• Login
  • Register
The Daily Sceptic
No Result
View All Result
  • Articles
  • About
  • Archive
    • ARCHIVE
    • NEWS ROUND-UPS
  • Podcasts
  • Newsletter
  • Premium
  • Donate
  • Log In
The Daily Sceptic
No Result
View All Result

New Cleveland Clinic Study Confirms Negative Efficacy of Covid Vaccine: Boosted 33% MORE Likely to Get Covid

by Igor Chudov
17 June 2023 11:00 AM

A brand new study from the Cleveland Clinic is out. And it found something we already knew: Covid vaccines increase the chances of getting Covid instead of being protective.

In the pre-print study, which is awaiting peer-review, Shrestha et al. looked at specific employees of the Cleveland Clinic. Most of them are Covid-vaccinated due to the federal mandate. However, while a minority (11,990 employees) chose to be ‘up-to-date’ on their Covid vaccines, the majority (36,344 employees) wisely chose to refuse Covid vaccines.

Guess which group had more Covid? The up-to-date people had approximately 25% more Covid infections.

The study’s authors did an excellent job of weeding out confounding variables. For example, could it be that Covid-conscious, vaccine-loving people test for Covid more often? The following chart answers this question: while the propensity to test somewhat affects the likelihood of getting a positive test, it does not explain the difference.

The authors also point out that their results are not confounded by age. However, in a disturbing finding, the female sex is associated with a 24% higher chance of a Covid infection among the vaccinated people.

Why are vaccinated females 24% more likely to get Covid, than vaccinated males?

In the above multivariate analysis, adjusting for confounders, those ‘up-to-date’ are 33% more likely to get Covid! (1 ÷ 0.75 = 1.33)

I am so sorry for all those vaccine believers who got a shot of a completely unproven ‘bivalent’ substance. The authors lament (emphasis mine):

This study’s findings question the wisdom of promoting the idea that every person needs to be ‘up-to-date’ on COVID-19 vaccination, as currently defined, at this time. It is often stated that the primary purpose of vaccination is to prevent severe COVID-19 and death. We certainly agree with this, but it should be pointed out that there is not a single study that has shown that the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine protects against severe disease or death caused by the XBB lineages of the Omicron variant. At least one prior study has failed to find a protective effect of the bivalent vaccine against the XBB lineages of SARS-CoV-2. People may still choose to get the vaccine, but an assumption that the vaccine protects against severe disease and death is not reason enough to unconditionally push a vaccine of questionable effectiveness to all adults.

This study exposes the dishonesty and quackery of promoters of bivalent Covid vaccines, which are based on studies of several mice who were promptly killed as soon as the antibody-counting experiments were completed.

In one study, all bivalent-vaccinated mice who were challenged with Covid got sick.

Remember that the CDC and the FDA hysterically promoted non-working Covid vaccines with false advertising such as this:

Do you think that they owe us an apology?

This article was first published on Igor’s Substack page. Subscribe here.

Stop Press: According to FactCheck.org, the Cleveland study “did not show vaccines increase COVID-19 risk”. The fact check is misleading in that it quotes various ‘experts’ pointing out that correlation is not causation and there could be any number of confounding factors skewing the results but omits to say that the researchers looked at some of the more likely confounders and ruled them out. You can read the fact check here.

Tags: COVID-19Negative EfficacyPropagandaVaccineVaccine efficacy

Donate

We depend on your donations to keep this site going. Please give what you can.

Donate Today

Comment on this Article

You’ll need to set up an account to comment if you don’t already have one. We ask for a minimum donation of £5 if you'd like to make a comment or post in our Forums.

Sign Up
Previous Post

Spotify Gives Meghan and Harry the Boot

Next Post

Time to End the NHS Mask Mandate Postcode Lottery

Subscribe
Login
Notify of
Please log in to comment

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

22 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
AethelredTheReadier
AethelredTheReadier
1 year ago

“...it would be completely mad for Ukraine to deliberately kill its own civilians...”

Isn’t this how it all started in the first place though, Mr Rons? Wasn’t Ukraine already ‘completely mad’ because it was killing its own civilians from 2014 onwards? I’m not saying the Russians didn’t blow the dam – who knows, maybe they did to deny the Ukrainians irrigation or to lower morale – but you have to agree that a high degree of madness exists in that failed state and amongst its lowest moments was the deliberate campaign against its ethnic Russian community.

