Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Dr. Josh Axe highlighted growing concerns about Google’s influence over health information online. He pointed out that Google had acquired pharmaceutical companies and began prioritizing results from conventional medical sources. Referencing his own experience, Dr. Axe explained that his site, once the top natural health platform with 20 million...

newstart_2024's profile picture

Camus

418,939 subscribers

19,375 views • 9 months ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

HOLEE SHIZZLES‼️ 🚨 RFK JR Sounds the Alarm on the WHO IHR Amendment's — A “Trojan Horse” is Quietly being Installed to implement Digital Health ID's and a Global Health Database • he expresses concerns about the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and their potential to "open the door" to "that kind of system of health IDs," suggesting a pathway to broader surveillance and control mechanisms. • He says the WHO is laying the groundwork for a CENTRALIZED Medical Database for every human being • He connects the potential for digital health IDs to broader issues of surveillance and industry influence. He Mentions Mass "surveillance" and he refers to "industry influence," implying that these IDs could be part of a larger mass surveillance framework that benefits certain industries while encroaching on individual privacy and freedoms. • Kennedy's concerns are framed within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, where he believes critical information and criticisms were suppressed. He suggests that the amendments could perpetuate similar dynamics, potentially using digital health IDs as a tool for narrative management and censorship, as seen during the pandemic. - His overall stance is that such measures, including digital health IDs, could jeopardize civil liberties and national sovereignty. He argues that the U.S. should not sign over authority that could lead to lockdowns and other public health measures without thorough consideration, especially when these measures might invite a system that undermines individual rights. What’s next? - Proposal and Adoption Process: The amendments were proposed and negotiated through the World Health Organization (WHO) processes, in an agreement by the World Health Assembly in May 2024 [World Health Assembly, 2024]. However, the implementation of these amendments is not automatic and requires further steps. - Opt-Out Period: There is a specific window for member states to opt out of these amendments. The U.S. and other countries have until NEXT WEEK, to formally reject the amendments. This opt-out period is crucial because it allows countries to decide whether to be bound by the new regulations.
4:49

HOLEE SHIZZLES‼️ 🚨 RFK JR Sounds the Alarm on the WHO IHR Amendment's — A “Trojan Horse” is Quietly being Installed to implement Digital Health ID's and a Global Health Database • he expresses concerns about the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and their potential to "open the door" to "that kind of system of health IDs," suggesting a pathway to broader surveillance and control mechanisms. • He says the WHO is laying the groundwork for a CENTRALIZED Medical Database for every human being • He connects the potential for digital health IDs to broader issues of surveillance and industry influence. He Mentions Mass "surveillance" and he refers to "industry influence," implying that these IDs could be part of a larger mass surveillance framework that benefits certain industries while encroaching on individual privacy and freedoms. • Kennedy's concerns are framed within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, where he believes critical information and criticisms were suppressed. He suggests that the amendments could perpetuate similar dynamics, potentially using digital health IDs as a tool for narrative management and censorship, as seen during the pandemic. - His overall stance is that such measures, including digital health IDs, could jeopardize civil liberties and national sovereignty. He argues that the U.S. should not sign over authority that could lead to lockdowns and other public health measures without thorough consideration, especially when these measures might invite a system that undermines individual rights. What’s next? - Proposal and Adoption Process: The amendments were proposed and negotiated through the World Health Organization (WHO) processes, in an agreement by the World Health Assembly in May 2024 [World Health Assembly, 2024]. However, the implementation of these amendments is not automatic and requires further steps. - Opt-Out Period: There is a specific window for member states to opt out of these amendments. The U.S. and other countries have until NEXT WEEK, to formally reject the amendments. This opt-out period is crucial because it allows countries to decide whether to be bound by the new regulations.

MJTruthUltra

437,422 views • 1 year ago

This is Dr David Mackereth, a medical doctor with 30 years experience in A&E He was sacked by the DWP, as a medical health assessor, because he refused to address a man as ‘she’ as it went against logic, ethics and his Christian faith. He took the DWP to an employment tribunal, which he lost. They stated his conduct was “incompatible with human dignity” (2019) He appealed in 2022 and lost again. This is one of hundreds of cases that will now need re-visiting after the Supreme Court ruling. We are screaming out for brilliant doctors and they sack them for not bending to compelled speech. He is a beyond eloquent, dedicated and courageous in his fight against the cult. Thank you Dr Mackereth 👏🏼
2:21

This is Dr David Mackereth, a medical doctor with 30 years experience in A&E He was sacked by the DWP, as a medical health assessor, because he refused to address a man as ‘she’ as it went against logic, ethics and his Christian faith. He took the DWP to an employment tribunal, which he lost. They stated his conduct was “incompatible with human dignity” (2019) He appealed in 2022 and lost again. This is one of hundreds of cases that will now need re-visiting after the Supreme Court ruling. We are screaming out for brilliant doctors and they sack them for not bending to compelled speech. He is a beyond eloquent, dedicated and courageous in his fight against the cult. Thank you Dr Mackereth 👏🏼

HC ▪️

107,268 views • 1 year ago

Examining the Conflicts of Interest: Dr. Ciara Kelly and Janssen Pharmaceuticals In recent discussions about medical ethics and transparency, the name of Dr. Ciara Kelly has emerged, particularly concerning her connections with Janssen Pharmaceuticals, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson. The issue of conflicts of interest in the medical field has garnered significant attention, as it poses critical questions about the integrity of healthcare professionals and the implications for patient trust. Dr. Ciara Kelly is a notable figure in the medical community, known for her contributions to health advocacy and her role as a commentator on health issues. As a respected physician, she has used her platform to inform the public on various health matters, ranging from chronic diseases to public health policies. However, recent revelations about her financial ties with Janssen have prompted scrutiny, raising alarms about potential biases in her commentary and recommendations. Understanding Conflicts of Interest A conflict of interest occurs when an individual’s professional actions may be influenced by personal financial interests. In the medical field, this can raise ethical concerns, especially when it comes to prescribing medications, endorsing treatments, or providing public health guidance. Transparency is essential; physicians must disclose any financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies to maintain the trust of their patients and the public. The Connection to Janssen Reports suggest that Dr. Kelly has received funding from Janssen Pharmaceuticals for various projects, possibly including research and speaking engagements. This financial relationship could both enhance her work and present challenges regarding impartiality. Critics argue that such ties can lead to a preference for certain medications or therapies, undermining the objective nature of medical advice. The Implications for Healthcare Conflicts of interest like those associated with Dr. Kelly and Janssen raise important questions about the integrity of healthcare communications. Patients rely on healthcare professionals to provide unbiased and evidence-based recommendations, particularly when it comes to complex decisions about treatment options. If a physician's commentary is influenced by financial relationships, it may compromise the quality of care and patient autonomy. The Importance of Transparency Transparency is key in navigating potential conflicts of interest. Disclosures should be clear, accessible, and comprehensive, enabling patients and the public to understand the potential influences on a physician's recommendations. Health institutions, professional organisations, and regulatory bodies must enforce stringent guidelines to ensure that all healthcare providers disclose any financial ties to pharmaceutical companies or other entities that could influence their clinical judgment. Moving Forward with Integrity As Dr. Ciara Kelly's situation evolves, it serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding ethical standards in the medical field. Healthcare professionals must navigate their relationships with pharmaceutical companies carefully, prioritising patient welfare and maintaining trust. The emergence of conflicts of interest in medicine calls for continued dialogue and rigorous scrutiny, emphasising that the ultimate goal should always be to provide the best possible care for patients, free from undue influence. In an era where information is readily available, patients deserve the assurance that the advice they receive is grounded in sound ethics and a commitment to their health, unmarred by conflicting interests. The medical community must remain vigilant, encouraging transparency and accountability to foster trust and ensure that healthcare remains a noble profession focused entirely on patient care.
1:13

