Watch: Small Stones of ‘Truth and Scientific Analysis’ Can Slay the COVID Establishment ‘Goliath’

Written by Lisa Pacheco on September 19, 2024. Posted in Current News

The COVID-19 Goliath — powerful forces promoting fear and censoring challenges to the official narrative, according to Norman Fenton, Ph.D. — can be slain by small stones of “truth and scientific analysis.”

In an interview with medical commentator John Campbell, Ph.D., Fenton — co-author of “Fighting Goliath: Exposing the flawed science and statistics behind the COVID-19 event” — said these powerful forces include the U.K. government and its major institutions, such as the Office of National Statistics, and American institutions like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

They also include news outlets and Western academia, Fenton said.

Campbell and Fenton, professor emeritus of Risk at Queen Mary University of London, discussed Fenton’s new book on Campbell’s YouTube show.

Campbell described Fenton’s book as an impressive, thoroughly documented academic work, but said he wanted to simplify the book for the lay reader. He started by asking Fenton, “Who’s Goliath?”

Fenton explained that through hard scientific evidence and personal stories, the book documents how “the powerful forces,” represented by Goliath, shaped “the official narrative.”

He said the communications with some government institutions revealed how “bizarre the whole hysteria around COVID was but also how deceptive and … corrupt some of those institutions really are.”

“COVID hysteria” — as Fenton and his co-author Martin Neil, Ph.D., call it — “was based on massively exaggerated case and mortality numbers” created through “flawed definitions, easily manipulated data and inaccurate mass testing of healthy people” that convinced people the “only way out of the pandemic and lockdowns” was an injection that was neither safe nor effective, according to Fenton. He and Campbell admitted that initially, they bought into the hysteria.

Campbell said that in his 27 years as a nurse, he had to follow the guidelines and update his teaching accordingly but “things do seem to have changed … now the trust seems to have gone” and “many of us have a great feeling of being let down.”

He asked Fenton if he felt comfortable that his academic analysis led to these conclusions.

“We were only looking at the data and what the data was telling us … was something different” from what the governments were saying from the beginning, Fenton said. The “guidelines that they’ve been using for years and even the guidelines that were supposed to have been prepared for pandemics weren’t followed.”

He said early peaks in deaths happened only in a few places — London, New York and northern Italy — and that his co-author Neil, a British statistician and computer scientist, was very rigorous in analyzing the mortality data.

Neil concluded that most of those excess deaths, which were mostly in the elderly, resulted from either not following the guidelines, including failing to treat bacterial pneumonia, or the inappropriate use of ventilators and “end of life drugs” including midazolam.

That’s why Fenton said he and Neil believe the deaths were caused not by the SARS-CoV-2 virus but by the pandemic countermeasures and hospital protocols. He said how “the numbers” were calculated played a large part.

When it came to COVID-19 vaccination status, Fenton said anybody who tested positive within 21 days of their first vaccination was classified as unvaccinated. In most cases, people who died shortly after vaccination were also classified as unvaccinated.

But he and Neil found that when you adjusted for those “fundamental flaws and systemic biases,” there was no evidence that the vaccines were effective and safe. “In almost all of the different age groups you were seeing slightly higher all-cause mortality in the vaccinated” than unvaccinated groups, Fenton said.

He said he’s spoken to young people who had no medical reason to get the shot but did so and that if they had known about the safety issues, they never would have gotten it.

“I put myself in that category,” Campbell said. If he had known then, “there’s no way” he would have taken it.

Fenton said the book examines the global organizations that influenced pandemic measures — including masking, lockdowns and social distancing — and presents the lack of evidence for implementing them.

He said U.K. government officials were “comfortable and delighted” when people weren’t driving or flying, claiming it was “really good for the environment.” They even said lockdowns should be done regularly to prevent climate change and that it was time for the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset.”

Fenton summarized his key recommendations for Campbell’s viewers:

• We should be concerned about the World Health Organization’s pandemic guidelines and the authoritarian control the organization represents.
• Don’t be worried about the next pandemic and don’t be scared by these people pushing the fear.
• Don’t think that everything academics, doctors and authority figures say is true.

Watch Campbell’s interview with Fenton here:

See more here The Defender

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

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATI ONAL, 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.