正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Pfizer Knowingly Caused 18,000 Women To Develop Brain Tumors. Birth Control Injections Cause 5X More Meningioma Brain Tumors & Pfizer Has Known This Data For Decades. Other Countries Warn Patients Of The 5.6X Greater Risk, But The US FDA Never Forced Pfizer To Warn The Public. The Discovery of...

ValerieAnne1970's profile picture

Valerie Anne Smith

250,045 subscribers

160,590 次观看 • 8 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

健康养生新闻政治教育
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

🚨 BREAKING: Pfizer’s trial date was just set in a lawsuit by thousands of women who allege their birth control drug caused brain tumors. Dr. Karl Jablonowski just broke down this massive lawsuit on CHD TV: “Depo-Provera is a very popular form of contraception.” “There is an estimate that about one in four women have ever taken it.” “And recent research shows that if you are on this medication for up to a year, you’re around three to five times more likely to develop this form of brain cancer.” “It’s produced by Pfizer.” “In one version of events, Pfizer finds out that this adverse event occurs with their product, and then they ask the FDA if they should update their label.” “And the FDA says no.” “A lot of courts may interpret that as preemption, where the FDA is holding Pfizer to not be liable for any of these brain cancers.” “But that version of events depends on Pfizer being a good actor.” “They have been found guilty 107 times over the last 26 years, paying out $11 billion.” “22 of those were False Claims Act, defrauding the government.” “With Depo-Provera, to harness the power of the ‘no’ from the FDA, you need to know someone in high places—and they did.” “The director of the Centers for Drug Evaluation and Research was Dr. Cavazzoni, who was a former employee of Pfizer.” “Dr. Cavazzoni is now the chief medical officer and executive vice president at Pfizer.”
4:40

🚨 BREAKING: Pfizer’s trial date was just set in a lawsuit by thousands of women who allege their birth control drug caused brain tumors. Dr. Karl Jablonowski just broke down this massive lawsuit on CHD TV: “Depo-Provera is a very popular form of contraception.” “There is an estimate that about one in four women have ever taken it.” “And recent research shows that if you are on this medication for up to a year, you’re around three to five times more likely to develop this form of brain cancer.” “It’s produced by Pfizer.” “In one version of events, Pfizer finds out that this adverse event occurs with their product, and then they ask the FDA if they should update their label.” “And the FDA says no.” “A lot of courts may interpret that as preemption, where the FDA is holding Pfizer to not be liable for any of these brain cancers.” “But that version of events depends on Pfizer being a good actor.” “They have been found guilty 107 times over the last 26 years, paying out $11 billion.” “22 of those were False Claims Act, defrauding the government.” “With Depo-Provera, to harness the power of the ‘no’ from the FDA, you need to know someone in high places—and they did.” “The director of the Centers for Drug Evaluation and Research was Dr. Cavazzoni, who was a former employee of Pfizer.” “Dr. Cavazzoni is now the chief medical officer and executive vice president at Pfizer.”

Children’s Health Defense

43,589 次观看 • 5 个月前

In the UK, only around 14% of menopausal women take HRT and this number usually shocks people. But as you can hear Dr Mary Claire Haver talk about here - in the US it is only 4% now, when just over 20 years ago it was around 40%. Much of this reduction in HRT use and the negativity regarding HRT stems from the misinterpretation of the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study which was published in 2002. For those of you who don’t know much about this, in 1993, the WHI began a clinical trial looking at the health effects of women taking oestrogen-only or combined HRT compared to a placebo. In 2002, researchers halted the part of the study looking at women taking both oestrogen and progesterone (two hormones that decline during the perimenopause onwards) early over concerns there were small increased risks of breast cancer, heart disease, strokes and blood clots. This led to confusion and concern from doctors and women worldwide, and in the UK women taking HRT fell sharply. But even with the older versions of HRT, the WHI researchers have subsequently acknowledged that HRT is the most effective treatment for managing menopausal symptoms like hot flushes and that taking oestrogen alone reduces the risk of breast cancer by 23% and death by breast cancer by 40%. It is time we move on from the misinterpretation of this study and allow more women to access hormone replacement if that is what they want.
1:19

In the UK, only around 14% of menopausal women take HRT and this number usually shocks people. But as you can hear Dr Mary Claire Haver talk about here - in the US it is only 4% now, when just over 20 years ago it was around 40%. Much of this reduction in HRT use and the negativity regarding HRT stems from the misinterpretation of the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study which was published in 2002. For those of you who don’t know much about this, in 1993, the WHI began a clinical trial looking at the health effects of women taking oestrogen-only or combined HRT compared to a placebo. In 2002, researchers halted the part of the study looking at women taking both oestrogen and progesterone (two hormones that decline during the perimenopause onwards) early over concerns there were small increased risks of breast cancer, heart disease, strokes and blood clots. This led to confusion and concern from doctors and women worldwide, and in the UK women taking HRT fell sharply. But even with the older versions of HRT, the WHI researchers have subsequently acknowledged that HRT is the most effective treatment for managing menopausal symptoms like hot flushes and that taking oestrogen alone reduces the risk of breast cancer by 23% and death by breast cancer by 40%. It is time we move on from the misinterpretation of this study and allow more women to access hormone replacement if that is what they want.

Dr Louise Newson

39,105 次观看 • 2 年前

Women have been misled by medical dogma for decades. It's time for the truth about Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT). As Dr. Marty Makary explains, the pervasive fear that HRT increases a woman's risk of dying from breast cancer is not supported by clinical trial data. This critical misunderstanding has robbed countless women of profound health benefits. The short-term relief from perimenopause symptoms—like hot flashes, night sweats, and mood swings—is well-known. But the long-term benefits are truly staggering and largely underappreciated: ✅ Cuts the risk of heart attacks by 25-50% (the #1 killer of women). ✅ Reduces the risk of cognitive decline & Alzheimer's by up to 64%. ✅ Slashes the risk of osteoporosis and debilitating bone fractures in half. When initiated within 10 years of perimenopause, HRT may be one of the most impactful preventive medications in modern history for improving women's long-term health outcomes on a population level. Yet, as Dr. Makary points out, it remains underrecognized, underappreciated, and underfunded. This is a pivotal issue in women's health that demands attention. Every woman deserves to know the real data, beyond the outdated dogma, to make an informed decision with her doctor.
2:39

Women have been misled by medical dogma for decades. It's time for the truth about Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT). As Dr. Marty Makary explains, the pervasive fear that HRT increases a woman's risk of dying from breast cancer is not supported by clinical trial data. This critical misunderstanding has robbed countless women of profound health benefits. The short-term relief from perimenopause symptoms—like hot flashes, night sweats, and mood swings—is well-known. But the long-term benefits are truly staggering and largely underappreciated: ✅ Cuts the risk of heart attacks by 25-50% (the #1 killer of women). ✅ Reduces the risk of cognitive decline & Alzheimer's by up to 64%. ✅ Slashes the risk of osteoporosis and debilitating bone fractures in half. When initiated within 10 years of perimenopause, HRT may be one of the most impactful preventive medications in modern history for improving women's long-term health outcomes on a population level. Yet, as Dr. Makary points out, it remains underrecognized, underappreciated, and underfunded. This is a pivotal issue in women's health that demands attention. Every woman deserves to know the real data, beyond the outdated dogma, to make an informed decision with her doctor.

Camus

81,830 次观看 • 10 个月前

My understanding, listening to hours of Robert F. Kennedy Jr is that he asserts that the US regulatory system of pharmaceuticals & foods is broken & captured by the industries it supposes to regulate! Many serious scientists agree with this assertion! Mainstream media and people like Paul Offit use the typical tactics of calling people conspiracists instead of addressing RFK arguments! Ironically, they are part of the system & narrative that pushed the harmful COVID vaccines into massive use, including in children & pregnant women! Offit speaks about transparency re the COVID vaccine approval process but neglects to acknowledge that FDA & Pfizer wanted to conceal the data for 75 years! He said he read 800 pages as a member of the advisory committee to the approval process, but he missed(?) the fact that the Pfizer vaccines given to the US & world population were fundamentally different than the ones in the clinical trials & with high level of DNA contamination! Who should we believe?
6:34

My understanding, listening to hours of Robert F. Kennedy Jr is that he asserts that the US regulatory system of pharmaceuticals & foods is broken & captured by the industries it supposes to regulate! Many serious scientists agree with this assertion! Mainstream media and people like Paul Offit use the typical tactics of calling people conspiracists instead of addressing RFK arguments! Ironically, they are part of the system & narrative that pushed the harmful COVID vaccines into massive use, including in children & pregnant women! Offit speaks about transparency re the COVID vaccine approval process but neglects to acknowledge that FDA & Pfizer wanted to conceal the data for 75 years! He said he read 800 pages as a member of the advisory committee to the approval process, but he missed(?) the fact that the Pfizer vaccines given to the US & world population were fundamentally different than the ones in the clinical trials & with high level of DNA contamination! Who should we believe?