273
-13
FerdIII
FerdIII
1 year ago
Reply to  AethelredTheReadier

Agree. Makes little sense for the Russians to do this. Given the US 51rst state’s recent activity, it seems more credible that the US proxy is at fault, though in all honesty no one really knows including Ian who seems intent on drinking the propaganda kool aid spooned out by the CIA et al.

157
-9
welshsceptic
welshsceptic
1 year ago
Reply to  FerdIII

What do you mean by 51st state, exactly? Ukraine itself?

7
0
LaptopMaestro
LaptopMaestro
1 year ago
Reply to  AethelredTheReadier

Rons is a mono-maniac – rationality is wasted on it.

98
-10
For a fist full of roubles
For a fist full of roubles
1 year ago
Reply to  LaptopMaestro

Got it in one (that is intended to be a play on “mono”).

32
-5
JohnK
JohnK
1 year ago

In addition to the matters described, a report on Al Jazeera came up with a rough financial guesstimate for the loss of revenue due to reduced export of agricultural products, e.g. wheat. Can’t remember the numbers exactly, but it was in $billions.

5
-18
GlassHalfFull
GlassHalfFull
1 year ago

Ian Rons is single handedly making subscribers question their continued payments to The Daily Sceptic.

218
-19
LaptopMaestro
LaptopMaestro
1 year ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

I am forced to assume that he pays for the column inches.

72
-8
For a fist full of roubles
For a fist full of roubles
1 year ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

I now look upon it as humorous relief in the fiction department.

Last edited 1 year ago by For a fist full of roubles
90
-7
acle
acle
1 year ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

Yes I said to my husband this morning I would be out if another pro Ukraine piece appeared. Maybe they did blow it up, maybe Russia did, but the point of DS is to be sceptical not to present a one sided view of a foreign war.

106
-10
GlassHalfFull
GlassHalfFull
1 year ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

We’re here on The Daily Sceptic to get away from all the lies, propaganda and omissions in the main stream media NOT to have them reinforced by the establishment leaning articles by Ian Rons.

125
-10
godknowsimgood
godknowsimgood
1 year ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

I like to read a range of views, not just those that I already agree with. I don’t want to pay to be in an echo chamber.

24
-12
GlassHalfFull
GlassHalfFull
1 year ago
Reply to  godknowsimgood

I don’t want to pay to read Ian Rons ridiculous establishment views that I can read in the main stream media for free.
I want The Daily Sceptic to inform us with different versions to government and their vested interests mantras.
There is nothing wrong with The Daily Sceptic being an “echo chamber” of dissent.

38
-4
MTF
MTF
1 year ago

I cannot understand the criticisms of this post. It is detailed well argued case. That should be enough by itself to justify taking it seriously.

It is also very convincing. It is incredibly far fetched to suppose Ukraine had a motive but the clincher is that they didn’t have the kit to do it and Ian has shown this in detail. What Ian might have explored more is whether it was approved at the highest level by Russia, whether whoever did it anticipated how awful it would be, or whether it was an accident based on the explosives Russia had in place.

25
-102
For a fist full of roubles
For a fist full of roubles
1 year ago
Reply to  MTF

Perhaps you ought to consider why the Ukrainians left the taps turned on full upstream so that the reservoir filled, literally, to overflowing, ensuring maximum pressure on a dam already weakened by previous Uke artillery and missile attacks, and then turned them off once the dam was breached to ensure the reservoir drained as quickly as possible. The Russians certainly had no hand in either action.

109
-8
MTF
MTF
1 year ago
Reply to  For a fist full of roubles

I don’t understand – what “taps” are these? In any case the water level was under Russian control as all they had to was open the floodgates a bit more to lower it.

10
-45
For a fist full of roubles
For a fist full of roubles
1 year ago
Reply to  MTF

The “taps” are the flow controls on the dam by the Dieper power station in Ukrainian controlled Dnieperpetrovsk. Normally the water flows through the generation turbines, but the Ukrainians gave up making electricity in return for opening their sluice gates to achieve maximum water flow for the first time in living memory. Most normal people would wonder why

85
-3
MTF
MTF
1 year ago
Reply to  For a fist full of roubles

I have scoured the internet but cannot find an reference to this story. Do you have one?

