New England Journal of Misinformation

November, 22, 2021 | 19 Comments

Comments

  1. ‘We are never going to learn how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it’

    This is terrible in three senses. That we are ‘never going to learn’ and ‘we start giving it’ and using that word ‘safe’ –

    Many people have said that the Covid-19 vaccines are not ‘real vaccines’ in the true sense of the word as they do not cause immunity but instead allow infections to be passed and allow infections to be caught. A new kid on the block invented in rapid-speed-time where all caution was blown-to-the-wind –

    Antidepressants, on the other hand, had a much more murky history with clinical trials not just showing up adverse events but actually contained suicides mis-coded primarily as ’emotionally labile’ –

    Paroxetine has had such a chequered past that the Tobin case and more recently the Stewart Dolin case hit the headlines because lawyer Baum Hedland now represent hundreds of cases where there is more or less proof of fraudulent behaviour by GlaxoSmithKline –

    The cases of Vaccine Injury are like a little spike, at present, whiffs of serious injury but with no historical background to move the injuries forward –

    It is a New-Day for the Vaccine-Injured, but they might Take-Heart that Paroxetine had its’ Winners and like King Arthur and the Knights of the ;Round Table ‘of light vs darkness and good vs evil.’ …

    • Thanks for the ‘helping-hands’ …

      JOHN HUMPHRYS:

      https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-10247743/JOHN-HUMPHRYS-four-day-work-week-boost-mental-health-Thats-just-idiotic.html

      SARAH VINE:

      https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10235945/SARAH-VINE-anxiety-like-house-crumbling-Pills-never-fix-root-cause.html

      Such drugs create dependency. Anyone who doubts that should read the compelling column Sarah Vine wrote in these pages just a few days ago.

      She was responding to an announcement from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence issuing new guidelines to doctors who were considering prescribing anti-depressants.

      They should, said NICE, consider alternative options such as therapy, meditation or exercise first.

      Sarah is one of the many who was prescribed anti-depressants. She took them for nearly ten years — and they worked. But when she realised she had become dependent on them, she tried to break free. And that was when the real nightmare began.

      Her hellish experience should be noted by all those who trot out that grotesquely overused expression ‘mental health issues’.

      They should also note the staggering increase in the number of people being prescribed anti-depressants in England today. Well over seven million. More terrifying still, about a quarter of a million of them are children between the ages of five and 16.

      Can it really be possible that life is so much more difficult for a child today than it was a generation ago? So difficult that the only answer is to embark on the nightmare journey that may lead to drugs dependency?

      Surely the question answers itself.

      OPEN EXCELLENCE
      @openexcellence
      ·
      Coming soon! The video is a two-way discussion between Stevie and Mark, in which Stevie describes her time on the drug and her protracted withdrawal and Mark explains the science behind her experience. He gives specific guidance on how to safely withdraw. https://buff.ly/312eqJm

      https://openexcellence.org/how-antidepressant-withdrawal-presents-itself-and-how-to-help-people-withdraw-safely/

      STEVIE LEWIS (ABOVE LEFT) IS A CAMPAIGNER AND BOARD MEMBER OF THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PSYCHIATRIC DRUG WITHDRAWAL. DR MARK HOROWITZ (ABOVE RIGHT) IS A CLINICAL RESEARCH FELLOW IN PSYCHIATRY AT UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON AND THE NHS. THE FOLLOWING TEXT WAS CO-WRITTEN BY THEM.
       
      PRESCRIBERS ILL-EQUIPPED TO RECOGNIZE, ADDRESS WITHDRAWAL SYNDROME …

  2. Thank you so much for sharing this. It is worrisome to learn that some medical journals with a high impact factor are absolutely untrustworthy. This research malpractice leads to distorted evidence, generalized misbelief in the effects of interventions and severe damage to the population.

    The way clinical trials are published has to change dramatically. All regulatory documents should be made available soon after the trial completion and in a timely manner. Anonymized individual-patient data should also be public and independent scrutiny of clinical trials should be made possible.

  3. The fact is that a lot of people are heavily invested in this scam, if not financially, then emotionally. Small children when they get caught out often deny their guilt so emphatically that they may come to believe that they are being wronged by their accuser. Facilitators in the health industry and the media are in that situation.

