Renowned Doctor Slams Medical Education & Says We Have “An Epidemic Of Misinformed Doctors” Dr.
Asseem Malhotra is known as one of the most influential cardiologists
in Britain and a world-leading expert in the prevention, diagnosis and
treatment of heart disease.
Currently,
he is leading a huge campaign against excess sugar consumption. What
also makes him unique is something he recently admitted took him decades
to figure out: that our entire medical system, one of the main
‘protectors’ of the human race, is completely corrupt.
Related: After Working ‘Every Single Day For 30 Years’ This Couple Gets Screwed By American Healthcare System At The End
He now believes that medical education is a state of “complete system failure,” causing “an epidemic of misinformed doctors.”
He
also stated that honest doctors can no longer practice honest medicine,
and that there is also a growing epidemic of patients who are being
harmed. There
is no denying that to some extent, medicine and doctors have done a lot
of good and saved a lot of lives. However, an over-reliance on doctors
for our health and well-being has spawned a serious problem, one that
should be in the spotlight and immediately fixed.
 The Need To Think For Ourselves We
all have to realize that society has been manufactured in a way where
we simply give up our own mind to someone else, who has been given
theirs by someone else. We lack the ability to think for ourselves
because, from birth, we are programmed to think a certain way by
somebody else. This
is something important for us to change, and by ‘us’ I not only mean
patients; it should be a priority for all who practice medicine. And
there are signs that it has started changing.
Related: The Corruption Of Evidence Based Medicine - Killing For Profit
Why? Because there is a shift in consciousness taking place.
People
within all societal systems (health, financial, education, government,
etc.) are waking up, and starting to investigate what they have been
taught.
Rather
than simply believing the promotional literature, more are pursuing
self-education (which Dr. Malhotra stressed was the only real form of
education). Malhotra
pointed out seven ‘sins’ that contribute to the lack of knowledge that
not just doctors but everyone has, including patients, regarding modern
day ‘medicine.’
He made these comments at a recent European Parliament meeting:
Related: Fluoridation Is Mass Medication, New Zealand Supreme Court Rules
Other Prominent Doctors Speak Out He’s
not the only one to speak up about this issue. In fact, it seems that
those who represent doctors have been speaking out about this for a long
time.
Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), considered one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world, has said that; 
"It
is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research
that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or
authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion,
which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor
of The New England Journal of Medicine.”
- Source |
Then there is Dr. Richard Horton, the current Editor-in-Chief of another prestigious peer-reviewed medical journal, The Lancet, who says,“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.”
What is Medicine’s 5 Sigma? [Full Article]
“A lot of what is published is incorrect.” I’m not allowed to say who made this remark because we were asked
to observe Chatham House rules.
We
were also asked not to take photographs of slides. Those who worked for
government agencies pleaded that their comments especially remain
unquoted, since the forthcoming UK election meant they were living in
“purdah” - a chilling state where severe restrictions on freedom of
speech are placed on anyone on the government’s payroll.
Why the paranoid concern for secrecy and non-attribution?
Related: Is
Psychiatry Bullshit? Some Psychiatrists View The Chemical-Imbalance
Theory As A Well-Meaning Lie + Psychotropic Drugs, Are They Safe?
Fourteen Lies That Our Psychiatry Professors Taught Us In Medical School
Because
this symposium - on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical
research, held at the Wellcome Trust in London last week - touched on
one of the most sensitive issues in science today: the idea that
something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human
creations.
The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.
Afflicted
by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory
analyses, and flagrant confl icts of interest, together with an
obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science
has taken a turn towards darkness.
As
one participant put it, “poor methods get results”. The Academy of
Medical Sciences, Medical Research Council, and Biotechnology and
Biological Sciences Research Council have now put their reputational
weight behind an investigation into these questionable research
practices.
The
apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their
quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data
to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses
to fit their data.
Related: The Flawed Germ Theory; Unfortunately The Basis Of Modern Medicine
Journal
editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the
worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an
unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love
of “significance” pollutes the literature with many a statistical
fairy-tale. We reject important confirmations.
Journals
are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle
for money and talent, endpoints that foster reductive metrics, such as
high-impact publication.
National
assessment procedures, such as the Research Excellence Framework,
incentivise bad practices. And individual scientists, including their
most senior leaders, do little to alter a research culture that
occasionally veers close to misconduct.
Can Bad Scientific Practices be Fixed?
Part
of the problem is that no-one is incentivised to be right. Instead,
scientists are incentivised to be productive and innovative. Would a
Hippocratic Oath for science help?
Certainly
don’t add more layers of research red-tape. Instead of changing
incentives, perhaps one could remove incentives altogether. Or insist on
replicability statements in grant applications and research papers.
Or
emphasise collaboration, not competition. Or insist on preregistration
of protocols. Or reward better pre and post publication peer review.
Related: Why Does Modern Medicine Have A Big Problem With Natural Health?
Or
improve research training and mentorship. Or implement the
recommendations from our Series on increasing research value, published
last year.
One
of the most convincing proposals came from outside the biomedical
community. Tony Weidberg is a Professor of Particle Physics at Oxford.
Following several high-profi le errors, the particle physics community
now invests great eff ort into intensive checking and re-checking of
data prior to publication.
By
filtering results through independent working groups, physicists are
encouraged to criticise. Good criticism is rewarded. The goal is a
reliable result, and the incentives for scientists are aligned around
this goal. Weidberg worried we set the bar for results in biomedicine
far too low.
In
particle physics, signifi cance is set at 5 sigma - a p value of 3 × 10
to the power of 7 or 1 in 3·5 million (if the result is not true, this
is the probability that the data would have been as extreme as they
are).
Related: Here’s
How Industry-Funded “Research” Is Making Us Sick And Fat + Like Tobacco
And Big Pharma, The Sugar Industry Has Manipulated Research For 50
Years
The
conclusion of the symposium was that something must be done. Indeed,
all seemed to agree that it was within our power to do that something.
But
as to precisely what to do or how to do it, there were no firm answers.
Those who have the power to act seem to think somebody else should act
fi rst. And every positive action (eg, funding well-powered
replications) has a counterargument (science will become less creative).
The
good news is that science is beginning to take some of its worst
failings very seriously. The bad news is that nobody is ready to take
the first step to clean up the system.
Related Articles:
 Top
10 Food And Medicine Myths You Probably Fell For At Some Point + How
The Mind Treats “Impossible Things That Couldn’t Be Happening”
Modern
Life Is Killing Our Children: UK Cancer Rate In Young People Up 40% In
16 Years + 12 Things A Cancer Doctor Should Never Say
The Tide Is Turning: Big Pharma Billionaire Arrested, Charged With Conspiracy And Bribery Of Doctors
Peer
Reviewed 'Science' Losing Credibility Due To Fraudulent Research &
Manufacturing Consent In Science: The Diabolical Twist
This is a lightly edited copy & paste of a post by SGT REPORT That was originally posted here: https://www.sgtreport.com/2018/09/renowned-doctor-slams-medical-education-says-we-have-an-epidemic-of-misinformed-doctors/
|
