I keep coming back to McDonald’s line.
When a number of associated delusions organize themselves into an irrational belief system, a state of psychosis can develop. When the man who believes the world is out to get him also insists that his restaurant food is poisoned, that his wife is having a lesbian affair with the neighbor’s daughter, and that his boss is somehow involved in both—he is psychotic.
This is such a profound concept for me.
What it basically says is that bad inputs can create delusions, and that multiple bad inputs can create a psychosis.
I wrote about these inputs, or lego bits, here:
The inputs (the lego bits) that form people’s realities have been messed with, they’ve been corrupted, on scale and not just in Australia, and the realities they can construct with those corrupted (untrue) lego bits are different to my reality.
The above 4-minute clip is from the amazing French documentary L’Alu Total. If you have any interest at all in childhood vaccination, it’s a must watch.
She makes the point that science, real science, can be so easily polluted and corrupted into Junk Science and that industry has been doing it forever, and especially effectively over the last 100 years and ultimately perfected by big tobacco.
The goal of corrupted, Junk Science, is to manufacture doubt, in order to stall for time before the product is eventually banned. This industrial defence strategy can be effective for decades.
But what I think of when I hear Junk Science is McDonald’s framing of delusion and psychosis and the neighbour’s daughter.
Junk Science corrupts the inputs, it disconnects you from reality, from what is true. It creates delusions. So, it not only manufactures doubt, but in a deeper sense it manufactures delusions, and it is so effective at it that it manufactures plenty of delusions, which circling back to McDonald means, that Junk Science manufactures psychosis. Societal psychosis. Mass psychosis.
Toby Roger’s framed it this way recently.
Discernment
Actual science begins with proper methods, e.g.:
• appropriate study design,
• registered clinical trials,
• large sample sizes,
• long observation periods,
• randomized,
• double-blinded,
• rigorous statistics,
conducted by people following Mertonian norms of:
• communalism,
• universalism,
• disinterestedness, and
• organized skepticism.Then there is Pharma Junk Science that is characterized by:
• financial conflicts of interest,
• manipulated study design,
• captured regulators,
• deviations from protocol,
• small sample sizes,
• short observation periods,
• bad record keeping,
• data manipulation,
• inappropriate statistical analysis,
• drawing sweeping conclusion from weak data,
• suppression or censorship of data that does not fit a predetermined narrative,
• bullying, gaslighting, and blacklisting of scientists who ask hard questions.Knowing the difference between actual science and Pharma Junk Science is a matter of life and death these days.
The FDA and CDC do NOT engage in actual science. Everything they do is Pharma Junk Science. Those who fail to understand this fundamental truth are not going to make it.
The problem is that Junk Science looks an awful lot like Real Science.
The majority of people simply cannot make the distinction. This is the resource that industry mines; people’s inability to distinguish true from untrue, real from junk. It’s not exactly ignorance although it can display as such. You can be very educated, even smart, but have a very poor ability to distinguish.
The inability to distinguish is the basis for societal trust. If you cannot figure it out yourself, you need to trust someone else to tell you how it is.
And this is the basis for “…they would have told us.”
“If the water in Flint, MI, had been full of lead, they would have told us.”
“If asbestos caused mesothelioma, they would have told us.”
“If lead paint caused brain damage, they would have told us.”
“If Vioxx caused heart attacks, they would have told us.”
“If thalidomide caused birth defects, they would have told us.”
“If silicone breast implants leaked, they would have told us.”
“If DDT destroyed ecosystems, they would have told us.”
Back to Big Tobacco, I wrote this a while back, a thought thread from one of my favourite movies Thank You for Not Smoking:
Tobacco had to create its own “Academies” and “Councils” and hire as many “scientists” as they could to whitewash their poison.
This is child’s play for Pharma. They don’t need to create fake groups. They can simply capture all existing credibility manufacturing and sense making organisations to do their bidding. Medical journals, regulators, media organizations are just a small list of Pharma captured groups.
But my point is that by allowing themselves to be captured, they are no more, and no better, than an “Academy of Tobacco Studies”.