Retsef Levi

64,677 次观看 • 1 年前

This Zimbabwean member of parliament whose parliamentary submission has gone viral is making a valid point based on peer-reviewed research. She is essentially saying that men who have regular sex are also reducing their risk of prostate cancer. Medical studies suggest a link between frequent ejaculation and a reduced risk of prostate cancer. However, the exact number of times a man should ejaculate per month to maintain optimal prostate health has not been definitively established. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found that men who reported ejaculating at least 21 times a month had a lower risk of developing prostate cancer compared to those who ejaculated less frequently. The study, which followed over 31,000 men for several years, suggested a correlation between frequent ejaculation and a lower risk of prostate cancer. A study conducted by Australian researchers and published in the journal British Journal of Urology (BJU) in 2003 found that men who ejaculated more than five times per week in their 20s had a reduced risk of prostate cancer compared to those who ejaculated less frequently. A 2008 study in the British Journal of Urology International examined over 30,000 men and found that those who reported higher ejaculation frequency showed a lower risk of prostate cancer. A 2016 study published in the journal European Urology investigated the association between ejaculation frequency and the risk of prostate cancer. The study found that men with a higher ejaculation frequency had a lower risk of developing prostate cancer, particularly in their 40s. Men over 40 should have regular medical check-ups and discuss any concerns about their prostate health with healthcare providers such as nurses and doctors. While this data is available for us to engage with, we cannot return to the old tradition she mentions in her presentation of passing on young women from the wife’s family to older men. The JAMA study's findings do not justify the revival of the outdated and exploitative traditional practice of passing young women from the wife's family to older men. Read more here; More👇🏿
1:58

This Zimbabwean member of parliament whose parliamentary submission has gone viral is making a valid point based on peer-reviewed research. She is essentially saying that men who have regular sex are also reducing their risk of prostate cancer. Medical studies suggest a link between frequent ejaculation and a reduced risk of prostate cancer. However, the exact number of times a man should ejaculate per month to maintain optimal prostate health has not been definitively established. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found that men who reported ejaculating at least 21 times a month had a lower risk of developing prostate cancer compared to those who ejaculated less frequently. The study, which followed over 31,000 men for several years, suggested a correlation between frequent ejaculation and a lower risk of prostate cancer. A study conducted by Australian researchers and published in the journal British Journal of Urology (BJU) in 2003 found that men who ejaculated more than five times per week in their 20s had a reduced risk of prostate cancer compared to those who ejaculated less frequently. A 2008 study in the British Journal of Urology International examined over 30,000 men and found that those who reported higher ejaculation frequency showed a lower risk of prostate cancer. A 2016 study published in the journal European Urology investigated the association between ejaculation frequency and the risk of prostate cancer. The study found that men with a higher ejaculation frequency had a lower risk of developing prostate cancer, particularly in their 40s. Men over 40 should have regular medical check-ups and discuss any concerns about their prostate health with healthcare providers such as nurses and doctors. While this data is available for us to engage with, we cannot return to the old tradition she mentions in her presentation of passing on young women from the wife’s family to older men. The JAMA study's findings do not justify the revival of the outdated and exploitative traditional practice of passing young women from the wife's family to older men. Read more here; More👇🏿

Hopewell Chin’ono

127,956 次观看 • 1 年前

PFIZER IS IN BIG TROUBLE. NEW interview with Kris Kobach, Attorney General for the State of Kansas, who is suing Pfizer, along with 5 x other American States. He mentions they knew 10% of women had miscarriages: "Pfizer was well aware of the many risks to pregnant women and they had information in their possession not only of of causing you know grave problems for pregnant rats but they also had information as early as February 2021 on 458 pregnant women and they knew that there were complications including miscarriages in over 10% of the cases" TRANSCRIPT FOR CLIP: NEWSMAX "You're suing Pfizer for misleading claims on the covid vaccine sir round of applause for you on this what's this about and what's your case" KRIS KOBACK "Well the case is that Pfizer violated the Kansas Consumer Protection Act and by the way all 50 states have some version of a consumer Protection act and while the federal government gave all the vaccine manufacturers immunity from normal tort suits, where someone who's injured would sue the company seeking damages for their injury, the federal government did not give the vaccine manufacturers license to misrepresent or state things that they knew to be false when trying to push their product, and that's what this lawsuit is about" "[Pfizer] made multiple misrepresentations, including saying it was safe for pregnant women, when Pfizer was well aware of the many risks to pregnant women. And they had information in their possession not only of of causing, you know grave problems for pregnant rats, but they also had information as early as February 2021 on 458 pregnant women and they knew that there were complications, including miscarriages in over 10% of the cases..... just think about that a person dies in every miscarriage and yet they proceeded to advertise it as safe for pregnant women". This lawsuit also highlights the amount of ignorance within other government departments, that are still pushing the "safe and effective" narrative on a Global scale. Add on top of the that the more recent accumulating evidence of DNA contamination in Pfizer and Moderna vials, and you have a ticking time bomb for the Pharmaceutical industry
1:25

PFIZER IS IN BIG TROUBLE. NEW interview with Kris Kobach, Attorney General for the State of Kansas, who is suing Pfizer, along with 5 x other American States. He mentions they knew 10% of women had miscarriages: "Pfizer was well aware of the many risks to pregnant women and they had information in their possession not only of of causing you know grave problems for pregnant rats but they also had information as early as February 2021 on 458 pregnant women and they knew that there were complications including miscarriages in over 10% of the cases" TRANSCRIPT FOR CLIP: NEWSMAX "You're suing Pfizer for misleading claims on the covid vaccine sir round of applause for you on this what's this about and what's your case" KRIS KOBACK "Well the case is that Pfizer violated the Kansas Consumer Protection Act and by the way all 50 states have some version of a consumer Protection act and while the federal government gave all the vaccine manufacturers immunity from normal tort suits, where someone who's injured would sue the company seeking damages for their injury, the federal government did not give the vaccine manufacturers license to misrepresent or state things that they knew to be false when trying to push their product, and that's what this lawsuit is about" "[Pfizer] made multiple misrepresentations, including saying it was safe for pregnant women, when Pfizer was well aware of the many risks to pregnant women. And they had information in their possession not only of of causing, you know grave problems for pregnant rats, but they also had information as early as February 2021 on 458 pregnant women and they knew that there were complications, including miscarriages in over 10% of the cases..... just think about that a person dies in every miscarriage and yet they proceeded to advertise it as safe for pregnant women". This lawsuit also highlights the amount of ignorance within other government departments, that are still pushing the "safe and effective" narrative on a Global scale. Add on top of the that the more recent accumulating evidence of DNA contamination in Pfizer and Moderna vials, and you have a ticking time bomb for the Pharmaceutical industry

Humanspective

548,782 次观看 • 1 年前

The Dark Secrets Of Johnson & Johnson...One Of The World’s Most Admired Corporations Is Also Its Deadliest Criminal Enterprise. Gardiner Harris J & J Targeted Nursing Homes To Use Antipsychotic Medications As 'Chemical Restraints' While Knowing Full Well It Would Kill Millions. 1 in 5 nursing home residents are prescribed an antipsychotic medication as 'off label' for use as a 'chemical restraint.' Keeping nursing home residents quiet benefits the facility. Antipsychotics like Johnson & Johnson's Risperdal are given to patients with dementia, often without informed consent, to control & sedate behavior. Risperdal is an antipsychotic medication used in the treatment of bipolar disorder & schizophrenia that Johnson & Johnson claimed had fewer side effects than its older antipsychotic, Haldol. Johnson & Johnson illegally marketed the use of Risperdal to elderly patients with dementia. Risperdal led to strokes, pneumonia, heart attacks & death. Risperdal & many other antipsychotic medications should never be used on patients with dementia. These antipsychotics are for specific diagnostics only...Schizophrenia & Bipolar. The package insert of Risperdal displays the harshest warning known as 'the black box warning' which is the most severe warning on a drug label: RISPERDAL® is not approved for use in patients with dementia-related psychosis. WARNING: INCREASED MORTALITY IN ELDERLY PATIENTS WITH DEMENTIA RELATED PSYCHOSIS Elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis treated with antipsychotic drugs are at an increased risk of death. Analyses of 17 placebo-controlled trials (modal duration of 10 weeks), largely in patients taking atypical antipsychotic drugs, revealed a risk of death in drug-treated patients of between 1.6 to 1.7 times the risk of death in placebo-treated patients. The deaths were cardiovascular (e.g., heart failure, stroke, sudden death) or infectious (e.g., pneumonia) in nature. Yet, despite the black box warnings added in 2005, nursing home residents are still given antipsychotics everyday as part of their polypharmacy 'medication cocktail' to keep them sedated & compliant. Drug manufacturers need to be held accountable for marketing drugs for uses that are known to be dangerous. Nursing facility staff need training & sufficient staffing to manage behaviors without resorting to drugging patients. 👇Risperdal Package Insert👇 👇No More Tears: The Dark Secrets Of J & J👇 👇The History Of Risperdal Warnings👇 Speaker: Gardiner Harris Podcast: Dr. Josh Axe
1:30

The Dark Secrets Of Johnson & Johnson...One Of The World’s Most Admired Corporations Is Also Its Deadliest Criminal Enterprise. Gardiner Harris J & J Targeted Nursing Homes To Use Antipsychotic Medications As 'Chemical Restraints' While Knowing Full Well It Would Kill Millions. 1 in 5 nursing home residents are prescribed an antipsychotic medication as 'off label' for use as a 'chemical restraint.' Keeping nursing home residents quiet benefits the facility. Antipsychotics like Johnson & Johnson's Risperdal are given to patients with dementia, often without informed consent, to control & sedate behavior. Risperdal is an antipsychotic medication used in the treatment of bipolar disorder & schizophrenia that Johnson & Johnson claimed had fewer side effects than its older antipsychotic, Haldol. Johnson & Johnson illegally marketed the use of Risperdal to elderly patients with dementia. Risperdal led to strokes, pneumonia, heart attacks & death. Risperdal & many other antipsychotic medications should never be used on patients with dementia. These antipsychotics are for specific diagnostics only...Schizophrenia & Bipolar. The package insert of Risperdal displays the harshest warning known as 'the black box warning' which is the most severe warning on a drug label: RISPERDAL® is not approved for use in patients with dementia-related psychosis. WARNING: INCREASED MORTALITY IN ELDERLY PATIENTS WITH DEMENTIA RELATED PSYCHOSIS Elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis treated with antipsychotic drugs are at an increased risk of death. Analyses of 17 placebo-controlled trials (modal duration of 10 weeks), largely in patients taking atypical antipsychotic drugs, revealed a risk of death in drug-treated patients of between 1.6 to 1.7 times the risk of death in placebo-treated patients. The deaths were cardiovascular (e.g., heart failure, stroke, sudden death) or infectious (e.g., pneumonia) in nature. Yet, despite the black box warnings added in 2005, nursing home residents are still given antipsychotics everyday as part of their polypharmacy 'medication cocktail' to keep them sedated & compliant. Drug manufacturers need to be held accountable for marketing drugs for uses that are known to be dangerous. Nursing facility staff need training & sufficient staffing to manage behaviors without resorting to drugging patients. 👇Risperdal Package Insert👇 👇No More Tears: The Dark Secrets Of J & J👇 👇The History Of Risperdal Warnings👇 Speaker: Gardiner Harris Podcast: Dr. Josh Axe

