The philosophers tell us that the more we know about anything, the more we learn that we didn’t know much or anything about it. That is what we are now being told by an American specialist doctor,a woman, who has been looking her professional colleagues straight in the eye and telling them and the public that they LIED to the World about COVID 19 to fatten their pockets against public health and interest, and that they are a huge disappointment to humanity. In particular, DR.LISSA RANKIN,52, who has 24 years practice as an Obstetrician and Gynecologist behind her, castigates President Donald Trump accusing him of collaboration with the huge pharmaceutical companies to defraud the world and cause the death of many Americans when simple natural medicines are available world-wide to cure this disease. DR LISSA RANKIN should know what she is saying. Besides obstetrics and gynecology, she is a Family Medicine doctor and Integrative Medicine doctor rolled together. This 1969 graduate of the University of Miami Medical School is the founder of WHOLE HEALTH MEDICINE INSTITUTE.
When I read her criticism of the way doctors worldwide presented COVID19 to their fellow countrymen and women, my thoughts went to DR.OLATUNJI-DARE editorial page editor and chairman of The Guardians editorial board in that newspaper’s heydays, and to what human or event he would make the paper present to his readers as 2020 MAN OF THE YEAR. What else could it be if not COVID19 which literally shoots down our civilization? I am not taking the wind out of Dr. Dare’s sail by presenting and another side of the coin of COVID19. Really, will 2020 MAN OF THE YEAR be COVID19 or, as DR.Lissa Rankin says, THE BIGGEST FRAUD OF THE CENTURY?
Dr. LISSA RANKIN’S presentation of her case against the profession of orthodox medicine agrees with the position of this column in a series of articles on CORONA VIRUS posted on www.olufemikusa.com. Her struggle to expose what she calls public deceit and fraud is serialized in this column, under her original title…17 things we don’t know and shouldn’t pretend to know about COVID19. Ladies and Gentlemen
DR LISSA RANKIN has the floor…
A few days ago on Facebook, I made a casual comment questioning part of the dominant narrative (that the anti-viral remdesivir is indeed worthy of Dr. Fauci’s optimism and a lightning speed rush to FDA approval.) A physician and medical director challenged me, saying he was concerned I was dismissive of science and worried I might influence people in ways that would make them turn away from science. I welcomed his challenge and asked for his email so I could get him to peer review something I was writing about remdesivir. He peer-reviewed what I wrote and wrote a cogent response, which he also ran by some of his trusted medical sources. I was grateful for his scientific engagement and for the opportunity to have a respectful discussion. However, I noticed as I read his response to what I had written that his response was based on assumptions I was questioning (assuming that Covid-19 tests or Covid-19 death rates are accurate, for example). I realized that if any of those assumptions turned out to be false, our seemingly logical discussion could be at risk of cognitive error. This respectful scientific discourse with a professional colleague inspired me to make a list of all of the other assumptions I was questioning, which inspired me to crowdsource this list on Facebook), asking for help from my community to make a comprehensive list of assumptions we’re making in public health policymaking and clinical decision making. It’s clear that there are many things we don’t yet know about COVID-19 and the SARS CoV-2 virus, but I have yet to see any “expert” clearly admit what we don’t know, so I thought I’d take a stab at it. Unless we’re willing to be transparent about where we’re uncertain, attempts at false certainty will only mislead the public and potentially interfere with personal and collective wise decision-making. After writing the first draft of this list, I also asked for peer review from ten medical doctors and researchers who I know well and trust that they have no hidden agendas or financial conflicts of interest. I then shared it with hundreds of more doctors asking for feedback, including Gabor Mate, MD, author of When The Body Says No.
Gabor asked me a great question — “What is your intention for writing this essay? What do you hope to achieve by questioning these assumptions?” I told him that my intention is not to scare people or overwhelm anyone with all this uncertainty, but to be willing to question the dominant narrative respectfully and with scientific rigor, since good science is based on good questions, with a willingness to question every assumption. I told him I was also motivated to gather this list because I see people either rigidly complying with the rules of our leaders- and shaming everyone who doesn’t. I see others blindly rebelling against the rules with no apparent concern for public safety. Both are the result of trauma and conditioning early in childhood. I was conditioned to blindly comply with authority, so I have a tendency to just do as I’m told. Other people I know were conditioned to blindly rebel against authority, automatically resisting if anyone tells them what to do. Blind compliance is how Nazi Germany happened. Outright rebellion by not abiding by quarantine guidelines can compromise what’s good for the collective. “Now is the time,” I told Gabor, “for us to neither blindly comply nor automatically rebel. Now is the time to Self-lead our parts, letting what I call your “Inner Pilot Light”) take the lead in your decision-making.” Self-leadership is not selfish; it doesn’t just consider what’s good for you. Because the divine essence of you is also connected to the divine essence of all beings, this center of your being can make wise decisions that expand to include all other beings. Compliant parts can put us at risk of becoming blind sheeple in the midst of corrupt leaders that could silence us when we need to be speaking out. Rebellious parts can behave like tantruming toddlers who feel entitled to freedoms they’re not entitled to when public health is at risk. We need the inner children in us to calm down so the wise adults can lead our behavior. We also need to question the dominant narrative until we have better science- and better morals- informing those in positions of leadership.
So that is at the root of what motivated me to write this list of 17 assumptions I think are worth questioning. If we’re basing global behavior on assumptions that turn out to be untrue, all of our epidemiological models about what the future holds become little more than guesswork in a situation where we keep making best guesses that turn out to be wrong. Of course, in an emergency, we need to be willing to do our best and then admit when we make mistakes. We try something, we observe what happens, we modify our behavior based on what we’re learning — in other words, we use science to help us assess whether our hypotheses were correct — and we admit when we’re wrong
For example, many of the doctors I know who are on the front lines initially thought ventilators were the solution. Then the numbers started rolling in, and it became more clear that 1) a huge proportion of people who got put on ventilators never got off them 2) ventilators may have worsened already existing lung damage, which may turn out to cause permanent lung disability even if people do get off the ventilator 3) early intervention with oxygen — and not ventilators — may turn around this disease without causing the harm ventilators cause. So we try ventilators — and when we discover they may have unnecessarily killed people, we modify our behavior.
What other assumptions are we making that might be wrong? Everyone is saying “trust the experts,” but as a critical thinker and physician who is not an infectious disease expert, an epidemiologist, or someone trained in public health, it seems to me that many of the assumptions our “experts” seem to be relying on seem erroneous at best and flagrantly misrepresentative of the truth at worst. It’s crucial that we admit what we know and what we don’t know — and remain transparent around our assumptions, not misrepresenting them as proven facts.
For the record, inquiring about our assumptions in no way says I’m taking a position on whether lockdown is good or bad, whether I believe any conspiracy theories, whether I agree with masks and social distancing, whether I think this whole pandemic is intended to serve some globalist agenda or any other assumption you might make about someone who asks good questions. I’m not taking a position here—and I don’t intend to take a position until we have more certainty. I’ve been 100% compliant with all of Governor Newsom’s recommendations and have hardly left my house in eight weeks except for my daily walk with my dog. I am merely noticing that there is a tendency for people to attack, demonize, and censor anyone who questions the dominant narrative, and that is not good science. Rigorous science requires us to be curious and ask good questions! To put blind faith in the advice of “experts” is fundamentalism, not science. I realized in eight years of researching my book Sacred Medicine that sometimes it’s less about knowing the answers with certainty and more about asking the right questions with humility and a willingness to say “We don’t know.”