Category: Vaccines

(Tom: This is a GREAT compilation! Even though I had seen nearly all of them individually it paints a very damning picture when they are presented as a collection.)

Please look past the marketing slogans and do actual research!
———————–
One of the most vital issues of all is the matter of “trusting the science”. It is inevitable that we all rely on what we are told has been “scientifically proven”. But, mountains of evidence proves that the world of science has been deeply corrupted, yet the majority of the public do NOT realize this critically important fact. It is a tragic mistake to believe what we are told regarding the most important aspects of our lives. Please do NOT blindly trust the “settled science”, the corrupted medical establishment, or heavily controlled corporate media.. Honest scientists and doctors have bravely warned of this systemic corruption, but most people have never heard anything other than what the corrupt establishment wants them to hear.
———————–
1. Dr. Marcia Angell, Editor in Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ),
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine”
———————–
2. Dr. Richard Horton, the current editor-in-chief of the Lancet – considered to be one of the most well respected peer-reviewed medical journals in the world.
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.”
———————–
3. Dr. Herbert L. Ley Jr, former Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration
“The FDA protects the big drug companies, and is subsequently rewarded, and using the government’s police powers, they attack those who threaten the big drug companies. People think that the FDA is protecting them. It isn’t. What the FDA is doing and what the public thinks it is doing are as different as day and night.”
———————–
4. Dr. Raeford Brown, chair of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Committee on Analgesics and Anesthetics
“Congress is owned by pharma.”
———————–
5. A group calling itself CDC Scientists Preserving Integrity, Diligence and Ethics in Research, or (CDC SPIDER), put a list of complaints in writing in a letter to CDC Chief of Staff and. The members of the group have elected to file the complaint anonymously for fear of retribution.
“It appears that our mission is being influenced and shaped by outside parties and rogue interests… and Congressional intent for our agency is being circumvented by some of our leaders. What concerns us most, is that it is becoming the norm and not the rare exception,” the letter states. “These questionable and unethical practices threaten to undermine our credibility and reputation as a trusted leader in public health.”
———————–
6. Dr. John P. A. Ioannidis, Editor-in-chief, European Journal of Clinical Investigation (2010 – Present)
“most current published research findings are false.”
———————–
7. Dr William Thompson Senior Scientist at the CDC (Center for Disease Control),
“I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”
———————–
8. Assistant Professor Ray Moynihan , one of the leaders of The BMJ’s campaign:
“When we want to decide on a medicine or a surgery, a lot of the evidence we used to inform that decision is biased,” “It cannot be trusted. Because so much of that has been produced and funded by the manufacturers of those healthcare products.”
———————–
9. But Dr. Fiona Godlee, editor of the BMJ,
“I think we have to call it what it is. It is the corruption of the scientific process.”
———————–
10. Susanna Rees, an editorial assistant with a medical writing agency until 2002
‘Medical writing agencies go to great lengths to disguise the fact that the papers they ghostwrite and submit to journals and conferences are ghostwritten on behalf of pharmaceutical companies and not by the named authors,’ she wrote. ‘There is a relatively high success rate for ghostwritten submissions – not outstanding, but consistent.’
———————–
11. Sydney Brenner, winner Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2002.
“And of course all the academics say we’ve got to have peer review. But I don’t believe in peer review because I think it’s very distorted and as I’ve said, it’s simply a regression to the mean…..I think peer review is hindering science. In fact, I think it has become a completely corrupt system.”
———————–

You can just hear the comment in the board room, “Hey! It worked before, why not do it again!”

This is well worth watching:

ttps://newtube.app/user/Fredyatelmstreet13/stMqJaC

I am particularly interested in the whole concept of being ’anti-’ or a ’denier’, or a sceptic. I think in great part this is due to constant attacks I have had to put up with because of my views of cholesterol and statins. I am often called a statin ’denier’. I have also been referred to as a professional contrarian, a sceptic, a zealot and suchlike. However, I am not actually a cholesterol sceptic, nor a denier. I am not denying cholesterol exists. I just happen to believe it is not harmful – probably beneficial.

To be accurate, it is the other side who attack cholesterol and who should be called cholesterol sceptics. I am really an anti-anti-cholesterol sceptic. This must make me twice as bad. I am not just anti. I am anti-anti.

Now we have the deadliest insult of all. ’Anti-vaxxer.’ Two relatively short words, but if you dare to touch them, they explode into maelstrom of poison that spreads far and wide, destroying anyone and everyone in range.

Today, to mix my metaphors, there is probably no deeper abyss to be dropped into, than the abyss of being labelled an ’anti-vaxxer.’ Of course, the term has no definition. It doesn’t even have any discernible boundaries. You can be wandering about quite innocently and suddenly find you have become an ’anti-vaxxer.’

I mentioned that the phase III clinical trials on AstraZeneca’s COVID19 vaccine will not be completed until 2023. This, it seems, to some people on a medical website called doctors.net makes me an anti-vaxxer.

We have now reached the position where, to state an incontrovertible fact about a clinical trial, makes you an anti-vaxxer. Which means that there truly are no longer any places to go. If, that is, you want to discuss vaccines in any way. The only approved position to take, particularly if you are a doctor, is the following… “All vaccines are entirely safe. They have no adverse effects, and they are one hundred per cent effective in all cases. Anyone who questions vaccines in any way does not understand anything about science and they are putting millions of lives at risk. In fact, they should probably be treated as criminals.”

Goodbye age of enlightenment. So long scientific debate. Finally killed by COVID19. You will be missed. I hope some small groups may manage to keep the flame alive. Right now, it seems to have been stamped out.

My name is Mark Trozzi. I am a medical doctor; I graduated in 1990 from The University of Western Ontario. I have been practicing Emergency Medicine for the past twenty-five years; and I have been on call in multiple emergency units since the onset of the so-called “pandemic”, including one ER designated specifically for COVID-19. I am an Advanced Trauma Life Support professor with the College of Surgeons of America, and I hold teaching positions at Sunnybrook Health Sciences in the Advanced Life Support Department, as well as with both Queen’s University and The University of Ottawa. What follows is my observations and opinions; I am bound by my personal and religious convictions to speak openly and honestly. I have watched the suppression of doctors and scientists who performed serum antibody studies, whose findings showed that the virus was much more widespread, yet generally nonfatal, and asymptomatic or very mild in most cases; and that in many regions we had likely already achieved natural herd immunity by summer 2020. I have never seen a patient sick with COVID-19; I have seen some positive PCR tests in asymptomatic people, and watched people be imprisoned in their own homes and isolated from family and friends. My research into the PCR test has convinced me personally that it is misleading, manipulatable, and being used to drain endless taxpayer’s money and future debt, to dramatically enrich the very criminals running this scandal. Meanwhile our federal government is bringing in hundreds of thousands of doses of potentially dangerous experimental injections of modified viral genetic material, calling them “vaccines”, and having the military manage them. My career as an emergency physician always provided me an opportunity to practice my religious and ethical beliefs of honesty and kindness, while making a good living. Now maintaining the career I love, would require participating in the deception, violating my oath and spiritual beliefs, and in my opinion committing crimes against humanity as defined by the Nuremberg Code. I empathize with all my fellow doctors and nurses. We are all victims of the covid abuse.

Kassie Kitson writes:

“I’ve noticed that the people who are not getting the vaccine know all about it

but the ones getting the vaccine have no clue about what it really is

The more educated you are on the topic, the less you want this vaccine

Most people just have blind faith in a corrupt industry.”

That’s as concise and accurate a statement as you will get on the subject.