Can, And Should, Scientific Misconduct Be Criminally Prosecuted?

Written by Pierre Kory, MD, MPA on April 10, 2024. Posted in Current News

MP Andrew Bridgen is convening a group of experts to present evidence of criminal corruption during Covid to the Police. I want a seat at that table. Oxford’s trial authors should be nervous

In my last post, I exposed the glaring amount of evidence of extensive scientific misconduct by Oxford’s PRINCIPLE trial investigators in the ivermectin arm of their trial.

Problem: outside the followers of me and those of my network on Substack and Twitter (and the FLCCC), the wider public would never be aware of the level of fraud they committed.

That just changed when an Op-Ed written by me and Paul Marik was published in RealClearPolitics last Friday.

We provided a more concise litany of the fraudulent tactics deployed by Oxford. I will tell you we were a bit shocked that it got accepted, and even more so from the editor’s response: “Excellent piece.”

Check it out:

Score another one for the FLCCC as it appears the public was quite interested in this topic because our Op-Ed was still leading the list of Op-Eds four days later:

Then, over the weekend, I came across the below article about a recent statement made by my friend and colleague, MP Andrew Bridgen, in the British Parliament:

Besides addressing his (appropriately as you will learn below) sensationalist statement, they also wrote:

“Bridgen has contacted the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Mark Rowley, to organize a three hour meeting where experts and whistleblowers will lay out the evidence to prove criminal activity by the most senior members of government and civil service in the UK.”

Now, although I boasted above that I wanted “a seat at that table” because I (and others) have compiled a mountain of evidence of research fraud in the largest trials of ivermectin (see our posts on Bill Gates/Sam Bankman Fried’s TOGETHER trial, Fauci’s NIH ACTIV-6 trial, and Oxford’s PRINCIPLE trial etc).

However, I don’t think it would make a difference because unfortunately… research misconduct is not a crime (with rare exceptions). For instance, this article from 2017 reported that between 1979 and 2015 only 39 scientists from seven countries have been subjected to criminal sanctions for research fraud.

So, what is research misconduct? The most accepted definitions are taken from Danish law:

**I maintain that Oxford’s PRINCIPLE trial investigators committed all of the underlined actions above

Other classifications have also been proposed, I like this author’s in particular because he grades them in terms of severity, i.e. “Class 1 – Betrayal of the Truth:”

In the article above they discuss the fact that there have been repeated calls for such behaviors to be criminalized. They point out that although a number of countries have criminalized doping in sport but… none have criminalized cheating in science. Crazy right?

Yet, there is extensive published literature over the past 25 years that debates whether research fraud should be a crime, with many papers in favor:

But as of today, again, it is not a crime. One paper (by a federal prosecutor from Maryland (i.e. NIH territory) stated that “..the criminal prosecution of scientific research fraud is rare, if not wholly unprecedented.”

Although the papers above go into somewhat erudite moral and legal arguments/theory, they also highlight the concerns and difficulty with drawing the line where scientific misconduct is criminal or not, plus they worry about both whistleblower protections as well as protections for the accused.

I am unmoved by the debate. For the past 4 years of Covid, I have, on a nearly daily basis, called out corrupt, non-scientific policies along with the immense amount of research fraud involving ivermectin.

It is my opinion that the repeated scientific misconduct in the largest ivermectin trials that I described in my book, The War on Ivermectin, led to millions of deaths around the world.

When your actions directly lead to the deaths of others, knowingly or unknowingly, there are a range of criminal charges that could be brought, from negligent homicide to murder. MP Bridgen is absolutely right in going to the police.

Again, although I personally do not think there is a debate as to whether the researchers directly responsible for those frauds should be criminally prosecuted, the line on exactly who should be prosecuted may be difficult to draw (in terms of who knew what and when and/or how much authority or involvement in the planning and execution that they had).

I would start at the top and work my way down.

Now, if not blowing the whistle to fraud was a crime, I could see many researchers going to jail, but apparently the legal view is that unless an offense directly results in serious injury or death, the act of not reporting it is not a crime.

The “directly led to” is the difficult part to prove (or not).

So how is scientific misconduct dealt with currently? It is largely handled at the university or research institution level or at the journals. People have been fired, careers have been ended, papers have been retracted, reputations of institutions have been tarnished but… no-one goes to jail.

No wonder we have seen so much brazen fraud throughout Covid. The perpetrators do not have to fear prison.

Interlude: my friend and partner in the FLCCC, Professor Paul Marik, was once accused (by a jealous, competitive, well-known fellow expert in critical care medicine) of research misconduct for… get this… “self-plagiarism.”

At the time, Paul did not even know what that was so he had to study the topic. With his newfound expertise, he wrote one of my all-time favorite papers of his called “Self-plagiarism: the perspective of a convicted plagiarist.” It is a hoot to read.

Now, if scientific misconduct was illegal and you could be convicted of it, the list of “crimes” perpetrated by scientists and institutions in Covid is vast. In no particular order, as I am not attempting to be comprehensive (instead I will ask my readers to suggest more examples in the comments and I will compile later), here is just a sampling of my initial stream of thoughts:

