How Hospitals Turned on Their Patients During COVID
Throughout history, ruling elites have relied on a recurring playbook (manufactured crises, public examples, bought-out hierarchies, and economic coercion) to keep populations compliant, and nearly every tactic was used during COVID.
• Federal policies paid hospitals tens of thousands of dollars per COVID admission, boosted reimbursement for ventilated patients, shielded providers from liability, and made remdesivir the standard of care, creating powerful incentives for harmful protocols.
• At a recent Senate hearing, families shared strikingly consistent tragic stories of unvaccinated patients being isolated, told they would die, denied safe repurposed drugs, given remdesivir over their objections, and pushed onto ventilators and into DNRs.
• An attorney who sued hospitals on behalf of 212 families reported that only 3 of the 72 patients who received court-ordered ivermectin died, while every one of the 140 who didn’t get it died—making suing hospitals one of the most effective treatments in history.
• Trauma surgeon James Miller testified that his hospital was never overwhelmed despite the headlines, inflated its COVID numbers, and had infectious disease doctors who seemed to know remdesivir was harmful, and he was driven out of surgery after opening a free clinic for the unvaccinated.
• Because the system steadily removes the doctors who will break a failing protocol to save a patient, trust in physicians and hospitals fell from 71.5% to 40.1% between 2020 and 2024, and it will only return if medicine becomes honest and starts offering things that work.
The ruling elite typically aims to accumulate an immense amount of wealth, which often can only be obtained by extracting it from a large number of people, hence requiring each of those people sacrifices their quality of life to meet the elite’s needs. An excellent meme, in turn, synopsizes the challenge ruling elites seeking this excessive wealth and power have faced throughout history:
Since it is not economically feasible to directly force an entire population into submission (e.g., the estimates I’ve found put 3-5% of the population as the maximum number of soldiers a society can afford to support), a variety of other tactics have been reused throughout history to keep the population compliant. These include:
•Use crises (e.g., war, plague, famine, or financial panic) to justify emergency powers, mute ordinary skepticism, and recast dissent as sabotage. The pattern is ancient: a problem arises, the public demands protection, and the apparatus claiming to provide it expands—all while fear makes the population far easier to divide and control.
•Make public examples of non-compliant individuals so everyone is scared into compliance, or maintain a system for punishing (and monitoring) dissenters that everyone feels is always hanging over their shoulder. This goes hand-in-hand with making the legal and bureaucratic system so complex it can’t be navigated without specialists the system itself trains (raising the cost of challenging it) and that almost everyone is technically in violation of something—which allows the law to be selectively applied so only those who challenge vested interests are arrested or prosecuted.
•Reward compliance, as careers, grants, titles, access, and prestige for those who play along are just as important as the examples made of the defiant (since most people would rather climb the existing hierarchy than tear it down).
•Create a rigid social hierarchy everyone defers to, and then buy out its top (e.g., having a few select “prestigious” medical journals, “impartial” guideline panels, regulatory agencies, or “experts” be deferred to for medical guidance while everything else is ridiculed as “uncredible”—despite each of them typically taking significant pharmaceutical money and only supporting industry narratives).
Note: one major problem in medicine (which is ingrained through numerous compliance mechanisms) is that the majority of doctors are not willing to deviate from standardized protocols and guidelines—even when it is clear they will not produce an acceptable outcome for the patient (instead, in those situations, they will simply insist they did their best and there was “nothing we could do”).
•Structure the system so everyone is forced to work within that hierarchy (e.g., making physician employment, reimbursement, and immunity from lawsuits dependent upon following the “standard of care” and requiring all other healthcare workers to defer their judgement to physicians).
Note: I believe this accounts for the aggressive push to move doctors from independent to corporate practice. For example, Obamacare was structured to facilitate this, as immediately prior to its passage, 60-70% of physicians were in independent or doctor-owned practices,1,2,3 whereas by 2024, only 35-42% were1,2 (e.g., a 2024 article was titled “Doctors continue to shift away from private practice, citing insurer payment rates and regulatory issues”).
•Make accumulating money be a guiding principle everyone in the society strives for and then use economic incentives (since they can easily be changed from the top down) to create the desired behavior in the population (e.g., Biden’s federal policies leading to most workers being told they would be fired if they didn’t vaccinate).
•Have every media source parrot the same message needed to maintain the status quo (as this persuades most of the population since people like to follow the crowd). This is often paired with well crafted propaganda that effectively misleads the public.
•Create a devout belief in the state or its leader, which not only makes people compliant but also leads them to attack those who aren’t, thereby making the population police itself.
•Create a robust social framework everyone is expected to fit into that requires compliance at each step while simultaneously training people to be compliant (e.g., go to school to go to college to get a job to get married).
•Atomize the population. Independent bases of loyalty (e.g., extended family, church, guild, or town) are much harder to extract from than isolated individuals, so weakening them leaves people facing the state and the market alone—at which point they are far easier to message, hire, saddle with debt, and shame.
•Whenever something awful and unacceptable will be done, first test and refine it on a marginalized group that cannot advocate for itself, and once it succeeds, use that success to normalize it so it can be done to the general population. This is why I feel it’s critical not to ignore it when this happens to others, as beyond that apathy being immoral, it often sets people up to be subjected to the same thing once it has gained so much momentum it can no longer be easily opposed (best synopsized by the famous Holocaust poem where the speaker did not speak up for each successive group targeted because he did not belong to it, which concludes with “Then they came for me, And there was no one left To speak out for me”).
Note: pages could be written about how this applies across the medical field (e.g., prior to COVID, one of my longstanding frustrations was helping people who’d been severely injured by a pharmaceutical that never should have been in general use, as despite the immense suffering, no one really cared because not enough people were affected). Likewise, I’ve recently been thinking about the broader implications of the Ukrainian government’s decision to sacrifice its population and country to keep the war going so they can continue enriching themselves from it.
•Normalize and gradually increase the exploitation so people view it as a fact of life rather than noticing (let alone questioning) it. For example, since the medical system is structured to continually produce costly proprietary drugs patients must take for long periods (if not permanently), treatments which compete with this model are suppressed. When DMSO was discovered in the 1960s, it was better than any existing therapy for many illnesses, yet it was dismissed for “insufficient evidence” compared to “proven cures” (many of which were later pulled from the market), and it remained suppressed despite tens of thousands of studies showing its utility and foreign healthcare systems (e.g., Russia and Ukraine) adopting it. Most importantly, when I drew interest back to it sixty years later, it was still more effective than any approved therapy for many ailments (which is why that series got so much traction). A major reason I’ve put so much work into it, in turn, was to show that the primary obstacle to solving many of the illnesses we face is the structure of the medical system itself.
Note: I think one of the major mistakes the ruling class has made recently, in the pursuit of further profit, was to escalate the exploitation so rapidly that the public is now noticing it.
•Distract and preoccupy the populace so they don’t focus on the major issues facing them (e.g., with “bread and circuses” or by dividing them so they blame another segment of society rather than the ruling class actually creating their problems).
Note: one of my major fears about AI is that it effectively solves the problem elites have struggled with for centuries (being able to afford enough soldiers to police the population), since AI is much cheaper than a full time soldier and hence makes it feasible to exert a much greater degree of control over each member of the population.
read the rest at www.midwesterndoctor.com