Jag är så ledsen över den globala censur som just nu pågår. Här i Sverige märker vi mest av den i sociala medier där många “kollegor” till mig stängs av eller begränsas. Ofta för att de skriver om covid-19 eller om den kvinnliga cykeln (ja även kvinnor kan vara en källa till rädsla, men låt oss lyfta ämnet häxor genom historien vid ett annat tillfälle). Även vänner som uttrycker sig kritiskt till restriktioner eller liknande, får sina möjligheter att skriva inskränkta. Detta är oerhört oroande och ett stort hot mot yttrandefriheten. Det handlar ju inte om vem som har rätt eller fel, utan vår rättighet att få uttrycka oss, att få diskutera och debattera.
Vad som kanske inte är lika tydligt, men som också sker här i Sverige, är den väldigt ensidiga medierapporteringen. Få känner till de enormt stora protester och demonstrationer som sker, både IRL och på nätet, eftersom de inte får utrymme i medier. Och när de väl får det så intervjuar man den mest radikala person man kan hitta, för att kunna sätta en foliehatt-stämpel på det hela. Detta är djupt oroväckande och tragiskt. Vår frihet håller på att glida oss ur händerna.
Återigen – det handlar inte om vad som är korrekt eller ej, det handlar om vår frihet. Frihet att få uttrycka oss, frihet att få välja om vi ska vaccinera oss eller inte, frihet att få röra oss och resa osv.
Än värre är det i andra länder. Dr David Brownstein berättar i min intervju med honom om hur han tvingats ta ner alla blogginlägg pga påtryckningar från staten. Nu rapporterar Dr Mercola en liknande situation där han bestämt sig för att låta det han skriver ligga uppe i endast 48 h innan han tar bort det pga de problem han annars utsätts för. Jag vet inte om även detta tillkännagivande kommer att raderas, så därför väljer jag att både länka och citera det han skriver längre ner här i inlägget.
Rädsla
Det finns en rädsla som gör att vi just nu låter oss begränsas. Jag vill gå så långt som att likna det vid vad som hände under nazitiden innan och under andra världskriget. Det är viktigt att känna till rädsla och vad den gör med din hjärna.
“The only thing we have to fear is fear itself”
Rädslan stänger av våra övre funktioner, det logiska tänkandet och empatin.
Med rädsla får vi förlita oss på reptilhjärnan och känslohjärnan. Reptilhjärnan tar nämligen över när de övre funktionerna i storhjärnan fungerar sämre, som vid stress och rädsla.
- Rädsla aktiverar försvarsreaktioner.
- Rädsla gör att hjärnan kidnappas av känslorna.
- Själva tankehjärnan sätts ur spel.
- Den del i hjärnan som hanterar rädslor kallas amygdala. Amygdala är en del i det limbiska systemet – känslohjärnan
- Blodflödet minskar i frontalloberna och cortex, de nyaste delarna av hjärnan som hjälper oss att tänka logiskt.
Det är med rädsla vi förlorat demokrati och gemenskap genom historien. Som vi låtit andra styra och ställa och tänka åt oss. Det är rädsla som ställt oss mot varandra.
Jag märker att det finns mycket rädsla nu. Senaste året har präglats av olika läger som vänder sig mot varandra, går till attack, istället för att hjälpas åt. Min egen oro i detta är inte för pandemin, eller vem som har rätt eller fel, utan för att det finns rädsla som skapar ensamhet, som minskar frihet, demokrati och begränsar yttrandefrihet. Det finns en kollektiv rädsla som lätt kan utnyttjas och missbrukas.
Igen “The only thing we have to fear is… fear itself” (Roosevelt)
Det är viktigt att vi visar hänsyn och bidrar till att minska smittspridning. Vi måste vara rädda om varandra och visa respekt. MEN vi ska inte agera ur rädsla. Vi måste värna om demokrati och yttrandefrihet. Om frihet. Om kärlek och empati.
Som sagt – klyftorna förstärks av media, motståndsrörelser snedvinklas. De mest radikala lyfts fram.
Låt oss värna om frihet, yttrandefrihet och demokrati.
Jag vill även citera min vän Anna och det hon skrev, som jag delade på Anna Sparre-sidan på facebook (https://www.facebook.com/asparre4H):
“När världen delas i två läger. Omfamna båda. Välj den gudomliga blicken, den som ser att allt är liv som söker sig själv. Söker sig hem. Även när det tillfälligt söker sig bort.
När världen delas i två läger, välj inte sida. Se båda, så ser du både fram och baksida av samma sak.
