Covid-19: a clinical doctor’s outcry

Dr. Jean Stevens, a retired cardiologist who practiced in Caussade, in the Tarn-et-Garonne region, has sent an open letter to the presidents of the French Medical Association (Ordre des Médecins) in which he questions their astonishing silence on the ethical level. He explains.

doctor Jean Stevens cardiologist retired
doctor Jean Stevens cardiologist retired

You are a doctor, retired after 45 years of eclectic clinical experience: university hospital medicine, internal medicine, general medicine (in Belgium) and cardiology (in France). You have just sent an open letter to the presidents of the councils of the Order in which you express your anger. Why?

Since my retirement at the end of 2016, I had completely lost interest in medicine. I had therefore only followed the pandemic from a distance. It was the debilitating side effects of the second injection of the Covid vaccine that woke me up. Looking for information, I quickly had the feeling that the official websites were deliberately minimizing the frequency of side effects. It did not correspond at all to the one I was observing in the very restricted world of my close relations. It was then that I stumbled upon a video of Dr. Fleming. He is the same age and professional profile as I am, but he had a well-established worldwide reputation… before his video was released. Even though there are obvious errors in this video, I believe he has humanistic and honest intentions. For me, he was the gateway to discovering a host of other “high level” researchers, doctors and scientists who are driven by the fierce desire to know and tell the truth. But, very curiously, they went, in a few months, from being “brilliant scientists” to “dark conspiracists”.
I have never known a “media purge” of such magnitude in the scientific world. This censorship alone – exercised by censors who are by nature not very “disinterested”, the pharmaceutical industry and the information giants – should arouse the suspicions of any sensible individual. It is reminiscent of the strategy of all totalitarian systems: lies, slander, discrediting of any non-“orthodox” thought and, above all, diverting the attention of the public from the search for certain truths.
I have thus gradually discovered a vast network of brilliant intellectuals who have “gone underground” because they do not support the discourse of the “authorities” who manage the health strategy and who, most probably, do not realize that they are very subtly manipulated by economic interests that are as gigantic as they are unconcerned about the health of the citizens.
I have addressed the councils of the order because only they have the legal authority to give back to individuals (citizens and practitioners) the place they deserve and which should counterbalance the statistical vision of epidemiologists and “scientific” medicine. Its primary function is to impose respect for the ethical principles of medicine, which are the guarantors of the most profound human values. And today it is not fulfilling its function. It accepts without any resistance to submit to the injunctions of politicians while the latter clearly flout the sacrosanct principles of medical ethics: the “Hippocratic oath” and the “primum non nocere”.

You are angry with the management of the health crisis by the executive and the health authorities. Are you a “conspiracy theorist”?

The more I advance in my search for the truth about the root cause of this pandemic – i.e. the “natural” or “artificial” origin of the SARS-CoV2 Virus – the more it seems obvious to me that a real conspiracy has been hatched by very high political and scientific officials in an attempt to hide from the people, by all means, their complicity in the creation of the chimeric virus and therefore of the pandemic.

You say in your letter to the Councils of the Order that no institution, political or health, “has the right to substitute itself for clinical doctors in the decisions they make, in soul and conscience, in the singular dialogue that links them (by trust) to their patients”. Why, in your opinion, do the vast majority of doctors comply with this vaccination obligation for all their patients?

I must unfortunately admit that this attitude of the “majority” of my colleagues is part of a process of mass psychology well identified by Stanley Milgram: “submission to authority”. It is a perfectly natural process in a well organized society where this authority acts for the “common good”. The problem is that we live in a globalized world actually run by transnational economic and financial powers whose moral value and professional ethics are not controlled by any bottom-up feedback mechanism, unlike in our democratic countries. I think of our own national health authorities and this “majority” of “pro-vax” doctors, victims, in all good faith, of a drug industry whose hidden corrupting power over the political and scientific world we do not suspect. For 50 years, it has slowly infiltrated and perverted these two places of power.

In your long letter, you question the effectiveness of vaccines. What makes you doubt their reliability?

It would be ridiculous for me to contradict the figures that demonstrate the (certain but relative) effectiveness of vaccines. What I am denouncing is 1) the long-term effectiveness of a vaccine strategy, 2) the “all-vaccine” strategy made possible by the deliberate elimination of all potential competitors, 3) the removal of all the safety barriers installed for decades to avoid “iatrogenic*” health disasters and 4) the illusion that we can win the “war” against the evil virus (created by Science?…). Coronaviruses, like terrorists, have an incredible capacity to reproduce and mutate in order to resist the derisory “weapons” (pharmaceutical) that we deploy. It is in fact the whole philosophy of our “scientific” biomedicine that the pandemic will force us to revise.

Regarding the potential toxicity of vaccines, you even mention “a gross manipulation of statistics”. Aren’t you being a little harsh?

Just one recent example: Minister Olivier Véran declared on October 15 that “there are no proven deaths attributable to the vaccine”. Two weeks earlier, the ANSM (France) declared more than 900 deaths attributed to the vaccine (and the VAERS (USA) 5,471 deaths. But the well-known technique of “skeptical doubt” consists in distinguishing between “attribution” and “imputability” because 100% certainty of imputability is unattainable.

Finally, you say you have “entered the resistance”. What does this mean?

By a full-time commitment to both comparative information work between “orthodox” and truly independent sources (I admire the quality of the work of the Independent Scientific Council – ISC). Today, more precisely, I am working on a response to the only interlocutor of the Order who “replied” to my open letter … a copy and paste of 10 lines…

* Drug iatrogenesis refers to all the harmful effects that can be caused by a medical treatment.