正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Creatine is SAFE! CASE CLOSED! I have been saying for years that creatine monohydrate (CM) is the most effective & safest supplement on the market for improving lean mass, strength, performance, & now we have data showing it may improve cognition while decreasing symptoms of depression & possibly protect...

BioLayne's profile picture

Layne Norton, PhD

231,086 subscribers

43,972 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

健康养生科学技术教育
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

We know creatine is awesome for muscles and performance, but it’s also good for your brain 🧠 A new study showed acute improvements in cognitive function from just a single high dose of creatine monohydrate Also… it doesn’t harm your liver It doesn’t harm your kidneys There’s no evidence it causes hair loss It doesn’t cause subcutaneous water retention For some people it can cause GI irritation. For these folks, doing multiple smaller doses throughout the day rather than a single dose may help Creatine is the most effective, tested, safe supplement on the market today 🤷🏼‍♂️
8:18

We know creatine is awesome for muscles and performance, but it’s also good for your brain 🧠 A new study showed acute improvements in cognitive function from just a single high dose of creatine monohydrate Also… it doesn’t harm your liver It doesn’t harm your kidneys There’s no evidence it causes hair loss It doesn’t cause subcutaneous water retention For some people it can cause GI irritation. For these folks, doing multiple smaller doses throughout the day rather than a single dose may help Creatine is the most effective, tested, safe supplement on the market today 🤷🏼‍♂️

Layne Norton, PhD

193,122 次观看 • 1 年前

Creatine Monohydrate is STILL KING Creatine monohydrate (CrM) is the most effective supplement on the market & has decades of data & thousands of studies to back up its use. It is also the least expensive form of creatine on the market. If CrM is so effective why do companies keep trying to reinvent the wheel? I’ll let you in on a dirty little supplement industry secret, companies can’t make much money on CrM because it is so widely available that it drives down the price. So companies make ‘new & improved’ forms of creatine to justify charging you 2-4x more money. There’s only one problem… these forms are either less effective or only equally effective but cost WAY more One of the new forms of creatine that has generated a lot of buzz is creatine hydrochloride (CrHCl). CrHCl is more soluble in water & so the claim has been made that it gets absorbed better & you don’t need to take as much to get equal results. A recent study (PMID: 39545789) aimed to test these claims directly. The researchers split the participants into 4 groups who resistance trained (RT): RT + placebo RT + CrM at 0.03g/kg BW RT + CrHCl at 0.03g/kg BW RT + CrM at a loading dose of 0.3g/kg BW followed by a maintenance dose of 0.03g/kg BW At the end of the study all the creatine groups had better results than the placebo group, but NONE of the creatine groups had any significant differences from each other. Sorry CrHCl, you’re just another overpriced reinvention of the wheel to try to get people to spend more money so that supplement companies can pocket more Some people do get GI distress with rCM, in this case you can try splitting the normal 5g/day dose up into 2-3 smaller doses throughout the day & that will help Stick with tried & true CrM. It is inexpensive & very effective. That is why we use CrM in my Recovery product from @outworknutritionofficial (link in bio) because why would we charge you more for a less effective, more expensive product? We wouldn’t, because we don’t roll like that
3:36

Creatine Monohydrate is STILL KING Creatine monohydrate (CrM) is the most effective supplement on the market & has decades of data & thousands of studies to back up its use. It is also the least expensive form of creatine on the market. If CrM is so effective why do companies keep trying to reinvent the wheel? I’ll let you in on a dirty little supplement industry secret, companies can’t make much money on CrM because it is so widely available that it drives down the price. So companies make ‘new & improved’ forms of creatine to justify charging you 2-4x more money. There’s only one problem… these forms are either less effective or only equally effective but cost WAY more One of the new forms of creatine that has generated a lot of buzz is creatine hydrochloride (CrHCl). CrHCl is more soluble in water & so the claim has been made that it gets absorbed better & you don’t need to take as much to get equal results. A recent study (PMID: 39545789) aimed to test these claims directly. The researchers split the participants into 4 groups who resistance trained (RT): RT + placebo RT + CrM at 0.03g/kg BW RT + CrHCl at 0.03g/kg BW RT + CrM at a loading dose of 0.3g/kg BW followed by a maintenance dose of 0.03g/kg BW At the end of the study all the creatine groups had better results than the placebo group, but NONE of the creatine groups had any significant differences from each other. Sorry CrHCl, you’re just another overpriced reinvention of the wheel to try to get people to spend more money so that supplement companies can pocket more Some people do get GI distress with rCM, in this case you can try splitting the normal 5g/day dose up into 2-3 smaller doses throughout the day & that will help Stick with tried & true CrM. It is inexpensive & very effective. That is why we use CrM in my Recovery product from @outworknutritionofficial (link in bio) because why would we charge you more for a less effective, more expensive product? We wouldn’t, because we don’t roll like that

