Executive summary

Restricting the free speech rights of healthcare workers is a terrible idea. But that’s what we have today. If you disagree with the government, you can get fired or have your license revoked. This doesn’t lead to the best outcomes.

(Article by Steve Kirsch republished from SteveKirsch.Substack.com)

If you are a healthcare worker who believes that free speech is important, please subscribe now to a new substack newsletter created specifically to organize health care workers to restore your ability to speak openly and honestly to your patients and to the public. Your subscription is free.

The problem

We have a difference of opinion in America over the COVID policies of the government. Censorship techniques are used to silence the views of people (especially licensed healthcare providers) who do not agree with the government. This is dangerous.

Unfortunately, appealing directly to the public has been unsuccessful.

One thing I’ve learned over the past 6 months in that the average American isn’t likely to be persuaded by evidence and facts about vaccine safety; they are going to ask their doctor and follow their doctor’s advice. Their doctor is not going to question the CDC since that would be perceived as being anti-science.

First, we have to understand how people make decisions

For COVID decisions, most people look for advice from a higher authority that they trust, usually their doctor (not your doctor).

Here is a typical example. A highly educated, very intelligent friend of mine (doubly vaccinated) just got COVID and asked me for a list of doctors to prescribe early treatment. I gave him a list of the top doctors in the world, doctors with incredible track records on hospitalization, deaths, and long-haul (like zero or near zero in every category). My friend said all these doctors prescribed ivermectin which shared my point of view, and he wanted an independent doctor, so he decided to go with a local doctor. He didn’t ask about his doctor’s success record in treating COVID (rates of hospitalization, death, and long-haul). That didn’t matter at all. What mattered is he trusted the doctor because he choose the doctor. The doctor told him to just rest, take honey and vitamins, and use light ibuprofen/Advil as needed. The doctor of course provided no evidence to back up the recommendation. And my friend checked with his other friends who all told him they used rest, vitamins, and healthy food. Peers know best. Why bother with world-famous doctors with impeccable track records? The use of ivermectin disqualifies them all!

More examples of deference to authority figures:

1. Parents in California trust Governor Newsom for medical advice as to what to inject into their kids. If Gavin mandates it for schools, parents comply. Gavin knows best (even though Gavin is vaccine injured from his booster (he got GBS) and will not vaccinate his kids).
2. Employees in the US trust their companies to tell them what to inject into their body. And others trust their doctors for medical advice.
3. My daughters’ universities (Harvard Business School and University of Rochester) are both requiring them to have a booster to return to school. I can show them study after study showing this is unnecessary and it harms my child. Will this make a bit of difference? Absolutely not! Trying to convince these people is a complete waste of my time and theirs. Their thinking is effectively, “If the CDC says it is good, it is good. Nobody can question the CDC. They are the world’s experts and they are always right and they always have our health as their top priority.” Nobody is going to listen to de-platformed conspiracy theorists who say the vaccines are unsafe. Come on. These organizations are way too smart to waste any time on that.

This deferral to authority applies to doctors themselves. One of my followers wrote:

Unfortunately it seems a lot of doctors simply defer to authority as well. I recently saw my sister-in-law who is a physician's assistant, speaking disdainfully of COVID patients' families suing her hospital to get treatments "that aren't even approved by the FDA". The total disgust and absolute lack of curiosity as to why people would be doing this were astounding.

Organizing the medical community is the fastest way forward: a single person can be silenced, but not half of America’s doctors

All of this leads to one thing. If we want to change the thinking in America, all we have to do is change the thinking of around half of the doctors in America.

Sounds simple, right?

The good news is that I actually think that is possible based on conversations I’ve had with doctors.

Also the typical statistics of mass formation (30% are immune, 40% persuadable, 30% are unreachable) support this approach as well.

We’re already 20% to 30% of the way there

Doctors and nurses seeing vaccine victims first hand is a great convincer.

For example, read this article, “More VC Nurses Blow Whistle on ‘Overwhelming’ Numbers of Heart Attacks, Clotting, Strokes.”

People in hospitals are now so angry that they are risking their career by speaking out (anonymously only at this point for fear of retribution). They want their stories to be told. Some people won’t believe their story. But many others will shake their heads and say, “The same thing is happening in my hospital. Maybe it is time for me to speak out too.”

None of them can speak out individually or they will lose their jobs.

The only way to speak out is together and only when their numbers are large enough.

So there are two challenges:

1. Educating the persuadable
2. Organizing them so they can speak publicly without fear of retribution

Can we continue to ignore what is happening?

Some medical professionals will be outraged at this news story:

Other medical professionals will dismiss it as “fake news.” That is how they deal with the cognitive dissonance. Other events like this are dismissed similarly.

The reason doctors don’t believe such evidence is simple:

Doctors are remaining silent to protect their careers

Let’s be honest. I’ve talked to a lot of “red pill” doctors. They know fully well what is going on and disagree with it, but a doctor’s first duty is to their own family, not to their patients. They won’t speak out publicly against the vaccines or their license to practice medicine will be immediately revoked. They know that.

So while many are convinced about what is going on, they can’t say anything publicly to let you know that. This is why the public believes there is no danger since no doctor is speaking out.

Censorship of doctors through intimidation of the medical community is imperative to keeping the false narrative going.

They are extending this censorship now to early treatment because they do not want anyone to know that ivermectin works. Japan has had virtually no deaths from COVID after they started using ivermectin. That’s why it’s outlawed in America. If anyone here learned it works, it would be all over for the vaccines. So if you prescribe or fill a prescription of ivermectin for COVID, you will be punished per this article on TrialSiteNews entitled “Feds Coming After Doctors & Pharmacies that Market Ivermectin as Effective & Safe for COVID-19.” Nothing like this has ever happened before in our history.

To get a sense for how widespread the counter-narrative is, I asked an ER doctor, “So how many of your peers know what is really going on?” He said 20 to 30%. That’s great. We can work with that. It means that if each “red pill” doctor made a commitment to educate/persuade just 1 other doctor, we have more than critical mass to stop this.

Of course, not every doctor will participate, so the we need to get each “red pill” doctor and nurse to commit to persuading just 3 of their peers. That should do it, or at least it will be a good start.

This can all be done in zoom calls, inviting anyone open to listening to world-famous doctors such as Peter McCullough to talk about the evidence. A doctor cannot get sanctioned by their medical boards just for attending a seminar. But that may change soon so it is important to move quickly.

This plan allows us to use doctors and nurses to spread the truth. If the attendees are convinced, their homework assignment is to get 3 of their peers to simply watch a short video with an open mind and decide for themselves which side is telling the truth.

Nobody participating in the new substack I created has to declare their position. You are only expressing interest in learning more about whether giving doctors and other healthcare providers free speech is a good idea or not.

Nobody will get in trouble for that.

Read more at: SteveKirsch.Substack.com