How modern medicine was born

Video Transcript

Welcome to Truly Right View
Let The Truth Be Told!

Are you ready to hear the real truth unfiltered by bias media or government intervention?
Subscribe to the Truly Right View Channel

Modern medicine was born out of an intricate scheme by some of the most wealthy and powerful men in history. They transformed healthcare from an era of natural remedies, traditional knowledge, and holistic wellness to one of synthetic drugs, centralized licensing, and corporate influence that has decimated the health of generations. John D. Rockefeller, being one of richest men of all time, found that mere financial gain was just not enough for him. In an effort to satisfy his insatiable lust for power, his most trusted advisor came to him with a plan to control one of the most fundamental aspects of society: healthcare. This manifested with the Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research, America’s first biomedical university. It served as a vessel for him to exert his influence on the future of healthcare directly through medical education. Andrew Carnegie, another industry mogul of Rockefeller’s time, also wished to exert his influence and distribute his wealth in a manner that suited his agenda– thereby establishing the Carnegie Foundation. In 1907, the Carnegie Foundation surveyed medical schools with a man named Abraham Flexner, whose brother led the Rockefeller Institute. This survey, known as The Flexner Report to the Rockefeller foundation in 1910 favored German-trained allopathic medicine, shunned natural and holistic wellness, and supported the idea that there were simply too many people practicing medicine. This led to rigorous and costly medical education requirements that restricted access to medical careers to a wealthy few. Flexner’s recommendations mandated eight years of higher education and drastically reduced the number of medical schools from 650 to 50 by the end of World War I, decreasing the number of graduates by two thirds. This report effectively extinguished many medical schools that did not teach the allopathic medical fundamentals of drugs and surgery. Now, if you wanted to practice medicine, you had to play by their rules, go to their schools, get their medical license, practice the way they taught you. If you didn’t, laws would soon be put into place to keep your mouth shut. The medical industrial machine became so hellbent on crushing traditional styles of medicine that by the mid 1900s, they sent out SWAT teams to raid the homes of old ladies for making herbal teas and giving their friends vitamins. In Rockefller’s time, medicine became a science like chemistry or physics rather than an artform that the traditional methods embraced. This meant that it would be more easily controlled through large academic institutions, and focused more on interventions for populations rather than individuals. Hospitals were transformed from charitable shelters to a monopolized industry. The proliferation of hospitals in the U.S., from a mere 178 in 1873 to a staggering 4,359 by 1909, marked a seismic shift. The expansion of hospitals was underpinned by significant investments from the same magnates. Their financial support was crucial in establishing hospitals as elite centers of medical care, but it also tied these institutions to the interests of their benefactors. The Rockefellers and the Carnegies did most of the heavy lifting while the Rothschild family pulled their strings in the background, ensuring they aligned with the broader objectives of the ruling class. This tightly controlled network ensured that all parts, from charities to businesses, operated cohesively under a unified strategy that sought to shape the future of not only medicine but society at large. Prior to the industrial revolution of the mid 1800s, independent holistic practitioners were the backbone of healthcare in small towns and rural areas. These healers relied on generations of wisdom, using natural remedies to treat the common ailments of the day. Their approach took the patient’s environment, diet, lifestyle, and well-being into consideration. On the flip side, there were a handful of doctors, often trained in prestigious European institutions, who catered specifically to the wealthy and urban populations. These doctors considered themselves the true authorities on health and medicine, shuning the small-scale holistic practitioners and ushering in the era of allopathic medicine– utilizing drugs and surgery over traditional treatments. The sudden interest in medicine from the titans of the oil and steel industries was clearly driven by their business interests. They saw the opportunity to use medicine as a way to keep laborers healthy enough to work in their factories. While building the first medical universities, these robber barons were simultaneously building the first public schooling system, streamlining the process from birth to indoctrinated worker effectively. Their purported charitable endeavors aimed to "advance" medicine; these efforts temporarily silenced critics who believed they never utilized their significant wealth for any good. Notably, Rockefeller’s involvement in the petrochemical industry, which entailed refining oil to produce various products, likely motivated him to support the promotion of drugs that were beginning to be derived from those same petrochemicals. He had working relationships with I.G. Farben, the German pharmaceutical powerhouse of the era. When the company was split up by the Allied Governments following World War II, he maintained his positions in these new companies. As industry boomed during the industrial revolution, cities blossomed and brought with them a slew of new health problems. Living conditions became more crowded, sanitation standards couldn’t keep up, and the rise of factory work imposed stressors to the likes of which humanity had never seen. At the time, most people were actually skeptical of doctors. Regular physicians were seen as being socially, economically, and geographically disconnected from the populace, and their clinical methods were often dreaded. The treatments offered by these physicians were not only seen as expensive and ineffective, but were also unpleasant and frequently dangerous. Bloodletting. Mercury. Arsenic. Purgatives. Blistering– which is scalding burning to create blisters followed by draining. These methods were aimed at attacking both the disease and the body, which many found more detestable than the diseases themselves. To regain public confidence and reduce competition, leading doctors tried various strategies throughout the century. These included advocating