor.

Leave a Reply