Yet another patient has just described to me a situation with which I am all too familiar: They want to get certain things from their doctor, that they've been asking for for some time, but for which there seems to be an endless stream of excuses for why they can't have it. When I explain to the patient some steps they will need to take to ensure they get what they're after, which essentially means taking a more assertive approach and being willing to pursue a series of incrementally challenging steps if necessary, the patient immediately says, "But I don't want to get into a confrontation with them - I need them".
Trust in a medical professional really comprises of two separate parts:
- Is their knowledgeable reliable?
- Will they behave with integrity?
The main thrust of HEAL London is challenging the medical orthodox perspective of AIDS and therefore asserting that in many respects most doctors knowledge of HIV/AIDS is not reliable. That will be the subject of a separate article, “How could so many doctors be wrong?” . But can HIV/AIDS doctors be trusted to behave with integrity though? And that itself can be broken down into two parts:
- Will they give you an unbiased assessment of the risks and benefits of both diagnostic tests and treatments?
- Will they tell the truth as they believe it to be?
The evidence from my experience is that for those two criteria HIV/AIDS doctors are not all trustworthy. It does not mean that all will lie, but there seems to be such a high proportion that will at the minimum mislead their patients that essentially the ability to trust AIDS specialist doctors has broken down.