Layne Norton, PhD

28,197 次观看 • 1 年前

Creatine is for Brain Power, not Just Muscle Power A New RCT just dropped looking at creatine hydrochloride (HCl) and creatine ethyl ester (CEE) on cognitive outcomes (PMID: 40854087). Researchers gave perimenopausal women 8 weeks of either low-dose creatine HCl (750 mg or 1.5 g / day), a blend of HCl + CEE, or placebo. 👉 The 1.5 g HCl group showed small but significant improvements in reaction time and even a ~16% increase in frontal brain creatine levels on MRS scans. The HCl + CEE combo didn’t outperform HCl alone. All forms were well-tolerated and there were no serious side effects. The results add to growing evidence that creatine supports cognition—not just strength, hypertrophy, and power—but let’s keep perspective: ⚠️ Creatine ethyl ester has consistently underperformed in bioavailability studies. Multiple head-to-head trials show it’s rapidly degraded to creatinine in the gut and fails to meaningfully raise muscle creatine compared to creatine monohydrate (PMID:19228401). Creatine HCl seems to dissolve better in water and some anecdotal reports claim it’s easier on digestion for some people, but so far there’s no solid evidence it improves muscle or brain creatine stores beyond what you get with monohydrate. Bottom line: this study is promising for the cognitive benefits of creatine overall, but it doesn’t change the main recommendation Creatine monohydrate is still the gold standard. It’s the form used in hundreds of human RCTs, proven to raise muscle and brain creatine, and it’s cheap. Until stronger data show otherwise, save your money and stick with monohydrate.
2:52

Creatine is for Brain Power, not Just Muscle Power A New RCT just dropped looking at creatine hydrochloride (HCl) and creatine ethyl ester (CEE) on cognitive outcomes (PMID: 40854087). Researchers gave perimenopausal women 8 weeks of either low-dose creatine HCl (750 mg or 1.5 g / day), a blend of HCl + CEE, or placebo. 👉 The 1.5 g HCl group showed small but significant improvements in reaction time and even a ~16% increase in frontal brain creatine levels on MRS scans. The HCl + CEE combo didn’t outperform HCl alone. All forms were well-tolerated and there were no serious side effects. The results add to growing evidence that creatine supports cognition—not just strength, hypertrophy, and power—but let’s keep perspective: ⚠️ Creatine ethyl ester has consistently underperformed in bioavailability studies. Multiple head-to-head trials show it’s rapidly degraded to creatinine in the gut and fails to meaningfully raise muscle creatine compared to creatine monohydrate (PMID:19228401). Creatine HCl seems to dissolve better in water and some anecdotal reports claim it’s easier on digestion for some people, but so far there’s no solid evidence it improves muscle or brain creatine stores beyond what you get with monohydrate. Bottom line: this study is promising for the cognitive benefits of creatine overall, but it doesn’t change the main recommendation Creatine monohydrate is still the gold standard. It’s the form used in hundreds of human RCTs, proven to raise muscle and brain creatine, and it’s cheap. Until stronger data show otherwise, save your money and stick with monohydrate.

Layne Norton, PhD

17,692 次观看 • 9 个月前

Creatine is probably not harming our kidneys. Studies using doses up to 11 grams per day for a year have found no harmful effects on kidney, liver, or cardiovascular markers in healthy people. Yet the “creatine ruins your kidneys” myth refuses to die. Even some healthcare professionals still repeat it. Creatine breaks down into creatinine, which shows up on blood tests. If you supplement with creatine, your creatinine levels can go up, but that doesn’t automatically mean your kidneys are failing. It often just means… you’re taking creatine. If you take creatine and your lab work shows elevated creatinine, it’s often a false alarm, not a sign your kidneys are shot. A more reliable marker of kidney function to use when taking creatine is cystatin C. Creatine has plenty of debates around it. But at this point, in healthy people using reasonable doses, “it wrecks your kidneys” shouldn’t be one of them.
2:26

Creatine is probably not harming our kidneys. Studies using doses up to 11 grams per day for a year have found no harmful effects on kidney, liver, or cardiovascular markers in healthy people. Yet the “creatine ruins your kidneys” myth refuses to die. Even some healthcare professionals still repeat it. Creatine breaks down into creatinine, which shows up on blood tests. If you supplement with creatine, your creatinine levels can go up, but that doesn’t automatically mean your kidneys are failing. It often just means… you’re taking creatine. If you take creatine and your lab work shows elevated creatinine, it’s often a false alarm, not a sign your kidneys are shot. A more reliable marker of kidney function to use when taking creatine is cystatin C. Creatine has plenty of debates around it. But at this point, in healthy people using reasonable doses, “it wrecks your kidneys” shouldn’t be one of them.

