After finishing the first part of the DMSO series (which explains how millions of permanent disabilities and deaths from strokes, traumatic brain injuries and spinal cord injuries could have been prevented if the FDA hadn’t blacklisted DMSO), I decided to take a technology break. However, as I was drifting to bed last night, a lot of people began contacting me about a disaster that was unfolding in California.
What I find astounding about this case is that within minutes of looking into the limited information that was available, I was relatively certain of what happened, and now that her basic labs were posted online, it was indeed what happened. However, as best as I can tell, a fairly straightforward (conventional) diagnosis was missed and Alexis Lorenze has instead been put at risk of a life threatening injury.
I was initially in disbelief this was possible (and to an extent still am), but people directly connected to the situation confirmed this indeed is the case. As this case is an instructive example of medical blindness, I felt it would be helpful to share what happened.
Note: premier academic hospitals, while less likely to have a compassionate and caring relationship with their patients, are normally better at recognizing less common diagnoses and are typically equipped with the specialized services needed to address those situations—all of which makes me particularly surprised this was missed. To some extent, I am juxtaposing my understanding of the Midwestern academic centers onto this situation, so if you are directly familiar with the UC hospital system (particularly Irvine) and there’s is something I am missing here, please let me know.
Medical Blindness
A major in medicine is that doctors are frequently unable to recognize conditions which:
•Create cognitive dissonance for them (e.g., by forcing them to acknowledge they hurt a patient or accept that the guidelines their medical tribe gave them are flawed).
•They were not taught to identify to recognize (as there is so much complexity to a human being, the majority of physicians lack the innate capacity to see things they weren’t taught to filter for or the willing to seriously consider the significance of things which do not make sense within their cognitive map of the world).
Because of this, physicians frequently fail to recognize a pharmaceutical injury is occurring or believe a patient who claims an injury was linked to a pharmaceutical (particularly since medical education conveniently does not train doctors to recognize these injuries and simultaneously trains them to believe anything patients report that is not backed by science is “anecdotal” and most likely a spontaneous coincidence). This in turn leads to the tragic phenomenon of “medical gaslighting” (discussed further here) something many patients understandably find infuriating.
This issue is particularly common with vaccines because:
•The meaningless slogan “safe and effective” has been used to market them for decades regardless of how much evidence of harm exists (e.g., I previously listed some fairly tragic examples that ultimately go back over a century). Because of this, the majority of doctors assume vaccines are 100% safe and that no possible issue can emerge from giving them ad-infinitum.
•To maintain the mythology of “safe and effective,” a massive embargo existing on publishing any information which is critical of vaccine safety. For example, here I presented numerous independently conducted studies which all show that vaccines cause between a 2-10 fold increase in numerous chronic diseases which have “inexplicably” spiked throughout America at the same time the vaccine schedule proliferated throughout the society (due the manufacturers being granted complete immunity from the harms of their products as they were going out of business due to the cost of injury lawsuits).
•Much of the credibility of modern medicine arises from the mythology that it rescued us from the dark ages of infectious disease with vaccinations (when in reality that decline was entirely due to improved public sanitation). Because of this, attacking vaccination directly attacks a doctors identity and social status.
As a result, the medical profession will frequently go to extraordinary lengths to defend a bad vaccine they’ve endorsed—with the COVID-19 vaccines being one of the most absurd examples I’ve seen in my lifetime, but not by any means the first time this has happened.
Hospital Vaccine Injuries
Suzanne Humphries (and Roman Bystrianyk) did an incredible service to the vaccine safety movement by publishing Dissolving Illusions, a book which clearly demonstrated that the mythology we were sold about vaccines saving the world was hoax, and in reality they caused far more harm than they benefitted people (discussed further here).
Suzanne Humphries embarked on this project, because as a nephrologist, she kept on seeing patients enter kidney failure after a vaccine (or have their kidneys significantly worsen once they received a vaccine at a hospital).
Note: Nephrologists have a somewhat unique position in medicine as if they request for a drug to be discontinued because they suspect it is harming a patients kidneys, other doctors will listen and stop the drug (whereas if a non-nephrologist points out a drug injury to a colleague, they colleague often won’t discontinue it).
“One Monday after picking up the weekend service, a hospital inpatient with kidney failure got very grumpy with me. Seeing him in the middle of his dialysis treatment, I’d asked the usual questions, like “And how long have you been on dialysis?” and the man exploded. “I’ve never been on dialysis! I never had anything wrong, until they gave me that shot.” . . . Working up a lather he almost yelled . . . “I was fine until I had that vaccine!” Taken aback, I asked, “What vaccine did you get? When did you get it, and how do you know your kidneys were fine before?” Apparently he’d told his story to everyone, but had been blown off. Now, he was startled that anyone was even asking sensible questions. So he tumbled the whole story out. After a very thorough investigation and a fine-tooth-combed patient history analysis, which did indeed reveal that his kidney function was perfectly normal a month before, I decided that his words and beliefs had merit”
“After the first man with kidney failure, I began asking other people, with unusual case presentations, whether or not they had been recently vaccinated. Some would become wide-eyed after the question, as if they too had never considered any connection, but in others, the light dawned and after picking up their jaws, they often replied, “YES, it was shortly after that!” Sure enough, the records would show the time relationship. Sometimes violent sickness began on the very day.”
“After three people came in with fulminant kidney failure, temporally related to vaccination, I thought it prudent to bring the cases to the attention of the hospital chief of medical staff. Upon passing him in the hallway, we stopped for the usual cordial robotic small talk: “Hello. How are you? How is the practice going? Are you happy here?” To which the answer for the previous seven years”“had been “Great. Great and yes!” But this time I had news! “We have a problem. I’ve seen three cases of kidney failure in adults shortly after they were vaccinated and two of the three told me they were fine until the vaccine. All of them had documented normal kidney function within two months of the vaccine. What do you think?”
After a short silence, I got to know a different side of this man. Perhaps he could also say he got to know a different side of me. His immediate response was, “It was not a vaccine reaction. They just got the flu and the vaccine didn’t have time to work.” The problem was that none of the three even had flu-like symptoms. Why did he automatically jump to that conclusion? It is true that even less than once in a blue moon, influenza infection all by itself can lead to interstitial nephritis and kidney shut down. I’d never treated a case of flu-related kidney failure in all my years of practice as a very busy nephrologist in large tertiary care centers.”
“Around this time, I admitted a patient of mine for a kidney biopsy. I came to write the admitting order 45 minutes after she arrived, and saw that she had been given a flu shot before I got there, with an order that had my name on it. I hadn’t ordered it, so I asked the nurse how this could be. Astonishingly she said that it was now policy for the pharmacist to put a doctor’s signature on the order if the patient gave consent. They were very efficient that day.
Usually it could take forever to get an IV infusion set up, yet suddenly vaccines were given immediately on arrival. While the first problem for me was that I didn’t order the vaccine, the second was that the policy extended to ALL admissions, even if they had sepsis or worsening cancer, or were having a heart attack or stroke. A third problem was that there was no realization that a vaccine, or two, might make it more difficult for a clinician to subsequently work out what the problems were caused by, and correctly diagnose and treat the patient. Plainly, there was no consideration as to the utility, benefit, or detriment of a flu shot, to any seriously, acutely ill patient.”
Note: a key reason why hospitals push vaccines is because Obamacare, in a mission to “improve” medicine changed their financial reimbursements to reward “quality health care” and made a key component of that metric that a hospital ensured vaccinating a high percentage of their staff and patients.
“As time went on, inpatient consults became quite revealing because we could track the kidney function from normal or slightly impaired, to failed after a vaccine was given on admission.”
“In the past when I was consulted on kidney failure cases and said, “Oh that was the statin/antibiotic/diuretic that did that!” instantly the drug would be stopped—no questions asked. Now, however, a new standard was applied to vaccines. It didn’t matter that the internist’s notes in the charts said, “No obvious etiology of kidney failure found after thorough evaluation.” It didn’t matter that I considered the vaccine a possible cause when all other potential culprits had been eliminated. It was never the vaccine. The collective mindset said with glazed-over eyes, “Vaccines? Not possible or likely.”
“When I was discussing the issue one day on a cardiology ward, a cardiologist who knew me well, approached me with wide eyes. He was horrified, thinking he was behind on the latest recommendation. He said “Wait! Are we not supposed to be giving flu shots? I have been brow-beating my patients into flu shots whenever possible!” I explained the situation I witnessed and he listened. He also had never considered a vaccine to be a potential danger in any way. Whether or not he has since changed his thinking, or his practice at all, I don’t know. What was telling to me, was that all he wanted to know was what he had missed. He was not interested in thinking it out on his own. He was far too busy for that. He just wanted to know if he missed anything of ‘importance’, so that he could be a good, correct doctor. Kind of like the student who only wants to know what will be on the exam, but not how to think about how that information might fit into the bigger picture.”
“Several months went by, and the medical executive committee met to discuss my concerns, without allowing me to be present at the meeting. I was informed in writing that the nursing staff were becoming confused by me discontinuing orders to vaccinate and that I should adhere to hospital policy. I thought this odd, given that nurses are not accustomed to giving the same treatment to every patient, and are fully capable of reading individualized orders.”
“The next time the medical chief of staff and I met in the corridor, an oncologist was present. At one point, I asked the chief, “Why doesn’t anyone else see the problem here? Why is it just me? How can you think all this is “okay? Why is it now considered normal to vaccinate very sick people on their first hospital day?” The oncologist gave an answer that surprised me. She said, “Medical religion!” and turned and walked away. That was a strange outburst from her because in the months that followed, I watched her continue marching down the aisle of medical religion—not only with her own health issues that she shared with me, but also with her cancer patients.”
I looked deeper into the poke, because I was forced to—but ONLY after I realized that what I thought I purchased with my medical education, was not complexity of thinking or even complete analysis of science, but rote training, and reactive responses.
A good doctor researches fact. My research turned up a mass of medical articles about kidney failure related to influenza and other vaccines, and reasons to suspect that vaccines could also be causing many of the other diseases commonly labeled as ‘idiopathic’. I was shocked at the potential scope of the damage I had previously brushed off because of lack of education. Like my col“eagues, I had considered many vaccine reactions to be coincidences. Auto-immune diseases and kidney diseases requiring harsh immune-suppressive drugs are not unheard of, after vaccines. Nowhere in medical school, internship, residency, or fellowship, had kidney failure after vaccines been discussed. Why not?”
Note: many of my awake colleagues joke that idiopathic denotes individuals being too idiotic to recognize the obvious cause of a disease.
“I wrote all the cases out and put together a comprehensive brief for the hospital administration, but to no avail.”
“As time went on, it was interesting seeing the divide in the hospital staff. Nurses would bail me up in quiet corners and tell me stories that completely backed up what I was seeing. They would guardedly support me, when their superiors were out of eye- or ear-shot. A deeper respect was building between those who could see what I saw, while an icy wind roared from those on high.”
“I kept presenting the administration with facts they could not respond to, in the hope that they would get a blinding revelation of the obvious. Finally, they recruited the Northeast Healthcare Quality Foundation, the “quality improvement organization” for Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont, to get me off their backs. Dr. Lawrence D. Ramunno sent a letter invoking the fallacy of authority, which adamantly informed me that hospital vaccination against influenza virus would become a global measure for all admissions in 2010, and that my evidence of harm was not significant because 10 professional organizations endorse vaccination.”
“Not satisfied with demanding that I practice automaton obedience to dictates from on high, they initiated a shadow observation, where everything I did and wrote in the hospital, from then on, was observed and scrutinized.
This unscientific and unprofessional harassment only served to reinforce my decision to leave no policy unquestioned, ever again.”
Suzanne Humphries in turn was inspired to write her book “Dissolving Illusions” because one of the most common counterarguments she received from her colleagues about flu shots causing kidney failure was that “vaccines saved us from smallpox and polio so there’s no possible way a vaccine could be bad.” This in turn inspired her to look into the data underlying that claim, at which point she realized most of it wasn’t publicly available, but when she unearthed records from the basements of medical libraries, she discovered that statement was a myth, after which point she published that evidence in her book.
In my own case, I’ve admitted quite a few patients to the hospital who I quickly realized were hospitalized because of a vaccine injury (e.g., including a kidney failure case like Suzanne Humphries described), and in each case, one of the biggest challenges I had was finding a way to present the case in such a way that the other doctors at the hospital would not get elgaged at me for it (e.g., I was successful in one case by attributing one injury to how the vaccine was administered rather than the vaccine itself).
Note: in this publication, I’ve emphasized the forgotten medical theory that many vaccine injuries are a product of them altering the zeta potential of the body, causing blood in the body to clump together and create microstrokes which damage critical parts of the body (e.g., I’ve seen numerous cases where this happened in the brain or kidneys).
Likewise, I believe one of the most common reason why people are hospitalized is because the zeta potential of their body has weakened enough that they begin developing severe symptoms which meet the criteria for hospitalization. In turn, I’ve seen textbook zeta potential collapse cases from a vaccine that resulted in hospital admission and I also believe one of the most helpful things hospitals do for patients is give them IV saline (which is just done routinely because everyone is “dehydrated”) because IV saline marginally restores the physiologic zeta potential.
The post What Happens When a Hospital Vaccine Injures You? appeared first on LewRockwell.
0 comments on “What Happens When a Hospital Vaccine Injures You?” Add yours →