Forum Topic

A brave doctor

… one of many thousands worldwide speaking out, none whom you’ll ever hear reported in the same conglomerate-owned media as those who tout the “cure”To coin a phrase from ‘Lord’ Sugar:“With regret [not], doctor, you’re FIRED”. “For the first time in history medical treatment, protocols are not being formulated based on the experience of the physicians treating the largest number of patients successfully, but rather individuals and bureaucracies that have never treated a single patient—including Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, EcoHealth Alliance, the CDC, WHO, state public health officers and hospital administrators. Dissenting information has been labeled “misinformation” and “dangerous lies”, even when sourced from top experts in the fields of virology, infectious diseases, pulmonary critical care, and epidemiology. These blackouts of truth occur even when this information is backed by extensive scientific citations from some of the most qualified medical specialists in the world.[23] Incredibly, even individuals, such as Dr. Michael Yeadon, a retired ex-Chief Scientist, and vice-president for the science division of Pfizer Pharmaceutical company in the UK, who charged the company with making an extremely dangerous vaccine, is ignored and demonized. Further, he, along with other highly qualified scientists have stated that **no one should take this vaccine**”— Dr. Russell L. Blaylock, To coin a phrase from ‘Lord’ Sugar:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9062939/?fbclid=IwAR0fkr3orf1gJkT9e-k4quQga7HM8LTJsO-UHwZtl7DbxcWnGIOFrnG-QTA

Lydia Tapping ● 705d38 Comments

Thanks for the confirmation of of what I had already assumed, but couldn’t be arsed to research, if nothing else because they quoted him. There’s evidently some sort of personality disorder involved in all this codswallop. The need to big themselves up as a sort of saviour. To be special. To have a clarity of vision of the ‘truth’. A whistleblower with an insight that the rest of us are too indoctrinated to see. The phrase ‘sheeple’ is an identifier - i.e. I’m able to see through the fog of disinformation that even the best investigative journalists, who one would argue are ultra-hungry to break a story and get the big scoop through thorough research, can’t get to. But… they can. The conceit is astounding. Oh snd the BS about the media colluding to cover it all up? Well speaking as someone who’s worked for the demonised ‘msm’ I can state for a fact there’s no censorship beyond the laws of the land and the press standards. Never in any editorial meeting did the editor or anyone else say ‘we can’t print that’ or anything remotely similar, unless confusing a paper’s line - some confuse this with an unbiased press of which there is no such thing - which is a different matter. There’s always been right and left biased press. Anyone who thinks otherwise is beyond help. So the reality is, if it’s a story worth reading and it fits the papers agenda, they’ll print it (the BBC and it’s duty to be unbiased is what messes with these people’s brains) and if it’s world changing it most certainly will be published, amazingly even if it was to prove the nutters right. But then the aforementioned nutters would inevitably say there was something afoot. An ulterior motive. You can’t argue with stupid, as the saying goes.        End of sermon. 🙏

Freddie Francis ● 688d