New law forces doctors to serve CDC first, not patients

California’s descent into totalitarianism progressed further Sunday as the new year meant new laws went into effect, including one that left acclaimed Dr. Jay Bhattacharya saying now “California doctors serve the CDC over their patients.”

(Video: Fox News)

As the “Twitter Files” have suggested, the throttling of information like that pertaining to treating COVID may have had a significant impact in prolonging and increasing the danger faced by at-risk individuals. Now. the Golden State’s Assembly Bill 2098 has gone into effect essentially enforcing continued suppression by threatening the licenses of doctors who stray from the approved narrative.

Bhattacharya, the co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration and Stanford University epidemiologist, joined Fox News host Laura Ingraham on her program “The Ingraham Angle” Tuesday to criticize the state for putting the opinions of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) between patients and their personal physicians.

“In California now, essentially, if you go to the doctor, you have the CDC in the same room with you as your doctor and the doctor has to decide whether they’re going to serve the CDC or the patient,” he said. “It’s an absolutely incredible thing that’s happened.”

As written, A.B. 2098 states, “This bill would designate the dissemination of misinformation or disinformation related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, or ‘COVID-19,’ as unprofessional conduct,” whereby misinformation is defined as “false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care,” i.e. whatever the powers that be dictate.

“Normally you would want the doctor to serve the interest of the patient rather than just public health in general and now under law, under threat of losing their license,” Bhattacharya said, “California doctors serve the CDC over their patients.”

Ingraham went on to suggest the timing of the bill was interesting given all the now-available data pointing to simple early and preventative treatments that had gone widely ignored and suppressed as the shots themselves have been shown to have waning or even negative efficacy with unknown long-term side effects.

For the doctor, this solidified his point that “these issues are complicated. There’s a lot of differences of opinion…among experts on these issues. What this law does…is essentially tells doctors if you express your honest opinion you could lose your license. That’s the purpose of the law–is to take qualified doctors out of that conversation so that there’s an illusion of consensus on all of these complicated issues when in fact what we really need is all minds at the table talking, considering, honestly saying what they actually think instead of this sort of oppression of opinion by government edicts.”

Jenin Younes, a member of the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) Litigation Counsel that is backing a lawsuit filed in November over this law said at the time, “I think this is a horrendous First Amendment violation and violates the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship, and it jeopardizes doctors’ ability to treat their patients to the best of their ability.”

“Doctors are supposed to use their own judgment and experience to treat each patient individually, not to parrot some supposed consensus that may or may not even exist,” she added.

DONATE TO AMERICAN WIRE

If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to American Wire News to help us fight them.

Thank you for your donation!
Kevin Haggerty

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Latest Articles