There is a passage from The Real Anthony Fauci captures the breadth and depth of what Junk Science looks like and how it’s made:
The PIs: The Pharma/Fauci Mercenary Army
NIAID’s lack of in-house drug development capacity allowed Dr. Fauci to build his new program by farming out drug research to a network of so-called “principal investigators,” or PIs, effectively controlled by pharmaceutical companies. Today, when people refer to the “Medical Cartel,” they are principally speaking of pharmaceutical companies, hospital systems, HMOs and insurers, the medical journals, and public health regulators. But the glue that holds all these institutions together, and allows them to march in lockstep, is the army of PIs who act as lobbyists, spokespersons, liaisons, and enforcers. Tony Fauci played a key historic role in elevating this cohort to dominate public health policy.
PIs are powerful academic physicians and researchers who use federal grants and pharmaceutical industry contracts to build feudal empires at universities and research hospitals that mainly conduct clinical trials—a key stage in the licensing process— for new pharmaceutical products. Thanks to NIH’s largesse, and to NIAID in particular, a relatively tiny network of PIs—a few hundred—determines the content and direction of virtually all America’s biomedical research.
In 1987, some $4.6 billion of NIH’s $6.1 billion budget went to these off-campus researchers. By 1992, NIH’s budget had expanded to $8.9 billion, with $5 billion going to outside scientists at 1,300 universities, laboratories, and other elite institutions.73,74 Today, Dr. Fauci’s NIAID alone controls $7.6 billion in annual discretionary expenditures that he distributes mainly to PIs around the globe.
PIs are pharmaceutical industry surrogates who play key roles promoting the pharmaceutical paradigm and functioning as high priests of all its orthodoxies, which they proselytize with missionary zeal. They use their seats on medical boards and chairmanships of university departments to propagate dogma and root out heresy. They enforce message discipline, silence criticism, censor contrary opinions, and punish dissent. They populate the Data and Safety Monitoring Boards (DSMBs) that influence the design of clinical trial protocols and guide the interpretation of clinical trial outcomes and conclusions; the external advisory FDA panel, Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), that guides determination of whether new vaccines are “safe and effective” and merit licensure (marketing); and the CDC panel, The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), that essentially mandates vaccines to children. They are the credentialed and trusted medical experts who prognosticate on television networks—now helplessly reliant on pharmaceutical ad revenue—to push out Pharma content. These “experts”—Paul Offit, Peter Hotez, Stanley Plotkin, Ian Lipkin, William Schaffner, Kathleen Edwards, Arthur Caplan, Stanley Katz, Greg Poland, and Andrew Pollard—appear between Pharma ads on network and cable news shows to promote the annual flu shots and measles scares, to drum up fears about COVID, and to rail against “anti-vaxxers.” They write the steady stream of editorials that appear in local and national newspapers to reinforce the hackneyed orthodoxies of the pharmaceutical paradigms—“all vaccines are safe and effective,” etc. They root out heresy by sitting on the state medical boards—the “Inquisition” courts—that censure and de-license dissident doctors. They control the medical journals and peer-review journal literature to fortify Pharma’s agenda. They teach on medical school faculties, populate journal editorial boards, and chair university departments. They supervise hospitals and chair hospital departments. They act as expert witnesses for pharmaceutical companies in civil court and the federal vaccine court. They present awards to one another.
The 2006 meeting of CDC’s ACIP provides an illustrative blueprint for how Tony Fauci and his Pharma partners use their PIs to control the key FDA and CDC panels that license and “recommend” new vaccines for addition to the childhood schedule. That 2006 ACIP panel recommended two new blockbuster Merck shots: the Gardasil HPV vaccine for all girls ages nine through twenty-six, and three doses of a Merck rotavirus vaccine, Rotateq, for infants at ages two, four, and six months. Both Bill Gates and Tony Fauci (via NIAID) had provided seed and clinical trial funding for the development of both Gardasil and the rotavirus vaccine. Merck maintained it had not tested either vaccine against an inert placebo in pre-approval trials, so no one could scientifically predict if the vaccines would avert more injuries or cancers than they would cause. Nevertheless, the sister FDA panel, VRBPAC, approved Gardasil—to prevent cervical cancer—without requiring proof that the vaccine prevented any sort of cancer, and despite strong evidence from Merck’s clinical trial that Gardasil could dramatically raise risks of cancer and autoimmunity in some girls. ACIP, nevertheless, effectively mandated both jabs. Gardasil would be the most expensive vaccine in history, costing patients $420 for the three-jab series and generating revenues of over $1 billion annually for Merck.
