(The Center Square) − The House Select Committee on Homeland Security heard from physicians on Thursday that are unhappy with the way government handled the COVID-19 pandemic.
Dr. Ralph Abraham, the current Louisiana surgeon general, along with Dr. Whyche Coleman, expressed dissatisfaction with government interventions during the pandemic, stating they were largely ineffective and infringed on constitutional rights.
“I would have done everything differently,” Abraham said. “It is my opinion that every government intervention has been ineffective.”
The doctors claimed that government and third-party interference progressively eroded the doctor-patient relationship, shifting focus away from patient care. The doctors cite statistics that show trust in physicians has fallen from 70% to 40% in the years following the pandemic.
Abraham treated around 20,000 COVID-19 patients, emphasizing early treatment and opposing the CDC’s guidance, which he believes led to unnecessary mortality due to the mismanagement of inflammation and the cytokine storm caused by the virus.
Abraham pointed to a fear of retaliation, interference from pharmacists and the threat of license revocation by medical boards leading to a lack of doctors engaging in early treatment. He also noted that local pharmacists were pressured by federal authorities to avoid filling early treatment prescriptions.
Both Abraham and Coleman argue that there was a “chilling effect” in the medical community, with a general reluctance to challenge official guidelines.
Abraham, who treats patients with alleged vaccine injuries, criticized the emergency use authorization of vaccines, claiming heart and skin-related injuries are frequently linked to COVID-19 vaccinations in his practice. He also argued that terms like “off-label use” were unfairly demonized during the pandemic.
Rep. Alonzo Knox, D-New Orleans, echoed concerns about government overreach, emphasizing that his position is not anti-vaccine but antigovernmental interference.
Both Abraham and Coleman advocate for a reevaluation of how medical decisions were handled, calling for open debate between doctors and a more patient-focused approach.
