The Medical Con Game

by Jon Rappoport

'The history of emergency, crisis, acute trauma medicine is the history of applying one cruel measure of success or failure: did the patient live or die?

There was no hiding the result. It was there for all to see.

The soldier lying wounded on the battlefield, the crash victim extracted from his car, the rescued half-frozen mountain climber---do the doctors put them back together, or do the patients fail to make it?

Over time, this branch of medicine achieved spectacular results. Yes, even ER heroics can be overworked and drive the patient into chronic disability, but all in all, we would have to say the field of emergency medical practice has been a major success.

The Big Con enters the scene when doctors pretend that such achievements can be assumed and inferred over the whole range of practice: all surgeries, drug therapy, treatment of chronic diseases, so-called mental disorders.

But through favoritism, partnerships with governments, and other monopolistic practices, modern medicine has been able to blur the standards of success or failure.

“We are the Only Ones. If we save a patient, if the patient succumbs, if the patient is injured by our work---it doesn’t matter, because no one in the world would be able to do better. Every treatment we apply is the best that science can offer at the moment. Therefore, we’re exempt from blame.”

Modern medicine has awesome PR capability. It has used that force to disseminate the notion that its successes in the ER are mirrored in all other branches of its work. And, of course, this is the big lie.

Because a doctor can repair a broken leg, does this mean he can wield a dangerous drug like Ritalin and better the life of a child who is bored in the classroom? Because the doctor can break up a blood clot that is threatening to kill a patient in the next hour, does that mean he can help a woman whose breast tumor would never progress to a dangerous stage---by removing both of her breasts?

Because the doctor can temporarily beat down an inflammation that is cutting off vital organ function, does that mean he can assist an immune-deficient patient by giving him a drug that nullifies the ability of immune cells to reproduce?

Because the doctor can stay an infection that has spiraled out of control, does that mean he can erase a prolonged state of depression by prescribing a medicine that unpredictably scrambles brain neurotransmitter processes?

These are questions that make no sense to most doctors. Relying on unscientific, slanted, fraudulent, incompetent studies, doctors will assert that their treatments for hundreds of conditions represent the frontier of what humans are able to do to help one another.

In these treatments, all real standards of success and failure are missing. There is no yardstick. There is only self-inflating propaganda.

When the practice of healing loses its way, and refuses to confess its lies, one result is the telling of bigger and more damaging lies.

The whole efficacy testing of vaccines relies on the faulty premise that the production of antibodies is the only goal. If a new vaccine can induce antibodies, it is deemed an unqualified success. However, in the last 25 years, antibody tests used to diagnose diseases have gained a new ascendance. If a patient is found to have antibodies to a particular disease-germ, he can be said to be infected by that disease.

On the one hand, production of antibodies via a vaccine is a sign of immunity to a disease-germ. But discovering those same antibodies during a diagnostic test is taken to mean the patient is ill or will become ill.

Admitting this gross contradiction would be akin to prosecutors, all over country, saying the last 20 years of their criminal cases have been wholly tainted by invented lab work, whose sole purpose was gaining convictions in court.

Once upon a time, it was well understood that the mere detection of a germ in the patient was insufficient for a disease diagnosis. It was necessary to establish that an army of millions of these germs was active in the body. Now, that is overturned. Again, the standard has been blurred and decimated. This sea change has paved the way for the declaration of epidemics where no epidemics exist. It has emboldened and empowered public health agencies all over the world to force vaccines and medicines on populations.

Following the money is easy. Drug companies accrue enormous profits from these escalating medical lies. In fact, the companies work hand in glove with medical researchers to foster the various cons.

In the immunization arena, no true controlled trials of new vaccines are carried out. There are no long-term studies which compare the outcomes in matched groups, where one group receives a vaccine and the other group does not. By “matched,” I mean equivalent nutritional status, equivalent environmental (toxic burden) status, equivalent immune-function, equivalent medical history.

The absence of such trials---and the accompanying lies about “scientific veracity”---benefits the vaccine manufacturers, who can claim efficacy and safety for their products without the application of a true standard of success or failure.

When a child who has just received a DPT shot begins to scream and suddenly spikes with a high fever and experiences seizures and subsequent brain damage, you are seeing the result of these lies and the intentional eradication of all standards.

You’re seeing how cold and vicious the practice of medicine can be, and how far it can depart from the simple notion of saving a human being’s life when he is lying on a battlefield or a highway.'


No comments: