⟵ Return to index
Related Gates: poogate
01-02-2024
i agree .@lonnibesancon - this is shameless. you, bik, gideon and sheldrick did nothing to expose #surgisphere. we did. the people you hate so much and denigrate. doctors and scientists who are not supported by pharma millions. @chrismartenson https://twitter.com/_escapekey_/status/1620511780467511296
and yet you join the ranks of the "no-expertise experts" recruited in 2020 do fulfil a particular role in #covid just one first author paper before 2020. how does someone get a phd with one first author paper?
and then suddenly you are given the job of writing papers with @gidmk which go straight into @nejm, the home of the #surgisphere fraud. who fast-tracked your paper? who are you - with no research history - to be first author on this letter to nejm?pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=besan%c3…
now... where have i seen this before @feeredfern? vanatech "behavioural sciences" in the uk? a shell company. nudge units. where did i catch them before? how did steadson call you to write this letter? who is david steadson?
@davidsteadson only has two papers on pubmed.gov in total. so why is he running an extremely suspicious and coviert "behavioural engineering" unit and getting besancon to front letters to the @nejm? what exactly do @vana_tech do?
david steadson (with the azov flag in his bio) has zero medical publications pre-covid. so if he is not driving lonni, that means it must be @flahault (the 3rd author) at the "institute of global health" hmmm
flahault is a huge name in "global health" aka who aka "onehealth" - all linked organisations. hugely eminent, but now on the dark side of medicine. so how does he get involved with two hardly-published authors to front a letter to the @nejm?
well through @vana_tech of course - the company that does "nothing" and has no presence on the internet. ▶️find a junior researcher with no publications. ▶️ghost write a script for them. ▶️use your bigwig to underwrite the letter. and finally...
▶️publish in the totally captured @thelancet or @nejm both of which publish total junk like #surgisphere... which they would have gotten away with if it hadn't been for those pesky #mousearmy twitterers
and that is how your unknown researcher gets elevated to "expert" and that is #poogate and #lancetgate and #beijinggideon and #chisquaredkyle and all the other astroturf "fraud busters".https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1619908640919650304
and i bet if you look hard enough you will find a link between vanatech and recently exposed 77th brigade... or andrew hill, @unitaid and the #magicapp that led to so many deaths by withdrawing antibiotics from the elderly. this is not over. not by a long chalk#3tblets.
well i think we have the answer. steadson's following list is a real who's who of covid zealots, including daszak, gorski, bik, multiple 77th accounts. and... ukraine extremists and... asio. i mean, who tf follows asio? this guy makes alexander downer look tame.
i'll be blocking #ukrainedave as i do with all the azov accounts. it's not worth the hassle of engaging with the military "disinformation units". they will expose themselves eventually. he can bleat all he wants. archive.is/wip/qrvbu
yes the 77th brigade are real. real scum committing real treason. not real soldiers. https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/1620537301976727553
this one's for you @feeredfern vanatech and beta - the australian government ai nudge unit. did ai create the magic app protocol that killed so many of our elderly because ai does not understand the nuances of human medicine?
Related Gates: pregnagate
26-02-2024
cheesy debunk 🧀🧀🧀... huge red flags over this #pregnancy and #miscarriage paper, which is absolute junk. we're going to dive in and show you why this should never have been published and anybody associated with it will be forever tainted. academic.oup.com/humrep/advance… https://twitter.com/drmike_rimmer/status/1628165788233351169
here's the first red flag. redacted tables. i have never seen this in more than 20 years reviewing papers. this is from the actual pdf on the hum reprod page for the paper. web.archive.org/web/2023022600…
now we're going to have to assume (because the titles are redacted🤦‍♀️) that the first forest plot shows the #miscarriage rate in each study. the bigger the square the more the weighting in the study - generally more for bigger studies. the two largest raise a massive red flag
the kachikis study has a #miscarriage rate of only 0.7% and the kharbanda study has a miscarriage rate of 12.5%. both given similar weightings. how is this possible? well, let's look at the included kachikis study.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/p…
the answer is there you just have to understand the wording. 49/6244 = 0.78%. but this is just the women that reported a miscarrriage "at the time of their second dose". and the trimester of vaccination (hugely important) is not stated.
