This is an 26-minute conversation generated by Google’s NoteBookLM, which does a good job in pulling out the key themes from this fascinating and comprehensive article by Toby Rogers:
The fake pandemic with its tyrannical medical and "public health" responses has opened up a rotting can of worms for many of us who care to pay attention. Pre 2020 I was unaware of the corruption embedded in the upper echelons of the medical and public health institutions, these unfortunately are the people that hold the power, authority and influence to ensure working doctors are indoctrinated into the corrupted evidence based medicine and its medical protocols, how perfectly staged it all was for an emergency where following orders was the most important prime directive.
Re: “Pre 2020 I was unaware of the corruption embedded in the upper echelons of the medical and public health institutions…”
A major failing is the lack of transparency e.g. for conflicts of interest.
In Australia, for years I’ve pursued disclosure of conflicts of interest for people who influence taxpayer-funded vaccination policy.
In 2015 I had some success after writing to then Prime Minister Tony Abbott, and we achieved some disclosure for members of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI). The information was meagre, but at least it demonstrated that there were members of this group who did have associations with vaccine manufacturers via their participation in vaccine clinical trials, attendance at conferences etc.
Historical information was not maintained, only information for current members was published. Then, during ‘Covid’ even this information was not updated, there was no transparency of conflicts of interest for the members of ATAGI who were directing ‘Covid’ policy.
You were ahead of most of us in seeing the corruption. There is no accountability to the public, this is demonstrated by their absence of responsibility for their disastrous actions, there is the pretence they do but it is a sham. When you have no accountability or responsibility to the people you hold power over then there are no safeguards and that is when the contempt, disregard and tyrannical behaviours come flooding in. The covid debacle was a warning of how extreme their measures could become.
Yes Amat, with no transparency and accountability, it’s tyrannical behaviour!
That’s where we’re at now, it’s already happened - they showed what they’re capable of with ‘Covid’, the deliberately manufactured crisis to steal the people’s freedom.
Who is behind it all, it’s bewildering the scope of this thing?
But let’s deal with what’s right in front of us, the capture of ‘our’ institutions, which have betrayed us.
The medical profession and the legal system for instance, which capitulated with the governments and bureaucrats which have betrayed us, with the support of the mainstream media and even the churches, at the behest of whom exactly? The corporations and the banks etc, whoever is actually behind them?
I suggest we work on this from the ground up…for instance go after those ‘following orders’ who trashed voluntary informed consent…
Because whatever is actually going on, they still had to admit they have to get our consent - this was relayed to us in the letter Emma McArthur received from the Australian Government in December 2021, which confirmed consent should be obtained for COVID-19 vaccination, just like any other vaccination… And also the letter I received from the regulator of practitioners, AHPRA, in September 2021, which also confirms the obligation for voluntary informed consent for vaccination to be obtained. But at the very same time, vaccine mandates were being imposed across the country!
What a ginormous contradiction! And here’s the major scandal…there is NO VALID CONSENT for vaccination undertaken under duress.
What is this going to mean when the penny drops? Who is going to be held accountable. How do we do this?
I was sucked into ‘evidence based medicine’ back in 2008/2009 when I started investigating pet vaccination. David Sackett was the father of evidence medicine, and it seemed a plausible idea…until it became clear who was defining ‘the evidence’.
Similarly ‘guidelines’, these seem like a good idea too, until you realise these are used to lock doctors into prescribing treatments and tests etc.
The entire thing is a money-making racket, capturing the population and the medical profession for a never-ending list of mass population interventions, which are taking away money and resources from actual medical assistance people need.
How to shine the spotlight effectively on the burgeoning medical industrial complex?
It’s a lot like peer review which is more often than not used to exclude innovation and protect the status quo. Because randomised control trials are hard to do, and very expensive, it leaves us at the mercy of the usual suspects who fund the trials that profit them and shut down anything that might work against them. So in both cases what starts out as a seemingly good idea is turned against us by vested interests.
Epitomised by the Cochrane Collaboration, in my experience.
For years I’ve sought accountability for a systematic review on aluminium and vaccine safety undertaken by authors associated with the Cochrane Vaccines Field, see my correspondence here:
“Evidence-based” medicine is Orwellian doublespeak, and together with “population-based” medicine (aka “population health management”) its purpose is to collectivize medicine and thereby destroy it.