    The same, of course, applies to those who accepted the injections in good faith: in the medium term they will be unlikely to confess even to themselves that they may have made a catastrophic error, preferring to rail against “vax deniers”. Those who are running this show know that’s how sheeple think – and they also know that, whatever the outcome, if and when this gets to a Crimes Against Humanity Court, you can’t unspill milk.

  4. Law, ethics and medicine

    Seroxat and the suppression of clinical trial data: regulatory failure and the uses of legal ambiguity

    THE MHRA’S INVESTIGATION INTO GLAXOSMITHKLINE The MHRA’s investigation into GSK was launched in October 2003, following GSK’s submission, in May 2003, of data from Studies 329 and 377, clinical trials which tested the efficacy of paroxetine (Seroxat/Paxil) in children and adolescents in the mid-1990s in 11 countries.

    https://jme.bmj.com/content/35/2/107

    This article critically evaluates the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s announcement, in March 2008, that GlaxoSmithKline would not face prosecution for deliberately withholding trial data, which revealed not only that Seroxat was ineffective at treating childhood depression but also that it increased the risk of suicidal behaviour in this patient group. The decision not to prosecute followed a four and a half year investigation and was taken on the grounds that the law at the relevant time was insufficiently clear. This article assesses the existence of significant gaps in the duty of candour which had been assumed to exist between drugs companies and the regulator, and reflects upon what this episode tells us about the robustness, or otherwise, of the UK’s regulation of medicines.

    GSK Paxil Clinical Trials | Court Documents

    Scientific manipulation via ghostwriting of pharmaceutical industry-sponsored clinical trial reports has caused significant harm to patients. Shockingly, despite overwhelming evidence of fraud, misleading conclusions about clinical data remain part of the medical literature for Paxil (paroxetine), one of the most prescribed antidepressants in United States history.

    Ghostwriting and Fraud in GSK Clinical Trials

    https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/prescription-drugs/paxil-suicide-lawsuit/gsk-clinical-trials-paxil-fraud/

    GlaxoSmithKline

    GSK statement on MHRA investigation
    https://www.worldpharmanews.com/gsk/337-gsk-statement-on-mhra-investigation

    it was only when all the data became available, at the end of the research programme, and were analysed together was an increased rate of suicidal thinking or attempted suicide revealed in those paediatric patients taking Seroxat. GSK brought this analysis to the attention of the regulatory authorities, including in the UK.
    The company rejects any suggestion that it withheld drug trial information as results from its paediatrics studies were documented and submitted to regulators in accordance with regulatory requirements.

    Results were also presented publicly, published in scientific journals and have been made available on GSK’s website.

    Clinical trial data disclosure

    GSK has been at the forefront of industry efforts to publish clinical trial findings and is committed to maintaining best practice disclosure of clinical data. GSK rigorously meets all requirements to provide data to regulators and makes extensive efforts to publish its clinical trial findings in peer review journals and at scientific meetings. GSK also discloses all trial information, irrespective of outcome, on its Clinical Trial Register.This is a record of detailed summaries of more than 2,800 clinical trials conducted to study its prescription medicines and vaccines and is available to the public at http://ctr.gsk.co.uk.

    GSK also provides relevant unpublished clinical trial data to agencies such as the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in accordance with their current processes.

  5. In UK parliament today the prime minister evaded answering the question of payment for vaccine harms. Nigel Mills didn’t bring up that his constituent as well as everyone else was unable to give informed consent to the vaccine – if she had been given the full information, which is still being with -held she still might have decided to take the risk – but she might not have. Pushing the vaccine with threats and misinformation and no access to trials trumps right to consent and probably years of battling for compensation for those harmed. Someone should be publishing the truth by now – it will likely include a number of suicides ,numbers of people have already been undermined when reporting adverse effects . Terrible echoes of what happens regarding adverse effects of meds.

    VIDEO 1 MINUTE 27 SECONDSVIDEO 1 MINUTE 27 SECONDS1:27

    UK ParliamentCopyright: UK Parliament
    Conservative MP Nigel Mills says “we know that serious side effects from vaccines are very rare” – but he says one of his constituents lost most of her eyesight and now lives in constant pain after a jab.

