No Longer Taboo to Publish Articles of COVID Vaccine Injuries. Why are GBCA Injuries Still Rarely Published?

What was once taboo, and major journals refused to publish them, research studies reporting on vaccine injuries, about 3 years after the mRNA vaccines started to be administered, now publishing these articles in fine. In 2016 I wrote the first paper on GDD in a publication entitled Gadolinium in Humans: A Family of Disorders. Why after 8 years following the publication of this article by the most scholarship accomplished author on Safety in Radiology and on Abdominal MRI , Richard Semelka, MD, does the disease remain still so poorly appreciated by physicians? I actually thought, maybe naively so, that when the most published authority on the value of using GBCAs, suddenly wrote: 'hey, wait a minute, some people get very sick from GBCAs', that within months the broad community would understand it. But it wasn't so.

There are a number of differences between the two situations:

the pool of reviewers for articles on vaccines would be much larger and composed of individuals with a broad range of knowledge on vaccines including injuries sustained by them
With GDD, the pool of reviewers is much smaller, and individuals 'recognized' as experts in MR contrast, really are not experts on the broad subject of GBCAs but rather are radiologists who interpret a lot of MRI that includes the use of GBCAs. This type of reviewer is highly unlikely to approve for publication articles that may suggest that what they are doing is harmful to patients.
Since there is much more research on vaccines which is sponsored by major granting organizations that are either governmental or large nonprofits, the overbearing role of pharmaceutical companies was only sufficiently powerful to block articles for 3 years on safety concerns of vaccines, whereas the funding for research on GBCA safety concerns is negligible, so funding for MR contrast studies is generally just by the companies that produce the GBCAs.
Radiologists essentially never see patients so are oblivious to the fact that patients experience toxicity from GBCAs. Patients when they experience GDD go either to the Emergency Department or to their primary physician, and neither of these groups are aware of the condition, because it has not appeared in the literature.
Amongst all specialties, Radiology probably publishes the least and has the least emphasis on scholarship, paper writing, grant writing.
MR contrast agent companies are major sponsors of journals in Radiology. They possibly sublimally convey the message: " Ixnay on aftey-say roblems-pay with BCA-gay." Yes they would say it in Pig Latin so it could not be discovered.

These are just 6 of the reasons why GDD still is taboo to speak in polite company. So for the present you have to be vigilant and the steward of your own health care. I try to be understanding of the broader community of physicians and turn to the words of Jesus on the cross: "forgive them for they know not what they are doing". But.... that is easy for me to say because I am not in extreme constant pain and agony from GBCA injections.

Richard Semelka, MD