It's one thing for the public to lose trust in the medical "authorities," but what are we supposed to do if medical professionals like us can't trust the medical agencies we inherently believed?
I am thinking there should be a stronger phrase than "mistrusting doctors" for what, essentially, was doctors deliberately lying and inflicting harm for money. I already mistrust doctors because they are obedient to the insurance companies. The Covid scenario - poisonous injections (IMO) and lethal hospital care and refusal to recommend, much less allow, treatments that could have saved lives - that is a whole different evil thing.
Dr Martyka won in Poland. The medical Bord that had suspended his doctor's license for telling the truth about Covid, had his right to practice medicine revoked. Hopefully the decisions to suspend the licences of the remaining 114 Polish doctors' whose licenses were suspended for telling the truth about the Covid-19 and treating Covid patients early with amandatine, will be revoked soon.
Dr Martyla fb google translate:
"My case before the court of appeal has ended. The Supreme Medical Court has issued a final judgment in my case. The suspension of the right to practice for a period of 1 year, ordered by the District Medical Court in Kraków, has been CANCELLED. The court has issued a reprimand.
What does it mean to me? At the moment, absolutely nothing. Theoretically, a reprimand prevents me from holding managerial positions - but I do not hold such positions and will not hold them. I have been retired for some time. I can still see patients, so I continue to meet with you at the "Triada" clinic in Tarnów.
During the hearing, attorney Katarzyna Tarnawa-Gwóźdź, who represented me, emphasized that the opinion of the new expert, appointed specifically for the appeal hearing, was in opposition to over 700 scientific studies that we presented to confirm the truth of my words. What is more, the expert based her opinion only on observational studies and mathematical models – which were the lowest in the credibility ranking. However, she did not refer to any of the highest quality studies, RCTs, which we presented as evidence. Additionally, the expert did not answer any of the questions asked by the defense in writing, limiting herself only to answers to the court's questions, which by the way went beyond the indictment.
As attorney Tarnawa-Gwóźdź rightly noted, the fact that someone is an authority in their field and holds high positions, such as the court-appointed expert, prof. dr hab. n. med. and n. o zdr Iwona Paradowska-Stankiewicz, does not change the fact that it should not be difficult to find another person with similar competences, but who is not a person who issues recommendations (as a member of the Medical Council) and then gives opinions on them (as an expert).
1 060 / 5 000
The Advocate for Professional Liability, Dr. Joanna Szeląg, in her position requested that the judgment of the court of first instance be upheld. She rightly pointed out that medicine is a science based on research. That was the end of the sensible statement of the Advocate. She further stated that during this difficult time of the pandemic, my statements raised concerns among patients and society. This indicates that the Advocate did not familiarize herself with my statements, because at every step I emphasized that I oppose spreading panic and my goal is to calm society. I managed to achieve this goal in many respects. Later in her speech, the Advocate stated that doctors do not choose the type of procedure that they like more (whatever that was supposed to mean), but they base it on... RECOMMENDATIONS. It then became clear what the motives of the side seeking to punish me and other doctors were. Going against RECOMMENDATIONS. Not acting contrary to RCT studies, not harming patients. Acting contrary to RECOMMENDATIONS. And it was these RECOMMENDATIONS that I criticized.
1 116 / 5 000
Next, the Advocate stated that both masks and vaccines and social distancing are documented preventive measures. Certainly in accordance with the RECOMMENDATIONS, because certainly not with the results of the RCT studies that I presented to the court and which the court rejected. The Advocate had no doubt that the measures cited were effective (despite the lack of RCT evidence of effectiveness), and since I disputed such an opinion, I deserve to uphold the judgment of the court of first instance. Attorney Katarzyna Tarnawa-Gwóźdź could not fail to respond to such statements. She reminded the Court and the Advocate that the only "evidence" of my guilt is the opinion of the current expert, obtained in a manner contrary to the Code of Criminal Procedure, applicable in this case, and the only evidence based on RCT was provided by me. Let me remind you that the Court was not interested in them. For the Court, the RECOMMENDATIONS were more important. On the other hand, the evidence of effectiveness can be reduced to the sentence that "everyone knows that masks work". No, not everyone. Especially scientists developing RCTs who came to completely opposite conclusions.
The court emphasized that the allegations regarding the lack of evidence are unjustified, because the case files contain copies of my statements. Attorney Tarnawa-Gwóźdź immediately explained that proving that something happened (and I do not deny my statements) is one thing, and proving that it is contrary to medical knowledge is another.
