Tag Archives: malpractice

IN PHARMA’S FIELDS THE RUMORS GROW

IN PHARMA’S FIELDS THE RUMORS GROW

In days of yore (a term used here for the very first time in all of Prudence’ writings) DOCTORS were much revered and obeyed for their advice, in part for their licensed acceptance by their profession and peers, and just as much in part for their ethical standards to which they had sworn as had been their ethic for days and centuries of even greater yore.  They also possessed various elements of arcane knowledge to which the average supplicant of their curative powers was not privy.

Those days are gone thanks, most specifically, to the Great COVID Reset during which the politicization of medicine… of MEDICINE… has been completed.

Inadvertently, President Trump fed this beast upon the advice of both good and somewhat black-hearted advisors, many of whom are now billionaires.  Hapless Joe Biden has not only ridden the beast of politicization, but has whipped it into frenzy. “Politicization” can nearly be defined as the “monetization” of medicine, which has been going on for a long time, primarily, in the U. S., since the Johnson administration.

Many countries have provided “universal health care” while the United States has done so only stepwise, retaining as much innovation and private initiative as possible, resulting in the greatest industrialized health care system in the world even since Medicare, while the beast nibbled away, digesting philosophies and dollars with equal rapacity.  There are vestiges of independence and competition remaining, which enables our remarkable responsiveness to medical needs in comparison to most state-run “health-care” programs.  Unfortunately, competition and independent excellence are increasingly perceived as problems by the “nattering nabobs of negativism”1 whom we continue to re-elect.

The hitherto ethical boundaries that defined and protected our phenomenal medical care systems, have nearly disappeared.  Where “doctors” in general were once automatically trusted because of their ethical standing, more commonly, now, doctors are forced – and their patients just as much – to provide certain treatments at certain rates of contact for costs dictated by federal agencies.  The most egregious of these trends is crystallized by the Pfizer and Moderna and other injections purported to “protect” us from Covid-19 and variants thereof.

“Medicine” has attempted to protect itself through a principle known as “informed consent.”  The old “Hippocratic Oath” was too close to a religious oath, for one thing, and, as the ability of medical technology has improved to a point of sidestepping many life-threatening conditions (ie. Heart bypass and valve-replacement surgeries) ever-larger medical consortiums have seized upon “informed consent” to reduce their liability for bad outcomes.  Extraordinary promises require extraordinary defenses.

Consequently, patient-customers are presented with various forms of Informed Consent or “waiver” forms on even fairly simple procedures.  Contained within each is the promise by the patient to pay for any part of the cost that is not covered by either government or semi-private insurance.  Despite the fact that they have just agreed to the indemnification of the provider from bad results of whatever set of procedures are being ordered, what patients mainly recall about the forms ritual, is that he or she has agreed to pay.  The “waiver” part, though, helps contain the costs of “malpractice” insurance for the provider(s).  More on malpractice, later.  Let’s look, first, at how governments, and politicians and political appointees, are mandating medical procedures.

It’s fairly clear, now, two years after the fact, that sloppy, or, God forbid, intentional procedures in the Wuhan, China Virology Institute caused the recently engineered SARS-Cov-2, novel coronavirus to spread rapidly in the city and across the Hubei Province of which it is the capitol, and from there across the globe.  Sadly, the Dr. Anthony Fauci-led National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases – NIAID – funded gain-of-function research through research company, Eco-Health Alliance, a “non-profit” headed by British scientist Peter Daszak.  Eco-Health remains non-profitable as it funds research in various places around the world, including Wuhan, from grants it obtains from entities like the National Institutes of Health, within which lie the NIAID and Dr. Fauci.  That sentence means what it says.

“Gain of Function” means that a natural bat coronavirus was modified, or engineered in the Wuhan laboratory to enable it to readily infect humans and “humanized” mice for research purposes, but it is a matter of intent.  If some Communist dictatorship intended to create a bio-weapon – just saying – it would cause the exact same engineering to go forward.  Any outside source of the funding needed for such engineering or research would, if it had half a wit, deny any connection to such a sharp, 2-edged sword.  This may account for argumentativeness on the part of the world-renowned Dr. Fauci during testimony in Senate hearings on the coronavirus.  He certainly has half a wit.

For those Americans who carefully limit themselves to certain news sources, the participation of the NIAID in development of Covid-19 is just a rumor, nothing more.

