2024-02-09 18:17:00
In a letter to MPs entitled “bill on sectarian abuses”, the BonSens.org association alerts the national representation to the unacceptable clauses for democracy, fundamental freedoms, freedom of expression which range from scientific debates to the freedom of expression of scientists and doctors and the protection of whistleblowers.
The letter was sent on February 9, 2024 to the presidents of groups in the National Assembly as well as to those not registered and by email to each French deputy so that they become aware of this critical situation. Namely the fact that the law commission saw fit to restore “these articles which have only found acceptance in the worst dictatorships.”
“With this bill that you are preparing to vote on, and in particular articles 4 and 5, these medical and scientific alerts could no longer be launched under penalty of risk of imprisonment and fines for anyone who risks doing so.”
The entire letter is reproduced below.
Madam Deputy, Mr. Deputy
This is a very serious time for our democracy, our fundamental freedoms, the freedom of scientific debate, the freedom of doctors and scientists to express themselves, and the protection of whistleblowers.
You will soon have to vote on a bill [1] aimed at “strengthening the fight against sectarian aberrations”. In this text of law, however recently redacted by the Senate of three articles dangerous for our republican and democratic life, in particular articles 4 and 5, aimed at establishing new offenses in the Penal Code, the law commission saw fit to restore these articles which only found validity in the worst dictatorships.
If you are not convinced of the danger represented by these articles 4 and 5 you must remember that Recent history has revealed, thanks to a free press and courageous whistleblowers, numerous health scandals where the authorities themselves have been condemned. Here are two fairly recent examples that you certainly haven’t forgotten yet.
In the case of MEDIATOR laboratories SERVIER [2] , drug marketed for 33 years 1976 to 2009, accused of causing the deaths of 1,500 to 2,100 people in Francenot counting those still suffering from the consequences of side effects.
The whistleblower of the time, was the pulmonologist IRENE FRACHON.
The CONDEMNATIONS were handed down in 2021 (and in 2023 after appeal by the Servier Group)
- The Serviera Group was found guilty of endangering health, fraud, homicide and involuntary injuries, influence peddling and improperly obtaining marketing et sentenced up to 180 million euros paid to victims and 415 million euros to social organizations/mutual societies
- ANSMy summer sentenced for negligence to 303,000 euros fine. (at the time Afssaps for French Health Products Safety Agency)
In the case of LEVOTHYROX [3] , the change in the drug’s formula in 2017 by Merck had led to numerous reports of adverse effects in pharmacovigilance and victims had filed complaints. The ANSM assured that the adverse effects were due to a thyroid imbalance caused by the change in treatment and not to the new formula. However, in March 2018, a criminal investigation was opened. Researchers from the University of Toulouse concluded that the new formula did not provide sufficient guarantees for patients. Merck was convicted in 2020 for having committed a mistake during the change of formula and had to pay 3.3 million euros to the plaintiffs.
At the end of 2022, Merck was indicted for aggravated deception et the ANSM was also indicted for deception.
There were also the cases of contaminated blood, Dépakine, Distilbene, growth hormones, Isomeride, Vioxx, Thalidomide that the French remember.
With this bill that you are preparing to vote on, and in particular articles 4 and 5, these medical and scientific alerts could no longer be launched under penalty of risk of imprisonment and fines for anyone who risks doing so.
It is critical that you realize this.
Even the Council of State has spoken out against these provisions.
In a notice dated November 9, 2023 [4]the BOARD OF STATE had considered that the targeted facts were already covered by the repression of the illegal practice of medicine. According to this opinion, the measure could infringe on freedom of expressionn, when it is exercised through “a general and impersonal discourse, for example held on a blog or a social network” and call into question, “by incriminating challenges to the current state of therapeutic practices, the freedom of scientific debates and the role of whistleblowers”.
What is true one day in science is not always true the next day, and this has been the case since the world began because science is constantly evolving through new data that emerges.
Constructive criticism and questioning information are essential aspects of the scientific process, and this must be done in a transparent and respectful manner. A scientific consensus is only of value over a limited period and only if it takes into account divergent opinions Science is an ongoing debate, stifling this debate in the name of a false consensus amounts to killing all progress or all corrective mechanisms. It is the pluralism of ideas – and not censorship – that makes us progress.
Faced with the abnormal and often illegal influence (known practices of corruption and taking of interest) of pharmaceutical laboratories in Public Health decisions, it is essential to preserve the safeguard what is freedom of expression on health issuesand in particular for doctors, scientists, and citizen defense associations or associations of victims of adverse drug reactions.