När världen delas i två läger, sök den plats i dig där du inte är tudelad.
När världen delas i två läger. Välj alltid kärlek.“
Från Dr Mercola. Dr Mercola sprider kunskap kring hälsa och har även skrivit boken “The truth about covid-19” :
Today, I have the most important announcement in the quarter of a century history of this newsletter. My goal and passion has always been about supporting you and helping you take control of your health. I am beyond thrilled that there are tens of millions of people who have benefited from what I have shared over the years.
I am filled with joy and gratitude every time I travel and lecture as invariably many people tell me how I’ve changed their lives by providing vital information they couldn’t find anywhere else and even better that was completely free.
These were the times when many of the views I presented were criticized, but that’s to be expected. That was one of the great freedoms we enjoyed. We could have different views and we could speak openly about these views without fear of retribution.
But we are now in a different time. A much darker time. The silence of free speech is now deafening.
Not only is blatant censorship tolerated, it is being encouraged by the very people who were to be entrusted with protecting our freedom of speech.
We are not living from the lessons we’ve learned before. Never in my life, would I believe the sitting President of the United States call out 12 Americans in a McCarthyism like attack in the United States. As you are aware, I was placed at the top of this list.
The last week has brought a tremendous amount of reflections to me, and a lot of unacceptable threats to a company full of amazing people that have helped me support you in this journey.
By now I am sure you know that there was a recent NY Times article attacking me and it was one of the most widely distributed stories in the world. The article was loaded with false statements made about me and my organization.
The report would be laughed at if it were to be submitted for peer review, the groups that created it are funded by dark money and operated by an illegal foreign agent. The press never questioned it, but ran with their orders from above.
I can deal with the CNN crews that chase me by car while I bicycle from my home. I feel sorry for the people in media that have to follow the orders they are given.
It is easy to dismiss the media pawns, but the most powerful individual on the planet has targeted me as his primary obstacle that must be removed. Every three letter agency is at his disposal, and the executive powers have grown beyond what an individual American’s rights can protect against.
A dissenter of medical mandates is now a target and obstacle to be removed. I know – that’s 25 years’ worth of blood, sweat and tears coming down.
I can hardly believe these words are coming out of my mouth. It’s a testament of just how radical things have degenerated in the recent past. However, I will continue to publish new articles, BUT going forward, each article I publish will be available for only 48 hours and will then be removed from the website.
We are at the crossroad where change is unavoidable. We all must make choices that determine our future. To many, this looks like a war … but what we need to find is peace. I am going to find peace through this sacrifice.
Just to be clear, ALL my content will be removed. This includes articles on:
Great Reset
General nutrition
The coronavirus
My interviews with experts
These will be removed to appease the individuals in power who have an arsenal of overwhelming tools at their disposal, and are actively engaged in using them. COVID-19 has activated and authorized emergency powers that have weakened our constitutional rights. Sadly, cyberwarfare and authoritarian forces are beyond our abilities to withstand, and this is now our only way forward.
Over 15,000 articles full of vital information that has helped tens of millions across the world take control of their health, will be removed. There was a time when people could debate and respect each other freely. That time is now gone. I believe laws are best applied like medicine – locally and specifically.
Local food, local democracy – our local community strength is the best way to achieve peace moving forward, and to stop authoritarian technocracy. I also believe we are at our strongest when we can care and maintain respect for each other. This is how we can make our most important decisions in life.
Again I will still be writing my daily articles that I started 25 years ago BUT they will only be available for 48 hours before they are removed. In this way I hope to continue my mission to help you take control of your health – but it’s up to you to download, share and repost this content. I will not be enforcing my copyright on this information so that you may freely share it.
Please also encourage others to read “The Truth About COVID-19,” where you will find much of the information from the past two years that people need to read to wake up and open their eyes. I am donating all earnings to the National Vaccine Information Center.
I want to thank all of you that have supported me over the years. I hope you can understand why I have decided to make this dramatic decision and hope the remaining ephemeral articles will be useful for those who wish to read them.
We will continue through these challenging times together, and remember this:
Your body was designed to stay healthy.
You hold in your hands the power to take control of your health.
Never let anyone take your right to health away from you.
