Joining Substack and The EMA Leak
How one comment changed everything
It was suggested to me by a Substack commentator a while back, in light of my complaints of a lack of coverage by Steve Kirsch on the EMA leak from early 2021, that I ought to start my own Substack covering it.
I retorted a single topic did not make sufficient justification for an entire Substack, after all, what would the point in registering be if I only had one article to write? It would disappoint any early signers expecting more, and it’d exhaust my own efforts to maintaining another account.
Yet, here I am. So what changed my mind? The more I thought about it, the more I realised I had more than just the EMA leak to discuss. The corruption of politics. The flaws in peer-reviewed studies. The lack of truth in media outlets. The conflicts of interest. The selective omissions on reporting. Many topics that could make many articles. So I figured I’d sign up.
What should you know from the EMA leak?
There’s a lot of things honestly. The BMJ’s coverage of the EMA leak on mRNA instability, although detailed, omitted the other giant red flags, such as the evident signs of collusion between Health Agencies, the Janssen’s deep vein sinus thrombosis (read: blood clots near the brain), and the EU’s health commissioner going at great lengths to bypass declaring an ‘Unseen Variation’ publicly by manually phoning all 27 EU countries (the UK was still technically part of the EU at the time). I cover the pieces of evidence showing various issues in my video here.
However, the video does not paint the full picture. Making even halfway decent videos is time consuming, however the medium was utterly required in order to show key pieces of the evidence. That said, it does not allow time to ruminate or to go further in-depth on the implications. That short, ~15 minute video took 2 weeks to make.
What implications?
The health agencies did not suddenly become corrupt or avoidant of responsibilities overnight. There was no sudden sweeping wave of corruption that suddenly made them forego their responsibilities to the public.
The evidence suggests they’ve been like this for some time, and the pharmaceutical companies know how to play this game for a while now. Revolving door jobs between “regulators” and pharmaceutical companies have been noted by the BMJ, Science Mag and even Stat News.
Even non-science outlets are aware of the issues, but politicians and civil bureaucrats seem content to ignore it, downplay it, or rarely, ask them a question in a debate then limp-wristedly allow them to do it again. Why? The public might want to look at the pharmaceutical companies’ lobbying efforts.
How long have the regulators been like this? What other hidden nasties have they failed to disclose information on? This wasn’t a lone, rogue agency. The EMA leak showed that the FDA (US health agency), MHRA (UK health agency), EMA (EU health agency) and HealthCanada were all content to keep quiet on the huge failures of the mRNA shot. When caught, they wouldn’t even disclose it to the BMJ.
Lack of accountability
The leak’s existence in and of itself is damning. It says the health agencies did not have the integrity enough to come forward and disclose the flaws and issues to the public themselves. They tried to keep it secret. Did they fix it? We don’t know, they won’t tell anybody.
They have no accountability. No transparency. Pharmaceutical companies can openly commit fraud, and rather than anyone going to jail for the deaths of the public involved, they just pay large multi-billion dollar fines. Or they’ll just spin-off a subsidary company to take the fall for them (how on earth is this even legal?). They’ll never shutdown, heck, the government gives them immunity to liability so there’s even less accountability.
Immunity to liability?!
Not just once, as seen with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, where the government were more concerned the public would rightly reject vaccines that cause childhood injuries, and weren’t concerned at all with the injuries themselves, but twice; with the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), which extended the immunity to liability to untested, experimental shots rushed through.
It isn’t simply enough for the public to hope the healthcare industry will speak up about this. If anything, I only have more bad news for you… they’re complicit as well. CBS reported that more than half of the doctors in the US - back in 2015 - received $2.4 billion in what’s known as ‘kickbacks’.
What’s a kickback?
A kickback is where someone receives something if they do a favour for someone else. For example, a politician ensures a specific military manufacturer gets a contract, and in turn, the manufacturer gives the politician some money for their campaign funds after they get the contract. This money is known as a ‘kickback’.
In this case, the doctor receives a kickback every time they recommend a specific product or service to people. It might be in the form of meals, or it might be in the form of literal cash.
UK doctors got paid in cash for every COVID-19 shot they administered, which is a massive conflict of interest as it incentivises money over healthcare decision making. Given the NHS staff haven’t seen a pay increase to match inflation, there’s an implied undue pressure. This isn’t unique to the UK, the US did it as well under CMS. Hospitals got the “reimbursements” too.
Johnson & Johnson paid more than $2.2 billion to ‘resolve allegations’ that they had been paying kickbacks to doctors and pharmacists. If you compare it to the amount CBS had discovered - $2.4 billion - it’s evident CBS only found the tip of the iceberg, and that this is widely more rampant than most people realise.
There is a giant hive of corruption that belies the healthcare industry and government in general, and this is only the beginning…