This from the people closest the source of the lies coming from the vested interests with zero integrity who have sold out their ethics and their fellow man.<\/p>\n
1. Dr. Marcia Angell, Editor in Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ)-
\n\u201cIt 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\u201d<\/p>\n
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)-
\n\u201cThe 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.\u201d<\/p>\n
3. Dr. Herbert L. Ley Jr, former Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration-
\n\u201cThe FDA protects the big drug companies, and is subsequently rewarded, and using the government\u2019s police powers, they attack those who threaten the big drug companies. People think that the FDA is protecting them. It isn\u2019t. What the FDA is doing and what the public thinks it is doing are as different as day and night.\u201d<\/p>\n
4. Dr. Raeford Brown, chair of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Committee on Analgesics and Anesthetics-
\n\u201cCongress is owned by pharma.\u201d<\/p>\n
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. The members of the group have elected to file the complaint anonymously for fear of retribution-
\n\u201cIt appears that our mission is being influenced and shaped by outside parties and rogue interests\u2026 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,\u201d the letter states. \u201cThese questionable and unethical practices threaten to undermine our credibility and reputation as a trusted leader in public health.\u201d<\/p>\n
6. Dr. John P. A. Ioannidis, Editor-in-chief, European Journal of Clinical Investigation (2010 – Present)-
\n\u201cMost current published research findings are false.\u201d<\/p>\n
7. Dr William Thompson Senior Scientist at the CDC (Center for Disease Control)-
\n\u201cI 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.\u201d<\/p>\n
8. Assistant Professor Ray Moynihan , one of the leaders of The BMJ’s campaign-
\n\u201cWhen 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.\u201d<\/p>\n
9. Dr. Fiona Godlee, editor of the BMJ-
\n“I think we have to call it what it is. It is the corruption of the scientific process.\u201d<\/p>\n
10. Susanna Rees, an editorial assistant with a medical writing agency until 2002-
\n“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.”<\/p>\n
11. Sydney Brenner, winner Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2002-
\n\u201c..and of course all the academics say we\u2019ve got to have peer review. But I don\u2019t believe in peer review because I think it\u2019s very distorted and as I\u2019ve said, it\u2019s simply a regression to the mean\u2026..I think peer review is hindering science. In fact, I think it has become a completely corrupt system.\u201d<\/p>\n
12. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician and epidemiologist-
\n\u201cWhen people say follow the science, what I\u2019ve seen is they often mean censor scientists who don\u2019t agree with some scientists\u2026the people who are sort of controlling policy.\u201d<\/p>\n
13. Kamran Abbasi, executive editor British Medical Journal-
\n\u201cScience is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health.”<\/p>\n
14.\u00a0“Peer review is a flawed process, full of easily identified defects with little evidence that it works.” Richard Smith, past editor of the BMJ and chief executive of the BMJ Publishing Group for 13 years.<\/p>\n
15. ‘Trust the Science’? Drug Development, Medical Research Tainted by Scientific Fraud as 10,000 Research Papers Retracted in 2023 Alone (Journal ‘Nature’) 16. Majority of COVID Surveys About Infection, Testing, Vaccination, Treatment ‘Classified as Fraud’: Peer-Reviewed Journal ‘JMIR Formative Research’<\/p>\n A new study published Friday in the peer-reviewed journal JMIR Formative Research found that 59.40% of web-based surveys about individuals\u2019 COVID-19 attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, are fraudulent.<\/p>\n
\nhttps:\/\/jonfleetwood.substack.com\/p\/trust-the-science-drug-development<\/a><\/p>\n