271 Comments

They're ALL ignoring the voices of truth because the lies can't hold up any more, there are too many people who've gotten sick with COVID or who've been injured or killed by the vaccines, and besides, there's all those thousands upon thousands of pages of vaccine research with all the adverse events and over a thousand deaths during the trials that the court ordered released by Pfizer.

Expand full comment

Unemployed not able to contribute

Thanks always enjoy reading your posts

Expand full comment

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)60696-1/fulltext

Steve-- I hope you read this and confront him on this. Does he remember writing it?!

Anyone can make sure Steve sees this from a few years back??

Expand full comment

Horton heard a Hoo because The Lancet has been bought off by Big Pharma, just like The NEJM and AMA have been. This is all disgusting; America is circling the drain.

Expand full comment

It’s truly incredible to see Steve being ignored by everyone who’s calling him a liar. Every time he’s blown off by a medical professional or professor who’s earlier claimed he’s “spreading misinformation”, it makes me, and others, I’m sure, double down on who’s side we’re on. What a time to be alive.... Maybe one day we’ll see an open, honest debate. Til then, Steve, keep doing what you’re doing. The truth always wins.

Anyone watch “Debunk the Funk” on Dr. Drew recently? Sounded like dude was reading script from the propaganda fueled media instead of forming his own thoughts and opinions. Not what I expected from a pro in the science field.. but it did, again, solidify my belief in who’s side I’m on.. not that I needed anymore convincing. At least he was open to debate. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Expand full comment

Still holding my breath, waiting for The Debate, or better yet, a series of debates. Keep trying, Steve!

Expand full comment

Propaganda that cannot be challenged is not science. Science that cannot be challenged is propaganda.

Expand full comment

It is one thing to be wrong, or lying, it is another thing to open you mouth and prove it. They may be evil but they are not silly. In any case tyrants don't debate. They only respect strength - the courts or the masses. Keep up the great work, Steve.

Expand full comment

American Military News just reported a Commander dying in his home. No mention of age, no mention of cause, and of course, no mention of vaccination status but we all know in the military, there's about a 95% chance he was vaccinated, and this is just another Died Suddenly statistic. The term "misinformation" is another tool of the left, they wildly throw BS out there because their followers believe whatever is thrown at them. They miss the fact that later, their BS is proven to be BS and the retractions/apologies etc don't reach the number of people the original BS statement did. This has been going on rampantly since 2016.

Expand full comment

There may be a lot of sick and dead people that took an unneeded shot for a virus that is just as dangerous as the common cold. Darwin was correct.

Expand full comment

Yes you are right! Sadly, so true, so many young people dying unexpectedly. I remember how many Celebrities were pushing it on people, shamming them if they didn't get the vax. I wonder if they feel any sense of responsibility now? they didn't know if it was safe and effective, how can they use their influence like that? it's terrible!

Expand full comment

The Lancet is run by corrupt people and a joke . If you're corrupt you don't go anywhere and risk exposure.

Expand full comment

The problem with the pharmaceutical industry is if people are healthy the industries profits would suffer greatly. So, pharma has a vested interest to keep us in a state of chronic illness. But at least when it comes to conventional medicines you can sue the drug company if you are harmed. Not so in the US when it comes to vaccines. Thats why there hundreds of new "vaccines" under development. They are "researching a new class of "vaccines" that are unrelated to infections disease such as "vaccines" for depression and alcoholism. These new shots will be added to the current "vaccine" schedule and in some states be mandated. I can just imagine how the conversation would go between a pediatrician and parent of a newborn." there is a chance your baby will grow up to be an alcoholic so

your baby needs the anti-alcohol vaccine"

Expand full comment

The Lancet op-ed ends with this: “This descent into unreason is what happens when you inflame public anxieties. It needs to stop.”

Neil Ferguson did that, with his faulty Covid death projections at Imperial college. Lancet should have called for a stop to inflaming public anxieties, a long time ago. Anxieties were inflamed, that people who didn't take the shot, were endangering other people. Lancet should have called for that to stop. The vaccinated can contract Covid and infect others.

The whole Covid response was based on unreason. There was no reason to wait for a vaccine and let people die, when there were anti-viral drugs available with which to treat Covid patients. A government agenda should not have overridden public health. Government inflamed public anxiety.

Expand full comment

British Heart Foundation in the Lancet: “There is no evidence that people are at risk of cardiac arrest in the days or weeks following the [COVID-19] vaccine.”

Red-pilled citizen: "Ok, show us that particular data then."

BHF: "Sorry, we don't have that on hand. Don't descend into unreason."

Cowards gonna coward but it will blow up in their faces sooner or later.

In Australia this week, MD Kerryn Phelps (previous president of AMA) has come out after 18 months admitting she and her wife have been seriously covid vax injured. Six months after being injured she was pushing the poisons on 5 - 11 year old kids on Twitter, and then waited another 11 months to take her case to parliament and the media.

Expand full comment

I choose something else because, if nothing else, the pharmaceutical industry is an industry that is opportunistic. The claim is that certain discernable information would prove their statements lacking, would only result in a demand of proof to counteract said statement. This is the way that they divert the debate and attempt to make it non-viable. This is also how they convince the general public that their position is above reproach. All that said, you can't give enough information, facts or opinions (qualified or not) to change the rhetoric being fomented. Unfortunately, the only other alternative is to bury that agenda deep under ground.

Expand full comment