For example, because the marketing authorizations for Covid-19 vaccines were only based on clinical trials carried out by the vaccine manufacturers themselves, and no randomized clinical study had been carried out. independently, then we are witnessing a resounding failure undermining public discourse, changing discourse according to new data. Unfortunately today, traditional vaccination suffers from these errors, from these erroneous announcements by health authorities which have lost credibility.
Rememberin the Covid-19 crisis that we have gone through, the discourse of the health authorities has evolved from: “ All vaccinated, All protected » with vaccines « safe and effective » with 95% effectiveness towards a speech where the vaccines ultimately did not protect against infectionbut only serious forms and, finally several months after the start vaccinationsrecognized serious adverse effects of myocarditis and pericarditis especially at young menpopulation not at risk who did not need to be vaccinated and who were placed at unnecessary risk of a chronic disease with a potentially very serious course, or menstrual problems hemorrhagic (recognized late by health authorities) requiring potentially hospitalizations among young women of which at this time there is no certainty about the impact that this may have had on their fertility.
Remember, there was even an abandonment of certain vaccines (AstraZeneca, Johnson and Johnson) for those under 55 because of very serious risks of thrombosis, including the death of young Anthony Rio, 24, who was recognized as being linked to vaccination [5]. Without the alerts of doctors, scientists, victims’ associations, how many deaths could these vaccines have caused among young people?
In history this is always how health scandals have been brought to light : through the free speech of doctors, scientists, citizens, victims’ associations, citizens’ associations, who fight, for months or even years, before the health authorities react or the justice system can rule .
Did you think about this law from an international point of view? Did you know that treatments against certain pathologies are authorized in certain countries (Covid19 [6] [7]Cancer [8] [9]Lyme disease [10] etc) and not in others like France? What do you think of the health authorities in these countries? What are sects? Just because their national protocols are different from those decided in France by the ANSM and the HAS9? Do you see the nonsense of this law? ?
And finally have you thought about French scientific research?
When article 4 of the draft announces “When these offenses are committed through the written or audiovisual press, the specific provisions of the laws which govern these matters are applicable with regard to the determination of the persons responsible. “, but what about the foreign press and media?
Legally, could French scientists who publish in a foreign journal be liable to prosecution depending on the content of their study or their scientific position?
Article 4 of this bill [11] would prevent French scientists from publishing their work, including in French and international scientific journals, and this would be a major risk for the credibility of French research.
Certainly the Order of Physicians has not thought about it because it does not carry out scientific research, but YOU must think about it and prevent this.
It is essential to vote against articles 4 and 5 of the bill against “sectarian abuses” because these articles have nothing to do with the subject of sects, they are only censorship dangerous for science and for public health.
To conclude, it seems important to us to recall that the freedom of expression was consecrated successively in thearticle 11 from Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (August 24, 1789 [12]l’article 10 of 1950 from European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms [13] and thearticle 19 from Universal Declaration of Human Rights [14].
Articles 4 and 5 of this bill also recall dark hours in history and in particular the Law of Suspects [15].
Passed on August 12, 1793, in the midst of the Terror of which it became the best instrument, this law allowed the immediate arrest, without reason or proof, of all those who “have not constantly demonstrated their attachment to the Revolution” or of those who “having done nothing against Liberty, have done nothing for it”.
Here, these articles will allow all those who have an opinion different from that of the health authorities on the therapeutic virtues of products to be prosecuted without proof. (possibly new) marketed by pharmaceutical laboratories. No criticism will be permitted and in the end not only those who doubt the quality of these products, but also all those who refuse to prescribe them, will be suspected of sectarian excesses.
We must, however, remember that the “Law of Suspects swept away the revolutionaries themselves, who ended up falling in their turn under the influence of this double-edged law that they made to get rid of their enemies.”
Let us never forget this.
We thank you for having read our alert on what should be called a legislative drift – at a minimum – in terms of science and its evolution.
Very respectfully,
The entire BonSens.org team
One of the administrators of BonSens.org declares:
“the restoration of these elements would lead to a loss of freedom of expression to the detriment of French people and patients. We cannot let this happen, and it was our duty, in common sense, to alert all MPs in order to stop this liberticidal drift“.
#BonSens.org #alerts #deputies #liberticidal #excesses #bill #sectarian #abuses