Another rumor that is very widely known… and repeated by numerous official sources, is that President Trump’s “warp speed” regulatory changes and funding produced three very effective “vaccines” against Covid-19 in record time.  Millions are convinced that the rumor is true.  But how could modified RNA technology have been applied to this novel coronavirus so rapidly?  Well, “Moderna,” a little-known Cambridge, Mass. Pharmaceutical company just happened to be working on such a rumored “vaccine” against the SARS-Cov-2 novel coronavirus IN THE WUHAN INSTITUTE OF VIROLOGY in late 2019 before the rest of the world had even heard of the disease.  What a fortunate coincidence.  Almost as if they had been preparing for the “lab leak” that put Covid-19 on the world stage, when the President called upon “science” and business to work together on an emergency search for a vaccine against the deadly worldwide pandemic, why they were more than halfway there!

Miracle of miracles, not just Moderna but Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson / Janssen were also able to develop “vaccines” in record time that were able to be “approved” by the FDA for emergency use, right AFTER the 2020 federal elections, since approval before November 3rd would have yielded bad optics.

Unfortunately, Trump was as much in the dark about the legal and illegal machinations of the NIH, CDC and NIAID as the rest of us.  He simply recognized the need for a vaccine to stem the disease and believed that what the pharmaceutical industry and Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx and the FDA were calling vaccines actually were vaccines.  Trump is a do-er, not a doctor, taking the best advice he could get.  He had no idea how thoroughly corrupted federal health agencies were by “big Pharma.”  Even the FDA whom we trust to protect Americans from bad foods and unproven drugs, is populated almost completely by former pharmaceutical-industry hacks.  So, we can put that rumor to rest.

The other rumor we can finally bury is the “vaccine” status of the modified RNA injections that are, even now, being mandated by businesses and governments, willy-nilly.  They’re not vaccines… they are stimulants.  They stimulate one’s cells to create non-infectious “spike” proteins that are similar to Covid-19 spike proteins.  There very quickly develops a flood of “foreign” spike proteins that the body does its best to get rid of.  If, while the flood of foreign proteins are sloshing around, one is also exposed to the Covid-19 spike proteins, well the body will get rid of them, too, during its stimulated get-rid-of-foreign-spike-proteins-phase.  It’s ingenious, really, and it can reduce the number of Covid-19 proteins (viruses) that are able to infect a person’s cells.  This provides some time for the body’s immune system to finally begin creating defenses against Covid.  For most who are exposed following an MRNA injection, the resulting Covid infection will be somewhat milder than it would have been if never injected.  However, the MRNA injections do not cause the body’s immune system to create T-cells and B-cells that will confer virtually life-long responsiveness to Covid proteins, and rapid immune defenses to them.  They do, however, practically guarantee the emergence of mutations – the dreaded “variants” – by mass-injection programs during a pandemic.

Since the body is good at filtering out foreign proteins, the MRNA injections wear off in a few months, leaving injectees vulnerable to future exposures to Covid-19, and with no built-up immunity or rapid immune defenses, possibly more vulnerable than if never injected.  There is some evidence that natural immunity function, itself, and natural immunity to Covid-19 following infection and recovery, may be impaired by MRNA injections.  Natural immunity to Covid is 5 to 25 times stronger than the temporary “immunity” conferred by MRNA injection, so it seems a shame to weaken it with future MRNA shots.  Apparently our politicians know better than scientists and doctors what is “good” for us.

As part of “warp speed” development of the MRNA injections, pharmaceutical companies were granted immunity from suits due to bad injection reactions up to and including death.  This is interesting.  The same people who shy away from you if you are not “vaccinated” and who rush to get their children “vaccinated” with MRNA injections, want gun manufacturers to be made fully liable for the use of their products, yet many, many more people die from pharmaceuticals and bad reactions to them, and from bad drug interactions, than from gunshots – many more.  The MRNA injections, themselves, account for upwards of 45,000 deaths and hundreds of thousands of bad reactions that have yielded debilitating effects, including paralysis.  “Give it to our children!” some people cry.

One of the greatest, life-changing effects of MRNA injections, is the creation of dozens of new billionaires from governments’ purchasing of these “free” shots.

Malpractice insurance is no problem for big Pharma, but it is for most treatment providers.  Throughout medical school and residency, future physicians are schooled in the employment of “best practice” when diagnosing or treating patients both medically and surgically.  Best practice is a doctor’s only defense against charges of “malpractice.”  Hence, defensive medicine is the best practice: every test that might illuminate and inform a doctor’s next step or recommendation or prescription, must be employed lest a key piece of “best practice” be overlooked, creating malpractice vulnerability.

