From Pro-Vaccine to Skeptic: Dr. Boz’s Journey through the Pandemic

Spread the love

Loading

by Jeff Childers

You’ll enjoy the latest mea culpa from a formerly pro-vaccine healthcare professional-slash-social media influencer. Annette Bosworth, MD, also known as “Dr. Boz,” has a popular YouTube channel (600,000 subscribers) and website focusing on the health benefits of keto dieting and intermittent fasting. It seems like a great channel and I subscribed. Dr. Boz normally covers wellness topics like shopping for a good blood glucose monitor, breaking carb addiction, comparing exercise to intermittent fasting, and things like that.

So it must have shocked many of her subscribers when three days ago she named her most recent YouTube streamer, “The biggest crime in the history of medicine.

YOUTUBE: The biggest crime in the history of medicine (54:56).

That’s quite a title for a pro-vaccine doctor. And it quickly became Dr. Boz’s highest-watched YouTube ever. But within 12 hours, YouTube de-monetized the show, which was a new experience for the influential advocate. Two days ago, she published a short follow-up video trying to figure out what YouTube terms she violated. She was astounded that discussing a peer-reviewed paper could get her punished at this stage of the pandemic.

But let’s focus on her original video. It began with a bang:

“I am really excited about tonight’s show. (Wryly) I have been putting this off. I have been wrong. And I have seen lots of you out there and I have personal friends out there that have been telling me I was wrong, and I would much rather avoid this conversation and not do this at all, but … you were right.

Dr. Boz explained that it was the relentless pressure of subscriber’s jab  comments — comments she pretended to ignore but actually noticed — that kept her attention secretly on the science related to the vaccines.

Then she introduced Dr. McCullough’s (and five other authors including Jessica Rose and Steve Kirsch) latest 40-page, peer-reviewed article that published in the Cureus open-access journal on January 24th. The study was neutrally-titled, “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign.” Here’s how she described the study:

“This is a peer-reviewed article. If you’re like me, you’re not going to want to believe it. I don’t WANT to believe this. I’m so irritated by this article. This is a difficult thing for me to talk about. The dozen peers who reviewed this paper took two and a half months to cross-check and verify everything they said. I’m just going to point out a few things that made me sleepless. During the pandemic, we broke some of the rules to serve the public. One of the rules was this emergency use act.”

For regular C&C readers, there isn’t anything particularly surprising in the McCullough paper, which methodically and professionally walked through all the issues we currently know about, starting with the statistical tricks that Pfizer and Moderna employed in their early clinical trials to exaggerate the benefits and whitewash the risks, and then tackled thornier issues such as why the jabs are actually genetic therapies and are not actually vaccines. It was the carefully-documented way the authors addressed these problems that finally penetrated Dr. Boz’s cognitive defenses:

“I knew (the vaccine) came with some risks, but until this paper, I didn’t really appreciate it. The (biggest) problem with the vaccines is, there was no off-switch. This is a problem … when you trust the scientific process is being (properly) used, when there needs to be an exception to the rules (like EUA), you don’t just break every single rule there is… If you’re like me, when you get to the end of this article, you ask yourself: what did we say ‘yes’ to?”

Ultimately, the unyielding weight of McCullough’s data and logical analysis pressed Dr. Boz to self-reflect. She started by explaining how Pfizer and Moderna were able to conclude efficacy and safety only because they’d restricted it to healthy trial participants aged 18-55. Later she combined all these issues — the lack of a spike shut-off, the obviously faked trials, and Dr. McCullough’s carefully-documented findings of spike protein in the heart muscles of autopsied sudden-death patients — Dr. Boz took all of that and clearly experienced a painful change of heart:

“Until you start looking at the autopsies and start wondering: what part in this did I play? And… first of all, how do ya say, I’m sorry to all of ya’ll who’ve been putting comments in my videos for like, a year, (saying), ‘hey take a look at this!’ And I just said (to myself), okay, they’re just chirpin’ again. But you were right.

And worse, the loss of trust! I was in a class (last year), and everybody was like, I don’t think we should take ANY shots anymore, and I was SHOCKED. Even for flu or shingles. They asked, but can we trust these OTHER vaccinations? And I said, of COURSE you can.

But now, it’s hard for me to say that. How long will it take before the World will trust – before I will trust — what they’re telling me. And … what was MY part in it? How could’ve I been more …. I mean, I had MY kids vaccinated. I had all of the people I loved vaccinated. And when you look back and say hey, look at what it did — especially to the kids … um … anyway (trails off).

When it comes down to it, I was wrong. I don’t know that it gets worse than telling all my patients, get the vaccination, get the vaccination, get the vaccination. (Sighs) Okay, let’s move on to something easier to talk about than my continued failures…”

There’s plenty more in the video. To keep it a manageable length, I omitted several other interesting parts, like where Dr. Boz explained how trusted gatekeepers like herself were manipulated into towing the party line and not asking questions. As I said, you’ll enjoy hearing the thought process of a proud pro-vaccine doctor being convinced to humble herself and make a public apology.

What we don’t see though are all the doctors and health professionals who aren’t social media influencers like Dr. Boz, but who also have been convinced by Dr. McCullough’s careful, thoughtful, peer-reviewed article. Dr. McCullough is another one we should be grateful for. I’m not minimizing the contributions of the other authors, but Dr. McCullough was the most-published cardiologist in history. He knows a lot about how to get papers peer-reviewed and published, even regarding controversial topics.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Their trying to repopulate the world or reduce the Human Population to abide by the maniacal nonsense from Population Bomb nutcase Paul Ehrlich

Spurwing Plover: “They’re trying to repopulate the world. Or reduce the population. One of those things, or something else—I don’t know. What I do know is that I’m against it because of a book written fifty years ago. Or something.”

Her “mea culpa,” was too little, too late.
She called those who looked with their eyes and saw the problems associated with these covid vaccines but just called those who disagreed with the party line, “chirpers.”
Finally, when she could not ignore the data from her own practice any more and did her turnaround, she saw how she was IMMEDIATELY demonetized and demonized.
She will never be the same.

I lost a terrific doctor because, rather than take a 3rd covid shot, both she and her doctor husband quit medical practice.
The side effects were killing them both.
I have quizzed people and, in the last 6 months, no one, not one person admits to being fully up on all their “required” covid boosters.
Who has had 7 covid jabs?
Anyone?
Didn’t think so.
So, we are all vaccine “deniers” now.
I just happened to deny since before even one jab.
But welcome to everyone who woke up and joined in later.
Hope you’re all right.

We never wanted to be right, we all saw someone we loved get the jab.
Damn them that knew to ever burning hell.