Conspiracy Theory. Disinformation. Fake News. And Medicine?

Conspiracy theory is defined by Britannica as "an attempt to explain harmful or tragic events as the result of the actions of a small powerful group. Such explanations reject the accepted narrative surrounding those events; indeed, the official version may be seen as further proof of the conspiracy."

Misinformation is defined by Oxford Reference as "a form of propaganda involving the dissemination of false information with the deliberate intent to deceive or mislead."

 Fake News is simply and very succinctly defined by Reuters International and the University of Oxford as "the news you don't believe".

So when we hear someone, anyone, compounding a theory, an idea, or a concept, that runs counter to the 'dominant' or 'official' view we need to listen carefully before we either believe or dismiss it. This is especially so when it concerns health. We need to ask pertinent questions - to both those who are putting forward the idea, and those who are summarily dismissing it.

• Does the idea make sense to our experience/understanding of what is happening in the world?
• Is the idea well argued, supported and justified with sound evidence?
  
• Who is putting the new idea forward, what are their motives in doing so, and who do they represent? 
• Who is dismissing the idea as a conspiracy theory, disinformation, or fake news?
  
• What do each side have to gain from the acceptance, or the rejection of the idea?

It is always important to remember that just because an idea/concept/theory does not comply with the dominant, or 'official' view, it does not necessarily make it fake news, disinformation, or a conspiracy theory.

Lots of ideas that are routinely dismissed as conspiracy theories/disinformation/fake news, many deservedly so; they sound like nonsense, they make little sense, and they do not begin to meet any of the above criteria. Many can, and should be dismissed as such. Yet before we ever do so we should ensure that we have applied these criteria.

• Just because something is dismissed as "disinformation", "fake news", or "conspiracy theory" does not necessarily mean that it is!

For instance, some people call the concept of mad-made climate change a conspiracy theory. Climanate change has become the dominant or official version of what is happening to our weather. Yet many people deny this view - and because they question the dominant view they are usually dismissed as 'conspiracy theorists'. In such a situation we need to examine both sides. What are the vested interests of climate change theorists? What are the vested interests of those who are denying climate change? How sound is the science behind climate change? Is the case for man-made climate change properly argued and evidenced? And above all, is there evidence on the ground of climate change - desertification, melting ice caps, rising sea levels, extreme weather events, extensive forest fires, flash flooding, and the like. You don't need to be a scientist to see what is happening in the world!

When we examine an idea that is being dismissed as a conspiracy theory it's always important to understand that even non-scientists can ask questions, not least when these questions are based on our experience and understanding of the world. Does the dominant view, or the 'conspiracy theory', best explain what we see happening to the world? 

Moreover, when we have asked all these questions we can make up our own mind. We are not slaves either science or governments - both of which can be noted for their arrogance. Indeed, we all have a responsibility to look at the evidence and to make up our minds. Did mankind really got to the moon in the 1960's, or was it all staged and filmed on earth? Did 9/11 really happen, or were the twin towers deliberately blown up? You decide!

Health, Disinformation, Fake News and Conspiracy Theory

So let's consider what has become the most important area of 'conspiracy theory' at this present time - the issue of health, and in particular, what is happening to us in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic. The 'conspirators' amongst us claim a variety of things that are being summarily dismissed by conventional medicine - here are just a few.

• The excessive fear the CME (Conventional Medical Establishment) health campaign has generated about the Covid-19 virus.
• The clear and deliberate exaggeration of the numbers of Covid-19 cases, and Covid-19 deaths over the last 18 months. 
• The ongoing failure of hand washing, social distancing, the wearing of masks, and lockdowns, as effective preventative measures against the virus.
  
• The emotional, social, economic and medical harm brought about by the policy of the CME.
  
