Follow the Science

1. Investigative Journalism Uncovers Systemic Corruption in Science and Medicine

Money and greed are typical drivers.

A hidden crisis. The author's journey into investigative medical reporting revealed a serious crisis of manipulated health information, ignored by officials and media. This crisis encompasses rising diseases, mental illness, and new childhood disorders, often driven by financial incentives. The core issue is why powerful forces act against public health interests.

Profit over health. Prescription drugs are estimated to be a top cause of death, yet this draws little attention because solutions don't involve more drugs. Powerful interests undermine safety measures, and adverse events are often unrecognized, unacknowledged, or unreported to federal databases. Even when patterns emerge, government and pharmaceutical interests work to dismiss them.

Artificial reality. We live in a reality shaped by those selling medicine, hyping fears about some illnesses while minimizing others they profit from treating. Studies are funded to promote products, not solve problems. Government policies incentivize expensive treatments over prevention and punish independent doctors. Misinformation saturates the landscape, pushed by agencies, doctors, and media influenced by industry money.

2. Drug Safety Concerns Are Routinely Hidden or Downplayed for Profit

The actual number of injuries from vaccines or other medicine is accepted to be manyfold higher than what gets officially reported.

Delayed warnings. Critical safety information about drugs is often delayed or hidden. The author's investigation into Viagra revealed a clear pattern of blindness and deafness reports in the federal database years before warnings were added. This pattern was missed by the FDA, Pfizer, and prescribing doctors, but identified by a curious ophthalmologist and later, the author.

Intentional concealment. Drug companies are known to use various tactics to hide adverse events in clinical trials.

• Burying data under vague categories (e.g., Rezulin liver issues).
• Blaming adverse events on patients' preexisting conditions rather than the drug.
• Manipulating datasets or study parameters to make negative results appear positive.
• Conducting multiple studies but only publishing the one with favorable results.

Lack of accountability. Despite evidence of companies actively conspiring to hide dangers, penalties are virtually nonexistent. This incentivizes companies to skirt rules for profit, as fines are often less than the revenue gained from delayed warnings or withdrawals. This system prioritizes sales over patient safety, leading to preventable injuries and deaths.

3. Conflicts of Interest Pervade Medical Research, Journals, and Education

It’s difficult to find justification for why the medical profession permits this.

Undisclosed ties. Doctors and researchers who publicly defend or promote drugs often have financial relationships with the drugmakers, which are frequently undisclosed in media appearances or publications. Companies pay doctors for:

• Speaking engagements at conferences.
• Consulting fees.
• Leading scientific studies at academic institutions.
• Ghostwriting articles published under the doctor's name.

Compromised journals. Medical journals, considered the "gold standard" for scientific information, routinely publish studies influenced or controlled by drug companies.

• Companies design research to favor their products.
• Negative studies may be buried and never published.
• Ghostwritten articles promote drugs under the guise of independent research.
• Journal editors themselves acknowledge that much published research may be unreliable or untrue.

Industry-shaped education. Pharmaceutical influence extends to medical school curricula and continuing medical education (CME) classes. These are often designed or funded by the industry, focusing heavily on prescribing medicine while downplaying natural solutions or adverse events. Instructors in CME courses often have significant financial ties to the companies whose products they are teaching about, creating a clear conflict of interest.

4. The Vaccine Industry Exerts Immense Influence on Public Health Policy

The fact that people feel compelled to say, “I’m not anti-vaccine . . .” before making perfectly grounded statements or asking rational questions speaks to the success of one of the most influential propaganda movements of our time.

The "Third Rail". Questioning vaccine safety is uniquely controversial, often met with accusations of being "anti-vaccine." This label is a propaganda tool used to discredit scientists, journalists, and parents of vaccine-injured children, preventing rational discussion despite documented risks and injuries.

Vaccine Court. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 created a special court where injured patients must sue the government, not vaccine makers.

