FDA is Anti-Hand Sanitzer! Hand Sanitzer Saves Lives!
Required Summer Reading An AofA Best Of

John Stone: Intimidation and Suppression of Inconvenient Knowledge

CHD logoWe are pleased to excerpt this article by John Stone as published on Children's Health Defense in a collaborative effort.


By John Stone

These comments follow on the disappointing failure of Prof Kaye ‘UN Special Rapporteur for the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Opinion and Freedom of Expression’  to respond to two respectful letters complaining about the arbitrary use of terms like “misinformation” and “disinformation” for information which is likely just inconvenient for corporate global interests, global agencies and the policies of governments. I also protested at the use the of term “anti-vaccinationist” as catch-all hate speech for anyone who criticises vaccine products, programs or the lobby.

I was moved to write to Prof Kaye because he seemed to be displaying signs of intellectual fastidiousness last year when he asked Mark Zuckerberg to be more precise about how he defined “vaccine misinformation”. In my second letter I expanded this to include public and expert concern about 5G radiation – also coming to be classified expediently as “misinformation”, as with a recent communique by the Council of Europe (which I understand to be the committee of the 27 heads of government of the European Union). I wrote, it will be recalled:

“It seems now that at “warp-speed” global citizens are having their rights to discuss their future stripped away from them by politicians using Orwellian strategies. Now, every time that global corporate interests are called into question, governments only have to wheel out terms like “misinformation” or “disinformation” and they are safe from public scrutiny or accountability. This bodes ill both for democracy and the safety of citizens.“

It may be said that I was genuinely surprised when he did not reply to me the first time, and that a United Nations office did not even have the courtesy to provide an acknowledgment, even when repeatedly requested. It should also be obvious that this is just the sort of sensitive issue which his office should be attending to:  even if Kaye thinks I am absolutely wrong it ought to be within his grasp to explain why. The idea that there are increasing areas where governments should never have to be called to account is both absurd and menacing.

In the absence of a reply I went to Kaye’s 2019 book ‘Secret Police: The Global Struggle to Govern the Internet’ for illumination. The critical passage is found on page 91 where he writes favourably of the work of the Oxford Internet Institute (OII):

“OII has shown how all sorts of actors try to manipulate public opinion, from whether to vaccinate your children to whom to vote for in contested elections”

It is interesting to note here how once legitimate subjects of free speech have now fall under the heading of “manipulation”. In particular, he mentions OII’s Samantha Bradshaw, with whom I took issue at the House of Commons’ Digital, Culture, Media & Sports Committee Inquiry into FAKE News in 2017-18. I wrote to the Committee following her evidence:

Read more here.


Jenny Allan

You are of course correct John in that "simply being employed by the British state is a major potential conflict", but it is even more pervasive than that. Remember BMJ Editor Fiona Godlee admitting to a UK Government science and technology committee about the amount of Pharma influence in their publications? These days scientists and doctors have to keep their heads down if they want to keep their reputations and livelihoods intact.

Only two authors of that BMJ article declared any competing interests, but as far as I know the BMJ does not insist on such declarations. Do you think the BMJ Editors are having a change of heart?

This was published 6 months ago
'Cannot be trusted ... causing harm': Top medical journal takes on big pharma'

By Liam Mannix
December 4, 2019 — 12.01am
"A leading medical journal is launching a global campaign to separate medicine from big pharma, linking industry influence to the pelvic mesh scandal that injured hundreds of women.
The BMJ says doctors are being unduly influenced by industry-sponsored education events and industry-funded trials for major drugs.
Those trials cannot be trusted, the journal's editor and a team of global healthcare leaders write in a scathing editorial published on Wednesday.
The "endemic financial entanglement with industry is distorting the production and use of healthcare evidence, causing harm to individuals and waste for health systems", they write."

As yet there is no sign of our over lobbied and over pharma sponsored politicians listening, but history will deal badly with them if they turn a blind eye to the harm being done to humanity in the name of 'the common good'.

