Leading Cardiologist Gives Ray Of Hope In Face Of Widespread Corrupt Science
One prominent doctor has courageously changed his mind and come out against the controversial Covid vaccines.
Climate science has a lot of similarities with the science surrounding COVID prevention and treatment.
Both are awash with glaring contradictions, absurdities, corruption, censorship, propaganda, scientific bullying and coercion. But now one leading voice has courageously changed his mind and come out against the controversial vaccines.
“A reanalysis of randomised control trial data from both Moderna and Pfizer revealed one is more likely to suffer a serious adverse event from the COVID 19 vaccine than to be hospitalised with COVID 19,” Malhotra says.
“In part 2 of the paper, I aim to get to the root cause and understand why authorities and sections of the medical profession supported unethical, coercive and misinformed policies such as vaccine mandates and vaccine passports, undermining ethical evidence-based medicine and informed consent.”
“In conclusion of those papers, there is a strong ethical, scientific and moral case to be made that the COVID 19 vaccine rollout must stop immediately until more data has been released for fully independent scrutiny.”
Dr. Mahotra’s video announcement is a sign there’s still hope for true science and that scientific fraud is finally being exposed and challenged.
But we are not naïve and know this is far from being put right. We will keep pressing on until the true science emerges.
See more here notrickszone
Header image: Diabetes UK
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Alan
| #
These two papers are excellent and give a lot of useful references. It is perhaps a difficult subject to make sense of in view of all the propaganda and Dr Mahotra explains the risk as simply as it is possible to do, and I feel these papers should be understandable by most people and are essential reading.
I happened to be familiar with Randomized Control Trials and wanted to find out about these new types of vaccines. The results of the trials were published before the vaccines were approved and I saw immediately the issues raised in these papers. The question is why didn’t health professionals know about this? Perhaps they were afraid to speak out, so I appreciate Dr Mahotra doing so, but it all seems to be too late.
Reply