Science can flourish only in an atmosphere of free speech. ~ Albert Einstein
Dr Mercola skriver nu samtidigt en artikel på temat om var Covid-viruset kommer ifrån . Rätt eller fel säger jag inget om, men jag väljer att citera den här eftersom han själv kommer att behöva ta bort den:
How Scientists Muzzled the COVID Lab Origin Data
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
In its September 2019 report, the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board — a joint arm of the World Health Organization and the World Bank — warned that technological advances “allow for disease-creating micro-organisms to be engineered or recreated in laboratories,” and that the release of such organisms could cause greater devastation than a natural outbreak
On the Board are Sir Jeremy Farrar (director of the Wellcome Trust) and Dr. Anthony Fauci (director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIAID), both of whom have defended the zoonotic origin theory for SARS-CoV-2 and helped suppress the lab-leak theory
February 1, 2020, Farrar set up a confidential conference call with a dozen individuals, including Fauci. Two days later, WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus made a public call for censorship of “misinformation”
Five days after that call, Peter Daszak circulated the first draft of a scientific consensus statement that eventually got published in The Lancet, and thereafter was used by mainstream media and fact checkers everywhere to “debunk” any and all evidence of a lab leak
Six weeks after Farrar’s group call, several of the participants published a commentary in Nature Medicine, in which they stated they “do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible”
In the July 22, 2021, article,1 “Did Scientists Stifle the Lab-Leak Theory,” foreign reporter and columnist for Unherd, Ian Birrell, analyzes the circumstances that led to a near-complete blackout of questions about SARS-CoV-2’s origin.
In September 2019, the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board issued a warning that a new infectious disease was poised to spread around the world, and that nations were ill prepared for such an event.
The Global Preparedness Monitoring Board is a joint arm of the World Health Organization and the World Bank — two technocratic entities that aren’t always working in the best interest of humanity as a whole.
On the 15-person Board are Sir Jeremy Farrar (director of the Wellcome Trust), Dr. Anthony Fauci (director of the NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIAID) and George Fu Gao, director-general of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention.
Technocrat-Led Board Predicted Manmade Pandemic
As noted by Birrell, the board’s warning was “astonishingly prescient,” as SARS-CoV-2 emerged in December 2020. Importantly, the board did not necessarily focus its prediction on the emergence of natural zoonotic diseases but, rather, warned of technological and scientific advances that “allow for disease-creating micro-organisms to be engineered or recreated in laboratories.”
According to the board, accidental release of such manmade organisms could actually be far more devastating than a natural outbreak. “Accidental or deliberate events caused by high-impact respiratory pathogens pose global catastrophic biological risks,” the board stated in its September 2019 report, titled “A World At Risk.”2 In passing, the report also mentioned the need to control the flow of information:
“A deliberate release would complicate outbreak response; in addition to the need to decide how to counter the pathogen, security measures would come into play limiting information-sharing and fomenting social divisions.”
Same Board Members Denied Possibility of Manmade Pandemic
Despite the Board’s recognition that manmade pathogens pose a significant threat, some of its board members — Fauci and Farrar in particular — have played central roles in roundly dismissing the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from a lab. As reported by Birrell:3
“Farrar was a central figure behind two landmark documents published by influential science journals that played a key role in shutting down discussion of the lab leak hypothesis by branding it conspiracy theory.
These statements, signed and promoted by leading figures in the scientific establishment, pushed an idea that the pandemic was a natural occurrence by arguing against the plausibility of ‘any type of laboratory-based scenario.’ Critics say this ‘false narrative’ set back understanding of the disease for more than a year.”
In his book, “Spike: The Virus vs. The People — the Inside Story,” Farrar praises China for its pandemic response at the outset of the pandemic. This despite the fact that the Communist dictatorship is known to have silenced doctors who wanted to warn the public, and allowed the annual Chinese New Year’s celebration to proceed, thereby ensuring massive spread as people from all parts of China and across the world gathered.
Did Fauci and Farrar Collude to Suppress Lab-Leak Theory?
Birrell goes on to detail how Farrar and Fauci reacted to early reports suggesting the virus had telltale signs of gain-of-function. Emails4 obtained via freedom of information act (FOIA) requests reveal Fauci received a Science magazine article detailing the work of Peter Daszak (EcoHealth Alliance) and Shi Zhengli at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
“The article discussed controversies over risky ‘gain of function’ experiments, including mention of a 2015 paper by Shi and a U.S. expert on modification of a Sars-like bat virus to boost infectivity to humans,” Birrell writes.5
“Emails released through freedom of information requests show Fauci instantly circulated the article to U.S. officials and contacted Farrar saying it was ‘of interest to the current discussion’ …
[Scripps virologist Kristian] Andersen, when sent the Science article at the end of January, admitted a close look at the genetic sequences of Sars-CoV-2 showed that ‘some of the features (potentially) look engineered’ and that other experts agreed the genome was ‘inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory’ …
The Wellcome boss then set up a conference call for the pair of them with 11 other experts from around the world, warning their discussions were ‘in total confidence’ and information ‘not to be shared’ without prior agreement.