• The CME's failure/refusal to advise people about how they can support and strengthen their natural immunity against the virus. 
• The over-emphasis placed on the logistical success of the Covid-19 vaccine roll-out, and the under-emphasis on their abject failure to prevent infection, or hospitalisation, or death. 
• The growing evidence that the Covid-19 vaccines are causing serious adverse reactions, including a growing number of deaths; allied with the failure (refusal) of the government, medical authorities and the MSM to inform the general public about this. 
• The CHE's censorship and punishment of any conventional medical doctor or scientist who opposes or disagrees with the dominant CHE message. 
• And the MSM's ongoing refusal to acknowledge the work of natural medical therapists with their patients both to prevent and treat the condition.

This is all opposed to the 'dominant' CME view. Information about health is largely controlled by pharmaceutical medicine, and the 'science' on which it claims to be based. Pharmaceutical (or conventional) medicine is now so powerful it controls most national health provision in the UK, and in most countries around the world. It dominates most national governments. It has infiltrated and taken over most of the mainstream media (MSM). 

This domination is part of what I usually refer to, in this blog and elsewhere, as the CME. So what is the agenda of the CME? It has told us, persistently, for many years, that it is winning the war against illness and disease; that it is based on medical science, and that pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are keeping us healthy. And at the same time it dismisses other natural medical therapies, like homeopathy, acupuncture, herbalism, chiropractor, et al, as 'unscientific'; and so they do not work. 

Anyone who contradicts this dominant CME agenda, for example over the Covid-19 pandemic, and the life-saving importance of the Covid-19 vaccines, is now routinely dismissed as peddling fake news, disinformation. We are conspiracy theorists!

Are they right? Let's apply the rules. First, is the CME winning the battle against illness and disease, as it claims; and more specifically how well is it doing in its battle with the Covid-19 virus?

1. Does the idea make sense of our experience/understanding of what is happening in the world?

The CME is very clearly not winning the war against illness and disease. To determine this we have only to examine the rapidly growing incidence of chronic disease, any chronic disease, to discover that more people are now being affected, more seriously, than ever before. It is undeniable fact that we are facing epidemic levels of allergy, arthritis, autism, cancer, dementia, heart/lung/kidney/liver disease, et al, never before experienced.

And after 18 months the CME's response to Covid-19 is still struggling to make any impact on the virus, even after massive vaccination campaigns. In time, all epidemics subside, even the Black Death, the Great Plague, and Spanish flu, etc. But it will be different this time; it will not be a natural decline - the CME taking credit for it!

Yet to question either of these assumptions is considered to be disinformation, fake news; and anyone doing so is dismissed by government, by official health organisations, and by the MSM, as conspiracy theorists. We are described and dismissed as 'vaccine hesitant', as 'anti-vaxxers'  - but without any attempt to explain or discuss with us what our position is. 

And any mention of this 'disinformation' is now being routinely censored by social media organisations. Why does the CME need censorship to win their argument? It is necessary for the MSM to ensure that most people continue to think and believe it is winning the battle against illness and disease, and the war against Covid-19.

2. Is the idea well argued, and supported and justified with sound evidence?
The CME's treatment of illness and disease, its effectiveness and safety, is never seriously questioned or challenged; and hasn't been for the last 100+ years. Most people get their medical information from two sources, doctors and the MSM, and both usually toe the CME's line. So most people continue to believe the repeated assertions that conventional medicine is both safe and effective. Yet there is precious little evidence to support the claims.

I have argued most of the 'conspiracy' theories in this blog, not least during the Covid19 pandemic. They offer an alternative explanation about what has happened to us, and what can be readily observed in the world. 

• The Covid-19 campaign has generated high levels of fear amongst the general population. 
• The overall mortality rate has not increased significantly during the months of the Covid-19 outbreak, and does not warrant this level of fear.
• Hand washing, social distancing, the wearing of masks, and lockdowns, has neither significantly prevented or reduced the incidence of the disease.
• It harm to our emotional, social, economic and medical lives cannot be denied; and the harm has been caused by CME policies, and will have to be dealt with in the months and years to come.
  
• The CME'has rarely, if ever, advised us about the importance of the immune system in protecting us from the Covid-19 virus, or indeed any other virus.
  