Aside from the fact that most published research is garbage, “evidence-based” medicine could never be hijacked because it was never an ethical approach to medicine in the first place. It’s vicious garbage. It was never about good intentions and it was designed and put forward with deliberate malice. From the horse’s mouth, it’s right there in the quote that Toby Rogers provides from the Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group: “Evidence-based medicine de-emphasizes intuition, unsystematic clinical experience, and pathophysiologic rationale as sufficient grounds for clinical decision-making and stresses the examination of evidence from clinical research.” Any real doctor reading that should have been horrified.
The best doctors practice the art and science of medicine. They absolutely rely on their intuition, which is just another name for internalized knowledge gained over decades and through contact with thousands of patients. What the EBMWG smears as “unsystematic” clinical experience is in fact the art of medicine. Doctors combine that with their formal training and knowledge (the science), and that’s how the best of them solve their patients’ mysteries and save lives. The EBMWG openly proposed throwing all that out while dismissing the physical history and condition of specific patients with specific problems (“pathophysiological rationales”) as irrelevant. Instead they actually, publicly, and without any apparent shame proposed replacing clinical experience and scientific knowledge as applied to individual patients with…research. And the vast majority of doctors never said a damned thing in defense of their own profession. It makes their silence and inaction during “covid” a lot less inexplicable.
Huge thanks, Jonathan, for holding these people to task.
At this stage, anyone doing 'good work' while refusing to haul the fraud of viroLIEgy over the coals is complicit—guilty on all counts of helping to prop up the Quackccine narrative. And that narrative isn’t just about syringes—it’s the gateway drug to the Quackccine passport, which will soon be fused to your ability to access digital money in the Brave New World of C riminal B ankstaz’ D igital C hains − shackled on you!!
Want to make them squirm? I recommend putting a simple question to these folks:
"Do you believe that poisoning monkey kidney cells with cytotoxic chemicals to induce cytopathic effects is proof of a virus?"
Ask them to declare it publicly. On record. On their Substacks. So far, not a single one has dared to pin their name to this so-called 'gold standard' of 'viral' isolation.
Thanks again, Jonathan, for keeping the pressure on.
And for the rest of us? Subscribe to these peddlers of dangerous nonsense and start calling them out. Here's a starter pack of narrative preservationists:
Steve Kirsch, Meryl Nass, Robert Baloney, Pierre Kory, and Peter McCullough, to name a few.
Let’s roll the rock back over their viroLIEgy lair—and watch what scurries out.
Very well stated! The "narrative preservationists" you mention (and others) are very adept at playing on both sides of the fence and promoting their form of deliberate obfuscation to keep their readers guessing about where they really stand on the issues; I no longer trust the motivations of any on substacks who are promoting and/or selling products or claim they need paid subscribers in order to survive...for starters let them buy their own coffee like the rest of us have to!
I think the nefarious species out there — are the kind who claim they don’t court donations, yet are secretly funded/prompted to push a narrative.
Thank the Lord neither you nor I belong to that subset of lowlifes who pretend to take the moral high ground while pocketing under-the-counter payoffs/prompts, eh??
Frankly, their deceit is so corrosive, it ought to come with consequences. Wouldn’t you agree?
I have "liked" this - though with a caveat: Notwithstanding that all my articles are free, I don't think it's fair to paint all who ask for subscriptions in a bad light. Many have given up / been fired from their former careers to do the research and writing which regular journalists are being paid not to do.
Thanks Jonathan, Toby did a good job breaking it down. I commented on his article but I did find some extra suitable anagrams I feel of 'Evidenced-Based medicine'. I have added them to the two I mentioned on Toby's site.
The fake pandemic with its tyrannical medical and "public health" responses has opened up a rotting can of worms for many of us who care to pay attention. Pre 2020 I was unaware of the corruption embedded in the upper echelons of the medical and public health institutions, these unfortunately are the people that hold the power, authority and influence to ensure working doctors are indoctrinated into the corrupted evidence based medicine and its medical protocols, how perfectly staged it all was for an emergency where following orders was the most important prime directive.
Re: “Pre 2020 I was unaware of the corruption embedded in the upper echelons of the medical and public health institutions…”
A major failing is the lack of transparency e.g. for conflicts of interest.
