TruthArchive.ai - Related Post Feed

TheOriginalSai
Posted - January 14, 2023 at 6:43 PM
Saved - October 3, 2023 at 4:28 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The former NHS director of end-of-life care reveals the truth about the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2016, the UK government proposed changes to the death certification process, leading to the Medical Examiner (ME) system. The ME system eliminates variation in causes of death by having one examiner write all medical certificates. However, this centralized power can lead to misclassification. Hospitals were incentivized to report COVID-19 deaths, and doctors who disagreed were bullied. The government's control over doctors and the media's reporting raise concerns. The author left the NHS due to ethical concerns and the prioritization of money over patient safety.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

1. Thread: THE TRUTH ABOUT THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC FROM WITHIN THE NHS (EX DIRECTOR OF END OF LIFE CARE AT ONE OF THE LARGEST HOSPITAL TRUSTS IN THE UK) #NHS #Truth #Awareness #World #Freedom #Humanity #PowerToThePeople #Healthcare #COVID19 #CovidVaccine #VaccineDeath #Pandemic

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

2. In 2016, the British Government proposed & piloted a change to the process of how deaths were certified across all hospitals in the UK. I have attached a link to this Department of Health (DoH) document below: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/521226/Death_certificate_reforms_pilots_-_report_A.pdf

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

3. The DoH document proposed a switch to the "Medical Examiner" (ME) System and was sent to a number of different audiences for feedback and consultation. The ME system was already being piloted at two hospitals up north. The results of the consultation are below:

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

5. Prior to the Covid-19 Pandemic, the death certification process involved treating doctors of a patient to attend Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs to discuss the death and either: a) refer the death to the Coroner or b) write a Medical Certificate of Cause of Death (MCCD)

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

6. The MCCD states the cause of death. Whereby a direct cause (1a) or contributing causes (1b) (1c) (1d) are stated along with co-morbidities (not directly causing the death) being written in (2) on the MCCD. The MCCD is only ever a probable cause of death, it is not definitive.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

7. The only definitive way of determining an accurate and plausible cause of death is to refer the deceased patient to HM Coroner (if certain criteria is met), for HM Coroner to accept and take on the case, resulting in a Post Mortem (PM) being conducted by a Histopathologist.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

8. When a death is seen as natural and there is nothing untoward, the MCCD is written by the treating doctor of a deceased patient. Usually this is an F1, F2, SHO or Registrar that attends. It is rare for a treating Consultant to attend, but they will finalise the cause of death.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

9. A strict hospital hierarchy exists within the NHS for doctors. It is as follows - from lowest to highest rank: Foundation Year 1 (FY1), Foundation Year 2 (FY2), Senior House Officer (SHO), Registrar (Reg), Consultant, Clinical Lead, Medical Director.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

10. Junior doctors will very rarely speak up or challenge their seniors. A senior decision is seen as final and it will be carried out and executed without any hesitance or questioning.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

11. In my 5.5 years of experience in End of Life Care, I have only ever seen one junior doctor disagree with a proposed cause of death and challenge their consultant.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

12. With the number of deaths that occur in a hospital, as you can imagine, there is a great deal of variation with regards to causes of death, as we have numerous different doctors writing an MCCD and coming up with various different potential diseases in different orders.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

13. The proposed ME system would change this, as the government would now hire and pay one Medical Examiner, to sit in every hospital and write all MCCD's for all deceased patients. This would effectively eliminate any variation in causes of death.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

14. In 2016, when I heard of this proposal, I worked as a Bereavement Officer at a hospital in Central London. My mentor/line manager at the time was a former Chief Nurse who managed Bereavement Services and all hospital deaths would be controlled by her and the department.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

15. We essentially carried a huge amount of power with regards to decision making, as we would go through all patient notes following the death of a patient, and essentially guide and advise doctors on what would need to be written with regards to an MCCD or Coroners Referral.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

16. In my personal opinion, our role was to sit on the fence and act in the best interests of a deceased patient (and their families), but also protect the hospital and our doctors from any potential negligence.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

17. As you can imagine many battles were fought over decisions about a cause of death of a patient or a referral to the coroner with a vast amount of doctors over the years.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

18. F2's and SHO's were particularly the worst with regards to carrying an arrogance of knowing what should be written on an MCCD or stating that a patient didn't need to be referred to the Coroner (often stating that their Consultant had given them instructions).

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

19. It is worth noting that Consultants are also only human and can be incorrect at times too. We have to remember that they are succeeded in hierarchy by a Clinical Lead and beyond that a Medical Director. Who have far more experience and knowledge.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

20. When I asked my mentor in 2016, how the ME system would change things, I was told that Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs would become purely administrative and that the clinical judgement would fall to the Medical Examiner.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

21. The power and decision making with regards to MCCD/Coroners Referrals was being taken away not only from treating doctors but also from Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs/Bereavement Officers/Bereavement Service Managers/Directors of End of Life Care.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

22. This decision making power was being handed solely to the Medical Examiner, who has not been involved in the treatment of a patient during an admission. I took all this information in at the time and acquired as much knowledge as I could from my mentor/line manager.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

23. In 2016, I also happened to make a move and take up an opportunity to manage my own Bereavement Services at one of the largest hospital trusts in the whole of the UK. On average, I would oversee MCCD/Coroner Referrals for approx 1750 deaths on an annual basis.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

24. I developed a very close working relationship and friendship with one of the Medical Directors (a doctor with the highest ranking in a hospital). This was especially helpful when having to challenge doctors with regards to MCCDs/Coroners Referrals.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

25. Progressing to Director of End of Life Care, I became involved with the reporting of mortality rates, conducting mortality reviews and writing hospital policies. I had also developed an excellent working relationship with the HM Coroner who oversaw our Trust. TBC...

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

26. HM Coroner holds the power to investigate any hospital or trust with regards to a death or a number of deaths. A slight problem may arise, in that HM Coroner has an allegiance to the Crown and the Government.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

27. When a death is reported to the Coroner. This was previously reported via telephone call by the treating doctor. A discussion was had with the Coroners Office and an direct outcome and instruction would come from the Coroner's Office, by way of HM Coroner (via a phonecall).

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

28. There is a fundamental flaw to this system, as there is no documentation of the decision and instruction from the Coroner's. It comes via word of mouth. There is always room for error without any electronic documentation.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

29. Every Hospital/Trust & HM Coroner will have a different system of reporting deaths. I personally made a decision to safeguard my hospital and the trust, by developing an electronic coroners referral form, which I proposed to our Coroner and developed after their agreement.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

30. We now had documentation of every death being reported and every outcome. When reporting a death, the Coroner will look at a proposed cause of death and accept it, or reject the cause of death and take on the case (death of the patient), leading to an Inquest or a PM.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

31. In 2019, our Medical Director, came into my office one morning and stated that the Board of Directors at the Hospital had made a decision to switch to the Medical Examiner System. Hearing the words ME system was a massive case of Déjà vu (conversation with my mentor in 2016)

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

32. I knew exactly what the ME system was, but I chose instead, to play the fool and enquire what exactly the ME system was and what it meant for our service, my staff and our roles. Everything the Medical Director mentioned to me that day was a carbon copy of what I already knew

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

33. I knew that my time in End of Life Care had come to an end. I'd reached the top and there was no more progress for me. Losing all power and decision making to any ME coming into the hospital did not appeal to me. I'd already made up my mind that I needed to leave.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

34. Seeking a new challenge and experience, I made a move in 2019 to another major hospital in Central London, this time sidetracking into operational management. I was in charge of the operational management of Nephrology, Rheumatology, Dermatology and Diabetes & Endocrinology.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

35. In Jan 2020, I remember hearing about the first case of Covid-19 at our hospital, with a patient arriving from China and walking into our A&E. A&E was shutdown and steam cleaned that day, I recollect the moment I heard about this.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

36. In my mind, I saw the reporting of Covid-19 in the media as nothing more than Bird Flu or Ebola, which had caused panic but yet passed. I wasn't worried in the slightest bit. Things began to escalate around in Feb 2020, around the time I was going on holiday.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

37. Due to the reporting by the media, I bought N95 masks as a precaution for my trip and to give to my parents and younger sister. I was blessed to have had an opportunity to spend a few days in Sri Lanka for a wedding and then nearly a whole month in Australia (March 2020).

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

38. I watched as the narrative of a deadly infectious disease continued to grow with every day that passed. I made a decision to cut my holiday short by a couple of days so that I could make sure I got back to my family and not end up being stranded in Australia.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

39. Upon returning to the UK in late March 2020. One of the immediate things that struck me was the lack of any temperature monitoring or questioning at Heathrow Airport. This seemed odd for a potentially deadly infectious disease that was spreading around the world.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

40. This was especially odd, as Sri Lanka & Australia had questioned me/checked temperatures upon arrival, with even Singapore monitoring temperatures during transit.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

41. My mother had just recovered from Cancer, my father was over 70 and my younger sister was born with Down's Syndrome alongside having multiple other conditions. I had three high risk individuals to Covid-19 in my family and I was scared/fearful of giving them Covid-19.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

42. I asked my hospital to allow me to work from home. They refused. I wasn't deemed high risk, although I lived with my parents at the time. I needed to help my mum and my sister. The hospital held no regard for the safety of it's employees. They forced me to come into work.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

43. I spent two months isolating in my bedroom, I barely came out of my room, for fear of spreading an infectious disease. Never once did I think about the situation or my prior experience or knowledge, I was just reacting to the media frenzy. I was full of panic and stress.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

44. The first irregularity I noticed, was the government and media stating that Covid-19 was an infectious disease. However just before the first lockdown was implemented, I noted that the government had downgraded the status of Covid-19 stating it was no longer infectious.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

45. This made no sense to me. Why would we need to isolate if they downgraded the status? My circle of friends contained many medics and dentists. They were all panicking at the time, saying they had inadequate surgical masks and that they needed N95 masks.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

46. N95 masks were seen as the only way to prevent medical professionals from becoming infected with Covid-19. The public being asked to wear surgical masks made no sense to me. The virus would be able to go straight through. Something didn't seem right.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

47. I ended up meeting and dating an FY1 doctor (my ex gf) around October 2020. We clicked because she was different from every other doctor, I had previously spoken to about Covid-19. She also had her suspicions and believed it wasn't as infectious as it was made out to be.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

48. We both started to slowly realise that Covid-19 was a real disease (as it was showing up on X-rays in patients) but that it wasn't infectious at all, despite all the reporting in the media.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

49. I needed to experience working in a Covid-19 hotspot and see all the action for myself. In March 2021, I quit my job at the hospital in Central London and took up an opportunity to manage A&E and AMU (Acute Medical Unit) at a hospital in South London.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

50. The 6 months that I spent working in A&E/AMU confirmed all my suspicions and culminated in my decision to end my career in the NHS. TBC

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

51. The entire 6 months, I was not tested once with a PCR Test, despite walking into wards full of Covid-19 Positive patients on a daily basis. Yet we were required to test multiple times when visiting another country.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

52. The PCR Test that the NHS was using to test patients, is known to have a false-positive results. This is shown in numerous studies which can be found online, an example of which is: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/infectious-positive-pcr-test-result-covid-19/

Are you infectious if you have a positive PCR test result for COVID-19? - The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Tom Jefferson, Carl Heneghan, Elizabeth Spencer, Jon Brassey PCR detection of viruses is helpful so long as its accuracy can cebm.net

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

53. If a patient tests positive for Covid-19 with a PCR Test, this doesn't mean they are infected. If tested again, they may well turn out with a negative test. However in the NHS, patients are only tested once and this stays on their record throughout their admission.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

54. Hospital policies were changed alongside the implementation of the Medical Examiner System, to ensure that any patient who died within 30 days of positive test, would have to have Covid-19 as their primary cause of death. This was regulated by the Medical Examiner.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

55. The highest cause of death at every hospital per annum pre Covid-19 is Pneumonia. Pneumonia is a Respiratory Disease like Covid-19. Pneumonia can be broken down into 4 different causes of death:

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

56. Pneumonia can be broken down into 4 different causes of death: Bronchopneumonia, Aspiration Pneumonia, Community Acquired Pneumonia & Hospital Acquired Pneumonia. These four causes when added together kill the largest number of people on an annual basis prior to the pandemic

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

57. The Medical Examiner (one individual in each hospital), was certifying all these Pneumonia deaths as Covid-19 deaths. When 4 different diseases being grouped and now being called Covid-19, you will inevitably see Covid-19 with a huge death rate.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

58. The mainstream media was reporting on this huge increase in Covid-19 deaths due to the Medical Examiner system being in place.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

