The AAPS Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment has been downloaded and viewed by millions across the U.S. and around the world.  An updated edition was released on January 3, 2023 and is available for free at: https://aapsonline.org/covidpatientguide/

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) has filed an amicus brief with the Wisconsin Supreme Court to urge it to reverse a 2-1 appellate decision that cut off judicial review when a hospital denies potentially life-saving treatment to a hospitalized patient. AAPS asks the Wisconsin Supreme Court to reestablish the authority of courts to order a hospital to stop interfering with a widely used, FDA-approved treatment for a hospitalized patient.

In Gahl v. Aurora Health Care, a 2-1 panel of a Wisconsin appellate court ruled for the hospital as it denied a patient access to ivermectin for treating COVID-19, while the patient was deteriorating under the hospital’s protocol. The appellate court reversed the circuit court even though it had heard persuasive evidence from two physicians, one of whom is an expert on ivermectin.

The circuit court ordered the hospital to allow the patient to receive the treatment of his choice as prescribed by a physician he selected. But the appellate court reversed that pro-patient decision and granted the hospital carte blanche to deny medication sought by a hospitalized patient, without judicial intervention for the patient.

In its amicus brief, AAPS argued to the Wisconsin Supreme Court that hospitals are not authorized to practice medicine, and neither are the FDA and other entities that have been interfering with access to ivermectin throughout the COVID pandemic. Courts should not allow hospitals to interfere with the judgment of practicing physicians and the wishes of hospitalized patients to obtain safe medication that is widely available to those outside of a hospital.

“If a hospital can properly deny care to confined patients with safe, approved medications, then such a hospital should disclose that on the front door of its entrance to all before they enter,” wrote AAPS General Counsel Andrew Schlafly in this amicus brief. “Hospitals should not become unaccountable islands of tyranny, wielding unchecked power to withhold or deny care,” he added.

Read online: https://aapsonline.org/aaps-supports-courts-authority-over-a-hospital-that-denies-patients-access-to-a-common-treatment/

We are receiving an increasing number of requests from AAPS members for help spreading the word about opportunities to partner with their medical practices.

For example, some are looking to add a physician to their busy office, while others seek to transition their practice to a new physician before they retire.

On an as-needed basis, we plan to devote a section of email alerts to share these openings.
 

UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO ACQUIRE PROFITABLE, EXCLUSIVE MEDICAL PRACTICE

Nurturing Optimal Wellness is searching for a like-minded, conservative physician to join the integrative practice of Nancy Russell, M.D. as she approaches retirement. The practice is located in Kansas City, Missouri, just north of the Missouri river.

The established, 40-year-old fee-for-service practice is profitable while remaining independent of Medicare and networked insurance plans. We believe the needs of the patient come first and we provide the personal attention our patients crave.  Our dedicated, mature staff serves an exclusive clientele from the entire Kansas City metro area.  

Visit the website at https://nancyrussellmd.com/ for more information. Email Dr. Russell with a resume and cover letter at nancy@nancyrussellmd.com.

By Jane M. Orient, M.D.

Most Americans are aware that the nation is deeply divided, and that politics is intruding everywhere.

They seem to think that we have two equal opposing forces, as shown by razor-thin majorities in Congress and in many key elections.

This superficial appearance papers over a marked asymmetry in actual power, as described in a new Substack by Information Heals: “Politicization, Polarization & Power Asymmetry: The Sinister Triad Affecting Modern Medicine.”

The two power blocs might be labeled “Progressive” and “Conservative.” Those two adversarial tribes are hostile to each other. They have nothing in common and are locked into hermetic bubbles. The days of civil and courteous rivalry are gone; instead, there is anger and contempt for the other side. Irreconcilable cultural and moral differences preclude any dialogue. Each side believes that the other is unworthy to hold power, and that it is actually dangerous to have it in power. This may lead to the conclusion that stealing the election from the evildoers is morally justified.

In the population as a whole, the number of Progressives and Conservatives may be approximately equal. However, there is no equivalency between them regarding ability to project various types of power. Major institutions that are crucial for the operation of the state are dominated by the Progressives. Those institutions include:

• Federal and state administrative apparatus including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and medical licensure and specialty boards
• The legal system including part of police
• Academia including medical schools
• Elementary education
• Industry including the pharmaceutical industry
• Mainstream press
• Large parts of organized religion
• Large parts of the military.

Interestingly, both sides are frequently in denial about the obvious power asymmetry. It is an interesting paradox. Conservatives who are objectively weak keep denying their weakness. Progressives who are objectively strong keep denying their power.

The COVID-19 pandemic with its mandates was a rude awakening for many Conservatives. In a free society, it is essential that experts and institutions be neutral. For example, medicine should be a neutral tool, the purpose of which is to detect and cure disease. Politicization turns it into a partisan weapon designed for manipulation and coercion.

The very definition of “neutral” has changed. It now means “secular,” with the abolition of long-accepted religious or patriotic expressions, replacing them with aggressive ideological advocacy and performative activism in clinical spaces.

Before politicization, medical experts were expected to be impartial skilled consultants, whose role was to guide less qualified colleagues, reassure the public, and advise policymakers about rational public health policies. Politicization of medicine has perverted this mission. Politicized medical experts do the bidding of their masters. They rubber stamp medical treatments and policies that are favored for political reasons even if they are harmful and ineffective. The primary function of such “experts” is to deceive their colleagues and the public.

Read Full Article: https://aapsonline.org/the-lopsided-politicization-of-society-and-medicine/