It might help to explain that Doctor Kory is the head of the FLCCC, all of whose members support vaccinations. In fact, the only one of thousands of doctors who have protested at the mRNA jab who acknowledge the deaths and injuries caaused by vacinations per se, is Sherri Tenpenny. Having studied all vaccinations and their effects versus efficacy, I would state categorically that their stance flies in the face of 140 years of official analysis and conclusions. I passed two such Public Health exams, which were standard worldwide, and these show the actual causes of infectious disease reduction. Vaccinations show no correlation whatsoever. The vaxx industry has teamed up with the MSM to create a phoney history
I always thought they were critical of establishment positions, and it seems I wrongly assumed they would naturally be critical of the vaccine harms and shot-pushing!
That would explain why Dr Kory has an overt trust in the 'reporting' by the medical system; he has not encountered the buffers of the vaccine harms yet and has no reason to doubt the system (despite ironically contesting it over C19 treatments).
It's a shame. Dr Richard Ebright (not related to FLCCC) has a similar pro-vaccine mindset despite being critical of the US gov's zoonotic origin theory. I've been trying to politely sway him on the matter. He hasn't acknowledged my responses, but I'm hoping he reads and changes his mind over time.
I'm an unapologetic generalist and my attitude is that all doctors and nurses are sociopathic murdering members of the medical mafia. I am willing to accept that a handful have rethought their position but I still incline towards mass approbation of the sternest kind. LOL.
The FLCCC is not in favor of the mRNA jab. Beside the fact that they have 2 links on their website providing advice to those injured by the injection, they say this expressly:
"the vaccines don’t stop infection or transmission (i.e., they are not effective) and skyrocketing spikes in adverse reaction reports (i.e., they are not safe)." Hardly pro vaccine.
So my original assumption they weren't pro-vaccine was the correct one to occupy. I'm happy to be swayed by the evidence whichever way it points.
So my question becomes, why does Dr Kory invite people to trust medical experts to 'do the right thing' in relation to midazolam shots in light of overwhelming evidence showing the majority do not, especially in light of treatments and SC2 poison shots? Surely he knows this is an untrustworthy metric given the levels of complicity and deceit?
I do believe he answers your question in his latest article, "I can’t believe any suggestion that health care providers systematically began to practice euthanasia or homicide in the early pandemic. Or that the policies were formed with a primary intent to cause excess death in care homes. I just can’t do it. And won’t, because if I do, then the world is lost to me."
First, as always, you do great work. Damn shame more folks don't follow you. You're one of the smarter AND steadier ones around.
I can't speak directly for FLCCC but I can speak to 90+% of "Frontline Doctors".
90+% are against THIS vaccine (c19 shitshot) only. But they are uber pro all other vaccines. They hype them constantly.
These "Doctors" make NO sense with their idiocy and it pisses me off because they are extremely misleading - and more importantly, dangerously wrong. There is no safe vaccine. There is no effective vaccine. Period.
I'm responding a year+ late so I'm assuming you have figured this out?
I generally hold a distrust of any authority figures, especially promoted ones. The more promoted and in-my-face they are, the greater the overall distrust.
All of whose members support vaccinations? Really? You mean Dr. Mary Talley Bowman, who lost her job refusing the mandate and treating patients with ivermectin? THAT Dr. Bowman?
I was generalising. But opposing the mRNA jab, or supporting Ivermectin is a strong indication of sanity, that is all. I merely said that, apart from Tenpenny, not one of the listed medical experts who oppose the mRA jab have condemned vaccinations per se.
Being fair, Kory was one of the first to describe the banning of Ivermectin as "Mass murder", but he is still pro-vaccination. And Yeadon and Mallone have both said that all of their group are pro-vaccination. "We are vaccination experts" they said.
To my mind, that puts them squarely in the enemy camp. ie lazy experts, not crazy experts. Thus, I view them as conveient and temporary allies.
Malone is in this up to his eyeballs. Haven't trusted him, ever.