Examining the Conflicts of Interest: Dr. Ciara Kelly and Janssen Pharmaceuticals In recent discussions about medical ethics and transparency, the name of Dr. Ciara Kelly has emerged, particularly concerning her connections with Janssen Pharmaceuticals, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson. The issue of conflicts of interest in the medical field has garnered significant attention, as it poses critical questions about the integrity of healthcare professionals and the implications for patient trust. Dr. Ciara Kelly is a notable figure in the medical community, known for her contributions to health advocacy and her role as a commentator on health issues. As a respected physician, she has used her platform to inform the public on various health matters, ranging from chronic diseases to public health policies. However, recent revelations about her financial ties with Janssen have prompted scrutiny, raising alarms about potential biases in her commentary and recommendations. Understanding Conflicts of Interest A conflict of interest occurs when an individual’s professional actions may be influenced by personal financial interests. In the medical field, this can raise ethical concerns, especially when it comes to prescribing medications, endorsing treatments, or providing public health guidance. Transparency is essential; physicians must disclose any financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies to maintain the trust of their patients and the public. The Connection to Janssen Reports suggest that Dr. Kelly has received funding from Janssen Pharmaceuticals for various projects, possibly including research and speaking engagements. This financial relationship could both enhance her work and present challenges regarding impartiality. Critics argue that such ties can lead to a preference for certain medications or therapies, undermining the objective nature of medical advice. The Implications for Healthcare Conflicts of interest like those associated with Dr. Kelly and Janssen raise important questions about the integrity of healthcare communications. Patients rely on healthcare professionals to provide unbiased and evidence-based recommendations, particularly when it comes to complex decisions about treatment options. If a physician's commentary is influenced by financial relationships, it may compromise the quality of care and patient autonomy. The Importance of Transparency Transparency is key in navigating potential conflicts of interest. Disclosures should be clear, accessible, and comprehensive, enabling patients and the public to understand the potential influences on a physician's recommendations. Health institutions, professional organisations, and regulatory bodies must enforce stringent guidelines to ensure that all healthcare providers disclose any financial ties to pharmaceutical companies or other entities that could influence their clinical judgment. Moving Forward with Integrity As Dr. Ciara Kelly's situation evolves, it serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding ethical standards in the medical field. Healthcare professionals must navigate their relationships with pharmaceutical companies carefully, prioritising patient welfare and maintaining trust. The emergence of conflicts of interest in medicine calls for continued dialogue and rigorous scrutiny, emphasising that the ultimate goal should always be to provide the best possible care for patients, free from undue influence. In an era where information is readily available, patients deserve the assurance that the advice they receive is grounded in sound ethics and a commitment to their health, unmarred by conflicting interests. The medical community must remain vigilant, encouraging transparency and accountability to foster trust and ensure that healthcare remains a noble profession focused entirely on patient care.

Eleanor Mcgee

28,682 views • 1 year ago

Back in Trump’s first term, the Dems/MSM were all health experts, and accused Trump of being mentally, physically, and cognitively unfit for office. Flashback to 1/16/2018, when the MSM foamed at the mouth over then President’s Doctor, Ronny Jackson. The Dems were dissecting every single tiny thing Trump did, from how many scoops of ice cream he had, to arguing about his life expectancy, they even accused Dr. Jackson of withholding information from the public, and even asked about Trump’s prostate health… They had Trump under a microscope, claimed Trump was cognitively impaired, but completely missed Biden? They didn’t miss Biden. They knew he was a vegetable, and they assisted in the cover up. They chose to ignore his decline, while fabricating and amplifying that Trump was unfit for office. This is a supercut of questions from the press conference after Trump’s medical assessment, and you’ll notice the MSM NEVER asked a single question like this about Biden. This is only the first half of questions too, there’s much more. The MSM reporters grilled Dr. Jackson for nearly an hour. Don’t let the MSM tell you they didn’t know about Biden. They knew.
7:05

Back in Trump’s first term, the Dems/MSM were all health experts, and accused Trump of being mentally, physically, and cognitively unfit for office. Flashback to 1/16/2018, when the MSM foamed at the mouth over then President’s Doctor, Ronny Jackson. The Dems were dissecting every single tiny thing Trump did, from how many scoops of ice cream he had, to arguing about his life expectancy, they even accused Dr. Jackson of withholding information from the public, and even asked about Trump’s prostate health… They had Trump under a microscope, claimed Trump was cognitively impaired, but completely missed Biden? They didn’t miss Biden. They knew he was a vegetable, and they assisted in the cover up. They chose to ignore his decline, while fabricating and amplifying that Trump was unfit for office. This is a supercut of questions from the press conference after Trump’s medical assessment, and you’ll notice the MSM NEVER asked a single question like this about Biden. This is only the first half of questions too, there’s much more. The MSM reporters grilled Dr. Jackson for nearly an hour. Don’t let the MSM tell you they didn’t know about Biden. They knew.