9
-20
JXB
JXB
1 year ago
Reply to  MTF

Opinion is not evidence. It argues opinion – not the evidence which the author said was abundant but doesn’t mention.

11
-1
MTF
MTF
1 year ago
Reply to  JXB

But the article is packed with evidence! You can dispute it but it is certainly there.

3
-12
ebygum
ebygum
1 year ago
Reply to  MTF

No evidence of anything….just opinion and the usual one-sided propaganda and I happily dispute it…..all of this is based on Ukrainian or anti-Russian analysis…there isn’t a single Russian or independent person or publication mentioned throughout…It might convince you but I’d just ask..what do you think the Ukrainians WOULD say LOL!

18
0
For a fist full of roubles
For a fist full of roubles
1 year ago

Really Ian I can’t be bothered with you anymore after you embarrassed yourself commenting on your last work of fiction, and this doesn’t get any closer to engineering sense, despite your reference to an ex RE, who by looking at his Twitter feed is hardly likely to have a balanced view on Ukrainian issues.

125
-10
welshsceptic
welshsceptic
1 year ago

Thanks for another interesting post, Ian Rons. I’m a DS subscriber and really appreciate them.

16
-53
For a fist full of roubles
For a fist full of roubles
1 year ago
Reply to  welshsceptic

Love the irony.
PS I am sceptical about the Welsh too, after 3 years at a Welsh uni.

Last edited 1 year ago by For a fist full of roubles
43
-9
Jabby Mcstiff
Jabby Mcstiff
1 year ago

I don’t even know why people try to use their judgment in regard to analysis of such events. There are no standards to assess anything by in a rapidly moving situation and to pretend that you can understand it from an armchair is absurd. As long as you are aware of the the Anglo-American schtick and all that follows from it then you don’t really need to ask any further questions.

50
-5
Jabby Mcstiff
Jabby Mcstiff
1 year ago

I don’t mean to criticise anyone but I do feel that is in a sense unseemly to talk about overseas wars and more than that it is the opposite of what we are fighting for. Believe me in the next six months western support among the general populace will collapse. But unfortunately the Yanks have opened up their big storage sites in the desert and they are taking everything out of storage, thousands of aircraft. This is a huge operaton costing about $1 million dollars per plane and several weeks work. Just be aware that the next stage, an aerial war, won’t be as abstract and faraway as it has been.

30
-5
Marcus Aurelius knew
Marcus Aurelius knew
1 year ago

Let me know if I have summarised your article correctly, Ian:

‘Destroying the dam with missiles is difficult for Ukraine, therefore somehow Russia destroyed it.’

Last edited 1 year ago by Marcus Aurelius knew
133
-7
Marcus Aurelius knew
Marcus Aurelius knew
1 year ago
Reply to  Marcus Aurelius knew

Could the downvoters please explain where I have gone wrong with my attempt to summarise Ian’s article?

39
-4
ekathulium
ekathulium
1 year ago
Reply to  Marcus Aurelius knew

They´re paid 77th.

40
-3
Jabby Mcstiff
Jabby Mcstiff
1 year ago

You know who did it cut the crap we all know who did it. If youj want me to lay it out in triplivate I can give you details of Ukrainan threats on this site and previous reports of missile strikes on this site.This isn’t rocket science we know who did it.

44
-6
Jabby Mcstiff
Jabby Mcstiff
1 year ago

Just atacking sites and destroying people’s lives for the sake of some dead political battle. And then to be used by the West as some sort of last ditch attempt to keep things going. Avoid these forces. A time is coming where a man’s word will be his bond.

20
-6
LaptopMaestro
LaptopMaestro
1 year ago
Reply to  Jabby Mcstiff

Biden owes Ukraine a lot, the funding isn’t going to stop.

3
0
EppingBlogger
EppingBlogger
1 year ago

All this report needed to say was:

1
the power of explosive device(s) needed for an outside attack was not available to Ukraine and possibly not even the Wedt

2
Russia benefits at least in the short term from the damage. At no stage does it benefit Ukraine.

enough said.

8
-35
Hugh
Hugh
1 year ago

(OT)

To be fair Ian (re. James Delingpole “mad” over satanists controlling global weather theory) I actually took issue with a Delingpole theory in the comments of the recent London Calling episode (Town v. Country living), namely that an all meat diet (and certainly an all cooked meat diet) is a good idea as salad and fruit and raw food is genuinely beneficial (together with a proportion of meat/fish/eggs) as part of a balanced diet (see Phillip Day).