Dr. Rhonda Patrick

597,585 次观看 • 9 个月前

Most of us have been taught that creatine is strictly for sports performance. The clinical data tells a completely different story. It's the most researched supplement on earth. Studied for nearly 200 years, but are we still missing the point? This is why I sat down with Dr Darren Candow. He is one of the world’s most published researchers on creatine and ageing. He’s published more than 175 scientific papers, over 115 of them focused specifically on creatine and longevity. I was shown the data on why muscle loss starts happening decades earlier than we think, the exact mistake millions of us make with protein as we get older and what the clinical evidence actually says about creatine for women, children, and brain health. We discussed things like: - 5 biggest myths about creatine. - Why creatine is no longer just for athletes. - What women need to know about creatine. - Is creatine is safe for children? - How muscle loss begins much earlier than most people realise. - The protein mistake many people make as they age. What blew my mind during this chat is how far the science goes beyond sport and that creatine might be one of the most misunderstood supplements in the world. But Darren’s research points to something much bigger… If you care about staying strong and independent as you get older, I think this conversation is worth your time.
1:29

Most of us have been taught that creatine is strictly for sports performance. The clinical data tells a completely different story. It's the most researched supplement on earth. Studied for nearly 200 years, but are we still missing the point? This is why I sat down with Dr Darren Candow. He is one of the world’s most published researchers on creatine and ageing. He’s published more than 175 scientific papers, over 115 of them focused specifically on creatine and longevity. I was shown the data on why muscle loss starts happening decades earlier than we think, the exact mistake millions of us make with protein as we get older and what the clinical evidence actually says about creatine for women, children, and brain health. We discussed things like: - 5 biggest myths about creatine. - Why creatine is no longer just for athletes. - What women need to know about creatine. - Is creatine is safe for children? - How muscle loss begins much earlier than most people realise. - The protein mistake many people make as they age. What blew my mind during this chat is how far the science goes beyond sport and that creatine might be one of the most misunderstood supplements in the world. But Darren’s research points to something much bigger… If you care about staying strong and independent as you get older, I think this conversation is worth your time.

Steven Bartlett

177,717 次观看 • 2 个月前

Use creatine to protect your brain from head injuries: Repeated head injuries can lead to second-impact syndrome, where a subsequent injury before full recovery causes rapid and potentially permanent brain damage. This is a significant risk for athletes, military, or anyone prone to traumatic brain injury (TBI) or concussions. But here's the good news: research has shown that creatine supplementation can help mitigate the damage caused by second-impact syndrome. In fact, studies have found that creatine depletion prior to additional impacts can worsen the damage to your brain. So, what should you do? If you do experience a head injury, it's essential to replenish your creatine stores as quickly as possible. Creatine monohydrate is a good option, as it's the most researched and widely used form in studies, and it's also one of the most affordable and available options. Creating a regular creatine supplementation routine can be beneficial for overall health and wellness, regardless of your risk level for head injuries. You can obtain creatine through both food sources and supplements. While it is possible to get creatine from food, particularly from meat sources (which contain around 400-600mg of creatine per 100g or 3.5oz serving), it can be challenging to achieve the high dosages needed through diet alone. Most studies on creatine monohydrate for brain injuries have used high dosages of around 20g per day, which is significantly higher than the typical dosages used for performance benefits. As a preventative measure, a daily dose of 5-10g may be sufficient for most people. However, if you know you'll be at risk of exposure to head impacts, you may want to increase your dosage to 20-30g per day for a week, split into multiple doses. Remember, the primary goal should always be to minimize the number of head impacts and injuries in the first place.
1:22

Use creatine to protect your brain from head injuries: Repeated head injuries can lead to second-impact syndrome, where a subsequent injury before full recovery causes rapid and potentially permanent brain damage. This is a significant risk for athletes, military, or anyone prone to traumatic brain injury (TBI) or concussions. But here's the good news: research has shown that creatine supplementation can help mitigate the damage caused by second-impact syndrome. In fact, studies have found that creatine depletion prior to additional impacts can worsen the damage to your brain. So, what should you do? If you do experience a head injury, it's essential to replenish your creatine stores as quickly as possible. Creatine monohydrate is a good option, as it's the most researched and widely used form in studies, and it's also one of the most affordable and available options. Creating a regular creatine supplementation routine can be beneficial for overall health and wellness, regardless of your risk level for head injuries. You can obtain creatine through both food sources and supplements. While it is possible to get creatine from food, particularly from meat sources (which contain around 400-600mg of creatine per 100g or 3.5oz serving), it can be challenging to achieve the high dosages needed through diet alone. Most studies on creatine monohydrate for brain injuries have used high dosages of around 20g per day, which is significantly higher than the typical dosages used for performance benefits. As a preventative measure, a daily dose of 5-10g may be sufficient for most people. However, if you know you'll be at risk of exposure to head impacts, you may want to increase your dosage to 20-30g per day for a week, split into multiple doses. Remember, the primary goal should always be to minimize the number of head impacts and injuries in the first place.