John Stone


Just to say there are 14 authors only two disclose conflicts, but of course it doesn’t really matter because by now simply being employed by the British state is a major potential conflict. You’d think they might not even want to highlight such major contra-indications for a vaccine even if none is mentioned. Does it perhaps represent the extreme levels of confusion that now reign in public health that they barely even glimpse the problem?

Jenny Allan

I do not class myself as a 'scientist', although I have science qualifications; in other respects I am qualified to answer Dr Annand's question:-
"Since the antibody tests are completely useless in telling one whether one is immune, partially immune or non-immune, how does a person who is injected with one of the vaccines (being currently developed in our own OXFORD) know whether he is immune, partially or completely, to infection with the wild virus? And is there a possibility that he will, when he inhales the wild virus, ... not suffer the obscure immunological reactions mentioned in the preceding paragraph?"

The Oxford Vaccine Group has already answered the first query with a recent press release lamenting the UK disappearance of the Covid-19 virus in the UK, which has meant their human vaccine trials being compromised. A challenge approach has been mooted where volunteers are deliberately infected in order to test the vaccine's efficacy, but this is unlikely to be ethically approved in the UK. Human testing is presently taking place in Brazil, but it seems to be tacitly accepted the Oxford Vaccine does not provide immunity to Covid-19. In the UK all the hype is now concentrated on the Imperial College vaccine, beginning human trials. It is designed to provoke an immune response attacking the virus protein coat and hooks, but I have a very bad feeling about it

The BMJ scientists are plainly so conflicted, we should be asking what was the point of them writing the article at all? You do not need science qualifications to understand what their real agenda is about, amongst others, protecting the Oxford Vaccine, ( AstraZeneca), already in production, and the expensive antivirals manufactured by Gilead Sciences.

At the start of the UK lockdown it would have been lifesaving had elderly hospital patients been tested before being transferred to care homes. Half of the Covid-19 deaths in Scotland occurred in care homes, mostly as a result of infected patients being transferred from hospitals. A significant number of hospital patients, in for other reasons, became infected with Covid-19, as did hospital staff personnel. Testing was too little too late.

Recent scenes of crowded beaches and political demonstrations in the UK have not resulted in any Covid-19 'spike' in deaths, which are thankfully decreasing. There is NO reason to believe in 'second or third waves' of the virus or the need for a vaccine, although this is still being dangerously 'pushed' on to a reluctant population, by those vested interests determined to profit from their investments.

Jenny Allan

Yes John -I too noted the rapid responses and was tempted to quote from Dr Anand's, but I did not want to fall foul of the copyright or other laws. For other AoA readers, the responses to the article are very worth reading; just click on rapid responses at the top of the article.

Angus Files

Well said John I`m finding it hard to believe as its as mad as cheese.Probably so confusing that the public arent meant to understand.As Jenny points out Pollards posts are just total gobbledegook.The word science should be re written to mean, a word to use when you wish to shut up the public and confuse them so that you can sell a product thats never been tested and is highly dangerous.

Pharma For Prison


John Stone


But I also note the comment of Dr Anand:

Re: Rapid roll out of SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing—a concern. An ignorant person‘s comments


Dear Editor

I know nothing about the SARS-COV-2 antibodies. Nor about the tests. Nor about the duration of persistence of the antibodies in a quantity that MIGHT protect the person from further infection (which might be sub-clinical, or clinical, or might simply and unfortunately, result in some obscure immunological reaction - with unknown , unforeseen damages to the body).

The foregoing also leads me on to the question:

Since the antibody tests are completely useless in telling one whether one is immune, partially immune or non-immune, how does a person who is injected with one of the vaccines (being currently developed in our own OXFORD) know whether he is immune, partially or completely, to infection with the wild virus? And is there a possibility that he will, when he inhales the wild virus, ... not suffer the obscure immunological reactions mentioned in the preceding paragraph?

There are other questions. But if a scientist, medical or non-medical, not employed or contracted as a public relations officer by our world class universities, can answer these questions, I will be grateful.