Clandestine

288,036 views • 1 year ago

RFK Jr. Exposes the Ozempic Scam: “Banned in Europe, Pushed in America—It Paralyzes the Stomach and Destroys the Gut” Robert F. Kennedy Jr. broke down the shocking truth behind Ozempic. He cited a former pharmaceutical executive who revealed that the Danish giant Novo Nordisk—maker of Ozempic—openly admits in its own materials that 100% of its profits will come from the United States. The reason? Europe bans the drug for weight loss, but America allows it, despite the known dangers. RFK Jr. described the drug as “paralyzing the stomach” and destroying serotonin production in the gut—leading to serious gastrointestinal damage and long-term consequences even after stopping use. He pointed out that Ozempic now carries black box warnings about suicidal thoughts, yet the lobbying money behind it is unprecedented. Pharmaceutical companies, he said, have poured millions into medical associations and advocacy groups to silence criticism—going so far as to fund organizations like the NAACP, which now labels any questioning of Ozempic as “racist.” “The pharmaceutical industry has captured every institution—Congress, the press, and the medical establishment,” Kennedy said. “They’ve turned health into a profit system that keeps Americans sick and dependent.” A brutal, revealing statement on the state of Big Pharma—and why America’s health crisis may be more manufactured than accidental.
3:03

RFK Jr. Exposes the Ozempic Scam: “Banned in Europe, Pushed in America—It Paralyzes the Stomach and Destroys the Gut” Robert F. Kennedy Jr. broke down the shocking truth behind Ozempic. He cited a former pharmaceutical executive who revealed that the Danish giant Novo Nordisk—maker of Ozempic—openly admits in its own materials that 100% of its profits will come from the United States. The reason? Europe bans the drug for weight loss, but America allows it, despite the known dangers. RFK Jr. described the drug as “paralyzing the stomach” and destroying serotonin production in the gut—leading to serious gastrointestinal damage and long-term consequences even after stopping use. He pointed out that Ozempic now carries black box warnings about suicidal thoughts, yet the lobbying money behind it is unprecedented. Pharmaceutical companies, he said, have poured millions into medical associations and advocacy groups to silence criticism—going so far as to fund organizations like the NAACP, which now labels any questioning of Ozempic as “racist.” “The pharmaceutical industry has captured every institution—Congress, the press, and the medical establishment,” Kennedy said. “They’ve turned health into a profit system that keeps Americans sick and dependent.” A brutal, revealing statement on the state of Big Pharma—and why America’s health crisis may be more manufactured than accidental.

Camus

65,934 views • 9 months ago

RFK Jr. is declaring an end to the FDA's "war on alternative medicine." He argues that the agency has overstepped its role, shifting from a body that provides scientific guidance to one that restricts medical freedom. Why is there a war on healing substances like stem cells, peptides, vitamins, and minerals? His solution? The FDA should do the science and inform the public, but stop acting as a gatekeeper that denies Americans and their doctors the right to choose these treatments. He points to a shocking statistic: pharmaceutical drugs are the third leading cause of death in the U.S. With this as the status quo, he questions why safe, natural alternatives are so heavily restricted. His powerful conclusion? It's time to trust the intelligence and intuition of the American people to make their own health choices, rather than leaving our well-being solely in the hands of Big Pharma.
2:28

RFK Jr. is declaring an end to the FDA's "war on alternative medicine." He argues that the agency has overstepped its role, shifting from a body that provides scientific guidance to one that restricts medical freedom. Why is there a war on healing substances like stem cells, peptides, vitamins, and minerals? His solution? The FDA should do the science and inform the public, but stop acting as a gatekeeper that denies Americans and their doctors the right to choose these treatments. He points to a shocking statistic: pharmaceutical drugs are the third leading cause of death in the U.S. With this as the status quo, he questions why safe, natural alternatives are so heavily restricted. His powerful conclusion? It's time to trust the intelligence and intuition of the American people to make their own health choices, rather than leaving our well-being solely in the hands of Big Pharma.

Camus

197,923 views • 11 months ago

⚠️⚠️Power Warning from William Makis MD!⚠️⚠️ The new interim Chief Medical Officer of Health for Alberta, Dr. Sunil Sookram, appointed April 17th, 2025 by Danielle Smith, is a real concern for the health of Albertans. Lowlights include his: - Involvement in Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD). - Congratulated Mayor of Edmonton, Amarjeet Sohi, and Mayor of Calgary, Jyoti Gondek, with woke messaging of "These cities can look forward to continued progressive, inclusive leadership for years to come." - Wrote on X "We need a real vaccine passport in Alberta. One that cannot be forged. One that is mandated everywhere." - Also wrote "No healthcare worker should be unimmunized. No more excuses." Instead of Dr. Sunil Sookram, Danielle Smith had several choices, including Dr. Rodger Hodkinson, who was right the last five years and proved it when he recently beat the Alberta Collage of Physicians and Surgeons after a three year battle over "misinformation." Dr. Makis finds this inexcusable. I agree. Dr. Rodger Hodkinson call it like he sees it, frankly and honestly. - First do no harm and provide informed consent. - Stood up and took a bullet for all of us. - "It wasn't a pandemic. It was global but it didn't kill enough people." - "Everything that was done failed." - "Long COVID is not due to the persistence of the virus infection. It is due to a vaccine injury." Which doctor would you want as the Chief Medical Officer of Health for Alberta? Dr. Sunil Sookram or Dr. Rodger Hodkinson? Full episode available here Share if you care.
8:08

⚠️⚠️Power Warning from William Makis MD!⚠️⚠️ The new interim Chief Medical Officer of Health for Alberta, Dr. Sunil Sookram, appointed April 17th, 2025 by Danielle Smith, is a real concern for the health of Albertans. Lowlights include his: - Involvement in Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD). - Congratulated Mayor of Edmonton, Amarjeet Sohi, and Mayor of Calgary, Jyoti Gondek, with woke messaging of "These cities can look forward to continued progressive, inclusive leadership for years to come." - Wrote on X "We need a real vaccine passport in Alberta. One that cannot be forged. One that is mandated everywhere." - Also wrote "No healthcare worker should be unimmunized. No more excuses." Instead of Dr. Sunil Sookram, Danielle Smith had several choices, including Dr. Rodger Hodkinson, who was right the last five years and proved it when he recently beat the Alberta Collage of Physicians and Surgeons after a three year battle over "misinformation." Dr. Makis finds this inexcusable. I agree. Dr. Rodger Hodkinson call it like he sees it, frankly and honestly. - First do no harm and provide informed consent. - Stood up and took a bullet for all of us. - "It wasn't a pandemic. It was global but it didn't kill enough people." - "Everything that was done failed." - "Long COVID is not due to the persistence of the virus infection. It is due to a vaccine injury." Which doctor would you want as the Chief Medical Officer of Health for Alberta? Dr. Sunil Sookram or Dr. Rodger Hodkinson? Full episode available here Share if you care.