3
-1
Sontol
Sontol
1 year ago

I love the sheer comical irony and bathos of the “We don’t come to this explicitly free-speech orientated site to hear views we don’t agree with. Shut up or we’re going to take our money elsewhere’ type comments (and their upticks) on this and similar threads.

Mind you it would be astonishing if those who support the neo-fascist invasion of an independent country for daring to try and maintain multi-party liberal-democratic institutions and values would feel any genuine affinity with the free-speech principles of The Daily Sceptic – as opposed to simply seeing it as a relatively undefended platform to be captured for propagandist purposes.

And again it’s quite funny watching tyranny trying to impose itself over freedom when it doesn’t have any of the usual intimidatory mechanisms (eg gun-totting police and troops) to back it up, just verbal tantrums and attempts at financial blackmail based on tiny amounts of cash.

Last edited 1 year ago by Sontol
16
-63
Nearhorburian
Nearhorburian
1 year ago
Reply to  Sontol

Anybody who believes the USA and its lackey states are supporting Ukraine because of their commitment to national independence and multi-party liberal-democratic institutions is, at best, desperately naive.

67
-4
ebygum
ebygum
1 year ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

I’m going with ‘simple-minded’..it’s about the kindest….
let’s face it..to get to that conclusion you have to ignore years of history and politics and precedent…..

Just like a child, boil it down to only good v evil..where you know which is which..and everyone else is wrong and tainted by association..it’s the same argument with the climate..LGB+ etc…as it was with Convid…..if you don’t follow the ‘official propaganda’ you are the enemy..and there is no room for neutrality….

Luckily I truly believe the vast majority of the people in the World see the Western hypocrisy for what it is..along with a good amount of people who actually live in the West.

They have to keep this manufactured good/bad thing going because it’s all they have got..and even they know it’s rubbish….
Lies and pretence take too much time and effort..eventually people see through it…this will be no different…..

20
-2
ebygum
ebygum
1 year ago
Reply to  ebygum

The very knowledgeable and entertaining (and definitely not simple minded) Jeffrey Sachs on The Duran…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkrQokUYMmY

4
0
LaptopMaestro
LaptopMaestro
1 year ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

Biden is in deep shit when Ukraine loses and his corruption is exposed, hence the funding will continue.

11
-1
bfbf334
bfbf334
1 year ago
Reply to  Sontol

“neo-fascist invasion of an independent country for daring to try and maintain multi-party liberal-democratic institutions and values”

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
Your so funny.

1.The neo-fascist have run Ukraine since at least 2014
2.”independent” with Blackrock owning at least 30% of it.
3.”multi-party liberal-democratic institutions and values” that Zelensky has band.

15
-1
ebygum
ebygum
1 year ago
Reply to  bfbf334

Yes…if Ukraine is a multi party (Elenskyy banned them all..LOL) liberal democracy…I reckon Epstein was a youth outreach worker….

11
0
ekathulium
ekathulium
1 year ago

Yeh, right . . .
You underestimate the SBS.

11
0
NeilParkin
NeilParkin
1 year ago

NordStream was incontrovertibly blown up by the Russians, Ukrainians, Swedes, Poles, British and Americans, at the last count.

I will continue to believe nothing that comes out of either side..

31
-1
Dwain
Dwain
1 year ago

It doesn’t sound like Incontrovertible, it sounds like we don’t know but it must have been because we don’t have any evidence. If “it would have been blatantly obvious to the RC-135 Rivet Joint surveillance aircraft operated by the U.S. and the U.K. which are in constant rotation near Ukraine,” surely these spy planes and satalites could have seen where the planes came from and where they went back to. The USA is not above such actions, having a long history of corruption in starting wars and working in the background fanning the flames.

35
-2
morganlefey
morganlefey
1 year ago

there are so many uncontrolled assumptions and confounding variables in this assessment, it doesn’t even qualify for the adjective ‘forensic’.

20
-3
LaptopMaestro
LaptopMaestro
1 year ago
Reply to  morganlefey

It’s more reminiscent of religion.

