• 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

How to Understand Big Pharma: They’re Not Evil, But They Do Want Money

by Will Jones
24 April 2021 11:32 AM

As concerns about the safety of the AstraZeneca vaccine continue to grow and more and more countries move away from it, a comment appeared below the line this morning from “sophie123” that offers insight into the role big pharmaceutical companies are playing in the crisis and the psychology behind the actions of their employees that we thought was worth putting up here.

I work for Big Pharma. I am senior enough to know the executive team pretty well. Some very well.

They are not all good people, by any means – you don’t climb up the greasy pole by being filled with altruism to fellow man. But there’s no overarching evil plot to foist dangerous medicines on people. That is overly simplistic.

What I do see, that has contributed to the situation we are in and I have no doubt is any different at any of the other big pharma companies (execs at which I also know many of):

1) In the UK and US at least, a degree of complicity with what politicians want them to do (because governments ultimately can control pricing, taxes/tax breaks, regulation, all of which impact on stock price, and hand out gongs in the UK). This has many repercussions, and no doubt vaccines that might have been pulled under normal circumstances have continued to be used as a result. Political interference in a space politicians know little about combined with pharma spinelessness in the face of this interference can be very toxic.

2) A desire to be seen as “better” than the other Big Pharma companies. They are not all in cahoots with each other, and some are direct commercial competition. They work on mutual interests together to lobby government (primarily how to stop the US implementing price controls) but there’s as much politicking between CEOs as there is with governments. They mostly hate each other and love it when another company screws up in some way, not necessarily for competitive commercial reasons, but because it makes their failures in the eyes of institutional shareholders look less bad in comparison.
But anyway, they’re not some evil cabal cooking up plots to poison the world together. They are superficially cordial but actually all hate one another.

3) Stock price performance is seen as a measure of their success, and it will trump anything else. So any new information that might damage the share price, if it can be stalled or quashed, will be. Only when it’s absolutely necessary will there be a facing of the facts and transparency. Different companies draw the line in different places here. It’s not evil though. I’d liken it to being in denial, like a wife whose husband is working late every night, has a dubious explanation for the lipstick on his collar, denies to herself that anything could be amiss until she catches him and his lover in bed together and can’t ignore it any longer.

The head-in-the-sand approach can be pervasive throughout organisations, especially if there is a “shoot the messenger” culture (which there often is, as like I say, to climb the greasy pole you need to be a bit of an arsehole and shooting messengers is a common enough arsehole trait). So if side effect data start emerging that is not favourable, everybody is hoping and praying it will turn out to be nothing, and start to talk themselves into “it’s nothing”, and only when the evidence becomes incontrovertible is anything done. And then often too slowly. In a good company culture though, the right steps should be taken and personally I have never seen any egregious breaches of appropriate escalation. In the past, that certainly hasn’t always been the case, and many fines have resulted.

4) Boards are lazy. Their oversight is abysmal. They focus on trivialities and processes, rather than ensuring ethics are adhered to. Mostly they are interested in the quality of catering at board meetings and whether someone has printed off their boarding pass for their first class flight home, rather than board matters (they’re largely old, and don’t do electronic boarding cards).

5) Being a pharma industry person does not make you immune to Government/BBC fear tactics, sadly. They are as susceptible to the mainstream narrative as anyone else. Many people don’t seem to have even stopped and thought about this for more than a few minutes, and took the “deadly unprecedented virus to which we are all susceptible” at face value and look at you like you’re smoking something if you dare to suggest it may have been a tiny bit exaggerated.

6) They will only do things that make money, or might make them money in future. They are not charitable organisations. Drug development is risky and expensive, and shareholders want their returns. Sounds obvious, but it underpins everything and people seem to forget that at times.

Stop Press: The Times of Israel is reporting on a leaked Israeli Health Ministry report into the side effects of the Pfizer vaccine that raises “concerns that there could be a link between the second shot and several dozen cases of myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, particularly in men under 30”. Sixty two cases of myocarditis have been found out of five million vaccinated with two deaths, but no direct link has been established, according to the newspaper. (See more on Lockdown Sceptics.)

