Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Source: Probability and Risk

David Fuller: An example of how unqualified ‘journalists’ attempt to discredit and silence anybody publishing COVID-19 research that challenges the ‘official narrative’

Scott McLachlan

 Introduction

 On 12 August 2021 David Fuller wrote a long article[1] attempting to discredit the work of those who have challenged the ‘official’ narrative on the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines and alternative treatments. His article claims to be a detailed investigation into two independent journalists who produce the Dark Horse podcast[2] – Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying, as well as several of their on-air guests[3]. However, the article quickly descends into a polemic aimed at others including Dr Pierre Kory, myself and co-authors of this paper. As I will show here, when challenged about the personal attacks against me in the article, Fuller claimed he had never heard of me; when it was pointed out to him that his article contained an extensive attack against me he then tried to extricate himself from this by saying that he was not responsible for writing it – despite him being the sole named author.

 Here I expand on three Twitter threads I posted on August 19[4], August 20[5], and August 22[6] in response to Fuller’s hit piece.

Who is David Fuller?

 David Fuller, is a “writer and journalist” who produces documentaries mainly for Channel 4 and the BBC[7]. Fuller started his own website called Rebel Wisdom[8] in 2018, which he describes as a platform for philosophical, transformational and cultural topics[9]. The website asserts that he blogs “frequently about politics, and the inner world”, but the link provided on that statement (https://medium.com/@davidfuller) takes you to the page shown in Fig. 1. We might be given to wonder who Samuel Hinton is and why a URL containing David Fuller’s name lands on an empty account for Mr Hinton – but this isn’t the only incongruity we will see in the writings and claims of David Fuller.

[ . . . ]


Read the rest of this deserved evisceration here: Probability and Risk