Andy Galpin, PhD

137,470 次观看 • 2 年前

Creatine isn’t just for athletes. A growing body of scientific evidence now shows creatine helps preserve muscle during aging, maintains bone density, improves cognition (especially during stress), and speeds muscle recovery after intense exercise. To explore the mechanisms, optimal dosing strategies, and practical considerations, and more, I invited a leading creatine researcher Dr. Darren Candow (Darren Candow, PhD, CSEP-CEP, FISSN) onto the podcast. Even if you’re not an athlete—or you’ve dismissed creatine as a muscle supplement—you need to listen to this episode. Links to YouTube, Apple Podcasts, and Spotify in the comments. Timestamps: 0:00 - Introduction 0:56 - What makes creatine effective for exercise performance? 4:23 - The loss of explosive power with aging 5:59 - How creatine speeds up recovery between sets 8:36 - Two ways creatine boosts muscle strength 10:34 - Why creatine might not speed typical weight-training recovery 13:01 - Anti-catabolic effects 13:38 - Why do men and women respond differently? 15:12 - Dietary creatine vs. supplementation 15:59 - Is creatine supplementation necessary—or optional? 17:27 - Why plant-based may benefit most 18:38 - Should creatine dosage change with age? 19:23 - Loading vs. daily dosing 22:20 - Why 5 grams might not be enough—other tissues 24:11 - Can creatine prevent bone loss—even without weight training? 24:32 - How creatine supports osteoblast activity 26:13 - Preventing hip fractures with creatine 28:55 - Creatine vs. bisphosphonates 32:43 - Why creatine isn’t just for weightlifters 35:14 - Why stressed brains benefit most 37:19 - Why brain aging accelerates demand 40:16 - Why 10g per day might be the optimal dose 42:07 - Why creatine counteracts sleep deprivation 45:16 - Before vs. after concussion 47:39 - Should dosage be adjusted by weight? 49:01 - Does creatine improve sleep on training days? 51:56 - Creatine for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s 53:29 - Can creatine help with depression and anxiety? 56:46 - Creatine and glutamine for preventing respiratory illness 59:02 - Why creatine may enhance endothelial health and circulation 1:00:26 - Creatine’s role in cardiometabolic health 1:02:07 - When does loading actually make sense? 1:03:12 - Preserving muscle and enhancing recovery after injury 1:06:07 - Is creatine effective without exercise? 1:08:23 - Why creatine might improve male fertility 1:10:19 - Is it safe for children? 1:13:43 - Creatine supplementation during pregnancy 1:15:15 - Could creatine boost motor skills in kids? 1:15:55 - Creatine monohydrate vs. the rest 1:20:37 - How to avoid digestive issues with creatine supplementation 1:23:18 - Does timing matter—and should you cycle it? 1:24:54 - Should you take creatine every day—or only workout days? 1:25:39 - Why caffeine might blunt the effects 1:28:43 - Does creatine increase body fat—or is that a myth? 1:29:30 - Preventing cramps (the hydration myth) 1:30:55 - Why creatine won’t damage your kidneys 1:33:21 - Why creatine is linked (wrongly?) to baldness 1:36:44 - Debunking myths—sleep, cancer, urination 1:40:01 - How creatine affects homocysteine levels 1:42:54 - Creatine and protein—the ideal post-workout pair? 1:45:48 - How to pick the best creatine supplement 1:48:08 - What to know about micronized creatine
1:49:28

