We all have varying tolerances of how we will allow others to treat us as individuals. When there are seemingly high stakes (financial loss, loss of a friendship, family disruption, etc.), that tolerance seems to increase, as setting firm personal boundaries can be risky and result in perceptible, short-term negative consequences. The book “Seven Habits of Highly Effective People,” written by Stephen Covey, addresses personal interaction and the tolerances that most people will allow. He equates relationships to “emotional bank accounts;” there are deposits and withdrawals. When a person/entity overdraws, this negatively impacts that sanctity of the relationship. If a relationship is bound to financial compensation (especially when it affects an entire family and livelihood), it increases the complexity of the relationship and tolerance.
It requires a certain level of bravery to draw a hard moral line in the sand, especially when there is risk for significant financial loss. Many people during the pandemic were furloughed or let go, which is highly devastating and the decision was made for them. When a person is morally stressed, but has good job security, it becomes easy to develop moral relativity. I have recently been presented with a COVID-19 injection mandate by my employer. This violates all of my beliefs about how people/patients should be treated. Informed consent is far different than coerced consent and it just so happens that much of the information needed to make this critical decision is being censored. The important question to ask is “why” is it being censored?
You may have seen in my previous post that I question the COVID-19 injection mechanism of action on how it stimulates the immune system. It doesn’t make any sense biologically, as the lipophilic nanoparticles do not target immune-specific cells. We, as a society, have been programmed to accept, by blind faith, that our Big Pharma companies care about us and our health. If any of you have worked in Corporate America, you may realize that most companies covet profit over their employees. Big Pharma is no different. Unfortunately, the system that has been created requires that physicians be “aligned” with organizational trajectory and they link compensation to physician compliance.
The process by which this occurs is slow, deliberate decisions to strip decision-making away from the physicians. I have discussed how that has been allowed to happen in my previous post. It is death by a thousand cuts. It happens by such a slow process that employees accept small losses in hope to get some negotiating power later. This never happens. What is lost is lost and it will never come back. If you are perceived as maligned with the organization, they make your life quite challenging. Therefore, we sacrifice ourselves, accepting moral relativity, in exchange for financial comfort. In my experience, health care systems are not interested in a zero sum game, they are interested in dominating. Dominating the geographical area, patient population and real estate. Health care no longer exists in this country; it is big business, with a substantial revenue flow, disguised as health care.
It is time for physicians to take our profession back. We have allowed this perversion of our profession and have lost all control. I think it is time for a change and focus on health restoration and maintenance rather than disease management. Our current health care system is good for hospital executives, insurance companies and Big Pharma. The system is detrimental to physicians, patients and communities. Fighting back for our noble profession should be our #1 priority; and what better time than now?