Is the Hippocratic Oath, which dates back to antiquity, relevant today? Most reasonably informed people would know that it is an oath pertaining to a code of conduct, formulated by Hippocrates of Kos in fifth century BCE ancient Greece, to guide medical practitioners ethically – that is, concerning their actions in the practice of their medical profession. There is a classical version, dating back to the time of Hippocrates, and a modern version, written in 1964, both of which may be found here, together with a discussion of its contemporary relevance. 

The discussion focuses on two things – first, the fact that at present, in the United States, most graduating medical students perform some (usually modernised) form of the oath, confirming the continued belief that it constitutes an affirmation of the desirable ethical conduct of physicians, and second, the accompanying, and perhaps surprising phenomenon, that in many quarters the continued relevance of this time-honoured code of action has lately been questioned.

On the one hand, this tendency is understandable. After all, the world in which we live is incalculably more complex than that of the fifth century before the Common Era. As will be seen in the article linked above, this is the reason why many people have argued, from different perspectives, that the Hippocratic Oath is no longer applicable to the conduct of medical professionals today. According to them, it is simply impossible to accommodate its tenets in a world where:

…a growing number of physicians have come to feel that the Hippocratic Oath is inadequate to address the realities of a medical world that has witnessed huge scientific, economic, political, and social changes, a world of legalized abortion, physician-assisted suicide, and pestilences unheard of in Hippocrates’ time. 

On the other hand, however, in light of the discernible intention behind the original oath – namely, to provide binding guidelines for physicians regarding their conduct when treating patients – one might argue that what might be called the ‘spirit’ of the Hippocratic Oath be preserved in the context of the admittedly very different world of today, even while keeping this difference in mind. This amounts to the insistence that avoiding harm to those in need of medical treatment be reaffirmed as being imperative. (Today, one may justifiably add ‘pharmaceutical treatment,’ given physicians’ dependence on the products of this industry.)

Arguably, this consideration is what has motivated medical schools to retain a version of this oath for graduating medical students to take. Here are two versions of the Hippocratic Oath – the ‘classical’ one and a modern version, which should be kept in mind when reflecting on their relevance for today:

Hippocratic Oath – Classic:

I swear by Apollo the physician, and Asclepius the surgeon, likewise Hygeia and Panacea, and call all the gods and goddesses to witness, that I will observe and keep this underwritten oath, to the utmost of my power and judgment.

I will reverence my master who taught me the art. Equally with my parents, will I allow him things necessary for his support, and will consider his sons as brothers. I will teach them my art without reward or agreement; and I will impart all my acquirement, instructions, and whatever I know, to my master’s children, as to my own; and likewise to all my pupils, who shall bind and tie themselves by a professional oath, but to none else.

With regard to healing the sick, I will devise and order for them the best diet, according to my judgment and means; and I will take care that they suffer no hurt or damage. Nor shall any man’s entreaty prevail upon me to administer poison to anyone; neither will I counsel any man to do so. Moreover, I will give no sort of medicine to any pregnant woman, with a view to destroy the child. Further, I will comport myself and use my knowledge in a godly manner.

I will not cut for the stone, but will commit that affair entirely to the surgeons.

Whatsoever house I may enter, my visit shall be for the convenience and advantage of the patient; and I will willingly refrain from doing any injury or wrong from falsehood, and (in an especial manner) from acts of an amorous nature, whatever may be the rank of those who it may be my duty to cure, whether mistress or servant, bond or free.

Whatever, in the course of my practice, I may see or hear (even when not invited), whatever I may happen to obtain knowledge of, if it be not proper to repeat it, I will keep sacred and secret within my own breast. If I faithfully observe this oath, may I thrive and prosper in my fortune and profession, and live in the estimation of posterity; or on breach thereof, may the reverse be my fate!”

Hippocratic Oath: Modern Version:

I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon’s knife or the chemist’s drug.

I will not be ashamed to say “I know not,” nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient’s recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person’s family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

—Written in 1964 by Louis Lasagna, Academic Dean of the School of Medicine at Tufts University, and used in many medical schools today.

It is evident that, although there are differences in accentuation of certain matters, both versions affirm the primary interest of patients undergoing or in need of medical treatment. In the classical version, one is particularly struck by the explicit emphasis on studiously avoiding any injury or harm from being done to patients, including the refusal to poison them – regardless of certain parties’ insistence that this be done. Also conspicuous is the explicit undertaking to avoid aborting a fetus or baby by medical means (something which one is reminded of by the many miscarriages women suffer after being ‘vaccinated’ against Covid; more on this below). 