59. Patients being admitted and dying with very common conditions such as Old Age, Myocardial Infarctions, End Stage Kidney Failure, Haemorrhages, Strokes, COPD & Cancer etc were all now being certified as Covid-19 via the Medical Examiner System.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

60. Hospitals were switching to and from the Medical Examiner system and the Pre Pandemic System as when they pleased. When Covid-19 deaths needed to be increased, the hospital would switch to the Medical Examiner System.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

61. Doctors were one week being told they needed to complete an MCCD, to then be told the following week that they weren't required to fill out an MCCD, as the Medical Examiner was handling this.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

62. Hospitals were incentivised to report Covid-19 deaths over normal deaths, as the government was paying hospitals additional money for every Covid-19 death that was being reported. The Medical Examiner system ensured that Covid-19 was being put down as the cause of death.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

63. The government sends out the annual NHS budget to Primary Care Trusts. This is split to fund Hospitals and GP Surgeries. A clinical coding team at each hospital will assign codes to each treatment or death, so that money is paid out to the hospitals.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

63. Any doctor who argued against Covid-19 as a cause of death was bullied and vilified. The General Medical Council maintains a register of all doctors within the UK. This ensures that there is a fear of being struck off for speaking out against an agenda.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

64. The GMC effectively controls all doctors in the UK. Even if a doctor realises what is going on and wants to speak out. They will think twice about talking, as they would be risking their entire career and everything that they've worked so hard for.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

65. Doctors essentially have their hands tied, many have families, kids, mortgages and mouths to feed. If I was in their situation, I would think twice about speaking out, for fear of being struck off by the GMC and losing everything.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

66. The NHS Track & Trace App, which was introduced to try and control the spread of the virus, did not apply to medical professionals. We were all asked to turn this off, as Doctors and staff isolating for 14 days disrupted patient flow, beds and the discharge of patients.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

67. Any doctor that I spoke to regarding taking the Covid-19 vaccine, were insistent that they were going to wait for a period of time, before taking it themselves, to ensure that it was safe. How is it ethical to give a vaccine to your patients, but not want to take it yourself

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

68. In my 12 years of NHS service, never has a doctor pushed or influenced the public to take a vaccine. Yet on social media, I was seeing close friends who were doctors, starting to post on social media that they have taken the vaccine and that the public should.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

69. I wouldn't be surprised if doctors were being forced to promote the vaccine by their superiors or if they were receiving monetary gain in doing so.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

70. I have no doubt in my mind, that the Government has planned the entire pandemic since 2016, when they first proposed the change to medical death certification.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

71. Stress leads to disease and illness. Panic leads to people following whatever orders and instructions that are given to them by authority, such as prolonged mask use, which leads to an increase in admissions in to the NHS system due to hypoxia and bacterial pneumonia.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

72. The NHS treatment pathway involved patients being placed onto ventilators. There is a 50% chance of death from this clinical decision alone. How many innocent people have died from the clinical decision to place them onto a ventilator. TBC

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

73. During boardrounds (where every admitted patient is discussed), we were seeing patients on a daily basis being admitted due to suffering from adverse affects of taking the vaccine. Patients were blacking out after taking the vaccine or suffering from clots or strokes.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

74. The NHS is all about money and making money. The safety of a patient didn't seem like the most important thing. It was more about how do we make more beds available so that another patient can be treated.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

75. Patients with no next of kin are discharged to nursing homes with care packages. I can't comment on what happened to these patients in nursing homes, during the pandemic, as I have no experience of their inner workings.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

76. Patients are seen as money, even upon death, hospitals receive money for each death. Is there an actual concern for patient health and safety? I know numerous doctors who are driven primarily by money and monetary gain.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

77. THE REASON WHY I LEFT THE NHS in 2021 56 yr old male, admitted into a&e with end stage kidney failure, has a previous history of regular dialysis treatment for this. No respiratory symptoms on admission and no temperature. However when tested with a PCR Test...

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

he unfortunately tests positive. This stays on his record throughout his admission. Our hospital is relatively small in comparison to others I have worked at, we have no dialysis machine as a result. We urgently need to transfer this patient to another hospital....

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

otherwise this patient will die. Our treating doctor calls up larger hospitals with a dialysis machine to organise his transfer. All doctors pick up the phone and request the Covid-19 status of the patient. A transfer is declined due to a Covid-19 infection protocol....

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

Our doctors again reiterate the point that this patient will die without dialysis. We are told there is nothing that can be done and that the patient cannot be accepted for transfer. This gentleman ended up dying without dialysis. Now please tell me what goes on the MCCD....

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

1a) Covid-19 2) End Stage Kidney Failure Not written by the treating doctor who disagreed with this cause of death, but by a medical examiner, put in place by the government and the hospital.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

When innocent people are being killed by a corrupt organisation and system, for pure monetary gain, I can't stand by and be part of this anymore. My conscious was clear and I no longer wanted to be a part of this anymore.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

78. I am very blessed and lucky that I was in a position to walk away. I've been able to speak out, because my hands are not tied and I am not regulated by any organisation or governing body. I believe in speaking the truth and in doing so, I am only just an instrument for God.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

79. I joined the NHS, 12 years ago because I had a desire to help those in need, but the moment I realised that I was not doing this anymore was the time for me to walk away.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

80. I apologise to you all if the above thread is confusing with regards to terminology or you cannot understand it's contents. I'm hoping that at the very least, it can be understood by my fellow medical professionals or by journalists who would like to report the truth.

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

81. Would be very grateful if you could help spread this truth and raise awareness of what really went on within the NHS by reposting and tagging any relevant individuals who you think may help with spreading the truth of this thread. God Bless You All ❤️

VictorFromDE
Posted - March 12, 2023 at 2:36 AM
Saved - April 22, 2024 at 5:44 PM

@VictorFromDE - Victor Scott

Fathers testimony continued including the illegal DNR that was used. /8 https://t.co/LGrf1EuCxJ

Video Transcript AI Summary
Grace's death certificate listed COVID-19 pneumonia as the cause of death, but her family believes she was actually murdered. The hospital increased her medication dosage significantly, refused to resuscitate her, and put a do not resuscitate order in place. Despite pleas from her family, nurses did not intervene, claiming Grace was a do not resuscitate patient. The family suspects foul play due to the sequence of events leading to Grace's death.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That piece of Grace's death certificate is true and they received a $75100 bonus for listing that as the first cause of death. They listed the second cause of death as COVID-nineteen pneumonia and they received a $13,000 bonus for that listing. Of course that was not true. The second cause of death was in addition to Presidex which now on her last day they ratcheted up to 14 times the original dose. This is in spite of the doctor telling us that morning how great of a day Grace had been the day before but we refused the ventilator for the 5th time. My hypothesis is because we rejected that ventilator and that ventilator decision yields a $300,000 payday for the hospital, they had to figure out a different way to take her out. Because how can she start the morning having such a good day and then she is dead 11 hours after we have the phone call with the doctor. And you can't make up this sequence of events. I mean, with the Presadex now at 14 times the dose 4 days earlier, they combine that with lorazepam and morphine. That sequence of events got me to the point where I believe Grace was murdered. Right after, 8 minutes after they increased the dose of prosthetics to 14 times the dose, basically knocking Grace out. The doctor put a a do not resuscitate order on Grace 8 minutes later. Since Grace is getting cold, she asked The ICU nurse to do a temp. She said no no need. She said that's normal. Just cover with a blanket. Just call this done at 7.20 panicking on a FaceTime call. And we're seeing grace laying there. Just is saying that Grace's numbers are dropping like crazy. I said, get the nurses in. She said, they won't come in there. I said, I've been trying. They will not come in the room. She estimated 30 nurses in the hallway at this point in time. So we start hollering, save our daughter. They holler back to us. She's the NRA. Do not resuscitate. We holler. She's not being our save our daughter. They would not come in and give her that reversal drug to saber. Just ran out the hall during this time and a nurse had up on her screen that the doctor ordered a DNR and they couldn't do anything about it.
VictorFromDE
Posted - March 12, 2023 at 2:37 AM
Saved - April 22, 2024 at 5:50 PM

@VictorFromDE - Victor Scott

More testimony on DNR's and how people are being tricked into taking Remdesivir by the use of its brand name Veklury. /10 https://t.co/ymHR2n8ldh

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 expresses concern about residents in care homes signing DNR forms without proper understanding or capacity. Speaker 1 discusses how COVID patients in hospitals may develop pneumonia due to prolonged bed rest. Speaker 2 warns about confusion between the generic name Remdesivir and the brand name Veclery in hospitals.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now this is why I started to ask questions because I know the people. I know the residents in the care home. Okay? I know them well enough to know whether or not they should be signing a fucking DNR form. Do you understand? Let me tell you something. I guarantee you. If the family members knew what they are getting the fucking residents to sign, they wouldn't allow it. They wouldn't give consent. Some of these people don't have capacity. Alright? And they're getting people to sign these DNR forms, which are do not resuscitate. Speaker 1: Well, early on, I have some family members that are doctors. Early on, they would say, okay. You're COVID positive. And they go, well, I feel good. They said, well, you need to go to the hospital so they can evaluate you and watch you, monitor you just in case you take a turn. K. So a lot of people initially went to the hospital to get monitored and etcetera and they're hospitalized. And so what do they do when they go to the hospital? They put them in a bed. They shut the door, lock the door essentially. They lay in the bed. The horse that lays down, stays down. They get to where they do need oxygen. They do get to the point where they do develop hospital acquired pneumonia. Hospital acquired, health care acquired pneumonia, HCAP. And so yeah. Now you do have pneumonia after you've been there a week laying in a bed with the door shut, can't see your family, and eating yuck food. Duh. Anybody get pneumonia. So you just develop everybody's got bacteria. So that's how these people initially a lot of them, in my opinion, would develop pneumonia. They're laying in the bed and they can't get out. Speaker 2: Hey, everyone. It's Nicole Saratek with American Front Line Nurses. And I just wanna give you another heads up that we are getting reports from, patients across the country that when they go into the hospital, they decline remdesivir, but, the staff is saying it's not remdesivir, it's Veclery. Well, veclary is the brand name for remdesivir. So just remember that each drug has two names, a brand name and a generic name. So the generic name is Remdesivir and the brand name is Vecleri.
JacquiDeevoy1
Posted - August 7, 2023 at 10:16 AM
Saved - August 7, 2023 at 5:30 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
A man defied doctors who predicted his 75-year-old uncle's imminent death due to sepsis. Refusing to administer end-of-life drugs, he cited his mother's euthanasia experience. Nurses left, and his uncle, now recovered, enjoys life. This incident raises concerns about deliberate killings in the NHS. Videos documenting the story: [link1] [link2].

@JacquiDeevoy1 - Jacqui Deevoy

I’m talking to a man who was told last October that his 75-year-old uncle - in hospital after being abused by his carers - was “end of life” and had three days to live. The doctors said he had sepsis and that he was definitely going to die. The man - his uncle’s next of kin - managed to get his uncle home. They’d handed him a big pack of EOL drugs on departure from the hospital and told him he had to administer them to his uncle at home. Nurses came to his home to check whether he was giving the morphine, Midazolam and two other drugs to his uncle and the man told them in no uncertain terms that he had absolutely no intention of giving his uncle those drugs as he knew what they did (his own mum had been euthanised with the same drugs in hospital in 2021) and, after telling him his uncle would “die in pain” without the meds, the nurses left. He never heard from them again. His uncle is now fully recovered and living life to the full. To me, this is solid evidence that the NHS were deliberately killing - or trying to kill - people. @ng16322 @MaajidNawaz @CartlandDavid @davidicke @garethicke @KateShemirani

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the drugs used in palliative care, including midazolam, morphine, and another drug called Lebom. They mention that these drugs were sent to the Ministry of Time in September of the previous year. The speaker suggests that these drugs are causing deaths in octopus, particularly when midazolam and morphine are mixed together. They also mention that the nursing pencil website advises against mixing midazolam and morphine.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So you can see I'm not boxating you. There's the midazolam, 0 milligram per milliliter. There's the morphine, 1 milliliters. There's the Lebom, whatever that is. That's the third drug I did The palliative care. Let me turn them around. Turn them over, actually. And then there's a forklift that I give And then we've got the midazolam. Now, all these were sent home to the Ministry of Time in September last year. So it is these drugs that are causing the deaths in octopus. Especially midazolam, and the morphine mixed. Now the the nursing pencil website clearly states that midaziram and mopane should not be mixed

@JacquiDeevoy1 - Jacqui Deevoy

I’ve asked him to make a couple of new videos . Here’s the first one. https://t.co/6cJ7E1gM44

Video Transcript AI Summary
On the 21st of Q2, 2023, the patient was in the hospital. From the 14th to the 9th of September 2022, the patient received supportive care. Although it didn't explicitly mention end-of-life cases, the hospital's supportive care package is essentially an end-of-life care plan.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now this debtors dated 21st of Q2, that's when he was in hospital, 2023. Yet, 14th to 9th 2022, the patient is on supportive care. It didn't say end of life cases supportive. But if you look at the hospital version of supportive care package, it's basically the end of life care plan,

@JacquiDeevoy1 - Jacqui Deevoy

Here’s the second one. https://t.co/CGBzBkoFKC

Tony11Sim
Posted - August 26, 2023 at 12:44 PM
Saved - August 27, 2023 at 12:09 PM

@Tony11Sim - Dr. Truth

THE RESULTS ARE IN! Barry O’s Birth C e r t i f i c a t e was a “fraudulently created document”. Watch full video for conclusion!