I'm not anti-vaccination - some sterilizing vaccines I believe are beneficial risk/reward. Sterilizing - prevents infection, transmission, and confers immunity, usually lifelong. I'm perfectly fine not getting polio. But now kids get a ridiculous amount of shots, too close together, for no good reason. So many people get shingles now - because kids are all vaccinated against chicken pox. Adults used to get a mid-life immune boost when exposed through their kids. And autism through the roof.
As a literal nobody, with enough time on my hands to be typing on substack, I would never be so bold as to call someone a lazy expert.
"I would never be so bold as to call someone a lazy expert."
Perhaps you wouldn't, but others will, especially when effort is lacking. We're in an era when trust is at an all time low, and evidentiary standards need to be improved.
"Malone is in this up to his eyeballs. Haven't trusted him, ever."
I think we all have people we're suspicious of. So long as we agree on discussing the truth and evidence we shouldn't be led astray by figureheads.
"I'm not anti-vaccination"
Whether you're pro or anti-vaccination, I don't mind, so long as you're pro-truth and evidence.
You might want to read the CDC fudged statistics article regarding vaccine mortality rates:
I said that I MYSELF am happy to have avoided polio. I'm old enough to have had all the other childhood diseases, so no MMR vaccinations. No flu shots ever. No covid jab.
I have used FLCCC protocol for prevention for almost 3 years. Had a very weak, very brief nothing-burger case of delta in 11/21 - when others were being hospitalized. FLCCC protocol for that as well. I left my ineffectual, cowardly, long-time GP for a wonderful doc who is part of the FLCCC network. She's not vaccinated either.
I give the side eye to people who, from their desk chair, cavalierly trash and berate these docs who have put their livelihoods on the line fighting for the therapeutics. Not Malone, he's risked nothing. That's just where I'm at.
Evidently your litmus test for Dr. Kory is that he acknowledge the deliberate mass murder. Naomi Wolfe just wrote a brilliant article saying she believes that there is no explanation for this evil apart from a return of the "ancient" evil. Dr. Kory will acknowledge what he can, in his way, in his time.
"Evidently your litmus test for Dr. Kory is that he acknowledge the deliberate mass murder."
He doesn't have to agree, but if he's going to refute the premise, he needs to address the evidence as it's actually presented, and not go after very weird, selective strawman arguments that don't discuss the points raised. If you read the article I am confident you will be shocked.
It does not rely on myself; I do not invoke self-expertise (nor should it). References, graphs, datasets, peer-reviewed papers, articles, government statements are all provided, and you're invited to read, even if it's to pick it apart and offer criticisms.
"Naomi Wolfe just wrote a brilliant article saying she believes that there is no explanation for this evil apart from a return of the "ancient" evil."
As I've said to others I don't use the article to determine intentions. My suspicion is it's depopulation agenda, but I think injecting my suspicions into the dataset muddies the waters, and I want people to be able to take the data and make their own determinations of it.
I only ask they look directly at the data. Follow the links, poke the datasets, read the documents.
" Dr. Kory will acknowledge what he can, in his way, in his time."
I understand it is a difficult ask. I will continue to push him to address the evidence, even if it's only to receive criticism on it directly so I may refine what is presented. I have asked others for feedback and currently there is a shocked silence within medical circles.
You know everything about everything -- you certainly shoot your mouth off like you do. Now you're asking a nobody on substack about some FLCCC docs - that you've already trash talked? Dr. Kory has already posted a reply to himself, and you're right there ragging at him. Some discernment and impulse control is in order, no?
I've already been around this cut-de-sac. Once is enough.
Do you have any actual critiques of my raised points which aren't hyperbole attacking my person?
"Now you're asking a nobody on substack about some FLCCC docs - that you've already trash talked?"
Perhaps you have me confused with someone else, but I expressed surprise that FLCCC had pro-vaccine views, and has given them the benefit of the doubt in assuming they were critical. Apparently, this counts as 'trashtalking' in your perview, to which I'd retort you seem to be particularly oversensitive on, and very eager to make a very large mountain out of a comment.
"you're right there ragging at him"
Calling him out for failing to refute points he keeps ignoring is not 'ragging' on him. You're more than welcome to document the ad hominems.
