Another Doctor Dares to Challenge Tyranny

The drug cartel of the North has ways of bending physicians to its demands, until challenged by courageous individuals.

Perspectives on Health

Physicians who dare to tell the truth about COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccines face formidable opposition. Consider the case of Dr. Richard Eggleston, a Washington physician who publicly disputed the official COVID-19 talking points. Dr. Eggleston contributes medical articles to the Lewiston Tribune, an Idaho newspaper. He has appeared on the blog and podcast Voices for Medical Freedom, which was founded by basketball legend John Stockton.
Now, Dr. Eggleston is battling censors in his state government for his medical license. Those state actors are threatening the doctor’s medical license, despite the fact that he has been out of patient care for over a decade.

Last year, I wrote about the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), a private organization with no recognized government role under any statute enacted by any legislature. Nonetheless, the FSMB is a for-profit organization with clout over medical boards in all 50 states. The FSMB encouraged opioid prescribing at a time when excessive use of such drugs had resulted in the deadly opioid epidemic. During the COVID-19 years, the FSMB then promoted remdesivir and vaccines over far safer early treatments.
Despite the FSMB’s lack of formal governing authority, the Washington Medical Commission, the administrative agency in that state that licenses medical doctors, became a member organization of the FSMB, as do the majority of other medical boards in the United States. According to the FSMB, it represents 71 medical boards in the United States, its territories, and the District of Columbia.

And, according to the FSMB, “physicians who generate and spread COVID-19 vaccine misinformation or disinformation risk disciplinary action by state medical boards, including suspension or revocation of their medical license.”
Never mind what the law says about how a physician is licensed or, in extreme cases, de-licensed. Never mind that the public must rely on physicians’ vast education and experience, culminating in the doctor’s valuable medical judgment applied specifically to individuals’ health circumstances. The FSMB’s pronouncement, and the medical boards’ humiliating submission, are as if to say: Get your ideology in line, doc, and don’t even think about speaking out of turn if you know what’s good for you and your livelihood.

Recent attacks on Dr. Ryan Cole and Dr. Mary Talley Bowden have occurred. Hundreds of such attacks on the medical licenses of forthright physicians have occurred throughout the United States during the COVID-19 era.
Now, when Pharma wields undue influence over politicians and other government actors, the public is so accustomed to this most powerful of all industries, the “drug cartel of the North,” as it likes to call itself, pulling the strings it wants in order to get its way, that we accept it as a sad fact of life in the United States. Yes, the US is one of only two countries that allows drug advertisements on television. Yes, the pharmaceutical industry has more lobbyists in Congress than all other industries combined. Yes, it appears that people are no longer concerned that the industrial force behind Hitler was IG Farben (the parent company of Bayer), which supplied toxic chemicals to the Nazis and built concentration camps using slave labor.
In our day and age, the American public has come to rely on the courts to counteract Pharma’s disproportionate influence. But what if the courts are also subjected to Pharma hypnosis or financial pressure?

Dr. Richard J. Eggleston dared to express his medical opinion on the COVID-19-related topics listed below.

Dr. Eggleston emphasized the inappropriate reliance on a polymerase chain reaction test for COVID-19 infections (a fact emphasized by the late PCR inventor, Kary Mullis, Ph.D.).
He emphasized that the COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent transmission (a fact later confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s own statistics, which revealed that the majority of COVID-19 hospitalized patients had received the mRNA vaccines).
Dr. Eggleston noted that the COVID-19 vaccines were linked to a large number of deaths (though the 6,000 he cited was a conservative estimate at the time and is now known to be an underestimate).
He noted that natural immunity derived from SARS-CoV-1 may be protective against SARS-CoV-2.
He noted that ivermectin had already been used safely for four decades, and that four billion doses had already been administered around the world prior to the COVID-19 era, and that it had been shown in randomized trials to be very effective against COVID-19.
Dr. Eggleston was then charged with “unprofessional conduct” by the Washington Medical Commission for “COVID-19 misinformation,” despite the fact that thousands of peer-reviewed studies now support his claims. In my 2021 book, The Defeat Of COVID, I cited over 500. That Commission has threatened to revoke or suspend his medical license on the grounds of “unprofessional conduct.”
In response to these allegations, Dr. Eggleston invoked the First Amendment as well as his right under the Washington State Constitution “to freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects.” Pickup v. Brown, 740 F.3d 1208, 1227-28 (9th Cir. 2014), was another federal case he argued in the Ninth Circuit Court. Pickup v. Brown held that a physician’s speech, outside of the context of a specific physician-patient interaction, is fully protected by the First Amendment and cannot be regulated by the government.
Dr. Eggleston had sought an injunction against the Washington Medical Commission, and the trial court denied him that injunction while also failing to uphold his constitutional rights for some reason. (Why would the lower court do such a thing? Aren’t the courts the last line of defense for our rights?)

Fortunately, the lower court’s decision was overturned by the higher court—the Court of Appeals—and Dr. Eggleston now has judicial review, or “discretionary review,” of the lower court’s ruling. The decision is now available.
While this is a positive step, the injustice is that a retired physician who no longer sees patients must go through months, if not years, of litigation just to keep his medical license, even though no patient has complained of harm. Is this how a doctor should end his career, by defending his right to speak while sharing decades of valuable medical wisdom and knowledge with the public? If you believe Dr. Eggleston should be heard by the public, please contact “Butch” Alford, Jr., the editor of the Lewis Tribune, at

Reprinted with permission from Colleen Huber’s Substack.

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply