TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @lawrie_dr
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
Regarding the WHO's 'Pandemic Agreement': Imagine there is a gang in a school. The gang with their own gang rules set themselves up at the school gate and say: “We are in charge of this school. You cannot say this or that anymore, you must follow our gang rules, and you have to buy your lunch from us. Be quiet and don’t ask questions. If you don’t do our bidding, the teachers, whom we control, will force you to and/or detain you." This is how the #WHO is behaving. They haven't yet realised the school is derelict and no-one goes there anymore. You can read the document they aim to 'adopt' illegitimately here: https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Draft-WHO-Pandemic-Agreement_19-Sept_17.30.pdf There's a better way for world health. #pandemictreaty #pandemicagreement #IHRamendments #greatfreeset #betterway
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
WCH Health & Science Lead Christof Plothe DO asked 36 questions at the recent #Geneva press conference on Human Rights and COVID-19: 1- Why were we not told that the Covid 19 virus was patented by Moderna in 2018? 2- Why did Moderna produce 100,000 Covid-19 vaccine doses in 2019 before the pandemic started? 3- Why, against all scientific evidence, were lockdowns and masks used? 4- Why were we not told that the ‘vaccine’ does not remain in the arm, but accumulates all over the body? 5- Why was PCR testing recommended when it is not designed for diagnostic purposes? 6- Why were the definitions of ‘vaccine’, and ‘herd immunity’ changed prior to the Covid-19 outbreak? 7- Why was a pandemic declared when the case fatality rate was akin to ’flu? 8- Why were tests on genotoxicity, teratogenicity, and carcinogenicity not carried out, and yet we were told the ‘vaccine’ was safe? 9- Why was there no proper follow-up of all people injected when using a new gene therapy product? 10- Why were doctors and the public not reminded regularly about the need to report adverse reactions to these new and experimental genetic ‘vaccines’? 11- Why was a ‘vaccine’ recommended during an ongoing pandemic, which is contraindicated in vaccinology? 12- Why was a ‘vaccine’ recommended for those who had superior natural immunity? 13- Why was a novel gene therapy launched after three months, instead of the required ten years? 14- Why were we not told that, in the Pfizer trial, more people died in the vaccinated group than in the control group? 15- Why were we told that Covid injections were ‘safe and effective’ when the evidence did not substantiate this? 16- Why were – and are – opposing voices from science and practicing medicine discredited, punished, and jailed? 17- Why were doctors, for the first time in history, discouraged from treating a disease, and told to wait for a vaccine? 18- Why was early treatment discouraged, whilst we know it is the most important tool to address any infectious disease? 19- Why were effective and very safe medicines like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin discredited and even prohibited? 20- Why did the producers of the novel gene therapies not want their data to be published for 75 years? 21- Why were Covid injections, masks and lockdowns recommended for children when it was known that they were not severely affected and did not spread Covid? 22- Why were the Covid injections recommended in pregnancy, when over 80% of babies were lost in trials when women were vaccinated in the first trimester? 23- Why was emergency approval guaranteed when over 2,000 people died within the first three months after vaccination roll-out? 24- Why is there no scientific outcry after over 3,500 papers have been published demonstrating side effects of the Covid-19 injections? 25- Why are conflicts of interest tolerated among medical authorities, with the FDA, EMA, and WHO being 80-90% funded by industry? 26- Why was there no adequate education of doctors, patients, and the public, and thus no possibility of informed consent? 27- Why and how were the media captured so that they pushed only one agenda worldwide? 28- Why were and are effective treatment protocols, which have existed since 2020, banned and declared illegal? 29- Why are we not told about the unnecessary deaths that were attributed to Covid but actually caused by iatrogenic measures (e.g. Midazolam, ventilation) carried out in early 2020? 30- Why was the fundamental role of Vitamin D status, diet, and the microbiome not communicated, when these measures could have prevented almost 100% of Covid deaths? 31- Why was and is a certain medical procedure forced upon people against their will, whilst the Nuremberg Declaration clearly opposes this? 32- Why is gain of function research, like that relating to Covid-19, not banned worldwide? 33- Why is an mRNA product still being used, when we know that mRNA is being incorporated into the human genome, and resulting in the production of other, unknown, proteins? 34- Why has the failed mRNA concept not been stopped, when we know it increases the likelihood of the recipient getting Covid-19, thus demonstrating negative efficacy? 35-Why do these products continue to be recommended, when at least 17 million people are believed to have died due to the injections? 36-Why is there no investigation into excess deaths, and increases in rates of cancer and heart problems, etc., which started in 2021, not in 2020? What do we do when the so-called health authorities get it wrong and cause immeasurable harm? @RWMaloneMD @PierreKory @WCH_Japan2023 @P_McCulloughMD @Tammy1Peterson @mrmarkdolan @BretWeinstein @Johnincarlisle @JackieS82674799