Valerie Anne Smith

40,380 次观看 • 1 年前

Alberta government COVID-19 review calls for immediate halt to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, citing safety concerns The Alberta government’s newly, albeit quietly, released COVID-19 response review has made waves with its bold recommendations, especially its call for an immediate halt to the use of the novel, modified RNA COVID-19 vaccines particularly for healthy children and teenagers. This critical report, commissioned by Premier Danielle Smith, uncovers alarming gaps in the data used to authorize these vaccines and raises serious concerns about their safety and efficacy. The review was initiated in 2022 under the leadership of Dr. Gary Davidson, a clinical lead in emergency medicine in central Alberta. Dr. Davidson was tasked with evaluating the pandemic’s response, focusing on various aspects such as non-pharmaceutical interventions (masking and lockdowns), the accuracy of predictive modelling, and the role regulatory bodies played in the response. Experts like Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Dr. Byram Bridle, and Dr. David Speicher contributed to the investigation, each bringing their expertise to bear on a comprehensive assessment of pandemic policies. Among the most striking findings of the report is the task force’s criticism of Health Canada’s decision-making process for the rushed to market novel modified RNA injections. The group points out that there were “significant gaps” in the data supporting the approval of the COVID-19 vaccines. In fact, Health Canada has failed to disclose whether a proper risk assessment was ever conducted to justify the widespread use of these vaccines in individuals under 18, particularly considering the lack of long-term clinical data. One of the most disturbing aspects highlighted in the review is the data from Pfizer’s post-authorization trial. The report reveals that 1,223 deaths and 42,086 injuries were reported within just four days of vaccination. Notably, nearly half of these adverse events occurred in individuals aged 18-50—those at negligible risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. This troubling information calls into question the overall safety profile of the vaccines, especially in young and healthy populations. The report also discusses the known risks associated with the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used to deliver the modified RNA and spike protein into cells. These synthetic fat molecules have a well-documented toxicity profile, and there are concerns about the long-term health impacts of repeated doses. Furthermore, the review raises alarms over the increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, two heart conditions that can have lifelong and potentially fatal consequences, particularly for young individuals. Another critical aspect addressed in the Alberta report is the rushed approval process for these vaccines under Emergency Use Authorization. The review underscores that while such a pathway is easier to navigate in times of crisis, it becomes incredibly challenging to reverse decisions once questions about safety arise. The task force also points out the difficulty of obtaining accurate data on vaccine safety and efficacy within Alberta’s publicly funded healthcare system, making it almost impossible to conduct independent analysis or verification of safety claims made. The Alberta report draws attention to the discrepancies in the clinical trials, which were plagued by inadequate follow-up, missing data, and conflicts of interest. The interim findings of Pfizer’s clinical trial revealed that 21 deaths occurred in the vaccinated group compared to 17 in the placebo group, with an alarming 3.7-fold increase in cardiac events. Moreover, the report highlights issues with underreporting adverse events, noting that only 1-10% of adverse events were properly documented. Even more concerning is the data on pregnant women, which reveals a devastating 87.5% fetal/neonatal mortality rate in the limited trials conducted. These findings, alongside the acknowledged risks of the lipid nanoparticle delivery system, underscore the need for a re-evaluation of the vaccines' safety profile. Despite the mounting evidence, the public health narrative has largely ignored these critical concerns, dismissing them as misinformation. However, the Alberta review demands transparency, accountability, and a rigorous risk-benefit analysis moving forward. As the province calls for a halt to the use of these vaccines in healthy young individuals, the question remains: will these calls be heeded, or will the push for blanket vaccination recommendations continue unchecked? The review emphasizes the need for a more cautious, evidence-based approach in future pandemic responses, prioritizing transparency and informed consent over knee-jerk policies. The Alberta government’s newly, albeit quietly, released COVID-19 response review has made waves with its bold recommendations, especially its call for an immediate halt to the use of the novel, modified RNA COVID-19 vaccines, particularly for healthy children and teenagers. This critical report, commissioned by Premier Danielle Smith, uncovers alarming gaps in the data used to authorize these vaccines and raises serious concerns about their safety and efficacy.
12:45

Alberta government COVID-19 review calls for immediate halt to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, citing safety concerns The Alberta government’s newly, albeit quietly, released COVID-19 response review has made waves with its bold recommendations, especially its call for an immediate halt to the use of the novel, modified RNA COVID-19 vaccines particularly for healthy children and teenagers. This critical report, commissioned by Premier Danielle Smith, uncovers alarming gaps in the data used to authorize these vaccines and raises serious concerns about their safety and efficacy. The review was initiated in 2022 under the leadership of Dr. Gary Davidson, a clinical lead in emergency medicine in central Alberta. Dr. Davidson was tasked with evaluating the pandemic’s response, focusing on various aspects such as non-pharmaceutical interventions (masking and lockdowns), the accuracy of predictive modelling, and the role regulatory bodies played in the response. Experts like Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Dr. Byram Bridle, and Dr. David Speicher contributed to the investigation, each bringing their expertise to bear on a comprehensive assessment of pandemic policies. Among the most striking findings of the report is the task force’s criticism of Health Canada’s decision-making process for the rushed to market novel modified RNA injections. The group points out that there were “significant gaps” in the data supporting the approval of the COVID-19 vaccines. In fact, Health Canada has failed to disclose whether a proper risk assessment was ever conducted to justify the widespread use of these vaccines in individuals under 18, particularly considering the lack of long-term clinical data. One of the most disturbing aspects highlighted in the review is the data from Pfizer’s post-authorization trial. The report reveals that 1,223 deaths and 42,086 injuries were reported within just four days of vaccination. Notably, nearly half of these adverse events occurred in individuals aged 18-50—those at negligible risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. This troubling information calls into question the overall safety profile of the vaccines, especially in young and healthy populations. The report also discusses the known risks associated with the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used to deliver the modified RNA and spike protein into cells. These synthetic fat molecules have a well-documented toxicity profile, and there are concerns about the long-term health impacts of repeated doses. Furthermore, the review raises alarms over the increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, two heart conditions that can have lifelong and potentially fatal consequences, particularly for young individuals. Another critical aspect addressed in the Alberta report is the rushed approval process for these vaccines under Emergency Use Authorization. The review underscores that while such a pathway is easier to navigate in times of crisis, it becomes incredibly challenging to reverse decisions once questions about safety arise. The task force also points out the difficulty of obtaining accurate data on vaccine safety and efficacy within Alberta’s publicly funded healthcare system, making it almost impossible to conduct independent analysis or verification of safety claims made. The Alberta report draws attention to the discrepancies in the clinical trials, which were plagued by inadequate follow-up, missing data, and conflicts of interest. The interim findings of Pfizer’s clinical trial revealed that 21 deaths occurred in the vaccinated group compared to 17 in the placebo group, with an alarming 3.7-fold increase in cardiac events. Moreover, the report highlights issues with underreporting adverse events, noting that only 1-10% of adverse events were properly documented. Even more concerning is the data on pregnant women, which reveals a devastating 87.5% fetal/neonatal mortality rate in the limited trials conducted. These findings, alongside the acknowledged risks of the lipid nanoparticle delivery system, underscore the need for a re-evaluation of the vaccines' safety profile. Despite the mounting evidence, the public health narrative has largely ignored these critical concerns, dismissing them as misinformation. However, the Alberta review demands transparency, accountability, and a rigorous risk-benefit analysis moving forward. As the province calls for a halt to the use of these vaccines in healthy young individuals, the question remains: will these calls be heeded, or will the push for blanket vaccination recommendations continue unchecked? The review emphasizes the need for a more cautious, evidence-based approach in future pandemic responses, prioritizing transparency and informed consent over knee-jerk policies. The Alberta government’s newly, albeit quietly, released COVID-19 response review has made waves with its bold recommendations, especially its call for an immediate halt to the use of the novel, modified RNA COVID-19 vaccines, particularly for healthy children and teenagers. This critical report, commissioned by Premier Danielle Smith, uncovers alarming gaps in the data used to authorize these vaccines and raises serious concerns about their safety and efficacy.

Rebel News

125,746 次观看 • 1 年前

I find it astonishing that the public did not care about the mutilation of women's healthy breasts until the trans issue became criticized - that the experimentation on the healthy bodies of women and girls, being surgically harmed for no reason other than sexual objectification, was not contested when it was being done for pornographic purposes. For over three decades in the US silicone injections and breast implants were sold to women - many of whom developed brain cancer, or breast cancer, or died as a direct result - and not a single peer-reviewed study was released during that time on how this impacted women's health. Historically this issue was repeatedly addressed - women had suffered immensely - but it was not taken seriously. In this video from 2005, the then President of the National Organization for Women, Kim Gandy, criticized FDA Commissioner Lester M. Crawford during a press conference: "Lester Crawford is a veterinarian, but at the FDA, he's treating women like dogs." The single experiment conducted before breast implants were performed on women was done on a female dog, and the implant removed two weeks after; then, the surgeons declared the procedure to be "as harmless as water."
4:31

I find it astonishing that the public did not care about the mutilation of women's healthy breasts until the trans issue became criticized - that the experimentation on the healthy bodies of women and girls, being surgically harmed for no reason other than sexual objectification, was not contested when it was being done for pornographic purposes. For over three decades in the US silicone injections and breast implants were sold to women - many of whom developed brain cancer, or breast cancer, or died as a direct result - and not a single peer-reviewed study was released during that time on how this impacted women's health. Historically this issue was repeatedly addressed - women had suffered immensely - but it was not taken seriously. In this video from 2005, the then President of the National Organization for Women, Kim Gandy, criticized FDA Commissioner Lester M. Crawford during a press conference: "Lester Crawford is a veterinarian, but at the FDA, he's treating women like dogs." The single experiment conducted before breast implants were performed on women was done on a female dog, and the implant removed two weeks after; then, the surgeons declared the procedure to be "as harmless as water."

Genevieve Gluck

157,723 次观看 • 2 年前

The dark era of eugenics never ended—it evolved. A direct line connects 1970s government policy to modern-day vaccine scandals and the erosion of informed consent. In 1974, Nixon's National Security Council issued Memo 200, calling for "creating conditions conducive to fertility decline" in developing nations, using the UN and USAID. By 1976, the WHO had its "golden ticket": an "anti-fertility vaccine." Studies show they linked the pregnancy hormone (hCG) to a tetanus toxoid, teaching the female body to attack its own pregnancies. This theory became practice. USAID and the UN funded forced sterilizations in Peru in the 1990s. In 2014, a WHO-tied "tetanus" campaign in Kenya targeted only women. Independent labs found hCG in the vials, confirming the vaccine was a covert sterilization tool. The agenda came home. A 2019 U.S. study found a significantly lowered probability of pregnancy in women who received the HPV vaccine. The study was swiftly retracted. Now, in 2024, the FDA has enacted a rule allowing waivers for informed consent in "minimal risk" clinical trials. The architecture of population control, built over 50 years, is now institutionalized. From memos to forced sterilizations to tainted vaccines, the pattern is undeniable and ongoing.
8:28

The dark era of eugenics never ended—it evolved. A direct line connects 1970s government policy to modern-day vaccine scandals and the erosion of informed consent. In 1974, Nixon's National Security Council issued Memo 200, calling for "creating conditions conducive to fertility decline" in developing nations, using the UN and USAID. By 1976, the WHO had its "golden ticket": an "anti-fertility vaccine." Studies show they linked the pregnancy hormone (hCG) to a tetanus toxoid, teaching the female body to attack its own pregnancies. This theory became practice. USAID and the UN funded forced sterilizations in Peru in the 1990s. In 2014, a WHO-tied "tetanus" campaign in Kenya targeted only women. Independent labs found hCG in the vials, confirming the vaccine was a covert sterilization tool. The agenda came home. A 2019 U.S. study found a significantly lowered probability of pregnancy in women who received the HPV vaccine. The study was swiftly retracted. Now, in 2024, the FDA has enacted a rule allowing waivers for informed consent in "minimal risk" clinical trials. The architecture of population control, built over 50 years, is now institutionalized. From memos to forced sterilizations to tainted vaccines, the pattern is undeniable and ongoing.

Camus

18,794 次观看 • 8 个月前

Del Bigtree Exposes the Cumulative Lie of "Rare" Vaccine Injuries The largest COVID vaccine study ever, covering 99 million people, confirmed what Del Bigtree and ICAN have long asserted: the shots are linked to increased risks of severe disorders. The media was quick to label these injuries as "rare." But what does "rare" actually mean? As Del Bigtree highlights, the study reveals a shocking reality: • A 378% increased risk of brain and spinal cord swelling. • A 286% increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (paralysis). • A 610% increased risk of myocarditis. The critical question no one in the media is asking: If each of these individual risks is "rare," what is the cumulative risk when you add them all together? And then multiply that by multiple doses? This COVID vaccine data, as Del Bigtree explains, is a mirror held up to a much larger, silent public health crisis: the entire childhood vaccine schedule. A shocking truth, uncovered by ICAN through FOIA requests and lawsuits: None of the 14 routine vaccines on the CDC's schedule—given in roughly 72 doses—were ever tested in long-term, double-blind, placebo-based safety trials prior to licensure. The foundational science to declare them "safe" simply does not exist. Every vaccine carries a manufacturer-inserted list of potential side effects, stipulated by the FDA because there is a "reasonable belief" they are causally related. For example, the Hepatitis B vaccine given on a baby's first day of life lists nearly 50 potential adverse events, including paralysis, brain swelling, and autoimmune disorders. Its pre-licensing safety study? Just four days long, with no placebo group. The argument is always that these events are "rare." But how rare is it when you multiply ~50 potential adverse events across 72 doses? Del Bigtree points to the devastating data. In the 1980s, when the schedule contained about 11 doses, the chronic childhood illness rate was 12.8%. Today, after the schedule exploded to 72 doses, that rate—encompassing neurological and autoimmune diseases—has skyrocketed to 54%. This is the greatest decline in public health in human history. The "rare" neurological disorders identified in the COVID study (3-6x increased risk) mirror the explosion in conditions like autism, which now affects an estimated 1 in 35 children. The takeaway, as Del Bigtree powerfully states, is undeniable. Vaccine injury is not a myth; it is a documented, quantifiable reality. The conversation must no longer be if it happens, but how much risk is acceptable, and when will we demand the rigorous safety science the public has been denied for decades. The health of millions of children depends on it.
7:58

Del Bigtree Exposes the Cumulative Lie of "Rare" Vaccine Injuries The largest COVID vaccine study ever, covering 99 million people, confirmed what Del Bigtree and ICAN have long asserted: the shots are linked to increased risks of severe disorders. The media was quick to label these injuries as "rare." But what does "rare" actually mean? As Del Bigtree highlights, the study reveals a shocking reality: • A 378% increased risk of brain and spinal cord swelling. • A 286% increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (paralysis). • A 610% increased risk of myocarditis. The critical question no one in the media is asking: If each of these individual risks is "rare," what is the cumulative risk when you add them all together? And then multiply that by multiple doses? This COVID vaccine data, as Del Bigtree explains, is a mirror held up to a much larger, silent public health crisis: the entire childhood vaccine schedule. A shocking truth, uncovered by ICAN through FOIA requests and lawsuits: None of the 14 routine vaccines on the CDC's schedule—given in roughly 72 doses—were ever tested in long-term, double-blind, placebo-based safety trials prior to licensure. The foundational science to declare them "safe" simply does not exist. Every vaccine carries a manufacturer-inserted list of potential side effects, stipulated by the FDA because there is a "reasonable belief" they are causally related. For example, the Hepatitis B vaccine given on a baby's first day of life lists nearly 50 potential adverse events, including paralysis, brain swelling, and autoimmune disorders. Its pre-licensing safety study? Just four days long, with no placebo group. The argument is always that these events are "rare." But how rare is it when you multiply ~50 potential adverse events across 72 doses? Del Bigtree points to the devastating data. In the 1980s, when the schedule contained about 11 doses, the chronic childhood illness rate was 12.8%. Today, after the schedule exploded to 72 doses, that rate—encompassing neurological and autoimmune diseases—has skyrocketed to 54%. This is the greatest decline in public health in human history. The "rare" neurological disorders identified in the COVID study (3-6x increased risk) mirror the explosion in conditions like autism, which now affects an estimated 1 in 35 children. The takeaway, as Del Bigtree powerfully states, is undeniable. Vaccine injury is not a myth; it is a documented, quantifiable reality. The conversation must no longer be if it happens, but how much risk is acceptable, and when will we demand the rigorous safety science the public has been denied for decades. The health of millions of children depends on it.

Camus

52,491 次观看 • 9 个月前

Joe Rogan Is Shocked To Learn How Drug Trials Really Work... Before the actual trial starts, the participants are put on the drug for 6 weeks & then EXCLUDED from the trial if they have side effects from the drug! It Is Legal To Remove People Who Are Harmed & Not Report It. Pre-Randomization Run In Period: Before the actual trial starts, the participants are put on the drug for 6 weeks & then EXCLUDED from the trial if they have side effects from the drug! Clinical trials are structured to minimise the harms of the drug & show ONLY the results they want, in order to get FDA approval. This skews the entire end result of the trial data to only include participants who experienced no negative side effects from the drug. The act of excluding a large group of people from clinical trials after they have taken the drug for several weeks is not only legal, but it is an accepted practice. This results in study data that grossly underestimates the actual rate of side effects associated with statins. This explains why the rate of side effects in statin trials is wildly different from the rate of side effects seen in real-world experiences by patients. In The Heart Protection Study, 36,000 participants were removed during the "pre-randomization run in period," before the actual clinical trial began. Participants took 40mg Simvastatin daily for 6 weeks & then were removed from participating in the actual clinical trial. Unacceptable side effects were experienced by these 36,000 individuals. It is legal to label this in the trial data as "participant non compliance." In a clinical trial, a participant is labeled "non-compliant" when they experience adverse drug side effects that they deem too harmful to their health. Since they cannot continue taking the trial drug, they are kicked out of the actual trial, for not continuing the drug dose protocol rules. 👇Statin Wars: Real Evidence Of Harm👇 👇Adverse Events Reported As Non Compliance👇 Speakers: Dr Aseem Malhotra Cardiologist Joe Rogan Joe Rogan Experience
0:55

Joe Rogan Is Shocked To Learn How Drug Trials Really Work... Before the actual trial starts, the participants are put on the drug for 6 weeks & then EXCLUDED from the trial if they have side effects from the drug! It Is Legal To Remove People Who Are Harmed & Not Report It. Pre-Randomization Run In Period: Before the actual trial starts, the participants are put on the drug for 6 weeks & then EXCLUDED from the trial if they have side effects from the drug! Clinical trials are structured to minimise the harms of the drug & show ONLY the results they want, in order to get FDA approval. This skews the entire end result of the trial data to only include participants who experienced no negative side effects from the drug. The act of excluding a large group of people from clinical trials after they have taken the drug for several weeks is not only legal, but it is an accepted practice. This results in study data that grossly underestimates the actual rate of side effects associated with statins. This explains why the rate of side effects in statin trials is wildly different from the rate of side effects seen in real-world experiences by patients. In The Heart Protection Study, 36,000 participants were removed during the "pre-randomization run in period," before the actual clinical trial began. Participants took 40mg Simvastatin daily for 6 weeks & then were removed from participating in the actual clinical trial. Unacceptable side effects were experienced by these 36,000 individuals. It is legal to label this in the trial data as "participant non compliance." In a clinical trial, a participant is labeled "non-compliant" when they experience adverse drug side effects that they deem too harmful to their health. Since they cannot continue taking the trial drug, they are kicked out of the actual trial, for not continuing the drug dose protocol rules. 👇Statin Wars: Real Evidence Of Harm👇 👇Adverse Events Reported As Non Compliance👇 Speakers: Dr Aseem Malhotra Cardiologist Joe Rogan Joe Rogan Experience

