Hypocrisy of the AMAs Standard of Care

May 21, 2015

by Paul Fassa, Natural Health Journalist

(UtopiaSilver.com) Standard of care is a term that is used often in mainstream medical circles. It gives the illusion that it promises the finest medical care possible. But is standard of care more hypocritical than Hippocratic? Proof that it is an illusion comes with several estimates of iatrogenic illness, injury, and death that occur annually in the USA alone. Opinions aside, if we simply look at the facts the hypocrisy of the AMAs standard of care is undeniable.

Iatrogenic is the term that describes deaths, injuries, or illnesses that result from or are caused by any medical protocols or medicines. And iatrogenic death ranks third, conservatively, among all causes of death in the USA.

This ranking includes pharmaceuticals prescribed correctly, but excludes “cancer deaths” that are often from toxic chemo and radiation therapies. They do actually produce enough harm to kill, but the death certificates usually read death from cancer.

Also excluded are over the counter medicines, especially sleeping pills and those pain killers that contain acetaminophen, such as Tylenol and other generic forms.

Doctors and hospitals are able to avoid malpractice suits and criminal charges as long as all the invasive procedures and toxic medicines used were within the AMA guidelines called “standard of care”, ostensibly to promise certain medical guidelines are adhered to for the patients’ protection.

And who decides what pharmaceuticals prescribed are considered standard of care? The pharmaceutical companies and the FDA with agreement from the AMA. Pharmaceutical companies rule, even give lectures at medical colleges, then send sales reps into doctors’ offices and wine and dine them to promote their products, sometimes offering paid resort vacations if they sell, er prescribe, more.

Oncologists who administer chemotherapy in their offices or clinics buy expensive chemo medicines at wholesale and up the price to retail, profiting from the medicines themselves as well as the office visit fees. Fortunately for them, insurances cover most of the costs.

Exerpt from the legal definition of Standard of Care: “The medical malpractice plaintiff must establish the appropriate standard of care and demonstrate that the standard of care has been breached.”

So standard of care guidelines are often used to protect AMA physicians from liability or culpability regardless of what happens to a patient. The patient must prove the physician violated standard of care procedures, regardless of the toxicity of FDA approved medicines “correctly prescribed”, and even if it’s used off label.

If a patient dies under the care of a holistic MD, naturopath, herbalist, or chiropractor using non-pharmaceutical means, he or she can be arrested for murder. As long as an MD prescribes FDA approved toxic medicines within standard of care guidelines, that practitioner is not culpable or liable no matter how many die or are injured or made more ill.

Estimates from withing the medical field range from 100,000 deaths and higher for deaths from “correctly prescribed medicines”, not pharmaceuticals abused. Illnesses from pharmaceuticals are higher, and they usually are “corrected” with other prescribed medicines that shouldn’t be called medicines.

Standard of Care Also Inhibits Healing from Other Sources

In many states it’s considered illegal for an AMA physician to offer any thing other than chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery for treating cancer. Even nutritional advice is forbidden. In California, it’s a felony. Of course, almost all insurance, private and especially government, will not insure those less expensive, safer, and more effective natural protocols.

Generally speaking, most laws throughout the country, though varying from state to state, are extremely restrictive toward so called alternative therapies while invoking the AMA/FDA Big Pharma standard of care mantra. It’s a monopolistic racket folks. It’s not in your best interest at all.

Here’s a more thorough breakdown of state laws regarding standard of care that you should read thoroughly if you’re not convinced of these tyrannical atrocities.

Most actual cures are from therapies outside standard of care protocols. Thus standard of care guidelines and restrictions inhibit real breakthroughs, such as when Dr. Frederick Robert Klenner had attempted to prove with dozens of case study files that mega-dose injections of vitamin C cures polio. He had done this successfully with even paralytic polio cases for six years.

That was circa 1950, right around the time polio cases had peaked. Dr. Klenner brought his case studies to a regional medical board meeting, and discovered that none, absolutely zero, of the other MDs in attendance were interested at all.

They had their standard of care protocols, and mega-dose vitamin C injections were not part of them. Of course, the pharmaceutical industry can’t patent vitamin C, so pursuing FDA approval would be impossible and the FDA goes along with this to reject any non-pharmaceutical solutions.

After all, there is that revolving door between government agencies and pharmaceutical corporations. And the FDA is actually paid by pharmaceutical corporations to approve and license their medicines, which are tested by the medicine companies themselves.

Pharmaceutical medicines are not tested independently or by the FDA. The FDA simply reviews the trial materials to determine if the benefits outweigh the risks, casino medicine at its best. And over the past few years, many medicine trial papers have been found to be fraudulent by honest MDs and investigative journalists. You can find some of their books linked below this article.

Often the bad effects or cases of death are excluded, especially if the trials were done overseas and in third world countries. Sometimes in-house ghost writers create favorable reports that are signed by doctors and submitted to medical journals. Apparently, the journals are beginning to slowly catch on to this gambit.

Some argue that if pharmaceutical companies didn’t short-cut or fast-track their medicines, many would not benefit even as others die after market exposure. The benefits are surely questionable. The game is to create a new medicine every time a patent expires within its 20 year time frame to retain exclusive marketing. They usually wind up getting worse.

I remember a prescription allergy pill I had used in my youth circa 1960 that was very effective with only mild, pleasant side effects. Fast forward 35 years to 1995 when I was prescribed the latest and greatest new allergy medicine. It didn’t work well and I thought I had been poisoned. Guess I was! I threw it out.

Drugs are tested primarily to determine the extent of toxicity by using animals. LD 50 (lethal dose 50) was the standard that’s being phased out, supposedly, which indicates the dosage level used that killed half the animals used in testing.

Often terrible side effects show up after marketing to the public. Herbs, dietary methods, and other natural means don’t require this level of testing because they’re non-toxic to begin with, no matter how much the FDA and AMA claim they are to maintain their monopoly. They are applied to humans clinically and tested for efficacy, not toxicity.

A current example of how standard of care restricts better options is offered by an MD in this short video.

You can avoid casino medicine with dangerous medicines by consulting with MD, now naturopath Dr. Ken O’ Neal here on this site.


Books that you can look into and corroborate part of this article’s essential message are here and here.