Jason Lavigne

43,499 views • 1 year ago

The government needs to step up its efforts to fight health misinformation, say Bill Gates, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, because it’s reducing public trust in the medical establishment. “People are dying because of misinformation,” said Obama in a 2022 Stanford speech that promoted a sweeping government censorship agenda. In his new, heavily-promoted Netflix documentary, Gates called for AI-powered mass government censorship of people who raise questions about vaccines, citing the conspiracy theory that microchips were in Covid vaccines. But it’s the medical establishment itself, not misinformation, that causes public distrust, says Johns Hopkins physician Marty Makary MD, MPH in his outstanding new bestseller, Blind Spots, and in a fascinating two-hour conversation with me. “The biggest topic in our medical journals right now is mistrust in the medical establishment,” he said. “They’re scratching their heads. ‘People don’t trust us, and it must be because of those spreading misinformation.’... No, the reason they don’t trust the medical establishment is because it was lying to them for three years during the Covid pandemic.” America’s health and medical system does a lot of good, emphasizes Makary, who also holds a Master’s degree in Public Health (MPH) from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Makary stresses that the overwhelming number of people in the health and medical establishment are well-intentioned and motivated by compassion for their patients and a desire to cure disease. “The rank and file doctor often thinks independently, is creative, and takes in multiple sources of information,” he says. But the health and medical system as a whole has failed, Makary argues. Proof of this can be found in the fact that “half of all federal spending is going to health care in its many hidden forms,” he says, and yet the American people are “getting sicker and sicker… Chronic diseases are on the rise. Cancers are on the rise. And we have the most medicated generation in human history.” Health is arguably the most important issue facing the country. It’s not just a life-and-death issue; it also centrally affects our quality of life. The American Academy of Pediatrics’ poor track record is so scandalous that we will publish a follow-up article on how it is still making recommendations based on ideology, not science. So why has the health and medical establishment caused so much harm? What’s going on? Please subscribe now to support Public's award-winning journalism, read the rest of the article, and listen to the full podcast!
32:27

The government needs to step up its efforts to fight health misinformation, say Bill Gates, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, because it’s reducing public trust in the medical establishment. “People are dying because of misinformation,” said Obama in a 2022 Stanford speech that promoted a sweeping government censorship agenda. In his new, heavily-promoted Netflix documentary, Gates called for AI-powered mass government censorship of people who raise questions about vaccines, citing the conspiracy theory that microchips were in Covid vaccines. But it’s the medical establishment itself, not misinformation, that causes public distrust, says Johns Hopkins physician Marty Makary MD, MPH in his outstanding new bestseller, Blind Spots, and in a fascinating two-hour conversation with me. “The biggest topic in our medical journals right now is mistrust in the medical establishment,” he said. “They’re scratching their heads. ‘People don’t trust us, and it must be because of those spreading misinformation.’... No, the reason they don’t trust the medical establishment is because it was lying to them for three years during the Covid pandemic.” America’s health and medical system does a lot of good, emphasizes Makary, who also holds a Master’s degree in Public Health (MPH) from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Makary stresses that the overwhelming number of people in the health and medical establishment are well-intentioned and motivated by compassion for their patients and a desire to cure disease. “The rank and file doctor often thinks independently, is creative, and takes in multiple sources of information,” he says. But the health and medical system as a whole has failed, Makary argues. Proof of this can be found in the fact that “half of all federal spending is going to health care in its many hidden forms,” he says, and yet the American people are “getting sicker and sicker… Chronic diseases are on the rise. Cancers are on the rise. And we have the most medicated generation in human history.” Health is arguably the most important issue facing the country. It’s not just a life-and-death issue; it also centrally affects our quality of life. The American Academy of Pediatrics’ poor track record is so scandalous that we will publish a follow-up article on how it is still making recommendations based on ideology, not science. So why has the health and medical establishment caused so much harm? What’s going on? Please subscribe now to support Public's award-winning journalism, read the rest of the article, and listen to the full podcast!

Michael Shellenberger

40,542 views • 1 year ago

WHO Power Grab: The Silent Coup No One Is Talking About The World Health Organization (WHO) is on the verge of executing a global power shift—without a single shot fired. Under the guise of "public health," new amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and a so-called "Pandemic Treaty" (rebranded as "accord" or "instrument") will strip nations of sovereignty, erase human rights protections, and enforce draconian measures worldwide. What’s Changing? - Binding Enforcement: The old IHR were recommendations—now they’re legally binding. Countries must comply or face consequences. - Human Rights Removed: The current IHR states that health measures must respect "dignity, human rights, and fundamental freedoms." The new version deletes this language entirely. - Global Surveillance & Censorship: Mandated digital tracking, enforced medical surveillance, and a "single narrative" policy will silence dissent. - Fast-Tracked, Liability-Free Pharma: Vaccine and drug regulations will be "harmonized," bypassing safety checks. Manufacturers get full immunity—no accountability for harms. Who Triggers This? The WHO’s Director-General can declare a "Public Health Emergency of International Concern" (PHEIC)—or even just a "potential risk" of one. Once activated, his powers continue indefinitely, even after the emergency ends. Dr. Meryl Nass, a renowned physician and bioethics expert, warns: "This isn’t about health—it’s about control. The WHO is being weaponized to override national laws, discard human rights, and hand unchecked power to unelected bureaucrats. Once these amendments pass, there’s no going back."
2:13

WHO Power Grab: The Silent Coup No One Is Talking About The World Health Organization (WHO) is on the verge of executing a global power shift—without a single shot fired. Under the guise of "public health," new amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and a so-called "Pandemic Treaty" (rebranded as "accord" or "instrument") will strip nations of sovereignty, erase human rights protections, and enforce draconian measures worldwide. What’s Changing? - Binding Enforcement: The old IHR were recommendations—now they’re legally binding. Countries must comply or face consequences. - Human Rights Removed: The current IHR states that health measures must respect "dignity, human rights, and fundamental freedoms." The new version deletes this language entirely. - Global Surveillance & Censorship: Mandated digital tracking, enforced medical surveillance, and a "single narrative" policy will silence dissent. - Fast-Tracked, Liability-Free Pharma: Vaccine and drug regulations will be "harmonized," bypassing safety checks. Manufacturers get full immunity—no accountability for harms. Who Triggers This? The WHO’s Director-General can declare a "Public Health Emergency of International Concern" (PHEIC)—or even just a "potential risk" of one. Once activated, his powers continue indefinitely, even after the emergency ends. Dr. Meryl Nass, a renowned physician and bioethics expert, warns: "This isn’t about health—it’s about control. The WHO is being weaponized to override national laws, discard human rights, and hand unchecked power to unelected bureaucrats. Once these amendments pass, there’s no going back."