Creatine isn’t just for athletes. A growing body of scientific evidence now shows creatine helps preserve muscle during aging, maintains bone density, improves cognition (especially during stress), and speeds muscle recovery after intense exercise. To explore the mechanisms, optimal dosing strategies, and practical considerations, and more, I invited a leading creatine researcher Dr. Darren Candow (Darren Candow, PhD, CSEP-CEP, FISSN) onto the podcast. Even if you’re not an athlete—or you’ve dismissed creatine as a muscle supplement—you need to listen to this episode. Links to YouTube, Apple Podcasts, and Spotify in the comments. Timestamps: 0:00 - Introduction 0:56 - What makes creatine effective for exercise performance? 4:23 - The loss of explosive power with aging 5:59 - How creatine speeds up recovery between sets 8:36 - Two ways creatine boosts muscle strength 10:34 - Why creatine might not speed typical weight-training recovery 13:01 - Anti-catabolic effects 13:38 - Why do men and women respond differently? 15:12 - Dietary creatine vs. supplementation 15:59 - Is creatine supplementation necessary—or optional? 17:27 - Why plant-based may benefit most 18:38 - Should creatine dosage change with age? 19:23 - Loading vs. daily dosing 22:20 - Why 5 grams might not be enough—other tissues 24:11 - Can creatine prevent bone loss—even without weight training? 24:32 - How creatine supports osteoblast activity 26:13 - Preventing hip fractures with creatine 28:55 - Creatine vs. bisphosphonates 32:43 - Why creatine isn’t just for weightlifters 35:14 - Why stressed brains benefit most 37:19 - Why brain aging accelerates demand 40:16 - Why 10g per day might be the optimal dose 42:07 - Why creatine counteracts sleep deprivation 45:16 - Before vs. after concussion 47:39 - Should dosage be adjusted by weight? 49:01 - Does creatine improve sleep on training days? 51:56 - Creatine for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s 53:29 - Can creatine help with depression and anxiety? 56:46 - Creatine and glutamine for preventing respiratory illness 59:02 - Why creatine may enhance endothelial health and circulation 1:00:26 - Creatine’s role in cardiometabolic health 1:02:07 - When does loading actually make sense? 1:03:12 - Preserving muscle and enhancing recovery after injury 1:06:07 - Is creatine effective without exercise? 1:08:23 - Why creatine might improve male fertility 1:10:19 - Is it safe for children? 1:13:43 - Creatine supplementation during pregnancy 1:15:15 - Could creatine boost motor skills in kids? 1:15:55 - Creatine monohydrate vs. the rest 1:20:37 - How to avoid digestive issues with creatine supplementation 1:23:18 - Does timing matter—and should you cycle it? 1:24:54 - Should you take creatine every day—or only workout days? 1:25:39 - Why caffeine might blunt the effects 1:28:43 - Does creatine increase body fat—or is that a myth? 1:29:30 - Preventing cramps (the hydration myth) 1:30:55 - Why creatine won’t damage your kidneys 1:33:21 - Why creatine is linked (wrongly?) to baldness 1:36:44 - Debunking myths—sleep, cancer, urination 1:40:01 - How creatine affects homocysteine levels 1:42:54 - Creatine and protein—the ideal post-workout pair? 1:45:48 - How to pick the best creatine supplement 1:48:08 - What to know about micronized creatine

Dr. Rhonda Patrick

463,757 次观看 • 1 年前

"This [is] the brilliance of this bioweapon [the COVID jabs]... It goes to every part of your body—it will hit you at whatever your point of susceptibility is... [there are] 1,287 side effects... This [is] the most evil assault upon humanity that anybody could imagine." Dr. Charles Hoffe, a practicing family physician in BC, Canada, describes for Maryann Gebauer how the COVID injections are a "brilliant...bioweapon" because they cause such a staggering array of health problems. Hoffe, an outspoken critic of the injections who took on the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia (the medical board recently dropped their bogus case against Hoffe, which was based on his questioning the COVID injections in social media posts), notes that the poisonous shots "will hit you at whatever your point of susceptibility is" and highlights their use of "lipid nano capsules" that ensure their payload "[goes] to every single part of [a recipient's] body." "Every patient is different... There's no two that are the same. And and this [is] the brilliance of this bioweapon," Hoffe says. "The fact that they chose the lipid nano capsules as a delivery system ensured that this would get into every single part of your body. And so because it goes to every part of your body, it will hit you at whatever your point of susceptibility is. Whatever your point of weakness is, that's where you'll notice it the most." Hoffe adds: "For some people that were more prone to cardiac things, they're gonna get cardiac symptoms. For... people [who] are more prone to autoimmune things, that's what it'll be for them. For some people that were more easily prone to getting cancer, that's what they'll get. And so it was brilliant. If you're trying to track side effects from a new treatment, but the side effects are everything you can think of, how do you track it?" "There's no medical product that has 1287 side effects," Hoffe notes. I mean, it [the adverse events of special interest list] literally read[s] like a medical dictionary... almost everything you could think of is what Pfizer had recorded in the first 90 days as side effects." "This was the most evil assault upon humanity that anybody could imagine," Hoffe adds. "Because all of these people... were told that this was gonna keep them safe. And meanwhile, it was designed to cause harm." The physician goes on to say: "The most harmful part of the virus was the spike protein. That was the warhead on it. The fact that the vaccine turned your body into a spike protein factory...it got your body to make the most dangerous part of the virus. The fact that that was there in this [injection and it] was a patented bioweapon. For anyone to say...they were doing their best and it just went wrong: Bioweapons aren't designed to keep people safe. They are designed to cause harm."
4:22

