By Modesto P. Sa-onoy
If people were asked who they would trust most when they get sick, their doctor or their government? Chances would be expectedly high in favor of the doctor. If a patient or his family were given a choice who they want to help them when they are sick, a practicing physician, or a bureaucrat doctor in government health agencies, who would get the vote? The answer is obvious.
Every patient has the inherent right to life and that carries the right to choose his doctor. Can a democratic government refuse this right? Every doctor has the sworn duty to determine what is best for his patient. A doctor took the ancient oath to heal the sick and except in extremely rare instances, the doctors have kept true faith to their duty and their conscience. They prescribe medicines they know full well to be effective and not dangerous to their patients.
Can a government claiming to be representative of the people dictate on doctors what medication to prescribe against the physician’s best judgment and consent of the patient? The right to life is primordial; not even tyranny can take away that right.
Given these premises why should the government restrict or mandate what drugs the doctors should or not prescribe? Will the government take the responsibility for the life and death of the patient who succumbed because of its intrusions?
Even when there are malodorous intentions, government should respect the doctor’s right and duty to prescribe the medicine they know best.
We can understand the imperative of the government approving a medicine as its obligation that what enters the market is safe.
This brings us to the issue of the prescription of hydroxychloroquine “cocktails.” This drug had been used throughout the world for over 60 years and the fact that it has been in the list of approved medicine that long is proof that it has no adverse side effects, as claimed, unless used contrary to its protocol. Government, particularly our Department of Health has ruled this drug to be unsafe so the question asked earlier, why only now when for years it was considered safe? There seem to be sinister motives here.
The explanation of the DoH for prohibiting the use of HCQ is that it has “adverse side effects” that affected the heart. If that were so, how come there are many testimonies from doctors that have used this drug all these years saying it is safe? Indeed, to repeat, it was safe for over 60 years until Covid-19 came about but the DoH suddenly found it unsafe. It staggers the mind how the DoH can be contradictory.
Worst, while the government rejected the right and duty of doctors to prescribe or use HCQ, the DoH has not presented any alternative but isolation, lockdowns, face masks and shields, hand washing and social distancing at a huge financial cost to the nation, billions of lost revenues and millions joining the ranks of the hungry and destitute.
People are dying not just from lack of treatment but from their inability to be treated in over-crowded hospitals. Some people died not from the virus but from lack of medical care, even just the oxygen and getting their dialysis.
Last week, a friend suggested I watch the September 23 interview of Dr. Jerry Jurado, a practicing physician in New Jersey and New York in PUGAD Bloggers. It was enlightening because it explained why HCQ had “adverse side effects”, the reason for which our government, Dr. Fauci and WHO did not report. They just made a general excuse.
Dr. Jurado said he had been using HCQ alone or as a “cocktail” and without risk to his patients. When asked about the dosage he said his patients used 400mg per week or 200mg twice a week for several days and all went well.
It was during the exchange of views that the program host revealed a UK study showing that the patients were given 800mg per day and that dosage adversely affected the heart.
It is clear that the cause of the adverse side effect is not the medicine HCQ per se but overdosage. In everything, medicine especially, an overdose always brings ill effects and even death.
Let’s continue tomorrow.