Video Transcript AI Summary
Sheriff Joe Arpaio thanks the audience and recalls how the Surprise tea party asked him to investigate President Obama's birth certificate in 2011. He clarifies that his focus was on a possible government forged document, not the president's birthplace. He mentions Chief Investigator Mike Zullo and their ongoing investigation. Sheriff Arpaio states that they have concluded the birth certificate to be a fraudulently created document and will present an executive summary of their findings. He acknowledges the criticism they have faced and promises that the implications of their investigation will be significant.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Here's sheriff Joe Arpaio. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You know back thank you for showing up. Back in, 2011 about 2 50 members of the Surprise tea party came to me and asked me to investigate President Obama's birth certificate since they believed evidence Showed that the certificate was a fraud. I agreed to look into the matter And with Chief Investigator Mike Zullo we initiated In an investigation at this time And to this day I stated that I did not care Where the president was born. Had nothing to do with that. But We were going to investigate a possible government forged document. Hope you get that straight. Been saying that from day 1 since 2011. Today you would be presented With an in-depth executive summary of our investigation into the matter which We now have concluded to be a fraudulently created document Which has been represented as an official copy of the original birth certificate you. President Obama, we and anyone else who dared to question The document have been aligned falsely labeled, Grossly criticized in the bulk of the media on certain internet Sourcing for years, today we're going to set the record Great. I believe you will be shocked by what you hear and see Today. Also the implications will be profound.
CKellyUAP
Posted - September 10, 2023 at 2:08 PM
Saved - September 11, 2023 at 12:51 AM

@CKellyUAP - Craig Kelly

The hardest day in my life as an MP was sitting listening to Caitlin’s Mum, with Caitlin’s ashes in a box on the table. Caitlin’s Mum told me that Caitlin only got injected because of the mandates. Caitlin was never at risk from Covid, but she was from the fanatics

@RaeleneKenned20 - Justice4Caitlin

I've never shared this photo, because it upsets me so much. Around midnight Saturday 13th November, 2021. Caitlin drove herself to Emergency and presented with Shortness of Breath. The hospital didn't do a spirometry test, lung function, any test for asthma. There was no…

JacquiDeevoy1
Posted - September 19, 2023 at 12:47 PM
Saved - September 20, 2023 at 10:57 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
A heart valve operation was postponed due to Covid restrictions. Tablets given to the patient were actually morphine, forcibly administered. The patient's condition deteriorated, and he attempted suicide. He later died, with hospital-acquired frailty contributing to his death. Legal action was considered but deemed challenging.

@JacquiDeevoy1 - Jacqui Deevoy

Another tragic story received today… “My father-in-law, aged 76, was admitted to Preston hospital for a heart valve operation, which was postponed due to Covid restrictions. The hospital said they would keep him there until a transfer to a second hospital was possible where a heart specialist would undertake the op. They kept him for three weeks. During this time we began receiving the frantic phone calls and text messages. He said the tablets given to him that he was told were ‘water tablets’ were actually 270 Morphine Sulphate Logo (Actavis), which he described as having a crescent moon logo on them. He was holding them in his mouth and then spitting them into his sock later, but the staff noticed and forced him to swallow the pills. He was sending us desperate texts asking us to get him out of there. He understood exactly what they were doing to him. Each time we rang the hospital, they assured us all was well. They wouldn’t allow visits due to Covid so we had to take their word for it. He was eventually transferred to the second hospital where the surgeon declined the op due to the patient’s emaciated state. The surgeon later held a meeting with us where he expressed his utter disbelief at the physical condition of my father in law, having seen him just weeks prior to arrange the op. The doctor also said he couldn’t understand how he had been sent to him in such terrible condition and that he was a ‘different man’ to the one he had spoken to a few weeks before. My father-in-law was then returned to the first hospital, but there were no more phone calls and text messages from him. He was too weak to make contact. When we were called one morning and told there had been an ‘incident’ overnight, we were naturally very worried. We were told we couldn’t visit but my wife and I went to the hospital and barged in. We needed to see how he was and see for ourselves what physical state he was in. We managed to get to his ward. He told us he’d tried to kill himself the previous night by throwing himself out of the bed head-first onto the floor. He said 'you should have come three weeks ago… it's too late now' - words that will haunt me for ever. We then saw a nurse talking into a walkie-talkie, calling security. We didn’t want to be physically ejected from the hospital so we decided to leave peacefully. Before leaving, we demanded his release into our care by the next morning. The following morning however, at 9:20am we were informed by telephone that after an ‘episode’, he had become unresponsive and died. No further details were given then, and none are known to this day, although the doctor who informed us of his passing admitted ‘mistakes have been made’ and was very apologetic. According to the death certificate, his (hospital-acquired) frailty contributed to his death. That’s all we know or were ever allowed to know. I cannot say definitively that the drugs killed him, but they were definitely forcibly administered when not required and when he didn’t want them. I have the full and unexpurgated version of this story, including times, dates, names and greater detail. My intention was to take legal action and I did actually take advice from a barrister. He said that my claim was valid but, in his experience, the NHS would put up an exhausting and dirty fight for which we are ill-equipped to endure.”

JacquiDeevoy1
Posted - September 20, 2023 at 1:17 PM
Saved - September 21, 2023 at 1:14 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Former health secretary Matt Hancock implemented the controversial NG163 Covid protocol despite doctors' warnings. Nine doctors and two professors expressed concerns about the risks and lack of evidence-based dosages. The guideline lacked advice on monitoring patients and weaning them off powerful medications. Nurses were instructed to administer drugs regardless of respiratory depression fears. The combination of benzodiazepines and opioids raised concerns about potentially lethal effects. Many healthcare professionals followed orders, but their obedience may not protect them legally.

@JacquiDeevoy1 - Jacqui Deevoy

I’ve sent this to 30 mainstream newspaper editors. Reckon they’ll publish it? Hancock’s deadly Covid protocol was slammed by doctors in 2020… but he implemented it anyway By Jacqui Deevoy When former health secretary Matt Hancock first came up with NG163 (the Covid protocol reminiscent of the abolished Liverpool Care Pathway that was used to treat the elderly and those presenting with respiratory issues in hospitals and care homes) in early 2020, he was quickly presented with the advice of nine doctors and two professors, all of whom were familiar with end of life care procedure. After studying it, they said they were “concerned that uncritical use of NG163 may create unintended risks for people with suspected or actual COVID-19 infection” and suggested that it shouldn’t be implemented. The new guideline replaced NG31, which detailed how to deal with people dying of cancer. The doctors pointed out that, with regards to the old guideline, the evidence base was so poor that specific dosages were not recommended. They seemed confused by the fact that dosages recommended in NG163 were so specific. In a letter, published on April 20th 2020, the eminent experts, led by Professor Emeritus Sam H. Ahmedzai, point out that “while NG163 states ‘Note that symptoms can change, and patients can deteriorate rapidly in a few hours or less’, there is no counterpoint that most patients without the preconditions above will eventually recover.” They also state that, while there was plenty of detail on dosing up Covid patients with powerful medications, there’s no advice on monitoring the patients nor on weaning them off the drugs. Could that be because there was never any intention of weaning them off? Another major concern of the panel was the fact that NG163 states: “Sedation and opioid use should not be withheld because of a fear of causing respiratory depression.” This is probably the most frightening line ever to be written into a NICE guideline as it’s telling nurses not to be put off giving the prescribed drugs due to a fear that the patient’s breathing will dramatically slow down. They’re being told to disregard any concerns and administer the drugs anyway. Doctors prescribing the meds - and many of the nurses giving them - KNOW that using Midazolam and morphine together will slow down breathing (to the point of death if it’s administered continuously via a syringe driver) but this very clear instruction is telling them not to worry about that! How many medics administered this killer cocktail of ‘end of life drugs’ to patients, not all of whom were presenting with respiratory symptoms - or, in some cases, appearing to have nothing more than a positive result from a non-diagnostic, not fit-for-purpose PCR test - knowing it was going to kill them? Some doctors and nurses have since admitted wondering about the potentially lethal effect of this combination of benzodiazepines and opioids and knew that the doses they were giving were way too high (something else that was a point of concern in the letter), but very few spoke out and the vast majority just continued to follow orders. Sadly, as we know from the Nuremberg Trials, the excuse of “just following orders” does not stand up in court. (And, whether they knew the dangers of what they were doing or not, court is where many of these obedient ‘angels of death’ will end up.) (More to follow in comments below.)

SaiKate108
Posted - October 4, 2023 at 12:31 PM
Saved - October 5, 2023 at 1:04 AM

@SaiKate108 - Kat A 🌸

A distressing moment for Dr John Campbell as he realises all the videos he made on the vaccine trials were irrelevant. Nobody was told the shot they were getting was different to the one in the trials. No one gave informed consent. Everyone was duped.

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses how people were not informed about receiving a different product than what was used in the clinical trial for the COVID-19 vaccine. This lack of transparency means that individuals could not give informed consent. The speaker feels upset and violated, as they had relied on the trial data to make their decision to get vaccinated. They compare this situation to a fraudulent sales tactic called "bait and switch." The importance of informed consent is emphasized, especially for the speaker who had made videos based on the trial data.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Everybody in the UK and around the world got these process 2 lots. Now nobody was informed about this. I mean, I'm sure you didn't hear anything about this. And even though it's in the Pfizer protocol, nobody was told that they're actually getting a product That is different than the one that the, clinical trial was run on. And so what that means, essentially, Is that nobody could have given informed consent because they were kept in the dark about this. Right? You could have followed Free ins, all of the ins and outs of the clinical trial reports, you could have read that New England Journal of Medicine study. You could have known about the relative risk versus the absolute risk, everything, and you still would have been in the dark. You still would not have been able to give Your full and informed consent, and that's that's a real egregious, violation of of of people's basic, you know, rights and dignity under established, treaties and the Nuremberg Code. Speaker 1: That's what I did, Josh. I looked at the Pfizer reports at the time, I looked at the initial trial data, and, I found it convincing. I had 2 Pfizer vaccines and a Moderna vaccine Based on that, and now but it where now it appears that the clinical trials I was reading was a different product to what I was injected with. That makes me feel and this is not speculate, I feel I feel pretty bad about that. Furious certainly, but it's it's but it's just very concerning, but as you say, it appears I didn't give informed consent. It's, yeah. I I feel I feel I feel quite bad about that. It's Speaker 0: Well, you know, I mean, you could Make the argument that you were you were defrauded, right? There is a are you familiar with the term bait and switch? No. This is a this is a sales tactic where you advertise some using product. You advertise an amazing product. Somebody comes into the store to buy it and you say, well, actually, we're all out of that, but we've got this other thing that's just just like it that we could give you. Right? Which is probably of lesser quality, more profitable for the person selling it to you. Right? This is a fraudulent business practice. Right? Now, we I don't want it we could go, you know, we don't even have to go so far as to say that this is actually what Pfizer willingly and knowingly did, but I can definitely see the similarities here. Speaker 1: No. You you you're only explained to me what bait and switch means. That's all. But but but now you explained that I have worked in certain countries where I have come across this practice. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: Yeah. But no no. That is, yeah. You know, informed consent is just so crucial, isn't it? Oh, yeah. To me personally. And and Speaker 0: I am No. Speaker 1: I mean, I was making videos based on this data at the time. That that's even more distressing than the risk to me personally.
HopeRising19
Posted - October 10, 2023 at 7:32 PM
Saved - October 11, 2023 at 9:22 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
In New Zealand, parental rights can be overridden through "Gillick Competency." Children as young as 12 can make private healthcare decisions without parental involvement. A trusted source shared a letter informing their 15-year-old son about unaccompanied visits to the doctor and eligibility for injections. Research and contact your doctor or the Ministry of Health to understand this process. For more details, refer to the OIA document from the Ministry of Health.

