The microcosm of those who crown themselves as emperors of science... Recently, a professor at the University of Antwerp criticized me; he questioned my scientific credibility because, according to him, I haven't published enough in peer-reviewed journals!
GVB … the scientific debates stopped with Covid , even with my medical colleagues. Matter of fact, tried yesterday with a radiation oncologist . Her work has almost doubled . I asked her why ?….. her crappy answer …. Nobody went to the doctor during Covid there is a delay of care . …. Blooming idiots . You try to explain to some … you hit a brick wall. It’s futile . 🫠🫠🫥🫥
I recently read a very good paper, appropriately peer reviewed, then accepted for publication, published, then, after a backlash, retracted by the publisher. Titled :Covid 19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign. The authors were M Nathaniel Mead, Stephanie Seneff, Russ Wolfinger, Jessica Rose, Kris Denhaerynck, Steve Kirsch, Peter A. McCullough:
Peer reviewed holds little value now. Certainly, amongst all the dubious processes involved in being published these days, the example of this particular “Peer Reviewed” paper, being retracted by the publisher, puts the nail in the coffin, in my opinion. As is repeated often these days, we are all entitled to our own opinions, not our own facts. In the case of the paper I referred to here, it is a document of collated scientific facts and factual information. It was retracted because telling the truth these days is verboten. Unfortunately this makes all other “Peer Reviewed” papers particularly in that magazine, suspect. I’d rather follow Geert’s well described, well thought out, scientific analysis, step by step, with him, building trust in the man, in the scientist, in the science, because he is consistent and thorough and very exacting. His credentials, proven as they are, carry the most value so far as I am concerned. And it doesn’t matter who I am, because, I am “everyman”, the object for whom his analysis is the most urgent and the most critical in order to save lives.
In my over 30 years of medical practice I have come to see that many scientists, doctors and the medical industrial complex love to torture the truth to death but in the end rarely come to a concensus of what the truth is. They love to have intellectual debates adnauseum for the sake of massaging their egos (highly fragile I may add) desparately trying to protect their (perceived) microcosm of “expertise”. In the end, humanity is not well-served and the reductionistic, disease-model paradigm is emboldened to continue to profit off of the suffering of unsuspecting and less informed patients…which fundamentally goes against the tenets of the Hippocratic Oath.
Geert’s work is a threat to this paradigm. The scientific day of reckoning is upon us and the experts’ house of cards will soon come crashing down once and for all.
Spijtig genoeg gaat Al het geld naar die mensen, die woorddienst bewijzen aan hun geldschieters, en niet naar de wetenschappers, die daadwerkelijk onderzoek verrichten, gelijk in welke richting het resultaat gaat.
emperors new clothes! is the right story for this new product, in the meantime, old Nobel prize winners have been proclaimed as crazy (french guy for HIV)! and their products as poisonous (ivermectin)!
Criticism is easy. Contribution takes thought. Both have their place. Jesus told us we would be ridiculed and criticized. Dr. G is simply over the target so it makes sense someone is throwing rocks.
What good is 'peer review' in an echo chamber? I think there's way too much emphasis on peer review to the point where good old fashioned life experience and accumulated knowledge is ignored.
Thank you Geert. I personally, as a layperson, began to question our scientific community in the late '70s when the proliferation of prescribed medicine began to take over from the thoughtful discussion of lifestyle such as diet and exercise. Then in 1999 -2000 I read with interest the comments and subsequent resignations of Jerome Kassirer and Marcia Angell from the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJOM) on the subjugation of the NEJOM to the Massachusetts Medical Society for the purposes of branding and marketing healthcare services and products in the name of NEJOM and the concern for peer reviewed scientific papers created from pharmaceutical funding such that Angell stated " It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine ".
It is on the basis of this history that I choose to question the efficacy of the Covid vaccine and not to vaccinate. Since then I have discovered you, Geert, and read with interest your conclusions, because I have no scientific ability to understand your research. My point is that due diligence and common sense can go along way to navigating this problematic issue.
I would like to see a live debate between you, Geert, and the professor who criticized you. The professor could publish an article afterwards how he “out-scienced” you and increase his publication count by one. Should be enough of a motivation, since the number of publications is the most important thing, right?
But unfortunately these people are not dumb enough and know they have no chance debating you. So they only criticize you and then never respond to anything afterwards. I see a pattern here, there were so many who did this to you.
Thank you Geert for staying strong! Btw, love your book!
GVB … the scientific debates stopped with Covid , even with my medical colleagues. Matter of fact, tried yesterday with a radiation oncologist . Her work has almost doubled . I asked her why ?….. her crappy answer …. Nobody went to the doctor during Covid there is a delay of care . …. Blooming idiots . You try to explain to some … you hit a brick wall. It’s futile . 🫠🫠🫥🫥
> I haven't published enough in peer-reviewed journals!
