Establishment medicine, practiced today, has been long influenced by men whose goal was not to cure, or even treat, ill people. Their goal was to have a system that gave sick people "medicine" that did not cure, but, in reality, made the patient sicker or sick with a different illness. Doctors were trained to follow the system, so many are not even culpable. But, most should have been smart enough, trained enough, to recognize what the system was doing to uneducated, nearly hopeless patients-- essentially making them sicker or even killing them. Those that recognized the hoax should have ran away from the system. Doctors that stayed are/were only interested in making money.
Establishment medicine is so ingrained, it is doubtful if it could be put back on the proper track, assuming enough health professionals desire to reform the system. As with almost everything old and rotting, it should be discarded.
Thank you for this thoughtful and thought provoking essay. I couldn’t agree more. I’m grateful to those sitting on the ACIP committee for their commitment to returning medicine to the days of informed consent.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It sounds as if you always cared deeply and worked hard, and over these past five years have been making deep shifts in your thinking. I imagine you will have a positive impact on many. I do want to respond to a few of your musings with some food for thought (from outside the establishment medicine bubble).
In particular, on these two perspectives you offered:
1. "Virtually all the speakers representing organized healthcare were seemingly completely oblivious to the questions of safety... I thought that we had made real progress in things. Now I am not so sure."
2. "The actual study of leadership needs to be a part of education in the health professions... We need to understand that a physician should not be a 'treater of disease' but a 'leader of patients'."
I had the following thoughts:
I was born in 66 and became responsible for the healthcare of my three children born in 95, 99 and 03. By 1999, all health choices I made for my children and myself changed completely. I utilized virtually zero protocols from allopathic medicine. Why? Because they didn't hold up to reason. When examining the evidence and success rates for any MD-recommended solutions, they were obvious failures while neglecting to identify root causes and resolve them. This style of medicine, I could see, only succeeded in emergency care. Naturopathic medicine, herbal medicine, homoeopathic medicine, Chinese medicine, chiropractic, and energy medicine among others served us well. (Functional medicine wasn't a thing yet.)
I have since curated research and references that document what I had already experienced first-hand:
1. Failed Health Outcomes — The U.S. spends nearly twice the per-capita amount on healthcare than the next highest spender, yet Americans are the most chronically ill, and rank 48th in life expectancy, among other countries. In addition, medical misdiagnosis causes permanent harm and death to 795,000 people every year.
2 Verifiably Corrupt — Establishment medicine as a system* is verifiably corrupt, serving the interests of industry — not health. (*Obviously, not every individual working in establishment medicine is unethical. Rather, the system that educated / indoctrinated them, and that sets policy, hires, pays, and promotes them is verifiably corrupted.)
3. Big Pharma & Biotech: Immoral Business Model — Corporations, by design, are beholden to profit above all else, acting as powerful entities that are “essentially psychopathic and without conscience.” Pharmaceutical and biotech companies are the utmost example of corporate psychopathy, demonstrating inhumanity in response to human suffering.
4. Regulatory & Professional Betrayal — Government agencies entrusted to regulate the field of medicine fail to do so. The majority of influential professional organizations such as the American Medical Association are corrupted by industry.
5. Not Evidence/Science-Based — The bulk of establishment medicine’s standard of care is not based on unbiased, reproducible science. (We prove it here.)
6. Harms by Drug and Diagnostic — Establishment medicine providers routinely utilize diagnostic testing and “treatments” that cause harm (“adverse”, “side” effects). Get verifiable evidence of the harms, organized by drug, treatment, or test (mammograms, CT scans, antibiotics, statins, benzos, etc).
As for the idea that "a physician should not be a 'treater of disease' but a 'leader of patients'" I don't exactly agree. I agree that people who provide great service to others often get put into leadership roles, but I think history indicates that the best leaders did not seek that role but reluctantly accepted it. They had only been trying to be of real service to others, and their success caused others to convince them to take an elevated role. In my experience, I can't think of anyone who I have more gratitude and respect for than the naturopathic doctor who I relied on and learned from for decades. I didn't think of her as a leader, but as my partner, my guide, my trusted resource. She earned that distinction in my life not from being taught leadership skills but simply from doing her job so well that she succeeded in helping me and my family to be healthy. You used the word "physician" which I had to look up to ensure I understood your intention. The definition is simply "a person qualified to practice medicine" so as long as we remember that there are 20 medical systems to choose from...
... then presumably some physicians could become leaders. But most people who have been indoctrinated in the corrupt allopathic system don't dedicate the time necessary to overcome all that they misunderstand and don't know. The amount of time spent in medical school is so significant that only a few can overcome the pressure to remain independent in their thinking and have the energy to learn all they will need to learn that they weren't taught. There are certainly many examples of MDs (but more DOs and DCs, it seems) who have become leaders but it's always due to the knowledge they gained outside of their mainstream education. I have often said that good doctors are only so in spite of their education, not because of it.
