A doctor who was banned for questioning the safety of vaccines and the reliability of COVID tests has won in a major High Court case. After questioning the efficacy of face coverings in a video posted on Instagram and Twitter in June, Dr. Samuel White was slapped with an 18 month ban by the GMC.
Must Watch: Would you live on 3D Printed Mars for a year for $60,000?
In the video, White explained the reason why he could no longer tolerate working in his previous roles because of the “lies” around the NHS and the response of the government to the pandemic, which were “so vast” he could no longer “stomach” them.
White also commented that “masks do nothing” to stop the spread of COVID, and it was considered as the ultimate sin as this being the consensus medical opinion at the start of the pandemic before it mysteriously switched almost overnight.
Why I resigned as a GP Partner— ЯΞD ᕈILL LΞD 🔎 (@Red_Pill_Led) June 8, 2021
Dr Samuel White pic.twitter.com/544l4C2nga
In addition to questioning the efficacy of masks, the doctor also raised concerns about the safety of vaccines and the reliability of COVID tests.
White took his case against the GMC to the High Court on the basis of his freedom of expression “to engage in medical, scientific and political debate and discussion,” White’s barrister, Francis Hoar, told a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice.
Subscribe to GreatGameIndia
Hoar added that White’s opinions were “supported by large bodies of scientific and medical opinion” and had been “statements of fact and opinions about pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions in response to the pandemic.”
GMC’s Alexis Hearnden claimed that White’s views posed a “risk” to the public because they didn’t align with official pronouncements and were also misinformation.
However, asserting that the tribunal which banned him from speaking had violated the 1998 Human Rights Act, the court ruled in favor of White.
The ruling concluded that the tribunal’s decision was “an error of law and a clear misdirection,” meaning the decision was “clearly wrong and cannot stand.”
Meanwhile, an elderly patient was given Remedesivir to treat Covid-19 in an Illinois hospital, but it could not treat the patient. This hospital was insisting on administering this drug. But, the patient was recovered with Ivermectin when court allowed him to use it despite the hospital’s objections.
Recently, in a groundbreaking judgement the Belgian court declared COVID vaccine passport scheme straight out illegal and threatened to fine 5,000 euros per day to the regional government that insisted and imposed it.
Earlier, the French Senate rejacted a socialist senator’s proposal to make the COVID experimental vaccine mandatory for all citizens living in France. Non-compliance would trigger a fine of 135 euro (about $150 USD), and 1,500 euro for re-offenders.
Also the Supreme Court of India rejected a plea to initiate a door-to-door COVID-19 vaccination, saying that such pleas were a consequence of ignorance about the complexity of governance and diversity of the country.