What happened at the conference
After Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger’s presentation at the end of the conference, there was a lively debate between Dr.
Ryan Cole and Dr. Stuckelberger regarding the possible absence or presence of not just mRNA, but also ofgraphene oxide (GO)/other nanotechnology, in vials of mRNA injections.
This impromptu debate was accompanied by catcalls from a few persons in an isolated section of the audience.
A member of this group filmed part of the exchange between Drs Cole and Stuckelberger. Several days later, thefootage was shared via a Bitchute channel and subsequently aired on the Dr. Jane Ruby Show, which including
several unsubstantiated claims about the conference and its organization, which were purely speculative andentirely incorrect.
The conference organisers are making this statement to clarify what happened from our perspective, and to stateclearly that Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger was not censored at the conference.
We would also make the point that the conference was almost extent funded by ticket sales, plus a contribution
from small number of private donations made to Läkaruppropet/The Physicians Appeal. No externalorganizations were involved in funding the conference. This was made clear in a budget published on ourFacebook page after the conference, which was available until our page was permanently suspended by
Facebook on 1st February 2023.
Placing Dr. Stuckelberger as the last speaker in the conference program was a conscious decision. Not to be able
to censor her talk, but so that she could headline the end of the conference. She is a well-known and highly
respected speaker with direct experience and detailed knowledge of the UN and WHO, so we thought this would
provide an interesting perspective to the end of the conference, particularly in light of the WHOs agenda behind
their proposed “pandemic treaty”. The final session panel discussion was designed to fit the speakers in thesession, and was entitled 'Where are we heading and what should we strive for?'During each presentation, all speakers were briefed with 15 minutes remaining and then again with 5 minutesremaining. Despite this, all of the lecturers overran the allotted time on Sunday afternoon, which wasaccommodated by shortening the breaks. Unfortunately, when Dr. Stuckelberger went approximately 10 minutes
over her scheduled 40 minutes, there was no way to accommodate this delay, as it was the penultimate event in
the schedule. Hence, there was an urgency from the organizers to get Dr. Stuckelberger to wind up her talk, but
this was purely in the interests of time, rather than censorship.
After Dr. Stuckelberger’s talk, and with only 15 minutes remaining for the panel discussion, the organisers took
a quick decision to give each of the speakers from the last session just a few minutes to summarise what theywanted to say.
Once everyone was seated, Dr. Cole, who had spoken at the Sunday morning session, took to the podium tocomment on one of the claims made in Dr. Stuckelberger’s talk; namely that there was graphene
oxide/nanotechnology in all vials of COVID-19 vaccines. Dr. Cole stated that his research team had not foundany evidence for this, whereupon Dr. Stuckelberger defended her own point of view and stated that Dr. Colewas not an expert on nanotechnology. Voices were raised and both parties talked over each other. At the sametime, a member of the audience began to heckle Dr. Cole and suggested that Dr. Stuckelberger was beingcensored.
It would have been highly preferable to have held a scientific debate between Drs Cole and Stuckelberger,
where both could have presented evidence for their assertions, but unfortunately there was no time for this.
The conference concluded rapidly with a drastically shortened panel debate. This was due to the fact that a bus
was scheduled to take the speakers (and other attendees) back to the hotel for dinner. The bus had anotherbooking immediately afterwards and could not wait. Also the conference venue needed to be cleared and thiswas to a strict timetable according to the contract with the venue.

www.lakaruppropet.seWe would like to conclude by reiterating that there was absolutely no intent to censor Dr. Stuckelberger, nor toplace her in an awkward position at the end of her talk. However, we would really like to take the opportunity toapologize unreservedly for any animosity she may have experienced during the closing moments of theconference, which was highly engaging in this and all other respects.
We have given both Dr. Cole and Dr. Stuckelberger the opportunity to respond in writing to state their positionfor the record. Dr. Stuckelberger has not yet responded but we will update this statement if she chooses to do so.
Dr. Cole’s response is as follows.
Dr. Ryan Cole’s Response
The freedom movement is far more important than anybody’s pet project or ego. The events in Stockholm on
the last day of the conference were not as the naysayers portrayed them. Astrid’s talk was finished when I mademy comments, and I did not interrupt her. I was asked by several colleagues in the audience to make aclarification, indicating that research performed by Austrian university physicists and analytical chemists onover 100 vials, from 3 manufacturers and numerous lots, did not indicate the presence of GO or nano tech in anyof the vials tested. In addition, an antenna physicist with 26 years of experience, approached me from theaudience after my comments, thanking me and clarifying some basic physical principles, which cannot beviolated and that negate arguments about transmitting nano tech.
I have zero animosity towards anyone in the Freedom Movement, especially Astrid whom I consider as a friend.
We should all be on the same stage fighting for freedom and not conjecture projects that distract from themovement or the cause. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
We should focus on the fact that governments are corrupted and that there are many procedures that are in place
to limit or restrict our freedoms. However, focusing on things that do not help our cause will in the end lead orcause to self-destruct. What is most important is to stop the LNP and gene-based platform ultimately, as thesewill harm humanity beyond measure. Those two things are the necessary and sufficient aspect of the shots thatmust be stopped. We must focus our collective efforts on stopping government control, vaccine, passports, etc.
All attacks should be set aside. Cordial conversation should happen behind the scenes, and we should focus on
winning the cause for freedom.

www.lakaruppropet.se