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
The German microbiologist Sucharit Bhakdi send an important message via video in Geneva today: "The [mRNA] program is being expanded since the WHO generally intends to replace conventional vaccines in human and veterinary medicine with mRNA injectables. The WHO tells us that the COVID vaccines have shown their safety, so any quality control of future [mRNA] agents is entirely unnecessary. Dear fellow citizens, for the sake of your loved ones, never forget this: Uptake and expression of a foreign gene will always cause attack of the immune system on [the affected] cell. Since all further mRNA vaccines will encode non-self, they will cause harm that will worsen with every booster. And for sure, contamination of mRNA vaccines will be the rule because no cost-effective procedure exists to reliably separate mass produced mRNA from plasmid DNA. The WHO [mRNA] program threatens mankind." @P_McCulloughMD @JesslovesMJK @mattletiss7 @joerogan @EpochTimes @efenigson @VigilantFox @TheChiefNerd
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
South African's may be aware of the judgment handed down in the Pretoria High Court on 17 August 2023, however it has just come to my attention. The judge compelled the National Department of Health to provide access to the COVID-19 vaccine procurement contracts. The judgement and the contracts can be downloaded here: https://healthjusticeinitiative.org.za/pandemic-transparency/ The Pfizer contract in para 5.5 states, "Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known." The Purchaser is the government and they signed the contract on 1st April 2021. Therefore, any statement that these 'vaccines' were 'safe and effective' is at the very best a fabrication and at the worst deliberate misinformation. It must be assumed that governments throughout the world have signed similar contracts. They have all in lockstep pronounced these 'vaccines' to be 'safe and effective'.
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
I thank everyone who signed and supported our petition for the UK Parliament to debate the WHO IHR amendments. We made it! They will debate them and I will be there on that day. I would like to also take the opportunity to thank everyone who has supported the World Council for Health in 2023. This past year has seen our coalition of more than 225 grassroots organisations go from strength to strength! With your financial contributions, we have demonstrated leadership in medicine, holistic health and science, international health policy, and human rights law. The World Council for Health has become a leading voice on health and sovereignty issues that impact everyone. At WCH, we envision a healthy, free, and sovereign world where we all have what we need to generate, sustain, and protect our own health and that of our loved ones, our communities, and our environments. However, a minority of special interest groups have a rather different vision, they envision a New World Order where we have nothing, and they have everything. A world of monopoly power where we, the many, are made fearful and exploited by the few. This is the most pressing issue of our time and it has grave implications for the future of our children if we choose to do nothing. This is why we at the World Council for Health, in collaboration with the grassroots groups of men and women in every country, are actively countering this dystopian agenda and creating a Better Way for all. We do this by establishing autonomous councils, empowering communities, and educating men, women, and children so they know their rights and confidently take responsibility for their own health. With the intended expansion of WHO control over public health responses at the next World Health Assembly meeting in May 2024, our work is more critical than ever. We are not funded by Big Pharma or billionaires—we are supported by ordinary people like you. So, once again, a heartfelt thank you for your support. We have gone from a seed to a sapling, and with your continued nourishment we will become a very strong tree. Please consider gifting to the World Council for Health this season under the link below, and have a peaceful and joy-filled family time! To support our work please visit: https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/news/update/thank-you/ To learn more about the attempted power grab by the WHO please see: https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Rejecting-Monopoly-Power-over-Global-Public-Health.-WCH-Policy-Brief-on-the-Proposed-IHR-Amendments-and-Pandemic-Treaty.pdf @DrHoenderkamp @P_McCulloughMD @EpochTimes @ABridgen @efenigson @RobertKennedyJr @mattletiss7 @thecoastguy @Johnincarlisle @JohnBoweActor @JohnMappin @kharaguchi @laralogan @pjhlaw @BLNewsMedia @CartlandDavid @chrismartenson @ChildrensHD
