Doctors knowingly violate the AMA's code of medical ethics with vaccines

Blindly trusting medical professionals will leave you sick and depressed, disempowered and diseased.

The medical system is all about creating lifelong customers, not enlightened self-healers. Big Pharma spends lots of money on medical schools so that the students will learn to rely on meds to fix all problems. Recently Goldman Sachs told drug companies that cures are not profitable.. Managing disease is where the profit is at.

Likewise, the vaccination route to immunity creates lifelong customers by teaching medical system dependence. This feeds doctor's salaries and pads the pockets of health insurance companies while boosting the net profits of pharmaceutical companies. Vaccines are not magic potions for lifelong immunity. If they were, then why are today's children recommended to take in over 36 vaccines before six years, when children a couple of decades ago were only recommended to take around 10? At this rate, the vaccination schedule in 2035 may require children to take in over a hundred vaccines.

Vaccines are doubly profitable. First, they get the money from selling the poisoned needle, then they get a life long customer because the vaxx victim's immune system is severly compromised and they will always be getting sick and running to the doctor for a prescription.

Being an informed patient is now disencouraged This kind of skepticism isn't even tolerated today. Instead, this kind of information is withheld from the public. Educating people on the different kinds of diseases and the evolution of the vaccine schedule is not important to doctors. We're taught to just trust 'authorities' using nothing but brain-dead ignorance (further perpetuated by brain-damaging mercury in vaccines).

An informed patient is a menace to the whole system, a wrench in the medical system's gears. Doctors don't like to be outsmarted by their patients, even though it's not some kind of competition. How can healing occur if the doctor is not transparent with the patient? How can healing occur if the patient can't even understand their own body and the consequences of the pills they are told to eat and the injections they are instructed to take?

As the masses line up for a long list of injections, health self-reliance is more valuable than ever before. Understanding your own body, knowing what it's saying and being able to give it what it needs is the most important skill of our time.

It's also the most eroded and endangered skill of our time.

Dependence on the medical system is at an all-time high, and time per patient is dwindling. Family practitioners have a hard time healing patients because they aren't even listening to the patient and they definitely aren't treating the whole person. They are just covering up symptoms. Doctors have no skills in the healing arts of nutritional, herbal and energy medicine, which correct imbalances in the human body. Instead, they use what they are told to use -- pharmaceutical drugs, which create even more imbalances in the human body.

FluLaval vaccine insert admits to vaccine's ineffectiveness, mercury content and lack of safety testing When it comes to administering vaccines, doctors very rarely, if at all, show patients the vaccine inserts. These inserts would reveal the vaccine's ineffectiveness. For instance, the FluLaval vaccine insert admits, "Safety and effectiveness of FLUVALAL in pediatric patients have not been established." Additionally, "FLUVALAL has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility."




What's even more shocking is that the flu vaccine manufacturer doesn't even want patients to read the insert. For instance, the FluLaval vaccine comes in a pack of 10 vials which includes only one insert. This means nine out of 10 vaccine recipients don't even have a chance to see the vaccine insert. This creates a very unethical situation where vaccines are administered routinely without informed consent.

This goes against everything the American Medical Association stands for. Doctors now routinely break the AMA's code of ethics by withholding information from patients.

ama ethics and lack of informed consent

Doctors are literally breaking AMA's medical code of ethics every time they withhold a vaccine insert from a patient "The patient's right of self-decision can be effectively exercised only if the patient possesses enough information to enable an informed choice. The patient should make his or her own determination about treatment."

"Physicians should sensitively and respectfully disclose all relevant medical information to patients."

With that being said, why aren't doctors showing patients the vaccine inserts?

Are they afraid that patients might start turning away from this mercury-loaded poison?

As a society, are we afraid of confessing that modern medicine isn't always serving our best interests?

The pharmaceutical industry also needs the U.S. government to protect their economic interest, and they rely on federal agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to outlaw natural cures that cannot be patented, in order to protect their monopoly on healthcare.