• Even with the emphasis placed on the logistical success of the Covid-19 vaccine roll-out, the CME remains reluctant to allow vaccinated people to resume their lives; and vaccinated people continue to contract the virus, they are being hospitalised, and are still dying. 
• The Covid-19 vaccines themselves are now causing serious adverse reactions, and the number of reported deaths are increase every week. Yet neither government, the CME authorities, or the MSM have mentioned this to the general public. It can be found in official data; but we are not being told about it.
  
• The MSM is involved heavily in censorship. They put forward the government/CME position exclusively; and anyone who disagrees are not given a platform.
  
• The CME is disciplining and punishing any conventional medical doctor or scientist who disagrees with their dominant message. 
• And the MSM continues to neglect, and refuses to acknowledge the work being done by natural medical therapists with their patients.

3. Who is putting the idea forward, what are their motives, and who do they represent? 

One of the problems with the medical 'conspiracy theorists', those who do not comply with the dominant medical explanation of the Covid-19 pandemic, is that there are very few organisations sufficiently strong to get its message across. Nor is there any significant co-ordination between them. Indeed, about the only thing that unites the so-called 'conspiracy theorists' is their genuine concern about the harm that the CME is causing by it's response to the virus - to the economy, to our mental health, to social life, to children's education, and to personal freedoms and liberty. 

 

So it is difficult to see any major vested interest that is backing this 'disinformation' campaign!

 

4. Who is dismissing the idea as a conspiracy theory?

Clearly, the CME is currently dominant in health care provision. The pharmaceutical industry ,which leads and controls the CME, is immensely rich, powerful and influential. It has used its position to control national governments, most medical provision, and the mainstream media - indeed, most of the sources of information that the public can use to inform itself about health, illness, disease, and medical treatment. And it is now seeking to extend its control to the information that can be put on social media outlets.

 

So those claiming the existence of "a conspiracy" are back by powerful and influential vested interests. It is understandable that the CME wishes to maintain its dominant position. It has a lot to lose and a lot to protect. It is losing its battle with illness and disease, and is desperate to attack and condemn anyone and everyone who is not 'on message', or who speaks against them.

So the health 'conspiracy theorists' are facing an enormously powerful vested interest, whose very credibility is under threat by its ongoing failure to treat illness and disease successfully, the chronic disease that its drugs and vaccines have cause over the last 70-80 years.

5. What do the two sides have to gain from the acceptance, or the rejection of the idea?

There is only one side of this dispute that can point to any "gains" from the routine dismissal of the dominant message of the CME. It is the CME. Rather than responding to the criticism they condemn it as a 'conspiracy'. Rather than discussing the issues they deny that there are any issues.

It is becoming palpably clear that the "disinformation" is coming from just one side of this health argument. Consider just a few aspects of the so-called 'conspiracy theory':

• the "fake news" is that Covid-19 has been a major health crisis; the correct news is that average mortality rates have not increased significantly during this so-called pandemic.
• the "fake news" is that the Covid-19 vaccines are effective and safe, and will enable social life to return to normal
• the information that demonstrates the vaccines are ineffective and harm comes from the data published by the government and conventional medical authorities
• the failure to provide that information to the general public is 'disinformation' of the very highest order.

In brief, those who are being accused being "conspiracy theorists" are the people who are more accurately describing what is happening, and what can be seen to be going on in the world. Indeed, it is a more convincing explanation than that given by CME's dominant message. It is the government who is providing "disinformation". The MSM are the purveyors of "fake news". It is the CME who represents the "conspiracy theorist".

VACCINES. Disinformation? Fake News? Conspiracy Theories? Or is it Uncovering a Cover Up?

In my last blog I discussed the censorship of health news by the mainstream media (MSM). This censorship can be seen, in its clearest manifestation, in their attitude towards vaccines and vaccination. The MSM, alongside conventional doctors, routinely tell us that vaccines are 'entirely safe' and extraordinarily effective. Any one who disagrees with this position is accused of spreading disinformation, fake news, and conspiracy theory. Yesterday, Andrew Marr interviewed the man behind the new Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines for his BBC programme, and described him as "the saviour of the world" - or words to that effect!