Here's where something interesting happened. The court revealed that the person who reported me to the District Medical Chamber, Mr. Michał Biedziuk, requested to be appointed as an auxiliary prosecutor. The court left his application unconsidered.
The court also dismissed our application to set aside the expert opinion. In the court's opinion, it was clear and correct. The court ignored the defense's allegations that the opinion was based only on the lowest quality observational studies and mathematical models and did not answer a single question from the accused party. The defense clearly indicated to the court that such conduct was an obvious obstacle to the defense's ability to defend.
In issuing the verdict, the Court stated that my statements caused significant social unrest (sic!). Every doctor has the right to express their doubts, but we should consider WHERE we are discussing. In the oral justification, the court noted that as an infectious disease specialist, I had denied the canons of medicine (masks, distance). It is difficult to argue with such an arbitrary determination of canons in medicine, since the Court did not look at RCT, which is the very heart of evidence-based medicine.
Ladies and gentlemen, the most important point of this case is that my license to practice my profession is not and has never been suspended. I can see patients and will continue to do so. However, I have no doubt that the case was conducted with complete disregard for the law and my right to defense. I am waiting for the justification of the judgment. I have not yet decided whether I will file a motion to appeal the judgment to the Supreme Court. I can promise one thing. All the information that you will find on my website or that you will receive from me personally will always be based on evidence-based medicine. Not on the opinions of "authorities", not on recommendations, not on general conviction. On specific studies, including RCTs, which is the canon of medicine."
Congratulations to Dr. Roland Victor and to all the medical professionals (1) who were able to discern the Truth, and (2) who had the fortitude to defy wave upon wave of evil. This means you, Dr. Philip McMillan. Thank you, Dr. McMillan, for your knowledge, wisdom, and example. Outstanding.
In Poland Dr Martyla's licence was revoked by Medical Board after it was susspended for telling the truth about Covid-19 proceduers and medications https://www.facebook.com/martyka.zbigniew
I lack the right words to express my intense gratitude, respect and admiration for medical professionals standing up for truth.
Luckily, i also lack words to adequately describe what i think of those who made it necessary for aforementioned brave medical professionals to do what they do.
It's one thing for the public to lose trust in the medical "authorities," but what are we supposed to do if medical professionals like us can't trust the medical agencies we inherently believed?
I am thinking there should be a stronger phrase than "mistrusting doctors" for what, essentially, was doctors deliberately lying and inflicting harm for money. I already mistrust doctors because they are obedient to the insurance companies. The Covid scenario - poisonous injections (IMO) and lethal hospital care and refusal to recommend, much less allow, treatments that could have saved lives - that is a whole different evil thing.
I am now afraid of doctors.
You took the words right out of my mouth! Except I would call the injections more than poisonous, eugenics bio weapons!!
Agreed.
Dr Martyka won in Poland. The medical Bord that had suspended his doctor's license for telling the truth about Covid, had his right to practice medicine revoked. Hopefully the decisions to suspend the licences of the remaining 114 Polish doctors' whose licenses were suspended for telling the truth about the Covid-19 and treating Covid patients early with amandatine, will be revoked soon.
Dr Martyla fb google translate:
"My case before the court of appeal has ended. The Supreme Medical Court has issued a final judgment in my case. The suspension of the right to practice for a period of 1 year, ordered by the District Medical Court in Kraków, has been CANCELLED. The court has issued a reprimand.
What does it mean to me? At the moment, absolutely nothing. Theoretically, a reprimand prevents me from holding managerial positions - but I do not hold such positions and will not hold them. I have been retired for some time. I can still see patients, so I continue to meet with you at the "Triada" clinic in Tarnów.
During the hearing, attorney Katarzyna Tarnawa-Gwóźdź, who represented me, emphasized that the opinion of the new expert, appointed specifically for the appeal hearing, was in opposition to over 700 scientific studies that we presented to confirm the truth of my words. What is more, the expert based her opinion only on observational studies and mathematical models – which were the lowest in the credibility ranking. However, she did not refer to any of the highest quality studies, RCTs, which we presented as evidence. Additionally, the expert did not answer any of the questions asked by the defense in writing, limiting herself only to answers to the court's questions, which by the way went beyond the indictment.
As attorney Tarnawa-Gwóźdź rightly noted, the fact that someone is an authority in their field and holds high positions, such as the court-appointed expert, prof. dr hab. n. med. and n. o zdr Iwona Paradowska-Stankiewicz, does not change the fact that it should not be difficult to find another person with similar competences, but who is not a person who issues recommendations (as a member of the Medical Council) and then gives opinions on them (as an expert).