@HopeRising19 - NZ and the MRNA

DO YOU KNOW YOUR PARENTAL RIGHTS ARE OVERRIDEN IN THIS WAY IN #NZ? Recently i posted about a trusted medical professional friend, sharing with me the following message: "My 15 year old son was sent a letter telling him he could go to the Dr unaccompanied, without his parents present or their permission, to have a conversation with his Dr about creating his own health plan and the letter also informed him he was now eligible for 3 injections, I can't recall what they were, I was so angry I ripped it up and threw it in the bin." I have had some disbelieving push back that i am making it up. You don't have to believe me, i just want you to be "tipped off". Do your own research. Call your doctor. Call the Ministry of Health. Find out how your 12 year old can make completely private health care decisions without you being in any way involved in the process. It's called "Gillick Competency" and New Zealand operates under this standard. It means that if the health professional deems that your child understands the treatment they are about to receive, through an "informed consent" process (such as the woefully inadequate one deemed sufficient for #mrna gene therapy); then they can administer the treatment then and there without any parental knowledge. Here is an OIA with more on the subject. Don't believe me but do believe the #nz Ministry of Health https://health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/information-release/h202111971_7_october_2021.pdf

JacquiDeevoy1
Posted - November 3, 2023 at 12:43 AM
Saved - November 3, 2023 at 10:25 AM

@JacquiDeevoy1 - Jacqui Deevoy

Now you know the truth - that people were being euthanised through the plandemic, how many of you have started to wonder about relatives who died suddenly and unexpectedly in NHS facilities over the last three years? Was there a chance they could have been euthanised too?

BillboardChris
Posted - November 8, 2023 at 9:42 PM
Saved - November 8, 2023 at 9:52 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The @metpoliceuk warned me that if I return to the UK, I'll be charged with a "hate crime." Detective Chief Inspector Marcus Shapps called me about the incident where a person jabbed a flag in my face. They identified the person as a transgender woman. I mentioned that children can't consent to puberty blockers, as confirmed by the High Court. Shapps asked for my passport number, but I refused. He retired the next day. I filed a report with @BTP and plan to return to the UK. Children's well-being matters, and I'll continue to speak up.

@BillboardChris - Billboard Chris 🇨🇦🇺🇸

I have been informed by the @metpoliceuk that if I return to the UK I will be remanded into custody, and charged with a “hate crime.” The very unprofessional Detective Chief Inspector Marcus Shapps called me on Sunday, November 6th to speak with me about the incident where someone who appeared to be a woman came and jabbed her flag and flagstick in my face. I was told on Sunday the police would attempt to identify her and potentially charge her with common assault. I declined to file a complaint against the @BTP officer at the time — Police Sergeant 5558. Today I received a phone call from DCI Marcus Shapps, collar number 782EA, who wanted to know if I was still in the UK. He said they had made contact with the ‘woman,’ that ‘she’ is a transgender woman (an erroneous term for a man), and that I would be remanded into custody and charged with a “hate crime” if I return to the UK. I am most certainly guilty of standing quietly with a sign that says ‘Children Cannot Consent to Puberty Blockers.’ If that causes offence to someone, so be it. I pointed out to DCI Shapps how in December of 2020, the High Court of England itself declared that children cannot give informed consent to puberty blockers, and how the NHS is even putting a stop to this child abuse. I told him I would love nothing better than to face this ridiculous charge and “I’ll see you soon,” at which point DCI Shapps said to me “Is that a threat?” No, detective, it’s not a threat. It means I would be overjoyed to expose your ridiculous police service to the entire world. He then asked for my passport number so that he could inform UK border control. I declined to give it to him, and he hung up the phone. I tried to make contact several more times via phone, but the @metpoliceuk non-emergency line was down. When DCI Shapps learned that my calls were just heading to voicemail, his response was “Womp womp, too bad.” This whole thing is so absurd, I question his legitimacy but the phone number goes to the UK non-emergency line. He says he’s retiring tomorrow. When I asked for the name of the @BTP officer via text, he did not respond, but then messaged me via WhatsApp, saying “To gain PS 5558’s name you will have to travel to the UK and request it from a British Transport Police station.” I have filed a report with the @BTP for more info, and I intend to return to the UK sometime in the New Year. To the @metpoliceuk, children cannot consent to puberty blockers, and I’ll keep saying it wherever I please. Sorry you support this child abuse.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 why they are there repeatedly. Speaker 1 explains they are there to have conversations and wear a sign about children and puberty blockers. Speaker 2 asks Speaker 1 to move for their safety due to angry people nearby. Speaker 1 questions why they should move instead of dealing with the violent individuals. Speaker 2 states they are there to keep Speaker 1 safe and suggests moving to prevent a breach of the peace. Speaker 1 argues that they are not causing the aggression. Speaker 2 insists that Speaker 1's presence is causing the breach. Speaker 1 continues to stand their ground. Speaker 2 agrees to speak to the aggressive individuals if they approach Speaker 1 again.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Why are you here? Why are you here? I'm here Speaker 1: to have a conversation. Don't put that in my face. Speaker 0: Why are you here? Why are you here? Why are you here? Speaker 1: I'm here to Speaker 0: have a conversation. Why is Speaker 1: Come on. I'm I'm allowed to stand here. Yeah. I'm gonna ask you Speaker 2: to move away for your own safety because they're obviously quite Speaker 0: I'm here to have a conversation. Why are you here? Mate, it's with you, aren't they? Okay. So now I'm standing here. So which way do you want me to go? I'll go over Speaker 2: a bit further, and I'll have a chat with you. Speaker 1: Like, on this street? Speaker 2: Yeah. Just go over onto that island there, and I'll Okay. Speaker 1: So you're telling me I'm not allowed to stand on this public speaker. Speaker 0: Telling you Speaker 1: at the moment, I've Speaker 2: I'm moving you over there to prevent the breach the pace. Speaker 0: Come on. Speaker 2: Come over there and let's Speaker 1: talk to Wait a minute. People coming and getting a live face, it means I'm breaching the police. Speaker 2: Them to do that, aren't you? So How Speaker 1: how am I doing that? Speaker 2: Move over I know I have a chat with you. Speaker 1: How am I causing them to do that? Speaker 2: Well, I don't know what you're doing, Speaker 1: but you're getting understanding that. You're getting extremely hostile. They're getting hostile with me. I've got it all on video. Speaker 2: Okay. That's fine. And you've got me on video? Yeah. Alright. So this is for your safety because when I walked past, there was a large group of people Who are very angry with you. Okay? So I believe your presence at that location was cut packed to cause breach of the peace. So for your safety, I've asked you to move because it's a lot easier than moving a lot of people left this guy. Speaker 1: So Why are we getting in their face? So I can't stand I wasn't. They're getting in my face. Speaker 2: Okay. So why are they getting in your face? Why are they getting in your face? What Speaker 0: Why are you here? I'm here to have conversations. Why are you here? Are they aggravate you here? Speaker 1: Because I'm wearing a sign that says children cannot consent to puberty blockers. Yeah. Speaker 2: So you're entitled have to protest and so on and so forth. Speaker 1: I'm not even protesting. I just have conversations with people. Okay. Speaker 2: But if you're getting a reaction like that, you need to remove yourself from it. So you're all safe. Speaker 1: Wait a minute. How about you deal with the violent people instead of telling the peaceful person to get out of the way? Speaker 2: Well, I'm speaking to you. Speaker 1: I'm I. There's no problem. They're the ones that were getting violent. Okay. Because you were president. I'm here to look Speaker 2: at you Speaker 0: to keep Speaker 2: you safe. Okay? Speaker 1: The ones who were briefed in the peace, if I may speak. No. No. You were causing Speaker 2: a breach at the pace, Speaker 0: but you Speaker 2: you were hating that. Okay? Speaker 1: I've told you. Speaker 2: I've told you. We're not obviously not gonna agree, are we? So do not go back over Because your presence there is like the cause breach of the peace. If you wish to walk around with your banner, then do it over there. Okay? Speaker 1: So let me clarify one thing here. Speaker 2: Yeah. Speaker 1: If I stand peacefully and people come and get aggressive with me, I'm the one breaching Speaker 2: the people. Presence at that is causing people to do that, then yes. Okay? Speaker 1: I'm not gonna ask you to disagree with the audition. Me is my fault. Speaker 2: Okay. Is Speaker 1: that what you're saying? Speaker 2: Your behavior is causing the breach of That's what I'm saying to you. Speaker 1: Other people getting violent is my Okay. Speaker 2: That's the breach of the peace, isn't it? Speaker 1: Okay. And Okay. And your presence there. And if Speaker 2: I You're being argumentative. You're not listening to I'm telling you. Speaker 0: I Speaker 2: am. Okay? I'm here to make sure that you're safe. I'm not wrong. Speaker 1: I'm telling you. That I'm standing here peacefully Speaker 2: You can stay here peacefully. Speaker 1: And what about when they come here? They won't be come in here, will they? If they do, I'll Speaker 2: be going straight to them. Okay. So they'll Speaker 1: be coming here, and the same thing will happen again. So I hope you speak to them that time instead of blaming the victim. Speaker 2: Okay. You believe you're a victim. What I saw is what I saw. Is your presence caught in the breach of the Speaker 1: Yes. My presence standing peacefully is causing other people to get aggressive. Alright. Well, I'll stand here then. Speaker 2: Okay. That's fine. Speaker 0: And when Speaker 1: they come here and they get in my face again, what are you gonna do about it back then? Speaker 2: To you, then I will speak to them. Okay? I can only deal with what I saw.
AdamJSchwarz
Posted - December 6, 2023 at 2:42 PM
Saved - December 6, 2023 at 7:45 PM

@AdamJSchwarz - Adam Schwarz

Boris Johnson shown note from his private secretary recording him on 19 March 2020 saying: "Why are we destroying everything for people who will die anyway soon? Bed blockers." His response: "It wasn't designed to be publicly broadcast." #CovidInquiry https://t.co/NhcXdumJCy

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 questions the rationale behind implementing stringent interventions for people who will soon die anyway. Speaker 1 responds, stating that the choice was difficult and required a delicate balancing act throughout the pandemic. They explain that driving down the virus necessitates taking actions that can have damaging consequences in other areas. Speaker 1 acknowledges that their previous statement may not have been intended for public broadcast but was an attempt to summarize the problem. They express the need for a swift assessment of the benefits, impacts, and costs of the interventions.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Why are we destroying everything for people who will die anyway soon? Bed blockers. Is that not indicative of an absence of consistent position by you and a clear decision that on the basis of the scientific advice that you had received, these stringent interventions were necessary? Speaker 1: No, it's an indication of the cruelty of the choice that we faced and the appalling balancing act that I had to do throughout the pandemic? And in order to what if indeed, I said something like that, what I was saying, which is the truth, which is that in order to drive down the virus, to stamp out the virus? You have to do things that are going to be very damaging in all sorts of other Why? Perhaps it's not it wasn't designed to be publicly broadcast? But I was trying to find a way crisply to summarize of what I saw as part of the problem? And I needed people to And I think, by the way, the what I hope the inquiry will be able to do, [SPEAKER UNIDENTIFIED COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE:] I needed people to be able to do a faster reckoning of the benefits, the impacts of the MPIs and the costs?
biologyphen0m
Posted - December 9, 2023 at 3:18 PM
Saved - December 10, 2023 at 2:56 AM

@biologyphen0m - D

Scottish COVID inquiry|Day 21 part-4 'they found my father on his hands and knees trying to get to the toilet' 'I was then told they were going to introduce end of life medication which would be MIDAZOLAM and if needed MOPRHINE' 'i was SHOCKED !' Cause of death COVID-19 https://t.co/qUDdVO1tMi

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker received a phone call saying their dad was feeling unwell. They were told that their dad was agitated and had been shouting for help. They found him on his hands and knees trying to get to the toilet. The care home said they would introduce end-of-life medication, which shocked the speaker. They were allowed to visit their dad, but only at the door while wearing full PPE. They were not sure if their dad was COVID negative or if the restriction was to limit staff exposure. They were only able to see their dad lying on his side in bed.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Paragraph 76. Yes. You got a phone call saying your dad is feeling? Yes. Where did he been found? Speaker 1: Well, on his notes that I got from the care home as well, I got a phone call from the care room to say that my dad was failing. He was agitated. He'd been shouting for help. He'd been wandering into other rooms so he was still mobile but found him on his hands and knees trying to get to the toilet. I was then told they were going to introduce End of life medication which would be midazolam and if needed, and morphine and I was shocked. Speaker 0: But you were told you could come and see your dad? Speaker 1: I then got an opportunity because of that date. My father died on the 26th April and the impression that I got is that he was something serious had happened and he was now in a comatose state and you might only have a couple of days to go. And I was told I could go in fully PPE ed, I'd see it with Father, but I would only be allowed to stand at the door. Now, I don't understand this because I don't know if he was COVID negative by then Or maybe they wanted to be me going in and other staff, but all I'd be allowed to do is look at Medard lying on his side in his bed. That was all I was like to believe I was able Speaker 0: what
biologyphen0m
Posted - January 29, 2024 at 3:36 PM
Saved - January 29, 2024 at 6:36 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
During the Scottish COVID inquiry, Bill Jolly shared his father's distressing experience. His 89-year-old father fell in a care home, was admitted to the hospital, and suffered five more falls as an inpatient. Despite testing positive for COVID-19 without symptoms, he was discharged into a care home in a mentally damaged state, with multiple head wounds and no memory. Bill was shocked when he learned that end-of-life medication, including midazolam and morphine, was being considered without his consent. The cause of his father's death was COVID-19.