Pfizer trial research fraud (burying adverse events, dropping subjects from treatment groups for invented reasons in the interests of making the jabs look good, plus everything in whistleblower Brook Jackson’s lawsuit etc)
All of the pharma-conflicted trials with pre-determined results for early treatments like ivermectin and HCQ and ciclesonide etc. This Substack as well as those of Alexandros Marinos and Phil Harper contain a mountain of evidence of indefensible misconduct.
Public health officials lying, dismissing, distorting and refusing to release comparisons of the true hospitalization and death rates between the vaxxed and unvaxxed in order to prop up the jab campaign. As vaccine safety researcher Ed Dowd says, “you can’t hide the bodies,” and I believe there are many health ministry leaders and their underlings across the world who know this data and hide this data. They know “where the bodies are” and are universally keeping quiet about it. The New Zealand whistleblower case got a lot of attention, but I am telling you, there are many more than just him who have this knowledge. He was the only one courageous enough to make it public.
All the high impact medical journal editorial staffs rejecting and retracting wickedly positive trials of IVM and HCQ as well as negative vaccine studies
Dr. Andrew Hill’s admitting he allowed “his sponsors” to alter the content and write-up of his strikingly positive meta-analysis of ivermectin in early 2021.
Dr. Andrew Hill’s later independant publishing of a profoundly positive meta-analysis on IVM showing massive impacts on mortality with ivermectin and then self-retracting it, only to re-publish it as a negative trial? Although one of the most craven and damaging acts in history, he might be able to whip up enough arguments for his statistical chicanery to create plausible deniability, so likely no jail. I would love to be an expert witness in that trial though.
Whistleblowers have posted videos talking about numerous manufacturing safeguards and policies being ignored at Pfizer vaccine plants with safety reports being buried or workers influenced to not report. However, to hold someone criminally liable for homicide you would have to tie those violations to specific “hot lots” where huge spikes in deaths occurred. Problem: the vaccines have not caused a single death in the US according to the CDC. So there goes that one.
Fauci’s deliberate refusal to fund research into low-cost, safe, repurposed generics during the first 5 rounds and over two years of the NIH Covid trials (ACTIV program), instead throwing millions at studying only patented, high priced, Big Pharma products. Good luck prosecuting Fauci.

Again, if I spent more time, the list of criminal misconduct would fill many many pages. However, I do think there has been one trial where the actions taken do reach the level of a provable capital criminal offense.

The evidence is all available right now. Today.

The scientific crime I mention above involves the hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) trials in the UK and at the WHO which directly led to the deaths of research subjects. I (and others) believe the investigators committed homicide.

Although I haven’t asked Andrew Bridgen exactly what evidence he is bringing to the police, I submit that the HCQ scandal should be in there. RFK Jr. does a devastating exposure of this crime in his book, “The Real Anthony Fauci”:

Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates, and the WHO financed a cadre of research mercenaries to concoct a series of nearly 20 studies all employing fraudulent protocols deliberately designed to discredit hydroxychloroquine as unsafe.

Instead of using the standard treatment dose of 400mg a day, the 17 WHO studies administered a borderline lethal daily dose starting with 2,400mg on day one and using 800mg a day thereafter in a cynical, sinister and literally homicidal crusade against hydroxychloroquine.

A team of BMGF operatives played a key role in devising and pushing through the exceptionally high dosing. They made sure that UK government RECOVERY trials on 1,000 elderly patients in over a dozen British, Welsh, Irish, and Scottish hospitals, and the UN SOLIDARITY study of 3,500 patients in 400 hospitals in 35 countries as well as additional sites in 13 countries (the REMAP-COVID) trial all use those unprecedented and dangerous doses.

This was a brassy enterprise to prove chloroquine dangerous and sure enough it proved that elderly patients can die from deadly overdoses. The purpose seemed very clearly to poison the patients and blame the deaths on hydroxychloroquine says Dr. Merrill Nass, a physician, medical historian and biowarfare expert.

In each of these two trials solidarity and recovery the hydroxychloroquine arm predictably had 10 to 20% more deaths than the control arm the control arm being those patients lucky enough to receive standard supportive care.

RFK Jr. then goes into who funded the RECOVERY trial (this is likely why MP Bridgen is talking to the police): the funders were the UK government, Wellcome Trust (also in the UK), and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF).

He deliberately discusses the role of Bill Gates in this crime:

Gates’ fingerprints are all over this sanguinary project. Despite suspiciously missing pages, the published minutes of WHO’s part-secret March and April meetings show these medical alchemists establishing the lethal dosing of chloroquine for WHO’s SOLIDARITY clinical trial.

Only four participants attended the second WHO meeting to determine the dose of hydroxychloroquine for the solidarity trial. One was Scott Miller the BMGF Senior Program Officer.

The report admits that the SOLIDARITY trial used the highest dose of any recent trial. BMG’s unique dosing model for the studies deliberately overestimated the amount of HCQ necessary to achieve adequate lung tissue concentrations. The WHO report confesses “that this model is however not validated.”

Gate’s deadly deception allowed the FDA to wrongly declare that HCQ would be ineffective at safe levels. The minutes of that March 13 2020 meeting suggest that BMGF knew the proper drug dosing and the need for early administration.

Yet their same researchers then participated in deliberately providing a potentially lethal dose, failing to dose by weight, missing the early window during which treatment was noted to be effective and giving the drug to subjects who were already critically ill with comorbidities that made it more likely they would not tolerate the high dose.

The SOLIDARITY trial design also departed from standard protocols by collecting no safety data (Ed: What?), only whether the patient died or how many days they were hospitalized.

Researchers collected no information on inhospitable complications. This strategy shielded the WHO from gathering information that could pin adverse reactions on the dose.

A masterful and deeper dive into the clear (to me) criminal, homicidal intent of the RECOVERY investigators to use a toxic dose of HCQ was written by polymath Phil Harper here.

It provides even more detailed evidence of the investigator’s foreknowledge that the doses would be toxic.

One of the most damning excerpts is below (there are more):

There’s also the UK database on toxic substances. Look at hydroxychloroquine and you’ll get a clear answer, “Adults who have ingested 10 mg/kg or more chloroquine base as a single dose should be referred for medical assessment“.

This is taken from a long document. Read the rest here medicalmusings.com

Some bold emphasis added

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.