Josef is a superb interviewer and this is one of the best interviews I have ever contributed to. We touched on many subjects, including the disaster of drug focused psychiatry; that our drugs are the leading cause of death and that psychiatric drugs are the third leading cause of death; corruption of doctors, their organisations, medical journals, and the media; the moral and scientific collapse of the Cochrane Collaboration; that industry corruption of Cochrane authors is allowed; the disastrous Covid lockdowns; censorship; and Kennedy’s vaccine reforms.

I provide an overview of the interview below, with links to relevant documentation, and a representative sample of viewer comments. They were overwhelmingly positive, particularly considering that we attacked holy cows where many people have strong, vested interests.

Here is the interview:

Professor Admits Psychiatric Drugs Are Making Patients Worse

00.00 Psychiatry is a disaster.

02.45 Our drugs are the leading cause of death, psych drugs third leading cause.

05.00 Abstinence depressions.

10.30 Royal College of Psychiatrists lies, claiming that withdrawal symptoms are trivial.

13.30 Lancet, 50 years of antidepressants, totally flawed editorial.

15.15 BMJ, State of the Art articles are very misleading.

16.10 The effect of antidepressants is not clinically relevant.

17.10 Medical journals propagate the accepted narratives, don’t challenge dogma.

18.00 Those who say drugs are dangerous are labelled dangerous.

19.10 The Cochrane Collaboration.

20.40 New England Journal of Medicine is corrupt.

21.00 Dishonesty has become worse the last 10 years.

21.40 Hopeless to publish in the BMJ and you waste two years before they reject.

22.50 Cochrane, garbage in, garbage out.

24.10 Cochrane, our withdrawal review, Cochrane praises the antidepressant drugs.

26.20 Cochrane, detailed account of my expulsion.

31.30 Cochrane, they still allow conflicted authors!

35.00 Cochrane, if we don’t allow conflicts authors, we will not have reviewers.

39.30 AIDS research, how I ended up with a 1000-dollar bill from a company. Brown envelopes from Basel to be handed over to corrupt doctors, with dollar bills inside.

43.00 Solutions. CDC gets industry money, untrustworthy about flu shots.

44.30 My role in opening EMA’s archives of clinical study reports.

46.50 Our research on SSRIs, suicide, homicide.

47.00 Merck’s fraud with Gardasil.

48.30 Fraudulent fluoxetine trials, my research with David Healy.

50.50 Censorship, videos removed.

51.40 Washington DC, veterans meeting, suicides incresaed, I interviewed Jay Bhattacharya, met with Kennedy. Martin Kulldorff, Sweden did better than other countries by not locking down. Kennedy’s vaccine initiatives.

Here is a representative selection of viewer comments:

Psychiatric drugs

Every time, I hear safe and effective I just run as fast as I can. As long as they keep saying something is “Safe and effective” they will continue to rake in the DOLLARS. My doctor said psychiatric drugs “couldn’t hurt;” my mom is dying of kidney failure from lithium and I got Steven Johnson’s Syndrome from lamotrigine, then akathisia from Latuda. The doctors are front-line drug pushers for the pharmaceutical cartels, don’t trust them, ever. My sister has been on Zoloft for decades; yes, she doesn’t feel anxious, she doesn’t feel anything. If the entire country needs them, it’s NOT a chemical imbalance; more likely a reflection of a broken society. Big Pharma is the most unethical, immoral and greedy industry in the world. Honesty doesn’t pay for yachts and European vacations.

The interviewer and the interviewee

Gentlemen, you are both HEROS! Thank God there are some compassionate oversight professionals like you two. I am so glad you exist, having the balls to do what you do for us. You are so brave and bold!! I cannot thank you enough for your content!!! I am sharing with as many people as I can. We have GOT to get this info out there! Thanks, Peter, I have your book and am drug free, you are so tough to tell the truth; thank you Dr Joseph, you are also tougher than the rest, I’m right behind you reclaiming my life. Josef, your existence enhances my faith in humanity.

The interviewee

Gøtzsche is a very honest researcher, he tells the truth and has excellent conclusions on these issues; that is why he was banned on everything mainstream; he is bad for selling what not only you don’t need but also poisons you very badly. This man knows what he is talking about, so true. Peter Gøtzsche is a legend, it’s awesome to see him on your show Josef! Oh God, it’s Peter Gøtzsche! =) I have to watch this video. This is pure gold! Peter is such a truth warrior, I say warrior because he has faught many battles on behalf of truth and still standing, he deserves a lot of respect. Just love this interview with Professor Peter Gøtzsche, he has a truly beautiful soul! Such strength, dedication & fortitude. Bless him. Love the wisdom of Peter Gøtzsche. I have appreciated what he has to say about psychiatric meds, and the routine mammogram recommendations. Thanks for interviewing Dr G, people should look into his other work, esp his book about gangsterism by the pharma industry. Highly recommend Peter Gøtzsche’s books, scary and excellent.

The Cochrane Collaboration

I’ve heard of the Cochrane collaboration and admired it, it’s sad to hear that it’s deteriorated. It’s unbelievably disturbing to listen to him recount the events of what they did to him, as well as their general and very twisted policies.

There are always idiots around

@charlesbailey5579: Peter Gøtzsche is an anti-vaxxer and is against screening women for breast cancer using mammography. Reply by @MariaGonzalez-oz1zi: Yes, he is very intelligent. My comment: my vaccine book proves that my approach to vaccines is evidence-based and balanced.

SHARE THIS ON:

By Peter C Gøtzsche, Institute for Scientific Freedom

The smallpox vaccine has saved millions of lives, but vaccines also take some lives, e.g. the Covid-19 vaccines can cause thrombosis and myocarditis.

I explain in my book, Vaccines: truth, lies, and controversy, why vaccines are an emotional topic where the lines are sharply drawn and I give many examples of misinformation, both from vaccine deniers and from our authorities, e.g. the FDA and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Together with my filmmaker, historian Janus Bang, I shall deal with these issues in our upcoming documentary about vaccines. We have started applying for funding for our film, and if you wish do donate, you can do so via my GoFundMe account where we write:

“Scientific freedom is constantly under attack, particularly in healthcare, which is dominated by the drug industry and other vested interests. People who speak truth to power, e.g. about serious harms of vaccines and suicides being doubled by depression drugs, may become removed from their posts.”

We are currently finishing our documentary about the lack of scientific freedom and the moral and scientific collapse of the Cochrane Collaboration, a once highly respected institution, founded in 1993 with the aim of helping people make better decisions about healthcare interventions.

In our vaccine film, we will explore many issues in a historical perspective. Why are people asked if they are for or against vaccines, which depends on the specific vaccine in question? Why do only a third of healthcare professionals accept the offer of being vaccinated against influenza? Why did we not recommend the Covid-19 vaccine for young children in Denmark, unlike the USA until recently? Why did many countries introduce vaccine mandates, which are highly unethical and violate informed consent?

Why do some people think there is nothing to discuss when the childhood vaccination program in the US is far larger than in Denmark?

Why are people, e.g. the current Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., subjected to character assassination in scientific journals and in the press when they merely point out – correctly – that we do not know the harmful effects of our childhood vaccines because they were not compared with placebo before they were approved?

Why did the major media fail miserably when reporting on the evidence-based decision that it would no longer be recommended to give all newborns in the United States a hepatitis B vaccine? Why did the media denigrate the scientists behind this decision and why did they give prominence to people who only talked about their feelings or beliefs with no evidence in their support, and who were often wrong when they, unchallenged, contradicted the facts?

The purpose of our vaccine film is to tell what we know and don’t know about vaccines and to contribute to the debate becoming more evidence-based and nuanced, so that people to a greater extent can choose or reject vaccines on an informed and rational basis.

Neurological harms of vaccines and the Wakefield fraud

Strangely, as I describe in my vaccine book, the British doctor Andrew Wakefield is portrayed as a hero in vaccine denying circles in the United States even though his research was rigged right from the start. He claimed he had discovered a new syndrome, which he dubbed “autistic enterocolitis” in a paper later retracted by the American Journal of Gastroenterology.

Wakefield also claimed that the live measles vaccine causes both autism and inflammatory bowel disease, which was a result he never found. He published a paper in The Lancet in 1998 claiming a sudden onset of autism within days of vaccination with the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine. This was a total sham built on unverified, vague, and sometimes altered memories and assertions of parents who were bound to blame the vaccine when they came to the hospital because that was why they had been brought there, which Wakefield denied.

There was widespread falsification of patient selection criteria, clinical histories, and neuropsychiatric diagnoses. In not one case in the series of 12 children could the Lancet paper be reconciled with National Health Service records, and in not one case could the purported diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease be confirmed. When the results of the pathological examinations were shown to others, they said they were overwhelmingly normal and might be found in almost anybody’s gut. The original slides were claimed to have been lost, which is the standard excuse when people face trouble in fraud cases: “Sorry, the termites ate my data!” as an Indian researcher once claimed.

The UK’s General Medical Council (GMC) ruled that key elements of the Lancet paper were intentionally dishonest. The authors had omitted the children’s principal gastroenterological problem. Almost all had severe constipation, and standard blood tests for inflammation were normal, but this was also unreported.

Wakefield said he had nothing to do with the pathological findings, although the paper stated that he assessed the biopsy specimens with the pathologist and a trainee.

Some vaccine sceptics claim that Wakefield is innocent and was subjected to an unfair trial and a conspiracy involving the drug industry. They have also tried to denigrate the journalist, Brian Deer, who uncovered Wakefield’s fraud in a series of excellent articles in the BMJ.

But the facts are crystal clear. A panel of three doctors and two lay members hearing the GMC case handed down verdicts that wholly vindicated Deer. Branding Wakefield “dishonest,” “unethical,” and “callous,” they found him guilty (against a criminal standard of proof) of some three dozen charges, including four counts of dishonesty and 12 involving the abuse of developmentally challenged children. Furthermore, his research was found to be performed without ethical approval. Five days later, The Lancet retracted the paper as “utterly false.”

Wakefield had emigrated to America, and three weeks later, he was ousted by the directors of his Texas business, and he was later erased from the UK doctors’ register.

BMJ’s editor-in-chief called Wakefield’s research “an elaborate fraud” and accused the Royal Free medical school and The Lancet of “institutional and editorial misconduct.” The BMJ is very worried about possible litigation and it is extremely rare that this journal is so frank and direct about fraud, but in this case, it was justified.

Some vaccines can cause serious neurological harms, which my research group documented for the HPV vaccines. As an expert witness in a court trial against Merck, I uncovered – by reading 112,000 pages of internal study reports – that Merck had committed scientific misconduct on many counts, which included concealing serious neurological harms of its Gardasil vaccine for the FDA.

The influenza vaccine, Pandemrix, caused narcolepsy, a very serious neurological disorder for which there is no cure.

In science, we need to be open. The unexpected often occurs, and as we cannot exclude the possibility that some vaccines other than MMR might cause autism, it has recently been proposed by two outstanding researchers affiliated with the CDC, Christine Stabell Benn and Martin Kulldorff, to study this issue in the United States.

They also suggested to do a randomised trial of the extensive US vs the more limited Danish vaccine schedule for infants and toddlers, with five-year follow-up and meaningful outcomes: All-cause hospitalization, nontargeted infectious disease hospitalization, autism, asthma, allergy, autoimmune diseases, neurodevelopmental disorders, and obesity.

This is prudent because vaccination is associated with the development of atopic diseases, and the extensive US vaccine schedule could very well be harmful.

In his article in Lancet Psychiatry, “Drug development in psychiatry: 50 years of failure and how to resuscitate it,” leading UK psychiatrist, David Nutt, inadvertently kills his own specialty. As I show in my commentary, Nutt puts the blame for psychiatry’s failure outside psychiatry. He propagates the lie about the chemical imbalance causing psychiatric disorders and when he speaks about “anti-psychiatry lobby groups,” he includes psychiatrist Joanna Moncrieff who showed three years ago that the chemical imbalance is an emperor without clothes. We have never heard of “anti-cardiology” lobby groups, have we?

Nutt suggests more of the same: drugs. A popular definition of madness is doing the same thing again and again expecting a different result. In my paper, “Are Psychiatrists More Mad Than Their Patients?” I argue that they are.

There are clear elements of cognitive dissonance in Nutt’s article. There is none so blind as he or she who WILL NOT SEE, and Nutt ends his article with a series of statements that disagree with the facts. He provides the strongest testament to the total failure of biological psychiatry and self-inflicted blindness among its leaders I have ever seen.

These are the first four paragraphs in my autobiography:

HC Andersen’s fairy tale, The emperor’s new clothes, is my favourite, as it illustrates so well what most of the healthcare literature is about: deception. The authorities are often willing to lie about the evidence and they continue lying when you point this out to them, as authorities can never be wrong, right?

If you document that the emperor has no clothes, and you threaten financial, guild or political interests, you might be exposed to primitive and mendacious attacks, including attempts at character assassination, and you might be fired. My life as a whistleblower illustrates these elements. I was fired even though I had saved many lives and billions in healthcare expenditure. My book is a horror story about a healthcare that is focused on power and money, and on torturing the data till they confess.

I was an explorer and a pioneer and often came in trouble only because I was the first to demonstrate that the emperor had no clothes.

It never occurred to me that I should write an autobiography, but when historian, and one of Denmark’s best documentary filmmakers, Janus Bang from Fredericia, declared in November 2023 at an early breakfast in Stanford, when we were both severely jetlagged, that he wanted to write a historical biography about me, I had no choice. There was so much he would not know about if I didn’t write it down first.

You can download my book for free under Books.

The nauseating political correctness has now also crept into surveys about how to do good research even though extremely rare gender issues have absolutely nothing to do with this. The misguided signals of tolerance and inclusivity has been caused by the deplorable activism of a small minority of highly vocal, aggressive and intolerant people who do not identify themselves as a woman or a man. See my article.

When Kirsten Tolstrup, cardiologist and professor at the University of California San Francisco, spoke about the COVID-19 vaccines in an interview in Ugeskrift for Læger (Journal of the Danish Medical Association), she accused the US Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., of blatant lies. The one who lied was Tolstrup.

Why did people go crazy over face masks when they don’t seem to work? In Denmark, you could stroll along a golf course without a mask if you weren’t playing golf, but if you were a golfer, a face mask was obligatory. I was ordered to wear a face mask if I played badminton but not if I played tennis because the tennis director was more reasonable than his colleague. Read my article about the insanity.

My book will be published on 19 August by Skyhorse in New York (288 pages). It can be pre-ordered here.

Book description

This is a story of scientific misconduct, committed by Merck, the fourth biggest drug company in the world. Merck has committed scientific misconduct before, and the author describes the fraud related to Merck’s arthritis drug, Vioxx, which killed tens of thousands of patients because Merck concealed that it causes heart attacks.

In his role as an expert witness in a lawsuit against Merck, Dr. Peter C. Gøtzsche read 112,452 pages of confidential study reports about Merck’s HPV vaccine Gardasil, corresponding to 500 medium-sized books, and wrote an expert report of 350 pages with four appendices. Dr. Gøtzsche reveals that Merck used numerous tactics to avoid reporting serious neurological harms of Gardasil, including Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) and Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS), which, in his view, in some cases constituted outright fraud.

How Merck and Drug Regulators Hid Serious Harms of the HPV Vaccines details how the drug agencies were complicit in scientific misconduct and gives many examples that other authorities also provided seriously misleading information about the benefits and harms of the HPV vaccines.

