TruthArchive.ai - Related Post Feed

Posted - December 31, 2022 at 8:56 PM

Saved - January 19, 2024 at 9:06 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The approval of mRNA injections for children is questionable due to limited data, small sample sizes, and the use of assumptions rather than solid scientific evidence. The risk-benefit assessments were released shortly before the meetings, suggesting insufficient time for thorough analysis. The justification for approval lacks long-term data, control groups, and accurate risk reduction estimates. Concerns about myocarditis risk from these injections are supported by numerous studies. The decline in birth rates worldwide, along with increased excess mortality in young people, raises further questions. It is important to protect children from potential harm and not ignore the science.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Thread: The anti-science mRNA injection approval for children The so called “data” used to authorize the use of the covid injections in children should be a giant scandal and giving a child this should be a crime against humanity.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

It’s unjustifiable in every way and if that makes you upset, good because you should actually look at the documents and logic used to approve it. So how did they come to the conclusion to approve them and add them to the childhood schedule?

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Well, there was a risk benefit document released by Moderna 2 business days for the the VRBPAC meeting and another by Pfizer just 24 hours before the meeting. So the idea that the VRBPC members were able to read, analyze & interpret these assessments before meeting is laughable.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

How did they justify the approvals? Remember, children are very low risk from covid so the fact that they approved these mRNA injections for babies is an abomination and I’d argue gross negligence if not criminal.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Especially considering that we now know the majority of children have obtained natural immunity. So there is not a medical reason for this. However there are many monetary and legal reasons for it. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.12.21255275v3.full-text

Children develop robust and sustained cross-reactive spike-specific immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 infection medRxiv - The Preprint Server for Health Sciences medrxiv.org

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

They used something called “immunobridging” as the basis for approval NOT efficacy via RCT. No long term data, no control group, extremely small sample size, selective data poaching,no absolute risk reduction or even relative reduction estimate & breach of protocol after protocol

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Here is Eric Rubin the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine admitting they do not know if it works. https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxqWohAGPnl0KTos_qOnZ_FrFAcQGNJDYz

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Statnews also provided a succinct definition of Immunobridging. “Updated vaccines will be authorized for use based on small safety trials and what is known as immunobridging — comparing the antibody levels induced by the updated vaccines to those generated by earlier versions.”

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

“If they are similar, the assumption will be that antibody levels that protected against earlier versions of the virus will be protective again.” https://www.statnews.com/2022/06/27/fda-panel-to-advise-on-whether-and-how-covid-vaccines-should-be-updated/

FDA panel to advise on whether — and how — Covid vaccines should be updated The agency is seeking the advice of its panel of vaccine experts, the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. statnews.com

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

I ask you this. Do you think that we should be basing the decision to authorize the use of mRNA injections in our children by using assumptions? This doesn’t sound like science to me, it sounds like the FDA has been captured by the pharmaceutical industry.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Just to drive this point home here is another short clip that I found that explains it pretty good. https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx5lsMhVnab2p00p1owwoi_z2glQ0AVy8z

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Are you fine with this being the basis for injecting your children with experimental gene therapies, especially considering the following from the FDA’s own briefing document? https://www.fda.gov/media/159189/download

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Page 54 - “In the adolescent population 99.2% of vaccine recipients reported at least one adverse reaction after any injection with 25.3% reporting a reaction that was Grade 3 or higher.” 99% with 25% essentially unable to get out of bed to go to school the next day.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

The pesky myocarditis issue Toby Rogers who has a fantastic substack linked below that points out how the FDA chose to get around the issue of myocarditis. He explains it as follows, straight from the FDA briefing document.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

“it’s all right there on pages 19 and 20. It’s one of the most chilling things I’ve ever read. The FDA’s argument goes like this:

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

“Yes, by spring and summer of 2021 there were already seven high quality studies from around the world showing that mRNA shots increase myocarditis risk. By fall of 2021, the reports continued to come in from the U.K., Europe, Canada, and Nordic countries…

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

showing a 2x to 7x increased risk of myocarditis from mRNA shots. Yes, the CDC’s own study of the Vaccine Safety Datalink showed a 2x higher risk of myocarditis from Moderna shots.”

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

“By May of 2022, we have additional studies from the U.K., Denmark, several Nordic countries, Italy, and France showing a 3x to 7x increased risk of myocarditis from the Moderna shot.”

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

“In all, the FDA cited TWENTY-SIX STUDIES showing that mRNA shots in general, and Moderna in particular, increase the risk of myocarditis.” https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/the-sole-purpose-of-the-moderna-and?s=r

The sole purpose of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots in kids is to eliminate the control group. There are no health benefits, only harms The FDA is willing to sacrifice the health of 19 million little kids to cover up the evidence of a crime tobyrogers.substack.com

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

I’ll put it like this, if you support the approval to give these to children, you are complicit in thousands of children’s hearts being destroyed and the deaths that come with that. And for what? To line the pockets of straight up criminals?

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Is a generation of children used as collateral damage worth it to you? This isn’t a debate, the science is clear but being ignored, there is zero reason to plunge an experimental injection into your children. It’s all risk with no reward.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Look around people, birth rates are plummeting worldwide. Taiwan one of the most vaccinated countries in the world at 91% had a 27% drop in birth rates in one year, a 26-sigma event. The chances of that happening by coincidence is the same as earth being hit by a giant asteroid.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/taiwan-birth-rate-cratered-2766-in

Taiwan: Birth Rate Dropped -27.66% in June 2022!!! Invasion? We do not need no stinking invasion igor-chudov.com

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Germany? 13% drop, again an astronomical number that doesn’t happen unless there is a reason. https://t.co/3PFjVJqPil

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

A graph laying out the US monthly birth rates in 2022 compared to 2021. https://t.co/imiVNKc1fo

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

These kind of drops do not happen for no reason, so you tell me what is going on here. These numbers cannot be blamed on COVID or the lockdowns but there is one giant variable that was introduced on a worldwide scale, around the time we see these declines happening everywhere.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

I haven’t even mentioned the tremendous increase in excess mortality in young people that is coinciding with the birth rate decline.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

A society that refuses to protect its children from obvious harm is a morally bankrupt one. Silence because of fear of social ostracism, ignorance due to fear of knowing and simple apathy is complete complicity.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

A child has no choice in the matter so shame on you if you decided to put your head in the sand. Get angry at me all you want, at least I can tell my kids that I didn’t cower in fear or plead ignorance when they find out how utterly pathetic our society was when they find out.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

I wanted to add this UK graph which I found in the new book. “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Death in 2021 and 2022” by #EdwardDowd. I think it says a lot. Sorry for the quality, it’s picture taken from the book. Cumulative % excess deaths 2021, per age group. https://t.co/CqVJe1zE0x

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

If they were so safe and effective, we wouldn’t see an increase in deaths in all age groups right?

@Inversionism — Inversionism

Posted - August 17, 2023 at 4:10 AM

Saved - August 18, 2023 at 2:39 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

Injections can alter a baby's life trajectory, causing allergies, inflammation, neurological damage, and potential cancer. Multiple vaccines at once can lead to SIDS. The lack of safety studies on injected aluminum is concerning. Contamination and variable adjuvant levels in vaccines are prevalent. Quality control issues persist. Explore more: [link1] [link2].

@Inversionism - Inversionism

In 30 seconds of injections, this baby just had their entire life trajectory changed. Maybe now he's allergic to various foods that will cause low grade inflammation for his entire life and random nagging symptoms he can never figure out. Maybe it shaved 15 IQ points off with the neurological damage from the aluminum going to the brain and now he'll make significant less amounts of money, have worse relationships, or not graduate highschool. Maybe those vaccines were contaminated with various other heavy metals and particulates, and is now destined for cancer at a young age. Maybe he dies in his sleep tonight because he got too many vaccines at once, and then the mother or father is blamed for SIDS from negligence. This video makes me both very sad and full of rage at how we can allow such an insane level barbarism. I will remind everyone yet again, the NIH has no documents or studies on the safety of injected aluminum into infants. Not only that, almost all vaccines are contaminated and also contain widely variable amounts of aluminum and other adjuvants. See my SS. What you just witnessed was the equivalent of someone doing a lottery for brain damage or death. The more needles you allow injected into you or your child, the more likely they are to pull the short straw. https://twitter.com/Inversionism/status/1690894797735600128

@Inversionism - Inversionism

This is my regular reminder that the NIH has no studies or documents on the safety of injected aluminum in vaccines on infants. https://eprints.keele.ac.uk/id/eprint/9467/1/1-s2.0-S0946672X21000523-main.pdf Also vaccine quality control practices are abhorrent with terrible oversight thanks to regulatory capture and corruption…

Keele Research Repository - Keele University eprints.keele.ac.uk

@Inversionism - Inversionism

Here's subtack article I wrote on quality control and contamination in vaccines if you wanna know how bad it really is. https://inversionism.substack.com/p/vaccine-roulette-quality-control Can't link in main posts because it gets deboosted/shadowbanned for whatever reason (guessing elon feud). Got another on Offit's study with rotateq vaccine on infants where 44 died and 15 from SIDS, with an analysis of his bs in the MicrobeTV interview on placebo and inert. He pullled the same crap Plotkin did in the Siri deposition. https://inversionism.substack.com/p/offit-and-the-casual-cruelty-of-pseudo

Vaccine Roulette: Quality Control, Contamination, and Negligence. The Vaccine Act of 1986 has allowed pharmaceutical companies to neglect good quality control and contamination concerns because they have no financial incentive to care if they harm anyone. inversionism.substack.com

Offit and The Casual Cruelty of Pseudo-Placebo Vaccine Trials, Which Resulted in 44 Dead Babies. Offit made verifiably wrong claims about inert placebos/adjuvants, and used the same dishonest vaccine safety trial methods with pseudo-placebos to obscure vaccine harm and subsequent infant deaths. inversionism.substack.com

@ImMeme0 — I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸

Posted - September 4, 2023 at 2:18 AM

Saved - August 27, 2025 at 12:10 PM

@ImMeme0 - I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸

These people are truly evil!! In 2018 deposition, the Godfather Of Vaccines, Dr. Stanley Plotkin admits how he and his colleagues harvested organs, hearts, eyes, tongues, etc. from hundreds of fully formed aborted fetuses for use in making their vaccines. https://t.co/Rui0OUp8PG

Video Transcript AI Summary

During cross-examination, Speaker 1 describes fetal tissue work: the Wistar Institute study involving 76 fetuses, all three months or older when aborted and normally developed. Tissues were harvested by coworkers, cut up, and cultured, including pituitary gland, lung, skin, kidney, spleen, and heart (tongue probably). In his career, he says he worked with “quite a few” fetuses, but cannot recall exact numbers. He notes objections to using aborted fetal tissue in vaccines and cites that “The Catholic Church has actually issued a document on that which says that individuals who need the vaccine should receive the vaccines regardless of the fact, and that I I think it implies that I am the individual who will go to hell because of the use of aborted tissues, which I am glad.” Regarding religion, he says “Vaccination is always under attack by religious zealots who believe that the will of God includes death and disease?” and answers “Yes” and “Are you an atheist? Yes.”

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Your work related to vaccines, how many fetuses have been part of that work? Speaker 1: My own personal work? Two. I'm going to hand Speaker 0: you what's been marked plaintiff's exhibit 41. Okay? Are you familiar with this article, doctor Plotkin? Yes. K. Are you listed as an author on this article? Speaker 1: Yes. K. Speaker 0: This study took place at the Wistar Institute. Correct? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: You were at the Wistar Institute. Correct? Yes. How many fetuses were used in the study described in this article? Quite a few. So this study involved 74 fetuses, correct? I don't remember exactly how many. Turn to page 12 of the study. Speaker 1: Yeah. 76. Speaker 0: 76. Mhmm. And these fetuses were all three months or older when aborted. Correct? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: Okay. And these were all normally developed fetuses. Correct? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: What organs did you harvest from these fetuses? Speaker 1: A: Well, I didn't personally harvest any, but a whole range of tissues were harvested by coworkers. Speaker 0: And were these pieces were then cut up into little pieces. Right? Yes. And they were cultured? Yes. Okay. Some of the pieces of the fetuses were pituitary gland that were that were chopped up into pieces too? Mhmm. Okay. Included the lung of the fetuses? Yes. Okay. Included the skin? Yes. Kidney? Yes. Spleen? Yes. Heart? Yes. And tongue? Speaker 1: I don't recall, but probably yes. Speaker 0: So I Speaker 1: just want to make sure I understand. In in your entire career, and this was just one study. So I'm gonna ask I'm gonna ask Speaker 0: you again. In your entire career, how many fetuses have you worked with? Speaker 1: I don't Proximally. The exact number, but quite a few when we were studying them originally before we decided to use them to make vaccines. Speaker 0: Do you have any sense? I mean, this one study had 76. How many other studies did you have that you used aborted fetuses for? I don't remember how many. You're aware, are you aware that the, one of the objections to vaccination by the plaintiff in this case is the inclusion of aborted fetal tissue in the development of vaccines, and the fact that it's actually part of the ingredients of vaccines? Speaker 1: Yeah. I'm aware of those objections. The Catholic Church has actually issued a document on that which says that individuals who need the vaccine should receive the vaccines regardless of the fact, and that that I I think it implies that I am the individual who will go to hell because of the use of aborted tissues, which I am glad Speaker 0: to do. You know if the mother is Catholic? Speaker 1: I have no idea. Speaker 0: Do you take issue with religious beliefs? Yes. You've said that, quote, vaccination is always under attack by religious zealots who believe that the will of God includes death and disease? Speaker 1: Yes. Do you stand by that statement? I absolutely do. Speaker 0: Okay. Are you an atheist? Yes.

@bambkb — Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥

Posted - September 4, 2023 at 9:34 PM

Saved - September 4, 2023 at 11:53 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

Pfizer's Covid vaccine trial for children raises concerns. Out of 4526 participants, 3000 didn't complete the trial. Severe Covid was defined as a slightly elevated heart rate or more breaths per minute. Vaccine group had 6 cases, placebo had 1. Vaccinated child was hospitalized. Skewed data from 10 children was used to justify the vaccine's effectiveness. 97% of the data was ignored. Media silence on these issues is alarming. The trial's conduct is outrageous. Would you still vaccinate your child?

@bambkb - Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥

Diagnostic Pathologist @ClareCraigPath presents SHOCKING facts about the #Pfizer #Covid #Vaccine trials for children : “There is an awful lot about this trial that has SHOCKED me, and will probably SHOCK you too!!” “The trial recruited 4526 children, aged from 6 months to 4 years old - 3000 children did NOT make it to the END of the trial!! That’s a HUGE number!! There should be an answer for that!? Without an answer, this trial should be NULL and VOID!!!” “They DEFINED, ‘Severe #COVID’ as a child that had a SLIGHTLY elevated heart rate or a few more BREATHS PER MINUTE!! On that basis, 6 people from the #Vaccine group had ‘severe #Covid’ and 1 child from the placebo did as well - Based on the applied definition, the #Vaccine is causing ‘Severe #Covid’ at a rate of 6:1” “One #Vaccinated child was hospitalized during the trial with a fever and seizure” “How did they define ANY #Covid? Well they absolutely TWISTED the data - They #Vaccinate the children and then wait 3 weeks until they give them their second dose and then wait 8 weeks to give them their third dose - The data shows that the #Vaccinated children were getting #COVID at a much higher rate than the placebo group between doses and they still chose to IGNORE those FACTS!!” “#Pfizer IGNORED 97% of the FACTS in the TRIAL!! In the END, they picked 3 children that had #Covid from the #Vaccinated group and 7 children from the placebo group and then said that their #Vaccine was effective” So let me get this straight : (1) They defined ‘Severe’ #Covid as: ‘slightly elevated heart rate’ and ‘more breaths per minute’!? is this a joke? (2) Did they really use skewed data from 10 out of 4526 children to justify this #Covid #Vaccine for them? (3) 3000 children did not make it to the end of the trials? Why is this MASSIVE and disturbing finding NOT being taken into consideration when it come to this #Covid #Vaccine approval for our children? WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE 3000 KIDS!? CONCLUSION : #Pfizer ignored 97% of the data, and relied on 10 children, 3 from the #Vaccinated group and 7 from the #Placebo group for their conclusion = 10/4526 = 0.22% of the data Can anyone in the world rely on 0.22% of an entire STORY to make a solid and informed decision? Especially when it comes to injecting our BABIES!? The answer is………ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!! It’s insane!!!! ANDDD even then, the data is heavily SKEWED!! Why doesn’t the media tell anyone about this? Did anyone hear this on the news before? WHY NOT!? Imagine what they’ve been doing to other ‘safety’ trials for drug approval? I mean, do you see how they conducted this trial!? it’s OUTRAGEOUS!!! I wonder how anyone in the world could defend this? Would you still get you child #Vaccinated for #Covid after knowing these facts?

Video Transcript AI Summary

Pfizer presented evidence to the FDA on their trial for 6-month to 4-year-old children. Out of 4,526 children, 3,000 dropped out of the trial, which is concerning. The trial defined severe COVID as a slightly raised heart rate or increased breaths per minute. In the vaccine group, 6 children aged 2 to 4 had severe COVID compared to 1 in the placebo group. One child in the trial was hospitalized after vaccination. The trial twisted the data by ignoring cases of COVID during the 3-week gap between doses and the 8-week gap after the second dose. Ultimately, they only compared a small number of cases, claiming the vaccine was effective.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Claire Craig. I'm a diagnostic pathologist, and I am cochair at the Heart Group. And I wanted to take you through the evidence that Pfizer just presented to the FDA on the 6 months to 4 year old children. There's an awful lot about this trial that has shocked me, and I think will shock you too. The trial recruited 4,526 children aged from 6 months to 4 years old. 3,000 of these children did not make it to the end of the trial. That is a huge number, 2 thirds of them. Why was there this drop off? That needs to be answered. And without an answer to that, on the back basis alone, this trial should be deemed null and void. So what did the trial show? Well, they defined severe COVID as children who had a slightly raised heart rate or a few more breaths per minute. There were 6 children aged 2 to 4 who had severe COVID in the vaccine group, but only 1 in the placebo group. So on that basis, the likelihood that this vaccine is actually causing severe COVID is higher than the likelihood that it is. There was actually 1 child who was hospitalized in this trial. They had a fever and a seizure. They had been vaccinated. So now let's turn to what they defined as any COVID, And what they did was to utterly twist the data. They vaccinated the children and they waited 3 weeks after the 1st dose before the 2nd dose. In that 3 week period, 34 of the vaccinated children got COVID and only 13 in the placebo group, which worked out as a 30% increased chance of catching COVID in that 3 week period if you were vaccinated. So they ignored that data. And then there was an 8 week gap between the 2nd dose and the 3rd dose where, again, children were getting plenty of COVID in the vaccine arms. They ignored that data. They were sent 7 weeks after the 3rd day, which they also ignored, which meant that in the end, they had ignored 97% of the COVID that during the trial. And they just looked at tiny numbers, so tiny. In the end, they were comparing 3 children in the vaccine arm who had COVID the 7 in the placebo arm. And they said that this showed the vaccine was effective.

@Inversionism — Inversionism

Posted - September 29, 2023 at 8:00 PM

Saved - September 30, 2023 at 4:46 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

IV remdesivir is approved for infants 28 days and older, while oral remdesivir is for ages 12 and older. Concerns arise over the administration of IV remdesivir to newborns. Babies receiving vaccines may develop symptoms like fever, cough, and rash. Misdiagnosis as COVID leads to treatment with IV remdesivir. If the baby dies, it's labeled a COVID death, not linked to the vaccine. Trust in COVID's threat to infants is questioned. Johns Hopkins outlines pediatric dosing and potential adverse reactions of remdesivir. Adverse events reported include constipation, nausea, vomiting, and infusion-related reactions. Other effects include respiratory failure, liver issues, and renal problems.

@Inversionism - Inversionism

Did you know that IV remdesivir is approved in infants 28 days and older, with oral remdesivir for ages 12 and older? WHO IN THE HELL IS GIVING IV REMDESIVIR TO A 28 DAY OLD INFANT?!?! HOW IS THIS HAPPENING. Imagine being a mother, having your baby, and the first day of life they are given a aluminum laden HepB shot and vit K shot. Baby gets sick and develops symptoms from the vaccine like fever, respiratory infection, cough, rash, etc, as some do according to their own vaccines inserts. (Pediarix HepB shot inserts as an example lists various adverse events like high fever, upper respiratory tract infection, abnormal liver function tests, apnea/cough/dyspnea, rash, etc - which have often been attributed to COVID) Mother takes baby to the hospital, doctors think it's COVID because of the mass hysteria around it, and opt for a contrived test and it's positive. Hospital then proceeds to doing COVID treatment protocol and gives a baby IV remdesivir. If the baby dies, it's considered a COVID death and not a single doctor will attribute it to the vaccine or IV remdesivir because that would be career suicide and get them in trouble. This happens more often than you think, and is exactly why you can never trust people when they say "COVID can kill infants and children, so they need a vaccine too". In every single case, I bet you will find something else or some other factor as the underlying causal agent. I had no idea they had approved remdesivir for infants, so I went and looked up the protocol and this is what Johns Hopkins says. UNREAL. ----------------------------------------------------- USUAL PEDIATRIC DOSING COVID-19: Weight ≥3.5 kg - < 40 kg: 5 mg/kg/dose once (max 200 mg/dose), followed by 2.5 mg/kg/dose (max 100 mg/dose) IV Q24h for a total duration of up to 10 days. Weight ≥ 40 kg: 200 mg once, followed by 100 mg IV Q24h, for a total duration of up to 10 days. Administration instructions: Infuse each dose over 30 to 120 minutes in a total volume of up to 250 ml of sodium chloride 0.9%. Flush line with at least 30 mL sodium chloride 0.9% after remdesivir infusion. Do not administer simultaneously with any other medication or intravenous solutions. ----------------------------------------------------- ADVERSE DRUG REACTIONS Generally well tolerated. >Adverse events (AEs) up to 60% were reported in clinical trials; however, it is unclear if all were remdesivir-related. Adverse events were generally higher in patients receiving a 10-day duration of treatment compared to 5 days. Side effects: Constipation (6-14%) Nausea (5-10%) Vomiting (3%) Diarrhea (3%) Infusion-related reactions: hypotension, nausea, vomiting, diaphoresis, shivering Increased serum glucose (3-11%) Acute respiratory failure (6-11%) Hypoalbuminemia (13%) Hypokalemia (5-12%) Anemia (8-12%) Thrombocytopenia (10%) Increased bilirubin (10%) Transaminase elevations (4-7%) Consider discontinuing RDV in patients with LFTs ≥ 10 times the upper limit of normal during treatment. Or ALT elevation accompanied by signs or symptoms of liver inflammation or increasing conjugated bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, or INR. If therapy continues, no dose change is necessary. Prothrombin time (PT) elevation without a change in INR Rash -7% Renal: AKI (2-8%), decreased CrCl (3-12%). Rates are higher with a 10-day course compared to 5 days. Pyrexia (5%) Hypoglycemia (4%) Insomnia (5%) Hypersensitivity reactions reported, including angioedema and anaphylaxis

Video Transcript AI Summary

Remdesivir can be used intravenously for 28 days, while children aged 12 and older can take it orally. Mothers who are positive for COVID can pass antibodies to their babies, protecting them. Children aged 6 months and older can receive the COVID vaccine. The initial dose may consist of 2 or 3 injections, depending on the brand. It is important to protect children against COVID, just like the flu. Manufacturers adjust the flu vaccine each year based on the important flu components. As flu season approaches, it is crucial to protect both seniors and children by practicing good hygiene and focusing on their well-being.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Remdesivir can go down to 28 days as far as you use it intravenously. So if if a child, you know, it's interesting that mothers can pass somewhat of an antibody on if they are if they're positive for COVID. They can pass that on to the baby, and it's it's very protective of the the child and many times when we test the child, they're negative in the hospital. But if they pick it up, they can actually get the medicine in intravenously. Whereas if you're 12 or older, we give it to those children that, orally. So there's a gap in that that we really wanna protect, and 6 months and older can get the vaccine. Speaker 1: I don't know if we have that full screen, if we can put it at that on the on the television right now because I do Wanna remind folks. I mean, obviously, you kinda have some age restrictions. The vaccine that we talked about pretty regularly, tell me about the age for that. Speaker 0: Well, you know, just like the flu shot, the vaccine can be given to 6 months of age and older. Now depending on the brand that you're using, the initial dose is either 2 injections or could be 3, depending on which manufacturer is making the vaccine that you're using. But it is important that we try to get protect our children as quickly as we can. Just like we protect them against flu, we should be protecting them against COVID. And as people are talking about the variant in people changing the the the manufacturers are changing what, you know, variant has changed. And we do the same thing with the flu vaccine. We look at what is important about the flu, you know, and then we use those components in this year's, flu vaccine. Speaker 1: And that is a topic for possibly next month because the flu season is just around the corner as well. So between flu and COVID, we've gotta make sure that not only do we protect our seniors, our adults, but also those little bitties. Speaker 0: Very true. Very true. And and and do everything. Keep, obviously, the covering the coughs, covering the sneezes, washing their hands, all those things you can do, but really try to focus on protecting, your children. Speaker 1: Doctor Cyrus, we appreciate your time. We'll see you again next month. Speaker 0: Looking forward to it. Thanks again, Lee.

@robertdunlap947 — Bob Dunlap🎙

Posted - October 8, 2023 at 11:50 AM

Saved - October 8, 2023 at 1:19 PM

@robertdunlap947 - Bob Dunlap🎙

Pfizer KNEW THEIR WAS GOING TO BABIES AND STILL SENT IT OUT! What kind of evil person KNOWS that their “safe and effective” jab would millions, if not BILLIONS and be ok with it. This is THE GREATEST ATROCITY IN HUMAN HISTORY!

Video Transcript AI Summary

Pfizer documents reveal an 80% miscarriage rate among pregnant women who received the vaccine. Some records were lost, but the ones kept showed that 80% of the women lost their babies. Report 69 indicates that Pfizer knew the vaccine was exposing babies in the womb and causing their deaths. The vaccine also contaminated breast milk, leading to convulsions and deaths. Midwife Ellen Jasmer discovered that newborns had air sacks between their lungs and chest walls, causing respiratory distress. Despite this knowledge, babies were still being sent home and then returning due to the air pocket issue.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: There's a section of Pfizer documents where there's an 80% miscarriage rate, of the women whom they're following to term, and they happen to lose 2 36 out of the 270 records of pregnant women that they have, but the ones that they keep, 80% lose their babies. And then later on, this is report 69, and Doctor. Walenski resigned 5 days after we posted report 69, it shows that Pfizer knew that babies, the utero, were being exposed to the vaccine in their words through the babies were dying through trans placental exposure, But they knew that, and they knew that they were poisoning breast milk and that the the banana particles, the mRNA, and, presumably, the spike was getting into the breast milk and causing convulsions and deaths, an apro- apropos of what Doctor Thorpe has found and what you brought up about, problems with newborns, I interviewed doctor Doctor. I interviewed a midwife named Ellen Jasmer, who's finding what is in the Pfizer documents from 2 years before, they knew that newborns would have, some of them air sacks between their tiny lungs and their tiny chest walls, and this would cause respiratory distress. They knew it. It's in the Pfizer documents. And And yet, 2 years later, Doctor. Ellen Jasmine is finding babies go home. They seem to find they're coming back because there's an air pocket between their tiny lungs and their chest walls.

@bambkb — Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥

Posted - November 1, 2023 at 9:48 PM

Saved - November 2, 2023 at 3:12 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

Prominent vaccine developer and Moderna advisor, Stanley Plotkin, testified under oath about the disturbing contents of childhood vaccines. Shockingly, he confirmed the use of aborted fetus cells/tissue from human babies in these vaccines. This revelation raises questions about the substances injected into us and our children. How many people are aware of this unsettling truth? It's crucial to understand the implications of the COVID and childhood vaccine schedules.

@bambkb - Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥

🚨🚨🚨A prominent person in the development of #Vaccines and advisor to Moderna, Stanley Plotkin speaks about what’s in all the childhood vaccines under oath - This stuff is absolutely DISTURBING to hear 😳 one of the things they asked him: “Is there ABORTED FETUS CELLS/TISSUE from HUMAN BABIES used for vaccines?” His answer : “YES”😳🤬 (1) Instead of being in jail for life, he’s obviously awarded for this psychotic work (2) WHAT have these guys been injecting us and our children with??? (3) How many people actually know about this? #Covid #Vaccine #ChildhoodVaccineSchedule

Video Transcript AI Summary

The speakers discuss the presence of animal viruses in vaccines, such as SV 40 and circovirus. They also mention the use of animal-derived ingredients like cat serum, guinea pig cell cultures, cow's milk, egg protein, gelatin from pigs, and human albumin. The use of human cell lines, specifically MRC 5 and WI 38, in vaccine production is also mentioned. The discussion touches on the fragmentation of human DNA in vaccines and the safety studies conducted. The speakers mention a study involving the harvesting of tissues from 76 aborted fetuses for vaccine development. The objection to using aborted fetal tissue in vaccines is brought up, with one speaker expressing support for vaccination regardless of religious objections. The conversation ends with a discussion on the speaker's personal vaccination history.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Childhood, schedule contain monkey kidney cells? Speaker 1: Well, the polio vaccine, does. Speaker 0: Are you aware of any simian monkey viruses, meaning viruses that come from primates, that contaminated polio vaccines And infected individuals receiving the polio vaccine? Speaker 1: Yes, SV 40. Okay. Speaker 0: And what does SV 40 stand for? Speaker 1: Semiann Virus 40. Speaker 0: Was it the 40th simian virus found? Is that why it's called are you aware of any virus from any animal other than simian or bovine That isn't any vaccine? Speaker 1: Yes. There's a pig virus present in one of the rotavirus vaccines, circovirus. Do any of the vaccines in the childhood vaccine schedule contain blood serum from calves Or other Bovines? Calf Serum is removed before, the vaccine is used because you don't want to sensitize the vaccinee to, to cows. Speaker 0: What is this? Speaker 1: Vaccine excipient and media summary. Speaker 0: Can you go to Kinrix on the first page? Yes. DTaPIPV. Do you see in the 3rd line down, it says cat serum. Do any vaccines in the childhood Schedule contain embryonic guinea pig cell cultures? Speaker 1: Varicella vaccine was passage in guinea pig cells. Speaker 0: Do you know of any vaccines containing cow's milk in it? Speaker 1: Derived from cow's milk? It could be, casein for example, could be. Speaker 0: If there was Kaizen in the vaccine, a child could become sensitized to that. Correct? Speaker 1: No. I'm not sure about that. Speaker 0: You're not sure any more about that? Do any vaccines contain egg protein? Speaker 1: Yes. Influenza. Do any vaccines contain gelatin from pigs? Yes. Speaker 0: Do any vaccines in the childhood vaccine schedule contain human albumin? Oh, yes. What is human albumin? Speaker 1: Human albumin as part of human serum. It's part of the blood that is liquid. Speaker 0: None of it remains in the final product? Speaker 1: I don't believe so. No. Speaker 0: Yeah. Because that could be problematic. Right? Speaker 1: Well, it could be. I mean, if, if the individual is not not healthy. Speaker 0: Or if maybe some of the human blood components bind to some of the aluminum and develop antibodies, self antibodies, correct? Speaker 1: If they develop antibodies against the serum component, that would not be good. Speaker 0: Do any vaccines in the childhood vaccine schedule contain MRC 5 human diploid cells? Speaker 1: Yes. Rubella, Varicella, hepatitis a. Speaker 0: What are MRC 5 cells? Speaker 1: They are human fibroblast cell strain. They were created by taking, fetal tissue and, from a particular fetus that was aborted by maternal choice and the cells, the so called fibroblast cells were cultivated. Speaker 0: Do any vaccines on the Childhood vaccine schedule contained WI 38 human diploid lung fibroblasts. Speaker 1: Well, they used to, but I don't think anything is made in those cells anymore. Speaker 0: If you could turn to page 3 for MMR and MMRV, Do you see that within the ingredient list that lists WI 38 human diploid lung fibroblasts? Speaker 1: Yes. I do see that. Speaker 0: Isn't it true that human DNA in vaccines is typically purposely fragmented? Speaker 1: Yes. And I would say mostly, for theoretical reasons doesn't want to put DNA into intact DNA into vaccines. Speaker 0: Are you familiar with insertional mutagenesis? Yes. Do you have any study to show that injecting Millions of pieces of human DNA into babies and children is safe. Speaker 1: The only studies are all the safety studies that have been done on vaccines. Speaker 0: Wasn't the purpose of this study To help develop a human cell line or to support the use of human cell lines in the creation of vaccines? Speaker 1: The idea was to study the cell strains from fetuses to determine whether or not they could be used to make vaccines. Speaker 0: This study involved 74 fetuses. Speaker 1: Yeah. 76. Speaker 0: 76. And, these fetuses, were all 3 months or older when aborted, correct? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: What organs did you harvest from these fetuses? Speaker 1: Well, I didn't personally harvest any, but a whole range of tissues were harvested by coworkers. Speaker 0: Okay. And these pieces were then cut up into little pieces. Right? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: And they were cultured? Yes. Okay. Some of the pieces of the fetuses were pituitary gland That were that were chopped up into pieces? Mhmm. Okay. Included the lung of the fetuses? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: Okay. Included skin? Speaker 1: Yes. Kidney? Yes. Spleen? Yes. Heart? Yes. And tongue? I don't recall, but probably yes. Speaker 0: Are you aware that the one of the objections to vaccination by the plaintiff in this case is The inclusion of aborted fetal tissue in the development of vaccines and the fact that it's actually Part of the ingredients of vaccines? Speaker 1: Yeah. I'm aware of those objections. The Catholic church has actually issued a document on that which says that individuals who need the vaccine should receive the vaccines regardless of the fact and that that, I I think it implies that I am the individual who will go to hell because of the use of aborted tissues, which I am glad to do. Okay. Speaker 0: Do you know if the mother is Catholic? Speaker 1: I have no idea. Okay. So she should consult her priest. Speaker 0: Do you believe that someone can have a valid religious objection to refusing a vaccine? No. Do you take issue with religious beliefs? Speaker 1: Yes. Okay. Speaker 0: You've said that quote Vaccination is always under attack by religious zealots who believe that the will of God includes death and disease? Yes. You stand by that statement? Speaker 1: I absolutely do. Okay. Speaker 0: Are you an atheist? Yes. Do you accept that some people hold religious beliefs that are inherently unprovable? Speaker 1: Yes. I'm sure they do. Speaker 0: When you were a child, what vaccines did you receive? Speaker 1: Diphtheria? Well. In childhood, I I think it was probably only diphtheria.

@charlis_beauty — CHARLÍS

Posted - December 7, 2023 at 1:33 PM

Saved - December 7, 2023 at 7:50 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

Pfizer's latest vaccine, ABRYSVO, targets unborn babies, claiming to protect them against RSV. However, clinical trials revealed low birth weight in infants born to vaccinated pregnant individuals. This controversial drug raises concerns about potential adverse reactions. Shameful marketing tactics continue.

@charlis_beauty - CHARLÍS

This is just pure madness. Pfizer has now released a vaccine for babies who aren’t even born yet. From their own advertisement: “Get vaccinated during weeks 32-36 of your pregnancy to help protect your baby against RSV” “In clinical trials where ABRYSVO was compared to placebo, infants born to pregnant individuals experienced low birth weight” These people are shameless criminals, marketing a new drug yet again for pregnant women that has caused adverse reactions.

@DiedSuddenly_ — DiedSuddenly

Posted - December 7, 2023 at 1:37 PM

Saved - December 7, 2023 at 9:02 PM

@DiedSuddenly_ - DiedSuddenly

Pfizer is back on a murder spree, this time focusing on babies in the womb who can’t defend themselves.

@charlis_beauty - CHARLÍS

This is just pure madness. Pfizer has now released a vaccine for babies who aren’t even born yet. From their own advertisement: “Get vaccinated during weeks 32-36 of your pregnancy to help protect your baby against RSV” “In clinical trials where ABRYSVO was compared to placebo, infants born to pregnant individuals experienced low birth weight” These people are shameless criminals, marketing a new drug yet again for pregnant women that has caused adverse reactions.

@KatKanada_TM — Kat Kanada

Posted - December 7, 2023 at 8:20 PM

Saved - December 8, 2023 at 9:14 PM

@KatKanada_TM - Kat Kanada

This makes me feel sick to my stomach. 😳 ⬇️⬇️⬇️ "Brazil to include COVID shots in national vaccine schedule for babies and kids" https://thecountersignal.com/brazil-to-include-covid-shots-in-national-vaccine-schedule-for-babies-and-kids/

Brazil to include COVID shots in national vaccine schedule for babies and kids Starting in 2024, Brazilian children under five years of age may be subject to mandatory COVID-19 vaccines. thecountersignal.com

@bambkb — Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥

Posted - December 20, 2023 at 4:52 PM

Saved - December 21, 2023 at 7:59 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

The Pfizer Covid vaccine trials for children have raised concerns. Out of 4526 children, 3000 did not complete the trial. The definition of "severe Covid" was questionable, with slight changes in heart rate or breathing considered severe. Vaccinated children had a higher rate of Covid between doses, but this was ignored. Pfizer relied on data from only 10 children, 0.22% of the total, to conclude vaccine effectiveness. The media has not reported on these issues. The trial's conduct is outrageous, raising doubts about other safety trials. Given these facts, the question is whether one would still vaccinate their child for Covid.

@bambkb - Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥

🚨🚨🚨 Diagnostic Pathologist @ClareCraigPath presents SHOCKING facts about the #Pfizer #Covid #Vaccine trials for children👇😳 : “There is an awful lot about this trial that has SHOCKED me, and will probably SHOCK you too!!” “The trial recruited 4526 children, aged from 6 months to 4 years old - 3000 children did NOT make it to the END of the trial!!😳 That’s a HUGE number!! There should be an answer for that!? Without an answer, this trial should be NULL and VOID!!!” “They DEFINED, ‘Severe #COVID’ as a child that had a SLIGHTLY elevated heart rate or a few more BREATHS PER MINUTE!! On that basis, 6 people from the #Vaccine group had ‘severe #Covid’ and 1 child from the placebo did as well - Based on the applied definition, the #Vaccine is causing ‘Severe #Covid’ at a rate of 6:1”🤔 “One #Vaccinated child was hospitalized during the trial with a fever and seizure” “How did they define ANY #Covid? Well they absolutely TWISTED the data - They #Vaccinate the children and then wait 3 weeks until they give them their second dose and then wait 8 weeks to give them their third dose - The data shows that the #Vaccinated children were getting #COVID at a much higher rate than the placebo group between doses and they still chose to IGNORE those FACTS!!”😠 “#Pfizer IGNORED 97% of the FACTS in the TRIAL!! In the END, they picked 3 children that had #Covid from the #Vaccinated group and 7 children from the placebo group and then said that their #Vaccine was effective”🧐 So let me get this straight : (1) They defined ‘Severe’ #Covid as: ‘slightly elevated heart rate’ and ‘more breaths per minute’!?😑 is this a joke? (2) Did they really use skewed data from 10 out of 4526 children to justify this #Covid #Vaccine for them? (3) 3000 children did not make it to the end of the trials? Why is this MASSIVE and disturbing finding NOT being taken into consideration when it come to this #Covid #Vaccine approval for our children? WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE 3000 KIDS!? CONCLUSION : #Pfizer ignored 97% of the data, and relied on 10 children, 3 from the #Vaccinated group and 7 from the #Placebo group for their conclusion = 10/4526 = 0.22% of the data Can anyone in the world rely on 0.22% of an entire STORY to make a solid and informed decision? Especially when it comes to injecting our BABIES!? The answer is………ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!! It’s insane!!!! ANDDD even then, the data is heavily SKEWED!! Why doesn’t the media tell anyone about this? Did anyone hear this on the news before? WHY NOT!? Imagine what they’ve been doing to other ‘safety’ trials for drug approval? I mean, do you see how they conducted this trial!? it’s OUTRAGEOUS!!! I wonder how anyone in the world could defend this? Would you still get you child #Vaccinated for #Covid after knowing these facts?

Video Transcript AI Summary

Pfizer presented evidence to the FDA on their trial for 6-month to 4-year-old children. Out of the 4,526 children recruited, 3,000 did not complete the trial, raising questions about the drop-off. The trial defined severe COVID as a slightly elevated heart rate or increased breaths per minute. In the vaccine group, 6 children aged 2 to 4 had severe COVID compared to only 1 in the placebo group. One child in the trial was hospitalized with fever and a seizure after being vaccinated. The trial manipulated the data by ignoring instances of COVID during specific time periods, ultimately disregarding 97% of the cases. Despite this, they concluded that the vaccine was effective based on a small number of cases.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Claire Craig. I'm a diagnostic pathologist, and I am cochair at the Heart Group. And I wanted to take you through the evidence that Pfizer just presented to the FDA on the 6 months to 4 year old children. There's an awful lot about this trial that has shocked me and I think will shock you too. The trial recruited 4,526 children aged from 6 months to 4 years old. 3000 of these children did not make it to the end of the trial. That is a huge number. 2 thirds of them. Why was there this drop off? That needs to be answered. And without an answer to that, on that basis alone, this trial should be deemed null and void. So what did the trial show? Well, they defined severe COVID as children who had a slightly raised heart rate or a few more breaths per minute. There were 6 children aged 2 to 4, who had severe COVID in the vaccine group, but only 1 in the placebo group. So on that basis, the likelihood that this vaccine is actually causing severe COVID is higher than the likelihood that it is. There was actually 1 child who was hospitalized in this trial. They had a fever and a seizure. They had been vaccinated. So now let's turn to what they defined as any COVID. And what they did was to utterly twist the data. They vaccinated the children and they waited 3 weeks after the 1st dose before the 2nd dose. In that 3 week period, 34 of the vaccinated children got COVID and only 13 in the placebo group, which worked out as a 30% increased chance of catching COVID in that 3 week period if you were vaccinated. So they ignored that data. And then there was an 8 week gap between the 2nd dose and the 3rd dose, where again, children were getting plenty of COVID in the vaccine arms, they ignored that data. There was then 7 weeks after the 3rd dose, which they also ignored, which meant that in the end, they had ignored 97% of the COVID occurred during the trial. And they just looked at tiny numbers, so tiny. In the end, they were comparing 3 children in the vaccine arm who had COVID with 7 in the placebo arm. And they said that this showed the vaccine was effective.

@JoshWalkos — Champagne Joshi

Posted - February 24, 2024 at 12:29 AM

Saved - February 24, 2024 at 12:42 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I found an account on TikTok called "Voices for Vaccines" that presents itself as a credible source of vaccine information. However, upon further investigation, I discovered that they are associated with "The Taskforce for Global Health Inc." This organization is funded by various pharmaceutical companies, the US State Department, United Nations, NIH, Wellcome Trust, and World Health Organization. It seems that Voices for Vaccines is not as grassroots and independent as they claim to be. They are accused of being a propaganda arm for the pharmaceutical industry.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Pharma Shill Watch 🧵 I came across this account that has a young man doing Tik Tok videos about how dumb “anti-vaxxers”. As you can see they position themselves as a: “Credible vaccine information for families, from families❤️” So wholesome and caring of them.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

The videos feature this young man. He LOVES and I mean LOVES his vaccines. He has never seen one he didn’t want immediately injected into him and then injected into new born babies. Something seemed……..off to me so I set off to see what I could find.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

When you get to their cutesy “About” page you see this which at first I didn’t notice so I didn’t click the little “TM”, I just scrolled down. http://voicesforvaccines.org

Voices For Vaccines voicesforvaccines.org

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Instead of screenshots it’s just easy to show you a screen record. I’m sure there will be some faces you recognize associated with this down home, grass roots folksy vaccine advocacy organization. It’s a short video. Then when I saw Satan’s, erm excuse me Stanley Plotkin’s face followed by Paul Offit I was convinced something was definitely up here. So I decided to try and find their 990 form, after all they are. Non-profit and they are required by law to make them publicly available.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Still not recognizing the Trademark symbol I went to Pro Publica’s non-profit explorer and nothing came up for “Voices for Vaccines”🤔

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Ok back to their website I had to have missed something and I did, it was that little tiny “TM”, so I clicked it.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

It pulled up their trademark certificate with no indication of who they may be associated with. However upon close inspection I noticed this drop down menu. Click.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Ah ha Owner/Holder: THE TASKFORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC. You don’t say? I had not heard of them🤔 Well I suppose I’m going to have to investigate.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

https://www.taskforce.org Wow over 40 years old, in 150 countries with 17 separate programs? Seems important. I wonder who funds them?

Taking on big problems and making real impact. The Task Force makes real impact by solving massive health problems through stopping some of the world's worst diseases and strengthening health systems. taskforce.org

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

There it is. The wholesome down home folksy organization that simply provides credible vaccine information to families. I thought to myself “Ok maybe it’s benign and they are just a subsidiary created by The Taskforce for community outreach, could be nothing.” https://t.co/6dhcRISjIs

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

I’ll be damned, perhaps not, they are only funded by literally every pharmaceutical company on earth along with the US State Department, United Nations, NIH, Wellcome Trust & World Health Organization. Here is the full list of finders pulled directly from their website. Abbott Laboratories Abbvie African Society for Laboratory Medicine American Academy American Association for the Study of Liver Disease American Endowment Foundation Ascension Global Mission Asian Liver Center, Stanford University Bayer U.S. LLC, Pharmaceuticals Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation BioScience Brothers Brother Foundation Bruyere Research Institute Center for Compassionate Leadership Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CDC Foundation Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations Common Practice Conrad N. Hilton Foundation Dexcom Dispensary of Hope Eagle Medical Services Eisai Co. Emory University European Association for the Study of Liver Disease Genentech, A Member of the Roche Group Gilead Sciences GlaxoSmithKline Hewlett Packard Enterprises Hiroshima University Hospital Sisters Mission Outreach International Federation of Anti-Leprosy Associations International Federation of Pharmaceutic Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA) Izumi Foundation Johnson & Johnson Kay Family Foundation La Asociación Latinoamericana para el Estudio del Hígado (ALEH) Latter-day Saint Charities Medical Bridges Medshare MedWish International Merck & Co., Inc., (known as MSD outside of the United States and Canada) Meiners Minerals Partners National Association of Chronic Disease Directors National Health Institute Novartis Pharmaceutical Pfizer Inc. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Roche Molecular Systems Sanofi Espoir Foundation Sasakawa Health Foundation Scripps Seqirus, Inc. Siemens Healthcare Supplies Over Seas Taiwan Association for the Study of Liver Disease Templeton World Charity Foundation The John C. Martin Foundation The Latin American Foundation U.K. Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office (UK Aid) U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) U.S. Department of State U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) United Nations Children’s Fund Wellcome Trust World Health Organization

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

My intuition was proven correct, one last thing to check. How much money does this “non-profit organization” have? A FUCK TON to be exact. https://t.co/8GV9OHtmc5

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Let’s finish up by going back to the Voices for Vaccines PsyOp. They never disclose their affiliation as far as I can tell on their website aside from having to click the trademark and being directed to: https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn97095932&docId=ORC20221113035502#docIndex=0&page=1 where I had to examine the documentation in order to figure it out. This is a great example of the complete fuckery these people try and play on the public. They masquerade as a grass roots “community led” nonprofit organization and it couldn’t be further from the truth. They are a propaganda arm of a 40 year old Industry and government funded front organization designed to convince you to inject your family with their shitty products. This is just one example of literally hundreds of front organizations run by Pharmaceutical Companies. Make sure you let these liars know that you know.

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

With that I will leave you with their most recent TikTok video where our follicly well endowed dweeb Noah the shill, a recent Stanford grad I might add, lectures you on why if you don’t inject your new born baby with the Hepatitis B vaccine hours after birth, you’re a fucking moron and putting their life in danger. Just remember Voices for Vaccines is a bunch of lying big pharma shills and should be called that for eternity.

Video Transcript AI Summary

RFK Jr. claims babies don't need hepatitis B vaccine due to low risk of exposure. However, CDC data shows infants can contract it from infected mothers. Testing for hepatitis B in mothers is not foolproof, leading to some cases being missed. The virus can also survive on surfaces, posing a risk to babies. Vaccination is necessary to fill gaps in prevention methods and protect infants from lifelong infection.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Anti vaccine activist and potential presidential candidate, RFK Junior, did an interview where he said that there is no reason for babies to get the hepatitis b vaccine. He's very wrong, but the reason that he says can seem convincing, which is that the disease is transmitted through blood and body fluids. And so, you know, how are babies being exposed to this virus? Now the CDC has actually already examined how babies could get hepatitis B. This is a 2,005 report. So we've known for quite some time their reasoning. And then is that something like 30 to 40% of chronic infections come from catching it, kids catching it when they're born, so from their mother or in early childhood. And only about half of women with hepatitis b, hepatitis b chronic infection, because they carry it chronically, only half got identified before they had babies. The private school reality, and again, RFK Jr, as a presidential candidate, should be able to look up just publicly available information on the HHF website that an estimated 25,000 infants are born to mothers diagnosed with hepatitis b virus each year in the United States, and that approximately 1,000 mothers transmit that infection to their infants, where it has a high chance of having to be chronic, from lifelong infection with serious consequences. Some reasons for this are that testing for hepatitis B is became more complicated than other kinds of tests for different, you know, viruses and infections. And so because of this, some others were actually catching hepatitis B after they got tested. There can also be false negatives. If you're kind of testing every mother, there could be mistakes in testing, recording the wrong test, misreading results. There's just a number of reasons how that test is not a fail safe completely 100% way to prevent hepatitis b from being transferred to the infant. There are also other ways that hepatitis b. Hepatitis b can live in dried blood on surfaces for up to 7 days. So there are a number of ways that that could potentially infect the child. It's not a common way to get it, but it certainly can happen. So again, the test itself does not necessarily prevent all cases of hepatitis b. And since the vaccine is so safe and we know we can safely give it to newborns, RFK Jr. Is kind of taking advantage of our intuition, right, that there there must be some tests. So why do we need this vaccine? Or, you know, we're gonna catch it. You can only get it through, you know, drug use or, again, blood and body fluids. But he's wrong. We have this good amount of evidence that shows that kids actually can get it through different means. And so we're giving them the vaccine to kind of patch up the cracks in an imperfect system system and not just rely on tests or whatever else he thinks is a substitute for vaccination.

@Kingston_Truth — Karen Kingston

Posted - May 6, 2024 at 6:41 PM

Saved - May 7, 2024 at 4:36 PM

@Kingston_Truth - Karen Kingston

In Pfizer's baby and toddler study, there was a subgroup of 344 babies. Only 3 babies (less than 1%) made it to the end of the study. Pfizer's mRNA injections are not safe for babies. They're lethal. https://karenkingston.substack.com/p/what-happened-to-their-babies-bb1

Video Transcript AI Summary

The evidence shows that out of 344 babies in a Pfizer trial, only 3 completed it, with reasons like hospitalization and death leading to discontinuation. Less than 1% of babies finished the trial, yet it's claimed to be safe. The speaker questions the safety of these injections, citing reports of babies experiencing symptoms similar to sudden infant death syndrome.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: So the evidence is there, and the evidence is is overwhelming. It is catastrophic, you know, and it's hard to go through it, especially when I go through the babies data. 344 babies between the ages of 6 months and less than 2 years. Babies who were to get free of Pfizer's injections over an 11 week period. Only 3 babies made it to the end of the trial. Reasons for discontinuation include hospitalization and death. Less than 1% of the babies make it to the end of the trial, and they said this is safe for babies. I would not have been wailing out to God if there was any indication that these things are safe to use in any human being. The judge would have to say, I I I I hate humanity. I am a godless person, and I I support an evil authoritarian regime. You would that's the only conclusion you can come to when you actually look at the body of evidence of what what these injections have done in such a short period of time. There's reports of the babies becoming having a symptom of of it's like dead baby syndrome. They died.

What Happened to their Babies? In Pfizer's baby and toddler study, there was a subgroup of 344 babies. Only 3 babies (less than 1%) made it to the end of the study. Pfizer's mRNA injections are not safe for babies. They're lethal. karenkingston.substack.com

@NaturallyFTW — Natural Immunity FTW

Posted - July 9, 2024 at 2:05 PM

Saved - July 15, 2024 at 12:49 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The first post expresses concern about the "monoclonal antibody" RSV shot, Beyfortus, stating that 12 babies died in the trial but it was still approved. Two more babies have died after receiving the shot. The post criticizes the lack of action taken when medical products cause harm and accuses those responsible of covering it up for profit. The second post provides additional information about two infants who died shortly after receiving RSV shots, as revealed in CDC internal emails.

@NaturallyFTW - Natural Immunity FTW

🚨 The "monoclonal antibody" RSV shot Beyfortus is KILLING BABIES. 12 babies died in the trial. They approved it anyway. Now, 2 other babies have died. Immediately after the shots. "...infant girl was found not breathing by her father seven hours after receiving the shot." "...only 27 days old...received [the shot] at doctor's office & he passed away right there." In the 1960's, they made a different RSV shot. When it killed 2 babies, it was immediately pulled from market. These days, when a medical product kills 14+ babies, all they do is try to cover it up - & keep lining their bloodstained pockets. Absolutely unacceptable. The more we let them get away with this sh*t, the more they'll keep doing it!

@NaturallyFTW - Natural Immunity FTW

More info "Exclusive: Two Infants Died Within Hours of Receiving RSV Shots, CDC Internal Emails Show" https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/infant-deaths-rsv-shot-foia-vaers-nirsevimab-beyfortus/

Exclusive: Two Infants Died Within Hours of Receiving RSV Shots, CDC Internal Emails Show Freedom of Information Act documents obtained by Children’s Health Defense reveal that two infants died the same day they received nirsevimab, marketed under the brand name Beyfortus, a monoclonal antibody shot approved last year for infants for the prevention of RSV. childrenshealthdefense.org

@BlackTomThePyr8 — Tom Czerniawski

Posted - July 24, 2024 at 10:53 AM

Saved - July 24, 2024 at 10:14 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals is testing mRNA on infants, which I believe violates the Nuremberg Code and constitutes a crime against humanity. I urge everyone to share their thoughts on this issue, as I can no longer communicate with them directly.

@BlackTomThePyr8 - Tom Czerniawski

Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals @NNUH is experimenting with mRNA on infants. This is a Nuremberg Code violation, and a recognized crime against humanity. Tell them what you think of their efforts... all glorious thirteen thousand four hundred and seventy three of you.

@BlackTomThePyr8 - Tom Czerniawski

@NNUH (The pricks blocked me, so I'm outsourcing.)

@JoshWalkos — Champagne Joshi

Posted - August 31, 2024 at 10:11 PM

Saved - September 1, 2024 at 9:12 AM

@JoshWalkos - Champagne Joshi

Novavax is recruiting children 6 months to 2 years old for their pediatric covid injection. Parents are getting up to $3000 to allow their kids to be guinea pigs for big pharma. Listen to this father who enrolled 4 of his 7 kids. This shit is so unbelievably manipulative & evil. https://t.co/BQOYvuW96g

Video Transcript AI Summary

The Hummingbird Study allows kids to participate in science and contribute to medical research. According to Peter Johnston, a pastor with four children in the study, the COVID stuffed animal helped his family discuss their participation. One speaker noted that children are often more enthusiastic about the study than their parents, driven by the idea of contributing to new discoveries. Researchers obtain parental consent, answer all questions, gather medical history, and ensure participant comfort. The study involves lab work and vaccinations, with participants monitored for 30 minutes afterward. Future steps are then explained. The study is still recruiting families, and researchers hope to reach their goal, noting that the volunteer spirit and interest in contributing to a good cause is still alive.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: My name is Peter Johnston. I am a pastor in Lafayette, Louisiana and, we have 7 kids, 4 of which are enrolled in Hummingbird Study. The Hummingbird Study is a great opportunity to, participate in science to contribute to medical research. The kids are are interested in study and some of the different things that they, get and and allow them to think about it. So, for example, the, COVID stuffed animal has been a, a hit in the household, not only because it's fun, but because it gives us an opportunity to talk about what it is that we're doing. Speaker 1: Well, the kids at times were far more excited than the parents, and they're the one who drove the parents to enjoy the study. And, many many kids, like the idea of, being a first, in exploring something or discovering something or contributing to a new discovery. Speaker 2: The first thing that we do is we make sure we get the consent of the parent. We make sure we answer all questions before we start any of the study procedures. And then from there, we'll go into getting, kind of a background on the participant. We'll get their medical history. We'll make sure they're comfortable with everything that we're doing. And then we go in, we get a few labs. And from getting the labs, we go in into the vaccination part of the visit. And then afterwards, we keep them here for 30 minutes on-site just to make sure they're feeling okay, they're still doing well. And then we kind of explain the following steps of the next visits. Speaker 1: The volunteer spirit and the interest in, contributing to a good cause is still alive and well. We still are, recruiting more families to join us in the study and, hoping to reach our goal.

@drcole12 — ryancolemd

Posted - September 4, 2024 at 8:25 AM

Saved - September 5, 2024 at 7:09 AM

@drcole12 - ryancolemd

The CDC wants to run a genetic experiment on children. 100% risk. Zero benefit. They would have been hung at Nuremberg for this. Time for 2.0 trials.

@KLVeritas - Dr. Kat Lindley

From the article “Nine-month-old babies must receive multiple doses of an unlicensed mRNA COVID-19 vaccine to be considered “up to date” with their COVID-19 vaccination, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC’s updated guidance, issued Aug. 30, states that children — as young as 6 months old — should get either two doses of the 2024-2025 Moderna vaccine or three doses of the 2024-2025 Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. If getting the new Pfizer shot, the baby is supposed to receive the first dose at 6 months, the second dose three weeks later and the third dose at least eight weeks after the second dose — meaning, that by 9 months old, babies are supposed to have received three Pfizer shots. If getting the latest Moderna shot, the CDC recommends babies get the first dose at age 6 months and the second dose a month later. The latest Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 shots for children under 12 are unlicensed in the U.S. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted only emergency use authorization (EUA) for the vaccines.”

@DiedSuddenly_ — Died Suddenly

Posted - September 4, 2024 at 7:48 PM

Saved - September 4, 2024 at 11:03 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I find this absolutely evil. Nine-month-old babies are now required to receive multiple doses of an unlicensed mRNA COVID-19 vaccine to be deemed "up to date." The CDC's new guidance suggests that children as young as 6 months should get two doses of Moderna or three doses of Pfizer-BioNTech.

@DiedSuddenly_ - Died Suddenly

This is absolute evil. Nine-month-old babies must receive multiple doses of an unlicensed mRNA COVID-19 vaccine to be considered "up to date" with their COVID-19 vaccination. The CDC's updated guidance, states that children as young as 6 months old should get either two doses of the 2024-2025 Moderna vaccine or three doses of the 2024-2025 Pfizer-BioNTech.

@MdBreathe — Mary Talley Bowden MD

Posted - October 26, 2024 at 4:17 PM

Saved - October 26, 2024 at 6:35 PM

@MdBreathe - Mary Talley Bowden MD

They are calling for all babies to get 3 mRNA shots by the age of 9 months old. We have an enormous amount of data showing the shots don’t work and are all risk, no benefit - we just don’t have people in power willing to acknowledge it.

@DrBenTapper1 - Dr. Ben Tapper

Ultimate cringe. CDC Director Mandy Cohen and Senator Chuck Schumer are calling for another COVID-19 vaccination. When is enough enough? https://t.co/UeCCsE6FH4

Video Transcript AI Summary

Hi everyone, I'm Mandy Cohen, director of the CDC, here with Senator Schumer. We're encouraging everyone to get their flu shot and updated COVID booster. These vaccinations are painless and provide significant benefits. Getting vaccinated now can help you avoid serious health issues later. Please make sure to get your shots. Thank you!

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Hi, everyone. Mandy Cohen, director of the CDC, and I'm here with senator Schumer who has an important message for you about vaccines. Speaker 1: And what's many good things about our director, one of them, she's from Baldwin, New York. We're urging everybody to get their flu shot and their updated COVID booster. They don't hurt. These shots don't hurt anymore like they used to when I was a kid, and they do you a lot of good. Please get your shot. It'll avoid a lot of pain later. Speaker 0: Thanks, senator.

@ChildrensHD — Children’s Health Defense

Posted - November 4, 2024 at 12:01 AM

Saved - November 4, 2024 at 3:24 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I questioned how a clinical study on one-day-old infants could be approved, only to find out it wasn’t. The 1991 introduction of hepatitis B vaccines for newborns made me, pediatrician Ken Stoller, reflect deeply on the implications of such decisions.

@ChildrensHD - Children’s Health Defense

“How the hell did they get an IRB to do a clinical study on one-day-old infants?” “They didn’t.” The 1991 rollout of hepatitis B vaccines for newborns gave pediatrician Ken Stoller pause. With a devil on one shoulder and an angel on the other, here’s what he concluded. https://t.co/HF7hcgoEpb

Video Transcript AI Summary

In 1990, when the hepatitis B vaccine was introduced, I questioned the justification for administering it to one-day-old infants. My research revealed that the clinical studies supporting the vaccine involved older children, not infants, and lacked proper safety assessments. I found no credible evidence to support giving this vaccine to newborns, leading me to conclude that it was primarily driven by profit motives rather than health needs. With only about 200 women annually giving birth with chronic hepatitis, the rationale for widespread vaccination seemed flawed. This prompted me to investigate other vaccines, and I discovered that they also lacked proper placebo trials and comprehensive safety evaluations, raising concerns about their validity.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: I was just like you and all the other pediatricians, but 1990, the hepatitis b vaccine came out. And, you know, I originally wanted to go into research, and I had tried to get an IRB on one day old infants, and it's virtually impossible to get an IRB on 1 day old infants for anything. So the first thing that crossed my mind was, how the hell did they get an IRB to do a clinical study on 1 day old infants? Well, they didn't. They didn't. The clinical study they did had nothing to do with 1 day old infants. It had to do with children. The oldest one was 11, and there was, like, a 140 subjects, which they followed for 4 days. That was their safety study, which is obviously not a safety study. I thought it was my duty to obtain informed consent for this new vaccine. So I remember spending about 3 months on and off trying to find anything in the medical literature that justified giving this vaccine to a one day old infant, and I couldn't find anything. And then one day, you know, the little devil on my shoulder said, so you think you're such a good researcher. You can't find anything. You're not such a good researcher. And then the little angel said, well, may maybe he can't find anything because there's nothing to find. And suddenly, you know, the light bulb goes off. Oh my god. There is nothing to find. There's no justification for giving this to all one day old infants. This vaccine is a scam. What about if the kid becomes a paramedic, a nurse, a firefighter, or a through IV drug abuse or a prostitute? That vaccine will help them. No. It won't. Those antibodies that you give the infants and children, those antibodies are gone by the time they they're teenagers. So you can't even use that as a rationale. So the reason the vaccine is given to one day old infants is only about money. Yep. There are about 200 women a year who give birth with chronic active hepatitis. Theoretically, those are the only babies who might need the hepatitis b vaccine. You can't make a gazillion dollars just selling 200 vaccines a year. So somehow they got approval to sell it to everybody. And so what happened with me was, well, if that vaccine's a scam, are these other vaccines that I've just been blindly given? Are they scams? So 1 by 1, I started researching these vaccines, and I realized they're all scams too. Speaker 1: Not a single one has a proper placebo trial. The trials are short. The trials only look at prespecified outcomes. So if if the vaccine causes something that they're not looking for, it's just written off as coincidence.

@ChildrensHD - Children’s Health Defense

Full video: https://t.co/6QX0E761Xz

@catsscareme2021 — Jessica Rojas 🇺🇸💪

Posted - November 15, 2024 at 12:08 AM

Saved - November 16, 2024 at 4:22 PM

@catsscareme2021 - Jessica Rojas 🇺🇸💪

This should wake everyone up. Absolutely zero reason to inject newborns with a vaccine intended for high risk individuals. https://t.co/iFHnGW4MQI

Video Transcript AI Summary

A child born in a U.S. hospital is immediately subjected to pharmaceutical interventions, including Erythromycin ointment and a hepatitis B vaccine, often without informed consent. The hepatitis B vaccine targets a sexually transmitted disease and IV drug use, which newborns are not at risk for. It's questioned why infants are vaccinated for conditions they are unlikely to encounter. The rationale provided by some doctors includes the notion that parents might forget or that a child could encounter a contaminated needle, despite no historical evidence supporting such transmission outside of the known routes. Thus, there seems to be no valid reason for administering this vaccine on the first day of life.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: A child born in a hospital in the United States today within hours of coming from source into this, you know, into this body, the first thing that happens to them is pharmaceutical intervention Without really asking, you know I mean, there's barely con informed consent about this. That child's eyes are smeared with Erythromycin ointment, and they're given a hepatitis b vaccine in their first day of life. And the hep b vaccine is for hepatitis b, which is a sexually transmitted disease and IV drug user disease, of course, which babies are not gonna be exposed to, and yet every single baby in America is getting the intervention. So from the literally the day we are born, we must try to know. Speaker 1: I mean, why not test the pregnant mother for the They do. Okay. So They Speaker 0: give it to the women who, even if they have tested negative, Speaker 1: they give it to the overwhelming majority. Absolutely. Sue, I don't understand why would you treat a child on his first day of life for illnesses you know for a fact he doesn't have and isn't gonna get? So a child's born. Let's just take the sign. The child's born. Hep b is spread by 2 routes, sexually transmitted disease or intravenous needles. So my one day old isn't gonna be having sex or doing heroin right away. So what's the purpose of getting this on the schedule in the first day of life, the first hours of life? And if you push, and I welcome anyone to do this with their doctor, you get to 2 things. You get to the American patients are too stupid to remember, so we need to do it right away. That's literally like what they say. And then my doctor told me that that a child at daycare could trip over a needle that has hepatitis B on it. That's literally what they get to, that a needle could be on the playground, that somebody just did heroin or something, threw the needle down, and it has hepatitis B blood on it. I asked the doctor, has there ever been in human history a case of hepatitis b to being transferred that way? They said no. It's only through intravenous needles and sex. So you actually to to just to steel man this, and, again, welcome any number to respond, there is not actually a scenario absent of intravenous needles or sex that a person gets hepatitis b. There is not a reason for this to be given.

@stella_immanuel — Dr. Stella Immanuel MD

Posted - November 25, 2024 at 8:11 PM

Saved - November 25, 2024 at 8:59 PM

@stella_immanuel - Dr. Stella Immanuel MD

This is crazy and many parents will allow it while schools and daycare centers will be the enforcers. God have mercy.

@DiedSuddenly_ - Died Suddenly

The CDC says that little 6 month old babies must get SEVEN doses of the Covid Vaccine 💉 in order to be considered fully “up to date” on their vaccinations. This isn’t including the dozens of other vaccinations leading up to 6 months. Pure evil. https://t.co/sMnCVB4ENM

@SenseReceptor — Sense Receptor

Posted - March 26, 2025 at 7:52 PM

Saved - March 27, 2025 at 1:05 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I discussed the alarming inclusion of COVID vaccines in the vaccination schedule for six-month-old infants, emphasizing the potential harm, such as the impact on stem cells in pregnant women. I referenced findings by Kevin McKernan, highlighting the presence of SV40, a staphylococcal endotoxin gene, and two snake genes in the vaccines. I expressed concern over the financial incentives driving hospitals to administer these vaccines, noting that doctors could lose significant income if they don’t comply with recommendations from groups like ACIP. It all seems to revolve around profit.