Throughout medical education, “best practices” are taught, tested, drilled and tested again and again.  The advancement of medical knowledge is not as rapid as it may appear.  It takes time and extensive trial and error: studies, “teaching hospital” trials, even for surgical improvement, before a new procedure among dozens that comprise complex surgery or cancer treatments and every other interaction with doctors and laboratories, may be accepted as a “best” practice.  To a great degree, the defensibility of the procedure contributes to its “best” designation.  Also crucial, however, is the predictability of result in the majority of patients.

When new procedures are finally tried and used, the old “informed consent” firewall is duly presented and signed.  Progress is made, somewhat better methods and, presumably, results manifest, the patients recover, possibly faster.  Because of testing and trials with careful analyses of results written up for peer review and duplication of results in similar patients, “informed consent” is genuinely “informed.”  Insurance companies and their attorneys have been satisfied that coverage should, properly, be extended to cover the new procedure or device or development.  What ever the patient now consents to has been deemed “safe” enough and effective enough that the overall risk to the insurors can be quantified as low enough – and, thus, to the patient – that they’ll “cover it.”  The provider institution and every clinician who will be part of the new whatever, is also able to be insured, and PROTECTED so long as the insurable “best practice” is employed.  Are MRNA injections a “best practice?”  Who the Hell even knows?  Evidence is accumulating that they are NOT.

The cost of progress is not small.  Research and trials are financed, oftentimes by the pharmaceutical industries.  Many changes require new drugs or new formulations of drugs, and their new aspects and applications must also be tested, whether under real treatment conditions or in research programs at medical schools, among other venues.  Doctors are “educated” in large part by and thanks to pharmaceutical manufacturers.  All of their professors have been, too.  Best practice is as much best prescription as best action.  And doctors and institutions like pharmaceuticals that have been “approved” by the “independent” Food and Drug Administration (FDA); they form a large part of “best practices.”  If a malpractice suit is brought against any provider, his, her or its only defense, all things being normal, is that “best practices” were employed, documented, and witnessed by other professionals.  Every medical student knows this: it helps cement their trust of “Pharma.”  Their products are predictable in effect and “approved.”

Now and then, however, a drug is approved only for “emergency” use or for “last resort” use.  This is because there has not been sufficient testing on enough populations to gain full FDA approval.  Typically the emergency demand for such a drug is from a fairly small population, each of whom signs a quite different “Informed Consent” form that makes clear the experimental nature of the drug in question and its “emergency use only” designation.

Where does this leave all the brilliant people in the medical industry when the subject is the “emergency use only”-designated Covid-19 MRNA injections?  Are they impressed or confused by the description of the injections as “vaccines?”  Surely that can’t be so.

Are they blinded by the CDC’s daily recommendation to be “vaccinated” by these experimental chemicals, regardless of the mounting evidence of the rapid decline of such “protection” from Covid that they offer?  Impossible.  They’re all very smart, very careful professionals.  Are all the providers of the injections offering informed consent forms to every guinea pig…. ahhm, recipient of the experimental shots?  Well, no, how could they when the data from testing has not been released by the FDA?  Clearly when people roll up their sleeves they are consenting to the injection, but not because they are well-informed of the risks.  In fact, by calling the shots “vaccines,” they have been MIS-informed by every official health-care agency or department in municipal, state and federal governments, including the CDC, Dr. Anthony Fauci and the NIAID he heads, the FDA and thousands of Doctors nationwide and even worldwide.  Even the President and his predecessor and a host of other politicians are on the same misinformation train: they all refer to these weird biologics as “vaccines.”

People fundamentally trust vaccines.  Vaccines protect the recipient from diseases like polio, Rubella, chicken-pox, diptheria and tetanus.  Vaccines can protect against pneumonia, tuberculosis and shingles.  They confer “natural immunity.”  Someday, we hope, there will be an actual vaccine that protects against Covid-19; people will want to get that shot.  Unfortunately we don’t have one… not yet.  We have Modified RNA injections that don’t confer immunity and provide only temporary protection from the worst effects of infection.  They’re NOT vaccines.  OMG.  Is money a factor?

“Medicine” has crossed an ethical line, as if to catch up to the dozens of ethical and legal lines politicians and governments cross every day.  Across the country hospitals are literally firing highly trained and experienced doctors, nurses and others who are declining to receive the experimental MRNA injections.  This seems stupid, on the face of it.  Why would smart professionals fire other smart professionals over an experimental shot the safety and efficacy of which the former group cannot describe to the latter?

Do you know who else is being fired?  Police officers, firefighters, Army, Navy, Marine and Special Operations troops – all expensively trained and needed.  What kind of idiots would do that?

Speaking of crossed lines, did you know that life-saving surgeries are being denied to people who are not the recipient of these weird injections?  God save us. 1. With thanks to the late Spiro Agnew.