Tags: Big PharmaVaccines

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

Travel to “Green List” Countries May Still Be Barred by Foreign Office

Next Post

Try As They Might, Lockdown Proponents Can’t Escape the Blame for the Biggest Public Health Fiasco in History

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.

44 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
WeAllFallDown
WeAllFallDown
4 years ago

Thank you for your insights, but frankly, I find it so shockingly naive that I’m not quite sure where to start. There are so many parallels between pharmaceutical behaviours and that of Criminals behind bars currently serving crime for truly evil behaviours, that I can’t actually command the energy to respond. It just reminds me of someone who has become so inured to the disregard for human life that they cannot comprehend that what they are witnessing is systematic annihilation. Like soldiers in Iraq clearing dead bodies with a bulldozer so they the military vehicles can pass.

It is shocking and crushing to discover that your industry and by extension you, have been complicit in doing much human harm. (I have been there myself). Especially when you entered it first altruistic reasons, and with high hopes. But you do owe yourself the examination needed to actually hold your industry to account.

And as to genocidal cabals? Who knows. Not you and I. They certainly don’t seem to be needed if outcomes are to be judged.

Last edited 4 years ago by WeAllFallDown
12
-4
sophie123
sophie123
4 years ago
Reply to  WeAllFallDown

I am very certain nobody is actively trying to make a vaccine that harms people.
Governments and regulators have removed the barriers and safeguards you would usually expect to expedite vaccine development. This carries risk. We are seeing these risks materialise. Personally I don’t think it was the right thing to do, but if you are CEO at Pfizer or Moderna, you are probably thinking “great! I can use this crisis to accelerate development of this technology we have been developing for years and hopefully make some money…especially if we are first to market. And then use this technology for future vaccines”

They have a vested interest in the vaccines being safe and efficacious. It helps their reputation, it helps their share price. The fact that they are perhaps not as safe as one might like, would lead to them being abandoned (in my opinion) if the threat of COVID were given anything like a sensible risk assessment and everyone were behaving rationally.

So now there is a motivation to maintain the fear. And for governments too, given that they are committed to buying loads of vaccines regardless. They don’t want to look like they overreacted,

I don’t think I am naive. I’m incredibly cynical compared to many in my industry. Maybe I am a unique case, but I have never seen anything in all my years in the companies I have worked in that has made me feel like patient safety wasn’t a priority, balanced against the benefit of treatment. COVID has skewed that, as it’s being treated like raging global Ebola, when plainly it is not.

I didn’t ask for my comment to be posted as an article so I am not about to get into a debate about it. I am just reporting what I have seen, Money and reputation, that’s what drives actions at CEO level.

26
-2
TJN
TJN
4 years ago
Reply to  sophie123

Many thanks Sophie. A balanced account that carries a sound ring of truth and plausibility.

6
0
DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  TJN

Seconded. And will all those people who have had their lives or those of their families, saved by pharmaceutical interventions such as semi-synthetic penicillins, beta-blockers, analog insulins, antidepressants, etc., etc., etc. please calm down and reflect on the totality of what the pharmaceutical industry has provided

0
0
TJN
TJN
4 years ago
Reply to  DevonBlueBoy

Thanks – but that’s not to say I don’t think there may be some serious problems with the pharmaceutical industry – although Sophie’s post quoted above the line does, I think, implicitly concede that.

0
0
helenf
helenf
4 years ago
Reply to  sophie123

I’m surprised that someone “incredibly cynical” can continue to work for Big Pharma. Must cause a lot of cognitive dissonance.

2
0
B.F.Finlayson
B.F.Finlayson
4 years ago
Reply to  sophie123

I am very certain nobody is actively trying to make a vaccine that harms people.