@SenseReceptor - Sense Receptor

"They're giving COVID vaccines to 6-month-old children now...[but] we know that it ruins stem cells in pregnant women...[plus] Kevin McKernan [et al. found that] there's SV40 in it. There was [also] a staphylococcal endotoxin gene...[and] two snake genes in there." Suzanne Humphries (@DrSuzanneH7), a physician and the co-author of Dissolving Illusions, describes for Joe Rogan (@joerogan) how the CDC still has three COVID injections on its "vaccination" schedule for six-month-old infants. Humphries notes "how bad [this] is" by highlighting the fact that the injections "ruin stem cells in pregnant women." The physician also highlights the fact that scientist and former R&D lead of the Human Genome Project at MIT Kevin McKernan found SV40 in the injections (which is linked to the development of cancer). Furthermore, Humphries says that there's also a staphylococcal endotoxin gene and "two snake genes" present in the genetical material in the COVID injections. Regarding why hospitals are willing to administer such dangerous injections to infants, Humphries says that "[it's] all a money game. That's really the bottom line of it." ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "If you look at what happened with COVID—let's just look at that. Like, how did how did they pass this off? Look at the media today. Do you know that they're giving COVID vaccines to six-month-old children now? We know how bad it is. We know that it ruins stem cells in pregnant women. "The industry is upset because the placentas no longer have stem cells. They used to use those stem cells in research and cosmetics, etc.[, but] they're not getting them anymore because of what the COVID shots did to the placentas and those infants. That's not being talked about in the media. "Nothing bad about the shots being talked about when we have Kevin McKernan and all these people looking at it going, there's SV40 in it. There was a staphylococcal endotoxin gene. There were two snake genes in there... [But] nope, we gotta put it on the baby vaccine schedule. Because any doubts whether or not well funded about the vaccination must not be allowed to exist. "They get three [COVID injections] by...I believe it starts at 6 months, and they get three of them kind of boom, boom, boom. "There's a group of people called ACIP, the doctors usually with vaccine interests in their bank accounts that make the recommendations for the vaccines and they have recommended that that [six-month-olds get the COVID injections]. So if your doctor is following the ACIP program, you have to be offered that vaccine. "Another part of the story is that doctors likely to lose $250,000 a year if they don't do that because there's incentive given to hospitals and doctors, which is what naively I was on the other end [when Humphries was a practicing physician]. "I woke up in 2008 and said, 'Wait a minute. Why are we doing this stuff to my sick inflamed patients? You're giving more inflammation.' It's because the hospital would lose something like $40,000 if they didn't give a vaccine within the first 24 hours of admission... it was all a money game. That's really the bottom line of it."

Video Transcript AI Summary

The speakers discuss COVID vaccines, claiming they are now given to six-month-old children despite allegedly ruining stem cells in pregnant women, leading to a shortage of stem cells from placentas used in research and cosmetics. Speaker 0 claims that Kevin McKernan and others found SV40, a staphylococcal endotoxin gene, and two snake genes in the vaccines, indicating gain of function. The speaker alleges that vaccines are added to the baby vaccine schedule to suppress doubts, and that this is like a religion or cult. Speaker 0 asserts that ACIP, a group of doctors with vaccine interests, recommends the vaccine for six-month-olds. Doctors following ACIP are required to offer the vaccine, and may lose $250,000 a year if they don't. Hospitals allegedly receive incentives for administering vaccines, with one speaker recalling a hospital losing $40,000 for not administering a vaccine within 24 hours of admission. The speaker concludes that it's all a money game.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Even if you look at what happened with COVID, let's just look at that. Like, how did how did they pass this off? Look at the media today. You know that they're giving COVID vaccines to six month old children now. We know how bad it is. We know that it ruins stem cells in pregnant women. They don't give stem cells to their babies. The industry is upset because the placentas no longer have stem cells. They used to use those stem cells in research and cosmetics, etcetera. They're not getting them anymore because of what the COVID shots did to the placentas and those infants. That's not being talked about in the media. Nothing bad about the shots being talked about when we have Kevin McKernan and all these people looking at it going, there's s v 40 in it. There was a staphylococcal endotoxin gene. There were two snake genes in there. You know, it's a definite gain of function. Nope. We gotta put it on the vaccine the baby vaccine schedule because any doubts whether or not well funded about the vaccination must not be allowed to exist. That's why. Speaker 1: That sounds like a religion. Speaker 0: And it's been gone. Speaker 1: Like a cult. It sounds like a crazy cult that the whole world's been sucked into. Giving a COVID shot to a baby today is insane. Speaker 0: Three of them. They get three by the certain I know you'd have to look up the schedule, but I I believe it starts at six months and they get three of them kind of boom boom. Speaker 1: Are doctors really recommending this? Speaker 0: It's it's on the it it look. There's there's a group of people called ACIP. They're doctors usually with with vaccine interests in their bank accounts that make the recommendations for the vaccines and they've recommended that that six month old. So if your doctor is following the ACIP program, you have to be offered that vaccine. And now that doctor this is another part of the story. Is that doctor's likely to lose $250,000 a year if they don't do that because there's incentive given to hospitals and doctors which is what naively I was on the other end of when I woke up in 02/2008 and said wait a minute why are we doing this stuff to my sick inflamed patients? You're giving more inflammation. It's because the hospital would lose something like $40,000 if they didn't give a vaccine within the first twenty four hours of admission. Speaker 1: Oh my god. Speaker 0: And they would get 40,000. It it was all a money game. That's really the bottom line of it. And I didn't know that until a nurse years ago who was a high level administration, she said, Suzanne, this is why they do they did that to you. Oh, wow. Okay. Well, at least it makes sense now. Speaker 1: Nobody wants to Speaker 0: think

@SenseReceptor - Sense Receptor

Full interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=207W1A_bJqI

@ricosangel333 — RNR, RN, BSN

Posted - April 7, 2025 at 7:03 PM

Saved - April 7, 2025 at 9:03 PM

@ricosangel333 - RNR, RN, BSN

@TheChiefNerd 3 covid shots are given to every infant by 9 months. They are disabling and killing our babies and are collecting money for it. When are they going to stop this insane madness of disabling us at birth?

@ValerieAnne1970 — Valerie Anne Smith

Posted - September 1, 2025 at 7:37 AM

Saved - September 1, 2025 at 4:46 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I believe that six-month-old infants are considered vaccine deficient, with their only underlying condition being their age. Babies face almost zero risk from COVID-19, yet Big Pharma influences policy significantly, as seen in the $388 million spent on lobbying for 2024. Myocarditis has been linked to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, especially in young boys, raising concerns about non-verbal infants being unable to communicate vaccine-related heart issues. The potential reproductive risks for girls, including a significant reduction in egg supply, make vaccination seem unjustifiable. The Pfizer vaccine insert outlines numerous risks and side effects, reinforcing my concerns.

@ValerieAnne1970 - Valerie Anne Smith

Ex-CDC Official, Daskalakis Believes 6 Month Old Infants Are Vaccine Deficient, Citing Their Underlying Condition For Needing A COVID Shot Is 'Being Young.' Babies Have Almost Zero Risk. The Real Truth Is Big Pharma Directly Influences Policy & 2024 Lobbying Was $388 Million. Myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, has been identified as a side effect of the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, particularly in young boys. Can babies, non verbal without communication skills, show or tell parents that they have chest pain from vaccine injury to the heart? Obviously the answer is NO. Causing vaccine induced chest pain, shortness of breath, palpitations & permanent scarring of the heart is in no way worth injecting a baby...or anyone for that matter. The future reproductive risk to girls directly affects fertility & lifetime egg supply being halted by mRNA vaccines. Is the risk of vaccine injury to girls by reducing their reproductive possibility by wiping out 60% of their egg supply worth vaccinating? Obviously the answer is NO. The package insert for Pfizer Biontech Covid-19 Vaccine is filled with the harms, side effects & adverse events that completely show that the shot is ALL RISK. 👇Pfizer Covid Vaccine Package Insert👇 https://labeling.pfizer.com/ShowLabeling.aspx?id=16351&format=pdf 👇Pfizer Covid Vaccine Myocarditis👇 https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availability-biologics/fda-approves-required-updated-warning-labeling-mrna-covid-19-vaccines-regarding-myocarditis-and 👇60% Female Egg Supply Gone Permanently👇 https://publichealthpolicyjournal.com/breaking-covid-19-mrna-shots-destroy-over-60-of-womens-non-renewable-egg-supply/

Video Transcript AI Summary

We're seeing the tip of the iceberg. So right now, I think probably the most prominent, demonstration of that, is, what secretary Kennedy did with changing the childhood schedule for COVID nineteen. In that, we were directed that only children with underlying conditions would be the ones that should qualify for vaccination. That's not what the data shows. Six month old to two year old, their underlying condition is youth. Fifty three percent of those children hospitalized last season had no underlying conditions. The data say that in that age range, you should be vaccinating your child. I understand that not everybody does it, but they have limited access by narrowing that recommendation. Insurance may not cover it.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: We're seeing the tip of the iceberg. So right now, I think probably the most prominent, demonstration of that, is, what secretary Kennedy did with changing the childhood schedule for COVID nineteen. In that, we were directed that only children with underlying conditions would be the ones that should qualify for vaccination. That's not what the data shows. Six month old to two year old, their underlying condition is youth. Fifty three percent of those children hospitalized last season had no underlying conditions. The data say that in that age range, you should be vaccinating your child. I understand that not everybody does it, but they have limited access by narrowing that recommendation. Insurance may not cover it.

BREAKING: COVID-19 mRNA Shots Destroy Over 60% of Women’s Non-Renewable Egg Supply - Science, Public Health Policy and the Law By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH publichealthpolicyjournal.com