There are several reasons why it is difficult to trust organizations like the CDC and FDA when it comes to the safety of vaccines and pills:

Firstly, these organizations are primarily funded by the very companies they are supposed to regulate, namely big pharmaceutical companies. This close financial relationship raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest and biases in their decision-making processes.

Secondly, these organizations have a long history of initially declaring vaccines and pills as “safe and effective,” only to later reevaluate their claims after significant damage, including cases of death, have occurred. This pattern of reassessment often comes after big pharmaceutical companies have already made tremendous profit. In many cases, these companies can afford to pay fines in the millions, which are often minimal in comparison to their earnings (Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine has so far made them $90+ billion) ,essentially resulting in nothing more than a symbolic “slap on the wrist” punishment.

This cycle of misconduct and minimal consequences has persisted for decades. Anyone who cares enough to examine the history of pharmaceutical companies and the fines they have had to pay for the damage caused by their products over many decades can easily see this pattern.

In addition to the aforementioned concerns, there are additional factors that contribute to the lack of trust in the medical system:

Medical journals, which play a crucial role in disseminating research findings, are also susceptible to influences from big pharmaceutical companies. It is a well-known fact that medical journals receive grants and funding from these companies, which introduces the potential for bias in the research and publication process. This financial relationship can influence the selection, interpretation, and presentation of data, undermining the objectivity and reliability of the published studies.

Furthermore, when it comes to clinical trials conducted by big pharmaceutical companies, there is often limited transparency regarding the raw data. Instead of providing unrestricted access to all the data collected during the trials, these companies tend to provide filtered or selective data to medical journals and regulatory bodies. This practice raises concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the information available for review and analysis.

Yet doctors rely heavily on medical journals as trusted sources of information. As members of the general public, we, in turn, place a lot of trust in our doctors, assuming that they are making informed decisions based on the best available evidence.

However, the concerns surrounding the financial ties between pharmaceutical companies, medical journals, and regulatory bodies, as well as the limited access to raw data, erode our confidence in the integrity of the medical system as a whole.