As someone who is convinced that vaccines are both unsafe (positively dangerous in fact), and have an effectiveness that is consistently over-hyped by the MSM, the MSM presumably consider me to be an "anti-vaxxer". 

By contrast, I consider myself to be someone in favour of SAFE MEDICINE. 

Disinformation? Fake News? Conspiracy Theory? Or Conventional Medical Literature?

I will give readers of this blog a guarantee. The information that will be used in this blog about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines (and pharmaceutical drugs, and all conventional medical treatment generally) will come mainly from these two sources.

1. The literature of the conventional medical establishment itself; including Patient Information Leaflets (PILs), and websites owned by pharmaceutical interests, such as Drugs.com. Patients should never agree to any vaccination without first reading the PIL; and most of these PILs can be found on this website. Read the side effects for yourself, and then decide if the vaccine is safe.
   
2. Vaccine compensation schemes for the few patients who have been able to prove that damage to their health has been caused by vaccination. These include the UK's Vaccine Damage Payment scheme; and the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in the USA. Both schemes pay out enormous sums of money for people who have been damaged by 'safe' vaccines.
   

So conventional doctors tell us routinely that vaccines are safe. Yet the literature of conventional medicine, and the medical science it says underlies it, is sufficient to prove otherwise. Vaccines are harmful, many more people are damaged every year who cannot prove the link. And yet our doctors tell us they are safe; they are not telling us the truth.

In addition, I will report on evidence that appears on social media that conventional medicine should take seriously, investigate thoroughly, and come to a conclusion - but which is usually ignored or rejected outright without investigation.

1. Evidence that comes from vaccine victims; patients who have taken them, been damaged by them, have had their lives changed for the worse; and have not been believed by conventional medicine. Such links are usually dismissed by conventional medicine as 'anecdotes', with no causal effect proven; but real-life tragedy for families.
   
2. Investigative journalism, studies and reports of vaccine concern that have not been properly investigated, or which are  being discounted or dismissed by the conventional medical establishment. Two examples of these, concerning vaccines, and already in my in-tray, are as follows:

Lawsuits begin over SARS-CoV-2 Laboratory Leak. This concerns the persistent rumour that the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic was a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Wuhan Center for Disease Control, and the EcoHealth Alliance. An application for information from the National Institute of Health made by the US Right to Know organisation was met with silence. 'Conspiracy Theory' is one thing; refusal to provide information in response to a legitimate request for information is another, and is suggestive of a cover up. It is our right to know this information.

Flu Shot Deaths in South Korea said to be 'coincidental'. More than 80 people have died in South Korea following influenza vaccination. This was investigated by South Korean health authorities who dismissed this as 'coincidence', and decided to contine promoting the vaccine "despite public anxiety'. One death following vaccination might be a coincidence; even two; at a stretch three. But dismissing 80 deaths as a 'coincidence' is not a satisfactory response.

In both these examples, people are looking only for the truth; a reasonable explanation; some semblance that genuine concerns are being considered, and a determined and rigorous application of the precautionary principle. Silence (ignoring the issues), and dismissal (discounting the importance of the issue) is insufficient. As long as the conventional medical establishment responds to genuine concern in this inadequate way people will be dissatisfied, patients will ask questions, and expect reasonable answers.

Disinformation? All that's necessary, then, is open access to the real information.

Fake News? If so, all that's required is access to the real news.

A Conspiracy Theory? Or is it really about uncovering a Cover Up?

Okay! I think vaccines are harmful, so now I'm a Russian Agent! What has happened to the health debate?

Yesterday I posted several of my blogs on the MMR vaccine, and its links to the creation of Autism as a disease. Today the mainstream media is saying that I, and many other people of like mind, am repeating Russian lies, spreading false information about the flu, measles and other vaccine. The Mirror seems to be leading this story, but the rest of the mainstream media, the Sun, the Express, the Telegraph, and of course the BBC, are joining in.

They all provide the story, with the same words, almost identical headlines, which suggests that they are, as usual, singing from the same hymn sheet, the same press release, the same propaganda. "UK lives in DANGER because of Russian propaganda and fake news over MMR jabs" states the Express. They continue.