the kachikis paper should not have been included because it was not looking prospectively for miscarriage. it was merely reporting short term events in a narrow time window, of women who were pregnant many of whom would have already passed their first trimester.
the authors were also double-dipping, taking fees from pfizer and the nich this paper was completely inappropriate for this meta-analysis. massive fail - showing that the authors had no idea what they were doing here.
worse, the 0.7% miscarriage rate is impossible - unless you are including women who were in advanced weeks of pregnancy. once you get past 14 weeks, miscarriage rates fall to this level. this is what the kachikis study did - ignored the group of interest (first trimester)
the baseline miscarriage rate in a normal population (after diagnosis by ultrasound) is well established at 5-6% (naert et al). #bigpharma will have you believe it is up to 25%. it's not. arkmedic.substack.com/p/the-curious-…
irrespective of whether you agree with the baseline rate the fact that there is such a discrepancy between kachikis and kharbanda, yet they were given similar weighting, shows that these authors were not competent to write this meta-analysis. and look at magnus and moro - >20%
now let's look a bit more at the 2021 magnus study. this is actually a case-control study so shouldn't have been used in this context (overestimates the rate). it wasn't even a study but was a letter to the discredited #lancetgate @nejm who published it.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/p…
the 2022 magnus follow-up study is of some interest and underpins a previous meta-analysis touted by @vikilovesfacs who doesn't understand the role of confounders in clinical trials. it was quoted but not used in this analysis ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/p…
interestingly the 2022 magnus study, using the same pregnancy registry, does not include data on miscarriage to confirm or refute the 2021 study. that study was massively confounded - the authors even wrote about it separately.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/p…
so the magnus group(1) failed to follow up on miscarriage rates(2) published a study showing "no impact" on stillbirth rates despite knowing that the study was confounded by smoking and low ses(3) have a delusional bias towards the vaccines' efficacy (now known to be negative)
finally we come to the last major weighted study in this ridiculous "meta-analysis". the kharbanda study 2021. here it is. another case-control study rather than a cohort study which is what is needed (otherwise the denominator is unknown)pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34495304/
there are big red flags on this study. the first is the overall calculated miscarriage rate. it's super low, consistent with naert et al. 264,104 registered pregnancies 13,160 miscarriages ▶▶ 5% miscarriage rate. this is a huge finding....
...because this is supposed to be a major us emr database. kharbanda threw pfizer, moderna and the cdc under the bus. if the baseline miscarriage should be 5% then why did the @cdcgov say that their post-vaccine miscarriage rate of 14% was ok?igorchudov.substack.com/p/cdc-data-mod…
or is it possible that the kharbanda data is "too good to be true"? well who was the supervising author? one healther s lipkind. the dsmb members were literally pfizer employees.
the fact that pfizer paid the dsmb members is a travesty revealed recently under deposition of kathryn by @aaronsirisg the dsmb should be completely independent - but it wasn't. thehighwire.com/videos/the-dep…
so what about elyse kharbanda? she's been very busy - 50 papers in 4 years. niaid grant awards. fauci's organisation. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=kharband…
she is also a bigwig for the cdc's vaccine safety datalink. so this dataset should be publicly available, but it's not. therefore we must assume it's synthetic. cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/…
because there were only 7 authors on this paper with over 200,000 pregnancy records. data collection finished june 28. paper submitted, reviewed, revised and accepted aug 26. it usually takes about 6 weeks to review, revise and accept a paper.
if you're expecting me to believe that a small group of authors working full time had time to write a paper on 200,000+ pregnancy records in two weeks, i'm going to say one word to you. #lancetgate
it's not possible to publish this paper with these authors so i'm going to go out on a limb and tell you how i think the kharbanda study came about. i think it was ghost written, just like the desai #lancetgate papers. and based on synthetic data.
that would explain how the miscarriage rate was so low (normally low). because the ai that synthesised the data generated it from the existing emr data that was available. i don't believe that lipkind and kharbanda analysed this data. https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1608768003684061184
they are welcome to prove me wrong. submit the data to the public domain. then we'll ask you some questions about how you analysed it. let's see what happens.#lancetgate #pregnagate
addendum: this gets a little dark. if elyse kharbanda wrote this paper, why is gabriela vazquez-benitez's name on the supplementary pdf that was submitted to the journal after the acceptance date? and why does she have a profile on deepai.org?
and more on the pfizer conflicts of the dsmb here:uncoverdc.com/2022/04/13/pfi…@chrismartenson @maryannedemasi @sonia_elijah
update: thank you to an intrepid anonymouse for pointing out that alisa kachikis's huge conflicts of interest also turned up in this article about covid deaths (fortuitous or intentional) of pregnant women follow the link to the highlighted section.thewayout.substack.com/p/the-war-on-l…
bear in mind that all the papers in this thread have been reused for other "meta-analyses" to attempt to underpin the false claim of safety of the mrna investigational therapies in #pregnancy. please share the thread in response to any such posts that you see#pregnagate
update: i should clarify that the miscarriage rate in kharbanda is impossible to reliably ascertain from the available data. the 5% rate was deduced from the published tables but these include pregnancies counted more than once.... https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1629675987700187137?s=20
in addition the cohort is not prospective so includes women of different gestations. 42% of the cohort were 14+ weeks who have a less than 1% risk of miscarriage. this produces a huge skew the 5% estimator therefore stands, unless elyse kharbanda wishes to publish the raw data.
Related Gates: deergate
15-03-2024
reminder. @thelancet sold the world out on #lancetgate allowing the genocide of 50000 elderly in nursing homes in the uk. richard horton is the editor in chief. the same person who colluded with the gmc to remove andrew wakefield and then lie to the world as to what he did. https://twitter.com/profnfenton/status/1635719548916707329
to clarify, horton's "testimony" set up a false claim against wakefield who was then portrayed publicly as having committed fraud in publishing his paper on the destroyed lives of a case series of children after the mmr vaccine. wakefield simply asked for a pause on mmr...
and to give the vaccines separately as previously. this was terrible for the pharma industry so @thelancet made sure that the world thought the paper was fraudulent, even though it never was. the only claim against wakefield was...
that he didn't declare the fact that he was an expert witness for a legal firm taking on similar cases. this was not a cause for declaration at that time. many high profile doctors help in legal cases. it's normal. of course if you work for pharma that's fine.
for the record this is the bmj editorial. subsequently claiming fraud never raised or shown in the gmc enquirybmj.com/content/342/bm…
yet this is the whistleblower report to the contrarybmj.com/content/342/bm…
and wakefield's version is in his book goodreads.com/book/show/8217…
make your own mind up about who is right. but one thing that is definitely known is that richard horton published the fraudulent #surgisphere data in his journal that led to the removal of working protocols for covid that included #3tablets antibiotics.
and these protocols were adopted from those used in the treatment of sars in 2003 from which very few people died no lockdowns. no masks. antibiotics to treat pneumonia. a more lethal disease but less deaths any investigation into covid must now include horton and @thelancet
more on horton, goldacre and the links to the ccp herehttps://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1542451359206608896
for further clarity it should be noted that the bmj editorial here, which never lists the scientific claim of "fraud" (and which was never shown) is just a rehash of the extremist brian deer's obsession with wakefield. godlee fails to declare thisbmj.com/content/342/bm…
so an opportunity to clarify. @fgodlee did you collaborate with brian deer to write that editorial without declaring that vested collaboration, after you were already forced to declare competing interests at a later date?bmj.com/content/342/bm…
it didn't take long. the narcissistic brian deer thought he would stroll along to my timeline and spam his website. so i archived it and asked him just two questions about his conflicts. then i was blocked. https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1635945629729030144
and.... such a bad look.
well, well, well... look at this. why on earth was brian deer in #samoa at the time that children were dying at an unprecedented rate after a measles vaccine delivery from unicef? unless he was sent by pharma. is he their "agent"?https://twitter.com/carl_jurassic/status/1636079865442041856?s=20
related #deergate https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1636103708932210688
#deergate keeps giving. this is what he wrote after blocking me, so i didn't see it. this is an indicator of a person who lies at the drop of a hat, because this was not the charge that was being made. did you partially or wholly ghost write the @fgodlee manuscript?