Great, you can always argue that you didn’t want to compromise your credibility by feeding automated journals and reviewers.
Evidence: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/ (Why Most Published Research Findings Are False, by John Ioannidis, 2005).
I recently read a very good paper, appropriately peer reviewed, then accepted for publication, published, then, after a backlash, retracted by the publisher. Titled :Covid 19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign. The authors were M Nathaniel Mead, Stephanie Seneff, Russ Wolfinger, Jessica Rose, Kris Denhaerynck, Steve Kirsch, Peter A. McCullough:
https://www.cureus.com/articles/203052-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-lessons-learned-from-the-registrational-trials-and-global-vaccination-campaign#!/authors
Peer reviewed holds little value now. Certainly, amongst all the dubious processes involved in being published these days, the example of this particular “Peer Reviewed” paper, being retracted by the publisher, puts the nail in the coffin, in my opinion. As is repeated often these days, we are all entitled to our own opinions, not our own facts. In the case of the paper I referred to here, it is a document of collated scientific facts and factual information. It was retracted because telling the truth these days is verboten. Unfortunately this makes all other “Peer Reviewed” papers particularly in that magazine, suspect. I’d rather follow Geert’s well described, well thought out, scientific analysis, step by step, with him, building trust in the man, in the scientist, in the science, because he is consistent and thorough and very exacting. His credentials, proven as they are, carry the most value so far as I am concerned. And it doesn’t matter who I am, because, I am “everyman”, the object for whom his analysis is the most urgent and the most critical in order to save lives.
In my over 30 years of medical practice I have come to see that many scientists, doctors and the medical industrial complex love to torture the truth to death but in the end rarely come to a concensus of what the truth is. They love to have intellectual debates adnauseum for the sake of massaging their egos (highly fragile I may add) desparately trying to protect their (perceived) microcosm of “expertise”. In the end, humanity is not well-served and the reductionistic, disease-model paradigm is emboldened to continue to profit off of the suffering of unsuspecting and less informed patients…which fundamentally goes against the tenets of the Hippocratic Oath.
Geert’s work is a threat to this paradigm. The scientific day of reckoning is upon us and the experts’ house of cards will soon come crashing down once and for all.
Peer review sure mattered for the lab-leak suppression effort.
Academia is a circle-jerk of "you cite me, I'll cite you". Its a wonder anything novel ever appears anymore.
There's no room for exploring ideas that deviate from the mainstream (read: approved) narrative. Even to the end of the human species.
.
They Get What They Want
For Following Along.
They Get Absolved Of Responsibility.
.
Spijtig genoeg gaat Al het geld naar die mensen, die woorddienst bewijzen aan hun geldschieters, en niet naar de wetenschappers, die daadwerkelijk onderzoek verrichten, gelijk in welke richting het resultaat gaat.
Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche!
Please read this insightful blog post by this brilliant guy.
https://www.rintrah.nl/hey-look-serotypes/
emperors new clothes! is the right story for this new product, in the meantime, old Nobel prize winners have been proclaimed as crazy (french guy for HIV)! and their products as poisonous (ivermectin)!
Criticism is easy. Contribution takes thought. Both have their place. Jesus told us we would be ridiculed and criticized. Dr. G is simply over the target so it makes sense someone is throwing rocks.
What good is 'peer review' in an echo chamber? I think there's way too much emphasis on peer review to the point where good old fashioned life experience and accumulated knowledge is ignored.
Thank you Geert. I personally, as a layperson, began to question our scientific community in the late '70s when the proliferation of prescribed medicine began to take over from the thoughtful discussion of lifestyle such as diet and exercise. Then in 1999 -2000 I read with interest the comments and subsequent resignations of Jerome Kassirer and Marcia Angell from the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJOM) on the subjugation of the NEJOM to the Massachusetts Medical Society for the purposes of branding and marketing healthcare services and products in the name of NEJOM and the concern for peer reviewed scientific papers created from pharmaceutical funding such that Angell stated " It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine ".
It is on the basis of this history that I choose to question the efficacy of the Covid vaccine and not to vaccinate. Since then I have discovered you, Geert, and read with interest your conclusions, because I have no scientific ability to understand your research. My point is that due diligence and common sense can go along way to navigating this problematic issue.
Remember Pfizer invested / bought our oncology drug companies…. Connect the dots .
Pride goeth before the fall.
I would like to see a live debate between you, Geert, and the professor who criticized you. The professor could publish an article afterwards how he “out-scienced” you and increase his publication count by one. Should be enough of a motivation, since the number of publications is the most important thing, right?
But unfortunately these people are not dumb enough and know they have no chance debating you. So they only criticize you and then never respond to anything afterwards. I see a pattern here, there were so many who did this to you.
Thank you Geert for staying strong! Btw, love your book!
Money and greed destroy everything.
Prove me wrong.