• The burden of proof is high, and discovery is limited.
• Over $5 billion has been awarded for over 10,600 claims.
• Compensation comes from a fund paid by fees on vaccine doses, not the manufacturers.
• The court holds a database of injured patients, yet the government doesn't use it to study risk factors.

Undermining safety concerns. Despite evidence linking vaccines to injuries (e.g., DPT and brain damage, MMR/thimerosal and autism in some cases), public health officials and industry allies actively work to deny or minimize these links. The CDC has been accused of altering studies and misrepresenting findings to downplay risks, even when their own experts or court decisions indicate a connection.

5. Covid Exposed Widespread Data Manipulation and Misinformation by Authorities

The vast majority of the errors “exaggerated the severity” of Covid risks, especially related to children.

Exaggerated dangers. The CDC made numerous statistical errors during Covid, almost always exaggerating risks, particularly for children.

• Misrepresenting Covid as a top cause of death in children based on flawed comparisons.
• Overstating pediatric hospitalization numbers and death rates by significant factors (e.g., 100x error in one instance).
• These errors were widely disseminated by media and officials, influencing public perception and policy.

Miscounting deaths. Covid death counts were inflated by including deaths from other causes where the person happened to test positive for Covid.

• Examples include murder-suicides, traffic fatalities, and cancer deaths counted as Covid.
• Some localities admitted to overcounting and later reduced their death tolls significantly.
• The federal government never filtered out non-Covid deaths from the national total.

Lack of accountability. Despite documented errors and misrepresentations, often identified by independent analysts or members of Congress, the CDC and other officials were not held accountable. They continued to promote false statistics, influencing policies like vaccine mandates and school closures, causing significant societal damage.

6. Natural Immunity and Alternative Treatments Were Actively Suppressed During Covid

Independent scientists begin asking: Who benefits from the government taking away a medicine that could prevent serious illness, and guaranteeing more people will be admitted to hospitals for expensive treatments that might fail?

Ignoring natural immunity. Public health officials largely denied or downplayed the effectiveness of natural immunity acquired through Covid infection, despite scientific evidence showing it was often superior to vaccine-induced immunity. This omission made vaccines appear more necessary and effective than they were.

Demonizing existing drugs. Cheap, existing drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, which some studies and doctors indicated could be effective early treatments for Covid, were aggressively disparaged and restricted by government agencies and media.

• Hydroxychloroquine, a drug used safely for decades, was suddenly portrayed as dangerous.
• Ivermectin was falsely implied to be only for animals.
• Studies showing potential benefits were attacked or ignored, while questionable studies showing harm were amplified.

Promoting expensive alternatives. Simultaneously, expensive, experimental drugs like remdesivir, with questionable efficacy and side effects, were heavily promoted and granted emergency use authorization. This strategy benefited pharmaceutical companies and, crucially, allowed experimental vaccines to be authorized under rules requiring no adequate alternative treatments exist.

7. Government Health Agencies Prioritize Industry Interests Over Public Well-being

The damage caused by the CDC’s negligence or corruption is arguably far worse and more encompassing than other crimes chosen for prosecution in our society on a daily basis.

Revolving door. High-ranking officials at agencies like the CDC and NIH often move into lucrative positions within the pharmaceutical industry or related foundations after leaving government service. This creates a potential incentive to make decisions favorable to the industry while in public office.

• Former CDC Director Julie Gerberding became head of vaccines at Merck.
• Former CDC Director Tom Frieden started a group funded by vaccine boosters.
• Former NIH Director Francis Collins was involved in controversial gain-of-function research and efforts to spin Covid origins.

Undisclosed funding. Government agencies receive billions in taxpayer money, but transparency regarding total budgets and funding sources, particularly those tied to industry, can be difficult to obtain. Foundations linked to NIH accept millions from drug companies, potentially influencing research priorities.

Lack of oversight. Despite documented errors, conflicts of interest, and questionable decisions that impacted public health and cost lives, there is a striking lack of accountability for government officials and agencies. Reforms are discussed but rarely implemented, and budgets continue to increase, suggesting a system resistant to meaningful change.

