Silenced for Curiosity: The Troubling Truth About Questioning Science

Over the last few years, I have focused on tough questions in medicine and science, especially about COVID-19, immunity, and public health policies. I believe that science grows through discussion and questioning. However, I notice more and more that asking questions can lead to censorship, not misinformation.

Recently, my posts on LinkedIn discussing excess deaths, vaccine outcomes, and the need for scientific transparency faced restrictions or removal. Why? Because they went against the mainstream narrative.

The spike protein from the virus is a big concern. It can attach to normal proteins in our bodies, which raises the risk of autoimmune responses. This connection could happen no matter where the spike protein comes from. One area of worry is its interaction with CD147, present on certain immune cells. This link may tie autoimmune issues to immune system problems and could even worsen some cancers. Is it fair to link these scientific ideas to the unusual disease patterns we’re seeing today?

As we explore these questions, we must remember that scientific progress often needs the courage to challenge established beliefs. Think of historical figures like Galileo and Semmelweis, who faced harsh backlash for questioning the norm. Today, however, we find ourselves in a digital age where scientific discussions are monitored by algorithms and corporate interests.

This type of censorship isn’t isolated. It affects doctors, researchers, and analysts everywhere who dare to question the story surrounding COVID-19, vaccine effectiveness, and public health strategies. If we can silence questions, we can also silence the truth.

If the science stands strong, why fear examination? If the data backs up the claims, why dismiss analysis? Genuine science welcomes scrutiny. Shutting down legitimate questions sends a worrying message: some truths are too uncomfortable to discuss.

When scientific debate is stifled:

• Errors linger because no one is allowed to challenge wrong conclusions.
• Public trust declines as people realize they are being given only part of the information.
• Medical progress halts because researchers hesitate to explore vital, albeit controversial, topics.
• Policy errors remain uncorrected and harm the very groups we aim to protect.

This issue is not just about my experiences or a handful of deleted social media posts. It’s about our ability to think freely, the future of medicine, and the very essence of scientific integrity.

I refuse to be quiet about this, and I know many of you feel the same. If we truly value evidence-based medicine, free thought, and truth-seeking, we must push back against this rising tide of censorship.