               "Experts have previously warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin's government has been trying to erode trust in US and European Governments by spreading lies on social media and 'fake news'. But now it is feared the Kremlin is using the same techniques of misinformation over flu jabs and the MMR measles vaccine. This is all about destabilisation by external forces. War is ever changing and becoming much more cyber-based. For generations, governments in the UK and the West have been extremely worried about destabilisation from external forces." (My emphasis).

Apparently these are the words of Chris Phillips, former head of National Counter Terrorism Security Office, who said it has become "a threat to daily life". The Express article then quotes Public Health England, and the Royal College of GPs, who have "repeatedly expressed concern" over the amount of 'fake news' shared on social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter.

So clearly I am a Russian agent, an external force, spreading misinformation, fake news, and causing destabilisation, and eroding trust in US and European Governments! 

Or am I? Are my blogs 'misinformation', 'fake news'? Or is the underlying problem here the censorship of the media's coverage of important health issues?

Underlying this whole story are people, like myself, who genuinely believe that there is clear and undeniable evidence that the MMR vaccination is causing harm to children, particularly in creating the new disease of Autism. My concerns have been around for decades,  and particularly since the late 1990's. But then, in the early 2000's there were several studies that proved conclusively that there was no link between the MMR vaccination and Autism. Since that time, the mainstream media has refused to cover the concerns, there has been no further coverage, debate has ended.

So has the issue gone away? No, it certainly has not. Those who question the safety of vaccines, all vaccines not just the MMR, have used the social media to raise important and ongoing safety issues that arise, and we have done so mainly because the mainstream media have refused to do so.

So let me make an offer to the security forces, to the pharmaceutical industry, and to the mainstream media. I will take down this blog, and stop posting on social media, if the following issues are fully and openly discussed in future, as and when necessary.

• If vaccines are entirely safe, why are so many victims of vaccine damage paid $millions by the US Vaccine Court after they have suffered vaccine damage?
• Why have governments around the world given the pharmaceutical industry indemnity against any legal or financial claim for compensation?
• If it is not vaccines, what is the cause of the epidemic rise in Autism, why is a disease unknown in the 1940's now affecting at least 1 in 10 children?
• Why has the author of an important study that 'proved' there was no link between the MMR vaccine and Autism admitted that he and his team destroyed evidence that would have proved otherwise? Why has this never been discussed in the American Congress?
• How effective is the flu vaccine, when for the last several years after flu seasons studies have shown that it has only minimal effectiveness?
• Why is the health of so many fit, healthy, normal young girls been so completely compromised and destroyed after they are given the HPV vaccine?
• Why is it that when there are outbreaks of mumps and measles it is vaccinated children who contract the illness rather than the unvaccinated?
• Why is it that so many older people, and now so many younger people, suffer with dementia? Is the research that links dementia with annual flu vaccines correct?

These are just a few of the non-debated questions about vaccine safety. There are many more that should be discussed by the mainstream media. BUT THEY ARE NOT DISCUSSED. There is silence. Media organisations refuse to engage in the health debate. Why?

Wherever there is division, or disagreement or debate in society, a genuinely 'free' press would want to discuss the issue. They would examine the arguments of both sides. They would ask questions of both sides of the argument. They would ensure that they are brought together to debate the issue. Yet in matters of health this has not been done for the last 20 years. So many people accept these vaccines without any engagement in the debate about the issues. They have never looked at the pros and cons. They have never been made aware of the issues. MOST PEOPLE, AS A RESULT, ARE QUITE UNABLE TO MAKE AN INFORMED CHOICE.

The evidence against vaccines cannot never be discussed in any mainstream media platform. We are routinely denied access to those platforms. We have to resort to social media, not because the evidence is weak, not because it is 'fake' news, not because it is disinformation, but because they are the only platforms available to us.

And now we are accused of spreading false information that puts people lives in danger! We would argue that lives are placed at risk because people are not warned of the dangers of vaccination. So who is right? The issue is never argued. Governments tell us that vaccines are safe. The pharmaceutical industry tells us that vaccines are safe. The conventional medical establishment tells us that vaccines are safe. The mainstream media goes along with them, slavishly - vaccines are safe. So it is not surprising that most people accept that vaccines are safe.

