from youarewithinthenorms.com
NORMAN J CLEMENT RPH., DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, IN THE SPIRIT OF JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., INC., SPIRIT OF REV. IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER R. CLEMENT BS., MS, MBA. HARVEY JENKINS, MD, PH.D., IN THE SPIRIT OF C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., M.B.A., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., EVELYN J. CLEMENT, IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGSWORTH, RENEE BLARE, RPH, DR. TERENCE SASAKI, MD LESLY POMPY MD., CHRISTOPHER RUSSO, MD., NANCY SEEFELDT, WILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., NEIL ARNAND, MD., RICHARD KAUL, MD., IN THE SPIRIT OF LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, AISHA GARDNER, ADRIENNE EDMUNDSON, ESTER HYATT PH.D., WALTER L. SMITH BS., IN THE SPIRIT OF BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER MD., CUDJOE WILDING BS, MARTIN NJOKU, BS., RPH., IN THE SPIRIT OF DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS
Debra Houry, CDC Hypocrisy, and Opioid Guideline Conflicts
The article comprises an extended critique from the Doctor Patient Forum and related entities. argues that former CDC Chief Medical Officer Dr. Debra Houry demonstrated significant hypocrisy by raising concerns about conflicts of interest in vaccine guidelines while previously overseeing the highly contentious 2016 CDC Opioid Prescribing Guideline. The authors assert that the opioid guideline process was marred by undisclosed financial and intellectual conflicts, leading to a “committee-stacked” system that ultimately resulted in the criminalization of physician care through the weaponization of federal statutes against doctors. Furthermore, the document highlights how prosecutorial overreach and the dysfunction of state medical boards, prioritizing punitive action over truth, have harmed competent physicians and negatively impacted patient access to care, particularly for those in chronic pain. Ultimately, the forum calls for urgent reform and transparency in all public health guideline development to prevent the continued creation of policies that harm patients while serving competing financial interests.
FROM DOCTOR PATIENT FORUM
THE HYPOCRISY DEBRA HOURY
As Debra Houry steps down from the CDC amid discussions of conflicts of interest and committee-stacking in vaccine guideline processes, it’s a good time to look back at past instances where similar concerns were raised, such as the creation, implementation, and impact of the 2016 CDC Opioid Prescribing Guideline. She served as the Chief Medical Officer and Deputy Director for Program and Science of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention until she resigned in protest at the firing of Susan Monarez.
The hypocrisy here is striking: Houry was at CDC overseeing the 2016 opioid guideline, one of the most conflict-ridden, committee-stacked processes in recent memory, that directly led to the Criminalization of Physician Care. The article mentions the Controlled Substances Act, health care fraud statutes, and a labyrinth of federal regulations as being weaponized against physicians. Yet now she’s sounding alarms about conflicts in vaccine guidance.
DOCTOR NOT GUILTY AND U.S.A DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE/DEA VS. RAJ
According to both Dr. Muhamed Aly Rifai, a Clinical Psychiatrist, and Dr. Raj Bothra, a General Surgeon and Interventional Pain Specialist, the modern American legal system has unjustly targeted physicians, turning them into criminals through the weaponization of regulations like the Controlled Substances Act and health care fraud statutes.
The author, Dr. Muhamad Aly Rifai, in his book Doctor Not Guilty, details specific cases of doctors like Thomas Sachy and Loey Kousa who faced severe charges, often related to pain management or alleged “pill mill” operations, only to be acquitted or have charges dismissed later.
The piece asserts that prosecutorial overreach and inflammatory rhetoric, exemplified by the author’s own experience facing serious fraud charges despite eventual acquittal, have normalized the presumption of guilt.
MEDICAL BOARDS DISTORTING TRUTH AND FACTS
Kayvan Haddanan, MD, out of Roseville, California, argues in his paper “Why Reforming Medical Boards is Critical to Saving Patient Care,” that this “overreach” is financially and emotionally damaging to competent physicians and leads to physician shortages, negatively impacting patient access to care, particularly in underserved areas.
Dr. Kayvan Haddanan writes;
“…This process is fundamentally misaligned with its purpose. Boards are often armed with prosecutors who prioritize winning over discovering the truth, distorting facts, and relying on questionable “expert” testimonies while dismissing the input of respected colleagues…The consequences of medical board dysfunction extend far beyond the individual physician, creating a public health crisis that affects communities and erodes trust in the healthcare system itself. When competent doctors are unfairly sidelined, the impact is felt in emergency rooms, clinics, and households, particularly in the nation’s most vulnerable areas. “
Furthermore, the source suggests that greed, a lack of transparency, and professional lobbying influence contribute to the boards’ inconsistent and often punitive actions, concluding with a call for urgent reform to ensure fairness and accountability.
- Prosecutorial Overreach: The alleged misuse or excessive use of authority by prosecutors in pursuing criminal charges.