"This [is] the brilliance of this bioweapon [the COVID jabs]... It goes to every part of your body—it will hit you at whatever your point of susceptibility is... [there are] 1,287 side effects... This [is] the most evil assault upon humanity that anybody could imagine." Dr. Charles Hoffe, a practicing family physician in BC, Canada, describes for Maryann Gebauer how the COVID injections are a "brilliant...bioweapon" because they cause such a staggering array of health problems. Hoffe, an outspoken critic of the injections who took on the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia (the medical board recently dropped their bogus case against Hoffe, which was based on his questioning the COVID injections in social media posts), notes that the poisonous shots "will hit you at whatever your point of susceptibility is" and highlights their use of "lipid nano capsules" that ensure their payload "[goes] to every single part of [a recipient's] body." "Every patient is different... There's no two that are the same. And and this [is] the brilliance of this bioweapon," Hoffe says. "The fact that they chose the lipid nano capsules as a delivery system ensured that this would get into every single part of your body. And so because it goes to every part of your body, it will hit you at whatever your point of susceptibility is. Whatever your point of weakness is, that's where you'll notice it the most." Hoffe adds: "For some people that were more prone to cardiac things, they're gonna get cardiac symptoms. For... people [who] are more prone to autoimmune things, that's what it'll be for them. For some people that were more easily prone to getting cancer, that's what they'll get. And so it was brilliant. If you're trying to track side effects from a new treatment, but the side effects are everything you can think of, how do you track it?" "There's no medical product that has 1287 side effects," Hoffe notes. I mean, it [the adverse events of special interest list] literally read[s] like a medical dictionary... almost everything you could think of is what Pfizer had recorded in the first 90 days as side effects." "This was the most evil assault upon humanity that anybody could imagine," Hoffe adds. "Because all of these people... were told that this was gonna keep them safe. And meanwhile, it was designed to cause harm." The physician goes on to say: "The most harmful part of the virus was the spike protein. That was the warhead on it. The fact that the vaccine turned your body into a spike protein factory...it got your body to make the most dangerous part of the virus. The fact that that was there in this [injection and it] was a patented bioweapon. For anyone to say...they were doing their best and it just went wrong: Bioweapons aren't designed to keep people safe. They are designed to cause harm."

Sense Receptor

110,610 次观看 • 1 年前

“Unless you're comparing a vaccine against saline, how can you say it’s safe?” Dr. Sherri Tenpenny just exposed Pharma’s “safe and effective” narrative as a complete sham. “There has never been—on any one of the vaccines that are currently given—a truly placebo-controlled trial where in one set of children they were given the new vaccine, and then the other set of children it was a true saline placebo.” “All of the vaccine trials are a vaccine compared to another vaccine,” Alex Clark: “How long were the majority of the safety trials done on the vaccines on the childhood schedule?” Dr. Tenpenny: “The average length of time is probably somewhere between 15 and 30 days.” “It’s been as short as 4 days.” “When they brought the first hepatitis B vaccine to market, they followed to see if there were any side effects for 5 days.” “The second hepatitis B vaccine that came to market, they followed side effects for 4 days.” “That is not a safety trial.” “It can take months to years to develop autoimmune diseases, neurological complications, other types of things like [gastrointestinal] disorders.” “Encephalitis can start right away, but it can be slow brewing for a long period of time.” Dr Sherri Tenpenny
2:37

“Unless you're comparing a vaccine against saline, how can you say it’s safe?” Dr. Sherri Tenpenny just exposed Pharma’s “safe and effective” narrative as a complete sham. “There has never been—on any one of the vaccines that are currently given—a truly placebo-controlled trial where in one set of children they were given the new vaccine, and then the other set of children it was a true saline placebo.” “All of the vaccine trials are a vaccine compared to another vaccine,” Alex Clark: “How long were the majority of the safety trials done on the vaccines on the childhood schedule?” Dr. Tenpenny: “The average length of time is probably somewhere between 15 and 30 days.” “It’s been as short as 4 days.” “When they brought the first hepatitis B vaccine to market, they followed to see if there were any side effects for 5 days.” “The second hepatitis B vaccine that came to market, they followed side effects for 4 days.” “That is not a safety trial.” “It can take months to years to develop autoimmune diseases, neurological complications, other types of things like [gastrointestinal] disorders.” “Encephalitis can start right away, but it can be slow brewing for a long period of time.” Dr Sherri Tenpenny

Children’s Health Defense

49,833 次观看 • 8 个月前

NEW: Marjorie Taylor Greene on how many in Congress know the Covid jabs have killed "hundreds of thousands" of Americans, lack of Big Pharma liability "Probably under 40...willing to... admit... the Covid vaccine has...injured people and killed people" "These things were bad. And they are bad. And we have to face it and say it" "[But] people know it deep down" "They know it. But they're not willing to face that truth" "And the reason why is, most people are vaccinated" "If they face that truth, they have to face the truth [of] what are the long-term side effects that I myself may face, that I took several of these Covid vaccines" (Note: MTG did not herself get jabbed.) "Or, what are the long-term side effects for my children that I forced to get vaccinated. Or my elderly parents" "They have to face that truth, and the truth can be terrifying" "It's also [about them] owning being wrong" "These things were bad. And they are bad. And we have to face it and say it... But then that also brings the next level... and it's the one that's really stopping that from happening, and that is forcing the pharmaceutical companies to own the liability" "And that is a wall right now that can't be penetrated" Former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 Steve Kirsch Vaccine Safety Research Foundation
3:12

