What Are People to do When They Are Not Allowed to Speak the Truth?

The Censorship of Dr. John Campbell, Gruesome Rubbery Blood Clots and the UK’s Creation of the Statistical Undead

Louis Conte’s The Truth be Told: Exploring corruption, controversy, and deception in today’s world from the perspective of a forensic psychophysiologist (Polygraph Examiner).

Louis Conte is a professional Polygraph Examiner, investigator, and writer. In addition to the thousands of offenders he interviewed over his thirty-three years in law enforcement, Conte has conducted over eighteen hundred polygraph cases. He uses well-honed observation skills to ferret out the truth. Observation and careful attention to words and behavior often reveal the truth.

Dr. John Campbell

What do people look like when they are not allowed to speak the truth? It is an awful situation for human beings with a conscience. What if you have a concern that many people are being harmed, you suspect a cause but are not able to express your concerns because you know your government will not allow you to say the quiet part out loud.

People in this situation experience stress and anxiety. They have to watch what they say and censor themselves.

One might argue that in the course of a regular day, we all do this. Someone asks, “How are you feeling?” You say, “Fine,” even though you have a splitting headache.  

We have all done something like that.

But what if you have dedicated your life to informing people about science, medicine, and their health for your entire professional career and now, you cannot do that. What if you know that the words you speak may result in your You Tube channel being taken down, your name being placed on a government list, or even worse, getting a knock on your front door by agents of the state?  

Unfortunately, Dr. John Campbell is now a person placed in this situation. Many of you know Dr. Campbell from his talks about science and medicine on his You Tube channel. Dr. Campbell typically begins his chats, with a sincere smile saying, “A warm welcome to you…” as he does here, Vit D and prostate cancer. With a light relaxed voice, he then presents his audience with informative lectures on a variety of topics that help people make informed health decisions. Dr. Campbell is a classical educator – no sexy power point slides or distracting videos. Just Dr. John, the research paper he is presenting and a pen that he uses to emphasize key points for the viewer. He guides his audience through complex scientific papers in a direct manner that respects the audience’s ability to learn. And that is all Campbell is trying to accomplish. People admire him for his integrity and respect him for his work.

However, having ‘baselined’ Campbells’ facial expressions, I have noted a change in one recent interview - John and Neil.

Dr. Campbell begins this interview with Neil Oliver, a Scottish journalist and television presenter, with a pronounced frown. His voice is serious and lower in pitch than usual. Campbell delivers troubling news about a new pathology coming to light from coroners. He displays grim images of rubbery, white stringy blood clots being pulled from human bodies during autopsies. Dr. Campbell explains that this phenomenon has not been encountered before. It is “a new pathology being found in dead bodies around the world.” He noted that the clots have been found in about twenty percent of autopsies and that they did not occur before 2020. Campbell noted that the clots were observed with increasing frequency in 2021, 2022, and 2023.

During pauses in Campbell’s presentation, his face settles into a frown. There are times when one has the sense that he would like to say something else but cannot. The area between his eyebrows – the glabella – furrows. Dr. Campbell’s face briefly shows anger when he notes that “Fewer post-mortems are being done in the United Kingdom at the moment.” He has thoughts about why this is so, but he is self-censoring. Does he feel that the decrease in post-mortem work is part of a conspiracy to keep the problem hidden from public view?

The furrow returns to Dr. Campbell’s forehead when he expresses his concern about the conversations he has had with fellow professionals who agree “that this is a genuinely new pathology.”    

Neil Oliver then introduces Tonya Buxton, a television personality and ‘foodie’ on My Greek Kitchen on UK television. Ms. Buxton is a popular figure in England, known for speaking her mind. She opens the door a bit wider on what many believe is really going on with the awful blood clots asking, “What have we done differently, globally, that we haven’t done before 2021?” Buxton adds, “We all know what this could well be, but we are restricted from saying out loud what we truly believe it to be.”

Oliver then turns back to Campbell and asks, “What it is like to operate in a world where speculating about things that appear quite obvious is somehow forbidden ground? This is the new reality for likes of us.”

Dr. Campbell (again) frowns and swallows hard but reminds us that science confronted an analogous situation in the 1950’s and early 1960’s when Dr. Austin Bradford Hill suspected that cigarette smoking was linked to lung cancer. In 1965, Bradford Hill developed a criterion for assessing the strength of an association between a disease and its supposed causative agent - Bradford Hill criteria - Oxford Reference.

The Bradford Hill criteria eventually established a link between cigarette smoking and cancer. If big tobacco had the ability to silence debate about cigarettes and cancer, would we have ever learned the truth about the causal relationship? How many more people would have died if the issue had been censored?

As he always does, Campbell brings us back to the scientific method. He points out that we have the scientific expertise readily available to solve the mystery of the white rubbery blood clots.

The discussion then goes to the phenomena of excess deaths in working aged people being observed across the globe. ‘Excess deaths’ are the number of deaths that we would not expect to occur in a given year. Every year, an expected number of people will pass away. But when the numbers are excessively high when there is not an apparent cause – such as wars, pandemics or natural disasters, those deaths are considered to be excess deaths.

Dr. Pierre Kory and Mary Beth Pfeiffer published an excellent article about excess deaths in The Hill - This is bigger than COVID: Why are so many Americans dying early? | The Hill and asked, “Why is the traditionally healthiest sector of our society — young, employed, insured workers — dying at such rates? Public health officials aggressively oversaw the pandemic response, for better or worse. Why aren’t they looking into this?”

It seems that UK government statisticians answer that question by counting excess deaths in a significantly different way than in the past in an apparent attempt to lower the number of deaths counted as excess.

When asked about the government’s data manipulation Campbell vents, “It just beggars’ credulity, doesn’t it? We don’t like the figures, politicians are being embarrassed so, hey-ho, you change the ways these deaths are being reported.”

Has the UK suddenly changed the way deaths have been counted for years? Are the UK government bureaucrats creating the statistical undead?

The problem of the gruesome rubbery clots and its relationship to the excess deaths being observed across the globe must be discussed openly. However, the censorship regime presently in vogue with ‘democratic’ governments restricts the issue from the public square. The censorship must end, and the discussion must be allowed to occur – even if it damages Big Pharma.

Censorship poses a threat to human progress because the silencing of debate inhibits problem solving.

Truth be told, if you cannot say there is a problem, you cannot begin to solve it.