9
-1
JXB
JXB
1 year ago

‘Over the past week, much evidence has come to light which puts beyond reasonable doubt the conclusion that Russian forces occupying the Kakhovka Dam were responsible for its destruction…’

With so much ‘incontrovertible’ evidence coming to light, I was rather hoping you were going to share some of it with us.

Instead a lot of speculative waffle about how the Ukrainians couldn’t technically do it, whereas the Russians could.

17
-2
adamcollyer
adamcollyer
1 year ago

You would have done better to stop at “for defensive purposes – as in this instance”, Ian! The article up to there is an interesting description of why Ukraine probably did not destroy the dam.

After that, though, you descend into suppositions, speculation and opinions. You state, for example, that it would have been “legitimate under the laws of war” for Ukraine to destroy sluice gates to hamper a Russian retreat, but imply that it is not legitimate for Russia to destroy the dam.

You cite without comment a “signal intercept” released by the SBU (Ukrainian intelligence) as evidence that Ukraine was not responsible.

You state that “the scale of the flooding does seem to have taken Russia by surprise”, without noting that this surely is at least some evidence that Russia was not responsible.

You state that Ukraine did not have a motive “given their adherence to the Geneva Conventions” – even if it were true that they are adhering to those conventions, I am not sure why that would affect whether they had a motive for blowing the dam.

You also state that “it would be completely mad for Ukraine to deliberately kill its own civilians by blowing the dam – citizens that they are in the process of liberating” – this is ridiculous since the same would obviously apply to the Russian side, especially as their own troops were among those affected.

And you say that “The loss of agricultural irrigation both in these regions and in Crimea (which was, in any case, without irrigation between 2014–22) is of little significance to Russia – they have almost no regard for the lives of their troops, and none for Ukrainian civilians.” This is a complete non sequitur – even if it were true that the Russians do not care about the lives of their troops (which I find extremely unlikely to be honest), why would that affect whether they cared about loss of irrigation, especially in Crimea?

You have produced a compelling case that the Russians blew the dam – and then wrecked it with a very silly second half of the article.

8
-2
Ian Rons
Author
Ian Rons
1 year ago
Reply to  adamcollyer

You state, for example, that it would have been “legitimate under the laws of war” for Ukraine to destroy sluice gates to hamper a Russian retreat, but imply that it is not legitimate for Russia to destroy the dam.

Increasingly the outflow of water is not the same as destroying a dam, causing a flood affecting civilian areas.

You cite without comment a “signal intercept” released by the SBU (Ukrainian intelligence) as evidence that Ukraine was not responsible.

I said that it was “supposedly between Russian soldiers”, not that it was between Russian soldiers, and I also included a lot of other “chatter” – described as such – which goes toward making a circumstantial case.#

You state that “the scale of the flooding does seem to have taken Russia by surprise”, without noting that this surely is at least some evidence that Russia was not responsible.

I don’t agree that it is evidence of that. There were different forecasts of what would happen if the dam were blown, and it was an inherently uncertain and risky undertaking. “You were only meant to blow the bloody doors off!”, etc.

You state that Ukraine did not have a motive “given their adherence to the Geneva Conventions” – even if it were true that they are adhering to those conventions, I am not sure why that would affect whether they had a motive for blowing the dam.

Ukraine would have to have been crazy not to see the consequences, including from the very self-interested angle of Western support.

You also state that “it would be completely mad for Ukraine to deliberately kill its own civilians by blowing the dam – citizens that they are in the process of liberating” – this is ridiculous since the same would obviously apply to the Russian side, especially as their own troops were among those affected.

Nonsense. Russia is not “liberating” people it calls “kokhols”. You totally misunderstand what’s happening.

And you say that “The loss of agricultural irrigation both in these regions and in Crimea (which was, in any case, without irrigation between 2014–22) is of little significance to Russia – they have almost no regard for the lives of their troops, and none for Ukrainian civilians.” This is a complete non sequitur – even if it were true that the Russians do not care about the lives of their troops (which I find extremely unlikely to be honest), why would that affect whether they cared about loss of irrigation, especially in Crimea?

I don’t think you non sequitur means what you think it means. Perhaps you missed the phrase “…and none for Ukrainian civilians”. Obviously irrigation affects civilians living in Ukraine (which includes Crimea), but they don’t care about them. There are of course some Russians who’ve moved into Crimea, so perhaps I should have said they don’t care about them either.

