Sunday, April 14, 2024
HomeNewsThe Golden State Gag: California doctors must back Covid ‘consensus’ or be criminalised

The Golden State Gag: California doctors must back Covid ‘consensus’ or be criminalised


WHO should you go to for medical advice? If you live in California, the answer might not be your doctor.  

A new Bill, AB 2098, just signed into law by the state’s Democratic governor Gavin Newsom, makes it ‘unprofessional conduct’ for any physician or surgeon to ‘disseminate misinformation or disinformation related to Covid-19’.  

Since existing law requires action to be taken against medical professionals charged with unprofessional conduct, in effect this means that doctors’ ability to speak freely on Covid has been curtailed, with any challenge of the Blob’s narrative criminalised.   

What this means, says Robert F Kennedy Jr – founder of the Children’s Health Defense vaccine activist group in the US – is that the doctor no longer serves the best interests of the patient, but acts as an agent of state policy. He warns: ‘When governments start practising medicine, the story never ends well.’ 

In fact, the issue goes much further than freedom of speech – such interference is directly contrary to medical ethics except as practised in totalitarian states. 

In the Bill’s wording, ‘misinformation’ means ‘false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care’.  

Who decides this ‘consensus’ is not defined. Presumably it will be a nexus of the same people who told us in no uncertain terms that vaccines were completely effective, that Covid-19 was not transmissible from person to person and that ‘double-masking’ was a good idea. 

That a ‘consensus’ is the antithesis of scientific progress is similarly ignored. Were it not, doctors would still be concerned about disease-causing miasmas and encouraging the use of leeches to cure a variety of ailments.   

Not only is it anti-science and anti-medical ethics (but necessarily pro-‘The Science’), but it is deeply anti-free speech and an infringement of the United States Constitution, which guarantees the individual’s freedom of expression.   

It is only through constant discussion and deliberation – in the context of science and experimentation – that progress can be made. What is now on the cards in California is the suppression of dissenting voices by those with intimate knowledge of healthcare provision.     

Instead, a rigid conformity of thought is imposed. Now only the line regurgitated by an unthinking media, often merely reprinting the press releases of other institutions, may be uttered.  

Moreover, a precedent has been set. Those who once rolled their eyes at the ‘slippery slope’ argument must now be more sceptical in light of society’s slide into madness and the wholesale entertaining of freakish ideas.  

Able to muzzle medical professionals, the quashing of dissent in other areas is likely next. After all, if even doctors cannot question the party line, there is surely no reason why the concerned-yet-unqualified citizenry should be able to either.   

For the law to take effect in California, it required Governor Newsom’s consent. This is the man who, at the height of Covidmania, chowed down with his pals at one of the state’s most expensive eateries without a face mask in sight. Such behaviour contradicted ‘the contemporary scientific consensus’ that the new law so sternly seeks to enforce.   

Amid the growing concerns about the vaccines’ side-effects – any mention of which was utterly verboten during the peak of the coronavirus panic – as well as a steady stream of sudden and ‘unexplained’ deaths in the previously young and healthy, many increasingly question the untouchable ‘scientific consensus’.   

The narrative that has been so carefully cultivated, and which now totters more by the day, can be shored up only by government diktat.  

Those sensing desperation in the Bill’s provisions must surely be right. After relying on the behemoths of social media and the press to enforce the proscribed narrative on its behalf, California’s move is a sign that, if the authorities do not get their way by soft coercion, they will resort to force.   

By in effect outlawing any questioning of such concerns by healthcare professionals, California is treading a dangerous path which other parts of the world may be tempted to follow. It is unlikely that questions surrounding Covid-19 will remain the last target in this attempt to stifle freedom of speech.   

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Frederick Edward
Frederick Edward
Frederick Edward is from the Midlands. You can see his Substack here.'

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.