The once esteemed British Medical Journal (BMJ) withdrew a previously published scientific paper whose team of qualified experts advised that excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic could have been caused by COVID-19 control measures, including vaccinations.

The Truth is no Defense

Before publication, this paper successfully passed a nine-month peer review process and was found to be reliable.

However, this week, the BMJ removed the previously published paper after an additional investigation. Yet, it found no evidence of foul play, falsification, or data distortion.

Oh Dear! Revealed the Truth

The paper was retracted simply because it claimed that it ‘does not reflect the scientific consensus’ and it draws attention to the negative consequences of vaccination, which ‘poses a risk to public health.’

Authority in denial

Shocked by this conclusion, experts wrote in a letter to the BMJ: ‘Retracting the paper from publication is an inappropriate decision and seriously raises the question of the extent to which it was influenced by political considerations.

‘This decision not only damages the integrity of existing published scientific information, but also sets a terrible precedent at a time of growing political pressure on scientists.’

Donald Meester, a professor at the University of Amsterdam, told The Telegraph:

‘There is no scientific basis for retracting the article. Retracting it in this case seems strange; there is nothing wrong with the article itself. I think the BMJ may have been pressured, but it’s unclear by whom.

The real reason must be political.

This is very sad for science. I don’t understand how we can take science seriously anymore when editors are willing to make decisions for such reasons.’

Dr. Jonah Walk, a researcher in immunology and infection, stated that the article was retracted only after it received publicity in traditional media:

This is a political, not a scientific, reason

‘This is a political, not a scientific, reason. With this decision, the BMJ is setting another dangerous precedent in the growing political interference in scientific research today.’

In June, Dr. Mostert, one of the authors of the retracted paper, testified before the US Senate.

She stated that the section on potential vaccine harms was originally much shorter, but BMJ reviewers requested additional evidence.

We gave them what they demanded

‘Because we had the evidence, we added it,’ she said in her written testimony. ‘From the beginning, it was an uphill battle.

Our call for an investigation into the underlying causes of high mortality was censored and, in one way or another, suppressed.’

She added: ‘To be clear, I lost my position after publishing official government mortality data and calling for further scientific investigation into persistently high mortality.

Science cannot function when asking legitimate questions becomes professionally dangerous.

When scientists fear losing their profession, the public loses access to honest scientific research.’ Let readers know what you think

THANK YOU FOR SHARING WITH FRIENDS AND SOCIAL MEDIA