The Death of Informed Consent | "They would lie right to your face," he said. "You'd tell the nurse that you didn't want Remdesivir and she'd say, 'Fine. But you're a bit dehydrated, so let's get some fluids in you.' And she'd hook up the IV, but it wasn't fluids. It was Remdesivir."

submitted by stickdog from (americanthinker.com)

all 8 comments
sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun

[–]tsanazi2 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Fantastic article.

I wonder if the doctors were technically right when they said the insurance would refuse to pay if the patients rejected medical advice.

[–]stickdog[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Good question. What strikes me about this whole article is how easily PROTOCOLS can be used to coerce mostly well-meaning professionals to be heinously evil to their clients.

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I've been told that some doctors will say this - either because they mistakenly believe it themselves, or because they want to unethically pressure their patients - but it isn't backed up by anything I've ever seen, and it doesn't make any sense.

 

edit: according to a 2012 study there are no instances of this occurring, but a startlingly high percentage of MDs claim they believe it. Assign benevolent or pecuniary motivations according to taste.

Of 46,319 patients admitted from 2001 to 2010, 526 (1.1%) patients left AMA. Among insured patients, payment was refused in 4.1% of cases. Reasons for refusal were largely administrative (wrong name, etc.). No cases of payment refusal were because patient left AMA. Nevertheless, most residents (68.6%) and nearly half of attendings (43.9%) believed insurance denies payment when a patient leaves AMA. Attendings who believed that insurance denied payment were more likely to report informing AMA patients they may be held financially responsible (mean 4.2 vs. 1.7 on a Likert 1-5 scale, in which 5 is "always" inform, p < 0.001). This relationship was not observed among residents. The most common reason for counseling patients was "so they will reconsider staying in the hospital" (84.8% residents, 66.7% attendings, p = 0.008)

[–]tsanazi2 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Thx, What does "patients left AMA" mean in this context?

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Against Medical Advice

[–]tsanazi2 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks. Sorry for my ignorance.

[–]penelopepnortneyBecome ungovernable 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The ultimate denial of informed consent was the hospitals' refusal to allow the patients to leave. "Patients lost all rights when they went in the hospital," Senator Ron Johnson told Patty Myers in her documentary, Making A Killing. "They became prisoners." A cottage industry of hospital rescues cropped up, as desperate family members hired lawyers to try to spring their loved ones out of hospital "care." Ralph Lorigo, a lawyer in Buffalo, told me that in every case when he succeeded in getting a patient's case before a judge and the judge ruled in the family's favor, the patient went home and survived. In all cases where the judge refused to hear the case or ruled against the family, the patient died.

[–]stickdog[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Excerpt:

Here's what never happened in the hospital during COVID: a doctor sat down next to a patient and said, "You have a choice. We can give you Remdesivir, which killed 53% of the patients in an Ebola trial. It was so bad the trial had to be shut down. And you'll notice here in Remdesivir's fact sheet, it says, 'Not a lot of people have used Remdesivir. Serious and unexpected side effects may happen.' Or we can give you ivermectin, a safe and effective drug that's been successfully used for decades, and send you home. Which do you prefer?"

The reason that conversation never happened is that it would have cost the hospital too much money. If the hospital gave you ivermectin and sent you home, the federal government paid the hospital $3,200. If the hospital gave you Remdesivir, the federal government paid the entire hospital bill, plus a 20% bonus. So the hospital executives' choice was to receive $3,200 or $500,000, which was the average hospital bill. No contest. Patients were going to get Remdesivir — whether they wanted it or not.

Informed consent died a grotesque death in the hospitals during COVID, and we need an autopsy. There was no information, and there was no consent, and without them, patients are reduced to helpless victims, exploited for corrupt financial gain and immoral experiments.

Informed consent has been enshrined in numerous judicial rulings as the foundation of ethical medical practice and seared into the public's conscience from the Nuremberg trials. Seven Nazi doctors were hanged in Germany by an American military tribunal for "murders, tortures, and other atrocities committed in the name of medical science." Yet murders, tortures, and other atrocities are exactly what was committed by medical staff in the hospitals against thousands of Americans during COVID.

Take, for example, Ray Lamar, who arrived in the emergency room with a message written with a black sharpie pen on his arm: "NO VENT NO REMDESIVIR." On his other arm, he wrote the same message and added his wife's name and phone number. Yet the doctors gave him Remdesivir anyway, without ever informing him. His widow Patti told me she constantly wonders what she could have done to save him.

...