NEW: Marjorie Taylor Greene on how many in Congress know the Covid jabs have killed "hundreds of thousands" of Americans, lack of Big Pharma liability "Probably under 40...willing to... admit... the Covid vaccine has...injured people and killed people" "These things were bad. And they are bad. And we have to face it and say it" "[But] people know it deep down" "They know it. But they're not willing to face that truth" "And the reason why is, most people are vaccinated" "If they face that truth, they have to face the truth [of] what are the long-term side effects that I myself may face, that I took several of these Covid vaccines" (Note: MTG did not herself get jabbed.) "Or, what are the long-term side effects for my children that I forced to get vaccinated. Or my elderly parents" "They have to face that truth, and the truth can be terrifying" "It's also [about them] owning being wrong" "These things were bad. And they are bad. And we have to face it and say it... But then that also brings the next level... and it's the one that's really stopping that from happening, and that is forcing the pharmaceutical companies to own the liability" "And that is a wall right now that can't be penetrated" Former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 Steve Kirsch Vaccine Safety Research Foundation

Sense Receptor

140,976 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚨 🚨 🚨 Marcel de Graaff, member of the European Parliament, tells of the shocking facts about the Covid19 shots found in a response from the European Medicines Agency. Marcel is talking here about the Dutch government, but I edited the original video to make it even more relevant to New Zealand. Watch, and you'll see. There are English subtitles, but here is most of what is said. I realise it's a long read, but please do read it. The EMA explicitly states that it has exclusively allowed the corona vaccines on the market for individual immunisations. And absolutely not for the control of infection and absolutely not for preventing or reducing infections. And this is devastating for governments that have gone full circle with the message that you are doing it for someone else Not only did the EMA not allow the vaccines at all to go against infections, the EMA goes even further. It explains in its answer, and I quote "The EMA's assessment reports on the admission of vaccines emphasise the lack of data on contagiousness" In other words, the vaccines were not intended to prevent infections and there are no data at all that substantiates that the vaccines help against infections. In fact, the EMA states that the exposure to the virus increases the chance of infections even in those vaccinated. The mass government campaigns to vaccinate yourself, to protect your parents, your neighbors, the weaker in society, were not only unauthorized, but also completely nonsense and not based on facts. The EMA says that the vaccines are only for the protection of the vaccinated individual. And before the individual, the patient, is vaccinated, all safety information must, and I quote the EMA again, "Be taken into account when administering or recommending a vaccination". So you were only allowed to make a recommendation for a vaccination after a doctor had determined that this was sensible in your case. And because almost no one under the age of 60 had a chance of serious complications due to the coronavirus, no one, but also no one under the age of 60 should be vaccinated after a single exception. So the sports halls full of vaccine prickers were completely in conflict with the use of which the vaccines had been administered by the EMA. To assess the safety of the vaccines, it was essential for the EMA that side effects would be properly registered. And the EMA says about this, we expect many reports of side effects that occur during or shortly after vaccination. And that means that the complaints must be reported especially in the first period immediately following vaccination. The government supported a policy in which these complaints were not reported the first 14 days after vaccination, because the vaccine would need 10 to 14 days to become effective. All complaints in that period were written to the coronavirus, and that is not only fraudulent, but that is deliberately endangering people's lives. And I remind you once again that we are still fighting with a gigantic so-called unexplained excessive mortality The government knew that the vaccines would not protect against the spread of the virus, but did not share this information with the citizens. On the contrary, it forced the vaccines to our citizens with lies, obscured the side effects and thus brought the health of everyone who had taken such a vaccine into danger. The vaccination campaigns should be stopped as soon as possible, and it is simply not safe. And it does not meet the requirements set by the EMA. And the government and all political parties that supported this should be held accountable for their lies and fraud. And please retweet! Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH® Dr Aseem Malhotra Neil Oliver Andrew Bridgen Matt Le Tissier ✝️ Winston Peters NZDSOS - NZ Doctors Speaking Out with Science #VaccineInjuries #VaccineDeaths #mRNA #ExcessDeaths
7:59

