One of the primary inspirations for the development of HippocratesWired.com is that there is a shrinking number of physicians who can share their honest medical opinion without risk of losing their job. Physicians are generally highly intelligent, caring, and opinionated people. However, in the new world of Big Box Medicine and a powerful pharmaceutical industry, physicians who would like to have a job are discouraged and even disciplined for sharing an opinion that is not well within the status quo of “science.”

Earlier this month, Dr. Daniel Neides, medical director of the esteemed Cleveland Clinic’s Wellness Center, wrote a thoughtful blog where he raises the issue of toxins in our environment, including those which we inject directly in to our bloodstream.  When he recently got his flu shot, he chose the “preservative-free” option, and to his surprise found that while it didn’t contain thimerosal (a preservative that contains mercury, a potent neurotoxin), it still contained formaldehyde.  Since when is formaldehyde not a preservative?  I digress…  Dr. Neides’s thoughtful article is about limiting our total body burden of toxins and raising attention to the numerous preservatives and adjuvants in vaccines.  These agents, including aluminum, are burdening the underdeveloped immune systems and detoxification systems in infants at the very point in their development when their nervous system is rapidly developing.

His blog sparked a fierce backlash from all over…with other medical authorities denouncing him as “reckless,” “anti-science,” and even “dangerous.”  The prestigious Cleveland Clinic quickly responded with what I imagine was a coerced apology by Dr. Neides with the promise that he would be disciplined.  Dr. Neides’s statement read:

“I apologize and regret publishing a blog that has caused so much concern and confusion for the public and medical community. I fully support vaccinations and my concern was meant to be positive around the safety of them.”

The website http://holisticprimarycare.net/ published a great overview of this whole story on their website, and I would like to share one excerpt:

“If Neides does, in fact, receive the “disciplining” promised in the Clinic’s public statements, it will likely discourage other integrative physicians from voicing opinions that run counter to or are critical of mainstream medicine. That, in the long run, could be detrimental to the entire field of holistic and functional medicine and to healthcare in general. An atmosphere in which clinicians do not feel free to raise questions, publish observations and opinions, or explore alternative viewpoints, is one that will kill innovation.

And THAT, my friends, is my largest fear for the direction of medicine and the sole reason for the development of HippocratesWired. For when physicians no longer have a platform by which to raise questions, and when the science is declared to be settled; that is when real science is dead.

Who, I ask, will be the last physician?

5 Comments on Who will be the last physician?

  1. Great article. Thank you. Our medical schools and residencies train us to do what we are told and to not “stir the pot.” Our training is similar to what Green Berets and Navy Seals endure by learning to follow orders and not question authority. Then they can kill without qualms, just as we learn to treat without misgivings. That obedience training leaves us with little ability to challenge and question. Hats off to Dr. Neides!

    • You make a great point in terms of the abusive conditioning process thru which all physicians must go. OTH, I do feel a little more secure in knowing that our special forces folks are not given to arguing over the mission 🙂

  2. I notice following Dr. Neifes article is a qualifier that there is great debate in the industry over his blog. I thought medicine was a profession. But even as an “industry” why is it afraid of alternate ideas or questions about efficacy?

  3. Why haven’t the Integrative Care and Functional medicine health providers organized more effectively to attack the big Pharma and the AMA, ADA….. etc, on their biases and fraudulent claims regards so called medical science? Is it the lack of money, organization, fear of retribution, or leadership?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *