In September of 2021 the American Medical Association (AMA) released a guide that instructed doctors to disinform the general public by using psychological and linguistic tools in order to manipulate them into getting the Covid-19 vaccine.
The Winter 2021 “AMA COVID-19 Guide: Background/Messaging on Vaccines, Vaccine Clinical Trials & Combating Vaccine Misinformation,” issued by the American Medical Association (AMA) raises serious questions about the AMA’s adherence to transparency, honesty, ethics and the moral standards to which it will hold its members.
The AMA was founded in 1847 and is the largest professional association and lobbying group of physicians and medical students in the U.S. According to the AMA itself, its mission is to promote the art and science of medicine and the betterment of public health.
How then do they explain this “COVID-19 messaging guide,” which explicitly teaches doctors how to deceive their patients and the media when asked tough questions about COVID-19, treatment options and COVID shots?
AMA Teaches Doctors How to Deceive
“It is critical that physicians and patients have confidence in the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines as they become available for public use,” the “AMA COVID-19 Guide” states, adding:
“To overcome vaccine hesitancy and ensure widespread vaccine acceptance among all demographic groups, physicians and the broader public health community must continue working to build trust in vaccine safety and efficacy, especially in marginalized and minoritized communities with historically well-founded mistrust in medical institutions.”
Indeed, the entire guide is aimed at teaching doctors how to foster confidence in the medical profession in general, as it pertains to treatment of COVID-19, but in particular as it pertains to the experimental COVID shots.
The guide provides “suggested narratives” for various engagements, such as when communicating on social media, as sell as “talking points to guide external communications,” such as when being interviewed. It lists nine specific “key messages” that they want doctors to focus on when communicating about COVID-19. These key messages can be summarized as follows:
AMA Concerned About Disinformation
On page 7 of the guide, under the science narrative heading, the AMA declares it is “deeply concerned that rampant disinformation and the politicization of health issues are eroding public confidence in science and undermining trust in physicians and medical institutions,” adding that “Science should be grounded in a common understanding of facts and evidence and able to empower people to make informed decisions about their health.”
To that end, the AMA is calling upon “all elected officials to affirm science and fact in their words and actions,” and for media to “be vigilant in communicating factual information” and to “challenge those who chose to trade in misinformation.”
AMA Then Instructs Doctors on How to Disinform
It’s a disappointment, then, to find the AMA instructing doctors on how to misinform the public using a variety of psychological and linguistic tools. Perhaps one of the most egregious examples of this is the recommended COVID-19 language swaps” detailed on page 9.
As you can see below, the AMA explicitly instructs doctors to swap out certain words and terms for other, more narrative-affirming choices. Shockingly, this includes swapping “hospitalization rates” to “deaths” — two terms that are not even remotely interchangeable!
It strains credulity that the AMA would actually tell doctors to substitute a factual data point with an outright lie. But with this swap, are they not telling doctors to state that people are dead, when in fact, they’ve only been hospitalized with COVID-19?
Hospitalization rate refers to how many people are sick in the hospital with COVID-19, whereas death refers to how many people have died. The first term refers to people who are still alive, and the other refers to patients who are not alive.
It strains credulity that the AMA would actually tell doctors to substitute a factual data point with an outright lie. But with this swap, are they not telling doctors to state that people are dead, when in fact, they’ve only been hospitalized with COVID-19?
Another highly questionable word swap is to not address the nitty, gritty details of vaccine trials, such as the number of participants, and instead simply refer to these trials as having gone through “a transparent, rigorous process.”
Swapping the factual term “Operation Warp Speed” for “standard process” is another outrageous misdirection. The two simply aren’t interchangeable. In fact, they’re actually diametrically opposed to one another. Standard process for vaccine development includes a long process of over a decade and a large number of steps that were either omitted or drastically shortened for the COVID shots.
Following standard process is what makes vaccine development take, on average, 10 years and often longer. Operation Warp Speed allowed vaccine makers to slap together these COVID shots in about nine months from start to finish. You cannot possibly say that the two terms describe an identical process.
The Power of Language
Other language swaps are less incredulous but still highlight the fact that the AMA wants its members to help push a very specific and one-sided narrative that makes power-grabbing overreaches and totalitarian tactics sound less bad than they actually are, and make questionable processes sound A-OK.
Language is a powerful tool with which we shape reality because it shapes how we think about things. As noted by storyteller and filmmaker Jason Silva:
“The use of language, the words you use to describe reality, can in fact engender reality, can disclose reality. Words are generative… We create and perceive our reality through language. We think reality into existence through linguistic construction in real-time.”
For example, “lockdown” sounds like involuntary imprisonment imposed by a totalitarian regime, which is what it is, whereas “stay-at-home order” sounds far less draconian. After all, “home” is typically associated with comfort and safety.
The same goes for using “COVID protocols” in lieu of “COVID mandates, directives, controls and orders.” “Protocols” sounds like something that is standard procedure, as if the COVID measures are nothing new, whereas “mandates, controls and orders” imply that, indeed, we’re in medical fascism territory, which we are.
How to Steer, Block, Deflect and Stall Inconvenient Questions
The AMA could have instructed its members to simply stick to the facts and be honest — and in some sections, it does do that — but it doesn’t end there. Rather, the AMA provides a full page of instructions on how to steer the conversation, and how to block, deflect and stall when faced with tough questions where an honest answer might actually break the official narrative.
Here’s a sampling of these instructions. I encourage you to read through page 8 of the guide, and pay attention to these psychological tricks when listening to interviews or reading the news.
It’s worth noting that the AMA also stresses that:
1) Doctors are to speak for the AMA, and
2) doctors are NOT to offer their personal views.
Speaking for the AMA is listed under “Your Responsibilities” when being interviewed, while not discussing personal views is listed under “Interview Don’ts.”
AMA Is Rapidly Eroding All Credibility
The AMA’s guidance isn’t all bad. Some of its advice makes perfect sense. But the inclusion of language swaps that result in false statements being made, and tools for steering, blocking, deflecting, redirecting and stalling in order to avoid direct answers do nothing but erode credibility and thus trust in the medical community.
Its direct instruction to not share personal views is another trust-eroding strategy. When people talk to their doctor, they want to hear what that doctor actually thinks, based on their own knowledge and experience.
They don’t expect their doctor — or a doctor appearing in an interview — to simply rehash a narrative dictated by the AMA. If we cannot trust our medical professionals to give their honest opinions and give direct answers, there’s little reason to even discuss our concerns with them, and that’s the opposite of what the AMA claims it seeks to achieve.
The AMA is concerned about the proliferation of misinformation and eroding trust, yet it’s telling its members to keep their professional views to themselves and lie about COVID deaths. With this guidance document, the AMA is essentially implicating itself as a source and instigator of medical misinformation that ultimately might injure patients.
In a Stew Peters Show interview, Dr. Bryan Ardis criticized the AMA guidance document, pointing out that while the AMA claims it put out the guidance to prevent political ideologies from dictating medicine, it is actually proving that the AMA itself is deferring to political ideology rather than medical facts.
The AMA wants its members to act as propagandists for a particular narrative — using “politically correct language” — rather than sharing information and acting in accordance with their own conscience and professional insight. As noted by Peters:
“If a doctor’s just going to repeat what the AMA tells them, why have doctors at all? You can get plenty of starving propagandists at any liberal college, but instead we want to turn our medical professionals into ideological zombies with stethoscopes.”
The Cruel Science Experiment They Want to Force You to Take. The Year Was 2012
In January of 2012 the American Medical Association (AMA) published a paper proposing the introduction of a new federal law that would force each individual to make a “mandated choice” to participate in vaccine trials. Your only way out of this directive would be to sign an ‘opt out form.’.
The paper was written by Susanne Sheehy, BM BCh, MRCP, DTM&H, and Joel Meyer, BM BCh, MRCP on the ‘Virtual Mentor’ website, it stated that there has been a steady decline in the numbers of healthy volunteers willing to participate in clinical trials.
The AMA believes that more people should want to help in the development of new vaccinations. They stated:
“Reasons for this decline are unclear but are likely to be multifaceted. One familiar problem is the payment of volunteers. To date, the relatively meager compensation that participants often receive could be seen to belittle and undervalue the contribution of these individuals to global health.”
Volunteer Participation to Become a Thing of The Past
Because of the decline in willing volunteers, the AMA has decided that volunteer participation in vaccination trials should become a thing of the past. They said:
“If progression of promising vaccines from the lab to the clinic is to remain unaffected and financial inducement is an ethically unacceptable solution to the recruitment shortage, other strategies need to be considered. Compulsory involvement in vaccine studies is one alternative solution that is not as outlandish as it might seem on first consideration. Many societies already mandate that citizens undertake activities for the good of society; in several European countries registration for organ-donation has switched from “opt-in” (the current U.S. system) to “opt out” systems (in which those who do not specifically register as non-donors are presumed to consent to donation, and most societies expect citizens to undertake jury service when called upon.”
That’s right; according to the AMA we should all sign ‘opt out’ forms if we do not want to participate in vaccination trials. If, for some reason, we should forget to do this, then we should automatically be classified as giving passive consent!
Proof Of What We Already Know
he paper, written by Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic and Dr. Christopher Shaw from the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of British Columbia, states:
“In the past several decades, there have been numerous studies and case reports documenting neurological and autoimmune adverse reactions (ADRs) following the use of various vaccines. Arthritis, vasculitis, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), encephalopathy, neuropathy, seizure disorders and autoimmune demyelinating disease syndromes are the most frequently reported serious adverse events.”
The paper goes on to describe serious errors in the HPV vaccine Gardasil’s safety trials, which they say shows evidence of significant flaws in study design, data reporting and interpretation. They believe this has led to the death and injury of many young women.
Dr. Tomljenovic and Dr. Shaw have found the following alarming results after studying the brain samples of two young women who died shortly after they were administered with the Gardasil vaccination:
“In both cases, the autopsy revealed no anatomical, microbiological nor toxicological findings that might have explained the death of the individuals. In contrast, our IHC analysis showed evidence of an autoimmune vasculitis potentially triggered by the cross-reactive HPV-16L1 antibodies binding to the wall of cerebral blood vessels in all examined brain samples. We also detected the presence of HPV-16L1 particles within the cerebral vasculature with some HPV-16L1 particles adhering to the blood vessel walls. HPV-18L1 antibodies did not bind to cerebral blood vessels nor any other neural tissues. IHC also showed increased T-cell signaling and marked activation of the classical antibody-dependent complement pathway in cerebral vascular tissues from both cases. This pattern of complement activation in the absence of an active brain infection indicates an abnormal triggering of the immune response in which the immune attack is directed towards self-tissue.”
Bearing this knowledge in mind makes a mockery of the AMA’s belief that we should offer ourselves willingly as guinea pigs for vaccination experiments.
The AMA Wants You… Fore Deadly Diseases
If all this is a little hard to believe, the AMA goes on to state:
“Society is unlikely to accept compulsory recruitment to a trial for a vaccine against the common cold if the vaccine causes severe complications in vaccines. Increase the severity of the disease in question, however, and compulsory recruitment becomes a more palatable option.”
Unbelievable! The AMA is actually naïve enough to believe that society will be more willing to be used as guinea pigs in their vaccination trials, if the trials are for deadly diseases!
In my opinion, members of society are highly unlikely to be too keen to offer themselves up as human sacrifices in the pharmaceutical industry’s sick experiments, whether the experiments are for deadly diseases or not. I believe that society will more likely remember past vaccine trial disasters and turn around and run in the opposite direction as fast as they can.
CONCLUSION
It appears that pharmaceutical industries, medical professionals and government agencies have little regard for human life or indeed human suffering when it comes to vaccines. Their multi-billion-dollar industry must go on at all costs. Whether it is the homeless, the poor or the vulnerable, they will exploit them and kill them without so much as a backwards glance.
The AMA didn’t get their way in 2012, but given American law and politics in 2026, it may not be long before you or your child could be included into mandatory, legally obligated vaccination trials if you have not signed an ‘opt out form.’ This means that if your child comes home with a form scrunched up at the bottom of their school bag and you do not find it, or if you forget to sign it, then the drug company will classify your absent-mindedness as passive consent and your child will be used as a pharmaceutical industry guinea pig.
References
Virtual Mentor Susanne Sheehy, BM BCh, MRCP, DTM&H, and Joel Meyer, BM BCh, MRCP – Should Participation in Vaccine Clinical Trials be Mandated?
Homeless people die after bird flu vaccine trial in Poland
Without consent: how drugs companies exploit Indian ‘guinea pigs’
3 Reasons Not To Trust The American Medical Association on Vaccines
The Cruel Science Experiment They Want to Force You to Take
The American Medical Association Will Soon Be Able To Force People To Enter Experimental Vaccine Trials
The American Medical Association (AMA) has instructed doctors to disinform the general public
Margin of the Law publishes constitutional analysis, civic research, and legal education for people who want to understand the system they actually live in. Read the Full Constitutional Analysis Library at marginofthelaw.com.
© 2026 – MK3 Law Group
For republication or citation, please credit this article with link attribution to marginofthelaw.com.