@biologyphen0m - Big Dave

🆕Scottish COVID inquiry|Day 21|Bill Jolly -William's 89yo father admitted to hosptial during lockdown after a fall in care home 🚨POA deemed by NHS as ''irrelevant'' 🚨Suffers another FIVE falls as hospital inpatient 🚨Then tests +COVID (no symptoms) and discharged into care home 'mentally damaged' DOUBLE INCONTINENT w/multiple head wounds and no memory ''They found my father on his hands and knees trying to get to the toilet..I was then told they were going to introduce end of life medication which would be MIDAZOLAM and if needed MOPRHINE and i was SHOCKED !'' 🚨At the point EOL medications were decided William had never agreed to this for his father. 1⃣Lockdown 2⃣Isolation 3⃣Neglect 4⃣Deterioration 5⃣DNR 6⃣Midazolam -Cause of death COVID-19 Full statement- https://www.covid19inquiry.scot/sites/default/files/ev-documents/sci-wt0254-000001.pdf

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses concern about the treatment of their father in a care home. They received a picture showing their father with injuries and were shocked to learn that he didn't receive a brain scan for those injuries. The speaker also mentions a phone call informing them that their father was failing and that end-of-life medication would be introduced. They were allowed to visit their father but only from the door. The speaker questions the reasons behind these restrictions.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm playing with people's lives and I just thought this is just it was just crazy what was going on. Going back to the picture, the weird picture, yes, I don't know if anybody else here has probably most people have got iPhones, but on the loop on the iPhone, I could my dad was taken into the care home. I got a picture sent to me by the care home manager of my dad with bandages, cuts, blood, a cleanly closed eye, a swelling on the side of his head. Now I found out he didn't get scanned for his head injuries he got in Aberdeen Royal Infirmary. He got scanned with a head injury when he fell onto the back of his head, but the more serious falls in my opinion and I think the evidence shows it on the pictures. He didn't get a brain scan for the injuries he received in Aberdeen Royal Infirmary. He was sent back to the care home, as I say in the photograph show it, in a terrible state. The photograph I'm referring to was horrendous because on the loop that you get, you can hear them being asked to smile and it's just a name grand on and I thought oh my god, if I blew it up and I saw the state of them, I was just horrified. Speaker 1: On Sunday 19th April, paragraph 76. Yes. Speaker 0: You got Speaker 1: a phone call saying your dad is failing? Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: Where had he been found? Speaker 0: Well, on his notes that I got from the care home as well, this box, I saw a phone call from the care home to say that my dad was failing. He was agitated. He'd been shouting for help. He'd been wandering into other rooms, so he was still mobile, They'd found him on his hands and knees trying to get to the toilet. I was then told they were going to introduce end of life medication, which would be midazolam and if needed and morphine and I was shocked. Speaker 1: But you were told you could come and see your dad? Speaker 0: I then got an opportunity because that date my father died 26 April and The impression that I got is that he was something serious had happened and he was now in a comatose state and you might only have a couple of days to go. And I was told I could go in fully PPE ed and see my father, but I would only be allowed to stand at the door. Now I don't understand this because I don't know if he was COVID negative by then or maybe they were me going in or the staff, but all I'd be allowed to do as look at Medard lying on his side in his bed. That was all I was like to believe I was able to do.
CartlandDavid
Posted - March 6, 2024 at 12:35 PM
Saved - March 6, 2024 at 6:03 PM

@CartlandDavid - Dr David Cartland

SICK!!! Disabled people were secretly given Do Not Resuscitate orders, Scottish Covid-19 inquiry hears https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12781471/Disabled-people-secretly-given-Not-Resuscitate-orders-Scottish-Covid-19-inquiry-hears.html

Disabled people were secretly given Do Not Resuscitate orders Disabled Scots felt like their lives were 'not worth saving' during the pandemic after Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders were secretly imposed on many of them dailymail.co.uk
CartlandDavid
Posted - March 29, 2024 at 4:31 PM
Saved - March 29, 2024 at 5:14 PM

@CartlandDavid - Dr David Cartland

MAKE THIS VIRAL The Moment Witnesses Broke Their Silence on Scotland's End-Of-Life Care Protocols During Covid: What Really Happened... "Regardless of what the residents symptoms were, they were prescribed just in case medication (midazolam and morphine). We really struggled." via https://www.youtube.com/live/owk3_fQjlJw?si=0qwlwAZ5VO6HxQhm https://gettr.com/post/p32tpi172bf

Video Not Available youtube.com
The Stark Naked Brief. on GETTR : The Moment Witnesses Broke Their Silence on Scotland's End-Of-Life Care Protocols During Covid: What Really Happened... Regardless of what the residents symptoms were, they were prescribed just in case medication (midazolam and morphine). We really struggled. via https://www.youtube.com/live/owk3_fQjlJw?si=0qwlwAZ5VO6HxQhm The Moment Witnesses Broke Their Silence on Scotland's End-Of-Life Care Protocols During Covid: What Really Happened... Regardless of what the residents symptoms were, they were prescribed just in case medication (midazolam and morphine). We really struggled. via https://www.youtube.com/live/owk3_fQjlJw?si=0qwlwAZ5VO6HxQhm gettr.com
MISSXBUTTERFLYX
Posted - April 6, 2024 at 7:14 PM
Saved - April 7, 2024 at 4:41 PM

@MISSXBUTTERFLYX - missbutterfly 🌸

The truth is coming of Nhs murder/manslaughter ‼️‼️ #Midazolam Were Covid patients left to die against their wishes? Care homes under pressure to issue Do Not Res… https://mol.im/a/13277723 via https://dailym.ai/android

Were Covid patients left to die against their wishes? Gillan Grant (pictured right) put her name on a document that effectively denied her grandmother (left) potentially lifesaving treatment. dailymail.co.uk
Home | Daily Mail Online MailOnline - get the latest breaking news, celebrity photos, viral videos, science & tech news, and top stories from MailOnline and the Daily Mail newspaper. dailymail.co.uk
TheRustler83
Posted - April 7, 2024 at 9:25 AM
Saved - April 7, 2024 at 11:15 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
There was a shocking discovery of a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) form for the author's grandmother, with the author's name on it without their authorization. Blanket DNR orders were placed on care home residents, preventing hospital admissions and ambulance callouts. End-of-Life drugs were prescribed over the phone. The author questions the lack of a police investigation into the unlawful deaths of care home residents during the pandemic.

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

‘There was a still more shocking sight to come. It was a piece of paper known as a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) form for her grandmother – and Ms Grant's name was on it as the next of kin authorising it She had never authorise such a thing’ https://dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13277723/Were-Covid-patients-left-die-against-wishes.html

Were Covid patients left to die against their wishes? Gillan Grant (pictured right) put her name on a document that effectively denied her grandmother (left) potentially lifesaving treatment. dailymail.co.uk

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

Credit to @BrokerJonathan for writing this very important piece Jonathan, if you are needing any more information on this please feel free to extract anything from my posts Or the threads by @biologyphenom

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🎙Scottish COVID-inquiry, Care Home managers confirm; 🚨Blanket ‘Do not attempt CPR’ notices were placed on their residents by GPs/NHS 🚨 No hospital admissions and no ambulances would attend Care Home residents with a DNR order Impact Hearing Day 31 26/3/2024 Part 1

Video Transcript AI Summary
Summary: Updating anticipatory care plans during the pandemic was challenging due to families wanting hospital treatment for their loved ones, but facing restrictions. There was a push by the NHS to implement DNA CPR in care homes, causing access to care to be limited without much public discussion. Translation: During the pandemic, updating care plans and implementing DNA CPR in care homes faced challenges and restrictions, impacting access to care without widespread public awareness.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'd like to move on to anticipatory care plans and DNA CPR. With regard to putting in place anticipatory care plans, I understand you had to contact patients contact families and also have discussions with residents. What is the reaction of families on being contacted about that matter? Speaker 1: I think we've always had anticipated a care plan, so getting in touch to update those, you know, on the back of the GPs asking to kind of just as lockdown came into play wasn't something that was out of the ordinary. The difficulty you then had was if the family member had said, well, if my loved one becomes unwell, not specifically COVID related, just with anything and hospital treatments required, then, yeah, I would still like them to go. That was then the challenge because you weren't able to put them anywhere because nobody would take them. So trying to have that conversation was really difficult, and it wasn't one that I personally would then put the families back to the JPs because that's not on me. That was my call, not to escalate that. But people were still wanting their care escalated, but were being told by medical professionals that they couldn't get it. Speaker 2: D and ACPR is a normal part of care home life, I guess. There's always a discussion with people about whether which route they would like to go. But I guess there was an impression that there was I'm not sure that's the right phrase, but a push on by the NHS to get more of these things in place. In one of our homes, we received D and A ACPRs for all of our residents that hadn't already got one in place, and we had a bit of a discussion back and forward, and we actually sent them back to the NHS. There was a restriction in terms of access to care for people in care homes. I think that was a decision that must have been made by the NHS, but that doesn't appear that wasn't a discussion that was held in the sort of full public light. It seemed to be a decision that was made very low key, not very well publicized, but was a reality of the first couple of years of the pandemic anyway.

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

@BrokerJonathan @biologyphenom

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

@AamerAnwar Revelation of method: 🚨 5,000 elderly patients discharged from hospital into care homes 🚨 blanket DNR orders placed on residents 🚨 no ambulance or GP call outs where resident had a DNR order 🚨 GPs prescribed End-of-Life drugs over the phone to care home residents

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

@BrokerJonathan @biologyphenom

@covidinquirysco - Scottish COVID-19 Inquiry

Day 15 of the Inquiry's Health and Social Care Impact Hearings begins today at 10 am. A Restriction Order has been placed relating to one of today's witnesses. More information and broadcast streams are available on the Inquiry's website: https://www.covid19inquiry.scot/hearing/impact-hearing-health-social-care-day-15

Impact Hearing | Health and Social Care | Day 15 | Scottish COVID-19 Inquiry Day 15 of the Scottish COVID-19 Inquiry's Health and Social Care Impact Hearings.Date: 23 November 2023Time: 10am covid19inquiry.scot

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

@BrokerJonathan @biologyphenom Clip of Gillian Grant extracted from the Scottish Covid Inquiry;

@biologyphenom - Dave-independent researcher

🆕Scottish COVID inquiry|23 Nov 2023 🚨🚨Gillian discovered AFTER her grans death there was a DNR in place. A concerned Lord Brailsford-'was it signed?' 'it was in block capitals..with my name...it is NOT my signature at all' Full statement-https://www.covid19inquiry.scot/sites/default/files/ev-documents/sci-wt0142-000002.pdf https://t.co/AWf6qfg0pl

Video Transcript AI Summary
I found out there was a do not resuscitate order for my grandmother after she passed away. The order had my name on it, but it wasn't my signature. The care home had discussed the possibility of a DNR with me, but I had clearly stated I did not want one. The DNR form was incomplete because the section asking if the patient was aware of the order was left blank.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And, you subsequently ascertain that there was a do not resuscitate notice in relation to your grant. Speaker 1: That's great. Speaker 0: Can you just explain how you you came by that information? Speaker 1: We had heard that there was a possibility that there was a donor resuscitate order. After my grandmother had died, we'd heard from the solicitors that there was talk that there was a do not resuscitate order in my grant's file, but nobody had ever seen it, and so we didn't know the full facts of it. But when I actually sat with the inquiry team to give this statement, my solicitor produced the do not resuscitate order, and it had my name on it, and it was dated on the 2nd November. And it sorry? I've got a copy of it, but, it's kind of block capital letters with my name. Speaker 0: So in other words, not your normal signature? Speaker 1: Not my signature at all. Speaker 0: Was the possibility of a DNR notice ever discussed with you by the care home? Speaker 1: Yes, it was. Speaker 0: And could the care home have understood from the discussion that they had with you that you might be authorizing a DNR notice for your grandmother? Speaker 1: Absolutely not. My exact words then were categorically, I do not want to put a do not resuscitate order in place. Speaker 0: You tell us in the in paragraph 65, which is a lengthy paragraph about this, that the DNR is incomplete. Yes. How is it incomplete beyond the point that you've just clarified with the lordship about about your signature? Speaker 1: There's a section in it that, asks if the if the patient is aware of the do not resuscitate order being in place, and there's a box to tick yes or no, and neither box is ticked.

