So what happened? Let’s start from the beginning.
A recent study published in the prestigious BMJ Public Health suggested a stark and worrying connection between COVID mRNA vaccines and an increase in global mortality during the pandemic. This significant discovery is supported by numerous other research papers, indicating that mRNA gene therapy, though hailed as groundbreaking, may in fact have caused more harm than benefit, as many have suspected.
This study published in BMJ has skyrocketed in interest, becoming the most accessed publication in the history of BMJ Public Health. The first mainstream media outlet to cover this was The Telegraph, in an article entitled “COVID Vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths.” The article highlights that "experts call for more research into the side effects and possible links to mortality rates," which is urgently needed.
The authors from Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, wrote: "Although COVID-19 vaccines were provided to protect civilians from morbidity and mortality caused by the COVID-19 virus, suspected adverse events have also been documented. Both medical professionals and citizens have reported serious injuries and deaths following vaccination to various official databases in the Western World."
This acknowledgment of real and potentially severe side effects underscores the necessity for transparency and further investigation, rather than censorship and suppression.
Lo and behold, two weeks later, the medical censorship complex rallied against it with a disturbing ferocity, turning their considerable resources towards forcing the retraction of the article from the BMJ Public Health. This organized backlash is nothing short of a modern inquisition, aimed at suppressing any dissenting voices in the scientific community. Such outrageous actions betray the very principles of scientific inquiry and intellectual freedom.
Two days ago, a hit piece appeared in what is often described as a "left-liberal" newspaper. It was penned by the notoriously pro-vaccine journalist Maarten Keulemans, who predictably cited physicians and “scientists” known for their unwavering support of experimental gene therapy.
English Translation
The Princess Máxima Center explicitly distances itself from the controversial 'anti-vax study' by oncologists.
The Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology is severely embarrassed by a study that was published last week. The study wrongly suggests that the excess mortality observed in various countries after the coronavirus crisis is due to vaccines.
At the heart of this storm is Saskia Mostert, the lead author of the BMJ article. Mostert has been recognized as a remarkably brave scientist — one of the few who dare to investigate the murky waters of medical corruption. Mostert has published many insightful commentaries fighting against corruption in health systems, such as the one titled “All It Takes for Corruption in Health Systems to Triumph, Is Good People Who Do Nothing”
Yet now, her own home institution, the Princess Maxima Center, is shamefully attempting to isolate her and discredit her work. In what can only be described as a witch hunt, the center has announced an investigation into "how it was produced in more detail" and is looking for any pretext to retract the paper.
Here is the complete statement from Saskia Mostert’s home institute. (Highlights are mine)
The Princess Maxima Center Distances Itself from Publication on Excess Mortality during the COVID-19 Pandemic
June 11, 2024
The Princess Máxima Center distances itself from the publication “Excess mortality across countries in the Western World since the COVID-19 pandemic: ‘Our World in Data’ estimates from January 2020 to December 2022”.
Serious questions have arisen regarding the publication “Excess mortality across countries in the Western World since the COVID-19 pandemic: ‘Our World in Data’ estimates from January 2020 to December 2022”. Therefore, we will conduct further investigation into the scientific quality of this research. The Princess Máxima Center deeply regrets that this publication might give the impression that the importance of vaccinations is being questioned.
Originally, the idea was to examine the impact of COVID measures on, among other things, the mortality rate of children with cancer in low-income countries. During the study, the focus shifted in a direction that, in our opinion, lies too far outside our field of expertise: pediatric oncology. We are not experts in the field of epidemiology and do not wish to create such an impression. Therefore, the Máxima Center explicitly distances itself from this publication. We should have been more vigilant regarding the creation and results of this publication and will investigate how it was produced in more detail. If it is found that the publication was produced carelessly, it will be retracted.
As the Princess Máxima Center, we want to emphasize that we strongly support vaccination and that this publication should certainly not be read as an argument against vaccination. The study in no way indicates that there is a link between vaccinations and excess mortality; that is explicitly not the finding of the researchers. We therefore regret that this impression has arisen.
Potential Conflict of Interest?
When you scratch the surface, it's no surprise to find that the Princess Máxima Center receives funding to conduct clinical trials. Specifically, two of the products they are funded for are Bosutinib and Inotuzumab, both cancer treatments developed by Pfizer.
Could this be the real reason why the Princess Máxima Center is distancing itself from Moskert’s study and now searching for reasons to retract it? Is it possible that Pfizer, the grand benefactor funding their research, isn't pleased with Mostert's findings?