    He is asking for the government to get on with Vaccine Damage Payments, which still has not been started, saying people who have suffered these extremely rare but very serious cases are still not being paid.

    The Vaccine Damage Payment is a one off payment of £120,000, given by the UK government.

    Johnson says cases such as Mills’ constituent are “extremely, extremely rare” and he urges people to continue getting booster shots.

    But he says the government is “putting more money in to gather evidence for claims” in these rare cases.

  6. They should understand that draconian measures to threaten those who speak out leads to even more mistrust of medics involved in the vaccination programme
    Pulse Today 24 Nov
    Home News Breaking news GPs who criticise Covid vaccine on social media ‘vulnerable’ to GMC investigation

    Tom Pilgrim, PA media
    24 November 2021

    Exclusive GPs have been warned that criticising the Covid vaccine or other pandemic measures via social media could leave them ‘vulnerable’ to GMC investigation.

    The warning, from the Medical Protection Society (MPS), comes as a GP is appealing a temporary social media ban imposed by the GMC after he was accused of spreading ‘misinformation’.

    Dr Samuel White is appealing against interim conditions imposed on his registration with the GMC following complaints about a video he posted to Instagram and Twitter in June.

    In a seven-minute clip, he discussed why he could no longer work in his previous roles because of the ‘lies’ around the NHS and Government approach to the pandemic that were ‘so vast’ he could no longer ‘stomach or tolerate’ them, the Royal Courts of Justice were told this month.

    He also raised concerns about the safety of the Covid vaccine and testing methods and claimed that ‘masks do nothing’, the hearing heard.

    Dr White, a partner at Denmead Practice in Hampshire until his resignation in February and now a locum GP, was ordered not to discuss the pandemic on social media and to remove previous posts on the subject by a GMC tribunal in August, following complaints about the video.

    He brought his High Court challenge against the GMC in a bid to quash the restrictions, which will last for a maximum of 18 months and his barrister called a ‘severe imposition’ on his freedom of speech.

    In written arguments, his barrister said that Dr White had an ‘unblemished career’ with beliefs informed by ‘libertarian principles’ and argued that his views were ‘supported by large bodies of scientific and medical opinion’.

    But the GMC’s written arguments said that its tribunal had recognised ‘serious concerns’ that he was using ‘language that echoed conspiracy theories about the pandemic’ and that there was a ‘risk’ members of the public would be influenced by him to ignore public health advice.

    The judge said he would deliver his judgement at a later date.

    MPS medical director Dr Rob Hendry told Pulse: ‘Personal views which may be intended for friends or family can easily be misinterpreted and become more widely available through social media, and all views expressed may be judged as professional matters.

    ‘Doctors should therefore be aware that advocating against the Covid-19 vaccine and other measures on social media platforms could make them vulnerable to investigation by the GMC.’

    GMC ethical guidance, which also applies to social media, states that doctors ‘must not impose [their] beliefs and values on patients or cause distress by the inappropriate or insensitive expression of them’.

    Dr Hendry said: ‘The GMC has also publicly stated that doctors have a responsibility to provide sufficient and balanced information about Covid-19 and the risks and benefits of treatments or preventative measures, and allow patients to make an informed choice.’

    The MPS would advise GPs who are ‘sceptical’ of the Covid vaccine or the preventative measures in the national public health programme to ‘ensure they are fully up to date with scientific evidence and act in accordance with national guidance’, he added.

    And Dr John Holden, chief medical officer at the Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland (MDDUS), said that it is ‘essential for doctors to remind themselves that the standards expected of them are not diluted simply because they are behind a keyboard’ as social media use ‘becomes ever more widespread’.

    He added: ‘We always advise doctors to exercise caution and refer to GMC guidance on social media when posting online, as they will be held accountable for opinions, advice and posts and may be expected later to justify the content.’

    It comes as GP practices and PCN-led vaccination sites are facing pressure from anti-vaccine protestors.
    Meanwhile, Covid vaccination will be a ‘condition of deployment’ for all public-facing staff in England’s health services from April next year.