Dr. Gøtzsche gives a rare insight into the behavior of drug company lawyers when a company comes under attack for having concealed serious harms of its drug. He describes how he was harassed by Merck’s lawyer who tried to impugn his character and scientific credibility in ways, which included setting up traps for him during his deposition. If anyone was in doubt whether Merck and our authorities can be trusted, this book gives the answer.

Peter C. Gøtzsche Is professor emeritus, physician, and a bestselling book author. His scientific works have been cited over 190,000 times. He is the only Dane who has published over 100 papers in “the big five” journals (BMJ, Lancet, JAMA, Annals of Internal Medicine, and New England Journal of Medicine). He has also appeared on The Daily Show. He currently works as a researcher, lecturer, author, independent consultant, expert witness in lawsuits, and produces films and interviews, in collaboration with Danish award-winning filmmaker and historian Janus Bang.

 

 

By Martin Hemberger
Diplom Wirtschaftsinformatiker (FH)
Würzburg, Germany

A dangerous misconception, deeply embedded in psychiatry, is that the return of symptoms after discontinuing psychiatric medication is a relapse of the original condition. For many patiens, including me, this belief has led to misdiagnosis, suffering, and unnecessary, prolonged exposure to harmful drugs. What psychiatry labels as “relapse” is almost always a physiological response to the cessation of a substance that has altered brain functions. Read full article

In 2003, Tim, known to most as Woody, died of a sertraline-induced suicide at age 37. He was not depressed, nor did he have any history of mental illness. He died after taking the drug for five weeks with the dosage being doubled shortly before his death. He was given the antidepressant by his general physician for “insomnia.”

Woody loved life and all that this world has to offer. He had endless energy, a constant smile and truly cared for others. He had a successful career in sales and was active in the community, socially and politically, always willing to fight against injustice. Woody truly inspired others to be the best they could be.

Woody went to his regular internist because he was having trouble sleeping, in part because he had just started a new position as vice president of sales with a start-up company about two months earlier. He was excited about this dream opportunity to make his mark on the business world. Along with this excitement came some stress and difficulty sleeping.

This was the first time he’d ever gone to a doctor for this sort of issue. Woody’s doctor gave him three weeks’ worth of sertraline samples and told him to come back for a follow-up appointment after the samples were finished. There was no discussion about the risks or the need to be closely monitored because of this mind-altering drug. The first three weeks Woody was taking sertraline his wife was out of the country on business and no one was monitoring him. Within a couple of days, he experienced many of the known side effects of sertraline, e.g. night sweats, diarrhoea, trembling hands, and worsened anxiety.

One of the most significant side effects Woody had was akathisia. He was very restless, which caused him not to sleep, and irritable and felt he always needed to keep moving.

Shortly before his death, Woody came home crying after driving around all day. He sat in a foetal position on the kitchen floor profusely sweating with his hands pressing around his head saying, “Help me. Help me. I don’t know what’s happening to me. I am losing my mind. It’s like my head is outside my body looking in.” The next day, Woody called his doctor to tell him what happened and was told to be patient because it could take four to six weeks before the drug worked.

Over the course of the next week, in typical Woody fashion, he was looking for ways to “beat this feeling in my head all while still running three to four miles a day. Two weeks later, when sertraline should have worked according to his doctor, Woody was found hanging from the rafters in the garage. Woody’s family and friends only wish they knew then what they know now. It wasn’t Woody’s head. It was the drug.

Never once did Kim, Woody’s wife, or Woody question the drug. Why would they? It was FDA approved, heavily promoted as safe and effective, and it was given by his doctor. People trust their doctors, who assume the FDA and the drug companies did their job to ensure that the drugs they prescribe are safe and effective.

The day Woody died, the front page of the local newspaper had an article that people in the UK had found a link between antidepressants and suicide in teens. Kim’s quest for the truth has led her to testify about the dangers of SSRIs at hearings in the US Senate, at the FDA, the Health Department, Congress and the courts. Together with other campaigners, she was active in getting black box warnings added to antidepressants.

(First published in my book, Deadly Psychiatry and Organised Denial)