They certainly wouldn’t want to harm people if they had to cough up financial compensation for side effects, but that essential safeguard against corporate greed and short-cuts is currently missing.
Even so, once the damage actually being done by these experimental gene therapies is pointed out (as it has been from the beginning of the roll out) is it still OK to turn a blind eye and keep rolling this stuff off the production line rather than stop, think and go through a full testing program?

5
0
karenovirus
karenovirus
4 years ago
Reply to  WeAllFallDown

Harsh on the author.

3
0
TJN
TJN
4 years ago
Reply to  karenovirus

And unfair.

1
0
TORs
TORs
4 years ago

So he’s saying (1) that Big Pharma is just doing what governments want it to do? Google “Pfizer” and “$2.9 billion fine” — hardly an example of government-Big Pharma cooperation. Also, read the British Medical Journal investigation of 2010 into the role of “experts who had declarable financial and research ties with pharmaceutical companies producing antivirals and influenza vaccines” for the 2009 influenza scamdemic. https://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c2912

bb.png
12
0
AfterAll
AfterAll
4 years ago

Could we say the same about the BMGF? Have they now withdrawn their funding from the organisations that have been issuing wildly exaggerated projections of deaths in the non-lockdown case? Have they now withdrawn their funding from ResearchGate for censoring scientists? Have they now withdrawn their funding from all those organisations that systematically sidelined and demonised cheap, safe and effective prophylactics and treatments that might have saved hundreds of thousands of lives? Or are they OK with these things?

Last edited 4 years ago by AfterAll
15
0
Fingerache Philip
Fingerache Philip
4 years ago

It’s called Capitalism.

9
-2
catchmatt
catchmatt
4 years ago
Reply to  Fingerache Philip

Or selective capitalism, apparently Mr Johnson doesn’t believe it to be the case for football and the Superleague.

2
0
RickH
RickH
4 years ago

Whether on not one agrees with all the details here, I reckon the article provides a good overview of the fact that there are always a network of forces determining a particular outcome at the system level.

There’s always a tendency tho simply vilify individuals, and whilst that may be justified (see : ‘Johnson’), it’s not the whole story.

The last point is the crucial one :

“They will only do things that make money, or might make them money in future. They are not charitable organisations. Drug development is risky and expensive, and shareholders want their returns. Sounds obvious, but it underpins everything and people seem to forget that at times.”

Or as another commentator has said (above) :

“It’s called Capitalism”

Trying to abolish that impulse is futile, but it goes terribly wrong if no checks and balances are in place. The whole Covid debacle has been about that systemic flaw.

20
-1
AfterAll
AfterAll
4 years ago
Reply to  RickH

Part of the problem is pharmaceutical IP rights, which are relatively recent; some European countries didn’t recognise IP on drugs until the 1970s. IP rights are not the same as physical property rights, they are about creating monopolies; there’s an interesting (free of course) book on this theme here: http://dklevine.com/general/intellectual/against.htm . Germany had a flourishing pharma industry without IP in the early 20th century. Without IP rights, priorities for COVID would have been testing low-cost prophylactics and treatments, there would have been no incentive for the lockdown/mask theatre, there would have been no epidemic of malnutrition in low-income countries.

8
0
RickH
RickH
4 years ago
Reply to  AfterAll

Thus my comment about ‘checks and balances’. This covers a whole range of issues, from the basic constitution (or lack of) to such nitty-gritty specifics as IP rights that you mention.

If government is allowed to ally simply with the most powerful interests, without checks, the the whole political process becomes corrupted. Like fly-paper, it attracts money-grubbers and power-seekers much more than a wider representative selection of candidates.

The whole process then enters a downward spiral as the token vilification of politics and politicians reinforces exclusion rather than inclusivity.

8
-1
I am Spartacas
I am Spartacas
4 years ago

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi … ‘this experimental vaccine roll out is so “goddamn dangerous” I cannot understand how my own colleagues don’t realize this?’

Worth watching …

https://twitter.com/_taylorhudak/status/1385067952534401027

Last edited 4 years ago by Ember von Drake-Dale 22
19
0
RickH
RickH
4 years ago
Reply to  I am Spartacas

A ‘must watch’.