for licensing laws, establishing medical schools and educational reforms, organizing medical societies, and adopting ethical codes. However, these efforts largely failed to enhance their technical effectiveness, credibility, or professional status. They need a structured entity– a collective where physicians and the elite could unite to dominate the healthcare industry. This scheme materialized as the corrupt American Medical Association– or AMA. Remember the Flexner Report that found there were too many physicians and that they all needed to practice allopathic medicine? The AMA originally requested the Carnegie foundation to initiate the Flexner Report, which squashed holistic medicine in favor of centralized allopathy. The AMA was actually started in a valiant effort to reform medical education in 1846. During the late 1800s, the AMA expanded rapidly, prompting the creation of state organizations. A man by the name of George H. Simmons, who founded the Nebraska Medical Association, was later appointed editor of the Journal of the AMA. He quickly ascended to secretary and general manager of the AMA, directing it towards authoritative and self-promoting policies. He also ensured all of the organization’s funds passed through his control. Simmons then found a young protege in Morris Fishbein, hiring him to the AMA in 1913. Immigrating from Europe, Simmons lacked verifiable medical education. He claimed to get his training from the Rotunda Hospital of Dublin, but this hospital has never issued a medical license and was not even authorized to do so. He said that he spent a year and a half in the largest hospitals in London, though he never indicated if he was a doctor or patient or an orderly. Later, Simmons acquired a medical degree by mail from a diploma mill called Rush Medical College in Chicago, without evidence of ever stepping foot on the campus. His ally, Fishbein, also attended Rush Medical College, but his graduation remains uncertain too. Later in 1938, he stated under oath that he never practiced medicine a day in his life. Under Simmons and Fishbein, the AMA started the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry, which worked in tandem with the newly established FDA and other federal agencies to regulate the medical marketplace. This collaboration often aligned the AMA’s interests with government actions, notably through a "Seal of Approval” system that demanded payments from pharmaceutical companies for endorsements. Due to the enormous power of the AMA, these endorsements were critical to commercial success of drugs. However, the AMA had no laboratories, research equipment, or staff, so these drugs were tested through “green research”– determining how much the pharma companies were willing to pay to get the seal. Some drug companies hated the “green research” process, notably Abbott Laboratories, which refused to pay. After having all of their drugs denied for approval, Wallace C. Abbott reportedly walked into Simmons’ office and laid mounds of documentation onto his desk detailing his fraudulent education diplomas, charges of medical negligence resulting in deaths of patients, and even accusations of sexual misconduct. He then, of course, got his company’s drugs approved swiftly. Simmons, after gaining profitable control over the AMA, maintained a lavish lifestyle, including a mistress in a luxurious apartment, while cruelly seeking to discard his wife by administering narcotics to drive her to insanity or suicide. This attempt led to a high-profile trial, where his wife testified against him, exposing his efforts to have her declared insane. The trial resulted in Simmons’ retirement from the AMA, and Fishbein then took full control, focusing on fundraising, political influence, and dominance in the medical field. He lived extravagantly, involving himself in book publishing, lecturing, and writing for newspapers. His column, marketed as medical advice, was syndicated across over 200 newspapers, establishing him as a leading medical authority despite never practicing medicine himself. In 1962, the United States government introduced new rules mandating drug manufacturers to demonstrate the efficacy of their products prior to market release and subsequently disclose any significant adverse reactions. The AMA and the drug industry were not happy about this and decided to create an initiative to distract from their non-compliance, culminating in "the War Against Quackery.” This became yet another effort to squash any health practices that didn’t involve drugs or surgeries. The “war” initially targeted chiropractors but quickly expanded its scope to attack other independent health practitioners. It got to the point where SWAT teams conducted nighttime raids on the homes of old ladies for giving out herbal teas and vitamins to neighbors. These individuals suffered severe losses, including their homes and life savings. The consequences of these actions have significantly impacted millions of regular people by limiting their access to affordable health care and subjecting them to the AMA’s expensive, often ineffective drug treatments. Yet, pharmaceutical companies continued to market harmful drugs with severe side effects unimpeded, ignoring the new regulations. As the AMA’s influence grew, there was a noticeable decline in physician accountability. The AMA’s Code of Ethics effectively shielded doctors from the repercussions of their mistakes, which sometimes led to patient harm or death. It also discouraged medical professionals from disclosing such errors in court. A respected figure in the U.S. Army Medical Staff and the U.S. Public Health Service, Dr. Norman Barnesby, criticized the AMA’s "code of silence" as akin to the Mafia’s Omerta– punishing any doctor who spoke out about medical failures with professional exile. By strategically influencing medical education, research, and practice, all of these power brokers from the AMA to Rockefeller, effectively monopolized the field. This orchestrated, allopathic transformation of medicine and marginalization of traditional healing methods has profoundly shaped everybody’s health today. But it doesn’t have to control your health. Check out the link in the description or top right corner of your screen to discover a range of high-quality products we’ve carefully selected to empower you in taking control of your health. For tailored assistance, where we personally assess your needs and steer you towards optimal well-being, again check out the link in the description or top right corner of your screen for Prism to receive a complimentary consultation and learn more. Don’t let them fool you, subscribe to our channel.

