Western medicine: a killing machine

Here’s precisely what’s wrong with today’s medical profession: an Alberta Queen’s Bench Justice described its practitioners as physicians, who are legally “independent contractors” liable to their patients, and free to exercise their clinical judgment.

Justice Paul Belzil may have been following the law as it exists, but he seems to have forgotten that medical science is based on different sets of laws. Such as that its practitioners are not permitted to pick and choose cases they are or they are not going to treat based on such concerns as whether the patient is or is not vaccinated against this or that condition.

Here’s a most drastic example of a physician’s duties: after the Second World War, Jewish physicians who had barely survived Nazi concentration camps would treat their injured SS torturers without a murmur. On some occasions they restored them to health to be ready for the gallows, but treat them they did.

Doctors playing God

An Edmonton Journal story by Jonny Wakefield describes the situation in which doctors saw fit to remove a terminally ill Alberta woman from an organ transplant list because she wouldn’t agree to get vaccinated against the so-called Covid virus.

This is not (and should not be) a story about whether the scare is legitimate or not. This is not (and should not be) a story about whether the so-called Covid vaccines are safe, either. This is not (and should not be) a story, even, about the fact that these vaccines have been recognised as experimental and, thus, mandates imposing them have been illegal both in medical and judicial sense.

Justice Belzil obviously hasn’t read any of the Nurmberg Tribunals code.

Annette Lewis, 57, sought an injunction against Alberta Health Services (AHS) and six local doctors after they told her that she could not proceed with the transplant unless she receives her Covid jabs.

Lewis claimed the requirement violated her charter rights, while AHS said it has an obligation to donors, their families and other patients to make sure organs are used on patients with the highest chance of surviving, the Journal story describes the situation.

Justice Belzil countered by saying that applying the charter to the clinical judgments of physicians would create “two classes” of organ recipients and result in “medical chaos with patients seeking endless judicial review of clinical treatment decisions.”

This is where Justice Belzil said, according to the Journal story, that the case came down to whether physicians, who are legally “independent contractors” liable to their patients, are free to exercise their clinical judgment.

As ridiculous set of statements as ever pronounced from a Queen’s Bench. Or from any bench.

The notice of appeal against Justice Belzil’s pronouncements has concentrated on what Lewis’s lawyers described as his legal errors. Saying, as Justice Belzil did, that the vaccine requirement was a clinical decision, rather than an “imposition” by “state agents” carrying out an AHS policy, was wrong, they said.

Also, putting AHS above Canada’s Charter of Rights was, in and of itself, perfect nonsense. Nobody is above the country’s Constitution, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms happens to be an integral part of it.

Justice Belzil also concluded in his ruling that Covid vaccines were safe and effective, a statement that he claimed was supported by “overwhelming evidence,” without quoting any, and a statement that Ms. Lewis challenges.

Considering that the U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) has just admitted that the vaccines aren’t what their proponents have been suggesting them to be, lifting the mandates at the same time, Justice Belzil is skating on thin ice here.

According to the Edmonton Journal, Ms. Lewis is asking the Alberta Court of Appeal to declare the Covid vaccine requirement a “definitive violation of (her) fundamental freedom of conscience and rights to life, liberty, security of person, and to freedom from arbitrary discrimination.”

AHS and the six doctors named in Lewis’s injunction said, the Journal reports, that Covid vaccines are required for organ transplant patients because the immune suppressing drugs used to prevent their bodies from rejecting the new organ make them uniquely susceptible to dying from the illness. They support this statement with just one set one of numbers that says that one group of patients who caught the virus without a pre-transplant vaccine suffered a 40 per cent mortality rate.

Except: this is NOT a case for statisticians.

Labs vs. nature

This is a case about Canadian (and western, in general) medicine gone bonkers. For very base reasons, to boot.

Also called allopathic, Canadian (and western, in general) medicine’s practitioners describe this system of medicine as a method of treating disease with remedies (such as surgery or drugs) that produce different effects from those caused by the disease.

It takes a science-based approach, they claim with straight faces, to treating patients. It uses conventional modern medical treatments such as surgery, medication, and therapies.

Allopathic physicians have the title of MD or medical doctor, their own definition of themselves continues, and they have various responsibilities related to maintaining health, such as prevention and acute care. They can specialise in several different specialty areas and build a career in research or teaching.

And here comes the revealing part of the definition: Allopathic medicine is also called biomedicine, mainstream medicine, conventional medicine, and orthodox medicine.

Please note the word: orthodox. Webster-Merriam Dictionary’s briefest explanation: conforming to established doctrine, especially in religion.

Let’s go on: and what, pray, is doctrine? Again, Merriam-Webster Dictionary to the rescue: a principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief: dogma.

And, how about the word dogma? Merriam-Webster Dictionary again: something held as an established opinion, a definite authoritative tenet, a code of such tenets, pedagogical dogma, and (that’s what it’s all about) a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds.

Basically, allopathic medicine has become an industry, replacing nature and her treatments tested through millennia with artificial chemicals and putting its practitioners on God-like pedestals.

As courageous Scottish physician Dr. Malcom Kendrick put it in his famous book, Doctoring Data, progress, if any, in allopathic medicine is limited by Aldous Huxley’s famous definition to one funeral at a time.

And this, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is what this argument between Ms. Lewis and the allopathic medicine establishment is all about.

Justice Belzil may have been a top student in his law school years. Still, one wonders what his thinking would be were he in Ms. Lewis’s shoes.

Nobody knows at the moment when Ms. Lewis’s appeal will be heard. Let us hope that she’ll be still around then, and that her body will still have enough strength to accept the life-saving organ transplant.

Should she not live to see the day of her legal victory, AHS and the six doctors involved could be safely described as bloody murderers, and Justice Belzil would be accessory in their crime.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: