The Use of Weaponized Science Against Natural Health Advocates — Goliath Versus David

The use of weaponized science against natural health advocates  — Goliath vs David

Calvin Mulligan, Futurescapes21C © May9, 2022 All rights reserved

“He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despair, against our will comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.” — Aeschylus (courtesy, Signs of the Times)

Sometimes those of us in the Resistance get a revealing look into how propaganda is used by those leading the current information war against us. One of our group members, along with my resister sister from Winnipeg, recently called my attention to the ugly “science” of Dr. David Fisman and graduate student Dr. Ashleigh Tuite, from the University of Toronto. Dr. Fisman, a former member of the ON Science Chair, is described as a “physician epidemiologist”.

His connections, even while serving on the ON Science Chair strongly suggest he plays for Team Covaxx. His recent modelling research purports to demonstrate that unvaccinated individuals present a risk to the vaccinated. The paper isn’t just badly flawed from a technical standpoint; you could say it’s weaponized to have an injurious impact on those favouring natural immunity. Nonetheless, it somehow managed to meet the editorial standards of the Canadian Medical Association Journal. The editorial failure aside, one would hope the fraudulent study would disappear from public view and die. But that’s not how the propaganda echo chamber works. Rather, the findings were distributed via mass and social media, thus enlarging its audience reach and amplifying its impact. For Resisters fighting the Deep State propaganda machine, the latter’s ability to leverage a lie in the face of demonstrated scientific truth echoes the disproportion of the biblical Goliath versus David contest.  

Articles on Fisman’s findings were carried by both CTV and CBC. The author of a tweet carried in the weekly Ben Fulford letter commented on the packaging of (selected?) news items for various news agencies. “It’s almost like there’s a single editor passing out the same assignment to every news agency”. As evidence, he attaches an image of articles on the Fisman study being distributed to 12 agencies (see image below my name). The amplification of Fisman et al’s toxic untruth didn’t end there however. Subsequently, the Liberal Parliamentary Secretary for Sport cited the study as justification for keeping the Canadian government’s Covid travel restrictions in place. How many will be impacted by the article’s publication in the CMA journal is unknown.

Thankfully, some virtuous “Davids” ensured the fabricated science bomb didn’t get a pass within the science community. Fisman’s study was roundly criticized by Dr. Mark Trozzi and shredded by Ontario vaccine researcher, Dr. Byram Bridle. Bridle described the paper as the worst research paper he has seen in his career, and “thinly-disguised hate speech” and calls upon its authors and the CMA journal to retract it. Bridle also suggests Fisman update his social media tweet referencing his tainted study, going so far as to propose appropriate wording for Fisman’s mea culpa. It reads:

After correcting just one of the several inappropriate immunological assumptions, our paper now supports the idea that the decision to get ‘vaccinated’ confers risk not only on the ‘vaccinated’ individual but (disproportionate to contact rates) on ‘unvaccinated’ individuals too; unlike our previous conclusion, the corrected model matches real world data. Thank-you to those who chose to remain ‘unvaccinated’ since you are now selflessly serving as a buffer to the vaccinated’. We are sorry to the field of public health modeling for disclosing how easy it is for the conclusions of our models to be manipulated by assumptions that we sometimes pull out of thin air. We also apologize to the ‘unvaccinated’ people (most of whom have received legitimate vaccines throughout their lifetimes) for misleading media organizations around the the world into promoting hatred against you. Now that our model has been shown to point to the ‘vaccinated’ as the main culprits of transmission of SARS CoV-2, we implore you not to promote hatred against us like we have done to you.  

At the moment, Goliath still stands and I doubt Fisman has the moral courage to issue the update. But who knows what the Bridle counterpunch may ignite. As Bridle has urged, the CMA journal could retract the study and review its peer review process. The College of Physicians and Surgeons could investigate Fisman and the harms caused by his paper, and the U of T could investigate the academic conduct of Drs. Fisman and Tuite. I’m not going to hold my breath awaiting any of these outcomes. But in the meantime, I’m delighted to know the Parliamentary Secretary for Sport is concerned about our health, because I’ve got some authentic studies for him. Unlike  Fisman’s study, these would actually help him make sense of what’s going on the real world regarding Covid-19 and the vaxx, and they would lend support to sound policies designed to protect Canadians. 



Fiction disguised as science to promote hatred (Dr. Byram Bridle):

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *