Please note the quotes in the title around the word "vaccines" are there to denote my skepticism at calling mRNA tech a vaccine at all, and for numerous reasons.
These numerous problems have been known to independent epidemiologists and vaccinologists around the world for quite some time, and yet our government cannot confront this "little" problem head on, and continues insisting all is well in vaxxyville.
Is our government so starved for revenue it will go to nearly any length to acquire it? Unless we've lost our ethical tether to reality completely this episode will eventually go down in history as a dark period.
Again, Dr John Campbell is doing champion work bringing to our attention the real science coming in from around the world.
Why am I calling it "real science"? Because it is unbiased. Lets not forget the invention of science was founded on the principle of filtering out bias from the discovery process. It is more than ludicrous the entities that concoct and profit from pharmaceuticals are also the entities that produce the "studies" on safety and efficacy.
Women may be particularly interested in this particular study:
In Canada a "National Citizens Inquiry" into how the Canadian government handled the pandemic is underway. This discussion with Mr Ches Crosbie, National Citizens Inquiry administrator, I found to be quite interesting.
Nassim Talib is a renaissance man, one of his hats is philosopher. Back when genetic modification of foods was being debated Talib spoke of the precautionary principle. Here's the definition of the precautionary principle from the wiki page:
"The precautionary principle is a broad epistemological, philosophical and legal approach to innovations with potential for causing harm when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. It emphasizes caution, pausing and review before leaping into new innovations that may prove disastrous."
Talib's objection was the GMO studies were not of sufficient duration for absolute certainty to be achieved, and in addition the studies were rife with financial bias.
Once the modification is "in the wild" it can potentially spread exponentially until the entire species is "modified". And if after time it is proven to be harmful as a food, the entire species would be effectively useless to humans as food. Many thoughtful people feel the precautionary principle should always be applied when there is even a small possibility of widespread harm.
And wait a minute...we humans also reproduce via "seeding"...could mRNA technology open that same door in our species?
And now for the more interesting part of this blog post we'll turn to Dr. John Campbell, who is going to tell us in some detail what the Nuremberg Code of 1947 was all about.
Many clinicians and researchers have been saying for many years that evidence based medicine is now impossible because of the tremendous power the US healthcare system has over US government regulators, and even the entire developed world.
How did this happen?
First is revenue, or how much health care contributes to the US economy in total, which gives this industry its power over government.
And second is how drug research is "fixed" to show predetermined results for profit.
Let's look at revenue first. In this IBUS World report of the 10 biggest US industries by revenue in 2023, the first four are all aspects of the health care industry. Pharmacies, number 3 on the list, also sell other products in addition to prescription drugs, so it's not, shall we say, a clean number. I didn't try to break it out however, as that is not remotely necessary to make this point:
First, note 5 through 10 at the link are completely unrelated to each other with the possible exception banking and insurance that can both be said to be "finance". And 1 thru 4, the biggest revenue drivers, are all healthcare, minus cosmetics and toiletries in number 2. And if we make 1 thru 4 a single category the total is so massive compared to any of the other entries it is very clear where healthcare stands in revenue production compared to the others..it's bigger than all others combined. And it's no big secret the US needs all the revenue it can get, and still can't put a dent in the debt the US has piled up.
Now let's look at how drug research is "fixed" to produce effectiveness and safety even when it is not either...the "model under test":
All of reality cannot be used for the model under test because it's unknown. So, sensibly, a model is constructed by the designers of the trial to reflect positive or negative changes to likely conditions.
And the design of the model under test is where all kinds of mischief can be introduced. The common example that makes this easier to understand is how for example the cigarette industry might have produced "studies" to "prove" smoking did not produce cancer:
1 pack a day smokers were gathered for the study, and half were told to up their smoking to a pack and a half a day. And the study ran for a relatively short period of time. Of course the one and a half pack smokers were no more likely over that time period to be diagnosed with cancer than the one pack a day smokers, and the tobacco industry was then able to say "smoking is safe".
Eventually however, thousands of independent studies with more accurately constructed models under test showing smoking produced cancer became so numerous, "the weight of the evidence" made it impossible for the tobacco industry to continue to assert smoking was safe and even healthy. But it was many years past the point the weight of the evidence was clear that the government made a move to inform the public with the surgeons general warning, and banning advertising. This had a huge impact on smoking, so why did government wait so long to act?
Revenue - the government is loath to interfere with revenue generation. And we're a free country, if people want to poison themselves it's their business.
And now revenue generation is exponentially more important than it was decades ago when the clamp on the tobacco industry was implemented. And putting revenue generation above the well being of the population is essentially how fiscally irresponsible governments that pile up debt become corrupt.
And the health care industry's revenue is a critically important component of US revenue. In the recent pandemic for example, this is why US health regulatory bodies forced "off patent" (cheap) drugs that clinicians were having great results with off the market...there was no profit there, and so no revenue, and they were effectively banned, and the media not knowing any better went along.
We know however these early treatments were effective, hundreds if not thousands of clinicians were using them and reporting very rapid reversal of symptoms in a high percentage of cases. But they were forced to stop using them, or lose their jobs and licenses to practice. Very little of that made it into mainstream media, but it was out there if you were tracking what doctors using early treatments were saying to each other online.
But something that was in the media was POTUS came down with the virus and was not doing well! Ever wonder how he, an older person, was out of the hospital in a few days? Early treatment drugs.
Dr. John Campbell is very careful how he talks about these things to avoid censorship, but he makes clear the problems in his own way. And in case you're not familiar with Dr. Campbell's work that he puts out on YouTube, he was very pro mRNA at the beginning, exhorting us to get the jabs, and he himself had all the jabs and boosters.
And here Dr. Campbell talks about this "little" ongoing problem.
