To understand how biased medical journals have become, please read this important article and learn that medical journals and 86% of clinical trials are funded by Big Pharma, turning journal articles into little more than marketing machines.  The COVID debacle clearly showed this in action.  Independent research, or those defying the narrative simply could either not get their work published or it was retracted.

Horowitz: Danish newspaper reveals largest study on masks has been rejected by 3 medical journals

‘The study and its size are unique in the world,’ one study author told the paper

By Daniel Horowitz

October 22, 2020

Why not just conduct a randomized controlled trial to test whether masks work against COVID-19? Why assume such a draconian and dehumanizing mandate works as if it’s an article of faith and create such division when we can discover which side is correct? That’s what a group of Danish researchers felt, which is why, over the spring, they conducted such a study. So why have the results not been published, three months later? According to one Danish newspaper, the study has been rejected by three medical journals because the results are too controversial.



Important excerpts:

The article reveals that, thus far, the study has been rejected by the Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine, and the American Medical Association’s journal JAMA, three of the publications that have been posting much of the research on coronavirus.

The CDC, prior to changing its position on universal mask-wearing, had previously cited 10 randomized controlled trials that showed “no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks.” 

The phobia among the political elites against subjecting mask-wearing mandates to the scientific method is not surprising. In July, Dr. Fauci told a group of Georgetown University students that he has no intention of conducting a controlled study in the U.S.

Yet this same Fauci has no trouble peddling his expensive antiviral Remdesivir, of which he:

  • sponsored the clinical trial for, and obtained EUA status before being peer-reviewed
  • still has not made public his financial relations with Gilead, the manufacturer 
  • instead of using science, he made the promotional announcement sitting on a couch in the White House, without allowing for review of the data.
  • at the time he also failed to disclose to the public that the primary outcomes of the study were changed, which the AHRF considers “dubious and suspicious”, of which the mainstream media ignored, but should raise serious red flags  
  • shrugged off a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center peer-reviewed, published Chinese study that was stopped due to serious adverse events
Are we really surprised when science comes out defying the accepted narrative?  

These same people have been getting away with murder for over 40 years:

I recently posted on how medical journals are bought out: (See comment section as well)

%d bloggers like this: