Posted on 07/03/2024 4:07:49 AM PDT by MtnClimber
How can Americans trust the medical establishment when it openly engages in openly ideological bias?
Together with 51,269,999 others, I watched the Trump-Biden debate on Thursday, June 27, 2024. I also paid attention to the obligatory spin from both sides. In addition to the usual talking head commentary, the Biden side released information about Joe’s health during his encounter with Trump. Based upon that narrow, self-serving information, one medical publication embarked upon an entire essay of uniformed Biden apologetics.
The Hill: “President Biden has a cold, a White House official told The Hill amid the first presidential debate.”
The Wall Street Journal: “A Biden campaign source familiar with the president’s health said that Biden is suffering from a cold. Biden’s voice is hoarse and he coughed a bit as he began the debate. He has been in Camp David for the past week preparing for the debate.”
Predictably, the moment health is mentioned, some within the medical profession pipe up and opine. This is not dissimilar to (although it’s different from) the irresponsible (IMHO) armchair psychiatric speculations from some alleged health professionals regarding Trump.
MedPage Today published an opinion piece on June 29, 2024, titled “Did Cold Medications Affect Biden’s Debate Performance? – How the American people assess the debate hinges on the answer.” The first author is “a professor of leadership practice,” and the second is “a cardiologist and a professor of medicine.”
There is a clear bias to the article. It begins:
Early last week, Donald Trump suggested that Joe Biden would be on performance-enhancing drugs for the presidential debate and demanded a drug test. The claim was widely laughed off as Trumpaganda, creating another fact-free conspiratorial haze. Still, perhaps Trump was onto something. The country is struggling to reconcile Biden’s cognitive impairment...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
There is a difference though.
Back then, drilling a hole in the skull did not contradict much of anything they knew about anything.
In today’s world, things like the approach to COVID did indeed run counter to known knowledge, such as in denying the effectiveness of acquired immunity, etc.
If they still observed the key part of the Hippocratic oath “do no harm“, they would never have forced that vaccine on people.
When I told my doctor that I’d quit the Crestor he’d prescribed ‘just because’, he stormed out of the room in a hissy fit, never inquiring as to why.
I fired his ass. That was nearly 20 years ago. I’ve since (hopefully) regained my health due to that medication and other issues for which he was no help whatsoever (though still procrastinating on a sinus surgery addressing yet another issue he misdiagnosed).
The lipid hypothesis is the biggest fraud ever of ‘M&M’; the rest of it is just collateral damage.
And contrary to what many people think, electroshock Therapy can provide benefits in certain very narrow conditions.
However, that was not what happened with the use of electro shock therapy over time.
It came to be used as a tool to control people, both functional, and non-functional people, instead of being used as it should’ve been to transition people who were near that borderline on the wrong side (people who were non-functional) to help them become semi-functional.
It became used as a tool to make it easier for people running institutions to run those institutions. Not just to subdue the dangerous and violent patients, but to subdue all of them they could get subjected to electro shock therapy.
The way it was used in that form Was not Medicine, it was tyranny over the individual.
That the Hippocratic oath would be replaced by that drivel.
See post #8 specifically.
The drivel in post #8 or in my post?
I read with disgust and horror in the Merck Manual that “some men can birth children.” This was over 15 years ago. The Merck Manual is a well-respected, widely used reference of comprehensive medical and psychological conditions.
I instantly knew that the medical field had been corrupted at that point.
I reread my badly framed comment.
I did not quit the Crestor ‘just because’; I quit due to severe side effects.
My ‘doctor’ prescribed it ‘just because’ my blood cholesterol was, by ama orthodoxy, ‘high’.
It was the second-most damaging single moment in my life, the day I went in for the physical after which he lamented on my cholesterol levels and I ignorantly agreed to that nonsense.
Science+Politics = It ain’t science no more!
We good?
Yup.:-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.