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT WHISTLEBLOWER DATA DUMP REVEALS TRUE EXTENT OF TOXICITY OF VACCINES, JUST AS WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION TRIES TO BRUSH AWAY GOVERNMENTS' ABILITY TO PROTECT PEOPLE The World Council for Health has been informed of the courageous revelations of a New Zealand individual who has been the main analyst for New Zealand government data on their vaccine rollout programme. This data and the interview with the whistleblower has been revealed today on the website of the New Zealand Loyal party, headed up by lawyer and journalist Liz Gunn. It reminds us at the WCH why we have engaged to bring health information with integrity to the people of the world. Viewers be warned, this is very difficult material to watch. As the whistleblower emphasises, NZ is a very small country and when you have in a town of 54,000 people, like Invercargill, one vaccinator who is responsible for continuing to vaccinate men and women when 30% of the vaccinees have passed away, it is shocking and damning, and that person is responsible in all terms of the Nuremberg Laws. You can watch the full interview here: https://nzloyal.org.nz/; or here https://rumble.com/v3ynskd-operation-m.o.a.r-mother-of-all-revelations.html #covid #vaccinedeaths @RobertKennedyJr @RWMaloneMD @ABridgen @PierreKory @P_McCulloughMD
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
David Martin shared this interesting detail about the W.H.O. with Russel Brand... A question for our expert legal panel perhaps? Join us at 7pm UTC today at worldcouncilforhealth.org/justice @rustyrockets
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
The WHO's problem with facts What WHO Director-General Tedros is not telling you on purpose here is that the WHO, in parallel to the so-called Pandemic Accord, is also working on far-reaching amendments to the WHO's International Health Regulations (IHR). These are meant to be complementary to the Pandemic Accord. The WHO's own International Health Regulations Review Committee (IHRRC) concludes that some of the proposed IHR amendments would make WHO recommendations, thus far non-binding, mandatory in times of crisis. Do you want an unelected, unaccountable, corrupt supranational organisation making decisions for you and your country in times of emergency or potential emergency, effectively undermining personal and national sovereignty? You can find more information on both the proposed IHR amendments and an early Pandemic Accord draft in the following expert policy document: https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Rejecting-Monopoly-Power-over-Global-Public-Health.-WCH-Policy-Brief-on-the-Proposed-IHR-Amendments-and-Pandemic-Treaty.pdf Here is an excerpt: Article 15 of the International Health Regulations (2005) states: If "it has been determined […] that a public health emergency of international concern is occurring, the Director-General shall issue temporary recommendations". Article 16 adds that the "WHO may [also] make standing recommendations of appropriate health measures […] for routine or periodic application." In the IHR (2005) [the version that has been applied thus far and is now in the process of being overhauled], the temporary recommendations issued by the Director-General and the standing recommendations are defined as non-binding advice to consider. A number of the newly proposed amendments [to the IHR], if adopted, would change the nature of [WHO] recommendations that can be issued, making them mandatory and legally binding. The amendments would achieve this by removing the descriptor 'non-binding' from the definition of the terms 'temporary recommendations' and 'standing recommendations' in Article 1 while simultaneously inserting a mandate to follow these in a variety of subsequent articles. For instance, the [WHO's] IHRRC in its report notes concerning a proposed New Article 13A: “This proposal […] renders mandatory the temporary and standing recommendations addressed under Articles 15 and 16.” (WHO 2023: 55) With regards to Paragraph 7 of the submitted article, the Committee continues that “these proposals effectively give WHO the authority to instruct States” (ibid.: 57). In relation to a suggested amendment to Article 42, the IHRRC explains likewise: “The proposed amendment to include a reference to temporary and standing recommendations seems to make application of these recommendations obligatory”. (ibid.: 67) Different amendments would also significantly expand the powers of the Director-General. An amendment to Article 15, for example, would enable the Director-General to issue recommendations not only during a PHEIC [public health emergency of international concern] by him or her but in all situations that are assessed by him or her to have the potential to become one (WHO 2023a: 15). An addition to Article 42, meanwhile, states that WHO measures such as recommendations made by the Director-General not only “shall be initiated and completed without delay by all State Parties“ but that “State Parties shall also take measures to ensure Non-State Actors operating in their respective territories comply with such measures“ (ibid: 22). The IHRRC writes that “non-State actors are not parties to the Regulations“ and that the “Committee is concerned that the proposed amendment goes too far in implying that States Parties must oblige, through legislation or other regulatory measures, non-State actors to comply with measures under the Regulations“ (WHO 2023: 67). Article 18 of the IHR features