Who funds / controls this shadowy umbrella organisation of medical regulators?

By reading the below article, I have been directed to go down a new line of enquiry with respect to the power structures which initiated and / or maintained the staged pandemic.

The Medical Council of New Zealand: Facade Crumbling

This caught my attention:

For quite some time I have been writing and speaking about the witch hunts conducted by the Medical Council of New Zealand against good doctors who spoke out against their upending of foundational medical principles — principles such as informed consent, which they strongly promoted but hypocritically disavowed.

I and other colleagues have exposed their connection to the Federation of State Medical Boards and its international arm, the International Association of Medical Regulatory Agencies, which appears to be pulling strings across the globe to extirpate ANY challenge to their inconceivably dangerous policies, such as actively working to prohibit early treatment and to push the covid jab as if it were a panacea.

The article goes on to cite testimony given at a High Court hearing¹ by an (as yet unnamed) former board member of the NZ Medical Council.

This is well worth reading. Read it in the article above, or via this PDF:

240923 Evidence Mcnz Member To High Court Hearing Nzdsos Case

35.5KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

So what about the Federation of State Medical Boards and its international arm, the International Association of Medical Regulatory Agencies?

For further reading, check out the links at the bottom of the NewZealandDoc’s substack article cited above.

I particularly recommend the interview with Dr Bruce Dooley².

Suffice it to say:

• The 2 organisations essentially act as one.

• The funding is rather opaque, involving a Foundation.

• Their mission seems to be to keep the profession operating within quite narrow - and purely allopathic - principles, encouraging other member organisations to police and punish miscreants extremely harshly - all for the safety of the public.

• Given the size and potential influence they are remarkably low-key and below the radar given that the parent body has been around since 1913 - just a few years after the Flexner Report was published.

• They have a history of receiving funding from pharma (in relation to opiods), though claim that is no longer the case.

1. The hearing concerns a legal challenge by a group of NZ doctors challenging the NZ Medical Council’s covid-19 guidance - see here.

2. I don’t agree with what he says about ivermectin / the need to treat a novel disease, but what he says about the doctor-patient relationship and the wave of medical censorship traversing the globe - facilitated by these organisations - is extremely important.