Profiles in Courage: Dr. Tess Lawrie
A New Series, An Honorable Woman, Ode to a Whistleblower, & Meltdown
 |
| 198 |
“Among other common lies, we have the silent lie—the deception which one conveys by simply keeping still and concealing the truth. Many obstinate truth-mongers indulge in this dissipation, imagining that if they speak no lie, they lie not at all.”
—Mark Twain
Introducing Profiles in Courage
With Julian Assange now facing extradition to the United States, valiant whistleblowers routinely being fed to the BigPharma/Big Media/Big Tech wood chipper, and ignoble liars deploying every weapon of mass deception in their forbidding arsenal, unmasking corruption is one of the most perilous adventures you can embark on in these totalitarian times.
As the quote misattributed to Orwell goes:
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
Mercifully, there are a few valorous lions roaring out, but they’re being drowned out by the masses of baaing sheep, mooing cows, and clucking chickens. We need a groundswell of truth-tellers to sound our barbaric yawps together if we wish to be heard above the telescreen’s “enormous, unbearable, ubiquitous commercial break.”
In the comments at the Glenn Greenwald post on Assange linked above, one commenter observed, “these days, there [is] no bravery and there are no heroes.”
I replied:
“I can name almost a million, including Dr. Reiner Fuellmich and everyone he and his Berlin Corona Investigative Committee have interviewed; all those I cited as examples in Letter to a Colluder; and RFK and everyone he listed in the Acknowledgments of The Real Anthony Fauci.…
“Plus every ordinary human being who chooses not to comply in the face of astronomical pressure and especially those who are brave enough to speak out against tyranny.”
I then cited nearly a hundred people off the top of my head, and that list scarcely grazes the iceberg. Contrary to the commenter’s statement, I have witnessed more gallant heroes rising up over the past two years than over the preceding half-century. But if people on the side of the resistance don’t even realize how many noble truth warriors we have fighting beside us, how can we expect normies to?
Thus was born Profiles in Courage, a new series celebrating whistleblowers; truth-tellers; and all who choose facts, scientific evidence, reality, human beings, and love over propaganda, disinformation, illusion, GloboCap, and fearful loathing. (Only later did I realize this series is not unlike Tessa Fights Robots’s Honest People Series, whom and which I also recommend :-)
I am going to try and keep these profiles brief because there are so many people to cover and I am already plate-spinning dozens of other articles in progress, including entries in other series (e.g., my popular Letters series, Recommendations Roundups, a new interview series, and the Behind-the-Scenes exchanges I teased a while back) as well as podcasts and videos of my articles.
Profiles in Courage is intended to introduce you to people you may not know about, honor individuals who are audaciously challenging authoritarianism, and share examples of superstars we can be proud to call allies as we try to awaken the sleeping.
Dr. Tess Lawrie
Meet the embodiment of integrity, Dr. Tess Lawrie, MBBCh, DFSRH, PhD:
If you are one of the few people on the planet who hasn’t yet read Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s The Real Anthony Fauci (hardcover, Kindle, audiobook), then start doing so now and get it for everyone on your Christmas list (along with my fairy tale :-)
In that book, you will discover one of the boldest examples of courage I have encountered in the scientific community: Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy director, physician, Cochrane Library contributor, and WHO consultant Dr. Tess Lawrie.
Her 120 peer-reviewed publications have garnered 5,091 citations and 177,634 reads as of this writing, putting her in the top 5 percent of ResearchGate members. Dr. Lawrie’s credentials, reputation, and passionate advocacy for patients are unassailable, but that doesn’t stop the BigPharma propaganda machine from trying.
Over the past two years, the formidable Lawrie has worked to save lives from every possible angle, whether by exhaustively researching and recommending life-saving ivermectin or taking on the UK’s near-worthless Yellow Card Scheme adverse events reporting system.
In a Zoom meeting with BigPharma lackey Dr. Andrew Hill (whose employer, University of Liverpool, had recently been awarded a $40 million grant by Gates Foundation vehicle Unitaid), Dr. Lawrie fearlessly confronts Hill about his fraudulent meta-analysis on ivermectin, which she warns him will be responsible for “many, many deaths.”
Below are some salient excerpts (full transcript here):
Dr. Tess Lawrie: This is what I don’t get, you know, because you’re not a clinician. You’re not seeing people dying every day. And this medicine prevents deaths by 80 percent. So 80 percent of those people who are dying today don’t need to die because there’s ivermectin.
Dr. Andrew Hill: There are a lot, as I said, there are a lot of different opinions about this. As I say, some people simply …
TL: We are looking at the data; it doesn’t matter what other people say. We are the ones who are tasked with looking at the data and reassuring everybody that this cheap and effective treatment will save lives. It’s clear. You don’t have to say, well, so-and-so says this, and so-and-so says that. It’s absolutely crystal clear. We can save lives today. If we can get the government to buy ivermectin.
AH: Well, I don’t think it’s as simple as that, because you’ve got trials …
TL: It is as simple as that. We don’t have to wait for studies … we have enough evidence now that shows that ivermectin saves lives, it prevents hospitalization. It saves the clinical staff going to work every day and being exposed. And frankly, I’m shocked at how you are not taking responsibility for that decision. And you still haven’t told me who is [influencing you]? Who is giving you that opinion? Because you keep saying you’re in a sensitive position.…
TL: But, Andy—know this will come out. It will come out that there were all these barriers to the truth being told to the public and to the evidence being presented. So please, this is your opportunity just to acknowledge [the truth] in your review, change your conclusions, and come on board with this Cochrane Review, which will be definitive. It will be the review that shows the evidence and gives the proof. This was the consensus on Wednesday night’s meeting with 20 experts.
Hill protests that NIH will not agree to recommend IVM.
TL: Yeah, because the NIH is owned by the vaccine lobby.
AH: That’s not something I know about.
TL: Well, all I’m saying is this smacks of corruption and you are being played.
AH: Okay. Yeah. I mean, it’s, it’s a difficult situation.
TL: No, you might be in a difficult situation. I’m not, because I have no paymaster. I can tell the truth. How can you deliberately try and mess it up … you know?
AH: It’s not messing it up. It’s saying that we need, we need a short time to look at some more studies.
TL: So, how long are you going to let people carry on dying unnecessarily—up to you?
TL: You’d rather risk loads of people’s lives. Do you know if you and I stood together on this, we could present a united front and we could get this thing. We could make it happen. We could save lives; we could prevent [British National Health Service doctors and nurses] people from getting infected. We could prevent the elderly from dying.…
I can see we’re getting nowhere because you have an agenda, whether you like it or not, whether you admit to it or not, you have an agenda. And the agenda is to kick this down the road as far as you can. So … we are trying to save lives. That’s what we do. I’m a doctor and I’m going to save as many lives as I can. And I’m going to do that through getting the message [out] on ivermectin. Okay. Unfortunately, your work is going to impair that, and you seem to be able to bear the burden of many, many deaths, which I cannot do.
TL: Would you tell me? I would like to know who pays you as a consultant through WHO?
AH: It’s Unitaid.
TL: All right. So who helped to … Whose conclusions are those on the review that you’ve done? Who is not listed as an author? Who’s actually contributed?
AH: Well, I mean, I don’t really want to get into, I mean, it … Unitaid …
TL: I think that … it needs to be clear. I would like to know who, who are these other voices that are in your paper that are not acknowledged? Does Unitaid have a say? Do they influence what you write?
AH: Unitaid has a say in the conclusions of the paper. Yeah.
TL: Who are these people? Who are these people saying this?
AH: Yeah … it’s a very strong lobby …
TL: … You’ve taken a position right to the other extreme calling for further trials that are going to kill people. So this will come out, and you will be culpable. And I can’t understand why you don’t see that, because the evidence is there and you are not just denying it, but your work’s actually actively obfuscating the truth. And this will come out. So I’m really sorry.…
TL: So, how long do you think the stalemate will go on for? How long do you think you will be paid to [make] the stalemate go on?
AH: From my side. Okay … I think end of February, we will be there, six weeks.
TL: How many people die every day?
AH: Oh, sure. I mean, you know, 15,000 people a day.
TL: Fifteen thousand people a day times six weeks … because at this rate, all other countries are getting ivermectin except the UK and the USA, because the UK and the USA and Europe are owned by the vaccine lobby.
AH: My goal is to get the drug approved and to do everything I can to get it approved so that it reaches the maximum …
TL: You’re not doing everything you can, because everything you can would involve saying to those people who are paying you, “I can see this prevents deaths. So I’m not going to support this conclusion any more, and I’m going to tell the truth.”
AH: Okay. Well, that’s where we’ll, I guess we’ll have to agree to differ.
TL: Yeah. Well, I don’t know how you sleep at night, honestly.
This is an electrifying example of how to demand accountability of a colluder. Dr. Lawrie has no compunction about calling Hill out for falsifying conclusions to appease his BigPharma owners—not only revealing the mechanism by which science is transformed into $cience™ in this corrupt industry but also unflinchingly assigning him guilt for the half a million lives he would be responsible for consigning to death.
And Dr. Lawrie’s fight to save lives didn’t stop there. She continues to relentlessly expose the putrefying erosion of her field while articulating an inspiring vision for a new model of research unsullied by conflicts of interest—as in this rousing speech she delivered at the First International Ivermectin for COVID Conference:
No comments:
Post a Comment