IF YOU are heartily sick of watching mainstream TV’s ‘non’ documentaries (propaganda more like) or, like me, have cancelled your TV licence, there is no need to despair. In the huge and almost chaotic choice of podcasts, YouTubes and Bitchutes, and the dramatically variable editorial and journalistic (often lack of) standards that can confront you, some really sound sources of news and information have emerged. One which applies good journalistic values and where the reporting and presentation is objective, calm and measured, while exploring territory off the MSM’s official narrative track, is Epoch Times TV, the growing TV arm of the Epoch Times. Their daily output is now considerable. They report on research, information, critical analysis and news that gets you deplatformed by the mainstream. You can choose from Epoch Original Documentaries, Crossroads with Joshua Philipp, American Thought Leaders with Jan Jekielek, and Facts Matter with Roman Balmakov.
It’s a recent episode of Facts Matter that I particularly want to draw to your attention today, not least for the typical bias by omission on this story by our MSM. It’s the story behind the withdrawal within days of a vaccine autopsy study published on July 5 on the Lancet medical journal’s pre-print server (where researchers can place their studies for them to be peer-reviewed) by nine medical researchers and titled A Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination. According to Dr Peter McCullough, the lead researcher, although this study was experiencing ‘hundreds of reviews per minute’, the Lancet decided to take it down. The website of the Social Science Research Network, which hosts the Lancet pre-prints, says: ‘This preprint has been removed by Preprints with The Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology. Preprints with The Lancet reserves the right to remove a paper that has been posted if we determine that it has violated our screening criteria.’
What Roman Balmakov does in this filmed report is to go through the conclusions of the study, as well as the rationale (or lack thereof) for why it was pulled. He starts by setting out the extraordinary credentials of the nine (cancelled) scientist and medic authors and explains the exacting criteria by which the number of autopsy reports were assessed for inclusion. You can see where this is going – there was no valid case for removing the study.
You can watch the programme and link through to the original scientific paper here.