Last December, Robert Malone, a molecular biologist and epidemiologist, spoke out on behalf of thousands of physicians and other scientists who signed a statement strongly criticizing current vaccine policy, especially for children(1). Malone is the pioneer in the development of mRNA vaccines. Obviously, the statement is generally ignored by the mainstream media. As for Malone, instead of really taking into account his approach and integrating it into a real debate about health policies (a debate we are still waiting for), almost all of these media tend to discredit this expert (if not outright do it). Recently, things have gone even further, including the blocking of his Twitter account(2).

Malone’s warnings include the toxicity of spike proteins, produced in immune response to RNA vaccines(3)According to him, these proteins  » often cause permanent damage to the critical organs of children (…) their brain and nervous system, their heart and blood vessels.(4)« The warning messages of this scholarLe Monde describes them as« alarmists »(5)RTBF talks about video  » deceptive « (6)the Libre Belgique and Ouest-France of « phony scientific studies(7)etc.

Of course, existing analyses and studies often diverge, and it is difficult for the layman to judge the value of one or the other. It is all too clear, however, that those that justify dominant policies are emphasized, while others are questioned. The bias is particularly evident in this case: p. e.g., Le Monde quotes Malone’s words reported above (before trying to disqualify them), but does not say a word about the declaration and its thousands of signatories. However, there are people like the virologist Geert Vanden Bossche (not very suspicious of being « anti-vax », he even worked for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation)(8) and the immunologist Marc Wathelet (very present in the Belgian media until his positions contradicted the dominant policies)(9)as well as many other experts(10).

 » These proteins often cause permanent damage to critical organs in children .

Recognition by policy, not fact

Concerning Malone’s discoveries, Le Monde and Libération write that he  » presents himself as the inventor of messenger RNA vaccines(11)  » or  » is presented « (12) as such, 20 Minutes goes in the same direction(13), etc. We are pleased that, in the article mentioned, Le Monde recognizes Malone as a pioneer in this field and that Libération does the same in another article(14). Nevertheless, this is the least we can do: Nature, the leading scientific journal, clearly confirms the important role of this scientist in the discovery in question(15), even if the data clearly allow us to speak of a co-inventor. It is probably a safe bet that if this expert were to endorse current policies, it would be the status of inventor that would be ostensibly displayed.

Another media trend is to highlight, first, the fact that Malone is working on the development of another type of vaccine, for Indian pharmaceutical companies (a defensible choice, given his rejection of mRNA vaccines).(16) The information is important and should be given, but the same kind of observation is valid for all working researchers, as research is almost entirely funded by industry. But here again, when it comes to experts supporting politicians, their links with pharmaceutical companies are not overly emphasized, far from it.

40 times more victims?

Another reason why Malone is so disturbing is that he was also involved in a study that, if confirmed, would be damning to current vaccine policies. According to this study, which points out the passivity of pharmacovigilance in the USA (but the same is true in Europe(17)), the cases of death linked to vaccinations against Covid are under-reported by a factor of 41…(18) (Note that in Belgium, we are at 260 official deaths(19)). In addition, according to a series of other studies on adverse drug reactions in general, only between 1 and 10% of these reactions are recorded, including some serious ones(20). A few searches in the « mainstream » media show that this type of study is received with the same degree of attention as the other facts discussed here…


Notes et références
  1.  https://doctorsandscientistsdeclaration.org/

  2. https://news.fr-24.com/sante/737808.html

  3. Cette toxicité a été établie par diverses études. Voir notamment : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-020–00771‑8

  4.  https://www.francesoir.fr/politique-monde/robert-malone-plaidoyer-vaccination-enfants

  5.  https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2021/12/26/covid-19-une-cinquieme-vague-d-infox-sur-la-pandemie-et-la-vaccination_6107346_4355770.html

  6.  https://www.rtbf.be/info/monde/detail_vaccination-des-enfants-contre-le-coronavirus-la-video-fallacieuse-de-robert-malone-l-un-des-peres-des-vaccins-a-arn-messager?id=10903625

  7. https://www.lalibre.be/planete/sante/2021/07/30/une-serie-detudes-scientifiques-bidons-encourage-la-desinformation-sur-les-reseaux-sociaux-JZJQGKQWBJAXLEBB7Q4OMTFEVY/ , https://www.ouest-france.fr/sante/virus/coronavirus/covid-19-des-etudes-scientifiques-bidon-encouragent-la-desinformation-sur-les-reseaux-sociaux-1a5f3758-f0fa-11eb-93e8-0068234e4a20

  8.  https://www.geertvandenbossche.org/

  9.  Voir p. ex. https://soirmag.lesoir.be/295970/article/2020–04-22/coronavirus-les-quatre-verites-du-virologue-marc-wathelet

  10.  https://doctorsandscientistsdeclaration.org/

  11.  Voir l’article indiqué plus haut.

  12.  https://www.liberation.fr/checknews/robert-malone-presente-comme-linventeur-des-vaccins-a-arn-messager-soppose-t-il-a-la-vaccination-des-plus-jeunes-20210710_OQE4CR4YPFEVJFKPWIZ5RRUELI/

  13.  https://www.20minutes.fr/societe/3204215–20211224-coronavirus-pourquoi-difficile-qualifier-robert-malone-inventeur-vaccins-arn

  14.  https://www.liberation.fr/checknews/que-sait-on-de-la-nouvelle-video-de-robert-malone-pionnier-de-larn-messager-et-oppose-a-la-vaccination-des-enfants-20211222_SPGBKR5WTVASVJ2RBYYFXZXUBY/

  15.  https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021–02483‑w

  16.  Voir le second article de Libération indiqué.

  17.  https://www.francesoir.fr/opinions-tribunes/t‑encore-le-droit-de-questionner-la-politique-vaccinale

  18. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/CDC-2021–0089-0024 

  19. https://www.afmps.be/fr/news/coronavirus_apercu_mensuel_des_effets_indesirables_des_vaccins_contre_la_covid_19_du_16

  20. Notamment ces deux études : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1615747/ , https://digital.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf

Espace membre

Member area