In April 2020, Facebook banned posts suggesting COVID-19 came from a lab. "Debunked conspiracy theory," they said.
In January 2025, the CIA assessed it was the most likely origin.
In early 2021, doctors who warned about heart inflammation after mRNA vaccines were threatened with medical board complaints.
By June 2021, the FDA added myocarditis warnings to vaccine labels.
In 2021, mentioning natural immunity from prior infection could get you deplatformed.
By 2022, CDC data confirmed it provided robust protection, sometimes exceeding vaccination alone.
Here's what nobody wants to talk about: It's not that new evidence emerged. The evidence was there. The studies existed. The warnings were made.
What changed was who was allowed to be right.
Doctors who raised early concerns about OxyContin's addiction risk in the late 1990s were dismissed by the medical establishment. Purdue Pharma's internal documents, revealed decades later, showed they knew.
Those doctors were right all along. But 450,000 Americans died first.
When researchers flagged that Johnson & Johnson's talc products might contain asbestos in the 1970s, they were ignored.
In 2025, juries are still awarding billion-dollar verdicts to cancer victims. The warning signs were there for fifty years.
The pattern is consistent:
- Early warnings
- Official dismissal
- Suppression of dissent
- Years pass
- Quiet acknowledgment
- Billions in settlements
- "Nobody could have known."
Except people did know. They were just called crazy for saying it out loud.
Right now, in 2025, there are doctors, researchers, and clinicians raising warnings that are being dismissed, deplatformed, and destroyed professionally.
Some of them are wrong. Some of them are grifters.
But if history is any guide, some of them are right.
The question is: What are they calling "misinformation" right now that might be tomorrow's congressional hearing?