That year, nine of the thirteen ACIP panel members and their institutions collectively received over $1.6 billion of grant money from NIH and NIAID.
This is how the “lego bits” are made.
What chance does the person on the street have of distinguishing between the “science” these people and these systems produce and the real deal?
Again, let’s go back to tobacco and the section from Handley’s book about The Tobacco Playbook.
The Tobacco Playbook
In November 1998 a Master Settlement Agreement was reached between tobacco companies and attorneys general from forty-six states. Tobacco companies were finally accountable for at least some of the damage cigarettes had caused. But the first science implicating tobacco was a mouse study published in 1953 in which scientists demonstrated, clearly and unequivocally, that cigarette tar caused cancer.12 The penalty of the settlement was $206 billion. What did US District Judge Gladys E. Kessler find the tobacco companies guilty of? “Conspiracy.” There’s that word again.
It took forty-five years for a reckoning because right after the mice study, to actively muddy the waters, tobacco companies formed the “Tobacco Industry Research Committee” so they could challenge all scientific evidence implicating tobacco. The organization provided hundreds of millions of dollars of funding for research at many of the leading institutions in the country that could sow doubt about the tobacco-cancer link. Producing “distracting research” that would sow endless doubt about a fast-emerging certainty became their primary goal. Committee members met with the leadership of every major newspaper, magazine, and television network, explaining their intent to fund a “research program devoted primarily to the public interest,” which was really a euphemism for research that would exonerate tobacco, or at least muddy the scientific waters and generate as much doubt as possible about the link between smoking and lung cancer.
Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, in their best-selling book Merchants of Doubt, explained how Big Tobacco exploited the vulnerabilities of science to their advantage, creating doubt at every turn in the road and effectively extending the industry’s reckoning by four decades:
By the late 1950s, mounting experimental and epidemiological data linked tobacco with cancer—which is why the industry took action to oppose it. In private, executives acknowledged this evidence. In hindsight it is fair to say—and science historians have said—that the link was already established beyond a reasonable doubt. Certainly no one could honestly say that science showed that smoking was safe. But science involves many details, many of which remained unclear, such as why some smokers get lung cancer and others do not.
What if I told you that the only “Big” bigger than Big Tobacco was back in their heyday is today’s Big Pharma, the very industry that makes all these vaccines? Big Pharma, one of the largest purchasers of advertisements in mainstream media, and Big Pharma, the industry that spends the most on lobbying, is the reason this fight about autism is taking so long. Don’t believe me? From 1998 to 2009 the CDC was run by Dr. Julie Gerberding, where she presided over a massive expansion in the number of vaccines given to children and a massive explosion in the number of autism cases in the United States. Where did Dr. Gerberding go after resigning from the CDC? To serve as president of the vaccine division of Merck, the largest “Big Pharma” company in the world and the market leader in vaccines. This is not an easy battle.
Let me remind you that the market for vaccines is expected to be worth $60 billion in 2020, up from $170 million in the early 1980s. Let me say that again. In the 1980s, with no childhood epidemics to speak of, the market for vaccinations was worth $170 million. Fast forward, and the market for vaccines has grown 350 times larger! In the 1960s the vaccine schedule in the United States called for three vaccines for childhood; today, as I said in chapter 2, it’s thirty-eight (that’s not a typo)—a more than twelvefold increase in the number of vaccines given to children.
Autism is Tobacco 2.0, with manufactured doubt cast on every new discovery from determined parents, doctors, and scientists. Just like tobacco, we even have mice studies that show precisely how a vaccine can cause autism in the brain of a newborn. This evidence of “biological plausibility,” now appearing in multiple scientific studies published since 2010, represents a tipping point for truth. History may not repeat, but it certainly rhymes.