Jenny Allan

Good heavens John - That BMJ link you provided was written by a plethora of UK based academics, apparently whinging about the roll out of new (in the UK) tests for Covid-19. The whinges are many and varied and are indeed confusing. They include questioning the 'scientific' basis and accuracy of the tests, and the necessity of blanket population testing, which they consider a waste of rescources.
QUOTE:- "this push to introduce a non-evidence based test for uncertain gains risks inefficient use of scarce resources

As a member of the public with some scientific training, (a long time ago before science got highjacked for political purposes), I was inclined to agree with their reasoning, UNTIL I looked at the competing interests at the bottom of the article. I reproduce them here:-

"Rapid roll out of SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing—a concern"
"Competing interests:
IB: chief data scientist adviser for AstraZeneca through the University of Liverpool. WI: speaker and consultancy fees from Roche, Janssen Cilag, Gilead Sciences, and Novartis; educational grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and Gilead Sciences; and research grant support from GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Cilag, Abbvie, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. All other authors: none declared."

NO confusion here. It's obvious where these persons expect the UK's 'scarce recources' to be directed! ( The UK Covid-19 testing regime has been yet another expensive disaster. It has revealed a significant percentage of the UK population already has Covid-19 antibodies. For most people this presents as no more than a bad dose of the common cold.)


@John Stone. Yes about censorship of Children’s Health Defense. Pretty shocking and pathetic.

John Stone

Thanks Jenny & Morag

And if you are not already confused

“ Rapid roll out of SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing—a concern”


But the government know what they are doing and have got everything under control really. Just as long as they can shut everybody up!



Thank you John , the wee Jimmy of the big long ackward silence ,was on channel 4 news last night
with a longitudional skype version of the similar subject?
"Blooming Technocracy!"

technocracy .news
Technocracy News and Trends
Article : Scientists :Covid -19 vaccine may not work for At -Risk older people.
Posted by Sarah Bosley Via The Guardian, 23 June 2020.
States -a useful vaccine did not need to be 100% . Even with 50% accuracy .... etc ?
Sounds 50% dodgy 50 % risky ! especially with Chief Medical officer advising to, maintain cruising altitude through the covid situation !
Will that be a few feet higher or lower than the airport tarmac ?
As vaccine still in the hanger getting a once over ?
Don't forget yer parachute-n -wellies for that experiment !
Billy Connolly- If it wisnae fur yer wellies [First -YouTube

Fact or fiction Truth or fable ?

Dr Andrew Kaufman responds to Reuters Fact Check on Covid -19 Vaccine Genetically Modyfing Humans .

Jenny Allan

Another Gem from Prof Pollard during an Oxford Vaccine Group lab visit from Prince William:-

Quote from Professor Pollard of the Oxford Vaccine Group:- "Prof Pollard highlighted HIV, a virus for which no vaccine has been found because it mutates, saying scientists’ great fear was coronavirus could be the same. In that case, he said, ‘there is nothing we could do apart from social distancing forever’ – a prospect William described as ‘frightening’."
(Prof Pollard is wellcome to social distance from the rest of us 'forever' -the sooner the better. ) Meanwhile, Covid-19 virus is disappearing fast in the UK. There are also far fewer deaths as treatments and therapies are found to prevent or reduce lung damage in persons infected. Who needs vaccines?

"The UK Government has provided £84million for the University of Oxford to develop and manufacture its coronavirus vaccine." (Not the UK Government's cash -the UK TAXPAYERS!!) WASTED!!
I believe the totally unelected and medically and scientifically unqualified Bill Gates also contributed to this vaccine. I would like to see him making some losses.

Jenny Allan

I was highly amused this morning by an obviously UK Government sponsored Facebook post on my news page,warning persons not to share 'fake news' about Covid-19. I could not be bothered commenting, but some wag said it was a pity about all the fake information peddled by the press and media.
Attempts to directly access some FB autism and vaccine damage sites including AoA, results in a recurring warning at the top of the page about accessing vaccine misinformation, followed by a load of pro-vaccine propaganda sites. One Australian site had at least a dozen of these above it, a lot of scrolling down.