"Some discernment and impulse control is in order, no?"
No, it isn't. Being dishonest and lying prompts being called out, and I would say you're being very much hypocritical in that regard. Or would you prefer it if I told you to 'stay in your lane' like Dr Kory did everyone else?
I notice you're respectful enough to use "Dr." Kory when replying to me - but not when browbeating him on his stack. He isn't obligated to reply to you. Sage Hana, right above your comment over there, understands how to do it. You might learn something. And get a reply.
I doubt I will get a reply. And for the record, I use the full title - Dr Pierre Kory - in my rebuttals, not merely in the comments.
Whether or not I refer to him as Dr Kory, Dr Pierre, Pierre Kory, or just Kory in the comments - styles which I alternate between depending on the writing prose - are stylistic choices.
If you actually read my rebuttals here, you will see I happily call him 'Dr Kory' regularly enough, and even show his credentials in the thumbnails!
Do you have any actual rebuttals to any of the points I have raised, or will you continue to mischaracterise me with selective strawman arguments and ad hominems? Because you're not doing his crowd reputation any favours with such selective attacks.
How someone else behaves does not dictate my behaviour, for the record. I am not a doormatt, and I am not a conformist. Tough shit if I don't use a title but you can't obligate speech.
Further, until Kory inclines a similar level of respect likewise for my own work - rather than mischaracterising it with vague unhelpful generalisations - I am under no obligation to have to do anything, nor can you compel me to do so, especially on my own Substack!
Dr. Kory is to be much admired, but this is a solid article.
I haven't read the substack article that relates to the Dr. Kory's quotes , so I cannot comment , but as a general rule be careful when you tell people to " stay in their lane ".
And it is silly to argue ( more or less ) that " the medical system will police itself ".
I recommend both authors check out the latest research put out by the estimable Denis G. Rancourt.
Personally I had no issue with Dr Kory until after he freaked out on the evidence compiled showing mass elderly deaths in the UK. If he wants to argue he was misinformed or the evidence lacking at the time, he can, but he cannot push for us to deny the collation of evidence that points in one direction so clearly purely by the use of ICU anecdotes.
I have invited him on Twitter to highlight the errors in my work (which was also looked over by Jikkyleaks), and have made sure I make no statements not substantiated by the overwhelming evidence. I've not yet heard a response; I hope the rebuttal prompts a response instead.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - George Orwell, 1984
I feel he's delivered up a list of exceedingly lame excuses on a silver platter, to be used effectively by the corrupt and complicit medical murderers.
Some of the excuses raised were already refuted in the article he had indirectly responded to (but evidently avoided linking to because I suspect he fears the evidence would undermine his argument).
For example, the suggestions the drugs were in response to C19 is undermined by the fact the death certifications attribute to dementia, peer-review shows the three-fold increase cannot be explained by any normal pandemic responses, and evidence shows the drugs do not aid in respiratory illness.
Gatekeeping WHAT exactly? Have you read anything at the FLCCC site? Have you taken their protocols? Have you made use of their resources in researching a way to purchase the necessary therapeutics? Do you work with one of their providers?
Writing a whole article full of fallacies and emotional pleas to refute a report only tangentially related to Covid doesn't strike you as a little odd? If I read UD right, there's a good chance that many deaths of the elderly were "encouraged" by care home providers in the UK. Neither my comment nor the author's report question Dr. Kory's competence in treating Covid. None of your questions are even germane to the subject of Dr. Kory weighing in on a report of possible misdeeds in another country. I'd offer you a hug if I knew you IRL, you seem quite emotional over this topic. I would also say Dr. Kory succeeded, at least in regards to you, in rhetorically dismissing the source material.
Personally I seethe with hatred for the people who have hurt others under cover of Covid and knowing what's best for others.
I feel fairly sure this is what happened to my mom in Dec 2020. My daughters and I traveled to visit her at Thanksgiving but by the time we landed, they had 30 positive cases in the wing of her floor. She wasn't one of them even though her roommate was. By the time we left, she tested positive with no symptoms. When I landed, she had been diagnosed with bronchitis or something they were treating with antibiotics.
