| | | Do the COVID-19 Vaccines Demonstrate the Collapse of Science?
Posted on January 23, 2024 by Baron Bodissey
Note: One version of this essay was first published in Norwegian at the website Document.no. It has been translated into English here with considerable aid from reader Free Sweden.
Do the COVID-19 vaccines demonstrate the collapse of science?
by Fjordman
John Campbell from England has been making popular videos on YouTube for several years.[1] He has gone from being a supporter of the officially promoted vaccines against the coronavirus COVID-19 to becoming a growing critic of them. He has done this by analyzing official statistics and known figures. The facts show that these vaccines are less effective against COVID-19 than originally claimed. They are also significantly more dangerous than people who took these vaccines were told by the authorities.
Substantial excess mortality rates that have yet to receive a convincing official explanation can be documented over an extended period. This began in part in 2021. The excess deaths have continued in many countries in 2022 and 2023, and unfortunately seem to continue in the UK [2] and elsewhere in 2024.
Campbell has had some very interesting conversations with Angus G. Dalgleish. He is a British professor of oncology, the study of cancer, at St. George’s Hospital Medical School in London. Dalgleish has been very active in the medical field for decades. He is the editor and co-author of the book The Death of Science: The Retreat from Reason in the Post-Modern World.[3]
Stating that science is dead, as the title suggests, may sound dramatic. Yet professor Dalgleish fears that this claim is not an exaggeration. He is highly critical of the way authorities have handled COVID-19 and the vaccines against this virus since the year 2020. Far too much of what is now being presented as scientific research is flawed, logically questionable or marred by corruption.
Angus G. Dalgleish focuses on medical issues, which are his area of expertise. However, he also questions the claim that we are indeed experiencing a man-made “climate crisis.” He argues that scientific data does not support the most alarmist claims about climate change. There is also a lot of money involved in these fields, both in the pharmaceutical industry and in the climate industry.
In 2020, the major US pharmaceutical company Pfizer partnered with Germany’s BioNTech to rapidly develop a vaccine against the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine was introduced at the end of 2020.
The American pharmaceutical and biotechnology company Moderna also rushed to develop an mRNA-based vaccine at the same time, with support and encouragement from the US government.
Before Pfizer and Moderna launched their vaccines, with unusually quick approval from Western governments, mRNA-based technology had never been used on humans on a large scale. It differs significantly from traditional vaccine technology. Some critics claim that these mRNA-based injections should be referred to as experimental genetic technology, rather than as vaccines in a traditional sense of the word.
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla himself stated in October 2020 that the company was “ moving at the speed of science.”[4] Bourla later remarked that “ It took us just 248 days to get from the day we announced our plans to collaborate with BioNTech on a potential Covid-19 vaccine to the day we submitted to the FDA for Emergency Use Authorization. We were able to move at extraordinary speed, while always maintaining our focus on safety, because this new structure allows us to be decisive.”[5]
On the social network Facebook, Pfizer also posted a video about their so-called vaccines in November 2020 entitled Moving at the Speed of Science.[6]
However, how fast is “the speed of science”? Is it 100 kilometers per hour? 1 centimeter per hour? One centimeter per year?
The truth is, science often moves very slowly. Much slower than a slug. It may take years, decades, generations, or centuries from the time an idea is proposed until it becomes widely accepted, such as the earth orbiting the sun. Maybe that’s how it should be.
Most countries have speed limits that specify the maximum speed allowed on a particular stretch of road. The reason for this is that very high speeds increase the likelihood of something going wrong, and thus endangering human life and health. Shouldn’t the same principle apply to science?
If any science should have a maximum speed limit, it is medicine, which directly affects human life and health. Normally, new drugs or vaccines are tested for years to check their effectiveness and possible side effects. This was not done to any reasonable extent in 2020 and 2021 when the so-called coronavirus vaccines were launched and used on a nearly global scale.
For this reason, it was ethically and scientifically deeply reprehensible that firms such as Pfizer and Moderna were allowed to inject people around the world with billions of doses of experimental gene therapy, hastily developed in a matter of months, in violation of standard procedures for medical research.
National and international health authorities have not in 2022, 2023, or so far in 2024 presented scientifically credible explanations for the international excess mortality rates. It appears that in several countries, mortality rates did not start rising prior to mass injections with the new mRNA-based coronavirus vaccines.
Yet most health authorities reject the idea that the excess mortality can be primarily attributed to the vaccines, even though this is a perfectly valid scientific hypothesis that can explain the available data.
The same applies to other health problems. Norway’s state broadcaster NRK reported in January 2024 that the number of patients seeking medical attention for fatigue has exploded within the past two years.
“ We see a dramatic increase in the number of consultations for fatigue. The increase is happening in all age groups. The exception is children aged 0-4 years.”[7] So says Richard Aubrey White, a researcher and statistician at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (FHI). “Several large studies show that COVID-19 can cause severe long-term effects. This is reflected in these figures,” White claims.
That health problems such as fatigue or heart problems may be due to the long-term effects of the COVID-19 coronavirus is a scientifically valid hypothesis that deserves to be investigated.
It is also a scientifically valid hypothesis that such health problems, which are now affecting large numbers of people internationally, may be due in significant part to side effects from mRNA-based so-called coronavirus vaccines. The indications for this are becoming too numerous to ignore.
For several years, health authorities have consistently refused to acknowledge the possibility that the vaccines they themselves have aggressively promoted could cause serious health damage or even death to large numbers of people.[8] This represents a scientific and moral breakdown.
The result of this collapse is what could, at worst, turn out to be the biggest medical scandal in world history.
Notes:
|
|