Farrar also sent Fauci a link to an article on ZeroHedge … that tied a Wuhan researcher to the virus outbreak. The site was banned the next day from Twitter …”
While we don’t know the full details of what was discussed during that February 1, 2020, phone call, Birrell points out what we do know. For example, we know they discussed contacting the WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and that two days later, Ghebreyesus made a public call for censorship of misinformation.
Five days after that call, Daszak also circulated the first draft of a scientific consensus statement6that eventually got published in The Lancet, and thereafter was used by mainstream media and fact checkers everywhere to “debunk” any and all evidence of a lab leak.
The dam is breaking. And with the surging floodwaters, comes a stunning realization: Almost across the board, our elite institutions got the most important question about COVID wrong. ~ James Meigs
The statement, signed by 27 experts, including Farrar, condemned “conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin.” A FOIA request revealed Daszak was the mastermind behind that Lancet statement7 — which, by the way, presented no actual evidence of natural origin — and that he wanted to make sure it could not be identified as being from a single individual or organization.
Six weeks after Farrar’s group call, four of the participants on the call — including Andersen — also published a commentary in Nature Medicine, titled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,”8 in which they stated they “do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.”
“This statement in a world-renowned journal, which has been accessed 5.5 million times, further depressed debate of alternative theories on the origins, despite being challenged by a few brave voices in the scientific community,” Birrell writes.9
Unanswered Questions
In his book, “Spike,” which was published July 22, 2021, Farrar admits he had deep concerns about the “huge coincidence” of SARS-CoV-2 emerging in a city with a biosafety level 4 (BSL4) laboratory that just so happens to specialize in collection, storage and research of bat coronaviruses. Birrell writes:
“The new coronavirus ‘might not even be that novel at all,’ he thought. ‘It might have been engineered years ago, put in a freezer, and then taken out more recently by someone who decided to work on it again. And then, maybe, there was … an accident?’
He was so concerned that he confided in Eliza Manningham-Buller, then the Wellcome Trust chair and a former head of the MI5 intelligence service, who told him to start taking precautions such as avoiding putting things in emails and using a burner phone for key conversations.
So what changed his mind so firmly he started signing letters and tweeting about alleged conspiracy theories? When I asked Farrar to share the evidence that set his mind at rest, he pointed to the Nature Medicine article. Yet his office told me later he helped ‘convene’ these five authors.
They also insist that ‘the weight of available data and scientific evidence continues to point towards zoonotic origins.’
But scientists have found no hard evidence on the pandemic origins, despite testing 80,000 samples on animals to find a natural link, while China has made increasingly ludicrous claims over the origins as well as covering up the outbreak, lying over the date of first cases and taking offline Wuhan’s key database of samples and viral sequences.”
In his book, Farrar also discusses specific concerns brought forth by Andersen in January 2020. Recall, in April 2020, Andersen published “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2” with four other co-authors. But in January, three things alarmed him about the virus:
The receptor binding domain, which is like a perfect key for entering human cells
The furin cleavage site, which is not found in other bat coronaviruses and would be expected “if someone had set out to adapt an animal coronavirus to humans by taking a specific suit of genetic material from elsewhere and inserting it”
A scientific paper describing the use of that very technique to modify the original SARS virus. Andersen allegedly thought it “looked like a how-to manual for building the Wuhan coronavirus in a laboratory”
Evidence of Collusion
Before Farrar’s February 1, 2020, call, Andersen was “60 to 70%” convinced SARS-CoV-2 was a lab creation, according to Farrar’s account. Yet Andersen also told Farrar he did not want to be a front man for the lab leak theory. Birrell writes:10
“Anderson told [Farrar] that he suddenly realized he might be the person who proved the new virus came from a lab. ’I didn’t necessarily want to be that person,’ he said.
‘When you make big claims like that you had better be sure that you can conclude something is based on evidence and not on speculation.’ So according to Farrar, then five experts wrestled with the evidence and, the following month, they declared in Nature Medicine that Sars-CoV-2 was ‘not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus’ …
They offered the circumstantial evidence that RaTG13, the closest known coronavirus to Sars-CoV-2, had different binding mechanisms — yet similar ones were found on pangolins, so ‘the ingredients … were out in the wild. They did not need to have escaped, or been unleashed, from a containment lab.’”
The problem with this argument is that they have no firm evidence of natural emergence. What’s more, while Andersen and co-authors claim they spent many sleepless nights carefully analyzing and evaluating the lab leak theory before finally dismissing it, in a May 2021 interview,11 co-author Robert Garry admitted the first draft of the Nature Medicine paper was finished February 1, 2020 — the day of Farrar’s conference call, which included four of the five co-authors.
Fauci’s email trove also reveals Farrar sent Fauci a rough draft of the Nature Medicine paper three days after that conference call, urging him to keep it confidential. That same day, Andersen also told another group of experts that the data “conclusively show” there was no engineering involved. “So far from having ‘many sleepless nights,’ these scientists seem to have changed their minds amazingly fast and reached fresh conclusions,” Birrell writes.
Elite Institutions Have Subverted the Truth
Another article addressing the subversion of truth by some of our most trusted scientific institutions is James Meigs’ Commentary piece, “The Lab-Leak-Theory Cover-Up.”12
“The dam is breaking,” Meigs writes. “And with the surging floodwaters, comes a stunning realization: Almost across the board, our elite institutions got the most important question about COVID wrong.
Worse, they worked furiously to discourage anyone else from getting it right. The leading scientific experts turned out to be spinning the truth. Our public-health officials put their political agenda ahead of any scientific mandate.
And the press and social-media giants eagerly played along, enforcing strict rules about which COVID topics were acceptable and which had to be banished from the national conversation.
During the Trump years, we heard a lot of hand-wringing about the public’s unwarranted ‘distrust’ of our society’s designated experts and leaders. But to be trusted, people and institutions have to be trustworthy.
The COVID-19 pandemic revealed a profound corruption at the heart of our expert class. The impact of that revelation will reverberate for years to come.”
As noted by Meigs, leading institutions not only declared the lab-leak theory incorrect, but also “dangerous and malicious,” and went to extraordinary lengths to “protect” the population from hearing anything that might infect their minds with such wrongthink.
In the end, all such efforts failed. Despite the ridicule, personal attacks and censorship, common sense and logic have managed to break through and, today, the failures of our most prestigious science institutions are laid bare.
Government Only Pays Lip Service to the Truth
The lab-leak question has also revealed corruption within other cherished institutions, such as the U.S. intelligence community. Two separate teams, one in the State Department and another under direction of the National Security Council, have been tasked with investigating the origin of SARS-CoV-2.
In Commentary, Meigs points out that both teams report facing intense internal pushback, according to Vanity Fair reporter Katherine Eban. Their own institutions urged them “not to open a ‘Pandora’s Box,’” which suggests the State Department and the NSC aren’t particularly interested in the truth. Of particular concern was the role the U.S. government may have played by funding gain-of-funding research on bat coronaviruses at the WIV.
While the ramifications of the truth might be extremely uncomfortable for some, if we allow individuals to shirk responsibility, the ramifications of that course of action could ultimately turn out to be lethal for mankind.
If U.S. institutions such as the NIAID funded gain-of-function research that resulted in a pandemic, we need to know, so we can close loopholes and implement better safeguards. I’ve argued that gain-of-function research that makes pathogens more dangerous to humans ought to be banned altogether, to prevent the creation of a truly lethal pandemic.
But even if we don’t ban it, we need to know what government agencies have been doing with our tax dollars, and decide whether they’ve been put to good use or not. In my opinion, creating pathogens capable of killing us is hardly a good use of our taxes, and should be stopped.
Origin Story Shows Importance of Independence
Most people want to trust government, academic and scientific institutions, and the media. Unfortunately, if the pandemic has taught us anything, it’s that these institutions aren’t worthy of unequivocal trust.
They say they’re trustworthy, and they insist we must trust them, but their actions tell a different story. The pandemic has also shown us just how important it is for investigators, researchers and reporters to be truly independent. As noted by Meigs:13
“The story of why the line of inquiry survived is not an account of leading scientists and health organizations dutifully parsing the evidence.
Instead, it is largely the story of little-known researchers — many working outside the bounds of elite institutions — who didn’t let the political implications of their findings derail their efforts.
Much of what we know today about the Wuhan Institute’s risky research is thanks to these independent skeptics who challenged the institutional consensus. Some risked their careers to do so.”
One key group of self-organized researchers is the Decentralized Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating COVID-19 (DRASTIC). They’ve made a number of important discoveries that have kept the lab-leak theory alive.