Camus

37,808 views • 1 year ago

Dr. Aseem Malhotra exposes how corporate power hijacked public health. He explains the "commercial determinants of health"—how global corporations shape what we eat, what drugs we take, and even what we believe about health itself. Through lobbying, they capture politicians. He recalls meeting Jeremy Hunt in 2012 when the UK government had held 99 meetings with food industry reps—and zero with independent scientists. The narrative on health policy was already bought. Malhotra says most politicians don’t even realize they're being used as tools for commercial agendas. The media then amplifies the illusion—setting the tone for what the public is allowed to think. In December 2021, while fighting to overturn vaccine mandates for healthcare workers, he spoke to the chairman of the British Medical Association. The chairman admitted that most of his colleagues were getting their vaccine information directly from the BBC, not scientific evaluation. This, Malhotra says, shows the dangerous fusion of media, industry, and policy—where truth is filtered and dissent is censored to protect profits. “The public,” he warns, “must wake up to how powerful interests shape their reality.”
2:28

Dr. Aseem Malhotra exposes how corporate power hijacked public health. He explains the "commercial determinants of health"—how global corporations shape what we eat, what drugs we take, and even what we believe about health itself. Through lobbying, they capture politicians. He recalls meeting Jeremy Hunt in 2012 when the UK government had held 99 meetings with food industry reps—and zero with independent scientists. The narrative on health policy was already bought. Malhotra says most politicians don’t even realize they're being used as tools for commercial agendas. The media then amplifies the illusion—setting the tone for what the public is allowed to think. In December 2021, while fighting to overturn vaccine mandates for healthcare workers, he spoke to the chairman of the British Medical Association. The chairman admitted that most of his colleagues were getting their vaccine information directly from the BBC, not scientific evaluation. This, Malhotra says, shows the dangerous fusion of media, industry, and policy—where truth is filtered and dissent is censored to protect profits. “The public,” he warns, “must wake up to how powerful interests shape their reality.”

Camus

19,715 views • 9 months ago

ALERT:🔥 DR. DAVID MARTIN: “THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION IS A CRIMINAL CARTEL” Speaking before an international audience, Dr. David Martin delivered one of his most powerful addresses yet — a direct challenge to the global health establishment: “For 110 years, humanity has been lied to. A small group of criminal industrial conspirators decided to subordinate the world — enriching themselves while impoverishing and killing the rest of humanity.” He declared he’s “done being polite”, condemning the use of terms like “acceptable death rate” as proof that morality has collapsed. Then came the accusation that echoed through the room: “Since its formation in the 1940s, the World Health Organization has been nothing more than a criminal cartel with one intent — control and profit.” Dr. Martin described a four-step pattern used to execute their global operations: 1) Plan an “exercise” 2) Fund the exercise 3) Create the crisis rationale 4) Deploy and profit from the outcome WHAT THIS MEANS: • Public health has been weaponized for power and profit. • Global institutions have crossed from negligence into criminality. • The truth will not be televised — it will be shared by you. “We’ve long passed polite,” Martin said. “When humanity stays silent, tyranny roars louder. So let the lion roar.” Dr. David Martin
2:57

ALERT:🔥 DR. DAVID MARTIN: “THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION IS A CRIMINAL CARTEL” Speaking before an international audience, Dr. David Martin delivered one of his most powerful addresses yet — a direct challenge to the global health establishment: “For 110 years, humanity has been lied to. A small group of criminal industrial conspirators decided to subordinate the world — enriching themselves while impoverishing and killing the rest of humanity.” He declared he’s “done being polite”, condemning the use of terms like “acceptable death rate” as proof that morality has collapsed. Then came the accusation that echoed through the room: “Since its formation in the 1940s, the World Health Organization has been nothing more than a criminal cartel with one intent — control and profit.” Dr. Martin described a four-step pattern used to execute their global operations: 1) Plan an “exercise” 2) Fund the exercise 3) Create the crisis rationale 4) Deploy and profit from the outcome WHAT THIS MEANS: • Public health has been weaponized for power and profit. • Global institutions have crossed from negligence into criminality. • The truth will not be televised — it will be shared by you. “We’ve long passed polite,” Martin said. “When humanity stays silent, tyranny roars louder. So let the lion roar.” Dr. David Martin

Jim Ferguson

45,148 views • 9 months ago

This Big Tech Researcher Just Exposed How the ‘Clinton Machine’ RUINED His Life THIS is the video you need to watch today. Dr. Robert Epstein told Joe Rogan that after he testified before Congress about his research on Google, someone warned him, "I predict you're going to be k*lled in some sort of accident in the next few months." While Epstein himself was not harmed, six people close to him have died, including the tragic death of his wife in a suspicious car accident. When Dr. Epstein published research critical of Google, Hillary Clinton, a figure he "had always admired," responded by discrediting his work on Twitter. Epstein described the experience as being "squashed like a bug" after Clinton's tweet to her millions of followers falsely claimed that his research "had been completely debunked and was based on data from 21 undecided voters." Epstein also warned about the pervasive influence and surveillance capabilities of Google and other Big Tech companies, explaining that they control the flow of information and can manipulate public opinion on a global scale. "These are controlled almost entirely by a couple of big tech companies, affecting more than 5 billion people around the world every single day," he stated. He detailed the pervasive surveillance capabilities of Google and other Big Tech companies, stating that they are tracking you in ways you "have no idea the extent of." He explained that even when you turn your phone off, it can still monitor you, which explains why phones no longer allow you to easily remove the battery. Dr. Epstein's research is so threatening to Google's enterprise that supermarket owner John Catsimatidis told him, “If I were Google, I would k*ll you.”
10:07

This Big Tech Researcher Just Exposed How the ‘Clinton Machine’ RUINED His Life THIS is the video you need to watch today. Dr. Robert Epstein told Joe Rogan that after he testified before Congress about his research on Google, someone warned him, "I predict you're going to be k*lled in some sort of accident in the next few months." While Epstein himself was not harmed, six people close to him have died, including the tragic death of his wife in a suspicious car accident. When Dr. Epstein published research critical of Google, Hillary Clinton, a figure he "had always admired," responded by discrediting his work on Twitter. Epstein described the experience as being "squashed like a bug" after Clinton's tweet to her millions of followers falsely claimed that his research "had been completely debunked and was based on data from 21 undecided voters." Epstein also warned about the pervasive influence and surveillance capabilities of Google and other Big Tech companies, explaining that they control the flow of information and can manipulate public opinion on a global scale. "These are controlled almost entirely by a couple of big tech companies, affecting more than 5 billion people around the world every single day," he stated. He detailed the pervasive surveillance capabilities of Google and other Big Tech companies, stating that they are tracking you in ways you "have no idea the extent of." He explained that even when you turn your phone off, it can still monitor you, which explains why phones no longer allow you to easily remove the battery. Dr. Epstein's research is so threatening to Google's enterprise that supermarket owner John Catsimatidis told him, “If I were Google, I would k*ll you.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

