I mistakenly used to think that people generally respond positively when presented with facts that oppose their thinking. I was wrong. People do not change their thinking or behaviour if they derive benefits from misleading and inaccurate information.
Mask wearing is an example of not following the science. At the outset of the pandemic last year health experts said masking would not curtail virus spread, but a year later the same experts (Fauci and Bloomfield) recommended mandatory masking.
Why the change of heart when the science has not changed? Masks have not been proven to prevent transmission, but they do make people feel safer and promote the appearance that ‘we are all in this together’. Masks have a political benefit instead of a health benefit.
Dr Samuel White saw no reason to change his stance on the futility of mask wearing, the reliability of PCR testing or the safety of Covid vaccines and the UK General Medical Council (GMC) was not pleased with him. Under their Fitness to Practice Rules the GMC, through their Interim Orders Tribunal (IOT), imposed an 18-month social media ban on White for spreading Covid misinformation.
“4. He must not use social media to put forward or share any views about the Covid-19 pandemic and its associated aspects.
5. He must seek to remove any social media posts he has been responsible for or has shared relating to his views of the Covid- 19 pandemic and its associated aspects.”
2. Other conditions were imposed in relation to the provision of information in respect of his employment. The IOT did not impose any conditions preventing the claimant from practising medicine, which he continues to do.”
High Court Judgement in Dr Samuel White and the General Medical Council
White resigned his GMC membership claiming he could not practise medicine with an NHS and government whose “lies” about the pandemic were “so vast” that he could no longer “stomach or tolerate” them. White appealed to the High Court for a ruling on his social media ban.
“GMC’s [solicitor] Alexis Hearnden claimed that White’s views were not only misinformation, but posed a “risk” to the public because they didn’t align with official pronouncements. However, the court ruled in favor of White, asserting that the tribunal which banned him from speaking had violated the 1998 Human Rights Act.The ruling concluded that the tribunal’s decision was “an error of law and a clear misdirection,” meaning the decision was “clearly wrong and cannot stand.”
Summit News
White’s lawyer had argued that social media restrictions were “effectively a ban” and a “severe imposition” on his freedom of expression and White won the case on this legal point.
The court did not express a view on the original dispute between White and the GMC about whether masks work, PCR testing is reliable or vaccines are safe.
White’s Pyrrhic victory gave him the freedom to say whatever he likes on social media about Covid testing, treatment and vaccines but his freedom comes at great personal cost – his medical career.
In Queensland this week a whistleblower told a Gold Coast meeting about “the horrors of vaccine adverse events including stillbirths, deformed babies, blood clots and cancer remissions reversed”.
“The 30-year nursing veteran Debbie Jane Harris, who has resigned from her profession, said there had been thousands of adverse events while Gold Coast University Hospital had seen only six Covid-positive cases in the ICU in 20 months. “All of those patients survived and were discharged and some were double vaccinated,” she said.
Harris went on to describe how a special Covid ward at the hospital been locked up and left empty for “months and months and months”. At the same time health officials, politicians and media in Queensland were claiming hospitals were being overloaded with Covid cases.”
The meeting was arranged to oppose the Morrison-enabled Palasczcuk vaccine mandate that has cost frontline health workers their jobs and is another example of the Covid experts saying one thing with frontline medical staff opposing them.
“Dr Camm also spoke on the censorship of doctors by the Australian Health Practititioners Regulatory Agency (AHPRA), which has threatened disciplinary action, including deregistration, against doctors who speak out against the vaccine rollout policy. At the same time governments say people with questions about vaccines should see their GPs. Harris said nurses had received the same directive and were also told their social media would be monitored. They had also been encouraged to dob in any colleagues involved in spreading anti-vaccine information.”
Not all politicians tolerate unsupported Covid arguments.
“Senator Malcolm Roberts told the meeting he was aware of four Queensland councils who were rejecting the vaccine mandate. He said he had put a series of questions on Covid response issues in a letter to Palasczcuk. She sent a two-page letter back but failed to answer any of the questions. He also accused TGA head Skerritt of covering up post-vaccination death statistics. He said when he asked Skerritt about the 564 reported post vaccination deaths, he ‘exploded’ and claimed the actual number was nine.
“Roberts said Skerritt, in a letter, tried to bully him into not speaking about Covid treatments by threatening to use some obscure power. Roberts wrote back telling Skerritt to stop illegally threatening his right as an Australian Senator to political communication. He also told Skerritt, ‘The government has blood on its hands for refusing ivermectin (treatment).’”
Cairns News
The same thing is happening in New Zealand. GPs with little or negligible experience treating Covid patients and scant regard for vaccine injury are of little use, while doctors who publicly contradict the Covid ‘experts’ are at risk of being struck off the register of the Royal New Zealand College of GPs.
“Given the clamour of evidence proving the vaccine does not work to stop infection or transmission, and the contradiction between NZ’s ‘reasonably robust modelling’ suggesting the vaccine provides frankly astonishing protection from serious outcomes and real-world public health data from Ireland, UK, Israel etc that proves the opposite, we are unable to come up with any benefits that trump the risks discussed below.
“The only apparent benefit is to remain in society a little longer, or rather the dystopian technofascist version that has been decided for us. By submitting to endless boosters of God knows what, we will NOT get our old lives back, that’s for sure. Grab your biometric ID if you must, but do not imagine some kindly dictators will then return your human rights that were never theirs to steal from you in the first place.”
NZ Doctors for Science
The message for doctors and front line medical staff who disagree with the experts and their own governing bodies is: by all means exercise your right to free speech but know that if you do, even if you are proved to be correct, your medical career will be flushed down the toilet.
Please share this article so that others can discover The BFD