Are Doctors Free to First Do No Harm?
Are Doctors Free to First Do No Harm?
Medical licensees now double as golden handcuffs or brass knuckles
The stark lesson to be learned is that medicine can be weaponized when doctors join forces with government & deviate from their personal and professional ethical commitment under the Hippocratic Oath – “First, do no harm”. - Vera Sharav
“Just following orders” is leading us back to some very dark places.
Last week, Oracle Films released Dr. Tess Lawrie’s A Letter to Andrew Hill. This is a must watch. It’s harrowing.
Tasked with reporting to the World Health Organization on studies from around the world suggesting that Ivermectin could be a remarkably safe and effective treatment for COVID-19, Dr. Andrew Hill instead allowed “Shadow Authors” to reach an unfavorable conclusion to his paper. We all know what happened to Ivermectin after that.
We’ll never know who might still be here today if only Dr. Hill had had the courage to speak up then, but Lawrie, setting her sights on salvaging integrity in medicine and science, asks him to access it now.
“We will forgive you, Andy, but come forward.”
But time is of the essence. Holocaust survivor and human rights advocate, Vera Sharav, warns us that “Never again is now. Unless we all resist.”
The practice of medicine is being stripped of both health and care and doctors are increasingly powerless to do anything about it… unless they are willing to access their courage and take some big risks with their careers. So how do we help them access courage? And why is it so hard?
Regulatory Capture Sets the Stage
Part of the problem is that the foxes have been guarding the henhouses. In 2014, even the Wall Street Journal was acknowledging the “revolving door” between regulatory agencies and the companies that profit from the decisions they make. This lucrative set-up created opportunities for agenda-first policy-making.
Dr. Craig Wax’s 2014 presentation provides critical background on how the regulatory and financial capture of medicine has eroded the doctor-patient relationship.
With regulatory capture, it isn’t necessary to corrupt good doctors and nurses. It’s a trickle down effect. Corrupt authorities influence education, policy making, hospital protocols, and drug approval processes. All that is required of the majority of health care workers, who came into this field to save lives and make a difference, is that they simply follow the rules.
And the rules are changing.
“Following orders has led to the sheer number of deaths that has occurred in these hospitals” - Frontline Nurse Nicole Sirotek
Over the last several years, the goal of public health has strayed from health itself and moved towards compliance. The focus has shifted towards creating legislation that chips away at individual and parental rights. Doctors have been recruited to manufacture consent and promote narratives that create vaccine confidence “or else.”
COVID pandemic measures further revealed the regulatory stronghold on health care practitioners. Throughout the pandemic, doctors and hospitals were incentivized and rewarded for applying protocols. Those who asked questions, pointed to problems or posed alternative solutions were often silenced or punished.
Liability Protection For Doctors that Follow Orders
With the arrival of SARS-CoV-2 and the public health emergency that ensued, liability protection was quickly introduced. Under the CARES Act, “physicians and other health care professionals who provide volunteer medical services during the public health emergency related to COVID-19 shall not be liable for providing such services that relate to the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of COVID-19 or the assessment or care of a patient related to an actual or suspected case of COVID-19.”
The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) authorized the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to provide tort liability immunity to individuals and organizations involved in the development, manufacture, distribution, administration and use of “covered countermeasures” against pandemics, epidemics and diseases and health threats. The countermeasures include approved drugs, vaccines, diagnostics and/or devices (e.g., COVID-19 tests and respirators) for the diagnosis, treatment, prevention, cure or mitigation of COVID-19 or the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 or subsequent viral mutations.
So, as long as physicians and health care practitioners follow approved protocols, they are fully protected from any liability, regardless of health outcomes. But limiting that protection to “covered countermeasures” approved by the HHS leaves those exploring a broader range of solutions unprotected.
Disciplinary Action for Dissent
It’s a very different situation for doctors who venture outside of the approved COVID-19 narrative. Last July, the Federation of State Medical Boards released a statement asserting that “physicians who generate and spread COVID-19 vaccine misinformation or disinformation are risking disciplinary action by state medical boards, including the suspension or revocation of their medical license.”
Currently, anything that opposes the current “safe and effective” narrative employed by the CDC and other regulatory authorities is considered misinformation despite much scientific evidence to the contrary.
So doctors are fully protected in applying any approved COVID treatment protocol (vaccines, Remdesivir, ventilators etc.) even if it produces harm or causes death. And patients have no recourse if they are harmed by any of these measures. BUT doctors who warn of risks of any of these measures, speak out against mandates, or try to provide other treatments like Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, or many other treatments/medications that have been used for decades and have been shown to save thousands of lives put their licenses and careers at risk. In some cases, doctors have been prevented from using these medications, even when all others have failed.
These boundaries have created a dichotomy that forces many physicians and health care practitioners to choose between their own professional judgement and what they believe is in the best interest of patients and their careers.