10
0
iane
iane
4 years ago
Reply to  I am Spartacas

Yes: it really beggars belief that ANYONE (even the politicians) would give such an enormous hostage to fortune.

Just imagine what the consequences would be if, say, 1% of the jabbed develop serious ill-health within a year or two of being vaccinated – that would really put a strain on the NHS! And the politicians think they could avoid blame after all their assertions of safety?

16
0
alw
alw
4 years ago

Big Pharma was in trouble until Covid came along.

6
0
iane
iane
4 years ago

The lady doth protest too much, methinks!

2
-4
RickH
RickH
4 years ago
Reply to  iane

Not at all. In the same framework, I don’t reckon all Tory voters are inherently evil.

3
-1
B.F.Finlayson
B.F.Finlayson
4 years ago

Sophie 123 can expect a promotion, or at least an index linked pay rise, for this bit simplistic white-washery. The term ‘Evil’ should perhaps be banned from all rational discourse in the first instance, as opposed to it being held up in the headline as an indefinable mediaeval moral yardstick against which to judge corporate ethics. Such methodology renders rational discourse meaningless.

If the final paragraph is not the most disingenuous, it is certainly the most naive:

6) They will only do things that make money, or might make them money in future. They are not charitable organisations. Drug development is risky and expensive, and shareholders want their returns. Sounds obvious, but it underpins everything and people seem to forget that at times.

Nobody forgets this, Sophie, but everybody is encouraged to overlook the big fat indemnification bribe that has effectively upset the delicate corporate RISK-BENEFIT control mechanism. As the AZ exec member said July 2020, the company could not have gone into production without the global guarantee of exemption from civil action (regarding death, side effects etc, from the experimental vaxx) being in place.

This is the main issue here, for with these rushed C19 experimental vaxes (whether mRNA or GMO) there is NO RISK attached for Big Pharma in taking short cuts, and the corresponding rewards for ditching medical ethics are of course potentially massive. The companies don’t have to be ‘evil’ to be in breach of long established codes of practice – just creative with their ethical code and less than thorough with their testing.

Might I ask if any Pharma company has refused this global exemption, insisted on the full carefully monitored trial period before release, and then agreed to stand four square behind its product financially?

15
-2
Evison1
Evison1
4 years ago

This is a very helpful comment. Tullock and Buchanan were awarded a Nobel Prize for coming up with the economic theory of Public Choice – stated simply, that ‘actors’ and institutions act out of ‘enlightened self interest’. This is exactly what you appear to be describing. The same will be true of Whitty, Valance, Ferguson and SAGE, Farrar, the various civil servants involved – and of course the power hungry politicians. You don’t need to be a conspiracy theorist to see that the influential figures are acting out of self-motivation and are not necessarily evil or acting with malintent (although some sure seem to be). The law (as well as ethics and human rights codes, and pandemic preparedness guidelines, and so on) – and parliament – should have protected us. They didn’t. That needs to be addressed quickly.

13
0
RickH
RickH
4 years ago
Reply to  Evison1

“ the economic theory of Public Choice – stated simply, that ‘actors’ and institutions act out of ‘enlightened self interest’.”

Like most economic theory – a partial rather than general explanation in this most overblown of the social sciences. (see the number of dickheads sporting a first in PPE!).

3
0
10navigator
10navigator
4 years ago

See “Money Vs Science” on Youtube. A nine minute watch and well worth it.

3
0
Catee
Catee
4 years ago

“How to Understand Big Pharma: They’re Not Evil, But They Do Want Money”
Except that money is the route of all evil.

7
-2
RickH
RickH
4 years ago
Reply to  Catee

“money is the route of all evil”

Another bit of pat nonsense.

Have you taken up the hermit’s life yet?

