Opinion
Featured Image

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here. 

(Children’s Health Defense) – Now doctors are being threatened with the loss of their license if they fail to toe the line of mainstream medicine on how to prevent and treat COVID.

The Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) on July 29 announced doctors who “spread COVID-19 vaccine misinformation” risk disciplinary action by state medical boards, including the revocation of their medical license.

The American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) on Aug. 26 issued a similar warning, stating physicians who publicly spread misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic risk losing their board certification.

What exactly constitutes “misinformation” is not defined in either case, and likely includes anything that doesn’t adhere to what government health authorities dictate.

This gagging of free speech about alternative treatments violates patients’ rights and the legal requirements of informed consent.

Who decides what counts as “misinformation”?

One thing we’ve learned from the pandemic is that available information can change, often quite rapidly. The CDC’s masking guidelines changed multiple times. Initially we were told that the virus could be spread on surfaces before subsequent investigations revealed that the virus mostly spreads when aerosols and droplets containing the virus are inhaled.

As we’ve said before, the Wuhan lab-leak theory was first dismissed as a conspiracy theory, but is now acknowledged as a legitimate, even likely, explanation of the virus’ origin.

Often the “misinformation” of today becomes the established facts of tomorrow.

Take ivermectin, for example. Informed consent legally requires your doctor to discuss the risks and benefits of alternatives to vaccines to address COVID-19.

Would it be misinformation to talk about the successes of ivermectin and the impressive body of evidence that recommends its use to prevent and treat COVID-19?

Is a doctor risking their license if they talk about the drop in COVID case counts in South American cities that instituted massive, prophylactic ivermectin distribution campaigns compared to cities that didn’t?

Despite this compelling evidence, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) stubbornly recommends against using ivermectin for COVID, likely because Big Pharma and their government cronies want mandatory vaccines, not ivermectin, as the answer to COVID because vaccines will make the most money.

The ABEM’s edict against spreading “misinformation” may be in response to the MATH+ protocol developed by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance for hospitalized COVID patients. Their protocol includes proven natural medicines like vitamin C, zinc, melatonin and vitamin D (in addition to ivermectin and other medicines).

Supplements like these are generally not patentable and thus unable to become FDA approved for the treatment of COVID, which requires expensive clinical trials. This is why the FDA and Federal Trade Commission launched a massive censorship campaign to silence discussion of how these “unapproved” medicines can help with COVID.

It is shameful that doctors may risk their medical license by discussing these plausible alternatives for addressing COVID.

The vaccination issue has become a highly controversial topic with strong feelings on all sides. The government is recommending COVID vaccination for almost everyone above the age of 12.

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Tell University of Pittsburgh to stop barbaric experiments using human babies
  Show Petition Text
7799 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 9000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

CAUTION: Some material below is by its nature disturbing and graphic.

The University of Pittsburgh (Pitt) is involved in barbaric experimentation using aborted baby body parts which are, by the university's own admission, obtained by their abortionist partners, Planned Parenthood, from babies who are still alive when the organs are "harvested."

What happens at Pitt after the aborted baby body parts are obtained is equally as gruesome. Just this May, it was revealed that in one experiment, Pitt was grafting aborted baby scalps onto lab rats to see if baby hair would continue to grow.

This depraved butchery must stop!

SIGN and SHARE this petition which calls on the Chancellor of the University of Pittsburgh and the Board of Trustees to call an immediate halt to this appalling experimentation using preborn human beings.

Of course, all abortion is barbaric and wrong, but this is downright ghoulish!

But, to make matters even worse, some of this experimentation is paid for, in part, by your taxpayer dollars, in the form of NIH grants. And believe it or not, some of the grants even specify racial quotas of aborted baby parts for this grisly butchery.

Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition to the University of Pittsburgh Chancellor, Patrick Gallagher, and to the Pitt Board of Trustees demanding that they put a stop to this ghastly experimentation.

At the same time, we will also CC this petition to the leadership of Pennsylvania State Legislature, urging them to do everything they can, including defunding (to the extent possible) any university departments involved in experimentation on aborted babies.

NB: You do not need to be from Pennsylvania to sign and share this petition. The University of Pittsburgh is a national leader in medical research and in receipt of millions of dollars in federal tax dollars, thereby necessitating a huge response from pro-lifers around the country!

After signing the petition, you might consider contacting the Pitt Board of Trustees directly to politely, but firmly, tell them to put a stop to this kind of barbarism masquerading as "scientific" inquiry.

The Board's direct phone number: 412-624-6623

The Board's email: [email protected]

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

'University of Pittsburgh’s organ harvesting practices include racial quotas for minority babies' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/university-of-pittsburghs-organ-harvesting-practices-include-racial-quotas-for-minority-babies/

WATCH CMP's YouTube video: 'Government-Sponsored Fetal Experimentation at the University of Pittsburgh and Planned Parenthood'

Photo Credit: CMP YouTube / screenshot

  Hide Petition Text

Informed consent legally requires doctors to discuss the risks and benefits of any medical procedure. Is it spreading “misinformation” to discuss with patients the 488,318 adverse events, including close to 5,000 deaths, reported in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)?

This isn’t hyperbole. We saw one “fact-checker” call out a post citing VAERS data as false because, the fact-checker claimed, VAERS is unreliable and doesn’t establish causation.

That is true, but it’s also true that a major limitation of VAERS is that adverse events are severely underreported, perhaps even less than 1 percent. This would mean that VAERS arguably understates the dangers and side effects caused by vaccines. Is it “misinformation” if your doctor informs you of these facts?

Is it “misinformation” if you have an autoimmune condition and your doctor warns that you may be at increased risk of serious adverse events like blood clots, as we discussed in our Right to kNOw campaign?

To us, this seems to be legally required by informed consent for vaccination — a complete picture of the benefits but also the risks of vaccination.

It’s easy to see this as a slippery slope, making it a license-threatening offense to discuss ways to boost immune resilience with supplements and other natural medicines.

As we argued with the federal bill that attempts to attack medical “misinformation,” attempts to control the information we are given hands power over to Big Pharma and the one-size-fits-all paradigm.

Natural medicine is predicated on the idea that each patient has individual needs based on unique biology and genetics. If doctors aren’t allowed to discuss alternatives to the mainstream medical approach, not only are the legal requirements of informed consent not being satisfied, but integrative doctors’ ability to treat individual patients will suffer.

Originally published by Alliance for Natural Health.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.

© September 10, 2021. Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.