8. Propaganda and Censorship Control the Scientific Narrative

The censors are never the good guys.

Orchestrated narratives. Powerful interests, including pharmaceutical companies and their allies in government and media, actively shape the public narrative on scientific and health issues. This involves:

• Funding "patient advocacy" groups that are fronts for industry interests.
• Using PR firms and third parties to fund propaganda indirectly.
• Enlisting academics and experts to promote industry-friendly views.
• Coordinating messaging across multiple platforms and news outlets.

Weaponized "Fact-Checking". Organizations claiming to be neutral "fact-checkers" or "media literacy" groups are often funded by entities with vested interests (e.g., Google, Facebook, left-leaning foundations, pharmaceutical companies).

• They disproportionately target off-narrative information, even when true.
• They use hallmark propaganda terms like "debunked," "discredited," and "conspiracy theory."
• They work with social media platforms to censor or label content that challenges favored narratives.

Suppression of dissent. Scientists, doctors, and journalists who present information or ask questions that contradict the favored narrative are often smeared, marginalized, or threatened. This chilling effect discourages independent inquiry and reinforces the dominance of the controlled narrative, regardless of scientific accuracy.

9. The Amish Approach Highlighted Flaws in Conventional Pandemic Response

The Amish approach appears to be far superior.

A natural experiment. The Amish community, largely rejecting government mandates like shutdowns, masking, and vaccination during Covid, experienced the virus spreading rapidly early on. This created a unique opportunity to study the outcomes of a population that pursued a different strategy compared to the rest of society.

Contrasting outcomes. Despite predictions of disaster, the Amish community did not experience higher death rates than populations that followed strict government protocols. Anecdotal evidence and some data suggested their outcomes were no worse, and potentially better, while avoiding the economic and social devastation caused by lockdowns.

Ignoring inconvenient data. The scientific establishment largely ignored or attempted to discredit the findings from the Amish experience. Studies attempting to analyze the outcomes were flawed, biased, or excluded data that contradicted the desired narrative that the Amish approach had failed. This demonstrated a reluctance to examine evidence that challenged the prevailing public health strategy.

10. New Post-Covid Illnesses Are Being Ignored or Mismanaged

It would be vastly worse if hundreds of millions of people were to suffer long-lasting or even permanent damage to their brain or heart microvasculature [small vessels] as an unintended effect of vaccines.

Emerging crisis. Millions are suffering from illnesses loosely termed "Long Covid" or "Long Vax," characterized by a wide range of debilitating symptoms appearing months or years after infection or vaccination. Independent researchers are linking these to the spike protein and microclots.

Lack of recognition and treatment. The medical establishment is largely failing to recognize, diagnose, or effectively treat these new illnesses. Doctors often dismiss patient complaints or lack knowledge of potential causes and treatments, leaving patients to seek help from independent physicians.

Suppressed knowledge. Evidence suggesting the spike protein from both Covid infection and vaccines can cause long-term damage existed early on, with some scientists warning the FDA. Government researchers even studied and treated a small group of vaccine-injured patients but kept this knowledge secret, failing to educate the broader medical community or public.

11. Becoming a Truth-Seeker Requires Questioning Authority and Following Money

Follow the Money.

Skepticism is key. In a landscape saturated with manipulated information, it is crucial to be skeptical of prevailing narratives, especially those pushed by government agencies, major media, and entities with financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. Do not accept information at face value simply because it comes from a seemingly authoritative source.

Identify bias. Learn to recognize the hallmarks of propaganda, such as the use of loaded terms ("debunked," "anti-vax"), calls for censorship, and the dismissal of opposing views without scientific counter-argument. Be wary when multiple sources use identical language or messaging.

Seek independent sources. Actively seek out information from sources that have proven reliable in the past, particularly those that are independent of pharmaceutical or government funding and are willing to challenge established narratives. Broaden your information consumption to include perspectives that are being suppressed or smeared.

Last updated: May 12, 2025