1,698,305 views • 1 year ago

A seismic shift is underway in psychiatry, moving beyond talk therapy and pharmaceuticals to target the very foundation of mental health: metabolic function. Leading this revolution are pioneers like Dr. Christopher Palmer of Harvard Psychiatry. For over two decades, he has focused on the most challenging cases—patients resistant to psychotropic medications. His groundbreaking protocol is strikingly simple, yet profoundly effective: a ketogenic diet. By placing patients into ketosis through a diet of meat and low-starch vegetables, Dr. Palmer has documented the reversal of conditions once deemed lifelong, including: • Major Depression • Anxiety Disorders • Bipolar Disorder • And in rare cases, even Schizophrenia The mechanism? While the official explanation points to improved mitochondrial health, a compelling alternative theory suggests that removing carbohydrates strengthens the immune system. This allows the body to finally subdue chronic, undiagnosed infections that may be driving neurological dysfunction. By halting the constant processing of sugars, the body can redirect its resources toward regeneration and fighting these underlying inflammatory and infectious threats. This isn't just a dietary trend; it's a paradigm shift. It reframes "mental illness" as a potential symptom of metabolic and immune system dysregulation. The work of Dr. Palmer, alongside researchers like Georgia Ede and Stanford's Annelise Barron, is offering not just management, but the possibility of genuine recovery. The future of mental health treatment may not be in a pill bottle, but on our plates.
1:59

A seismic shift is underway in psychiatry, moving beyond talk therapy and pharmaceuticals to target the very foundation of mental health: metabolic function. Leading this revolution are pioneers like Dr. Christopher Palmer of Harvard Psychiatry. For over two decades, he has focused on the most challenging cases—patients resistant to psychotropic medications. His groundbreaking protocol is strikingly simple, yet profoundly effective: a ketogenic diet. By placing patients into ketosis through a diet of meat and low-starch vegetables, Dr. Palmer has documented the reversal of conditions once deemed lifelong, including: • Major Depression • Anxiety Disorders • Bipolar Disorder • And in rare cases, even Schizophrenia The mechanism? While the official explanation points to improved mitochondrial health, a compelling alternative theory suggests that removing carbohydrates strengthens the immune system. This allows the body to finally subdue chronic, undiagnosed infections that may be driving neurological dysfunction. By halting the constant processing of sugars, the body can redirect its resources toward regeneration and fighting these underlying inflammatory and infectious threats. This isn't just a dietary trend; it's a paradigm shift. It reframes "mental illness" as a potential symptom of metabolic and immune system dysregulation. The work of Dr. Palmer, alongside researchers like Georgia Ede and Stanford's Annelise Barron, is offering not just management, but the possibility of genuine recovery. The future of mental health treatment may not be in a pill bottle, but on our plates.

Camus

42,765 views • 10 months ago

Yuval Harari’s Chilling Vision: Health as the Trojan Horse for Total Surveillance When WEF advisor Yuval Harari praises AI like IBM Watson replacing doctors, he isn’t just advocating for "better healthcare." He’s laying the groundwork for a dystopian trade-off: Surrender your privacy, and the technocratic elite will grant you health. His argument is seductive—imagine AI detecting cancer early, monitoring your vitals 24/7, and having a "doctor" in your pocket. But look closer. What he’s really saying is: 1. Your Body, Their Data: Watson won’t just "help" doctors—it will replace human judgment with algorithmic control, fed by your DNA, biometrics, and family history. Once corporations like Apple, Google, or IBM own your biological data, you no longer do. 2. Global Surveillance by Consent: Harari admits this requires violating privacy but shrugs it off, claiming people will "choose health." This is coercion disguised as convenience. Once you accept constant monitoring for "health," you’ve legitimized the most intrusive surveillance system in history. 3. The End of Human Autonomy: If an AI dictates your medical decisions, who programs its priorities? Will it serve you—or the interests of governments, insurers, and pharmaceutical giants? Harari’s vision doesn’t empower patients; it turns them into data points in a centralized medical panopticon. 4. The WEF’s Real Goal: This isn’t about curing cancer. It’s about conditioning the masses to accept total biometric tracking as "progress." Next, they’ll argue climate change or "social cohesion" requires similar intrusions. Health is just the entry point. Harari is right about one thing: human doctors will seem "primitive" next to Watson—because they answer to you, not to a corporate-state AI overlord. The choice isn’t between privacy and health. It’s between freedom and dependency. The WEF’s "health utopia" is a Faustian bargain. Once you let them inside your body, you’ll never get them out.
2:18

Yuval Harari’s Chilling Vision: Health as the Trojan Horse for Total Surveillance When WEF advisor Yuval Harari praises AI like IBM Watson replacing doctors, he isn’t just advocating for "better healthcare." He’s laying the groundwork for a dystopian trade-off: Surrender your privacy, and the technocratic elite will grant you health. His argument is seductive—imagine AI detecting cancer early, monitoring your vitals 24/7, and having a "doctor" in your pocket. But look closer. What he’s really saying is: 1. Your Body, Their Data: Watson won’t just "help" doctors—it will replace human judgment with algorithmic control, fed by your DNA, biometrics, and family history. Once corporations like Apple, Google, or IBM own your biological data, you no longer do. 2. Global Surveillance by Consent: Harari admits this requires violating privacy but shrugs it off, claiming people will "choose health." This is coercion disguised as convenience. Once you accept constant monitoring for "health," you’ve legitimized the most intrusive surveillance system in history. 3. The End of Human Autonomy: If an AI dictates your medical decisions, who programs its priorities? Will it serve you—or the interests of governments, insurers, and pharmaceutical giants? Harari’s vision doesn’t empower patients; it turns them into data points in a centralized medical panopticon. 4. The WEF’s Real Goal: This isn’t about curing cancer. It’s about conditioning the masses to accept total biometric tracking as "progress." Next, they’ll argue climate change or "social cohesion" requires similar intrusions. Health is just the entry point. Harari is right about one thing: human doctors will seem "primitive" next to Watson—because they answer to you, not to a corporate-state AI overlord. The choice isn’t between privacy and health. It’s between freedom and dependency. The WEF’s "health utopia" is a Faustian bargain. Once you let them inside your body, you’ll never get them out.

