In the 1950’s scientists Richard Doll and Bradford Hill published a study from the UK finding that the risk of lung cancer was related to the number of cigarettes smoked per day, and this risk was 25 times higher in those who smoked more than 25 cigarettes per day.
“It’s better to die on your feet than to live on your knees”, ascribed to Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata, is quoted by many, but few seem willing to live it. In any case, the pharmaceutical industry and its operatives throughout government, media and the medical establishment have terrorized an already infantilized society and brought it to its collective knees. A compelling 6-minute video of a 9/11 Truth march in Brussels in 2007 quotes a marcher: Continue reading →
In a 2012 meeting, the FDA voted to allow the use of human fetal cells and adult human tumor cells in vaccines, despite acknowledging the many risks, including that vaccine recipients might later develop cancer.
When good science is suppressed by the medical-political complex, people die
Politicians and governments are suppressing science. They do so in the public interest, they say, to accelerate availability of diagnostics and treatments. They do so to support innovation, to bring products to market at unprecedented speed. Both of these reasons are partly plausible; the greatest deceptions are founded in a grain of truth. But the underlying behaviour is troubling.
Given how much we don’t yet know, it’s unclear why those of us asking for more information about the leading COVID vaccines are being marginalised. We’re simply exercising our right to informed consent.
When everyone’s trying to pick potential winners of the global race to produce COVID vaccines, spare a thought for those of us who are the guinea pigs. We, the public, as well as concerned doctors and other health professionals, need to be crystal clear about what information we need to give consent — assuming vaccine rollout is not made mandatory in your country or state.
Before the COVID-19 pandemic engulfed the world, the big pharmaceutical companies did little investment in vaccines for global diseases and viruses. It was just not profitable. Of the 18 largest US pharmaceutical companies, 15 had totally abandoned the field. Heart medicines, addictive tranquilizers and treatments for male impotence were profit leaders, not defences against hospital infections, emergent diseases and traditional tropical killers. A universal vaccine for influenza—that is to say, a vaccine that targets the immutable parts of the virus’s surface proteins—has been a possibility for decades, but never deemed profitable enough to be a priority. So, every year, we get vaccines that are only 50% efficient.
It’s a serious question that few have asked, and there’s no clear answer. Up till this point in the Coronavirus play, discussion on vaccines has been limited to one perspective – how effective might they be, and how long before one is available. Thanks to the rigors of lock-downs and upending of society necessitated – we are told – by the need to avoid the virus and “save lives”, interest in a vaccine that might save us from this hell has been intense, not least amongst the shareholders of pharmaceutical companies vying for a share of the global market.
Is this THE final goal of this crisis, to impose a compulsory vaccination on everyone, with a biometric health passport and without it, the impossibility to move, to buy, to eat?
The near future will tell.
With time, the accumulation of side effects, the testimonies of more and more doctors, vaccination has become a subject of controversy, often passionate, sometimes violent.
This is not just a question of being for or against vaccination in general.
It is about being vigilant in the face of enormous pressure from companies and governments to inject billions of healthy people with a hastily manufactured product, using immature technologies such as DNA manipulation, with as yet unknown side effects.
Behind a veil of corporate media PR, the Gates Foundation has served as a vehicle for Western capital while exploiting the Global South as a human laboratory. The pandemic is likely to intensify this disturbing agenda.
By Jeremy Loffredo and Michele Greenstein
President Donald Trump’s announcement this July of a US withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO) set into motion a process that will have a dramatic impact on the future of global public health policy – and on the fortunes of one of the world’s richest people.
The financial muscle of Big Pharma has been busy distorting science during the pandemic
By Malcolm Kendrick, doctor and author who works as a GP in the National Health Service in England. His blog can be read here and his book, ‘Doctoring Data – How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense,’ is available here.
Evidence that a cheap, over-the-counter anti-malarial drug costing £7 combats Covid-19 gets trashed. Why? Because the pharmaceutical giants want to sell you a treatment costing nearly £2,000. It’s criminal.