Massive Collusion to Suppress Inquisitiveness
“Throughout the pandemic we’ve often heard admonitions to ‘follow the science.’ Looking back we can see that few scientists — and even fewer journalists — really did,” Meigs notes. Among the few journalists who did tackle the elephant in the room were former New York Times reporters Nicholas Wade and Donald McNeil Jr.
“Notice the irony here: While two refugees from the New York Times were publishing deep, well-reported articles on an alternative outlet, the Times itself was still mostly ignoring the Wuhan-lab story,” Meigs writes.14
“One of its current pandemic specialists, Apoorva Mandavilli, was on Twitter urging everyone to ‘stop talking about the lab leak’ … When the pandemic hit last year, we were all urged to fall in line and listen to the authorities. Scientists and bureaucrats were elevated to near-divine status.
‘Let us pray, now, for science,’ Times tech columnist Farhad Manjoo wrote last February. ‘Pray for reason, rigor and expertise … Pray for the N.I.H. and the C.D.C. Pray for the W.H.O.’ Now the public is waking up to the fact that, prayers notwithstanding, those institutions largely failed us.
The WHO kowtowed to China’s deceptions. Anthony Fauci trimmed his public statements to fit the prevailing political winds. Some of the nation’s top virologists didn’t just dismiss the lab-leak possibility, they appeared to be covering up their own involvement with Wuhan gain-of-function research.
Journalists and social-media companies conspired to suppress legitimate questions about a disease that was killing thousands of Americans each day.”
Establishment Needs a Deep Clean
While we certainly need expertise, as Meigs points out, we must also be able to trust our experts, and the only way for trust to rebuild, experts must act from a strong ethical foundation, and be held responsible for dangerous failures.
“If the public concludes that COVID-19 was, in effect, an inside job, the political fallout could last a generation,” Meigs writes.15 “I don’t mean people will believe the virus was deliberately released … but that they will see the disease as a product of an elite power structure that behaves recklessly and evades responsibility.”
What makes the situation so problematic is that it’s not just one type of institution that is behaving recklessly and shirking responsibility. It’s not just the legacy media, or academia, or government, or public health, the intelligence apparatus, Big Tech, Big Pharma or the medical journal system. It’s all of them.
The Medical Journal System Has Failed Us Too
Continuing along that same line of reasoning, a July 27, 2021, Spectator article16 by Stuart Ritchie reviews the unhealthy relationship between The Lancet and China, and its role in thwarting scientific investigation into the origins of SARS-CoV-2. Ritchie points out how The Lancet’s editor-in-chief, Richard Horton, has routinely defended China’s actions:
“It’s not just the scientists and health workers of China that the Lancet has praised. In May last year, Horton appeared on the state-owned broadcaster China Central Television to praise how ‘tremendously decisively’ the Chinese Communist party had handled the pandemic. He also penned multiple editorials about China, including one entitled ‘Covid-19 and the Dangers of Sinophobia.’”
Ritchie also stresses that “some of the most famous stories of scientific fraud have originated at The Lancet during Horton’s tenure as editor,” including, most recently, fraudulent papers proclaiming to show that hydroxychloroquine is dangerous when used in COVID-19 patients, and Daszak’s “scientific statement” condemning the lab leak theory as wild conspiracy theory.
“The purpose of the Lancet, back in 1823, was to slice away the immorality and complacency of the medical establishment … [Lancet founder Thomas] Wakley would have been stunned to see that his journal now exemplifies that establishment,” Ritchie writes.17“It embodies an unaccountable or only partially accountable elite that does often make progress, but fails abjectly to face up to its many faults.
In 2021, we might find that the best rejoinder to our establishment isn’t a new Wakley-style journal, but an entirely new way to think about science and how it’s published: a way that doesn’t hand over all our trust to editors and reviewers, but that emphasizes openness and transparency right from the start.
There are several proposals for how it could happen. The next rotten thing that needs to be cut away could be the journal system — and the Lancet itself.”
The censorship rolled out during the COVID pandemic has revealed a disconcerting truth, namely that corruption and collusion are rampant everywhere. By the looks of it, we need to do a clean sweep across the board, and that will require time, effort, and most of all, open public discussion.
Laws Have Been Broken. Who Will Hold Them Accountable?
In closing, I strongly recommend listening to Dr. David Martin’s explanation of antitrust law in the video below, and how, in the case of a criminal conspiracy, liability shielding evaporates.
In his view, having reviewed the evidence, there’s no doubt that the NIH/NIAID, the U.S. Health and Human Services Department, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, ATI, Moderna and Pfizer are guilty of criminal conspiracy (the legal definition thereof) and premeditative antitrust violations.