Camus

56,259 views • 1 year ago

A recent hearing chaired by Senator Ron Johnson brought significant attention to an unpublished study conducted by the Henry Ford Health System, led by Dr. Marcus Zervos, the head of infectious diseases. The study, which compared health outcomes in vaccinated versus completely unvaccinated children, has become a central point of controversy. Following the hearing, Henry Ford Health System pushed back, stating the study draft faced significant peer review concerns and serious data flaws, and that the institution was unaware the rejected draft was being discussed. Critics, including a Washington Post journalist, have echoed these concerns, labeling the research as commissioned by an "anti-vaccine group" and highlighting methodological issues. However, defenders of the study offer counterarguments to the criticism: - They assert the study was not "commissioned" but was a challenge to Dr. Zervos to prove the safety of the vaccine schedule. - They claim no formal peer review was ever conducted on the completed study. - They argue that while the unvaccinated cohort was smaller, its size was statistically significant for comparison. - They contend that sensitivity analyses—which limited data to one year, three years, and five years—consistently showed worse health outcomes in the vaccinated group, with the results becoming more pronounced over time. The core finding of the study indicates vaccinated children were 2.5 times more likely to develop a chronic disease. Defenders of the research argue that the study's design mirrors the CDC's own recommended blueprint for such comparative safety studies and question why a major health institution would bury concerning results rather than address the alleged flaws and publish. This incident is framed as part of a larger pattern where a comprehensive vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study is avoided by public health authorities. A forthcoming documentary, An Inconvenient Study, promises to explore the entire episode in detail.
14:19

A recent hearing chaired by Senator Ron Johnson brought significant attention to an unpublished study conducted by the Henry Ford Health System, led by Dr. Marcus Zervos, the head of infectious diseases. The study, which compared health outcomes in vaccinated versus completely unvaccinated children, has become a central point of controversy. Following the hearing, Henry Ford Health System pushed back, stating the study draft faced significant peer review concerns and serious data flaws, and that the institution was unaware the rejected draft was being discussed. Critics, including a Washington Post journalist, have echoed these concerns, labeling the research as commissioned by an "anti-vaccine group" and highlighting methodological issues. However, defenders of the study offer counterarguments to the criticism: - They assert the study was not "commissioned" but was a challenge to Dr. Zervos to prove the safety of the vaccine schedule. - They claim no formal peer review was ever conducted on the completed study. - They argue that while the unvaccinated cohort was smaller, its size was statistically significant for comparison. - They contend that sensitivity analyses—which limited data to one year, three years, and five years—consistently showed worse health outcomes in the vaccinated group, with the results becoming more pronounced over time. The core finding of the study indicates vaccinated children were 2.5 times more likely to develop a chronic disease. Defenders of the research argue that the study's design mirrors the CDC's own recommended blueprint for such comparative safety studies and question why a major health institution would bury concerning results rather than address the alleged flaws and publish. This incident is framed as part of a larger pattern where a comprehensive vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study is avoided by public health authorities. A forthcoming documentary, An Inconvenient Study, promises to explore the entire episode in detail.

Camus

33,372 views • 10 months ago

While Dr. Oz tackled the administrative rot in the system, FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary turned his focus to the cultural one. For decades, he argued, medicine in America has prioritized treatment over prevention, paperwork over health. "The modern medical establishment really has been disconnected,” Makary said. “We've been so busy focusing on treatment, on billing and coding and a high throughput model." Makary’s solution isn’t another pill—it’s a complete rethinking of how we approach wellness in the first place. “We've got to stop and ask ourselves should we be focusing more on school lunch programs, not just putting every kid on Ozempic?” he said. “We've got to talk about food as medicine and gut health and the microbiome. We've got to talk about environmental toxins that cause cancer not just the chemo to treat it.” And perhaps most radically: “Maybe we need to treat more diabetes with cooking classes, not just throwing insulin at people.” That kind of thinking, he said, is at the heart of the newly released MAHA report—short for Make America Healthy Again. It’s a federal roadmap to reverse the nation’s health crisis, not just patch it. "This report is a fresh new approach that really calls for a transformation of our healthcare system from a reactionary system to a proactive system,” he said. “So I could not be more excited about this report.”
0:46

While Dr. Oz tackled the administrative rot in the system, FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary turned his focus to the cultural one. For decades, he argued, medicine in America has prioritized treatment over prevention, paperwork over health. "The modern medical establishment really has been disconnected,” Makary said. “We've been so busy focusing on treatment, on billing and coding and a high throughput model." Makary’s solution isn’t another pill—it’s a complete rethinking of how we approach wellness in the first place. “We've got to stop and ask ourselves should we be focusing more on school lunch programs, not just putting every kid on Ozempic?” he said. “We've got to talk about food as medicine and gut health and the microbiome. We've got to talk about environmental toxins that cause cancer not just the chemo to treat it.” And perhaps most radically: “Maybe we need to treat more diabetes with cooking classes, not just throwing insulin at people.” That kind of thinking, he said, is at the heart of the newly released MAHA report—short for Make America Healthy Again. It’s a federal roadmap to reverse the nation’s health crisis, not just patch it. "This report is a fresh new approach that really calls for a transformation of our healthcare system from a reactionary system to a proactive system,” he said. “So I could not be more excited about this report.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

79,571 views • 1 year ago

It was a profound moment today as His Excellency President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR Bola Ahmed Tinubu, launched the National Health Fellows and unveiled the State of Health Report 2024—two landmark initiatives that reinforce this administration’s commitment to a stronger, more resilient health system under the #RenewedHope Agenda. The presence of young Nigerians—brimming with potential and standing as a testament to merit, accountability, and service—captured the significance of this moment. This is not just a program; it is the foundation of a deliberate and strategic movement to improve health outcomes, strengthen service delivery, and foster leadership across all levels of the sector. The Fellows Program is a bold step toward investing in the next generation of health leaders, ensuring that talent is developed, nurtured, and deployed effectively. Out of over 360,000 applicants, 774 young men and women, representing every local government in Nigeria, were rigorously selected on merit. Their diverse expertise—spanning medicine, public health, technology, and policy—positions them as critical agents of change in the health sector. As President Tinubu aptly stated, the Fellows, “…are the future, the leaders of our health system, the torchbearers of a stronger and more resilient Nigeria.” Beyond this launch, the initiative signals a structural shift in how Nigeria cultivates and retains high-caliber talent within its health system. These fellows are not just recruits; they are workhorses of transformation, expected to strengthen accountability, improve service delivery, and enhance health system resilience at all levels. Recognizing the depth of their potential, I strongly advocated for their absorption into public service, reinforcing the need to retain skilled professionals within government institutions. President Tinubu affirmed this commitment, making it clear that these fellows are not just engaged—they are “hired.” This marks a decisive step in ensuring that investments in human capital translate into tangible improvements in health outcomes. The unveiling of the State of Health Report 2024 further underscores this administration’s commitment to evidence-based policymaking. For the first time since the National Health Act 2014 mandated an annual health report, Nigeria now has a comprehensive, data-driven assessment of its health system. Developed through extensive collaboration with development partners, state governments, civil society, and technical experts, the report offers critical insights into sector performance and serves as a baseline for future interventions under the Nigeria Health Sector Renewal Initiative (#NHSRII). The findings highlight early signs of measurable progress, demonstrating the impact of ongoing reforms while underscoring the need for sustained investments and accountability. I would like to recognize the technical expertise of Sector-Wide Approach (#SWAp) Office, led by its National Coordinator, Dr. Muntaqa Al-Sadiq Muntaqa Umar-Sadiq, for their pivotal work in translating policies into action, fostering accountability, and ensuring effective coordination across stakeholders. Their dedication remains a cornerstone of Nigeria’s health sector transformation. As this movement gains momentum, the National Health Fellows now have both the platform and responsibility to translate this opportunity into sustained impact. Their work will strengthen frontline service delivery, drive innovation, and enhance accountability within the health sector. The task ahead is significant, but with the right support, policy continuity, and collective commitment, these fellows will drive the system-wide transformations needed to achieve equitable, quality healthcare for all Nigerians—fulfilling Mr. President’s vision of a healthier, more prosperous nation.
8:34