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

The evidence is all there In plan sight Where is the Police investigation into the unlawful deaths of thousands of Care Home residents during the ‘pandemic’ ? https://t.co/VgvyiBoa6e

ABridgen
Posted - May 21, 2024 at 11:30 AM
Saved - May 21, 2024 at 1:17 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
A widow shares her husband's experience with Covid-19, stating he seemed to be improving before being given Midazolam and subsequently passing away. A nurse with 45 years of experience expresses surprise at the use of Midazolam for sleep. The inquiry questions the use of Midazolam in care settings during the pandemic, while also focusing on unrelated gossip.

@ABridgen - Andrew Bridgen MP

“He FaceTimed me. He looked really well. He was up and dressed… he was laughing and joking.” Widow Lianne Menzies tells the Scottish Covid Inquiry how her 38 year old husband Jamie was getting better, was given Midazolam “to help him sleep”, then died. Experienced nurse John Campbell: “I’ve never, ever in forty five years of nursing given Midazolam to help someone sleep.” What on earth went on in care settings with Midazolam during the pandemic? The English Covid Inquiry, meanwhile, is fearlessly grilling Sue Gray about Westminster gossip. Shameful. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHBpD7cuNB4&t=131s

TheRustler83
Posted - February 3, 2025 at 2:24 PM
Saved - March 17, 2025 at 9:37 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
During lockdown, a significant number of care home residents were prescribed end-of-life medications, leading to thousands of deaths in Scotland and England. This practice, framed as "anticipatory care," raises serious ethical concerns, with claims of blanket DNR orders issued without family consent and falsified signatures. The NHS/NICE guidelines reportedly encouraged the use of drugs like Midazolam and Morphine, which can cause severe respiratory issues. Testimonies from the Scottish COVID-19 Inquiry highlight these troubling actions, suggesting state-sanctioned harm.

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

🚨🚨 9 times out of 10 Care Home residents were prescribed ‘End of Life’ medication during Lockdown What followed was 5,000 deaths in just 10 weeks at Scottish Care Homes and 50,000 in England…..

Video Transcript AI Summary
Antibiotics were often prescribed, but if a resident didn't improve, "just in case" medication was given. Consulting with GPs was done over the phone, and regardless of symptoms, "just in case" medication was typically prescribed. It could take months to get a GP to visit a resident's home.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Mentioned that often all that would happen was that just in case medication would be prescribed. If it was something more mild, were you able to get things like antibiotics and Speaker 1: milder Yeah, we prescribed antibiotics but nine times out of 10 if a resident didn't get better from that, it was just in case it was prescribed. Speaker 0: Thank you. Ms Curry, in your experience Speaker 1: No, we didn't get any GP's and we consulted with GP's over the phone and nine times out of 10, regardless of what the resident's symptoms were, they were prescribed just in case medication. We really, really, really struggled. I think it was months and months before we got a GP into her home.

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

Just-In-Case medication = Anticipatory Care medicine= End-of-Life drugs It’s just a nicer way of saying “We are going to kill you now”

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

Link to the full transcript + witness statements from the day⬇️ https://www.covid19inquiry.scot/hearing/impact-hearing-health-social-care-day-30

Impact Hearing | Health and Social Care | Day 30 | Scottish COVID-19 Inquiry Day 30 of the Scottish COVID-19 Inquiry's Health and Social Care Impact Hearings.Date: 26 March 2024Time: 9.45am Please note the timetable below is provisional and subject to change. covid19inquiry.scot

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

From the same day at the Inquiry 26/3/2024 This should have brought the entire house of cards crashing down 0 (zero) media coverage of those testimonies

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

They killed your elderly relatives in Care Homes… Then blamed it on ‘COVID’… https://t.co/Ldw7TXYcYv

Video Transcript AI Summary
The numbers of people who died of COVID are skewed because many unwell individuals were classified as suspected COVID cases without testing. Other health conditions seemed nonexistent during COVID, and care home residents who became unwell were automatically considered COVID positive. The numbers don't accurately reflect COVID deaths. According to Lisa DiGiacomo, a director with Open Ministry Healthcare, deaths were classified as suspected or COVID-related, even with underlying health conditions. Scott Finnegan, Group General Manager for First, agrees with this assessment.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Death, and actually, the the numbers of people who died in the COVID are very screwed because there's lots of people who just took unwell were were were classed as suspected COVID without any tests being carried out. There was lots of workloads that actually because, it seemed that other kind of health conditions didn't exist during COVID, and if you took unwell when you were living in a care home, you were just automatically considered as as being COVID positive. And think there was a lot of frustration about that as well because the numbers don't actually reflect the amount of people that sadly passed away from COVID. Speaker 1: As Scott clearly said, it wasn't all about Covid positive deaths, it was suspected Covid or Covid related, where it may have been another underlying health condition. I'm Lisa DiGiacomo, I'm a director with Open Ministry Healthcare. Speaker 0: Scott Finnegan, Group General Manager for First and

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

Midazolam Matt Hancock April 2020

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

In the week that Matt Hancock promoted the ‘Assisted Dying Bill’ Let us remember his role in promoting End of Life medicines during lockdown⬇️ ‘A Good Death’ by Matt Hancock & Dr Luke Evans https://youtube.com/shorts/4WozgdHS8WI?feature=shared https://t.co/0IdUNAST0i

Video Transcript AI Summary
Good death requires equipment, medication, and staff. The NHS has enough syringe drivers to deliver medications for comfort during passing. Precautions are in place to ensure sufficient medications like midazolam and morphine. Morphine is prescribed per patient to prevent abuse. Relaxing morphine prescribing laws for doctors and healthcare professionals could reduce waste in healthcare homes. The government is keeping the reduction of key medicine wastage under review.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Good death needs three things. It needs equipment, it needs medication and it needs the staff to administer it. So in terms of equipment, a few quick questions. Do you have enough syringe drivers in the NHS to deliver medications to keep people comfortable when they're passing away? Yes, we do. The second one is with that, that's the syringe drivers deliver medication, particularly things like midazolam and morphine. Do you have any precautions put in place to make sure we have enough of those medications to be delivered? Yes. And in line with that, morphine is currently prescribed per patient. The reason to do that is to stop it being abused. So I have to prescribe it for Mr. Hancock. However, in this situation, if you're going into a healthcare home, you may not want to waste precious things like morphine. Have you considered relaxing the laws around morphine prescribing for doctors and healthcare professionals so that there isn't waste. That's something that we keep under review. I've looked at that particular point to reduce wastage of key medicines.

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

Scottish Covid Inquiry | Full Documentary | https://youtu.be/bojR7A5MKPA?si=faXtUa_OCIRumdFk

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

Care Home Excess Deaths in 2020 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 No excess before lockdown 100% excess during lockdown No excess after lockdown https://t.co/VVNTUWYZ0h

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

DO NOT RESUSCITATE

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

🚨DO NOT RESUSCITATE🚨 💥 Blanket DNR orders across entire Care Homes 💥 DNR orders without families consent 💥 Falsified signatures 💥 No GP call outs to Care Homes 💥 Ambulances & Hospital access denied for Care Home residents https://t.co/jo8mnJn3P2

Video Transcript AI Summary
The inquiry anticipates hearing that people were pressured into DNR notices, were not resuscitated without a notice, and may have been neglected and left to starve. Families may not have been told the truth about the cause of death, and the usual death certification process was altered. A solicitor produced a DNR order with a name printed in block letters, not a normal signature. A witness stated they told the care home categorically that they did not want a DNR order in place for their grandmother. A care home manager said there was a push from the NHS to implement more DNRs. One home received DNR/ACPR forms for all residents who didn't have one. Challenges arose when families wanted their loved ones to receive hospital treatment for non-COVID ailments, but facilities wouldn't accept them. It was stated that GPs were said to have discussed DNR forms with families, but this didn't seem to be the case. The process was rushed, with a focus on who needed a DNR because they wouldn't be able to go to the hospital. There was no individual consideration, and care homes weren't asked about a resident's health when considering DNRs. Access to ambulances and hospitals was limited, leading to DNR decisions.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We anticipate the inquiry will hear that people were pressured to agree to do not resuscitate notices. That people were not resuscitated even though no such notice was in place. That residents may have been neglected and left to starve. That families are not sure they were told the truth about their relatives' cause of death that the usual process for certification of deaths was departed from. Speaker 1: The solicitor produced the do not resuscitate order and it had my name on it and it was dated on the November 2. Kind of block capital letters with my name. Speaker 2: So in other words, not your normal signature? Speaker 1: Not my signature at all. Speaker 3: And could the care home have understood from the discussion that they had with you that you might be authorizing a DNR notice for your grandmother? Speaker 1: Absolutely not. My exact words to them were categorically I do not want to put a do not resuscitate order in place. Speaker 2: My name is Peter McCormick. I'm the manager. I guess there was an impression that there was, I'm not sure that's the right phrase, but a push on by the NHS to get more of these things in place. In one of our homes, we received DNA ACPRs for all of our residents that hadn't already got one in place. Speaker 4: The difficulty you then had was if the family member had said, well, if my loved one becomes unwell, not specifically COVID related, just with anything, and hospital treatments required, then, yeah, I would still like them to go. That was then the challenge because you weren't able to put them anywhere because nobody would take them. Speaker 2: But I think there was a restriction in terms of access to care for people in care homes. I think that was a decision that must have been made by the NHS. But that doesn't appear that wasn't a discussion that was held in the full public light. And I think had it been, well, there have been people with all sorts of opinions, but it seemed to be a decision that was made very low key, not very well publicized, but was a reality of the first couple of years of the pandemic anyway. Speaker 5: On page five of the statement, I think it's a section that you've commented on, Ms Ling. You state that you were advised GPs had discussions with families about DNA CPR forms Then subsequently all residents who didn't previously have such forms were issued with them. But despite being told by the GPs that these discussions had taken place, your impression was that that wasn't actually the case? I think Why did you what created that impression for I Speaker 4: think it was because it was very much something that was just rushed. So it was updated ACPs, your anticipated career plans, which was fine. And then it was you need to look at who doesn't have DNRs because they will now then need to have one. And so when that was the discussion that was had with myself, I had said at the time, well, I can't make that decision. You'll you'll need to speak to the families about that, but I can let you know who doesn't have one. Because standard practice would be for the GP to have that discussion with the family member if the resident wasn't able to have that discussion themselves. And then within a couple of days, you then did then get these outstanding DNRs that we didn't have previously. So you would question whether that was something that was done in conjunction with families because the initial conversation was it's just they need to have them now because they won't be able to go to hospital because they just didn't want to take them. Speaker 5: Yeah. So essentially there was no nuance. There was, the conversation you had was based on there being no nuance, no individual consideration, just that everybody Yeah. In your care home who's resident there must have one of Yes, because Speaker 4: they wouldn't be going to hospital if they were unwell. Speaker 5: And I take it on that basis then you weren't asked about your impression of a particular resident's health and frailty as part of the consideration of whether was clinically appropriate to put the DNA CPR measures? Speaker 4: No, we weren't. And even when residents who did have COVID or maybe didn't have COVID just became unwell, you know, as people still continue to do throughout the pandemic, it was very much a cut and dry. You know, you got advice over the telephone, but you still you would have to fight very, very hard and challenge a lot to get someone admitted to hospital when you could clearly see that if they went to hospital, they had a really good chance of improving, of getting over, but, you know, it was making them unwell in the first place. But it was almost like you were not playing God, but it was just, no, you can't go. You just have to stay there. You could have gotten better if you'd been given the chance. Speaker 5: And your understanding is the lack of ability to access an ambulance, paramedics or hospital was the reason for these DNA CPR decisions being put in place? Yeah. Had you ever previously experienced a time where every resident your care had to have this? No.