When I asked if she was in any respiratory distress, the answer was curiously no. She died within two days. Now, she was 96 so it's not impossible that it was natural, but it seemed very strange. The funeral home was overwhelmed with the deaths--more than they'd ever seen at one time. Shoved into a body bag in her nightgown, with a closed casket funeral with fewer people in attendance than the pallbearers and speakers.
One thing I'd add is that they brought in an outside doctor for all the Covid cases. It wasn't the staff, who I believe really cared for my mom. So it's not necessary that everyone be complicit, as Kory says.
I'm sorry to hear of your loss regarding your mother.
"it's not necessary that everyone be complicit"
The evidence does not allow me to speak to the depth or level of complicity, nor does the article try to assign guilt - except perhaps implicating NICE. Perhaps some staff refused the orders, maybe others went above and beyond to follow the orders, maybe others quit, or some were ignorant to inappropriateness of the orders, or didn't care the legal ramifications. I cannot speak to people's unexpressed intentions, only actions and outcomes.
The Daily Mail mentions at least one whistleblower, and there could be more, ignored in the sea of media silence.
My job isn't to convict those responsible for the mass murders, nor do I have the resources to sift guilt or innocence, it is to expose the mass murders to begin with, such it may open the door to appropriate convictions.
What I can highlight is evidence drugs were abused for purposes they weren't intended for, following a government issued directive, that lead to a large quantities of deaths that were abnormally large in any context, with no plausible explanation as to why, labelled under a completely different set of deaths.
On weight of evidence I am thoroughly convinced it was the mass murdering of the elderly. Who gave the order, who followed it and who didn't is beyond the scope, hidden, no doubt, behind closed doors, and I doubt culprits will eagerly confess to wrongdoing.
Back before I did Substack in Dec 2021, I had a YT called Cui Bono Covid? https://youtu.be/jSF7O2FI0S4. Here's the description: In this video I look at who benefited from the pandemic, other than just pharmaceutical companies, and how the left became so obedient. I examine presentations linking 9-11 and C-19, and compare biodefense labs to breeding sabertooth tigers, just in case they came back in the wild. I ask whether we've been masterfully played by both sides to make the left into non-questioners of authority--Big Government, Big Tech & Big Pharma. I examine the savings to Medicaid from nursing home mortality, and the bankruptcies of small businesses, eliminating the competition for Amazon and Big Box Behemoths.
I have just become aware of this piece which I think is a very solid critique, but are you aware that he published a pretty major revision later the same day?
This appears to concede much of the core euthansia thesis while trying to come up with a mechanism to excuse it.
"I assume you'll trash McCullough next? Or Mercola perhaps?"
A rebuttal to Dr Kory's irrelevant anecdotes in indirect response to my original article (I encourage you to read the evidence of the mass murder campaign) does not mean a random attack on others.
Why would I have a beef with Dr McCullough or Mercola?
It might help to explain that Doctor Kory is the head of the FLCCC, all of whose members support vaccinations. In fact, the only one of thousands of doctors who have protested at the mRNA jab who acknowledge the deaths and injuries caaused by vacinations per se, is Sherri Tenpenny. Having studied all vaccinations and their effects versus efficacy, I would state categorically that their stance flies in the face of 140 years of official analysis and conclusions. I passed two such Public Health exams, which were standard worldwide, and these show the actual causes of infectious disease reduction. Vaccinations show no correlation whatsoever. The vaxx industry has teamed up with the MSM to create a phoney history
I did not know FLCCC supported vaccines.
I always thought they were critical of establishment positions, and it seems I wrongly assumed they would naturally be critical of the vaccine harms and shot-pushing!
That would explain why Dr Kory has an overt trust in the 'reporting' by the medical system; he has not encountered the buffers of the vaccine harms yet and has no reason to doubt the system (despite ironically contesting it over C19 treatments).
It's a shame. Dr Richard Ebright (not related to FLCCC) has a similar pro-vaccine mindset despite being critical of the US gov's zoonotic origin theory. I've been trying to politely sway him on the matter. He hasn't acknowledged my responses, but I'm hoping he reads and changes his mind over time.
I'm an unapologetic generalist and my attitude is that all doctors and nurses are sociopathic murdering members of the medical mafia. I am willing to accept that a handful have rethought their position but I still incline towards mass approbation of the sternest kind. LOL.
The FLCCC is not in favor of the mRNA jab. Beside the fact that they have 2 links on their website providing advice to those injured by the injection, they say this expressly:
"the vaccines don’t stop infection or transmission (i.e., they are not effective) and skyrocketing spikes in adverse reaction reports (i.e., they are not safe)." Hardly pro vaccine.
https://covid19criticalcare.com/lets-not-get-fooled-again/
So my original assumption they weren't pro-vaccine was the correct one to occupy. I'm happy to be swayed by the evidence whichever way it points.
So my question becomes, why does Dr Kory invite people to trust medical experts to 'do the right thing' in relation to midazolam shots in light of overwhelming evidence showing the majority do not, especially in light of treatments and SC2 poison shots? Surely he knows this is an untrustworthy metric given the levels of complicity and deceit?
I do believe he answers your question in his latest article, "I can’t believe any suggestion that health care providers systematically began to practice euthanasia or homicide in the early pandemic. Or that the policies were formed with a primary intent to cause excess death in care homes. I just can’t do it. And won’t, because if I do, then the world is lost to me."
Keeping the world is a mighty strong motivation.
First, as always, you do great work. Damn shame more folks don't follow you. You're one of the smarter AND steadier ones around.
I can't speak directly for FLCCC but I can speak to 90+% of "Frontline Doctors".
90+% are against THIS vaccine (c19 shitshot) only. But they are uber pro all other vaccines. They hype them constantly.
These "Doctors" make NO sense with their idiocy and it pisses me off because they are extremely misleading - and more importantly, dangerously wrong. There is no safe vaccine. There is no effective vaccine. Period.
I'm responding a year+ late so I'm assuming you have figured this out?
I generally hold a distrust of any authority figures, especially promoted ones. The more promoted and in-my-face they are, the greater the overall distrust.
Healthy.
But in this case, re: Frontline Doctors, 'we' have the proof.
All of whose members support vaccinations? Really? You mean Dr. Mary Talley Bowman, who lost her job refusing the mandate and treating patients with ivermectin? THAT Dr. Bowman?
I was generalising. But opposing the mRNA jab, or supporting Ivermectin is a strong indication of sanity, that is all. I merely said that, apart from Tenpenny, not one of the listed medical experts who oppose the mRA jab have condemned vaccinations per se.
Being fair, Kory was one of the first to describe the banning of Ivermectin as "Mass murder", but he is still pro-vaccination. And Yeadon and Mallone have both said that all of their group are pro-vaccination. "We are vaccination experts" they said.
To my mind, that puts them squarely in the enemy camp. ie lazy experts, not crazy experts. Thus, I view them as conveient and temporary allies.
Malone is in this up to his eyeballs. Haven't trusted him, ever.
I'm not anti-vaccination - some sterilizing vaccines I believe are beneficial risk/reward. Sterilizing - prevents infection, transmission, and confers immunity, usually lifelong. I'm perfectly fine not getting polio. But now kids get a ridiculous amount of shots, too close together, for no good reason. So many people get shingles now - because kids are all vaccinated against chicken pox. Adults used to get a mid-life immune boost when exposed through their kids. And autism through the roof.
As a literal nobody, with enough time on my hands to be typing on substack, I would never be so bold as to call someone a lazy expert.
HAGN
"I would never be so bold as to call someone a lazy expert."
Perhaps you wouldn't, but others will, especially when effort is lacking. We're in an era when trust is at an all time low, and evidentiary standards need to be improved.
"Malone is in this up to his eyeballs. Haven't trusted him, ever."
I think we all have people we're suspicious of. So long as we agree on discussing the truth and evidence we shouldn't be led astray by figureheads.