Given this blatant conflict of interest, the Princess Maxima Center should immediately recuse itself from any investigation into Mostert’s study. Carrying on as the ‘impartial’ judge in this matter is farcical and deeply unethical.
This concerted effort to silence scientific discussion and bury inconvenient truths is profoundly disturbing. It illustrates the extent to which the pharmaceutical industry’s influence permeates both academic and media institutions. The eagerness to censor and vilify researchers like Mostert reveals an industry more interested in protecting its profits than fostering genuine scientific exploration or public health. The pharmaceutical giants have weaponized their funding and influence, turning trusted institutions into little more than mouthpieces for their narratives.
What we are witnessing is not just the suppression of a single study, but an assault on the very core of scientific integrity. Researchers are being bullied, silenced, and ostracized for daring to question the prevailing orthodoxy. This dangerous precedent undermines public trust in science and can have dire consequences for future medical advancements.
Just last month, I wrote an article that cited some doctors who are bullying others into silence. These doctors, who are making a living out of sucking the tits of the pharma industry, need to stop.
Of Silent Doctors and Bullying Doctors
Recently, there were numerous new studies that raise concerns about the effects of mRNA. Feeling compelled by this, I took the initiative to reach out to several doctors. Some I know personally, and others I've been introduced to through referrals. They're all quite informed and, for the most part,
These institutions and doctors who are part of the medical censorship complex need to have a light shone on them and be shamed publicly. Please share this widely.
Update.
Excellent suggestion from Julian Gillespie.
Please email the Princess Máxima Center at info@prinsesmaximacentrum.nl to let them know what you think.
Here’s something to help you get started:
Dear Sir/Madam,
I hope this letter finds you well. My name is [Your Name], and I am writing to you as a concerned individual regarding the recent stance of the Princess Máxima Centre on silencing Dr. Mostert and retracting her study.
I was deeply troubled to learn that the institution, is distancing itself from Dr. Mostert’s work. Dr. Mostert has been recognized as a brave and diligent scientist who is passionate about uncovering truths, even when they are inconvenient. By attempting to retract her study, the center appears to be prioritizing external financial interests over scientific integrity and open discourse.
It is critical to allow scientists to investigate, publish, and discuss their findings without fear of censorship or retribution. Silencing researchers not only undermines the principles of scientific inquiry but also erodes public trust in vital institutions. I urge the Princess Máxima Centre to reconsider its stance and to support Dr. Mostert in her pursuit of truth, regardless of where it may lead.
The decision to retract the study raises important questions about transparency and independence in scientific research. As such, it is essential for institutions like the Princess Máxima Centre to lead by example, upholding the highest standards of academic freedom and integrity.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I hope the Princess Máxima Centre will reflect on its position and make decisions that honor the spirit of genuine scientific exploration.
Signing off for now,
A17
PS: Hi friends, I am still on a break, but this is too important to ignore. I’m going back to my break now. If you have any questions, please feel free to comment in this thread below.
Update from A17 & An Open Thread
Dear subscribers, Sorry for the lack of updates recently, I'm having a bit of burnout as I'm running on fumes. A few folks asked me if I have a team running this substack and my twitter account but as you can see I am running this blog 100% by myself. I am not affiliated with any organizations, I do not sponsor any products, and all my articles are provi…
good folk can email the The Princess Máxima Center and tell them you find their persecution of Saskia Mostert both anti-scientific and disgraceful and unbecoming of a medical institute, where on the basis of such anti-scientific behaviour The Princess Máxima Center should have all future government funding withdrawn .. or words to that effect:
info@prinsesmaximacentrum.nl
my email, just sent, went as follows, with appropriate hyperlinks for article titles:
Subject: persecution of Saskia Mostert
Hello,
I read the recent hit-piece by the discredited pro-pharma lobbyist and journalist Maarten Keulemans titled:
'Prinses Máxima Centrum neemt nadrukkelijk afstand van omstreden ‘antivaxstudie’ oncology'
The above article concerns a published study in the BMJ that went through the peer review process and has therefore been validated as credible:
'Excess mortality across countries in the Western World since the COVID-19 pandemic: ‘Our World in Data’ estimates of January 2020 to December 2022'
I regard the persecution of Saskia Mostert both anti-scientific and disgraceful and unbecoming of a medical institute, where on the basis of such anti-scientific behaviour The Princess Máxima Center should have all future government funding withdrawn.
Julian Gillespie
Their tentacles reach everywhere ...