1 060 / 5 000
The Advocate for Professional Liability, Dr. Joanna Szeląg, in her position requested that the judgment of the court of first instance be upheld. She rightly pointed out that medicine is a science based on research. That was the end of the sensible statement of the Advocate. She further stated that during this difficult time of the pandemic, my statements raised concerns among patients and society. This indicates that the Advocate did not familiarize herself with my statements, because at every step I emphasized that I oppose spreading panic and my goal is to calm society. I managed to achieve this goal in many respects. Later in her speech, the Advocate stated that doctors do not choose the type of procedure that they like more (whatever that was supposed to mean), but they base it on... RECOMMENDATIONS. It then became clear what the motives of the side seeking to punish me and other doctors were. Going against RECOMMENDATIONS. Not acting contrary to RCT studies, not harming patients. Acting contrary to RECOMMENDATIONS. And it was these RECOMMENDATIONS that I criticized.
1 116 / 5 000
Next, the Advocate stated that both masks and vaccines and social distancing are documented preventive measures. Certainly in accordance with the RECOMMENDATIONS, because certainly not with the results of the RCT studies that I presented to the court and which the court rejected. The Advocate had no doubt that the measures cited were effective (despite the lack of RCT evidence of effectiveness), and since I disputed such an opinion, I deserve to uphold the judgment of the court of first instance. Attorney Katarzyna Tarnawa-Gwóźdź could not fail to respond to such statements. She reminded the Court and the Advocate that the only "evidence" of my guilt is the opinion of the current expert, obtained in a manner contrary to the Code of Criminal Procedure, applicable in this case, and the only evidence based on RCT was provided by me. Let me remind you that the Court was not interested in them. For the Court, the RECOMMENDATIONS were more important. On the other hand, the evidence of effectiveness can be reduced to the sentence that "everyone knows that masks work". No, not everyone. Especially scientists developing RCTs who came to completely opposite conclusions.
The court emphasized that the allegations regarding the lack of evidence are unjustified, because the case files contain copies of my statements. Attorney Tarnawa-Gwóźdź immediately explained that proving that something happened (and I do not deny my statements) is one thing, and proving that it is contrary to medical knowledge is another.
Here's where something interesting happened. The court revealed that the person who reported me to the District Medical Chamber, Mr. Michał Biedziuk, requested to be appointed as an auxiliary prosecutor. The court left his application unconsidered.
The court also dismissed our application to set aside the expert opinion. In the court's opinion, it was clear and correct. The court ignored the defense's allegations that the opinion was based only on the lowest quality observational studies and mathematical models and did not answer a single question from the accused party. The defense clearly indicated to the court that such conduct was an obvious obstacle to the defense's ability to defend.
In issuing the verdict, the Court stated that my statements caused significant social unrest (sic!). Every doctor has the right to express their doubts, but we should consider WHERE we are discussing. In the oral justification, the court noted that as an infectious disease specialist, I had denied the canons of medicine (masks, distance). It is difficult to argue with such an arbitrary determination of canons in medicine, since the Court did not look at RCT, which is the very heart of evidence-based medicine.
Ladies and gentlemen, the most important point of this case is that my license to practice my profession is not and has never been suspended. I can see patients and will continue to do so. However, I have no doubt that the case was conducted with complete disregard for the law and my right to defense. I am waiting for the justification of the judgment. I have not yet decided whether I will file a motion to appeal the judgment to the Supreme Court. I can promise one thing. All the information that you will find on my website or that you will receive from me personally will always be based on evidence-based medicine. Not on the opinions of "authorities", not on recommendations, not on general conviction. On specific studies, including RCTs, which is the canon of medicine."
https://www.facebook.com/martyka.zbigniew
Congratulations to Dr. Roland Victor and to all the medical professionals (1) who were able to discern the Truth, and (2) who had the fortitude to defy wave upon wave of evil. This means you, Dr. Philip McMillan. Thank you, Dr. McMillan, for your knowledge, wisdom, and example. Outstanding.
Trust is FINISHED FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!
In Poland Dr Martyla's licence was revoked by Medical Board after it was susspended for telling the truth about Covid-19 proceduers and medications https://www.facebook.com/martyka.zbigniew
I lack the right words to express my intense gratitude, respect and admiration for medical professionals standing up for truth.
Luckily, i also lack words to adequately describe what i think of those who made it necessary for aforementioned brave medical professionals to do what they do.