Establishment medicine, practiced today, has been long influenced by men whose goal was not to cure, or even treat, ill people. Their goal was to have a system that gave sick people "medicine" that did not cure, but, in reality, made the patient sicker or sick with a different illness. Doctors were trained to follow the system, so many are not even culpable. But, most should have been smart enough, trained enough, to recognize what the system was doing to uneducated, nearly hopeless patients-- essentially making them sicker or even killing them. Those that recognized the hoax should have ran away from the system. Doctors that stayed are/were only interested in making money.
Establishment medicine is so ingrained, it is doubtful if it could be put back on the proper track, assuming enough health professionals desire to reform the system. As with almost everything old and rotting, it should be discarded.
Thank you for this thoughtful and thought provoking essay. I couldn’t agree more. I’m grateful to those sitting on the ACIP committee for their commitment to returning medicine to the days of informed consent.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It sounds as if you always cared deeply and worked hard, and over these past five years have been making deep shifts in your thinking. I imagine you will have a positive impact on many. I do want to respond to a few of your musings with some food for thought (from outside the establishment medicine bubble).
In particular, on these two perspectives you offered:
1. "Virtually all the speakers representing organized healthcare were seemingly completely oblivious to the questions of safety... I thought that we had made real progress in things. Now I am not so sure."
2. "The actual study of leadership needs to be a part of education in the health professions... We need to understand that a physician should not be a 'treater of disease' but a 'leader of patients'."
I had the following thoughts:
I was born in 66 and became responsible for the healthcare of my three children born in 95, 99 and 03. By 1999, all health choices I made for my children and myself changed completely. I utilized virtually zero protocols from allopathic medicine. Why? Because they didn't hold up to reason. When examining the evidence and success rates for any MD-recommended solutions, they were obvious failures while neglecting to identify root causes and resolve them. This style of medicine, I could see, only succeeded in emergency care. Naturopathic medicine, herbal medicine, homoeopathic medicine, Chinese medicine, chiropractic, and energy medicine among others served us well. (Functional medicine wasn't a thing yet.)
I have since curated research and references that document what I had already experienced first-hand:
1. Failed Health Outcomes — The U.S. spends nearly twice the per-capita amount on healthcare than the next highest spender, yet Americans are the most chronically ill, and rank 48th in life expectancy, among other countries. In addition, medical misdiagnosis causes permanent harm and death to 795,000 people every year.
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/americans-are-paying-billions-to
2 Verifiably Corrupt — Establishment medicine as a system* is verifiably corrupt, serving the interests of industry — not health. (*Obviously, not every individual working in establishment medicine is unethical. Rather, the system that educated / indoctrinated them, and that sets policy, hires, pays, and promotes them is verifiably corrupted.)
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/establishment-medicine-part-1-verifiably
3. Big Pharma & Biotech: Immoral Business Model — Corporations, by design, are beholden to profit above all else, acting as powerful entities that are “essentially psychopathic and without conscience.” Pharmaceutical and biotech companies are the utmost example of corporate psychopathy, demonstrating inhumanity in response to human suffering.
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/big-pharma-immoral-business-model
4. Regulatory & Professional Betrayal — Government agencies entrusted to regulate the field of medicine fail to do so. The majority of influential professional organizations such as the American Medical Association are corrupted by industry.
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/establishment-medicine-part-3-regulatory
5. Not Evidence/Science-Based — The bulk of establishment medicine’s standard of care is not based on unbiased, reproducible science. (We prove it here.)
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/establishment-medicine-part-2-not
6. Harms by Drug and Diagnostic — Establishment medicine providers routinely utilize diagnostic testing and “treatments” that cause harm (“adverse”, “side” effects). Get verifiable evidence of the harms, organized by drug, treatment, or test (mammograms, CT scans, antibiotics, statins, benzos, etc).
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/establishment-medicine-part-4-the
As for the idea that "a physician should not be a 'treater of disease' but a 'leader of patients'" I don't exactly agree. I agree that people who provide great service to others often get put into leadership roles, but I think history indicates that the best leaders did not seek that role but reluctantly accepted it. They had only been trying to be of real service to others, and their success caused others to convince them to take an elevated role. In my experience, I can't think of anyone who I have more gratitude and respect for than the naturopathic doctor who I relied on and learned from for decades. I didn't think of her as a leader, but as my partner, my guide, my trusted resource. She earned that distinction in my life not from being taught leadership skills but simply from doing her job so well that she succeeded in helping me and my family to be healthy. You used the word "physician" which I had to look up to ensure I understood your intention. The definition is simply "a person qualified to practice medicine" so as long as we remember that there are 20 medical systems to choose from...
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/youve-got-20-medical-systems-and
... then presumably some physicians could become leaders. But most people who have been indoctrinated in the corrupt allopathic system don't dedicate the time necessary to overcome all that they misunderstand and don't know. The amount of time spent in medical school is so significant that only a few can overcome the pressure to remain independent in their thinking and have the energy to learn all they will need to learn that they weren't taught. There are certainly many examples of MDs (but more DOs and DCs, it seems) who have become leaders but it's always due to the knowledge they gained outside of their mainstream education. I have often said that good doctors are only so in spite of their education, not because of it.