People are fond of characterizing autism as “complex,” but that obscures the simple explanation for what has happened to so many children, and why. In the 1970s the rate of autism was documented to be just under one in ten thousand children. Today one in thirty-six kids has autism—that’s roughly 1.8 million school-age (four to seventeen) American children. This also means there are 277 times more kids with autism today than there were thirty years ago. That’s a gain of almost 30,000 percent! An epidemic this severe has to have a simple explanation, just as the lung cancer epidemic had a simple explanation, too.
The Tobacco Playbook is being expertly utilized by Big Pharma and their paid supporters—it almost seems like the very same PR firms and law firms that helped Big Tobacco are now helping Big Pharma … because they are. Literally. At the same time, it’s astonishing how many people already know the truth about the autism epidemic and what’s happening to our kids. Hundreds of scientists, thousands of doctors, and tens of thousands of parents, all saying the same thing. Heck, there’s the camera man on Larry King Live, the makeup person on the set of The Doctors, the wife of the famous radio host, the Time magazine reporter who just can’t tell the truth for fear of reprisal, or the board member at Autism Speaks, so many people know the truth. In fact, surveys show fully one-third of Americans today feel vaccines and autism are linked. Attempts to dismiss people who “believe” vaccines cause autism as some sort of minuscule movement are not supported by the facts; hundreds of millions share my view and that of my wife and the many scientists, doctors, and parents you’re about to meet in this book.
In retrospect, it seems unbelievable that it took people more than forty years to convincingly prove that inhaling hot tar multiple times a day would trigger lung cancer, but that’s exactly what happened. The CEOs of all seven Big Tobacco companies stood before Congress, swearing to tell the truth, and then said (with a straight face, no less) that cigarettes were not addictive, nor was it clear that they were causing lung cancer. I remember the TV broadcast. It’s an image I have never been able to shake. That congressional hearing took place in 1994, a full four years before the Master Settlement Agreement.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the very same strategies used to keep the tobacco debate alive have been employed in the debates about links between DDT and the loss of ecosystems, lead paint and children’s IQs, coal and acid rain, asbestos and mesothelioma, CFCs and the ozone hole, Vioxx and heart attacks, and fossil fuels and global warming (to name just a tiny fraction of examples). This movie has been shown so many times before that I suppose it’s harder to see it clearly in the moment. But the patterns are clearly established. Here’s what we know about how corporations will behave in the face of mounting scientific evidence proving their product is causing harm:
Science will be utilized to manufacture doubt and manipulate the media and the public. This includes funding new science and paying experts to support the safety of a product causing harm. This strategy was created and mastered by Big Tobacco and now, as I’ve mentioned, even has a name: The Tobacco Playbook.
Public relations firms will make a fortune from these deep-pocketed clients, and their job will be to meet with and alert members of the media on their client’s sponsored science while refuting any science from the opposing side. This job is always easier if the industry causing harm is a large buyer of television, print, and other paid media. (The Tobacco Industry Research Committee was actually run by a PR firm, Hill & Knowlton.)
Aggressive lobbying will happen at the state and federal level and donations to politicians supporting industry views will rise. Where possible, lobbyists will write and promote laws supportive of the product, dismissive of health concerns, and protective of future liability. Their paid politicians will present and pass these laws.
Finally, real science will prevail. The truth will come out. And consumers will learn that the product in question causes harm, like the aforementioned mice study. This science will usually be hard to fund, condemned, and ruthlessly attacked, until enough courageous scientists publish the same information over and over again. Regulatory agencies will grudgingly respond. Few will see jail time, if any.
When the profits are big enough, corporations will do what they were formed to do: protect profits. This ruthless strategy continues today. Autism is arguably the most vicious, cruel, and dismissive battle yet. With so much at stake— money, careers, reputations—what happens when an inconvenient truth emerges? What happens when someone, somewhere speaks up and challenges the house of cards? Well, they need to be made an example of.
Thank you for reading this Substack.
Please consider a small paid subscription (donation). The money goes to a good cause.
I am always looking for good, personal GMC (pandemic and jab) or childhood vaccination stories. Shared stories are remembered and help others.
In the comments, please let me know what’s on your mind.
You can write to me privately: unbekoming@outlook.com
If you are Covid-jab injured, consider the FLCCC Post-Vaccine Treatment
Here are three eBooks I have produced so far:
FREE eBook: A letter to my two adult kids - Vaccines and the free spike protein
Share this post