Related Gates: bedfordgate
17-03-2024
please understand how conflicts of interests work with doctors and academics. they are not direct payments. grants to the institution allow the academic to claim kudos and get on committees. it's power that drives them. not money.npr.org/sections/goats…
https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1633646948657012736
https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1615123780757786625
more tweets on the trevor bedford involvement with fauci and his role in removing the pradhan paper from the internet, resulting in the creation of a false pandemic that allowed the iatrogenic deaths of millions of people. https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1635377229831233540
https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1530320663931592707
https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1541654792388616192
https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1541727422378147846?s=20
there are many more on this. the biggest question though, is why @robertkennedyjr told us that trevor bedford ghost wrote the #surgisphere #lancetgate papers that led to the deaths of so many people. @sonia_elijah #bedfordgate twitter.com/search?q=trvrb…
19-05-2024
er.... @feeredfern @carl_jurassic why does the epstein-linked @nyphospital turn up everywhere we look?ohdsi.org/wp-content/upl…
whoa! and every where we look... under every stone... we find @iqvia_global the "data collaborator" for every covid study you will never see the data for. @martinneil9
@iqvia_global @martinneil9 bingo. holy crap. this study was published in 2020 and was basically the third in the #lancetgate series. completely unverifiable and no possibility of being real data. where did the data come from? iqvia. jennifer lane (an unknown). oxford. ohdsi...
@nyphospital (jeffrey epstein) oxford. astrazeneca. columbia irving. erasmus (marion koopmans) vanderbilt david geffen bayer chinese academy (ccp) no such thing as a "conspiracy theory" when the conspiracy is this big. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32864627/@charlesrixey @daoyu15
you literally cannot make this stuff up. they didn't know this when they chose "88" as their theme? well, maybe symbolism will be their downfall.
hades? give me a break. @1979pop
and who the hell is this guy? absolutely nothing to see here.
i'm going to try and spell this out. @ohdsi are a shell corporation for #bigpharma, recruiting geeks with no clinical experience to push synthetic data sets generated by @iqvia_global to create papers that convince the world to buy their products. that's it. #covidin1tweet
@ohdsi @iqvia_global and you know what? if @ohdsi or @iqvia_global don't like what i've just revealed, they can give me access to jennifer lane's full dataset and i will show you whether it's real. you know why?....@boriquagato @ndorms @jennifercelane
@ohdsi @iqvia_global @boriquagato @ndorms @jennifercelane ...because #hydroxychloroquine is one of the safest drugs on earth and there is zero chance that it is associated with a 65% increased risk of cardiac mortality as claimed by @jennifercelane this paper is literally #surgisphere 3. you know how i know?...
@ohdsi @iqvia_global @boriquagato @ndorms @jennifercelane because i've been in this business longer than jenny from the block and she had never written a first author paper of any significance before iqvia ghost wrote this one for her. now she's able to analyse a 1m patient study, and lead a consortium? nope. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=lane%2c%…
@ohdsi @iqvia_global @boriquagato @ndorms @jennifercelane and this is exactly how we busted #surgisphere. it's the weekend. grab a cup of tea, coffee or glass of wine and sit down to one of the best analyses of the surgisphere scandal via @chrismartenson. enjoy your weekend. jenny might be busy.
and... if you really don't believe me about the new york presbyterian hospital and jeffrey epstein... here you are. enjoy your weekend. arkmedic.substack.com/p/william-farr…
oops apologies to @salliepermar for leaving her out!
Related Gates: emrgate
20-05-2024
unhealthy cheese 🧀🧀#emrgate 🧵 this is how it works. your hospital signs you up to an overseas emr (health record) corporation. they get your health data. you get zip. that data is used to generate artificial study data that promotes a drug, and pharma makes $billions.
here's an example. @addenbrookes hospital - one of the biggest hospitals in the country and a massive #bigpharma advocate... gives your health data to @epic. what, you didn't know? it's written in the t&c. right at the bottom of a 4,400 word disclaimer. can't you see it?
now comes the smart part. usually @nejm or @thelancet are involved. a noob medic comes along with a first author paper from a massive collaboration of people who don't know each other. the noob puts together an analysis of a 900,000+ patient cohort. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32864627/
there are 14 data sources from different countries. >900,000 patients. data amassed over 20 years up to the same year of the publication (therefore limited time for analysis). cleaning, matching, imputing this data would take 2 years+. @chrismartenson
yet we are expected to believe that an orthopaedic registrar with no prior publication record did this in a couple of months. not possible. the appendix for the study alone is 130 pages.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=lane%2c+…
multiple pharma and database companies were involved which would mean months of back & forth emails and agreements. some of the ethics approvals (where they bothered) would take months. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/p…
this is how we worked out that #surgisphere (#lancetgate) was fake. both @thelancet and @nejm were involved, because they are simp journals for #bigpharma. the study size prohibited any valid analysis in the time they proposed, it was impossible.