Valerie Anne Smith

311,309 次观看 • 1 年前

💥RFK - "The immunity which was passed in 1986" comes from Wyath (now Pfizer) telling Reagan they'd leave Big Pharma without liability protection. IS THE ERA OF LIABILITY PROTECTION ENDING? 🧵Here's 36 x evidences that might be revealed in the new Kansas suit against PFIZER 💥 ◽️ 1223 Deaths were reported in Pfizer's initial clinical trial data ◽️According to Dr Jeyanthi Kunadhasan, "At NO POINT during the trial was the intervention LIFE SAVING" ◽️ The same DR revealed undisclosed deaths in the vaccinated arm of the Pfizer trial ◽️RFK said that according to Pfizer’s own data, more people died of All Cause Mortality in the vaccine group at the end of a 6 x month period ◽️There was 5 x heart attacks in the vaccine group and only 1 x in the placebo group at the end of that period. An increase of 500% ◽️Guernsey had an increase of 500% in Myocarditis in the year of the roll-out, correlating to Pfizer actual trial data ◽️Pfizer reported to the FDA that Maddie de Garay had a "Stomach ache", when she's in a wheelchair ◽️Pfizer used data for FDA approval that does not match Maddie's adverse events reported in senate testimony for EUA approval and liability protection ◽️ According to Maddie's mother, The FDA approved Pfizer's mRNA covid vaccine for children when Maddie was in hospital from ADEs associated to the mRNA covid product she took in that clinical trial ◽️Pfizer emphasised relative risk as opposed to absolute risk for efficacy and marketing of the effectiveness of their product ◽️For Pfizer in terms of Absolute Risk (not relative risk), there was no Statistically Significant benefit to the prevention of people catching covid for the mRNA vaccinated group ◽️ Pfizer Admitted the NEVER TESTED the vaccine on whether it can prevent TRANSMISSION ◽️ Israeli research found men that were vaccinated had decreased sperm counts ◽️According to RFK, Pfizer had 2 x labels for the same product. The EUA product was available, but the licensed version of the same product was “unavailable” ◽️Pfizer and the FDA tried to withhold the clinical trial evidence for 75 years ◽️ Dr Dr Aseem Malhotra mentioned that Re analysis of the Pfizer data shows an adverse event rate of 1/800 ◽️ An Australian FOI revealed the TGA Bioaccumulation studies that show mRNA Lipid Nano Particles are distributed THROUGHOUT the body ◽️ In similar data, the implantation loss of the mice tested more than doubled in the mRNA group ◽️ Myocarditis is a recognised side effect from governments globally ◽️ Several studies have shown (one done in Israel) Myocarditis only occurs in the vaccinated ◽️Albert Bourla said “MRNA had never delivered a single product” and that Pfizer had less experience with” and that Pfizer and BioNTech were working on mRNA for FLU vaccines from 2018 ◽️ Albert Bourla, when asked on 2 x separate occasions whether he’d taken his own vaccine product, said “NO”, he didn't want to "cut the line" ◽️According to Dr Aseem Malhotra, Pfizer paid front groups to push for Vaccine mandates ◽️Pfizer had special mRNA vaccine batches for their employees according to Pfizer's own spokespeople in Australian Senate testimony ◽️South Africa court released documents revealed Pfizer asked governments to set up insurance scheme for adverse outcomes ◽️Pfizer admitted in the South African court documents that the “long term effects and efficacy of the vaccine are not currently known” ◽️Trial data used for assessing pregnancy safety was analysed by researchers that owned stocks in the company that made the product they were evaluating ◽️According to RFK, Pfizer needed to get it recommended to children for liability protection ◽️Kevin McKernan has found DNA CONTAMINATION IN PFIZER - Multiple studies confirm ◽️@P_J_Buckhaults has found DNA contamination ◽️DNA contamination confirmed in Australian Pfizer & Moderna Vials. DNA contamination in Pfizer was over 350 times above per dose limits set by the TGA ◽️Dr. David Martin mentioned that Pfizer admitted their product is experimental gene therapy in filings ◽️Pfizer did not seek approval through Gene Therapy regulations in Australia (Gillespie) ◽Dr. Naomi Wolf. 8 NYT Bestsellers. DPhil, Poetry. mentioned "Trans-placental exposure" of newborns to Pfizer's product ◽️"The miscarriage rate was 80% in the Pfizer trials" ◽️The Pfizer mRNA vaccine is based on a spike protein that strong evidence suggests was a man made virus, potentially done with GOF research ◽️According to the James Okeefe Veritas Whistleblower story, a Pfizer Director stated Pfizer are talking about “Mutating covid viruses” ◽️Dr Peter McCullough, one of the most published Cardiologists, has analyzed all the data and said that Pfizer “should never have been approved” What else is there to add to this list of EVIDENCE? The discovery process for this new Kansas lawsuit against Pfizer is sure to be EPIC
3:18

💥RFK - "The immunity which was passed in 1986" comes from Wyath (now Pfizer) telling Reagan they'd leave Big Pharma without liability protection. IS THE ERA OF LIABILITY PROTECTION ENDING? 🧵Here's 36 x evidences that might be revealed in the new Kansas suit against PFIZER 💥 ◽️ 1223 Deaths were reported in Pfizer's initial clinical trial data ◽️According to Dr Jeyanthi Kunadhasan, "At NO POINT during the trial was the intervention LIFE SAVING" ◽️ The same DR revealed undisclosed deaths in the vaccinated arm of the Pfizer trial ◽️RFK said that according to Pfizer’s own data, more people died of All Cause Mortality in the vaccine group at the end of a 6 x month period ◽️There was 5 x heart attacks in the vaccine group and only 1 x in the placebo group at the end of that period. An increase of 500% ◽️Guernsey had an increase of 500% in Myocarditis in the year of the roll-out, correlating to Pfizer actual trial data ◽️Pfizer reported to the FDA that Maddie de Garay had a "Stomach ache", when she's in a wheelchair ◽️Pfizer used data for FDA approval that does not match Maddie's adverse events reported in senate testimony for EUA approval and liability protection ◽️ According to Maddie's mother, The FDA approved Pfizer's mRNA covid vaccine for children when Maddie was in hospital from ADEs associated to the mRNA covid product she took in that clinical trial ◽️Pfizer emphasised relative risk as opposed to absolute risk for efficacy and marketing of the effectiveness of their product ◽️For Pfizer in terms of Absolute Risk (not relative risk), there was no Statistically Significant benefit to the prevention of people catching covid for the mRNA vaccinated group ◽️ Pfizer Admitted the NEVER TESTED the vaccine on whether it can prevent TRANSMISSION ◽️ Israeli research found men that were vaccinated had decreased sperm counts ◽️According to RFK, Pfizer had 2 x labels for the same product. The EUA product was available, but the licensed version of the same product was “unavailable” ◽️Pfizer and the FDA tried to withhold the clinical trial evidence for 75 years ◽️ Dr Dr Aseem Malhotra mentioned that Re analysis of the Pfizer data shows an adverse event rate of 1/800 ◽️ An Australian FOI revealed the TGA Bioaccumulation studies that show mRNA Lipid Nano Particles are distributed THROUGHOUT the body ◽️ In similar data, the implantation loss of the mice tested more than doubled in the mRNA group ◽️ Myocarditis is a recognised side effect from governments globally ◽️ Several studies have shown (one done in Israel) Myocarditis only occurs in the vaccinated ◽️Albert Bourla said “MRNA had never delivered a single product” and that Pfizer had less experience with” and that Pfizer and BioNTech were working on mRNA for FLU vaccines from 2018 ◽️ Albert Bourla, when asked on 2 x separate occasions whether he’d taken his own vaccine product, said “NO”, he didn't want to "cut the line" ◽️According to Dr Aseem Malhotra, Pfizer paid front groups to push for Vaccine mandates ◽️Pfizer had special mRNA vaccine batches for their employees according to Pfizer's own spokespeople in Australian Senate testimony ◽️South Africa court released documents revealed Pfizer asked governments to set up insurance scheme for adverse outcomes ◽️Pfizer admitted in the South African court documents that the “long term effects and efficacy of the vaccine are not currently known” ◽️Trial data used for assessing pregnancy safety was analysed by researchers that owned stocks in the company that made the product they were evaluating ◽️According to RFK, Pfizer needed to get it recommended to children for liability protection ◽️Kevin McKernan has found DNA CONTAMINATION IN PFIZER - Multiple studies confirm ◽️@P_J_Buckhaults has found DNA contamination ◽️DNA contamination confirmed in Australian Pfizer & Moderna Vials. DNA contamination in Pfizer was over 350 times above per dose limits set by the TGA ◽️Dr. David Martin mentioned that Pfizer admitted their product is experimental gene therapy in filings ◽️Pfizer did not seek approval through Gene Therapy regulations in Australia (Gillespie) ◽Dr. Naomi Wolf. 8 NYT Bestsellers. DPhil, Poetry. mentioned "Trans-placental exposure" of newborns to Pfizer's product ◽️"The miscarriage rate was 80% in the Pfizer trials" ◽️The Pfizer mRNA vaccine is based on a spike protein that strong evidence suggests was a man made virus, potentially done with GOF research ◽️According to the James Okeefe Veritas Whistleblower story, a Pfizer Director stated Pfizer are talking about “Mutating covid viruses” ◽️Dr Peter McCullough, one of the most published Cardiologists, has analyzed all the data and said that Pfizer “should never have been approved” What else is there to add to this list of EVIDENCE? The discovery process for this new Kansas lawsuit against Pfizer is sure to be EPIC