Truly Right View: Advocating for Free Speech in the Age of Political Censorship

Introduction: What is Free Speech Today?

In a world where political discourse is dominated by big tech, cable news, and social media influencers, free speech is constantly under threat. From censorship of conservative viewpoints to the silencing of dissent on controversial issues, we are witnessing an alarming trend of restrictions on the most fundamental rights of any citizen in our Constitutional Republic: the right to speak freely.

But what does free speech truly mean in today’s context? Are we protecting it, or are we allowing authoritarian ideologies like socialism, communism, fascism, and dictatorships to erode it?

The Constitutional Perspective: Why Free Speech is Non-Negotiable

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution is crystal clear: “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech.” The Founding Fathers understood the importance of free speech in preserving a free society. Without it, the ability to challenge government, expose corruption, and advocate for truth would be crushed.

Yet today, under the guise of protecting people from “misinformation” and “hate speech,” powerful institutions are curbing our ability to express ideas that do not conform to their narratives.

Do we not see this as a slippery slope toward authoritarianism?

Shouldn’t we, as citizens, be the ones who decide what we can or cannot hear, not a centralized body or corporation?

Social Media and Cable News: Platforms or Gatekeepers?

Social media was once hailed as the bastion of free speech. It allowed ordinary individuals to share their thoughts, advocate for causes, and hold the powerful accountable. However, over the years, major platforms like Twitter (now X), Facebook, and YouTube have become gatekeepers rather than facilitators of free expression.

Algorithms favor certain ideologies, while alternative viewpoints—especially those with a more conservative or constitutional slant—are shadow-banned, demonetized, or outright censored.

Does this not resemble the tactics of monarchies, communistic or fascist regimes that control what their citizens can see and hear?

Shouldn’t a true democracy allow the free flow of ideas, even if those ideas challenge the status quo?

Social Media Influencers: Fighters for Freedom or Puppets of Censorship?

Many social media influencers, especially those aligned with constitutional values, have become modern-day warriors for free speech. Yet, they face intense backlash, censorship, and de-platforming for voicing opinions that challenge globalist or left-leaning narratives.

How many times have we seen influential voices banned simply for questioning government policies, election results, or health mandates?

Isn’t it concerning that only a select group of elites can decide what is “acceptable” discourse?

While some influencers fall in line with these restrictive policies, others have emerged as champions for free speech, using their platforms to resist censorship and uphold constitutional rights. The question is: Will we support these voices, or will we allow them to be drowned out by corporate and governmental censorship?

The Dangers of Socialism, Communism, and Fascism: A Threat to Free Speech

At the heart of socialism, communism, and fascism lies a common tactic—control over speech. These ideologies have historically sought to suppress dissent, limit expression, and create a monolithic narrative that favors those in power.

Look no further than authoritarian regimes past and present, where dissenters are imprisoned, media is state-controlled, and free speech is criminalized. Can we really ignore the striking similarities between these oppressive ideologies and the current state of political discourse in America?

Is the suppression of speech today not a precursor to more draconian measures tomorrow?

Should we not fight to preserve the right to freely express political, social, and economic ideas?

The Truly Right View: Defending Freedom in the Digital Age

At Truly Right View, we believe in the unwavering defense of free speech as enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. We reject the encroaching influences of socialism, communism, fascism, and any form of dictatorship that seeks to undermine this fundamental right.

Our platform is dedicated to bringing you uncensored news, analysis, and commentary from a truly constitutional perspective. We provide a space where voices that have been silenced or marginalized can be heard, and where you—the citizen—can engage in the free exchange of ideas.

Join the Fight: Sign Up for Our Channel and Newsletter

Do you value free speech?

Do you believe that the right to express your thoughts, opinions, and beliefs should never be compromised, no matter how controversial they may be?

If so, we invite you to join the fight for free speech by subscribing to the Truly Right View channel and newsletter. Stay informed on the latest developments in free speech advocacy, political commentary, and constitutional rights. Together, we can stand against the creeping influence of censorship and authoritarianism.

Why wait for others to defend your rights?

Become part of a movement that fights for the truly free society envisioned by our Founding Fathers.

Will You Speak Up or Stay Silent?

In the end, the future of free speech rests in our hands. We can either stand idly by as it is eroded by corporate and governmental overreach, or we can take action to protect and preserve it.

Will you speak up for your rights, or will you allow them to be taken away piece by piece?

The choice is yours.

Subscribe to the channel for Truly Right View today, and support our patriots shop together, let’s ensure that free speech remains the bedrock of our Constitutional Republic.