0
0
Matt Mounsey
Matt Mounsey
1 year ago

One day we’ll all come to recognise Ian Rons as one of the true comedic geniuses of his generation.

16
-2

NEWSLETTER

View today’s newsletter

To receive our latest news in the form of a daily email, enter your details here:

DONATE

PODCAST

The Sceptic | Episode 38: Chris Bayliss on the Commonwealth Voting Scandal, Sarah Phillimore on the Bar’s Scrapped EDI Plans and Eugyppius on ‘White Genocide’

by Richard Eldred
30 May 2025
2

LISTED ARTICLES

  • Most Read
  • Most Commented
  • Editor’s Picks

Comedian’s Show Cancelled Over Liverpool Parade Crash Joke

30 May 2025
by Richard Eldred

News Round-Up

31 May 2025
by Richard Eldred

Miliband Attacks Blair Over Net Zero Criticism and Admits He Could Lose Seat to Reform

30 May 2025
by Richard Eldred

Useless Covid Data Analysis Riddled With Basic Flaws

30 May 2025
by Rebekah Barnett

There Will Be No Climate Catastrophe: MIT Professor Dr Richard Lindzen

29 May 2025
by Hannes Sarv

Comedian’s Show Cancelled Over Liverpool Parade Crash Joke

49

Miliband Attacks Blair Over Net Zero Criticism and Admits He Could Lose Seat to Reform

28

News Round-Up

18

News Round-Up

33

Electric Cars Halve in Value After Just Two Years

15

Basic Physics All at Sea in Sky News Climate Scare Nonsense Story

31 May 2025
by Chris Morrison

John Rentoul’s Fake Cost of Net Zero

31 May 2025
by Paul Homewood

Are Schools Actually Institutionalised Childcare?

30 May 2025
by Joanna Gray

Trump is Handing Africa to the Chinese for the Sake of Social Media Clout

29 May 2025
by Noah Carl

Hooked on Freedom: Why Medical Autonomy Matters

29 May 2025
by Dr David Bell

POSTS BY DATE

June 2023
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  
« May   Jul »

SOCIAL LINKS

Free Speech Union

NEWSLETTER

View today’s newsletter

To receive our latest news in the form of a daily email, enter your details here:

POSTS BY DATE

June 2023
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  
« May   Jul »

DONATE

LISTED ARTICLES

  • Most Read
  • Most Commented
  • Editor’s Picks

Comedian’s Show Cancelled Over Liverpool Parade Crash Joke

30 May 2025
by Richard Eldred

News Round-Up

31 May 2025
by Richard Eldred

Miliband Attacks Blair Over Net Zero Criticism and Admits He Could Lose Seat to Reform

30 May 2025
by Richard Eldred

Useless Covid Data Analysis Riddled With Basic Flaws

30 May 2025
by Rebekah Barnett

There Will Be No Climate Catastrophe: MIT Professor Dr Richard Lindzen

29 May 2025
by Hannes Sarv

Comedian’s Show Cancelled Over Liverpool Parade Crash Joke

49

Miliband Attacks Blair Over Net Zero Criticism and Admits He Could Lose Seat to Reform

28

News Round-Up

18

News Round-Up

33

Electric Cars Halve in Value After Just Two Years

15

Basic Physics All at Sea in Sky News Climate Scare Nonsense Story

31 May 2025
by Chris Morrison

John Rentoul’s Fake Cost of Net Zero

31 May 2025
by Paul Homewood

Are Schools Actually Institutionalised Childcare?

30 May 2025
by Joanna Gray

Trump is Handing Africa to the Chinese for the Sake of Social Media Clout

29 May 2025
by Noah Carl

Hooked on Freedom: Why Medical Autonomy Matters

29 May 2025
by Dr David Bell

SOCIAL LINKS

Free Speech Union
  • Home
  • About us
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy

Facebook

  • X

Instagram

RSS

Subscribe to our newsletter

© Skeptics Ltd.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Articles
  • About
  • Archive
    • ARCHIVE
    • NEWS ROUND-UPS
  • Podcasts
  • Newsletter
  • Premium
  • Donate
  • Log In

© Skeptics Ltd.

wpDiscuz
You are going to send email to

Move Comment
Perfecty
Do you wish to receive notifications of new articles?
Notifications preferences