The injuries, listed above, resonate with the time in which we live, considering the available evidence of physician complicity in the death of patients during the Covid ‘pandemic.’ Take, for example, Dr Peter McCullough’s testimony, that:

Covid patients were worth more dead than alive to hospitals thanks to the twisted priorities of Big Pharma and the global elite who were desperate to cull the sick and infirm and terrorize the masses into accepting the experimental mRNA vaccines….

Testifying before the Novel Coronavirus Southwestern Intergovernmental Committee, Dr. McCullough stunned those in attendance when he revealed that the higher the number of dead Covid patients, the higher the payout received by the hospital.

According to Dr. McCullough, huge financial incentives for hospitals to use lethal procedures previously tested in China explain why nearly all purported “Covid deaths” occurred in hospitals during the pandemic, with very few people dying at home…

How were these crimes against humanity carried out in front of the eyes of the world, without raising the suspicions of the credulous mainstream?

Hospitals were using Remdesivir to treat patients, despite the existence of Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, both of which were well known in medical circles to produce dramatically better results.

According to medical sources, Remdesivir quickly earned a reputation for killing instead of healing.

“Remdesivir is so lethal it got nicknamed ‘Run Death Is Near’ after it started killing thousands of Covid patients in the hospital,” wrote Stella Paul in a previous report.

“The experts claimed that Remdesivir would stop Covid; instead, it stopped kidney function, then blasted the liver and other organs.”

If the clause, ‘Hospitals were using Remdesivir to treat patients…’ is confusing here, it should be remembered that hospital staff, including doctors and nurses, were the ones carrying out the actual treatment. This is confirmed by Dr Bryan Ardis, who gives an account of the ‘bizarre’ hospital protocol – as corroborated to him by a hospital-employed doctor – that led to the death of his father-in-law, who was incongruously treated with three different antibiotics when he had Covid. This, despite the fact that Covid was supposedly caused by a virus, against which antibiotics are ineffective. 

Ironically – and dare one say, ‘not accidentally’ – at least one of these antibiotics (vancomycin) is known to cause acute kidney failure. When Dr Ardis confronted the doctor on the anomalous use of this medication, the latter blithely admitted that it was hospital protocol to use this for Covid patients. In effect, this practice amounts to poisoning patients in need of medical care, which Hippocrates explicitly forbade. 

Furthermore, provided one interprets the Hippocratic Oath broadly enough (as I implicitly suggested, earlier, under the changed circumstances of today), to be applicable to those scientists who work in the pharmaceutical industry – more specifically regarding the development of Covid ‘vaccines’ – then their culpability is beyond doubt, in light of overwhelming information concerning the lethality of especially the mRNA varieties, although AstraZeneca is included here. In the article linked above, Dr Vernon Coleman lists the astonishing variety of ‘injuries’ caused by these jabs, which (with the Hippocratic Oath in mind) include miscarriages on the part of vaxxed, pregnant women. 

Moreover, when even the American FDA – admittedly under the Trump administration (it is doubtful whether it would have occurred under Biden) – can issue a press release warning about ‘extremely high’ risk concerning long-term heart injury and myocarditis in young men who have had the jab, then alarm bells are ringing loudly. Here is an excerpt from the press release: 

The FDA has required and approved updates to the prescribing information for Pfizer Inc.’s Comirnaty (COVID-19 vaccine, mRNA) and ModernaTX, Inc.’s Spikevax (COVID-19 vaccine, mRNA) to include new safety information regarding the risks of myocarditis and pericarditis following administration of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

The FDA has specifically required each manufacturer to update the warning about the risks of myocarditis and pericarditis with information about

1. the estimated unadjusted incidence of myocarditis and/or pericarditis following administration of the 2023-2024 formulation of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and
2. the results of a study that collected information on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cardiac MRI) in people who developed myocarditis after receiving an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

If anyone should doubt the need for this warning by the FDA (in late June), they should take note of a recent study in Florida, which has revealed that ‘Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine may have killed more Americans in just one year than all the Americans killed in World War I, World War II and the Vietnam War combined.’ It would be disingenuous to claim that such a colossal death toll from a ‘vaccine’ – which supposedly protects recipients against a deadly illness, not kill them – is a mere accident due to something like clinical ‘error.’

On a previous occasion, I asked the question: Why has there been no justice for the millions of people who have died of Covid (pseudo-) ‘vaccines’ worldwide? Here, one may add something else, in light of the ethical implications of the Hippocratic Oath, keeping in mind the continued adherence to it by the vast majority of medical schools in the US, despite the (acknowledged) need to reinterpret it for our own era. This amounts to the claim that there is a parallel need for justice to be seen to be done as far as the complicity of medical and pharmaceutical professionals in the death of patients during Covid is concerned – both regarding treatment of patients in hospitals, and the development and administering of Covid ‘vaccines.’ Absent this, the culpable people would get away with murder.

https://brownstone.org/articles/the-hippocratic-oath-and-the-covid-debacle/