So for those who think "capitalism" is the problem, and that socialized medicine in the solution, they are greatly mistaken. Pure capitalism (which we do NOT have in the United States) would allow the market to dictate which products are successful in curing disease, but that is not allowed in the United States.

Even so, coconut oil is still under attack today due to the FDA and USDA positions on saturated fats and coconut oil, which prohibit anyone selling it to label it as "healthy." (See: War on Coconut Oil: California Companies Attacked to try and Prevent the Sale of Coconut Oil.)

Goldman Sachs Tells Drug Companies that Cures are Not Profitable

Originally reported on CNBC.com, an April 10 report by Goldman Sachs analysts entitled 'The Genome Revolution' addressed the question: 'Is curing patients a sustainable business model?'

From CNBC.com:

"The potential to deliver 'one shot cures' is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing.

However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies," analyst Salveen Richter wrote in the note to clients Tuesday. "While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow."

Richter cited Gilead Sciences' treatments for hepatitis C, which achieved cure rates of more than 90 percent. The company's U.S. sales for these hepatitis C treatments peaked at $12.5 billion in 2015, but have been falling ever since. Goldman estimates the U.S. sales for these treatments will be less than $4 billion this year, according to a table in the report.

"GILD is a case in point, where the success of its hepatitis C franchise has gradually exhausted the available pool of treatable patients," the analyst wrote. "In the case of infectious diseases such as hepatitis C, curing existing patients also decreases the number of carriers able to transmit the virus to new patients, thus the incident pool also declines - Where an incident pool remains stable (eg, in cancer) the potential for a cure poses less risk to the sustainability of a franchise."

Gizmodo.com reported a couple of days later that pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline was dumping some of its gene therapy products that had become too successful and would provide little in the way of profits:

The MIT Tech Review points out that that this may have been the impetus behind GlaxoSmithKline's announcement today that it will sell off its pipeline of gene therapies for rare disease to London gene-therapy upstart Orchard Therapeutics for a 20 percent stake in the company. One of those therapies is Strimvelis, a cure for a rare immune deficiency often called "bubble boy" disease. But even with the hefty price of $665,000, the small patient population means that the cure didn't look like it would amount to much of a business.

It's a callous calculation, and it shows that bringing to fruition the promises of the gene-editing revolution will take a lot more than mere scientific breakthroughs.

Again, it would be unfair to blame "capitalism" here for pharmaceutical companies' lack of desire to develop products that actually cure, and call for socialized medicine in its place.

It is the revolving door policy between government and Big Pharma that causes this, and their squashing out the products that a truly free market would choose based on the ability to cure disease. Many of these natural products, such as foods like coconut oil, have an ongoing market to not only cure disease, but prevent disease from happening in the first place.

Investment firm Goldman Sachs, it may be recalled, would not even exist today in a truly free market. They were bailed out by the U.S. government with tax payers' funds in 2008 as a financial institution deemed "too big to fail."

Henry M. Paulson Jr. left Goldman Sachs as the chairman and chief executive officer in 2006 to become President George W. Bush's Treasury secretary, so there was no way the government was going to allow Goldman Sachs to fail in 2008.

Government is the problem, not capitalism, in not allowing the public to have access to freedom of information about REAL cures. Turning all "healthcare" over the government would solve nothing, since it would effectively put the "fox in charge of the henhouse."

When it bacame apparent that IV vitamin C cures cancer, what did the FDA do? They outlawed IV vitamin C. They quashed laetril, another proven cancer cure, in a similiar manner.

So the next time someone comes around soliciting donations from you to "develop a cure" for some specific disease, like cancer, just remember that your money will go to the pharmaceutical industry which simply cannot afford to produce cures. So consider putting your charitable contributions elsewhere.

Source
Source















biggest lie ever told: vaccines are safe and effective