"I'm not anti-vaccination"
Whether you're pro or anti-vaccination, I don't mind, so long as you're pro-truth and evidence.
You might want to read the CDC fudged statistics article regarding vaccine mortality rates:
https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/fudgegate-cdc-caught-fudging-vaccine
Perhaps consider the somewhat lengthy, but very in-depth, article on Polio (which has not gained the same popularity as its article peers):
https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/you-shouldnt-trust-the-panic-on-polio
And even consider the evidence presented for mass murder which Dr Kory disputes. I think you will find the article to be quite in-depth:
https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/mass-murdering-of-the-elderly
I said that I MYSELF am happy to have avoided polio. I'm old enough to have had all the other childhood diseases, so no MMR vaccinations. No flu shots ever. No covid jab.
I have used FLCCC protocol for prevention for almost 3 years. Had a very weak, very brief nothing-burger case of delta in 11/21 - when others were being hospitalized. FLCCC protocol for that as well. I left my ineffectual, cowardly, long-time GP for a wonderful doc who is part of the FLCCC network. She's not vaccinated either.
I give the side eye to people who, from their desk chair, cavalierly trash and berate these docs who have put their livelihoods on the line fighting for the therapeutics. Not Malone, he's risked nothing. That's just where I'm at.
Evidently your litmus test for Dr. Kory is that he acknowledge the deliberate mass murder. Naomi Wolfe just wrote a brilliant article saying she believes that there is no explanation for this evil apart from a return of the "ancient" evil. Dr. Kory will acknowledge what he can, in his way, in his time.
"Evidently your litmus test for Dr. Kory is that he acknowledge the deliberate mass murder."
He doesn't have to agree, but if he's going to refute the premise, he needs to address the evidence as it's actually presented, and not go after very weird, selective strawman arguments that don't discuss the points raised. If you read the article I am confident you will be shocked.
https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/mass-murdering-of-the-elderly
It does not rely on myself; I do not invoke self-expertise (nor should it). References, graphs, datasets, peer-reviewed papers, articles, government statements are all provided, and you're invited to read, even if it's to pick it apart and offer criticisms.
"Naomi Wolfe just wrote a brilliant article saying she believes that there is no explanation for this evil apart from a return of the "ancient" evil."
As I've said to others I don't use the article to determine intentions. My suspicion is it's depopulation agenda, but I think injecting my suspicions into the dataset muddies the waters, and I want people to be able to take the data and make their own determinations of it.
I only ask they look directly at the data. Follow the links, poke the datasets, read the documents.
" Dr. Kory will acknowledge what he can, in his way, in his time."
I understand it is a difficult ask. I will continue to push him to address the evidence, even if it's only to receive criticism on it directly so I may refine what is presented. I have asked others for feedback and currently there is a shocked silence within medical circles.
I invite you to also scrutinise it in-depth.
"You mean Dr. Mary Talley Bowman, who lost her job refusing the mandate and treating patients with ivermectin? THAT Dr. Bowman?"
This is a fair rebuttal, she is indeed anti-vaccine mandate.
Which begs the question why is Dr Kory so trusting of the medical establishment to 'raise the alarm' if FLCCC members were mistreated in such a way?
Are all FLCCC members anti-vaccine?
You know everything about everything -- you certainly shoot your mouth off like you do. Now you're asking a nobody on substack about some FLCCC docs - that you've already trash talked? Dr. Kory has already posted a reply to himself, and you're right there ragging at him. Some discernment and impulse control is in order, no?
I've already been around this cut-de-sac. Once is enough.
Do you have any actual critiques of my raised points which aren't hyperbole attacking my person?
"Now you're asking a nobody on substack about some FLCCC docs - that you've already trash talked?"
Perhaps you have me confused with someone else, but I expressed surprise that FLCCC had pro-vaccine views, and has given them the benefit of the doubt in assuming they were critical. Apparently, this counts as 'trashtalking' in your perview, to which I'd retort you seem to be particularly oversensitive on, and very eager to make a very large mountain out of a comment.