Without that criminal conspiracy and their premeditative acts, we would not be in the situation we’re in now, where censorship and pandemic measures and rules are putting the public health, well-being and sanity at risk. Unfortunately, while there is, theoretically, a legal way out of this pandemic, deep cracks in our justice system has also been exposed over the past year and a half.
Martin is currently struggling to find a state attorney general willing to pursue these violations so that we can bring this faux pandemic to a close. Hopefully, once enough people understand the illegality of the situation, someone will have the courage to step up to the plate.
Jörgen says
Bra skrivet om rädsla och vilka effekter det får
Anna Sparre @ 4health.se says
Tack 🙂
Stina says
Hemskt. Jag säger att jag är vaxad om folk frågar även fast jag inte är det. Tagit mig år att reda ut mina autoimmuna sjukdomar med AIP kost och jag tänker inte riskera min hälsa med vaccin. Jag hoppas nästan jag blir smittad med en vild variant och får T-cells immunitet, vilket också ger ett långsiktigt skydd mot varianter. Tillskillnad från vaccinen.
Josefin says
Tack för att du tar upp detta så aktuella och viktiga ämne. Jag hoppas att fler vågar följa ditt mod och att världen snart kan upplevas som mindre polariserad 🙏
Elisabeth says
Tack för att du skriver!
Behöver lite verktyg för att kunna stå upp för mig själv att inte vaccinera mig.
VÄRDEGRUND = DIKTATUR says
Det är hemskt vi är på väg in i en diktatur där SVT SR är diktaturens försvarare.
När diktaturen vill dölja något används ordet vår värdegrund.
Om Hitler hade fått frågan om vad som ryker ur skrotstenarna på lägren så hade han svarat våra anläggningar följer vår värdegrund.
Ingen vet vad värdegrund står för, har googlat och aldrig hittat någon information.
Värdegrund kan därför vara vad som helst som någon tycker gynnar den som sa sig ha en värdegrund.
Brottslingar kan ha en värdegrund som säger att man stjäl inte barnens leksaker men det är ok att våldta barnens mor.
När ordet värdegrund dyker upp blir jag livrädd.
Kristna katoliker protestanter muslimer poliser militärer fattiga eller rika kan ha helt olika värdegrunder.
Ingen kan veta vad ordet värdegrund står för.
SVT SR brukar hänvisa till deras värdegrund men vad värdegrunden består av vet vi inte.
Finns det ens någon värdegrund, det kanske bara finns ett ord alltså ordet värdegrund.
Arbeit macht frei, (som betyder arbete ger frihet) nu ger värdegrunden oss fria åsikter.
VÄRDEGRUND
Diktaturens ny modeord.
En sak är jag säker på hade ordet värdegrund funnits på 40 talet så hade Hitler haft en värdegrund.
sociala medier som facebook kan ta bort vad som helst och sen hänvisa till deras värdegrund.
Alt överallt kan tas bort med hänvisning till värdegrunden, värdegrunden är bara maktutövarens egna åsikt.
Carina says
Bra text !!
Väcker nya tankar hos mig.
Tack för dessa tänkvärda rader om värdegrund.
Jonna says
Ser att alla kommentarer här håller med dig och sväljer det du skriver med hull och hår. Men då så, du som tycker att vi ska kunna diskutera. Här kommer en annan åsikt.
Jag har följt dig och lyssnat på alla poddavsnitt hittills och haft mycket nytta av infon du valt att dela. Men nu går du för långt. Det är såna som du som sprider rädsla. Var tvungen att läsa igenom hela spektaklet till inlägg på 4health.se för att förstå vad detta ens handlar om, men nu förstår jag alltför väl.
Du skriver detta:
”Det finns en rädsla som gör att vi just nu låter oss begränsas. Jag vill gå så långt som att likna det vid vad som hände under nazitiden innan och under andra världskriget.”
Och har mage att anklaga ANDRA för att sprida rädsla? Skrattretande. Och fruktansvärt osmakligt.
När ska ni rädda vaccinkritiker och ”frihetskämpar” förstå att det ÄR FRIVILLIGT att vaccinera sig i det här landet? Och vi har världens slappaste restriktioner. Exakt vad är det du inte kan göra?? Resa? Newsflash: det är inte en mänsklig rättighet att få resa. Suck. Följer man amerikaner tillräckligt länge blir man paranoid. Men Sverige ÄR INTE USA. Vi lever inte i en militärregim, till skillnad från många länder som faktiskt gör det. Gud vad förtryckta vi blir. Herregud. Ta dig din rättighet att inte vaccinera dig, sitt ner i båten och sluta skrämma upp folk med dystopiskt snack om cyberkrig, vaccinvapen och totalitärregimer!