So which side is putting the lives of people at risk? Those who are giving people vaccines containing mercury, or aluminium, and other substances known to be poisonous? Or those who are encouraging people not to accept vaccination, thereby denying them access to vaccines that are, apparently, so effective and 'entirely safe'?

• Those who argue the former are asking for a debate, an open examination of the evidence. 
• Those who argue the latter insist that they are right, that they should not be questioned, and that to do so creates 'a threat to daily life'.

I, and many other people, believe that vaccines are harmful to health. This is not 'fake news'. It is not 'disinformation'. All we ask is that the issue and the evidence is debated, openly and honestly, by the mainstream media. We may be wrong. Our arguments may be shot down in flames by the conventional medical establishment. If so, fine. The problem is not fake news it is no news, it is media censorship that bars discussion. Everyone should at least know the issues, the arguments, the evidence. Without it no-one can exercise an informed choice about vaccines.

At the moment people will have their lives destroyed either because they see something on social media that makes them decide not to accept vaccines that are a positive bonus as they keep us healthy, or because they have not heard about the evidence against vaccines, and their dangers. There is only one thing that needs stating, in a society that prides itself in being free.

Silence in not acceptable!

Fake health news. Junk health news. Censorship. Hundreds of thousands autistic children since 2004, and the 'Free Press' is culpable

There is no health debate being carried on within the mainstream media, our so-called 'Free Press'.

• Millions of people die every year directly from pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. 
• Chronic disease has been increasing rampantly during the decades conventional medicine has become the dominant form of medicine available to us. 
• Every year our health services fail to cope with the demands made on them by patients who are becoming sicker.

Yet when the NHS enters yet another annual winter crisis the only response is 

• "We want more of what we have!".
• "Let's invest even more in yet more pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines".
• "Drugs and vaccines are scientifically proven to save lives".

There can be, and will be no real debate about health care issues until such time that people are informed, openly and honestly, about what is happening, and in this, our news media is failing. Indeed it has palpably failed for the last 70 years, and more particularly over the last 20 years.

               "The mainstream media continues peddling its “fake news” narrative like a desperate pusher whose junkies are dying from his toxic dope. It’s slowly dawning on the media-consuming public that the MSM is the primary purveyor of “fake news”– self-referential narratives that support a blatantly slanted agenda with unsupported accusations and suitably anonymous sources."

So says 'The Daily Sheep', one of the alternative newspapers that has grown from a growing feeling and realisation that the mainstream media is not telling us the truth. Donald Trump has brought the concept of 'Fake News' to the forefront of the political debate in the USA. The Daily Sheepie gives us an example.

               "Many of these Fake News Narratives are laughably, painfully bogus: that President Trump is a Russian tool, to take a current example."

Certainly, the debate about Trump's relationship with Russia has dominated the news, and it is puzzling what 'good relations' between two countries should be a problem. On the other hand, it is equally puzzling what Trump should be annoyed that the press suggested that more people attended Obama's inauguration than his.

So we have a situation where the political 'right' are accusing the 'left' of generating false news, and vice versa. Politics was once about debating issues. Now there appears to be little debate because neither side is listening to, or accepting what the other is saying. It is the politics of the mute. And the public is becoming increasingly confused, not knowing what to believe.

It is the mainstream media that should be informing us, distinguishing fact from fiction, supporting views and opinions with balanced argument, and presenting this for their public to make up their minds! Only in this way can people make an informed choice about how to cast their vote, where to obtain their health care, and much else. The Daily Sheepie again

               "But the real danger isn’t fake news - it’s junk news. Junk News ..... is related to Junk Science and Junk Food. Junk science is presented as “science” but cherry-picks data to support a specific but unstated agenda - an agenda that requires downplaying or overlooking conflicting data.
One common example of junk science is the approval of new medications by the FDA. If you actually dig into Phase III data, you may well find that the “benefits” of the new wonder-drug are barely above statistical chance, and the potential interactions with commonly prescribed (or imbibed) drugs are ignored. This is how we end up with medications with an unfortunate side-effect: death from misadventure, addiction, in combination with other commonly prescribed meds, etc."

