Ethical concerns during Covid-19 we must never forget
On social media, one will quite commonly come across ethical concerns about the patient-doctor relationship and how healthcare professionals are silenced or silence themselves towards patient concerns about COVID-19 “vaccines” and treatment options. How much did doctors and nurses know or not about the experimental genetic COVID-19 injections they were recommending and administering? In Sweden, for example, nurses who recommended COVID-19 injected injured to have their injuries reported to the Swedish Medicines Agency were threatened with being reported to the security police.
Short Dialogue Steven Kirsch and Dr. Mark Trozzi:
Steve Kirsch: I just talked to a doctor friend of mine in Canada. He thinks about 20% of the doctors in Canada know exactly what’s going on but they’re keeping quiet about it. All of them are remaining silent. They simply aren’t recommending the vaccine for their patients. The other 80% believe the vaccines are safe and effective. Really incredible.
Dr. Mark Trozzi: Smart sheep are still sheep. Extra resources went into the carrot and stick indoctrination of doctors and nurses. They were coerced into being injected and became the hands of medical assault. I am one of the Canadian doctors who has stood against this most firmly from the beginning, and I have endured the sticks. Here is my wake up message and call to all doctors and nurses Please share
End of Dialogue
Here is Dr. Trozzis's message again with additional links from his webpage.
Dr. Kat Lindley has expressed other ideas on the doctor-patient relationship during COVID-19 and its flaws:
Attack on The Patient Physician Relationship
The patient-physician relationship is the cornerstone of medicine, and it is based on mutual respect, trust, and open communication. Patients need to be able to trust their physician to provide high level care while maintaining confidentiality and protecting patient’s sensitive medical information. Effective communication is essential to understand and address patient’s questions and concerns, all while involving the patient in full decision-making process about his/her health. Physician must obtain informed consent from a patient when initiating any treatment or course of action, allowing for the patient to make educated and autonomous choice about his/her health issues. This is a critical ethical and legal concept by which a patient is fully informed about potential risks, benefits, and alternatives of medical treatment before making a decision. Physician should always respect patient’s right to make informed decisions about their own healthcare based on their values and preferences. This includes the right to accept or refuse a particular course of action. Physician should always respect patient’s wishes, even when he/she disagrees with them.
One of the most important principles in medicine is “Do No Harm”, “Primum Non Nocere”. Physician should avoid any action that could cause a harm to the patient and serve as an advocate for their patient, working in their best interest to ensure the best possible outcome.
What Happened in Early 2020?
A virus
Fear propaganda
Lockdowns
Mandates
Censorship
Persecution
How Did the Pandemic Affect the Patient-Physician Relationship?
These past three years exposed the weaknesses in the patient-physician relationship. The masks mandates, lockdowns, travel restrictions and vaccines mandates, just to name the few, which were all endorsed by CDC, medical organizations, and institutions, in many cases interfered directly with the patient-physician relationship. The environment of outright censorship of science and persecution of physicians who spoke against the narrative left many weary to go against the current. While the institutions and the system mandated certain procedures and actions to be followed, patients felt abandoned by their physicians.
In some cases where patient and physician disagreed on a specific course of action, physicians went as far as advocating for the opposite of what patient wanted. Based on everything we know in medicine; this was a complete breach of trust. Now we find ourselves in this mess of our own creation, mistrust, confusion and some instances fear. If there is no trust left, is there even a patient physician relationship?
What Does the Future Hold?
The trust once broken will take a while to rebuild, there is no doubt about that. It starts with physicians and our commitment to the Hippocratic Oath, those sacred words of “Do No Harm”. The practice of medicine has been corrupted for years, through big pharma, regulatory changes, corporate practice of medicine and in some instances, government run healthcare. True art of medicine is and always has been keeping health and wellbeing of the patient as the primary focus and that focus was lost along the way. Healthcare has become business of illness and not health. We must return to the basics. As Thomas Edison once said: “The doctors of the future will give no medicine but will interest his patients in the care of the human frame, in diet and in cause and prevention of disease”.
The Dangers Ahead
The World Health Organization (WHO) is currently working on two different approaches, the Pandemic Accord and the amendments to IHR, in an attempt to strengthen their control over future pandemic responses. Under those, WHO would focus on early detection and prevention of future pandemics, universal and equitable responses via vaccines, medicines and diagnostics, a stronger international health framework with WHO in charge and “ONE HEALTH” approach that would connect the health of humans, animals, and the planet. As such, patient-physician relationship as we know it would further erode. While once, physician advocated and “worked” for the patient, with WHO mandates physician would have to comply and follow the directives of the system. The question that remains is, will physicians recognize the perils of such actions or will they continue on the path of patient abandonment. Time will tell.
"To be courageous requires no exceptional qualifications, no magic formula, no special combination of time, place, and circumstance. It is an opportunity that sooner or later is presented to us all."
John F. Kennedy
Prof Norman Fenton: A paper just published in @TheLancet (to great media acclaim of course) on "dangers of undervaccination" shows how desperate they are getting.
If there were a group of whistleblowers within a government funded organisation who wanted to subtly tell the world that there is no longer any credible evidence to support the ‘safe and effective’ narrative about the covid vaccines, then what they might do is the following:
1. Use their privileged access to extensive health data to show that all the previous publicly released ONS vaccination data were wrong.
2. Concoct an obviously flawed study which conflates the genuinely unvaccinated with all those who are vaccinated but not ‘fully up to date and boosted’ into a category called ‘undervaccinated’ to ludicrously compare their outcomes with the ‘vaccinated’.
3. Write the conclusions in such a way that the main stream media will wrongly be able to claim that those vaccinated are less likely to be hospitalised or die from covid.
4. Discredit the results by making clear that all the authors are part of a government funded organisation with a vested interest in the vaccines.
5. Further discredit the results by stating (in the ‘Data Sharing’ statement of the paper) that “The data that were used in this study are highly sensitive and are not available publicly”.
6. Submit the paper to the most high profile medical journal that has a known history of publishing bogus research that promotes the benefits of the vaccines.
Of course, it’s also possible that a group who are part of such a government funded organisation and who still desperately want to convince the world that the vaccines really are safe and effective might also do the above (because these people are not too bright but are very highly incentivised).
Well, whatever the motive (good or bad), this is exactly what the authors of the paper just published in The Lancet have done.
As reported by the @NakedEmperorUK, the supplemental data shows that the authors did not separate the unvaccinated data from the under-vaccinated data anywhere and the study actually confirms that the unvaccinated have less severe covid outcomes than the ‘undervaccinated’.
The paper is a joke and should never have been published
More on this on our su*tack @MartinNeil9