Exclusive interview with Professor Peter Gø Professor Peter Gt he gave us an interview that touches on various topics, from the relationship between industry and medicine to the effectiveness of anti Covid vaccines, from lockdon We also thank him publicly for not shirking questions about his personal story, his ouster from the Cochrane Collaboration, the independent scientific organization he helped found. I think it is essential that the general public know the reasons for the removal of an illustrious scientist from a scientific organization that was born to be independent but then found itself so constrained that it could no longer publish relevant studies. The reasons for this” clash ” cannot remain confined to the academic world because they concern not only the freedom of research but all of us, access to care and our trust in medicine.   Who it is. He was co-founder of the Cochrane Collaboration, founded in 1993 as an independent organization to inform on the efficacy and safety of drugs and therapies. Cochrane has long been considered the world’s leading independent medical research organization. In 2010 Gø Clinical research design and analysis university of Copenhagen. He has published more than 97 articles in the five most prestigious medical journals (Lanc He is also the author of books on the decline of Medicine including Deadl Medic e Organized Crime. After many years of outspoken criticism of the corruption of science by pharmaceutical companies, in September 2018, he stepped down from the Cochrane Board of Directors. Four council members resigned with him in protest. The pretext for the resignation (or ouster) of Peter Gt Tzsche from Cochrane was a criticism made to a revie pubblicata, published by Cochrane herself, which advocated the efficacy and harmlessness of the vaccine against the antipapilloma virus, HPV. Gt Tzsche and colleagues disseminated their criticism of BM Evid Evidence-Based Medicine by arguing that Cochrane’s analysis was based on only a portion of the published randomized trials, excluding the many others that led to different results (they did not support either vaccine efficacy or vaccine harmlessness). A controversy ensued between Cochrane and bm riass here. Professor, in 2018 the Cochrane Foundation, which she helped found, decided to oust her on charges of bringing the organization into disrepute. You want to say something about it?  “It is a lie that I have brought the organization into disrepute. The same lawyer hired by Cochrane cleared me of all charges. Thanks to my research I have greatly strengthened Cochrane’s reputation. Many told me that I was the best known Danish doctor in the world and that I was a symbol of integrity and high-level science. I was elected to the board with the most votes among all 11 candidates, although I was the only one to criticize Cochrane’s leadership. People hoped that I could change the disastrous direction of travel that our general manager Markil he had taken to Cochrane, which, instead of listening to my advice, organized one of the worst charade trials ever in academia, which expelled me. My expulsion was completely unexpected and they talked about it The Lancet, BM Nature e Science. The Chief Editor BM scrisse that Cochrane should publicly declare its, if any, ties to industry and academia, and that my expulsion from Cochrane reflected “a profound divergence of opinion on how much industry interference is too conditioning”. I wrote two books about this scandal and the decline and fall of the Cochrane Empire, one of which is freely available. Cochrane’s main funder criticised the organisation for the same reasons as me and took away all funding from UK-based groups on 31 March 2023. This is about 40% of all scientific organizations of this type in the world. Therefore, they will stop working, which, in my opinion, represents the beginning of the end for Cochrane”. Speaking of the papilloma virus, what do you think is the scientific foundation of the vaccine? In your opinion, did the HPV vaccine show serious adverse events, and if so, did these outweigh the benefits?  “Vaccines protect against some of the serotypes that can cause cervical cancer. In our review of the reports submitted by the companies to the European Medicines Agency, we found that these vaccines, in rare cases, cause severe neurological damage. In the United States, lawsuits are pending on behalf of patients who are convinced that vaccines have damaged them irreversibly. We still do not know what the benefits are, because vaccination began at the age of 12 in girls and it takes decades before we can see the full effect on cervical cancer. I hope the benefits far outweigh the harms, but we don’t know if that’s the case. People still need to undergo screening, and if they do, cell changes can be removed before they develop into cancer. I therefore think that the usefulness of these vaccines has been magnified, also because very few people die of cervical cancer”. As for the controversial events of the Covid19 pandemic, do you think there are grounds for considering it a global scam? If yes, what are they?  “COVID-19 has killed about 7 million people. You can’t talk about cheating. It is a tragedy, especially since it could have been avoided. In all likelihood, the virus was man-made and leaked from a lab inu The Chinese virus). The type of research that takes place there, in which a harmless virus is made dangerous through genetic manipulation (the so-called “Gain of Function”), should be prohibited. Politicians panicked everywhere except in Sweden, which kept schools and businesses open and did not have masks on. This nation was strongly rebuked by other countries, but Sweden had one of the lowest excess mortality rates in the whole world. In Sweden so they did the right thing. Draconian closures have caused enormous damage, including the‘increase in deaths from causes different from COVID-19”.   What do you think about mandatory vaccination, in general, and against Covid19?  “In my book on vaccines (which exists in Italian: Vaccines: truth, lies and controversy) I opposed compulsory vaccination. In Europe, public health officials have long opposed mandatory vaccination because it undermines trust between the public and health professionals. Mandatory vaccination is likely to increase anti-vaccine sentiments. Moreover, from an ethical point of view, we are not allowed to use people as a means of achieving something else, for other people. It has been argued that children should be vaccinated against COVID-19 to protect the elderly from infection, but vaccination is not without risks. Vector-borne vaccines can cause embolism, and mRNA-based vaccines can cause myocarditis, especially in young people, with a mortality of 1-2 in 200 people. In addition, vaccination has not been shown to reduce the transmission of the virus”.   About the anti-Covid vaccines were the risks or benefits greater?  “It is difficult to know exactly what the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines are. The studies were too short to prove an effect on mortality, but showed an effect on the risk of serious infections. On the other hand, the virus mutates and the effectiveness of the vaccine in clinical practice did not approach the 95% found in the studies. It has been closer to 50%, which makes COVID-19 vaccines poor vaccines. Together with a colleague I made a systematic review and our conclusions were: “More randomized trials are needed”. Authorities have recommended population-wide COVID-19 vaccination and booster doses. They do not believe that the benefit-risk ratio becomes unfavorable in low-risk groups such as children and people already cured of COVID-19 infection. It is wrong to recommend these vaccines to everyone, and there is no point in recommending recalls on recalls. In the United States, some people were vaccinated 7 times based on official recommendations”.