Humanspective

476,141 次观看 • 2 年前

CAC Coronary Artery Calcium Scan: New Heart Disease Test Causes Cancer. Major Organizations Warn Public Against It... 42 Of Every 100K Patients Develop Cancer From Ionizing Radiation. Radiation Dosage Varies 10X From One Hospital To Another, Causing 5,600 New Cases Of Cancer. The American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology & the United States Preventive Services Task Force do not recommend the use of heart CT scans for patients with a low or high risk of heart disease because CT scans could be more harmful than beneficial due to the relatively high dose of radiation. "Tens of millions of adults would be exposed to relatively high levels of radiation through this procedure. Doctors still have not established a standard dose of radiation to be used for heart CT scans & doses for this test vary from one hospital to another, with some patients getting 10X the amount of radiation as patients in another hospital." A 2009 study showed that one heart CT scan for the 50 million Americans who would receive the average radiation dose, these scans would result in 5,600 new cancer cases. The number of new cancer cases would be even higher if individuals were screened more than once in their lifetime. Radiation from CT scans is even of concern to the FDA even when the CT scans are necessary. On October 9, 2009, the FDA announced that it was notifying healthcare professionals that 206 patients who were being tested for stroke received CT radiation doses that were 8X the expected level at one particular medical facility. While this event involved a single kind of diagnostic test at one facility, the FDA warned that “it reflects more widespread problems with CT quality assurance programs.” Each year, over 600,000 Americans die from heart disease even though heart disease can be prevented. Although heart CT scanning may be a useful tool in detecting blockages in heart arteries, there is not enough evidence to show that this test is worth the risks, especially compared to traditional risk factor assessment. For this reason, the Cancer Prevention & Treatment Fund of the National Research Center for Women & Families agrees with the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force that heart CT scans are not recommended for screening for heart disease. 👇CAC Screening Radiation 10X Cancer Risk👇 👇Ionizing Radiation Risk From CAC Test👇 👇Cancer Risk From CT Scan Radiation👇 Video: Dr David Alfrey
2:13

CAC Coronary Artery Calcium Scan: New Heart Disease Test Causes Cancer. Major Organizations Warn Public Against It... 42 Of Every 100K Patients Develop Cancer From Ionizing Radiation. Radiation Dosage Varies 10X From One Hospital To Another, Causing 5,600 New Cases Of Cancer. The American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology & the United States Preventive Services Task Force do not recommend the use of heart CT scans for patients with a low or high risk of heart disease because CT scans could be more harmful than beneficial due to the relatively high dose of radiation. "Tens of millions of adults would be exposed to relatively high levels of radiation through this procedure. Doctors still have not established a standard dose of radiation to be used for heart CT scans & doses for this test vary from one hospital to another, with some patients getting 10X the amount of radiation as patients in another hospital." A 2009 study showed that one heart CT scan for the 50 million Americans who would receive the average radiation dose, these scans would result in 5,600 new cancer cases. The number of new cancer cases would be even higher if individuals were screened more than once in their lifetime. Radiation from CT scans is even of concern to the FDA even when the CT scans are necessary. On October 9, 2009, the FDA announced that it was notifying healthcare professionals that 206 patients who were being tested for stroke received CT radiation doses that were 8X the expected level at one particular medical facility. While this event involved a single kind of diagnostic test at one facility, the FDA warned that “it reflects more widespread problems with CT quality assurance programs.” Each year, over 600,000 Americans die from heart disease even though heart disease can be prevented. Although heart CT scanning may be a useful tool in detecting blockages in heart arteries, there is not enough evidence to show that this test is worth the risks, especially compared to traditional risk factor assessment. For this reason, the Cancer Prevention & Treatment Fund of the National Research Center for Women & Families agrees with the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force that heart CT scans are not recommended for screening for heart disease. 👇CAC Screening Radiation 10X Cancer Risk👇 👇Ionizing Radiation Risk From CAC Test👇 👇Cancer Risk From CT Scan Radiation👇 Video: Dr David Alfrey

Valerie Anne Smith

114,523 次观看 • 10 个月前

When trans activists claim that the drugs euphemistically called "puberty blockers" are "safe and reversible," they are lying to the public. Even experts who criticize the administration of these drugs to children often say, "there is limited research" regarding long-term effects. Yes, research on children is limited, and no long-term follow-up research is currently being required in the US. Yet there are plenty of horrifying reports from adults. Women have been given "puberty blocker" Lupron for a variety of issues - including IVF, surrogacy, and early puberty. (Lupron, like all "puberty blocking" drugs, is classified as a GnRH agonist.) The side effects have been horrendous - debilitating pain, early menopause, and brittle bones. Some women have reported their teeth falling out and their jaw bones detaching. Lupron was developed for the treatment of prostate cancer in men. When it failed to improve the health of dying men, it was pushed onto women, who have been suffering horrendously for decades while being ignored by mainstream media. A drug developed for terminally ill men, which is also used to castrate convicted male pedophiles, is being given to women and to healthy children. This is a failed, category X cancer drug being repurposed for profit. Lupron is only given to men when they are dying or as a punishment, but the drug is called "life-saving" for children. By 2019, the US FDA had received over 25,000 adverse event reports for Lupron products including more than 1500 deaths. This clip is from 2009 and features the investigative reporting of Darcy Spears who has repeatedly tried to bring awareness of this medical scandal. Society at large did not care that this was happening to women, and a result of this medical scandal being neglected is that both women and children are being irreparably harmed.
6:15

When trans activists claim that the drugs euphemistically called "puberty blockers" are "safe and reversible," they are lying to the public. Even experts who criticize the administration of these drugs to children often say, "there is limited research" regarding long-term effects. Yes, research on children is limited, and no long-term follow-up research is currently being required in the US. Yet there are plenty of horrifying reports from adults. Women have been given "puberty blocker" Lupron for a variety of issues - including IVF, surrogacy, and early puberty. (Lupron, like all "puberty blocking" drugs, is classified as a GnRH agonist.) The side effects have been horrendous - debilitating pain, early menopause, and brittle bones. Some women have reported their teeth falling out and their jaw bones detaching. Lupron was developed for the treatment of prostate cancer in men. When it failed to improve the health of dying men, it was pushed onto women, who have been suffering horrendously for decades while being ignored by mainstream media. A drug developed for terminally ill men, which is also used to castrate convicted male pedophiles, is being given to women and to healthy children. This is a failed, category X cancer drug being repurposed for profit. Lupron is only given to men when they are dying or as a punishment, but the drug is called "life-saving" for children. By 2019, the US FDA had received over 25,000 adverse event reports for Lupron products including more than 1500 deaths. This clip is from 2009 and features the investigative reporting of Darcy Spears who has repeatedly tried to bring awareness of this medical scandal. Society at large did not care that this was happening to women, and a result of this medical scandal being neglected is that both women and children are being irreparably harmed.

Genevieve Gluck

161,722 次观看 • 3 年前

"A Colonoscopy Is Far Too Dangerous, I Recommend Against Them." Dr John McDougall, MD "7 Out Of Every 100 People Suffer Serious Major Complications." "1 In A 1,000 Have A Colon Perforation & Half Of These People Will Die. "Colonoscopies Are Harming More Lives Than It Saves." ✳️Written Post Contains... 1⃣ Research data, 2⃣ Colonoscopy complication rates 3⃣ Alternative screening methods to colonoscopy 1⃣ The U.S. is the outlier of the world who uses colonoscopy as 1st line colon-cancer screening modality. There are about 15 million colonoscopies done in the U.S. every year. In 2001, Medicare agreed to pay for colonoscopy as a screening tool & that’s when the US made Colonoscopy as 1st line diagnostic. It is for money & profit, not health. Europe, Canada, Australia & parts of S America do not use Colonoscopy as a preventive screening. In those countries, the predominant colon-cancer screening is the stool test, or the newer version of that called FIT. The absolute risk of developing colon cancer for people following the Standard American Diet is 2.5%. Risk of cancer rate drops to almost 0% when a low carb/low sugar diet is followed. Yet, colonoscopy complication risk is 7%. One of the most serious hazards, often leading to death, is perforation of the colon, which occurs in about 1 per 1,000 procedures. It takes 1,250 people screened with colonoscopy to diagnose 1 cancer. This is almost an even exchange: for 1 cancer diagnosis & potential life saved, 1 life is lost from a complication, like perforation. 3 Highly regarded institutions warn colonoscopy does not reduce mortality... The Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine boldly stated, “…there is no randomized clinical trial (RCT) (or other high-quality evidence) showing that colonoscopy reduces CRC (colorectal cancer) mortality. In fact, the only tests shown to reduce CRC mortality in RCTs are periodic FOBT (fecal tests). The lack of benefits, & substantial costs & harms, has caused the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Care to tell the citizens of Canada: “We recommend not using colonoscopy as a screening test for colorectal cancer.” The New England Journal of Medicine published the NordIC trial, the largest randomized study published on the possible benefits from colonoscopy 10 years after screening..."The risk of death from any cause was 11.03% in those who had colonoscopy & 11.04% in those who did not have a colonoscopy." Unfortunately, these undeniable findings that screening using colonoscopy will not reduce your risk of dying will have little influence on medical doctors & facilities performing this highly profitable procedure, which brings in $4Billion profit each year. 2⃣ Colonoscopy Complication Rates: GI Microbiome: The harsh prep of toxic polyethylene glycol (PEG) to clean out the entire digestive tract ahead of a Colonoscopy kills 99% of beneficial good bacteria. Resulting is months of digestive issues as the digestive tract attempts to recolonize. Cardiac Event: 1 in 100 will suffer an Arrhythmia or Myocardial infarction. Bleeding: 1 in 2,000 will suffer bleeding needing inpatient intervention. Bowel Perforation: 1 in 1,000 requiring emergency surgical repair with risk of fatality. Spleen Injury: 1 in 6,000 from colorectal endoscopy tool injures the Splenocolic Ligament, emergency surgery & possible fatality. Infection: 1 in 1,000 will suffer bacterial infection which can develop into Sepsis. 3⃣ Non Invasive alternative testing is superior to Colonoscopy, used in most other countries around the world: Virtual Colonoscopy: used for colon cancer screening & to detect polyps or other growths in the colon. Camera Pill: used for colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) to examine the colon. The M2-PK: (tumor M2-pyruvate kinase) test is a non-invasive screening test that can detect colorectal cancer & polyps early. FOBT: Fecal Occult Blood Test is a non-invasive stool test to detect blood, cancer & polyps. FIT-DNA: Fecal Immunochemical Test detects altered DNA in serum blood tests & in stool. 👇Cardiac Events Post Colonoscopy👇 👇Other Countries Use Non Invasive Colon Tests👇 👇Post Colonoscopy Infections👇 Speakers: Chris Wark & Dr John McDougall, MD
1:00

