The Danger of Relying on Evidence-Based Medicine

I recently interviewed Dr. Richard Amerling on a variety of topics, including the harm caused by relying on evidence-based medicine.

Dr. Amerling is a nephrologist, a doctor specializing in diseases and disorders of the kidneys. He is also the Director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and Chief Academic Officer of The Wellness Company.

I discovered Dr. Amerling when he was featured in an hour-long feature on EpochTV, talking about how the medical profession is broken. He provided important insight into why relying on evidence-based medicine is part of what is destroying the medical profession. 

What is evidence-based medicine, exactly? The most commonly-quoted definition for evidence-based medicine is this: 

Evidence-based medicine is the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients.

A well-known research organization further states: 

The concept is about making sure that when decisions are made they are made on the basis of the most up-to-date, solid, reliable, scientific evidence. In the case of medicine or health care, these are the decisions about the care of individual patients.

In practice, evidence-based is closely tied to the “standard of care” in medicine. According to the Harvard Business Journal:

Evidence-based medicine now routinely defines the standard of care for many conditions. This approach mandates that new information, gleaned from randomized controlled trials and consolidated into clinical practice guidelines, can and must be used to improve the quality of care that patients receive.

Note carefully: The information from trials (often involving drugs) CAN AND MUST be used to improve quality of care.

This is where the omnipresent standards of care in medicine come from. Our doctors are obliged to comply with published standards of care whenever they treat patients or they risk lawsuits or cancellation of their licenses. This is why your physican MUST recommend certain treatment to you based on your tests or examination results. You can refuse it, but they have to try to administer that the recommended treatment and then document that attempt.

In other words, the doctors are not actually allowed to use their best judgment in their treatment of patients if it disagrees with the published and accepted standard of care.

With this in mind, here is what Dr. Amerling said about evidence-based medicine:

Evidence-based medicine is a scam that was hijacked very early on by Pharma to create guidelines to push their drugs. That’s really what it was all about. They have been extremely successful and doctors have, by and large, adopted this whole mantra of evidence-based medicine without giving it a second thought. I was among them. I said, “yeah, evidence-based medicine, that sounds great.”

But I realized very early on that this was being used to narrow the scope of treatment and to push various agendas and treatments that were Pharma, because Pharma was behind this whole guideline approach to medicine. They funded the guideline groups, either directly or indirectly, and got their people to be on the panels. They’re doctors who were proponents of their drugs, they got them to be on the panels. And that’s all they really had to do. And they would invariably come out with recommendations to use more and more products. The term evidence-based medicine has become synonymous with Pharma-based. 

Evidence is available for everything. You can always find evidence to support a theory. Whoever has control over these committees controls the evidence. The evidence base, the published medical literature, shall we say, is heavily corrupted by Pharma. There is publication bias where they only publish favorable articles. They point to the successes of their drugs, tiny though they may be. They spin articles in their favor. So that whole database is unreliable. So evidence-based medicine—based on what? Pharma studies? That’s really what it is.

You have to make people aware. This is huge part of the problem. It’s a hard sell. Because I even have a hard time convincing my colleagues who are very visible in media, such as Peter McCullough, to get him to come out and say the problem here is not just this particular program or drug or approach or vaccine. The problem is this concept of evidence-based medicine that says there is only one way to treat something. And it’s what we say because we are the authorities. Because we have this ability to give our seal of approval, we say, “this is the guideline.

I criticize guidelines going back 20 years, I’ve been criticizing guidelines as an approach. And one of the things I said was they have the potential now to create harm to thousands or millions if they are wrong. The vaccine was an example of how one policy harmed many, many people. And the ability for outside authorities—once the doctors produced this piece of sausage they called a guideline—outside authorities could turn this into an enforceable standard. And that’s what happened. 

We’ve gone from a standard of care, which was a very loosey-goosey idea that you would treat someone in a certain way based on—well, ethical practice. You would give them informed consent, you would respond to someone, you would call them back. You would order a lab test and you would report back to the patient what it showed. Things like that, the standard of care. That’s a high-level of communication, basically, 

But they morphed this into standardized care based on guidelines. If you don’t follow guidelines, you’re not practicing standard of care anymore and you are an outlier and you are subject to censorship, deplatforming and delicensing. 

They are going after my friend Peter McCullough’s board certification based on what he said about vaccines being potentially very harmful. So for expressing a scientific view, they can go after his credentials, That’s what we are facing. That’s one size fits all. Which everyone used to agree was the antithesis of good care.

Everybody is a unique individual and they deserve a unique approach. So if it’s one size fits all, you do away with all that and you can have centrally prescribed care which is exactly what we are seeing right now. 

Similar Posts