WE HAVE reported multiple examples of how respected medical journals have fought tooth and nail to protect the narrative that the covid vaccines are ‘safe and effective’. Papers describing studies which challenge this narrative have been routinely rejected, often without review, while attempts to get flawed studies that support the narrative retracted have also been consistently rejected.
However, even the most stubborn supporters of the covid vaccines accept that they present an increased risk of myocarditis, especially in young males. Multiple studies have confirmed this, and these have been published even in the pharma journals.
Despite this, in April 2022 the Lancet published a paper by Ling et al which came to the following conclusion based on their own meta-analysis of earlier papers: ‘There is no greater risk of developing heart inflammation after a Covid-19 vaccine than after other common vaccines, including the flu jab.’
This paper was published at a crucial time for the covid vaccines. There was by now increasing hesitancy especially among the young about taking the vaccine because of the known increased risk of myocarditis. So, it was not coincidental that the British Heart Foundation (BHF) immediately seized on this article to announce that nobody should be worried about taking the covid vaccine. Their website cited the paper and used the exact wording above from the paper’s conclusions.
In fact, a researcher, Anthony C L Lee, had submitted a very detailed rebuttal of the Lancet paper after it was published. He showed that the paper misrepresented data, under-reported myocarditis cases linked to covid vaccines and exaggerated cases from non-covid vaccines, particularly smallpox vaccines that are not widely used. Lee also exposed the hypocrisy of the BHF who later quietly removed the reference to the flawed Lancet paper from their website.
April 2022 BHF website April 2022 (left) compared with BHF website June 2023
Yet, inevitably, Lee’s attempt to get the Lancet paper retracted was unsuccessful. We have been in correspondence with Lee about his experiences with the Lancet and the BHF and he has now produced a comprehensive article which catalogues the entire story. Some of it is highly technical, but we recommend you read it as yet another example of the corruption of science that has typified the covid era.
If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.