Så får vi se om min kommentar censureras och blockas, intressant.
Anna Sparre @ 4health.se says
Svarar dig som jag gjorde på instagram, där du skriver samma sak:
tack för din åsikt. Jag tycker nog inte du uppfattat mig helt rätt. Du fokuserar på vaccinatioer, det gör inte jag, även om en del kommenterar om just vaccin här nedan. Men du verkar upprörd oavsett. jag skriver om den globala(!) censuren. Den är som sagt mindre tydlig i Sverige än tex i USA. Vaccin är jag inte anti. Bara för valmöjligheten att välja bort. Den finns till viss del. Men vaccinationspass och liknande kommer ev göra att det i realiteten inte är ett val att tacka nej för de flesta. Och jag har fått flera meddelanden från svenska instagrammare som blivit påhoppade eller censurerade när de skrivit om biverkningar av vaccination. Jag har en vän vars svärfar dog av vaccinet, en annan vars vän kämpar för sitt liv just nu. De flesta går det säkert jättebra för, men det vore fint om biverkningar lyfts fram på samma sätt som farorna med själva sjukdomen c19 gör. Och om media inte förminskar de demonstrationer som pågår. Men som sagt, det handlar inte om vaccin. Det jag betonar allra mest är som sagt friheten att skriva om olika sidor av myntet på de stora plattformarna som tex Facebook och instagram. Den saknas tyvärr då det censureras mycket. Samma sak för de läkare i usa jag skriver om där myndigheterna inte gör det möjligt för dem att dela sin erfarenhet och kunskap
Göran Löwenberg says
Herrgud inser du inte hur hjärntvättad du är??? Ta de lugnt!!! De råder inget tvivel om att vaccinpass begränsar människan eller hur??? Ett vaccin som inte på något sätt är godkänt!! Där tex Pfizer friskriver sig i brev till regeringar som i princip bryter mot lagen i alla fall i Sverige!! Om du nu är vaccinerad vad har du då att oroa dig för??
Benny Ottosson says
Tack ❤️ för att du vågar göra fram detta. Trots att du vet att det kan påverka ditt varumärke. Tack för modet. Det behövs fler som dig.
Anna Sparre @ 4health.se says
Tack fina!
Didine says
En alarmerande trend håller på att ta oproportionella dimensioner: polarisering. Vaccinerat eller icke vaccinerat. Vi har gått från konsensus till varje pris till ständiga konfrontationer. Vi brukade tolerera till och med det intoleranta. Vi har gått från en extrem till en annan. Att nyansera har blivit politisk inkorrekt, nästan tabu. Debatterna blir allt mindre. Konfrontationerna ökar. Monologer överallt. Övertyga eller bli förbannad. Ingen lyssnar. Ingen önskar inspirera och igen låter sig inspireras. Att övertyga är regeln. Våra övertygelse har blivit religiösa. Folk har blivit lika lätt kränkta som nya konvertiter. Att ta några steg tillbaka, att pausa eller att reflektera är inte längre några dygder. Att tvivla är numera en svaghet. Bara idioter byter aldrig åsikt brukade det heta. Alt ska gå snabbt. Swipa till höger det man vill ha, swipa till vänster det man vill förtränga. Och så gör man numera med andras åsikter, idéer och känsligheter. Är nyfikenheten en annan förlorad dygd? Har idéer blivit sorterad och förpackad för att bli “färdiga att svälja”? Är allt lika lätt tillgängligt och billigt som en hemkörd pizza av Foodora? Att ifrågasätta, att ställa frågor, att fråga “varför”, inte för att provocera men för att försöka förstå är grunden till frihet och framsteg. Bara idioter byter aldrig åsikt brukade det heta.
Vi blir allt mer sekulära men våra övertygelsen gör oss till “ny”fanatiker i en icke religiös samhälle. “Vi och dem” håller på att bli “vi mot dem”. Man är med eller emot. Polarisering är det sista vi behöver under en pandemi. En pandemi som kommer hoppas jag att omdefiniera flera koncept. En av dem är tolkningen av lyxen. Lyxen är numera en god hälsa, naturen, kroppen, själen och, låt oss drömma en stund: mer nyanserade debatter. Och lite mer ödmjukhet för att kunna säga “det har du rätt i” utan att oroa sig över att förlora sin stolthet.
Anna Sparre @ 4health.se says
Fint och tänkvärt skrivet, tack Didine!