which means these studies are either synthetic (created by modelling prior data sets gleaned by skimming your health data) or ghost written (written by pharma employees with ai help). in this case both of these things are likely to be true...
but @jennifercelane went along with it anyway. i have no idea what her contribution was but it looks like she was the "medic" front for a paper ghost written and produced by pharma and @iqvia_global who are the vaccine industry's data curators (or creators).
and here's the clincher. this should have been a red flag to jenny and @prieto_alhambra who was the supervising author. you see, it's a simple fact that azithromycin isn't a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. nor a long term treatment for anything in common use.
so it's just not possible that a third of the cohort taking hydroxychloroquine were also taking azithromycin long term. find a rheumatologist and ask them how many patients on hcq they also treat with azithromycin. zero. it's not a treatment.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=azithrom…
long-term azithromycin use is rare - bronchiectasis and other unusual indications. if it's used long term (i've never seen someone on it) it would be low dose, not the doses suggested in this paper. we're talking less than 1:10,000 peoplepubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=long-ter…
so the probability that one-third of a cohort of rheumatoid arthritis patients were also on long term azithromycin, when that is less than 1:10,000 people? zero. i'm calling this paper fake until the data is available to public inspection... "patient level data not available".
so this paper must be assumed to be the 3rd in the #surgisphere #lancetgate scandal. the 4th would have to be @bengoldacre's @opensafely paper in the @thelancetrheum that is also not available to inspection.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33349815/ all attempting to discredit #hcq
and all these papers (including the original #surgisphere papers) appear to have been ghost written, because it's not possible for the lead authors to do what they did in the time available.
and the real people that provided the health data have no idea that their data is being used to push a false pharma narrative that is endangering them, and making billions for the pharma companies who then pump a few quid back into the institutions. bargain basement bribery
👆👆👆this is #emrgate. but this 👇👇👇 is just one thread of the back-story. #surgisphere #surgisphere3 #emrgate@chrismartenson @feeredfernhttps://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1659531005529817091
@chrismartenson @feeredfern bingo and boom 💥💥💥 here's your ghost writer. patrick ryan of @ohdsi and @janssenglobal the lead author should be the corresponding author. if the corresponding author is not the lead author, it's because they don't want you asking questions of the lead author.
@chrismartenson @feeredfern @ohdsi @janssenglobal https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1659799752731664384?s=20
https://twitter.com/i/status/1659807664862289921
https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1659875180297228288?s=20
04-06-2024
important 🧀🧵 please remember that what @trishgreenhalgh is coordinating here is a mass attack on doctors who are raising safety concerns in the public interest. it is illegal. if you would like to raise concerns about her conduct, you can raise these with the @gmcuk.... https://twitter.com/trishgreenhalgh/status/1664714630239748098
patricia also has undeclared conflicts of interest related to pharma and to oxford university. undeclared conflicts of interest (e.g. on her twitter feed whilst claiming to be an authority) are potential grounds for deregistration from the @gmcuk ...
...on the basis of the andrew wakefield case, with which patricia greenhalgh @trishgreenhalgh was circuitously involved. bmj.com/rapid-response…
remember that the two people who were the main witnesses against andrew wakefield were brian deer, who is pharma's fake-journalist lapdog and who refuses to declares his funding...
and richard horton, editor of @thelancet who published fake data in #lancetgate that resulted in potentially millions of deaths from covid and facilitated the rollout of covid vaccines - the worst vaccine in medical history - that may have killed 100,000s or more
by contributing to @deerbrian's propaganda, patricia greenhalgh colluded to bias the wakefield case. and wakefield was deregistered primarily for "failing to disclose conflicts of interest" even though those "conflicts" were acting for lawyers, which is what many doctors do.
