Nah. Can't be. Our top medical journals have lies in them and some of our doctors and researchers are not ethical. Next you are going to say people with very valid sucessful cancer treatments have been harassed, threatened, and slandered for decades. Say it ain't so.
Dana Farber recommended the jabs to all their cancer patients. Brigham and Women's mandated them.
They also would manipulate their studies by withdrawing patients who failed to show improvement.
IT would not show up in the paper, but in the data they used. I know this personally, my best friend is a patient there. She got kicked out a study when after the jab her cancer came back.
Could be a scrubbing, could be a character assassination of Laurie Glimcher (or others). Or it could be a publicly-visible, non-statement statement about the current poor standards of what passes for Research.
Nah. Can't be. Our top medical journals have lies in them and some of our doctors and researchers are not ethical. Next you are going to say people with very valid sucessful cancer treatments have been harassed, threatened, and slandered for decades. Say it ain't so.
Dana Farber recommended the jabs to all their cancer patients. Brigham and Women's mandated them.
They also would manipulate their studies by withdrawing patients who failed to show improvement.
IT would not show up in the paper, but in the data they used. I know this personally, my best friend is a patient there. She got kicked out a study when after the jab her cancer came back.
Hard to know what this is.
Could be a scrubbing, could be a character assassination of Laurie Glimcher (or others). Or it could be a publicly-visible, non-statement statement about the current poor standards of what passes for Research.
Time will tell.
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/1/12/dana-farber-research-misconduct-allegations/
Perhaps future papers will make more use of ChatGPT