"you're right there ragging at him"
Calling him out for failing to refute points he keeps ignoring is not 'ragging' on him. You're more than welcome to document the ad hominems.
"Some discernment and impulse control is in order, no?"
No, it isn't. Being dishonest and lying prompts being called out, and I would say you're being very much hypocritical in that regard. Or would you prefer it if I told you to 'stay in your lane' like Dr Kory did everyone else?
I notice you're respectful enough to use "Dr." Kory when replying to me - but not when browbeating him on his stack. He isn't obligated to reply to you. Sage Hana, right above your comment over there, understands how to do it. You might learn something. And get a reply.
I doubt I will get a reply. And for the record, I use the full title - Dr Pierre Kory - in my rebuttals, not merely in the comments.
Whether or not I refer to him as Dr Kory, Dr Pierre, Pierre Kory, or just Kory in the comments - styles which I alternate between depending on the writing prose - are stylistic choices.
If you actually read my rebuttals here, you will see I happily call him 'Dr Kory' regularly enough, and even show his credentials in the thumbnails!
Do you have any actual rebuttals to any of the points I have raised, or will you continue to mischaracterise me with selective strawman arguments and ad hominems? Because you're not doing his crowd reputation any favours with such selective attacks.
How someone else behaves does not dictate my behaviour, for the record. I am not a doormatt, and I am not a conformist. Tough shit if I don't use a title but you can't obligate speech.
Further, until Kory inclines a similar level of respect likewise for my own work - rather than mischaracterising it with vague unhelpful generalisations - I am under no obligation to have to do anything, nor can you compel me to do so, especially on my own Substack!
Dr. Kory is to be much admired, but this is a solid article.
I haven't read the substack article that relates to the Dr. Kory's quotes , so I cannot comment , but as a general rule be careful when you tell people to " stay in their lane ".
And it is silly to argue ( more or less ) that " the medical system will police itself ".
I recommend both authors check out the latest research put out by the estimable Denis G. Rancourt.
Personally I had no issue with Dr Kory until after he freaked out on the evidence compiled showing mass elderly deaths in the UK. If he wants to argue he was misinformed or the evidence lacking at the time, he can, but he cannot push for us to deny the collation of evidence that points in one direction so clearly purely by the use of ICU anecdotes.
I have invited him on Twitter to highlight the errors in my work (which was also looked over by Jikkyleaks), and have made sure I make no statements not substantiated by the overwhelming evidence. I've not yet heard a response; I hope the rebuttal prompts a response instead.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - George Orwell, 1984
yup, going with the daily beagle on this one 🎯
Ditto...
I feel he's delivered up a list of exceedingly lame excuses on a silver platter, to be used effectively by the corrupt and complicit medical murderers.
Some of the excuses raised were already refuted in the article he had indirectly responded to (but evidently avoided linking to because I suspect he fears the evidence would undermine his argument).
For example, the suggestions the drugs were in response to C19 is undermined by the fact the death certifications attribute to dementia, peer-review shows the three-fold increase cannot be explained by any normal pandemic responses, and evidence shows the drugs do not aid in respiratory illness.
Bingo.
And given that fact, his stance is more and more ridiculous.
I Have to say that Dr. Kory is doing a great job of gatekeeping. All of the fallacies and appeals in his article make it rather blatant.
Gatekeeping WHAT exactly? Have you read anything at the FLCCC site? Have you taken their protocols? Have you made use of their resources in researching a way to purchase the necessary therapeutics? Do you work with one of their providers?
I can check all these boxes.
"Gatekeeping WHAT exactly?"
The mass murder of the elderly, which is discussed in the article.
"Have you taken their protocols? Have you made use of their resources in researching a way to purchase the necessary therapeutics?"
Does he need to in order to know what views they sponsor? What a weird argument.
"Do you work with one of their providers?"
Why would a commenter need to work with their providers in order to provide a timely critique?
Writing a whole article full of fallacies and emotional pleas to refute a report only tangentially related to Covid doesn't strike you as a little odd? If I read UD right, there's a good chance that many deaths of the elderly were "encouraged" by care home providers in the UK. Neither my comment nor the author's report question Dr. Kory's competence in treating Covid. None of your questions are even germane to the subject of Dr. Kory weighing in on a report of possible misdeeds in another country. I'd offer you a hug if I knew you IRL, you seem quite emotional over this topic. I would also say Dr. Kory succeeded, at least in regards to you, in rhetorically dismissing the source material.
Personally I seethe with hatred for the people who have hurt others under cover of Covid and knowing what's best for others.
I feel fairly sure this is what happened to my mom in Dec 2020. My daughters and I traveled to visit her at Thanksgiving but by the time we landed, they had 30 positive cases in the wing of her floor. She wasn't one of them even though her roommate was. By the time we left, she tested positive with no symptoms. When I landed, she had been diagnosed with bronchitis or something they were treating with antibiotics.
When I asked if she was in any respiratory distress, the answer was curiously no. She died within two days. Now, she was 96 so it's not impossible that it was natural, but it seemed very strange. The funeral home was overwhelmed with the deaths--more than they'd ever seen at one time. Shoved into a body bag in her nightgown, with a closed casket funeral with fewer people in attendance than the pallbearers and speakers.
One thing I'd add is that they brought in an outside doctor for all the Covid cases. It wasn't the staff, who I believe really cared for my mom. So it's not necessary that everyone be complicit, as Kory says.
I'm sorry to hear of your loss regarding your mother.
"it's not necessary that everyone be complicit"
The evidence does not allow me to speak to the depth or level of complicity, nor does the article try to assign guilt - except perhaps implicating NICE. Perhaps some staff refused the orders, maybe others went above and beyond to follow the orders, maybe others quit, or some were ignorant to inappropriateness of the orders, or didn't care the legal ramifications. I cannot speak to people's unexpressed intentions, only actions and outcomes.
The Daily Mail mentions at least one whistleblower, and there could be more, ignored in the sea of media silence.
My job isn't to convict those responsible for the mass murders, nor do I have the resources to sift guilt or innocence, it is to expose the mass murders to begin with, such it may open the door to appropriate convictions.
What I can highlight is evidence drugs were abused for purposes they weren't intended for, following a government issued directive, that lead to a large quantities of deaths that were abnormally large in any context, with no plausible explanation as to why, labelled under a completely different set of deaths.
On weight of evidence I am thoroughly convinced it was the mass murdering of the elderly. Who gave the order, who followed it and who didn't is beyond the scope, hidden, no doubt, behind closed doors, and I doubt culprits will eagerly confess to wrongdoing.
Back before I did Substack in Dec 2021, I had a YT called Cui Bono Covid? https://youtu.be/jSF7O2FI0S4. Here's the description: In this video I look at who benefited from the pandemic, other than just pharmaceutical companies, and how the left became so obedient. I examine presentations linking 9-11 and C-19, and compare biodefense labs to breeding sabertooth tigers, just in case they came back in the wild. I ask whether we've been masterfully played by both sides to make the left into non-questioners of authority--Big Government, Big Tech & Big Pharma. I examine the savings to Medicaid from nursing home mortality, and the bankruptcies of small businesses, eliminating the competition for Amazon and Big Box Behemoths.
I have just become aware of this piece which I think is a very solid critique, but are you aware that he published a pretty major revision later the same day?
This appears to concede much of the core euthansia thesis while trying to come up with a mechanism to excuse it.
https://pierrekorymedicalmusings.com/p/more-thoughts-on-the-increase-in
I wrote a rebuttal to that follow up in Part 2:
https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/a-rebuttal-to-dr-pierre-kory-part
Oops...should have checked your archive!
No worries, it wasn't a particularly well named article!
One day the wretches will face justice.
https://www.thebernician.net/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/
I assume you'll trash McCullough next? Or Mercola perhaps?
"I assume you'll trash McCullough next? Or Mercola perhaps?"
A rebuttal to Dr Kory's irrelevant anecdotes in indirect response to my original article (I encourage you to read the evidence of the mass murder campaign) does not mean a random attack on others.
Why would I have a beef with Dr McCullough or Mercola?