What is a Brandname?

A brandname is something I use to make this item stand out from its competition.

If I were a purist, I would say it has no competition.  And the truth is . . . there are no products out there that can do what my product does.

Of course there are some similars out there that have resemblances to what NPHG can do.  But when it comes to absolute numbers, figures, values, methods of evaluating, methods for using the outcomes of my product tells you, there is no other competitor for this work.

My product essentially gives you the truth about the market, the people, the industry, the needs and demands of the industry, and its consumers.  The other product tells you what you already know, on a map.  There is no way to use the other tools to analyze easily hundreds of items per days, such as changes in gas prices per month and the statistical significance of these changes, or where, based upon demographics, the most expensive chronic diseases are, on a per day prescription drugs basis combined with a non-compliance metric you developed for your particular study.

I can go into my tool, enter dozens or hundreds of indicators (ICDs) of childhood learning problems, and tell you exactly where the most problematic areas are for child-raising and schooling.  I can tell you, based on supposition, where younger people are crossing the border through what is more than likely illegal human trafficking, due to certain demographic indicators, ICD and V-codes.  Exactly where the diseases associated with southern in-migrations are having their peaks in the northernmost latitudes is also detectable here–as for understanding why these indicator ICDs are heaviest in the northern states, I am still at a lost.

The late 1990s Hanta virus route from the southwest to the Pacific Northwest is evident through this process.  The effects of the Appalachians on westward migration or diffusion of vector born diseases is immediately apparent using this 3D display technique.  Where the culturally-bound and culturally-linked diagnoses are prevailing due to in-migration patterns for most regions of the US are discernible with this technique.

This product gives you the up front and honest statistics about people, their health and their health related cost and health care requirements derivatives.  If you want to know where your cost for treating illegal residents of a certain background is anticipated, this method will answer such questions.

It is more truthful and applicable than any other way of defining health.  Need I be more upfront about the value of this method?!

It tells you where changes have to be made.  What kinds of changes need to be made.  In the best of circumstances, like Franz J. Ingelfinger said in a 1972 presentation of the “Haves and Have-nots in the World of Disease” [NEJM 287, Dec. 7, 1972, 1198-9], there are those diseases that have review and respect, and all the rest that we don’t have time to reckon with.  Because this method of disease analysis is not only faster, but capable of demonstrating the entire nationwide, large and small area, status of the disease, this method has the potential for accelerating our understanding of overall national population health disease-wise, and cost-wise, to everyone, in just a few years.

If you do the analysis correctly with this method it tells you who has to be changed, how old? at what age range? what gender? what ethnic group? what neighborhood? what median income or SES level?


In George Ehrlich’s “Health Challenges of the Future” [Annals American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, v 408, July 1973, 70-82], the need for more effective cost savings, more effective population health monitoring, more accurate disease statistics, need to be known.  Now, 40 years later, we see we have made no progress since he made this statement at the 77th Annual meeting of this association.  HIT has desensitized us even more to the patient as an individual, and removed the face to face aspect of health care that once existed with every general practitioner and family he treated.  HIT has turned its focus towards cost and cost savings, or revenues generation and customer activities improvement.  There is no more “health” being the focus in health care, just the focus on customers and consumers and how affordable health is for each and every individual.

If you are a business and this kind of marketing and expenses data is not at all valuable to you, you are perhaps in the wrong business, gambling you company’s finances and expenses of virtual, theoretical information, not at all real data.  Theory is a great way to begin making business plans, and a bad way to see them come to an end because in reality, you really didn’t know the details about what you are doing.

Chances are, I upset people and companies by putting out the “truths” this way.

But this is why the NPHG is better than the theoretical models being promoted in the old fashioned business world.  It is the tool of company that calls its business “a People’s Health Information Center.”  Companies that want to know their populations, use NPHG, not the very impersonal, business-centered alternatives out there that demonstrate no adaptability, no concern for its consumers or patients.


What is it about this methodology that makes it salable, or worth the investment?

It is worth the investment because it accomplished several very detailed outcomes that the other method cannot provide you with:

  1. It provides you with the option of either a small area perspective of what you need to know or the large area perspective.  There is no other way to develop the numerical or quantitative understanding of people so forwardly and succinctly.  One doesn’t have to read through pages and pages of charts, graphs and text to understand what conclusions have been drawn. 
  2. It requires little additional software or hardware requirements that what most institutions already have available to them.  No additional software tools need be purchased to produce these outcomes, just time and dexterity and some common skills in the use of some very common software tools.
  3. It defers any costs needed to improve a program towards making investments in a more efficacious, better directed direction for your program.  Manpower and time requirements are required to produce geographic outcomes no matter which way you try to accomplish this.  This method avoids the unnecessary expenses of having to buy or rent some costly software products in order to produce your newly desired outcomes.
  4. For those companies or groups that feel they need to engage in the big purchase at some point, this serves as a go-between and helps you to more quickly and easily understand your data and its potential uses in the future.
  5. It works easier and faster than any external software programming tools that have to be incorporated into your system in order to produce the much desired geographical outcomes.


In a review of approximately 100 facilities in the region for implementation of this way of analyzing peoples’ health, it was found that several barriers exist related to the hesitancy to adapting this new way of analyzing population health.

First, there is the lack of knowledge in this field.

Second, there is a lack of upper level management interests and abilities to invest.

Third, barriers to institutional change exist; work is done in a workplace environment, not an academic environment where exploration and improvements in the system are more strongly supported and sought out.

Fourth, there is this “fear of the unknown” that persists–the unwillingness to actively engage one’s self or company into a new avenue for engaging in a new method of engaging in the work process.  This means that if you were handed an opportunity to utilize a new product and to test it out, you would probably have an excuse not to, such as a lack of understanding, a fear of failure, the lack of adequate financial backing should an investment be desired following the trial period, etc..