"A Colonoscopy Is Far Too Dangerous, I Recommend Against Them." Dr John McDougall, MD "7 Out Of Every 100 People Suffer Serious Major Complications." "1 In A 1,000 Have A Colon Perforation & Half Of These People Will Die. "Colonoscopies Are Harming More Lives Than It Saves." ✳️Written Post Contains... 1⃣ Research data, 2⃣ Colonoscopy complication rates 3⃣ Alternative screening methods to colonoscopy 1⃣ The U.S. is the outlier of the world who uses colonoscopy as 1st line colon-cancer screening modality. There are about 15 million colonoscopies done in the U.S. every year. In 2001, Medicare agreed to pay for colonoscopy as a screening tool & that’s when the US made Colonoscopy as 1st line diagnostic. It is for money & profit, not health. Europe, Canada, Australia & parts of S America do not use Colonoscopy as a preventive screening. In those countries, the predominant colon-cancer screening is the stool test, or the newer version of that called FIT. The absolute risk of developing colon cancer for people following the Standard American Diet is 2.5%. Risk of cancer rate drops to almost 0% when a low carb/low sugar diet is followed. Yet, colonoscopy complication risk is 7%. One of the most serious hazards, often leading to death, is perforation of the colon, which occurs in about 1 per 1,000 procedures. It takes 1,250 people screened with colonoscopy to diagnose 1 cancer. This is almost an even exchange: for 1 cancer diagnosis & potential life saved, 1 life is lost from a complication, like perforation. 3 Highly regarded institutions warn colonoscopy does not reduce mortality... The Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine boldly stated, “…there is no randomized clinical trial (RCT) (or other high-quality evidence) showing that colonoscopy reduces CRC (colorectal cancer) mortality. In fact, the only tests shown to reduce CRC mortality in RCTs are periodic FOBT (fecal tests). The lack of benefits, & substantial costs & harms, has caused the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Care to tell the citizens of Canada: “We recommend not using colonoscopy as a screening test for colorectal cancer.” The New England Journal of Medicine published the NordIC trial, the largest randomized study published on the possible benefits from colonoscopy 10 years after screening..."The risk of death from any cause was 11.03% in those who had colonoscopy & 11.04% in those who did not have a colonoscopy." Unfortunately, these undeniable findings that screening using colonoscopy will not reduce your risk of dying will have little influence on medical doctors & facilities performing this highly profitable procedure, which brings in $4Billion profit each year. 2⃣ Colonoscopy Complication Rates: GI Microbiome: The harsh prep of toxic polyethylene glycol (PEG) to clean out the entire digestive tract ahead of a Colonoscopy kills 99% of beneficial good bacteria. Resulting is months of digestive issues as the digestive tract attempts to recolonize. Cardiac Event: 1 in 100 will suffer an Arrhythmia or Myocardial infarction. Bleeding: 1 in 2,000 will suffer bleeding needing inpatient intervention. Bowel Perforation: 1 in 1,000 requiring emergency surgical repair with risk of fatality. Spleen Injury: 1 in 6,000 from colorectal endoscopy tool injures the Splenocolic Ligament, emergency surgery & possible fatality. Infection: 1 in 1,000 will suffer bacterial infection which can develop into Sepsis. 3⃣ Non Invasive alternative testing is superior to Colonoscopy, used in most other countries around the world: Virtual Colonoscopy: used for colon cancer screening & to detect polyps or other growths in the colon. Camera Pill: used for colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) to examine the colon. The M2-PK: (tumor M2-pyruvate kinase) test is a non-invasive screening test that can detect colorectal cancer & polyps early. FOBT: Fecal Occult Blood Test is a non-invasive stool test to detect blood, cancer & polyps. FIT-DNA: Fecal Immunochemical Test detects altered DNA in serum blood tests & in stool. 👇Cardiac Events Post Colonoscopy👇 👇Other Countries Use Non Invasive Colon Tests👇 👇Post Colonoscopy Infections👇 Speakers: Chris Wark & Dr John McDougall, MD

Valerie Anne Smith

709,625 次观看 • 8 个月前

Thank you God 🙌 🚨BREAKING: RFK Jr. Orders Removal of Mercury-Based Preservative from U.S. Flu Vaccines, Citing Alarming Health Risks - Thimerosal, which is nearly 50% mercury by weight, is recognized as a neurotoxin, particularly harmful to fetal and infant brain development. - The EPA classifies mercury as hazardous even at trace levels, with the amount of ethylmercury in flu shots banned under Kennedy's order being 25,000 times the EPA's safety level for drinking water. - This decision aligns with a 1999 FDA request to vaccine manufacturers to reduce thimerosal use, though it remained in some flu vaccines until now. - Kennedy notes that thimerosal's own label advises against its use during pregnancy, as it has never been shown to be safe and causes mutations in mammals. - A 2017 CDC study linked flu vaccines to a 7.7% increased risk of miscarriage within 28 days for women who received the shot during pregnancy. - Another study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found an elevated risk of autism spectrum disorders in children whose mothers received a first-trimester flu shot. - The move is part of a broader effort under President Trump to restore public trust in vaccine safety and prioritize health over industry profits. - Kennedy's action fulfills a long-standing promise by the National Academy of Sciences to eliminate mercury additives from vaccines, a step many developed countries took decades ago. - Kennedy urges global health authorities, including the WHO and GAVI, to follow suit and stop using mercury in vaccines worldwide
8:46

Thank you God 🙌 🚨BREAKING: RFK Jr. Orders Removal of Mercury-Based Preservative from U.S. Flu Vaccines, Citing Alarming Health Risks - Thimerosal, which is nearly 50% mercury by weight, is recognized as a neurotoxin, particularly harmful to fetal and infant brain development. - The EPA classifies mercury as hazardous even at trace levels, with the amount of ethylmercury in flu shots banned under Kennedy's order being 25,000 times the EPA's safety level for drinking water. - This decision aligns with a 1999 FDA request to vaccine manufacturers to reduce thimerosal use, though it remained in some flu vaccines until now. - Kennedy notes that thimerosal's own label advises against its use during pregnancy, as it has never been shown to be safe and causes mutations in mammals. - A 2017 CDC study linked flu vaccines to a 7.7% increased risk of miscarriage within 28 days for women who received the shot during pregnancy. - Another study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found an elevated risk of autism spectrum disorders in children whose mothers received a first-trimester flu shot. - The move is part of a broader effort under President Trump to restore public trust in vaccine safety and prioritize health over industry profits. - Kennedy's action fulfills a long-standing promise by the National Academy of Sciences to eliminate mercury additives from vaccines, a step many developed countries took decades ago. - Kennedy urges global health authorities, including the WHO and GAVI, to follow suit and stop using mercury in vaccines worldwide

MJTruthUltra

60,710 次观看 • 11 个月前

Johnson & Johnson Is The Largest, Costliest & Deadliest Criminal Conspiracy In American History. Grand Jury Documents Show They Caused & Contributed To The Deaths Of 2 Million People. Gardiner Harris, Investigative Journalist Their "No More Tears" Baby Loving Image Is A Lie. The deadly public health crises involves 9 different products produced & sold by Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries: Johnson’s Baby Powder, Tylenol, Procrit, Risperdal, Duragesic, Ortho Evra, the Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implants, Prolift vaginal mesh & the Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine. Baby Powder: Johnson & Johnson knew that its talc powder was contaminated with asbestos, a highly carcinogenic mineral that causes cancers like mesothelioma. However, it hid this knowledge from the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) for decades. As a result, thousands of people, particularly women, got asbestos-related illnesses. Tylenol: Johnson & Johnson hid the evidence that Tylenol has a very narrow “margin of safety,” meaning that it is relatively easy to accidentally overdose on its active ingredient acetaminophen, which causes liver disease. Acetaminophen is the leading cause of Liver failure & the leading cause of Liver transplants in the US. Procrit: Johnson & Johnson hid studies that showed Procrit led to negative outcomes, particularly for cancer patients, as it led to the growth of cancerous tumors. Johnson & Johnson was also found liable for engaging in Medicare fraud in encouraging the prescription of this drug; it would provide Procrit to providers for low or no cost while asking the government for reimbursements for the full listed cost of the drug. Risperdal: An antipsychotic medication used in the treatment of bipolar disorder & schizophrenia that Johnson & Johnson claimed had fewer side effects than its older antipsychotic, Haldol. Johnson & Johnson illegally marketed the use of Risperdal to elderly patients with dementia & young patients with behavior disorders & depression. In elderly patients, Risperdal led to strokes, heart attacks & death. In younger patients, it led to metabolic disorders including diabetes & gynecomastia. Duragesic: A synthetic fentanyl patch used for the long-term treatment of severe pain. Johnson & Johnson marketed Duragesic as a less-addictive alternative to Purdue Pharma’s opioid OxyContin, despite evidence that fentanyl is just as addictive. Johnson & Johnson has an unacknowledged role in the ongoing opioid crisis in the United States. Ortho Evra: A hormonal contraceptive birth control patch. The patch delivers inconsistent levels of the hormone estrogen, leading to higher-than-average estrogen doses leading to blood clots & strokes. In some instances, the patch does not deliver enough estrogen, leading to pregnancy. Johnson & Johnson hid the unfavorable results of its Ortho Evra clinical trials from the FDA. Metal-on-Metal hip implants: Typically, hip implants are made from metal-on-plastic, as metal-on-metal wear & tear can lead to metal shards coming dislodged from the implant, embedding in muscle tissue & causing implant failure. The day before Johnson & Johnson sent its plans for a metal-on-metal implant to the FDA, an engineer reported one of its implants in a simulator had failed. Johnson & Johnson sent the original plans to the FDA for approval while changing the design without informing the regulatory agency. It hid reports of “adverse events,” or implant failure, from the agency. Prolift vaginal mesh: Inserted vaginally to help prevent the bladder from pressing against the vagina, causing incontinence & prolapse. Although the medical team that designed it raised concerns with the company about issues with the product, Johnson & Johnson put it on the market without asking for FDA approval. Over time, it became clear that the mesh would erode through thin vaginal walls causing terrible complications, including pain during sex. Many women had to have corrective surgery to remove the mesh. Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine: Although they had not developed vaccines, J & J wanted to do so in order to improve their public image following the backlash from the revelations about asbestos contamination in their baby powder. Johnson & Johnson created an adenovirus-based Covid-19 vaccine which did not need to be refrigerated & only one shot was required. Johnson & Johnson's vaccine proved to be harmful causing serious blood clots & Guillain-Barré syndrome. 👇No More Tears: The Dark Secrets Of J & J👇 👇Johnson & Johnson Litigation👇 👇Talc/Ovarian Cancer 60,000+ Lawsuits👇 Speaker: Gardiner Harris Video@ Dr. Josh Axe
1:32

