Health

Opinions expressed are solely those of the author(s). In former President Biden’s January 2025 farewell speech, he warned of the risk of the U.S. becoming an oligarchy, a government controlled by a select group of ultra-wealthy and elite individuals. While Biden was referring to the government, my over two-decade career in healthcare has led me to see a similar dynamic in science and medicine. For years, this elite group’s dominance went unchallenged, accepted by both the medical community and the public, perhaps out of naivety or complacency. However, the COVID-19 pandemic pulled back the curtain, offering the public a rare glimpse into how medical policies and decisions are made, revealing the sway of these elites. Rise of Medical Censorship Debates over treatments, vaccine development, vaccine mandates, and public health strategies like lockdowns and school closures showcased the power dynamics at play. Over time, as some of these decisions were questioned or refuted, there emerged a demand for accountability and a questioning of expertise, with some moves seen as missteps or swayed by external pressures rather than scientific merit alone. Adding fuel to the fire, these elites mocked and insulted anyone, including their peers and colleagues, while calling for censorship of those questioning their dominance and views. Who are these elites, and what role do they play in medicine? They are highly educated individuals from prestigious institutions whose influence shapes both public opinion and medical practice through their research and academic roles. Their control is solidified by publications in high-impact journals, which set the standards for medicine. In federal health agencies like the NIH, FDA, or CDC, they wield significant power over policy, treatment approval, and research funding. Through books, media, and platforms like TED talks, they also mold public perception and policy, often setting the health agenda. Their decisions can skew healthcare towards specific philosophies or interests. The dominance of these elites rests on three pillars: control of information, gatekeeping opportunities, and influencing policy and practice. They manage information flow through the peer-review system, where high-impact journals act as gatekeepers, often favoring insiders. This control shapes medical education and practice. Their prestigious roles and platforms grant them access to funding and career opportunities, making it tough for outsiders to challenge or innovate within established narratives. Questioning their orthodoxies and dominance will often lead them to publicly insult you, question your credentials and training, and send journalists looking for a story and a social media mob after you. Silencing The Truth On COVID-19 and the Vaccines My collaboration with Dr. Bruce Patterson on long COVID research over the last four years has shown similar patterns. Long COVID, a condition defined as new onset symptoms persisting beyond three months post-SARS-CoV-2 infection, is affecting over 20 million Americans and 65 million people worldwide. The research focus, funding, and narrative around long COVID are heavily shaped by these same academics and medical elites, influencing which symptoms are addressed, treatments pursued, and patient management strategies adopted. There is a risk that novel insights or treatments might struggle for acceptance unless they align with the views of these influential figures. This dynamic is starkly illustrated by the NIH RECOVER COVID initiative, a $1.6 billion US taxpayer-funded effort on long COVID that has been criticized for its shortcomings. A report in STATNEWS highlighted a lack of transparency in funding criteria and dispersal; criticized the glacial pace of research; and noted the failure to set up well-designed clinical trials to study various therapeutics. Research on symptoms and patient surveys has minimal clinical utility in 2025 when millions of people continue to suffer and enough published research points to vascular inflammation driving the underlying pathology. Competition Over Collaboration I have observed more competition rather than collaboration among long COVID research groups. The divisive politicization of our country has falsely and cruelly framed long COVID as a quasi-liberal female psychiatric disorder. Likewise, those people suffering from post-COVID-19 vaccine syndrome, a condition similar to long COVID, have been ignored, smeared, and abused as “anti-vaxxers.” With the newly confirmed Robert F. Kennedy as Secretary of Health and Human Services and the nomination of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya at the helm of the NIH, there exists a tremendous opportunity for both leaders to shape the long COVID narrative by shifting towards an inclusive and transparent policy-making process and fostering environments for collaborative rather than competitive research. Besides fostering collaboration and transparency in research funding, well-designed clinical trials on FDA approval pathways are desperately needed for the millions of disabled and suffering patients. By addressing these areas, there’s a chance to mitigate the oligarchic tendencies within medical science, increase accountability, and better serve the health needs of the population, particularly those with conditions like long COVID. Ram Yogendra M.D., M.P.H. is a board-certified anesthesiologist with a diverse background in medicine and public health. He has experience in infection control and surveillance from prior public health roles before shifting to clinical practice. Dr. Yogendra now contributes to research on Long COVID and post-COVID vaccine syndrome, co-authoring several studies on immune responses and treatments. Follow him on X @dryostradamus Read Dr. Ram Yogendra’s articles here: Long COVID diagnostic with differentiation from chronic lyme disease using machine learning and cytokine hubs – Nature Case series: Maraviroc and pravastatin as a therapeutic option to treat long COVID/Post-acute sequelae of COVID (PASC) – Frontiers Immune-Based Prediction of COVID-19 Severity and Chronicity Decoded Using Machine Learning – Frontiers Persistence of SARS CoV-2 S1 Protein in CD16+ Monocytes in Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) up to 15 Months Post-Infection – Frontiers Get News. Take Action. The Modern Memo was not designed to be your go-to site for breaking news; we’re better than that. You’re reading this post because you care more about America’s future than simply reposting rage-inducing headlines. You are the kind of patriot who wants to take action with your new knowledge; this is where we come in. Like you, we’re absolutely sick and tired of not being able to shape policy or protect American families outside of election…