At the moment, most of these 'liked' site vaccine and autism information posts come up in my FB news page, but for how long? On one occassion I got shut out of my FB news except for a couple of ads. It came back after I signed up to rival MeWe. Remember-Facebook relies on income from those targetted ads.

John Stone

It is likely that Dr Gaunt posted his brief comment under the wrong article this morning, so I am re-pasting here:

"Censorship is getting more heavy-handed. If I spell out the A-word or reference ageofautism.com or childrenshealthdefence.org, FB disappears whatever I posted. Is anyone else having this experience?"

Yes, it is indiscriminate, arbitrary, heavy-handed, against the public interest: ABUSE.

Jenny Allan

From John's written evidence:-
"What we have here are cosy arrangements between the government and the pharmaceutical industry which more certainly benefit the industry than the public, which completely escape serious comment in mainstream media and might easily get to be categorised as misinformation by the public relations machinery of the government and the industry if they came to be mentioned in social media. "

People have now become utterly bemused by all the Covid-19 conflicting stuff coming out of the press and media, most of it originating from UK Government sponsored sources and vaccine developers and manufacturers. We have got to the stage where we have no idea whether this propaganda is “misinformation” or “disinformation”, whether truths or lies, or just fanciful suppositions, assumptions and projections. Tonight's BBC news was devoted to hyping up the Imperial College, London vaccine. I found it scary.

They are expecting us all to accept a completely novel vaccine, on the basis of a few months of human trials. Not for me.

Jenny Allan

Another one from Prof Pollard's Oxford Vaccine Group's 'you couldn't make it up' files:-

The Mirror 15 June 2020
"Oxford scientists accidentally give patients wrong dose in coronavirus vaccine trial
EXCLUSIVE: The University of Oxford insists “no pause to the study is required” after a smaller dose was administered by accident during a trial of a potential Covid-19 vaccine
'...Prof Ian Jones, Professor of Virology at the University of Reading, said: “Under-dosing is going to impact upon the clarity of the trial.
“I’m very surprised and it’s very disappointing for them to find this and have to report it. I just hope they still get sufficient data to make it worthwhile.”...'

Jenny Allan

Is it just me, or is an element of panic setting in over the Covid-19 vaccines being developed in the UK. Our UK Government Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, first stated the Oxford vaccine would be given first to health workers, then to the over 65s. Children would be last on the list. Now it seems children are to be given the vaccine FIRST, apparently to prevent them passing on the virus to their grannies! Today's propaganda stated children would be administered the vaccine in some kind of spray form, since this works 'better'. As I write this neither the Oxford nor the Imperial College vaccines have produced anything like a satisfactory immune response to Covid-19. Their 'wondrous' remedy for this is to give TWO doses of the Oxford vaccine, or combine the two UK vaccines..

Below I enclose a few links to some of this nonsense. I only follow the comments in the Mail. Yes these troll infested threads should not be taken too seriously, but are useful in identifying public opinion trends, at the moment VERY anti these Covid-19 vaccines.

From Above:-
"Covid-19 vaccine breakthrough as scientists find giving TWO doses of Oxford University's experimental jab provokes a stronger immune response
The jab may work best in a two-dose way as the MMR vaccine is given
Trials on pigs revealed a 'booster' dose led to the body making more antibodies
Leading scientist said the vaccine could be ready for October
It is already being produced by the Cambridge-based company AstraZeneca "

Combined British vaccines could end crisis
• The Mail on Sunday
• 21 Jun 2020
• By Stephen Adams MEDICAL EDITOR
From above:-
"TWO rival vaccines being developed by competing British universities could end up being used together to provide lasting immunity to coronavirus, according to one of the experts leading the charge."

From Above:-
"MMR jab used to prevent measles, mumps and rubella 'could help protect against COVID-19' by boosting the immune system and reducing the risk of developing deadly symptoms"

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)