In Australia, for years I’ve pursued disclosure of conflicts of interest for people who influence taxpayer-funded vaccination policy.
In 2015 I had some success after writing to then Prime Minister Tony Abbott, and we achieved some disclosure for members of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI). The information was meagre, but at least it demonstrated that there were members of this group who did have associations with vaccine manufacturers via their participation in vaccine clinical trials, attendance at conferences etc.
Historical information was not maintained, only information for current members was published. Then, during ‘Covid’ even this information was not updated, there was no transparency of conflicts of interest for the members of ATAGI who were directing ‘Covid’ policy.
I wrote requesting updated disclosures, plus historical information. The upshot now is there is NO COI information for ATAGI members on the relevant webpage: https://www.health.gov.au/committees-and-groups/atagi/members
See my email thread on this matter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese - it remains unanswered. There is no accountability…
ATAGI - Disclosures / Conflicts of Interest and historical information - this matter is STILL outstanding, 5 March 2025: https://vaccinationispolitical.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/atagi-disclosures-_-conflicts-of-interest-and-historical-information-this-matter-is-still-outstanding-1.pdf
You were ahead of most of us in seeing the corruption. There is no accountability to the public, this is demonstrated by their absence of responsibility for their disastrous actions, there is the pretence they do but it is a sham. When you have no accountability or responsibility to the people you hold power over then there are no safeguards and that is when the contempt, disregard and tyrannical behaviours come flooding in. The covid debacle was a warning of how extreme their measures could become.
Yes Amat, with no transparency and accountability, it’s tyrannical behaviour!
That’s where we’re at now, it’s already happened - they showed what they’re capable of with ‘Covid’, the deliberately manufactured crisis to steal the people’s freedom.
Who is behind it all, it’s bewildering the scope of this thing?
But let’s deal with what’s right in front of us, the capture of ‘our’ institutions, which have betrayed us.
The medical profession and the legal system for instance, which capitulated with the governments and bureaucrats which have betrayed us, with the support of the mainstream media and even the churches, at the behest of whom exactly? The corporations and the banks etc, whoever is actually behind them?
I suggest we work on this from the ground up…for instance go after those ‘following orders’ who trashed voluntary informed consent…
Because whatever is actually going on, they still had to admit they have to get our consent - this was relayed to us in the letter Emma McArthur received from the Australian Government in December 2021, which confirmed consent should be obtained for COVID-19 vaccination, just like any other vaccination… And also the letter I received from the regulator of practitioners, AHPRA, in September 2021, which also confirms the obligation for voluntary informed consent for vaccination to be obtained. But at the very same time, vaccine mandates were being imposed across the country!
What a ginormous contradiction! And here’s the major scandal…there is NO VALID CONSENT for vaccination undertaken under duress.
What is this going to mean when the penny drops? Who is going to be held accountable. How do we do this?
See letters:
- Response from AHPRA, 20 September 2021: https://vaccinationispolitical.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/response-from-ahpra-re-informed-consent.pdf
- Response from Australian Government, 21 December, 2021: https://humanityattheprecipice.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/doh-reply-21-12-2021.pdf
I was sucked into ‘evidence based medicine’ back in 2008/2009 when I started investigating pet vaccination. David Sackett was the father of evidence medicine, and it seemed a plausible idea…until it became clear who was defining ‘the evidence’.
Similarly ‘guidelines’, these seem like a good idea too, until you realise these are used to lock doctors into prescribing treatments and tests etc.
The entire thing is a money-making racket, capturing the population and the medical profession for a never-ending list of mass population interventions, which are taking away money and resources from actual medical assistance people need.
How to shine the spotlight effectively on the burgeoning medical industrial complex?
On the subject of the routine mass population screening racket, see: The Colonoscopy Cartel: How Routine Screening Became a Business Model https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/the-colonoscopy-cartel-how-routine
It’s a lot like peer review which is more often than not used to exclude innovation and protect the status quo. Because randomised control trials are hard to do, and very expensive, it leaves us at the mercy of the usual suspects who fund the trials that profit them and shut down anything that might work against them. So in both cases what starts out as a seemingly good idea is turned against us by vested interests.
Ha, ‘peer review’, another racket…
Epitomised by the Cochrane Collaboration, in my experience.
For years I’ve sought accountability for a systematic review on aluminium and vaccine safety undertaken by authors associated with the Cochrane Vaccines Field, see my correspondence here:
- https://over-vaccination.net/aluminium-and-vaccine-safety/
- https://over-vaccination.net/cochrane-collaboration/
“Evidence-based” medicine is Orwellian doublespeak, and together with “population-based” medicine (aka “population health management”) its purpose is to collectivize medicine and thereby destroy it.
Aside from the fact that most published research is garbage, “evidence-based” medicine could never be hijacked because it was never an ethical approach to medicine in the first place. It’s vicious garbage. It was never about good intentions and it was designed and put forward with deliberate malice. From the horse’s mouth, it’s right there in the quote that Toby Rogers provides from the Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group: “Evidence-based medicine de-emphasizes intuition, unsystematic clinical experience, and pathophysiologic rationale as sufficient grounds for clinical decision-making and stresses the examination of evidence from clinical research.” Any real doctor reading that should have been horrified.
The best doctors practice the art and science of medicine. They absolutely rely on their intuition, which is just another name for internalized knowledge gained over decades and through contact with thousands of patients. What the EBMWG smears as “unsystematic” clinical experience is in fact the art of medicine. Doctors combine that with their formal training and knowledge (the science), and that’s how the best of them solve their patients’ mysteries and save lives. The EBMWG openly proposed throwing all that out while dismissing the physical history and condition of specific patients with specific problems (“pathophysiological rationales”) as irrelevant. Instead they actually, publicly, and without any apparent shame proposed replacing clinical experience and scientific knowledge as applied to individual patients with…research. And the vast majority of doctors never said a damned thing in defense of their own profession. It makes their silence and inaction during “covid” a lot less inexplicable.
Huge thanks, Jonathan, for holding these people to task.
At this stage, anyone doing 'good work' while refusing to haul the fraud of viroLIEgy over the coals is complicit—guilty on all counts of helping to prop up the Quackccine narrative. And that narrative isn’t just about syringes—it’s the gateway drug to the Quackccine passport, which will soon be fused to your ability to access digital money in the Brave New World of C riminal B ankstaz’ D igital C hains − shackled on you!!
Want to make them squirm? I recommend putting a simple question to these folks:
"Do you believe that poisoning monkey kidney cells with cytotoxic chemicals to induce cytopathic effects is proof of a virus?"
Ask them to declare it publicly. On record. On their Substacks. So far, not a single one has dared to pin their name to this so-called 'gold standard' of 'viral' isolation.
Thanks again, Jonathan, for keeping the pressure on.
And for the rest of us? Subscribe to these peddlers of dangerous nonsense and start calling them out. Here's a starter pack of narrative preservationists:
Steve Kirsch, Meryl Nass, Robert Baloney, Pierre Kory, and Peter McCullough, to name a few.
Let’s roll the rock back over their viroLIEgy lair—and watch what scurries out.
Very well stated! The "narrative preservationists" you mention (and others) are very adept at playing on both sides of the fence and promoting their form of deliberate obfuscation to keep their readers guessing about where they really stand on the issues; I no longer trust the motivations of any on substacks who are promoting and/or selling products or claim they need paid subscribers in order to survive...for starters let them buy their own coffee like the rest of us have to!
I think the nefarious species out there — are the kind who claim they don’t court donations, yet are secretly funded/prompted to push a narrative.
Thank the Lord neither you nor I belong to that subset of lowlifes who pretend to take the moral high ground while pocketing under-the-counter payoffs/prompts, eh??
Frankly, their deceit is so corrosive, it ought to come with consequences. Wouldn’t you agree?
I have "liked" this - though with a caveat: Notwithstanding that all my articles are free, I don't think it's fair to paint all who ask for subscriptions in a bad light. Many have given up / been fired from their former careers to do the research and writing which regular journalists are being paid not to do.
Thanks Jonathan, Toby did a good job breaking it down. I commented on his article but I did find some extra suitable anagrams I feel of 'Evidenced-Based medicine'. I have added them to the two I mentioned on Toby's site.
- ie indeed embed vaccines
- ie be dim needed vaccines
- admen indices be deceived
- bedded in decisive menace
- baddies deceived nice men
Thank-you for sharing. This is a topic like many that I would like a deeper understanding of.
The same scutiny applied to EBM should be applied to pandemic claims and storytelling.