🚨 🚨 🚨 Marcel de Graaff, member of the European Parliament, tells of the shocking facts about the Covid19 shots found in a response from the European Medicines Agency. Marcel is talking here about the Dutch government, but I edited the original video to make it even more relevant to New Zealand. Watch, and you'll see. There are English subtitles, but here is most of what is said. I realise it's a long read, but please do read it. The EMA explicitly states that it has exclusively allowed the corona vaccines on the market for individual immunisations. And absolutely not for the control of infection and absolutely not for preventing or reducing infections. And this is devastating for governments that have gone full circle with the message that you are doing it for someone else Not only did the EMA not allow the vaccines at all to go against infections, the EMA goes even further. It explains in its answer, and I quote "The EMA's assessment reports on the admission of vaccines emphasise the lack of data on contagiousness" In other words, the vaccines were not intended to prevent infections and there are no data at all that substantiates that the vaccines help against infections. In fact, the EMA states that the exposure to the virus increases the chance of infections even in those vaccinated. The mass government campaigns to vaccinate yourself, to protect your parents, your neighbors, the weaker in society, were not only unauthorized, but also completely nonsense and not based on facts. The EMA says that the vaccines are only for the protection of the vaccinated individual. And before the individual, the patient, is vaccinated, all safety information must, and I quote the EMA again, "Be taken into account when administering or recommending a vaccination". So you were only allowed to make a recommendation for a vaccination after a doctor had determined that this was sensible in your case. And because almost no one under the age of 60 had a chance of serious complications due to the coronavirus, no one, but also no one under the age of 60 should be vaccinated after a single exception. So the sports halls full of vaccine prickers were completely in conflict with the use of which the vaccines had been administered by the EMA. To assess the safety of the vaccines, it was essential for the EMA that side effects would be properly registered. And the EMA says about this, we expect many reports of side effects that occur during or shortly after vaccination. And that means that the complaints must be reported especially in the first period immediately following vaccination. The government supported a policy in which these complaints were not reported the first 14 days after vaccination, because the vaccine would need 10 to 14 days to become effective. All complaints in that period were written to the coronavirus, and that is not only fraudulent, but that is deliberately endangering people's lives. And I remind you once again that we are still fighting with a gigantic so-called unexplained excessive mortality The government knew that the vaccines would not protect against the spread of the virus, but did not share this information with the citizens. On the contrary, it forced the vaccines to our citizens with lies, obscured the side effects and thus brought the health of everyone who had taken such a vaccine into danger. The vaccination campaigns should be stopped as soon as possible, and it is simply not safe. And it does not meet the requirements set by the EMA. And the government and all political parties that supported this should be held accountable for their lies and fraud. And please retweet! Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH® Dr Aseem Malhotra Neil Oliver Andrew Bridgen Matt Le Tissier ✝️ Winston Peters NZDSOS - NZ Doctors Speaking Out with Science #VaccineInjuries #VaccineDeaths #mRNA #ExcessDeaths

Coronavirus Plushie

146,788 次观看 • 2 年前

👉 Lesbians United has released our review of the literature on the drugs marketed as “puberty blockers,” titled Puberty Suppression: Medicine or Malpractice? The review cites over 300 sources, most of which are peer-reviewed scientific studies, and digs into evidence from older and better-designed studies that have not yet been brought into the conversation about puberty suppression. To our knowledge, this is the most thorough review of GnRH agonists, the drugs now marketed as “puberty blockers,” to date. Three Takeaways Yes, there IS enough research. No more claiming that the research on puberty suppression just isn’t there. No more calling for more clinical trials or urging caution until more studies are conducted on vulnerable children. A massive body of research on GnRH agonists already exists—you’ve just been using the wrong search terms. The research shows that “puberty blockers” are really, really dangerous. Particularly urgent concerns for adolescents include loss of bone mineral density and increased risk of osteoporosis; potential for decreased IQ and other cognitive deficits; increased risk of depression and suicidal thoughts; and stunted sexual and reproductive development. GnRH agonists can also affect the heart, thyroid, digestive system, urinary tract, muscles, eyes, and immune system, and cause chronic pain. A lot of the side effects are irreversible. Osteoporosis, dementia, and diabetes are irreversible. Suicide is irreversible. Chronic pain can last for years, or forever. And major health events like heart attack, stroke, and pituitary tumors can cause problems for the rest of a person’s life. Not to mention that treating the other side effects of GnRH agonists may be extremely difficult, painful, and costly, and require other medications with other side effects.
1:14

👉 Lesbians United has released our review of the literature on the drugs marketed as “puberty blockers,” titled Puberty Suppression: Medicine or Malpractice? The review cites over 300 sources, most of which are peer-reviewed scientific studies, and digs into evidence from older and better-designed studies that have not yet been brought into the conversation about puberty suppression. To our knowledge, this is the most thorough review of GnRH agonists, the drugs now marketed as “puberty blockers,” to date. Three Takeaways Yes, there IS enough research. No more claiming that the research on puberty suppression just isn’t there. No more calling for more clinical trials or urging caution until more studies are conducted on vulnerable children. A massive body of research on GnRH agonists already exists—you’ve just been using the wrong search terms. The research shows that “puberty blockers” are really, really dangerous. Particularly urgent concerns for adolescents include loss of bone mineral density and increased risk of osteoporosis; potential for decreased IQ and other cognitive deficits; increased risk of depression and suicidal thoughts; and stunted sexual and reproductive development. GnRH agonists can also affect the heart, thyroid, digestive system, urinary tract, muscles, eyes, and immune system, and cause chronic pain. A lot of the side effects are irreversible. Osteoporosis, dementia, and diabetes are irreversible. Suicide is irreversible. Chronic pain can last for years, or forever. And major health events like heart attack, stroke, and pituitary tumors can cause problems for the rest of a person’s life. Not to mention that treating the other side effects of GnRH agonists may be extremely difficult, painful, and costly, and require other medications with other side effects.

JewForPeace🇺🇸🕊☮🍉

20,080 次观看 • 2 年前