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

People asking where the directive came from: Straight from the NHS/NICE

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

“Sedation and opioid use should NOT be withheld because of an inappropriate fear of causing RESPIRATORY DEPRESSION” COVID-19 rapid guideline: managing symptoms (including at the end of life) in the community NICE guideline NG163 Published: 3 April 2020 https://files.elfsightcdn.com/5266f37f-1e60-4e3b-9202-0f9e41473266/2a4df24d-b4c4-4056-aec6-c4bbd5c11090.pdf https://t.co/pRel3HLhaq

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

#Midazolam

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

🚨🚨 MIDAZOLAM NICE Guidance NG163 instructed the use of End-of-Life drugs Midazolam + Morphine to ‘treat’ elderly patients with ‘COVID’ Giving Midazolam with Morphine causes Respiratory Depression - like they are being WATERBOARDED!! https://t.co/vVF3NfpUXC

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker received a call from a care home stating her father had fallen and was agitated, and would be given morphine. She was shocked he was on an end-of-life path of injecting to stop his issues. She later learned midazolam, one of the medications being used, is considered by some practitioners to be like being waterboarded because it floods the lungs. The speaker was not advised about a specific end-of-life care plan for her father. She expressed concerns to the care home manager about what she had seen and the way end-of-life care was being administered. Despite a DNR in place from the first care home, she learned her father had been mobile and trying to get to the toilet. She felt it was a random decision to keep him quiet, in isolation, in a comatose state.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I was then told they were going to introduce end of life medication, which would be midazolam and if needed, and morphine, and I was shocked. Tuesday, April 21, I got a phone call again from the care home to tell me my dad had fallen out of bed again. He was very restless and agitated, and he was to be given morphine. I was shocked to find out he was not on a a related path of injecting to stop his issues, and this is where the confusion comes in because when you hear that somebody's on end of life care, you imagine, as I said earlier, that somebody is, you know, at peace. They're in pain. They can be in peace. And that that's the medication he was given, midazolam and morphine, would be helping him. Subsequently from that, I found out that midazolam isn't a particularly nice drug, and some practitioners refer it to being being waterboarded because it floods the lungs. And I I don't know if it's been removed, but I believe those motions are foot to look in at the the use of midazolam and morphine in end of life care. Speaker 1: Were you ever advised about a specific care plan in terms of end of life care for your father at the point Speaker 0: At that point? Speaker 1: Yeah. No. Did you know what the care plan was to be? Speaker 0: I didn't. No. I didn't know exactly what was going on, and, subsequently, there was a conversation with a doctor. Speaker 1: And tell me about what was said in that conversation. Speaker 0: I'd expressed my concerns to the returning new care home manager that I was distressed and upset about what I was what I'd seen, what was happening, and the way the end of life care was being administered. I was confused because I mean, there was a DNR put in place from the first care home. However, you know, I think anybody here would think to themselves that when they start introducing end of life care that there's no way back and that the person is beyond hope. And yet I found out that my father had been mobile. He'd been walking about. He had poor man had been trying to get to the toilet. He'd been shouting for help. And they had started, in my opinion, it was it was almost like a random decision to keep him quiet, keep him in isolation, in a room, in a comatose state.

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

Human Rights Act

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

🚨🚨The most powerful moment of the entire Scottish COVID-19 Inquiry remains the testimony given by Shelagh McCall on behalf of Bereaved Relatives Group SKYE…. State sanctioned murder Please watch and share🙏 https://t.co/6RvAd6II0a

Video Transcript AI Summary
The inquiry will investigate if the right to life was protected in care homes, including potential pressure for "do not resuscitate" notices, lack of resuscitation, and neglect. Evidence may point to systemic failures in care delivery, regulation, and inspection in Scotland. The bereaved want to know how the virus entered locked-down care homes and spread. The inquiry will hear that people were transferred from hospitals to care homes without testing, potentially ignoring local capacity and patient interests. Blanket bans on visits exacerbated the situation, denying families contact with loved ones. Some staff risked their jobs to inform families, while some management prioritized reputation over resident care. Families faced unanswered calls, were treated with disdain, and witnessed deterioration in health, suspecting neglect. Records were sometimes missing or incomplete. The inquiry must investigate potential violations of the prohibition on torture and inhuman and degrading treatment. The inquiry should consider whether inspection and regulatory regimes were fit for purpose and the impact of restrictions on family life. The group wants to ensure that no family member, no care home resident and no care worker in the future has to go through what they and their loved ones suffered during Covid-nineteen.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The inquiry must investigate whether the right to life under Article two was respected and protected. We anticipate the inquiry will hear that people were pressured to agree to do not resuscitate notices. That people were not resuscitated even though no such notice was in place. That residents may have been neglected and left to starve. This group is made up of people whose relatives died in care homes, as well as care workers who bore witness to the conditions in those homes. As well as revealing the suffering of individuals and their families, we anticipate that the evidence in these hearings will point to a systemic failure of the model for the delivery of care in Scotland, for its regulation and inspection. In due course, this group will be asking you to make recommendations that will ensure that the elderly and vulnerable are properly cared for, and that what happened during COVID-nineteen cannot happen again. The bereaved want to know how it was and why it was that the virus was able to enter care homes when they were in lockdown ahead of the rest of society, and how the virus was then able to spread like wildfire within the homes. The inquiry will hear evidence that people were transferred into care homes from hospitals without testing. This happened at a national level, with no obvious consideration given to local capacity or the best interests of patients and residents. It was at a time when it appears no Scottish hospital had reached a level of capacity that might have signalled an imminent critical incident necessitating such a step. The situation was only exacerbated by the decision of government that there should be a blanket ban on face to face visits with those in care homes. It's a natural human response to be as close as possible to a loved one in the final phase of their life. This was denied to care home residents and their relatives. The enquiry we hear that when relatives tried to contact their loved ones by video conference or telephone, their efforts were thwarted. Excuses were given about malfunctioning iPads, problems with the Wi Fi network. The excuses kept changing. In some instances, management told staff not to share with the outside world what was going on in a home. Some staff formed the view that management cared more about their reputation in the community and the protection of their business than they did about the residents, their families and the care workers who do the job not for the money but because their heart is in it. Some staff went behind management's back, risking their jobs to keep families informed. Families' calls went unanswered over days and sometimes weeks. On some occasions when contact was made, families were treated with disdain as if they were an inconvenience. Families were told their loved one was fine, only to get a sudden hurried phone call that they were dying. Many families witnessed remotely a significant deterioration of their loved one's physical and mental health in lockdown that was nothing to do with Covid-nineteen. Some suspected their loved one was suffering from neglect, dehydration and starvation. Questions were asked and relatives were fobbed off. The blanket ban on visits meant that care plans could not be checked. The inquiry will hear that when records were requested after a loved one's death relatives found that the records were missing or incomplete. When relatives did manage to make contact over video with their loved one and witness for themselves the deterioration in their condition, there is evidence that at times their wishes about medical treatment were ignored or overridden. The reality for bereaved relatives is that some did not see their loved ones face to face again after the lockdown began. The right to visit during the last moments of life was not always granted and if it was it was restricted to one family member. Some residents died alone. Care home staff witnessed many excess deaths. They held people's hands as they died. That trauma will never leave some of them. After death some relatives were not given all their loved ones belongings back. They suspect they were burned in spite of having been quarantined. After death some relatives were so concerned about what had occurred that they reported the death to the police. They want to know how it got to that stage. The inquiries promise to take a human rights based approach and hearing first from those impacted by the pandemic is a recognition of that approach in action and that is welcomed. But a meaningful human rights based approach goes far beyond that. The inquiry must investigate whether the right to life under Article two was respected and protected. We anticipate the inquiry will hear that people were pressured to agree to do not resuscitate notices, that people were not resuscitated even though no such notice was in place, that residents may have been neglected and left to starve, that families are not sure they were told the truth about their relatives cause of death, that the usual process for certification of death was departed from. The inquiry must investigate potential violations of Article three, the prohibition on torture in human and degrading treatment. Relatives will speak of their loved ones lacking food, water and hygiene that there was inadequate, inappropriate, absent or delayed medical attention that welfare attorneys' views were not listened to when it came to medical treatment that there was inadequate staffing to provide proper care resulting in residents suffering unnecessarily. We urge the inquiry to consider whether in light of people's lived experience the inspection and regulatory regimes were fit for purpose to prevent or remedy these harms. An inquiry must also consider the impact of the restrictions that were put in place in care homes on the rights of residents and their loved ones to a family life under Article eight. We expect the evidence will demonstrate that no proper efforts were made towards maintaining relationships and that people's health declined as a result. When you come to hear from the decision makers and those who implemented the decisions and the restrictions, we want you to ask did those people take a human rights based approach? Did they consider that the result of their decisions and the restrictions that followed would be the situations that the inquiry is going to hear about in this first tranche of hearings. Fundamental to a human rights based approach are accountability and a guarantee of non repetition. Most of all, what this group wants the inquiry to ensure is that no family member, no care home resident and no care worker in the future has to go through what they and their loved ones suffered during Covid-nineteen.

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

COVID MISATTRIBUTION

@TheRustler83 - Rustler

🎙The Doctors were lying to me on a daily basis. Nurses were lying to me on a daily basis….. COVID MISATTRIBUTION Pamela provides an explosive testimony on behalf of her brother, James, at the Scottish COVID-19 Inquiry…. https://t.co/w316XA7M0R