a non-exhaustive list of measures the WHO may tell State Parties to implement via recommendations when it comes to persons. This list includes among other things to require medical examinations, to review proof of medical examinations and laboratory analysis, to require vaccination or other prophylaxis, to review proof of vaccination or other prophylaxis, to place individuals under public health observation, to implement quarantine or other health measures and to implement isolation or treatment (cf. WHO 2023a: 17). The proposed amendments that would make recommendations issued by the WHO or its Director-General mandatory raise serious questions regarding their ramifications for state sovereignty and democratic governance that need to be urgently addressed. @RobertKennedyJr @NassMeryl @PierreKory @P_McCulloughMD @JesslovesMJK @efenigson @BretWeinstein @HeatherEHeying @ChildrensHD @chrismartenson @TheChiefNerd @EpochTimes @EthicalSkeptic @joerogan @FLSurgeonGen @JohnBoweActor @JamesMelville @DrJBhattacharya @JohnMappin @drcole12 @mattletiss7 @FiveTimesAugust @thecoastguy @jordanbpeterson @zoeharcombe @DrHoenderkamp @ABridgen @Jikkyleaks @stkirsch @MartinKulldorff @laralogan @CartlandDavid @UsforThemUK @bobscartoons @OracleFilmsUK @ukmfa1
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
This Press Statement has been sent to legacy and free media today. #mRNA #plasmidgate
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
WCH's Dr Mark Trozzi has just published an organized library of more than 1,000 peer reviewed articles which show that Covid-19 "vaccines" are harmful. Please do bookmark and share this page for ongoing reference. https://drtrozzi.org/2023/09/28/1000-peer-reviewed-articles-on-vaccine-injuries/ @P_McCulloughMD @ABridgen @DrHoenderkamp @DrTinaPeers @Johnincarlisle @PierreKory @joerogan @goddeketal @ChildrensHD @RWMaloneMD
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
The Great Freeset vs. The Great Reset – two competing designs for our future Let us choose wisely. To learn more, please visit https://TheGreatFreeSet.org. The Great Reset is an attempted coup by special interests, surveillance capitalists and transhumanist fascists officially launched in 2020. It is heavily promoted by the private World Economic Forum (WEF) as well as affiliated monarchs, billionaires, ideologues, corporations and stooges. So what ends are being pursued in the name of The Great Reset? Here are two examples. For one, there is an attempt to redefine human nature. WEF chairman Klaus Schwab puts it in the following way: "Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies will not stop at becoming part of the physical world around us – they will become part of us ... implantable in our bodies and brains. ... We will become better able to manipulate our own genes, and those of our children. These developments raise profound questions: Where do we draw the line between human and machine? What does it mean to be human?” In the transhumanist (Great Reset) worldview, humans are biological machines that can be updated regularly – which also happens to be a business model. The Great Reset group also aims to "reimagine" governance. The WEF believes that we should acknowledge that "policy development is no longer limited to [democratically elected] governments but rather is an increasingly multistakeholder [monarchs, billionaries etc.] effort." They see this as a desirable outcome and frame it as "agile governance". In other words, the respective monarchs, the extremely rich and big business want to draft and decide on policies without a popular mandate – as they were able to do in past centuries before the hassle of modern democracy came along. The question arises how resilient democracies are against such a coup from within conducted by powerful groups. The good news is you can opt out of their plans for your and your children's future by being vigilant, learning more about their designs and joining The Great Freeset. The Great Freeset is meant to empower you, instead of them. Please visit https://TheGreatFreeSet.org. (The Great Freeset is a shared initiative by @FreeWCH and @ChildrensHD.)
@lawrie_dr - Dr Tess Lawrie
The hug that saved a life In 1995, the twins, Kyrie and Brielle Jackson, were born 12 weeks premature, each weighing only about 2 pounds. They were placed in separate incubators. One twin was not expected to survive. She went into critical condition. Her heart rate was rising while her oxygen level was dropping significantly. They were about to lose her. It was then that one nurse, Gale Kasparian, went against the hospital rules and standard procedure, putting the healthy twin next to her struggling sister in the same incubator. This decision turned out to be life-saving. Once the twins were close to each other, the struggling sister (Brielle) snuggled up to the healthy sister (Kyrie) who put her arms around Brielle. Almost immediately after, Brielle's vital signs started stabilizing. Her heart rate and oxygen levels normalized. Both twin sisters eventually survived and grew into strong young women. The picture below came to be known as the rescuing hug and would change a part of our understanding of medicine. Hugging that is coming from the heart is proven to have calming and healing effects. Maybe there is someone in your life that can use a warm and heartfelt hug right now.