- Controlled Substances Act: Federal law that regulates the manufacture, importation, possession, use, and distribution of certain narcotics, stimulants, depressants, hallucinogens, anabolic steroids, and other chemicals used in their production.
- Health Care Fraud Statutes: Federal laws that prohibit fraudulent schemes related to healthcare benefits programs, often involving false claims for medical services.
- Pill Mill: A derogatory term used to describe a clinic or physician’s office that is alleged to prescribe excessive or inappropriate amounts of prescription drugs, particularly opioids.
- Hyde Motion: A legal motion under the Hyde Amendment, a federal law that allows individuals who have been the target of frivolous or vexatious prosecution by the government to recover attorney fees and expenses.
- Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs): State-run electronic databases that track prescriptions for controlled substances to help identify potential abuse and diversion.
- Statistical Outliers: Data points that are significantly different from other data points in a dataset, which in the context of the article refers to physicians with prescribing patterns that fall outside the norm.
- Presumption of Innocence: The legal principle that every person accused of any crime is considered innocent until proven guilty.
- DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration): A U.S. federal law enforcement agency under the Department of Justice tasked with combating drug smuggling and distribution within the United States.
- Due Process: The legal requirement that the state must respect all legal rights that are owed to a person, ensuring fair treatment through the normal judicial system.
- Scapegoats: Individuals or groups who are unfairly blamed for problems or difficulties.
CDC Opioid Prescribing Guidelines: Bad Faith or Incompetence?”
In 2022, the Doctor Patient Forum, led by Chad D. Kollas, MD, Claudia Merandi, and Bev. Schechtman and Carrie Judy co-authored a piece on Pallimed, “Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest by Physicians Creating the CDC Opioid Prescribing Guidelines: Bad Faith or Incompetence?” (read here). It documented how many of the physicians who shaped that guideline failed to disclose conflicts of interest, both financial and intellectual, at the very moment transparency was most needed:
“Our results suggest that advocates for unfocused reductions in opioid prescribing propagated a false narrative that physician overprescribing drove increases in overdose deaths over the last two decades. Using this false narrative, these advocates facilitated a corresponding moral panic that produced a flawed national opioid policy that has increased drug overdose deaths and harmed patients in pain but has also served the competing financial and intellectual interests of the CDC, health insurers, mass tort litigation attorneys, state attorneys general, and anti-opioid stakeholders.”
Key points from our analysis:
- Roughly 72% of “qualifying policy articles” by these doctors failed to disclose conflicts as defined by the CDC itself.
- Authors came into the process with pre-existing advocacy positions and even financial conflicts tied to systematic reviews or expert witness work.
- The panel was stacked with voices already committed to restrictive policy, while the patients most harmed by it were excluded.
- Hard dosing thresholds, supposedly for clarity, were over-applied and weaponized — leading to widespread patient abandonment.
- Meanwhile, the narrative that “doctor prescribing caused the overdose crisis” was pushed despite fentanyl already being the primary driver.
Why it matters today:
DEHUMANIZATION OF MEDICAL PAIN CARE PROVIDERS AND PATIENTS
According to the Eugenic Archives, ” The term ‘dehumanization’ was coined in the early 19th century and has acquired a wide range of meanings since then.
These include: treating certain people in degrading ways (for instance, merely as means to an end), referring to them as non-human animals or as inanimate objects.
Denying that they possess distinctively human characteristics, treating them in degrading ways that cause them to experience themselves as less than human, denying that they have mental states, conceiving of other people as less human than oneself, conceiving of them as inanimate objects, and conceiving of them as subhuman animals. ”
According to The Doctor Patients Forum, “..When Houry now raises concerns about stacked committees and expert witness bias in vaccine guidelines, it underscores a pattern. Public health guidelines are only as trustworthy as the independence, transparency, and diversity of the committees that create them. The opioid guideline shows what happens when those principles are ignored: policies that harm patients while failing to achieve their stated goals.
Moving forward, we need:
- Full disclosure of financial and intellectual conflicts from all guideline authors.
- Balanced committees that include a diversity of perspectives, especially affected patients.
- Transparent COI management, with recusal where appropriate.
- Post-implementation monitoring of harms and unintended consequences.
- Oversight of guideline development when public health stakes are high.
Houry’s resignation is a reminder that these concerns aren’t hypothetical. They shaped one of the most harmful guidelines in recent history. If we’re going to demand transparency in vaccines, we must also demand accountability for opioids.”
TO CASH APP:$docnorm
ZELLE 3135103378
ALL WATCHED OVER BY MACHINES OF LOVING GRACE
BE SURE TO DONATE TO THE MARK IBSEN GOFUNDME DEFENSE FUND, WHERE THE SON ALWAYS RISES!!!
FOR NOW, YOU ARE
WITHIN
THE NORMS