This blog has focused on this problem for several years. The mainstream media have become the willing lackeys of the conventional medical establishment, especially the pharmaceutical industry. I stopped buying 'liberal' newspapers, like the Guardian, the Independent and the Observer in the mid-2000's for this very reason, and this trend has continued with many colleagues, friends and acquaintances doing the same thing. The demise of the newspaper industry is not entirely due to television and the social media!

• We are told that new pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are wonder cures that will transform our lives, and our ability to treat illness and disease.
• We are told that the side effects and adverse reactions of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are a minor and necessary part of medical treatment (if we are told about them at all).
• We are told that conventional medicine is overcoming disease, and that it is the reason for us all living longer.
• We are told that pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are so good we all need to be required, or even forced to take them if we want to work, or send our children to school.
• And any alternative medical therapy, like homeopathy, is routinely rubbished in the mainstream media, with no right of reply, nor any attempt at providing any semblance of balance.

               "Junk news is like junk science - cherry-picked to support a corporate agenda - and like junk food in being digestible but toxic."

Yet junk news is not the worst aspect of the mainstream media's treatment of health issues. It is downright censorship! 

• Pharmaceutical companies are taken to court, convicted, and fines are imposed because they have been found to have behaved dishonestly, fraudulently.
• Studies that raise serious questions about the safety and effectiveness of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are rarely, if ever, published.
• People who have suffered from the severe, even lethal side effects of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are not allowed to tell the story of what has happened to them.
• The vaccine court in the USA pays out vast amounts in compensation to vaccine damaged children.

Censorship is the absolute refusal of media organisations to inform us about vital health news and developments. The kind of news, outlined above, might certainly have an impact on the decisions we would make about our own health care treatment - if only we knew about it!

Yet the worst example of media censorship is happening right now, at the very moment. It concerns the MMR vaccine, its links to the Autism epidemic, and the film VAXXED which has been produced to tell the public what our media refuses to tell them. I have written about it before.

• Autism, the MMR Vaccine, and Media Censorship (September 2014)
• Autism IS caused by MMR vaccine. Evidence of 'no connection' was fraudulent medical science (July 2015)
• The MMR Vaccine, Autism, and the silence and culpability of the Political, Medical and Media Establishment (August 2015)
• The MMR-Autism Controversy, and the dishonesty of Medical 'Science (September 2015)
• Medical censorship. 'Man Made Epidemic', a film about Autism, pulled from film festival (June 2016)
• Medical Failure and Health Freedom. Why is the Pharmaceutical Industry involved in Fraud, Corruption, Cover-Up and Censorship? (February 2017)

What this censorship means is that parents have been vaccinating their children in the belief that the vaccines are safe, and that there is no connection with autism. This is what we have been told by doctors, by the entire conventional medical establishment, by drug regulators, by governments - and by the mainstream media

What this means is that hundreds of thousands of children are now autistic, at least in part, as a direct result of press and media censorship.

Indeed, the mainstream media is as culpable of this dreadful crime as any medical scientist who has faked vaccine trials, any doctor that has prescribed harmful vaccines, every medical professional whose task appears to have been to deceive us, any government who has endorsed these vaccines, for whatever reason.

• Perhaps this is why they continue to refuse to publish what is happening.
• Perhaps this is why the makers of VAXXED is finding it difficult to find a cinema willing to show the film.
• Perhaps this is why the homeopathy college has been ejected from premises they have used for decades because they dared show the film.
• Perhaps this is why the university that awarded the degrees conferred on graduates of the college are under pressure to stop awarding them.

This modern day censorship is as bad as any censorship of any 17th and 18th century monarchy, of any modern-day dictatorships in the third world. Once, the press fought for its independence, and its right to inform the public. Now, at at the heart of this censorship is our 'free' press. Free from government, maybe. But certainly not free from the world of Big Corp, especially Big Pharma.