    • I find this comment interesting as it relates, in a way, to my recent experience.
      I won’t reiterate the background to my refusal of the booster jab – suffice is to say that the decision was made after consulting with our GP surgery, who, in turn, got in touch with a Consultant regarding the query. The reply ran short of saying “DON’T take it” but, reading between the lines, the intent was quite clear!
      My appointment for the booster came about 3 weeks before the actual date. I tried, almost every day, to cancel the appointment but it was impossible to get through on the given number.
      On the appointed day, I went along to explain my reason for not taking it, only to be given the reply “Thanks for letting us know – we’ll get them to send out a new appointment for you”. I DON’T WANT A NEW APPOINTMENT was clearly explained! Recently, I’ve received another appointment which I completely ignored! On the day I was phoned by a doctor from the vaccination centre asking for my reason for not turning up. Once my reason was given, he was taken aback and asked why my name hadn’t been taken off the list. – how would I know the answer to that one? I asked if he could now remove my name from the list. No, he couldn’t – the only person who can do so is MY OWN GP!
      Our GP surgery have known all along that I’m not accepting it, so why should there be a need now for me to inform them so that my name can be removed? Having read the above comment, I can see exactly why my name is still on the list and assume that there it will stay for a long time yet!

  7. Freedom Speech of Robert F Kennedy Jnr.

    Transcribed in English and German

    http://docs.shortxxvids.com/kennedy_nov13_milan.html

    “They have taken away our freedom of speech. They have closed the churches. They have taken away jury trials against companies, no matter how negligent they are, no matter how reckless they are. No matter how grievous your injury, you cannot sue that company. They have taken away our property rights in the United States. They closed a million businesses for a year with no just compensation and no due process. They have taken away our right to be free of warrantless searches and seizures and surveillance by the government.”

  8. Comment from Suzanne

    22 November 2021
    Re: Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity …https://www.bmj.com › content › bmj.n2635
    2 Nov 2021 — ‘I have advised my parliamentary colleagues accordingly. Regards,. Jim Shannon MP Strangford. ‘ …
    It would be great if J Shannon felt able to publish the responses he got from the MHRA; and Nice An MP with some integrity

    Dear Editor
    There is still no information being given out by the UK media. Very many of us are relying on The BMJ for ongoing trustworthy information about Covid.
    Jim Shannon MP N I is the only MP who has not only listened to the wise elderly people who expressed concerns but taken action as described in his r.r. I would like to ask you, Jim Shannon, if you might kindly keep us updated with the results of the actions you have taken. The media read The BMJ and would hopefully take more responsibility to inform the wider public. Thank you
    susanne

    • I keep putting up information regarding Covid/ the vaccinations on our Facebook group page. Due to being “blocked”, I have to share on my own Facebook page and then Shane shares the link on the group. How ridiculous can things get? I can’t share a link directly to the group ( as administrator) but I can, in a comment on any post shown there, share whatever I like with the group. We will not be silenced!
      I shall await December 7th. for my freedom to directly share onto the group again.

      • Great tactics Mary! looking forward to catchup after freedom day. Did they quiz you about your reasons for declining? An incentive given to me early on was a travel pass – not sure what happened to that carrot. So Another virus is going crazy – another push to take another booster
        to boost the booster likely? Just wonder how much vaccination bodies can take before overload.

        • Susanne, I wouldn’t say that I’ve been ‘quizzed’ over my reasons for declining but they do ask, either with a questioning “OH?” or a ‘straight out with it’ “WHY?” Once I mention the phlebitis, things quieten down somewhat! I don’t say that I had phlebitis because of the second jab as I don’t really know if that is true. Instead, I simply say “I had phlebitis after the second jab” and leave the rest to their own interpretation! Neither do I know how it’s been recorded in my medical notes – do I simply refuse this booster as it was within the 3 – 4 months that the condition needed to clear up completely, or do I refuse any vaccination in the future if I’m not sure of the data surrounding it? Hopefully that’s not a question that will need answering any time soon. Thankfully, the condition has completely cleared up as far as it’s physically possible to tell.

Leave a Reply to David T Healy