Various medical boards, and now even a California bill, threaten doctors who have exercised their independence from the government’s narrative in their efforts to discuss the risks of the COVID mRNA shots and the benefits of early treatments for COVID-19 with their patients.

Certification boards such as the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM), the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG), and the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) have all been named in a federal lawsuit filed in July by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons Educational Foundation (AAPS) in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.

The lawsuit claims the defendant boards have engaged in “unprecedented campaigns to censor speech that they falsely disparage as ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation.’”

AAPS continues its claim:

Defendants wrongly misuse their authority in a politically partisan manner to chill speech critical of positions taken by Dr. Anthony Fauci, lockdowns, mask mandates, Covid vaccines and even abortion. Defendants have acted in an apparently coordinated manner … to censor those who exercise their First Amendment rights on issues of public concern.

Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of AAPS, tells The Star News Network that, since the lawsuit was filed, “ABIM and ABFM have filed a motion to dismiss. They claim lack of standing and lack of jurisdiction. ABOG has not yet responded.”

While Orient says she has no way to know how many doctors have faced board complaints, she knows “many more have lost jobs, insurance contracts, or academic standing” as a result of exercising their clinical judgment independent of government mandates and edicts.

Asked about the potential effects of the tyranny on patient care, Orient responded, “Lack of freedom is not a potential problem – it is a current problem, and the body count is already huge.”

The California bill that still awaits a signature from Governor Gavin Newsom (D) could see healthcare professionals in the state face disciplinary action for “unprofessional conduct” for sharing what the state decides is “misinformation” or “disinformation” about COVID vaccines and many other health issues.

“Why should doctors who discuss these facts with patients be threatened with the loss of their livelihoods?” asked Dr. Harvey Risch, professor emeritus and senior research scientist in epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, in a column at RealClearHealth.

“Don’t patients have the right to receive informed consent?” he added. “Isn’t that obligatory for doctors to provide?”

Medical certification boards are contradicting their purpose when they serve as allies of the government and punish doctors for providing their patients with honest assessments of the risks and benefits of the COVID vaccines, said Matt Dean, senior fellow for health care policy outreach at The Heartland Institute.

“Medical boards are there to protect public safety through high standards of training and public practice,” he said, adding:

They are not there to chill speech or define “misinformation” or “disinformation.” These terms have been used as political weapons against adversaries both to the right and the left. It is very sad to see these terms coming from boards themselves as they are badgered by political groups to engage in broader political disputes. Science by its very nature is never settled and declaring it so has seldom ended well for science.

Cardiologist, internist, and pioneer of early treatment for COVID disease Dr. Peter McCullough cited an article at Children’s Health Defense regarding the Federation of State Medical Boards’ “aggressive stand against ‘the dissemination of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and disinformation by physicians” and its recommendations for punitive action against doctors who refused to comply with the global and U.S. government narrative about COVID disease, the vaccines, and the censorship of early treatment with readily available and inexpensive medications already in use for years.

McCullough has also been candid about the failure of government health agencies to adequately study the new COVID boosters they urge Americans to get, though human clinical trials have yet to be completed.

The widely known physician described the overwhelming results of the government’s policies forced on Americans over the past several years.

“Large-scale malfeasance with millions harmed by decisions, policies, errors of omission and commission, finger pointing will occur,” he tweeted. “Anyone who did not come out and forcefully stand for treating patients early to save as many as possible will be culpable. Including both of them.”

“The vaccines,” McCullough also noted, as The Heartlander reported, “are under EUA (Emergency Use Authorization): no board, no doctor can ever encourage or discourage people from taking them because they’re experimental.”

“The ABIM is violating the Nuremberg Code,” he added. “You can’t pressure people to take experimental products.”

Orient agrees that EUA products “must, by federal law, get informed consent,” but added “FDA approval does not relieve physicians of the ethical obligation to disclose risks.”

– – –

Susan Berry, PhD, is national education editor at The Star News Network. Email tips to [email protected].

Sign up here to get your copy of The Star News Network Daily Update

Daily updates, breaking news, special offers, and more

CONFIRM

Thank you for signing up!