Johnson & Johnson Is The Largest, Costliest & Deadliest Criminal Conspiracy In American History. Grand Jury Documents Show They Caused & Contributed To The Deaths Of 2 Million People. Gardiner Harris, Investigative Journalist Their "No More Tears" Baby Loving Image Is A Lie. The deadly public health crises involves 9 different products produced & sold by Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries: Johnson’s Baby Powder, Tylenol, Procrit, Risperdal, Duragesic, Ortho Evra, the Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implants, Prolift vaginal mesh & the Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine. Baby Powder: Johnson & Johnson knew that its talc powder was contaminated with asbestos, a highly carcinogenic mineral that causes cancers like mesothelioma. However, it hid this knowledge from the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) for decades. As a result, thousands of people, particularly women, got asbestos-related illnesses. Tylenol: Johnson & Johnson hid the evidence that Tylenol has a very narrow “margin of safety,” meaning that it is relatively easy to accidentally overdose on its active ingredient acetaminophen, which causes liver disease. Acetaminophen is the leading cause of Liver failure & the leading cause of Liver transplants in the US. Procrit: Johnson & Johnson hid studies that showed Procrit led to negative outcomes, particularly for cancer patients, as it led to the growth of cancerous tumors. Johnson & Johnson was also found liable for engaging in Medicare fraud in encouraging the prescription of this drug; it would provide Procrit to providers for low or no cost while asking the government for reimbursements for the full listed cost of the drug. Risperdal: An antipsychotic medication used in the treatment of bipolar disorder & schizophrenia that Johnson & Johnson claimed had fewer side effects than its older antipsychotic, Haldol. Johnson & Johnson illegally marketed the use of Risperdal to elderly patients with dementia & young patients with behavior disorders & depression. In elderly patients, Risperdal led to strokes, heart attacks & death. In younger patients, it led to metabolic disorders including diabetes & gynecomastia. Duragesic: A synthetic fentanyl patch used for the long-term treatment of severe pain. Johnson & Johnson marketed Duragesic as a less-addictive alternative to Purdue Pharma’s opioid OxyContin, despite evidence that fentanyl is just as addictive. Johnson & Johnson has an unacknowledged role in the ongoing opioid crisis in the United States. Ortho Evra: A hormonal contraceptive birth control patch. The patch delivers inconsistent levels of the hormone estrogen, leading to higher-than-average estrogen doses leading to blood clots & strokes. In some instances, the patch does not deliver enough estrogen, leading to pregnancy. Johnson & Johnson hid the unfavorable results of its Ortho Evra clinical trials from the FDA. Metal-on-Metal hip implants: Typically, hip implants are made from metal-on-plastic, as metal-on-metal wear & tear can lead to metal shards coming dislodged from the implant, embedding in muscle tissue & causing implant failure. The day before Johnson & Johnson sent its plans for a metal-on-metal implant to the FDA, an engineer reported one of its implants in a simulator had failed. Johnson & Johnson sent the original plans to the FDA for approval while changing the design without informing the regulatory agency. It hid reports of “adverse events,” or implant failure, from the agency. Prolift vaginal mesh: Inserted vaginally to help prevent the bladder from pressing against the vagina, causing incontinence & prolapse. Although the medical team that designed it raised concerns with the company about issues with the product, Johnson & Johnson put it on the market without asking for FDA approval. Over time, it became clear that the mesh would erode through thin vaginal walls causing terrible complications, including pain during sex. Many women had to have corrective surgery to remove the mesh. Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine: Although they had not developed vaccines, J & J wanted to do so in order to improve their public image following the backlash from the revelations about asbestos contamination in their baby powder. Johnson & Johnson created an adenovirus-based Covid-19 vaccine which did not need to be refrigerated & only one shot was required. Johnson & Johnson's vaccine proved to be harmful causing serious blood clots & Guillain-Barré syndrome. 👇No More Tears: The Dark Secrets Of J & J👇 👇Johnson & Johnson Litigation👇 👇Talc/Ovarian Cancer 60,000+ Lawsuits👇 Speaker: Gardiner Harris Video@ Dr. Josh Axe

Valerie Anne Smith

70,743 次观看 • 1 年前

Naomi Wolf Exposes: The Greatest Crime Against Humanity in Modern History – Pfizer's Hidden Assault on the Unborn and Infants Through Vaccine Data In the Pfizer clinical trials, a bizarre and unprecedented red flag was raised. Men were explicitly warned not to have intercourse with women of childbearing age. If they did, they were instructed to use two forms of contraception. Why? What did Pfizer suspect—or know—was in the vaccinated semen that could be so dangerous? Simultaneously, women were told not to get pregnant. 270 did anyway. In a blatantly illegal act, Pfizer "lost" the records for 236 of these women. But for the 34 records that survived, the outcome is horrifying: over 80% of those pregnancies ended in loss. Pfizer knew their vaccine was causing babies to die in utero. They had the data. The smoking gun is in the "Pregnancy and Lactation" report, which went directly to CDC head Dr. Rochelle Walensky. In it, Pfizer explicitly concluded that two in-utero deaths were due to "maternal exposure to the vaccine." The report contained a chart so monstrous it evokes Mengele. It detailed the effects on nursing babies from vaccinated mothers: This many babies are vomiting. This many babies are in convulsions. This many babies have fevers. This many reported seizures after breastfeeding. Pfizer was actively monitoring and documenting the poisoning of infants through breast milk. Yet, on April 23, 2021, just three days after receiving this report, Dr. Walensky stood at a White House podium and told pregnant women there was "no bad time to get a COVID vaccine." She had the evidence of death in her hands. At the same time, the FDA's Dr. Peter Marks was publicly declaring "no signals of death, no signals of injury." He was looking at the same lines of data detailing dead babies, convulsing infants, and vomiting newborns. This is not a mistake. It is not negligence. This is premeditated, calculated mass murder and fraud on a genocidal scale. It is a direct violation of the Nuremberg Code. They knew the drug was causing reproductive harm—63% of adverse events were in women, with 16% being "reproductive disorders." They knew it was killing the unborn. They knew it was harming babies. And they lied, mandated, and injected billions. This is the greatest crime against humanity in modern history. And the evidence is now public, thanks to those who fought for truth.
5:01

Naomi Wolf Exposes: The Greatest Crime Against Humanity in Modern History – Pfizer's Hidden Assault on the Unborn and Infants Through Vaccine Data In the Pfizer clinical trials, a bizarre and unprecedented red flag was raised. Men were explicitly warned not to have intercourse with women of childbearing age. If they did, they were instructed to use two forms of contraception. Why? What did Pfizer suspect—or know—was in the vaccinated semen that could be so dangerous? Simultaneously, women were told not to get pregnant. 270 did anyway. In a blatantly illegal act, Pfizer "lost" the records for 236 of these women. But for the 34 records that survived, the outcome is horrifying: over 80% of those pregnancies ended in loss. Pfizer knew their vaccine was causing babies to die in utero. They had the data. The smoking gun is in the "Pregnancy and Lactation" report, which went directly to CDC head Dr. Rochelle Walensky. In it, Pfizer explicitly concluded that two in-utero deaths were due to "maternal exposure to the vaccine." The report contained a chart so monstrous it evokes Mengele. It detailed the effects on nursing babies from vaccinated mothers: This many babies are vomiting. This many babies are in convulsions. This many babies have fevers. This many reported seizures after breastfeeding. Pfizer was actively monitoring and documenting the poisoning of infants through breast milk. Yet, on April 23, 2021, just three days after receiving this report, Dr. Walensky stood at a White House podium and told pregnant women there was "no bad time to get a COVID vaccine." She had the evidence of death in her hands. At the same time, the FDA's Dr. Peter Marks was publicly declaring "no signals of death, no signals of injury." He was looking at the same lines of data detailing dead babies, convulsing infants, and vomiting newborns. This is not a mistake. It is not negligence. This is premeditated, calculated mass murder and fraud on a genocidal scale. It is a direct violation of the Nuremberg Code. They knew the drug was causing reproductive harm—63% of adverse events were in women, with 16% being "reproductive disorders." They knew it was killing the unborn. They knew it was harming babies. And they lied, mandated, and injected billions. This is the greatest crime against humanity in modern history. And the evidence is now public, thanks to those who fought for truth.

Camus

119,132 次观看 • 10 个月前