A successful career - particularly one that would render one an “expert” - now requires doctors to speak and practice within the confines of consensus. “Trust the experts” applies exclusively to those who are willing to promote “science” that was settled before a COVID vaccine was even available. (Some believe it was settled behind closed doors at events like Event 201 - which took place in October, 2019 - where organizations like Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, World Economic Forum, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation simulate pandemics and make recommendations to government and public health leaders.)
A Tale of Two Doctors
The Doctor Who Created A Life-Saving Protocol…
Dr. Paul Marik is one of the world’s leading critical care physicians and the Director of the ICU at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital. Before the pandemic began, Marik was the second most published critical care doctor in the history of medicine, with more than 500 peer-reviewed papers and a research “H” rating higher than many Nobel Prize winners. He was already well-known in medical circles as the creator of the “Marik Cocktail,” a combination of cheap, safe, and readily available FDA-approved drugs that dramatically reduces death rates from sepsis by 20 to 50 percent.
Early in the pandemic, Dr. Marik teamed up with a number of colleagues, including Dr. Pierre Kory, and began working on a treatment strategy for COVID-19. By March 2020 - just a few weeks into the pandemic - he and his peers had formed the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance and were achieving remarkably high survival rates with the MATH+ protocol (Methylprednisolone, Ascorbic acid, Thiamine, Heparin) they were using on hospitalized patients.
It should have been big news. It wasn’t.
Over the course of 18 months, the MATH+ protocol was translated into 23 languages and was credited with saving thousands of lives, reducing hospital deaths of COVID-19 patients by at least 50% below the national average. But in November 2021, Sentara Norfolk General Hospital prohibited Marik from using the highly effective protocols that he had been using successfully throughout the pandemic. A sharp increase in mortality followed.
Asserting that patients were dying “unnecessarily and unlawfully,” Marik then filed filed a lawsuit over the ban of the use of life-saving medication.
He then had his hospital privileges suspended.
Here's Dr. Marik explaining why it matters…
“Remdesivir increases the risk of death by 3%. It increases your chances of renal failure by 20%. It is a toxic drug. But just to make the situation even more preposterous, the federal government will give hospitals a 20% bonus… if they prescribe Remdesivir to Medicare patients. The federal government is incentivizing hospital to prescribe a medication which is toxic.”
Dr. Marik is not the only doctor who has been vilified and suspended for trying to practice medicine to the best of his ability. Far from it. Dr. Meryl Nass had her license suspended and was ordered to get a psych evaluation after treating COVID patients with Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine.
And there are plenty of others. If you want to know who they are, follow the censored doctors, mainstream media hit pieces, and Joe Rogan’s forbidden guests.
The Doctor Who Makes Laws to Foster Vaccine Compliance
While most of the world rolls back COVID measures with plans to move forward, Senator Richard Pan wants to settle science, laminate the current narrative as truth and create legislation to punish health care practitioners who speak or act outside the lines.
On Valentine’s Day, Pan introduced A2098, a bill that “would designate the dissemination or promotion of misinformation or disinformation related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, or "COVID-19," as unprofessional conduct.”
A few weeks earlier, he introduced SB871, a bill that would mandate COVID-19 vaccines to attend school and grant California’s Department of Public Health the authority to mandate vaccines for any other disease it deems appropriate. The bill is proposed as “a means for the eventual achievement of total immunization of appropriate age groups.”
He also supports HB 866, a bill that would permit children 12 and over to receive the vaccines without parental consent or knowledge.
None of this is a surprise to those familiar with the California legislator. Senator Pan has been chipping away anything that might interfere with universal mandatory vaccination for years. This is the same California senator who brought us SB276, which gave state public health officials (with zero knowledge of patients) the power to decide whether medical exemptions written by physicians would be honored.
Here is Pan in 2015, reassuring California State Assembly members that robust medical exemptions, and the doctor-patient relationship, would be protected under SB 277, a bill that removed religious and personal belief exemptions to vaccination:
“What the bill and the law clearly states is that the medical exemption is at the discretion of the physician. We took an amendment to absolutely clarify that point.
“We are trying to create the space to allow doctors and their patients and their parents to work together hand-in-hand. The law in California says that a licensed physician can grant a medical exemption and it’s basically at their professional judgement. There’s no authority in the Department of Public Health to overturn that exemption - there’s no place in the law that says that.”
And here he is going back on his word in 2019 as he promotes SB 276, which put medical exemptions in the hands of bureaucrats and allows the state to investigate physicians who issue more than 5 medical exemptions in one year.
“The real problem is that schools are no longer safe because they have so many medical exemptions they cannot protect the children who attend that school from outbreaks of disease. And that’s why we have to step in.”
The paths of both of these doctors are cautionary tales we can no longer ignore.
As Elie Wiesel reminds us, “We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere.”
Doctors, and ultimately all of us, have some difficult decisions to make.
It’s time for courage. And forgiveness.
https://twitter.com/richardsarleen1/status/1554486989751087104?s=20&t=iCYBcT73uMm5lhbZ8HVmPg
https://globalcovidsummit.org/censorship/letter-from-a-pediatrician