It was a profound moment today as His Excellency President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR Bola Ahmed Tinubu, launched the National Health Fellows and unveiled the State of Health Report 2024—two landmark initiatives that reinforce this administration’s commitment to a stronger, more resilient health system under the #RenewedHope Agenda. The presence of young Nigerians—brimming with potential and standing as a testament to merit, accountability, and service—captured the significance of this moment. This is not just a program; it is the foundation of a deliberate and strategic movement to improve health outcomes, strengthen service delivery, and foster leadership across all levels of the sector. The Fellows Program is a bold step toward investing in the next generation of health leaders, ensuring that talent is developed, nurtured, and deployed effectively. Out of over 360,000 applicants, 774 young men and women, representing every local government in Nigeria, were rigorously selected on merit. Their diverse expertise—spanning medicine, public health, technology, and policy—positions them as critical agents of change in the health sector. As President Tinubu aptly stated, the Fellows, “…are the future, the leaders of our health system, the torchbearers of a stronger and more resilient Nigeria.” Beyond this launch, the initiative signals a structural shift in how Nigeria cultivates and retains high-caliber talent within its health system. These fellows are not just recruits; they are workhorses of transformation, expected to strengthen accountability, improve service delivery, and enhance health system resilience at all levels. Recognizing the depth of their potential, I strongly advocated for their absorption into public service, reinforcing the need to retain skilled professionals within government institutions. President Tinubu affirmed this commitment, making it clear that these fellows are not just engaged—they are “hired.” This marks a decisive step in ensuring that investments in human capital translate into tangible improvements in health outcomes. The unveiling of the State of Health Report 2024 further underscores this administration’s commitment to evidence-based policymaking. For the first time since the National Health Act 2014 mandated an annual health report, Nigeria now has a comprehensive, data-driven assessment of its health system. Developed through extensive collaboration with development partners, state governments, civil society, and technical experts, the report offers critical insights into sector performance and serves as a baseline for future interventions under the Nigeria Health Sector Renewal Initiative (#NHSRII). The findings highlight early signs of measurable progress, demonstrating the impact of ongoing reforms while underscoring the need for sustained investments and accountability. I would like to recognize the technical expertise of Sector-Wide Approach (#SWAp) Office, led by its National Coordinator, Dr. Muntaqa Al-Sadiq Muntaqa Umar-Sadiq, for their pivotal work in translating policies into action, fostering accountability, and ensuring effective coordination across stakeholders. Their dedication remains a cornerstone of Nigeria’s health sector transformation. As this movement gains momentum, the National Health Fellows now have both the platform and responsibility to translate this opportunity into sustained impact. Their work will strengthen frontline service delivery, drive innovation, and enhance accountability within the health sector. The task ahead is significant, but with the right support, policy continuity, and collective commitment, these fellows will drive the system-wide transformations needed to achieve equitable, quality healthcare for all Nigerians—fulfilling Mr. President’s vision of a healthier, more prosperous nation.

Muhammad Ali Pate

13,243 views • 1 year ago

In a recent interview with Alex Jones, Del Bigtree, producer of the documentary "Vaxxed," shared insights from an unpublished study conducted by Henry Ford Health System. The research, led by Dr. Matthew Zervos—a proponent of vaccination—involved data from 18,000 children and aimed to examine health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. Key findings from the study include a 2.5 times higher rate of chronic diseases among vaccinated children compared to unvaccinated ones, and six times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorders in the vaccinated group. Projections through age 10 suggested that 57% of vaccinated children in the sample had developed a chronic condition, versus 17% in the unvaccinated group. Bigtree noted that these results align with patterns observed in other vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated studies, such as those by Dr. Anthony Mawson on homeschool families and Dr. Paul Thomas from his pediatric practice. He highlighted anecdotal reports from parents describing rapid changes in their children's development following vaccinations, often within days of the third dose around 18 months. When asked why the study hasn't been published, Dr. Zervos reportedly cited concerns over data quality. Bigtree emphasized the film's role as an accessible resource for discussing these topics with others, and praised the ongoing work of figures like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in advocating for further research and transparency. This conversation underscores the value of independent studies in public health discussions. What are your thoughts on exploring more vaxxed/unvaxxed comparisons?
2:54

In a recent interview with Alex Jones, Del Bigtree, producer of the documentary "Vaxxed," shared insights from an unpublished study conducted by Henry Ford Health System. The research, led by Dr. Matthew Zervos—a proponent of vaccination—involved data from 18,000 children and aimed to examine health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. Key findings from the study include a 2.5 times higher rate of chronic diseases among vaccinated children compared to unvaccinated ones, and six times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorders in the vaccinated group. Projections through age 10 suggested that 57% of vaccinated children in the sample had developed a chronic condition, versus 17% in the unvaccinated group. Bigtree noted that these results align with patterns observed in other vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated studies, such as those by Dr. Anthony Mawson on homeschool families and Dr. Paul Thomas from his pediatric practice. He highlighted anecdotal reports from parents describing rapid changes in their children's development following vaccinations, often within days of the third dose around 18 months. When asked why the study hasn't been published, Dr. Zervos reportedly cited concerns over data quality. Bigtree emphasized the film's role as an accessible resource for discussing these topics with others, and praised the ongoing work of figures like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in advocating for further research and transparency. This conversation underscores the value of independent studies in public health discussions. What are your thoughts on exploring more vaxxed/unvaxxed comparisons?

Camus

27,528 views • 8 months ago