so, on the same basis, patricia greenhalgh is contravening @gmcuk rules in the following ways(1) failing to disclose conflicts of interest(2) soliciting vexatious reports to the gmc (3) public intimidation and threat to gmc registered doctors acting in the public interest
(4) bringing medicine into disrepute (5) airing private grievances on political grounds against medical peers in public(6) failing to declare conflicts of interest in her role with @oxprimarycare linked to the lethal az vaccine
if you would like to raise a complaint about patricia greenhalgh on the basis of the above information with the @gmcuk please go to the link below. any member of the public can do this. gmc-uk.org/concerns/suppo…
in the alternative you may choose to raise a concern with the university as @uniofoxford are clearly endorsing prof greenhalgh acting in contravention of uk public interest disclosure law, with vested interests. you can do that at this link. phc.ox.ac.uk/about/contact-…@pjhlaw
i will add that i will be happy to take down this tweet thread if i receive notification that @trishgreenhalgh has cancelled her vexatious campaign and apologised to @draseemmalhotra and any other doctor acting in the public interest in regard to public safety concerns.
the bullying of doctors acting in the public interest needs to stop. it is driven by pharma and zealots and it's not the first time. it needs to be the last. doctors contributing to this kind of heinous campaign need to be looking at jail sentences.article.wn.com/view/2009/03/3…
@threadreaderapp do your thing
Related Gates: lancetgate2
27-08-2024
for the record, ben goldacre had campaigned for years for full data transparency. in 2017 he backtracked. the paper is here. this happened under stuart buck's grant. the call for full data transparency died in 2017. pfizer would benefit in 2020. bmj.com/content/357/bm…https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1695593364392124691
also for the record there were two papers on the "failure" of #hydroxychloroquine published in the same journal, using huge datasets not available for audit, within 2 months late 2020. the second was ben goldacre's opensafely group. thelancet.com/journals/lanrh…
the earlier paper was funded by pharma and supposedly found over 300,000 patients who were taking hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for rheumatoid arthritis. that is not a combination used for ra. this paper needs to be fully audited. thelancet.com/journals/lanrh…
so what is the probability that two huge papers (over 100,000 patients) appeared at around the same time, in the same journal, after the #surgisphere scandal had died down, using exactly the same kind of model as surgisphere, and not available for inspection? @chrismartenson
@chrismartenson i should also point out that we have looked at this many times before, so this is an archival (legal) record. opensafely have produced papers previously that are not consistent with the same data from open sources. #lancetgate #lancetgate2 https://twitter.com/jikkyleaks/status/1658691730601033737?s=20
it's also worth noting that in the lancet rheumatology goldacre paper, the covid mortality rate for hcq users was 0.2% - in the uk in april 2020. the corresponding published mortality for the uk was over 0.5%. for over 70's: hcq mortality 0.3% uk mortality 1.2% over 80's hcq mortality 1% uk mortality 5% the whole cohort had similar mortality rates with or without hcq, but the non-hcq users were using other inflammatory modulators (dmards). goldacre's paper probably found one of the most striking cohorts (and thus treatment options) with reduced covid mortality, but this was never investigated. @profnfenton @joshg99 @clarecraigpath @p_mcculloughmd @stkirsch @alexandrosm
and just imagine that the massive reduction (60%+) in death rate in the #hydroxychloroquine (or dmard) cohort was known by rentsch and goldacre in jan 2021 but they failed to declare it, and refused to release the data... there were 78,000 covid deaths in the uk in 2021.
15-11-2024
wow! this whistleblower testimony raises serious probity concerns on another of @boulware_dr's trials "designed to fail".... this time the activ-6 ivm trial. it is not possible that this trial could have shown a benefit. this is big. @alexandrosmdoyourownresearch.substack.com/p/the-story-of…
and a reminder that @boulware_dr was involved in another trial that "killed off" #hydroxychloroquine in 2020 for similar reasons. in that study he "forgot" to declare his relationship with gilead and then went overboard on the next paper. methinks thou dost protest too much?
in that same trial boulware claimed that they used folic acid as a placebo "because it was similar in appearance to hydroxychloroquine" that was not true. see for yourself. the problem is that folic acid is an active treatment candidate.
so, what are the odds that the boulware study happened to choose a "placebo" that was subsequently (and preemptively) known to be a furin inhibitor when a study was being conducted into a treatment for the only sars-like virus with a furin site?pubs.rsc.org/en/content/art…
and of course, in the final coincidence the boulware study was published in the same journal - the infamous @nejm that published the diabolical #surgisphere #lancetgate fraud. we caught them that time... @chrismartenson @franklin_reeder