The pfizer whistleblower was published in the British Medical Journal, not exactly a shabby publication. True or false, it was a news event and at least should be addressed. The fact that it's been largely swept under the rug is not a good sign for science, which is built on skepticism, not compliance. I am willing to dismiss the whistleblower as nothing but smoke, if someone answered it. So far, they have not. Which is telling.

VAERS data is self-reported data, so it is far from conclusive. However, it was put there for a reason and shouldn't be ignored. It was put there to flag problems that need to be investigated.

Pfizermectin is not a conspiracy. He's just noting both ivermectin and the pfizer therapeautic are both protease inhibitors. That's all he said.

None of these are "conspiracies". So far, they are inconvenient truth assertions that a certain people seem to want to put down. We deserve, we are entitled to a fuller discussion than they are given.