3
-3
Catee
Catee
4 years ago
Reply to  RickH

What hermits life? Have to say I find your contributions on here patronising in the extreme. I realise from your posts that we’re all supposed to bow down to your superior knowledge but frankly I think you’re a tosser.

2
-1
RickH
RickH
4 years ago
Reply to  Catee

Getting into ad hominem stuff is never a good idea if you have a coherent point to make.

I was just expressing a dislike of simplistic untruth in the same league as ‘Covid is unprecedented’. As to the ‘hermit’s life’ – it was just an ironic question as to whether you’d forgone worldly goods to back up your claim – or whether you – like most of us – continue to use money and are thus encouraging evil?

… and who’s asked you to ‘bow down’? Just argue back – or follow the other saw about heat and kitchens.

Sorry you’re upset – but not much I can do about that.

4
-1
scuzbert
scuzbert
4 years ago
Reply to  Catee

Actually, the correct wording is ‘the love of money..’ etc.. Poor old money always gets it in the neck. 🙂

4
0
Tillysmum
Tillysmum
4 years ago
Reply to  Catee

I think the phrase is “The love of money is the root of all evil”

0
0
karenovirus
karenovirus
4 years ago

Thank you very much for your informed insider view. Much of it perhaps to be expected but some interesting surprises.

4
0
Hugh
Hugh
4 years ago

Blimey, you might as well say “they’re not evil but they do want racial hygiene”. Remind me what is the root of all evil?

6
0
JohnK
JohnK
4 years ago

Although all the commentary is related to the pharma trade, it is also valid w.r.t. many industrial structures, and associated political activity, such as all branches of transport technology, power delivery and so on. More of a psychological issue, in fact.

I’m not criticising Sophie123’s article though; it’s a good job, well done.

2
0
TJN
TJN
4 years ago
Reply to  JohnK

Yes, I’ve seen it in an entirely different industry.

2
0
imp66
imp66
4 years ago

As ever, it’s all about the money, honey ( oh, and power and control)

2
0
helenf
helenf
4 years ago

I’m sorry, but it’s just win win for big pharma. Regardless of whether or not they want side effects from their products, there ARE side effects, for millions of people, many adversely impacting on people’s quality of life and physical and mental health, many serious, some fatal. But rather than make those drugs safer, unless the product is withdrawn (presumably due to external pressure), big pharma profits again by developing and selling drugs to treat the side effects, drugs which have the their own side effects, and so it goes on (until the patient or gp says no more drugs, or until the person dies). It is an industry based on and driven by profit and greed (otherwise drugs would be much more affordable and safer). If any drugs or vaccines are pulled from the market, you can bet that those drug companies have another to replace it up their sleeve. Look how quickly the covid vaccines were ready to be rolled out! No questions asked. Anyone working within big pharma turning a blind eye to the harms and suffering caused by those drugs to millions of people (many of whom didn’t need the drug or vaccine in the first place!) are complicit. And now they want to test their covid vaccines on toddlers and children?! If that’s not evil, I don’t know what is.

6
0
DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  helenf

Wakey wakey. Pharmaceuticals are chemicals produced to work on relieving/removing problems with the body’s chemistry. ALL product have side effects as they are foreign to the body. Generally, the more powerful the product, the bigger the side effects. There is a view that if the product has no side effects then it won’t be very effective.

0
-1
helenf
helenf
4 years ago
Reply to  DevonBlueBoy

There are many effective natural alternatives to pharmaceuticals, but the medical industry isn’t interested in these because there’s no profit to be made. “The more powerful the product, the bigger the side effects”. So, poisoning people back to health. What could possibly go wrong.

2
0
DavidDLM
DavidDLM
4 years ago
Reply to  helenf

Many pharmaceuticals ARE natural products or are derived from them. And naturally occurring agents frequently have worse side effects than purely synthetic ones. One reason for modifying naturally occurring agents is to produce derivatives with less serious side effects. The idea that something natural is inherently innocuous is ignorant superstition. Many of the most lethal poisons known to science are natural products.

0
-1
helenf
helenf
4 years ago
Reply to  DavidDLM

I never said all naturally occurring agents are inherently innocuous. So you are either trying to gaslight me, or you are just stupid. Or both.

1
0
DavidDLM
DavidDLM
4 years ago
Reply to  helenf

The problem isn’t that the pharmaceutical industry favours synthetic over natural products. There’s no essential difference between them. It’s that it favours medications that need to be taken long term as these provide the highest profits. That’s why we’re running out of effective antimcrobials to treat evolving bacterial strains. Most research into new antibiotics is carried out by academic research groups rather than by industry.

0
0
catchmatt
catchmatt
4 years ago

Big pharma are not evil, just misunderstood says senior big pharma employee. Don’t know about you but I’m convinced particularly by the last point “they will only do things that make money”. Somewhat contradicts the propaganda about vaccines being supplied at cost.

2
0

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 EP.37: David Frost on Starmer’s EU Surrender, James Price on Broken Britain and David Shipley on Lucy Connolly’s Failed Appeal

by Richard Eldred
23 May 2025
6

LISTED ARTICLES

  • Most Read
  • Most Commented
  • Editor’s Picks

Follow the Silenced is the Untold Story of the Covid Vaccine Trial Victims

24 May 2025
by Antony Brush

News Round-Up

25 May 2025
by Will Jones

Trump in Nuclear Power Push Dubbed “Manhattan Project 2”

24 May 2025
by Will Jones

The Legal Case Against the AfD Has Collapsed

25 May 2025
by Eugyppius

Plebeians Can No Longer Rant About Bloody Murder

25 May 2025
by James Alexander

Plebeians Can No Longer Rant About Bloody Murder

49

Trump in Nuclear Power Push Dubbed “Manhattan Project 2”

33

News Round-Up

25

Follow the Silenced is the Untold Story of the Covid Vaccine Trial Victims

24

The Legal Case Against the AfD Has Collapsed

12

The Legal Case Against the AfD Has Collapsed

25 May 2025
by Eugyppius

Plebeians Can No Longer Rant About Bloody Murder

25 May 2025
by James Alexander

Follow the Silenced is the Untold Story of the Covid Vaccine Trial Victims

24 May 2025
by Antony Brush

Do Researchers’ Views on Immigration Affect the Results of Their Studies?

24 May 2025
by Noah Carl

Starmer’s EU Reset Tethers the UK to the EU’s Green Dystopia

24 May 2025
by Tilak Doshi

POSTS BY DATE

April 2021
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  
« Mar   May »

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

April 2021
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  
« Mar   May »

DONATE

LISTED ARTICLES

  • Most Read
  • Most Commented
  • Editor’s Picks

Follow the Silenced is the Untold Story of the Covid Vaccine Trial Victims

24 May 2025
by Antony Brush

News Round-Up

25 May 2025
by Will Jones

Trump in Nuclear Power Push Dubbed “Manhattan Project 2”

24 May 2025
by Will Jones

The Legal Case Against the AfD Has Collapsed

25 May 2025
by Eugyppius

Plebeians Can No Longer Rant About Bloody Murder

25 May 2025
by James Alexander

Plebeians Can No Longer Rant About Bloody Murder

49

Trump in Nuclear Power Push Dubbed “Manhattan Project 2”

33

News Round-Up

25

Follow the Silenced is the Untold Story of the Covid Vaccine Trial Victims

24

The Legal Case Against the AfD Has Collapsed

12

The Legal Case Against the AfD Has Collapsed

25 May 2025
by Eugyppius

Plebeians Can No Longer Rant About Bloody Murder

25 May 2025
by James Alexander

Follow the Silenced is the Untold Story of the Covid Vaccine Trial Victims

24 May 2025
by Antony Brush

Do Researchers’ Views on Immigration Affect the Results of Their Studies?

24 May 2025
by Noah Carl

Starmer’s EU Reset Tethers the UK to the EU’s Green Dystopia

24 May 2025
by Tilak Doshi

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