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker's brother, James, died in Ninewells Hospital in May 2021 at age 41. She describes him as a healthy, kind chef. After being taken to the hospital, she believed he was in the best place. However, she later learned from his medical records that doctors tried to put him on a ventilator, which angered her because this wasn't communicated to her. She communicated with her brother via text for the first few days, but then he was given lorazepam and ventilated. The family didn't want him on a ventilator due to low chances of recovery. He developed ventilator-associated pneumonia, which she discovered later in his records. The death certificate cited SARS COVID-2 as the cause of death. She noted a discrepancy in the time of death, raising questions about resuscitation. She requested investigations into his death, focusing on his participation in a trial where the signature on the consent form didn't appear to be his. She questioned whether trial drugs caused an allergic reaction. She also discovered he was prescribed toxomolobab, an immune suppression drug, making him more susceptible to hospital-acquired infections. She claims doctors and nurses lied to her daily.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Doctors were lying to me on a daily basis. Nurses were lying to me on a daily basis. Everything that was in my brother's notes was different from what I was being told on a daily basis. Speaker 1: It's about your brother James. Speaker 0: That's correct. Speaker 1: We know that James sadly died in Ninewells Hospital in Dundee on the 10/05/2021. Speaker 0: That's correct. Speaker 1: And he was 41. Yeah. And you tell us a little bit about him. In your statement he was a chef and he worked all over Scotland. Speaker 0: Yeah, that's correct. Speaker 1: Did James have any children himself? Two. You also say that he was kind, was helpful. Speaker 0: Very, and good. Speaker 1: And you describe him as generally as a healthy individual. Speaker 0: Yep. Speaker 1: I think after trying to get in touch with NHS twenty four, your brother was taken to A and E at Ninewells. Speaker 0: Well I thought he was in the best place. I thought he was just gonna get a drip and, you know, he was in there for, like, dehydration and everything would be okay. Speaker 1: At paragraph 15 you say that you now know or you know now that they were trying to put him on a ventilator. How did you come by that knowledge? Speaker 0: Because I obtained my brother's medical records and I read them every page. Speaker 1: And what was your reaction to finding that out? Speaker 0: That my brother must have been scared and I was angry. Speaker 1: Why were you angry? Speaker 0: Because the messages that I was getting from my brother and obviously he didn't tell me how scared he was and you know, I don't know, was angry. I angry. I was angry because the things that I read in his notes wasn't what the doctors were saying to me on a daily basis. The doctors were lying to me on a daily basis. Nurses were lying to me on a daily basis. Everything that was in my brother's notes was different from what I was being told on a daily basis. Speaker 1: I think you mentioned to me a few moments ago that you were able to keep in touch with your brother. Speaker 0: It was only for the first couple of days. My brother went into hospital on a Friday night. By half past ten on Friday night, were told my brother was going to die. We were communicating via messages and stuff like that, brother, you okay? And you know, he was texting back and I got a thumbs up in one of the pictured messages that sent me. I was telling him that he had to eat and he was going to be okay and got some fluids and that in him. That was happening for the first couple of days. That happened over the course of the weekend. Speaker 1: You note that things went a little bit quiet and you discovered from his records that your brother had been given lorazepam. Speaker 0: Yes, so I think that was the night that he was ventilated. So he got ventilated early hours of the Monday morning, which was the twenty first. Went out of the hospital on the September 17. He started to become, you know, he wasn't responding. I'm saying, Brother, are you there? Are you there? Answer me. Just give me a wee thumbs up, just give me someone. But I think it was by tea time on the Monday night, you know, I just wasn't getting any responses from him. So I had phoned the hospital and I asked them, have you given my brother anything? They told me that he was on a CPAP but he may start to get tired. So then I asked them and he told me that he was eating and he was drinking and he was good. And then I asked them, have you given my brother infant? Have you made my brother tired because he's not responding to me? So there was quite a discussion with one of the nurses, it got a bit heated. Speaker 1: What was your attitude towards your brother possibly being put on a ventilator, or indeed his attitude to that happening? Speaker 0: We didn't want that to happen. Why not? Because the chances of coming off one were no good. That was quite evident you were saying that people were going on them and no coming off them. Speaker 1: You say at paragraph 25 that he developed a ventilator associated pneumonia or VAP. Speaker 0: Yes. So I had Speaker 1: Is that something you found out afterwards? Speaker 0: Yeah, so I had a friend whose husband had also been in hospital with COVID and he was on maximum oxygen for three weeks. So what I can understand is why the ventilator was being pushed on my brother and I'm not a doctor but I thought why can you not just give my brother maximum oxygen for three weeks if that's what it takes, why is there such a hurry to put him on a ventilator? Sorry, with regards to the ventilator associated pneumonia, nobody told me about that. I found that out later. Speaker 1: It was something you found out from his record. Speaker 2: Yeah. In the early stages of the pandemic, COVID-nineteen patients with severe respiratory distress were often treated aggressively with intravenous fluids and mechanical ventilation. It became apparent however that intravenous fluids could exacerbate fluid in the lungs and further reduce oxygenation. Speaker 1: What he did tell you was that James had had a cardiac arrest. Speaker 0: That's correct. Speaker 1: And I think one of the infections that your brother had had was MRSA which had caused damage to his face. A death certificate in relation to your brother was released which certified that cause of death was SARS COVID. Speaker 0: SARS COVID two was the only thing on my brother's death certificate. Speaker 1: I think you made the point there was a very small discrepancy about the actual time of death as well. Speaker 0: Yeah, and that also brought in a question whether or not my brother was resuscitated. Speaker 1: You've asked for a considerable number of investigations into how your brother died. Speaker 0: Yeah, that's correct. And can you Speaker 1: just tell us about those investigations? What investigations have you asked for? What are you looking for? Speaker 0: Well, what had happened was my brother was put on a trial and I found through his notes that the signature wasn't his. It was a study investigator, I believe, signature that had signed him up for this trial. Now we've got a man that didn't go to doctors, didn't have any medications, you know he was allergic to penicillin, that's about all we knew. So these trial drugs and stuff, I had a query about why my brother was given these drugs, could anything have happened to him by being given these drugs, was it an allergic reaction that he had? That was about all I knew at the time of his passing until I obviously obtained his medical records and then found out lots of other things. By reading through the records and discrepancies at the time of death and then all the infections that he had and being lied to on a daily basis from the doctors I tried to then get a private postmortem and I was supported by my funeral directors to contact Health Improvement Scotland Speaker 1: Presumably from having read your brother's medical records the various hospital acquired infections that were disclosed. Speaker 0: That's a One thing, Speaker 1: I'm sorry, give me a moment. The one thing that you do make a note there is that you also found out that he'd been prescribed an immune suppression drug which may have made him more susceptible to those infections. Speaker 0: So that's a toxomolobab. He was given that and what that does is suppresses your immune system. Now he was already vulnerable and in a hospital. He didn't have these infections when he went in. And then he ended up with all of these.
DecentBackup
Posted - February 4, 2025 at 5:02 PM
Saved - February 4, 2025 at 6:05 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’ve been following the unfolding situation around NJ Governor Phil Murphy, who is reportedly under investigation for his alleged involvement in various scandals, including nursing home policies during COVID and market manipulations tied to major financial players. The connections to figures like Steven Cohen and the broader implications involving entities like Goldman Sachs and Palantir are striking. It seems there’s a web of collusion that could lead to serious consequences for many involved, and the narrative suggests a deep intertwining of politics, finance, and alleged misconduct.

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

👺NJ GOVERNOR PHIL MURPHY: Wait until you find out he’s gonna be under investigation his complicity in the “nursing home COVID/Remdesivir murders”, in collusion with the TISCH family (UJA/Loews Corp)… *And the ROBIN HOOD/GAMESTOP/AMC market manipulation and illegal “coordinated naked short protection” fraud scandal with CITADEL, MELVIN CAPITAL, ROBIN HOOD, POINT72 (IQT/CIA)… *And the recent HELICOPTER/PLANE collision involving the GAMESTOP/CHEWY/ICAHN/DUKE KUNSHAN/APOLLO/ATHORA/CASINO fa***ts. Because he’s in bed with them via GOTHAM FC. (Yep, it’s GOTHAM again.🤦🏻‍♂️)

@amuse - @amuse

CLOSED BORDER: Border Czar Tom Homan explains that NJ Governor Phil Murphy is now under federal investigation for harboring a fugitive. https://t.co/6V03PpJC6J

Video Transcript AI Summary
There's someone in our community whose immigration status is unresolved. We decided to let her stay in our house above the garage, making it difficult for authorities to intervene. I took note of this situation. If it turns out that he is knowingly harboring an illegal alien, it would violate Title 8 United States Code 1324, and we will pursue prosecution. He might be bluffing, but if he's not, we will address it accordingly.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Don't want to get into too much detail, but there's someone in our broader universe whose immigration status is not yet at the point that they are trying to get it to. And we said, you know what, let's have her live at our house above our garage and good luck to the feds coming in to try to get her. Speaker 1: I got note of it. We'll let it go. We'll look into it. And if he's knowingly, knowingly harboring concealing an illegal alien, that's a violation of Title 8 United States Code 13/24, I will seek prosecution or the secretary will seek prosecution. So maybe he's bluffing. If he's not, we'll deal with that.

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

I knew I’d be glad I decided to write THIS thread. You won’t BELIEVE how closely it’s all tied in. ✅STEVEN A. COHEN (Co-Owner of the NY Mets with Steven Temares) I mean, just LOOK at this goofy fa***t. And thief. And traitor. And JEW. *Steven Cohen literally uses CIA (In-Q-Tel) AI/ML/QC tech at Point72 to trade, manipulate markets and front run retail at GLOBAL SCALE. It’s how he and Ken Griffin were able to “bail out” Gabe Plotkin (“Melvin Capital” Jew) from losing his ass (and theirs) on his retarded (and should-be ILLEGAL) naked shorts bets on ROBIN HOOD.

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

GAMESTOP: Ryan COHEN, Chairman & CEO 💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥 2011: Founded CHEWY at age 25. 2013: Went 0/100 raising VC, then got $15,000,000 from VOLITION CAPITAL. 2016: BLACKROCK & T. ROWE PRICE (Gensler’s twin) invest and CHEWY is suddenly #1 PET RETAILER on EARTH?! https://t.co/0jTpUlaUnS

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

Here’s a quick teleport to the relevant posts.🫡

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

👺PRO TIP: Watch out for JAMES NELSON and CHEWY (GameStop, BC Partners) here, folks. *Boeing Private *Orbit Aviation *BC Partners *MGM Resorts (Athora/Apollo) *Caesar’s Entertainment (Athora/Apollo) *Icahn Enterprises (Krongard/CIA/IQT/Apollo) Yep, it’s Mossad, GCHQ and CIA (IQT) again.

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

This probably won’t help NJ GOVERNOR PHIL MURPHY too much, either. Get fucked, mutant.✌️

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

CRISWELL FEMA ADMIN *NYC COVID RESPONSE Is her PARTNER: ✅PAT MURPHY COMMISSIONER NYS Div Homeland Sec & Emerg Svcs For NYGs: Nursing Home Killer CUOMO Goldman Sachs/China-Installed HOCHUL Is PAT related to NJG: ✅PHIL MURPHY NURSING HOME KILLER GOLDMAN SACHS ASIA PRESIDENT https://t.co/Xv6UvmVwBk

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

Here’s a bit more context, just in case you need it.

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

We now have enough to put everyone here in prison for multiple life sentences.✌️ TISCH: Remdesivir/Vaccines/Hospitals/Hotez/Gotham/UJA MURPHY: Goldman Sachs Asia/Gotham *NJ GOV Murphy (TISCH/LOEWS/HOTEZ) *NY GOV Cuomo (APOLLO/UJA) NY GOV Hochul (SPEYER/LOEB) *Nursing Home: 💀 https://t.co/ermniKeqxc

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

👺COVID MURDERS/PALANTIR: America would be a much safer place if it paid me 10% of what it pays Palantir in government contracts each year, and then just returned the other 90% to the taxpayers themselves.

@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC

PALANTIR: I can guarantee you that ANY future $PLTR price target above “$0.00” is overvalued, @alc2022. And yes, the financials will be hard to recognize — because there won’t fucking be any financials to speak of 2 years from now. Now ask me how I know I’m right. https://t.co/5zUhWwb1Py

_janey_j
Posted - February 23, 2025 at 4:02 AM
Saved - February 23, 2025 at 10:08 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
My dad is back in the hospital with a chest infection. A doctor told me she wants to put a DNR on him after suggesting intubation. I insisted on antibiotics and treatment instead. I'm terrified to leave him alone; I just want him to pull through.

@_janey_j - Janey

My poor dad taken into hospital again with a chest infection - A bitch NHS Dr told me she’s putting a DNR on him after telling me she wanted to intubate and ventilate him. She was warned not to do that, give him the anti biotics and treat him. She said the consultant will make the decision tomorrow. How fucking dare they. 😡Scared to leave my dad alone as these scumbags simply cannot be trusted. Praying my dad makes it through this 😢🙏🏼

toobaffled
Posted - June 5, 2025 at 9:48 PM
Saved - June 6, 2025 at 1:32 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared a troubling incident where a patient just off a ventilator received an mRNA COVID vaccine, only to die days later. Following this, there was a verbal order to erase the vaccination from the medical record. This is a clear violation of medical ethics, as every doctor understands that critically ill patients should not be vaccinated. Despite the documentation of these events, no one has been held accountable for this situation in Canada.

@toobaffled - “Sudden And Unexpected”

A COVID shot given to a patient just off a ventilator — then an order to erase it from the record. 💉 Four days after surviving critical illness, an ICU patient was injected with mRNA. Days later, they died. Then came a verbal order to remove the vaccine from the chart. This wasn’t speculation. It was documented. Every doctor knows: 🚫 Never vaccinate the critically ill Yet it happened in Canada. No one was held accountable. - National Citizens Enquiry - https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1KTW2XtuCU/?

Video Transcript AI Summary
Four days after ordering a deadly injection, Dr. Picchu allegedly ordered the removal of the COVID-19 vaccination record from the patient's medical file. The speaker claims any doctor would know not to vaccinate an ill patient, especially one recently off a ventilator. The head of the ICU ordered an mRNA injection for COVID-19 for a patient less than a week removed from a mechanical ventilator. The patient died later that week. The speaker states that Dr. Picho, head of the ICU in British Columbia, still has his medical license.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Four days after ordering this deadly injection, the doctor, Doctor. Picchu, makes a verbal order to the nurse to remove COVID-nineteen vaccination from the medication record. Unless I had seen this medical record with my own eyes, I would not believe that any doctor would be so criminal as to try and forge and remove a medical record that showed evidence of deliberate harm to a patient who just recovered from a ventilator. Every family doctor, every medical student even knows, you never give any vaccination while a patient is still ill. This patient was less than a week off of a mechanical ventilator and the head of ICU orders an mRNA injection for COVID-nineteen. Later that week the patient died. As far as I know Doctor. Picho in British Columbia, head of the ICU still has his British Columbia medical license.
Error facebook.com
OlooneyJohn
Posted - October 30, 2025 at 11:22 AM
Saved - October 31, 2025 at 1:30 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m a funeral director of 18 years. Since the COVID vaccine rollout, I’m seeing vaccinated people die at unexpected ages. I process their cases, speak with doctors, and guide families through funerals. I’m pulling clots from arteries during embalming, claiming a new pathology linked to vaccines. I allege coroners and pathologists hide this; I’ve tried to raise alarms, but others are terrified. When will we stand up and seek accountability?

@OlooneyJohn - John Olooney

I'm a funeral director of 18 years and i run my own funeral home. @Keir_Starmer @ABridgen @joeroganhq @TuckerCarlson Covid vaccinated people are now dying off. People of all ages and not the usual ages im used to seeing - this has been mainly since the rollout of the covid jabs. I book these people in and i date it, i prepare them and put them into coffins, i then liase with the families and conduct the funerals. I process the paperwork and see the medical history, have often spoken to doctors and still do. I speak to the very angry families the whole way through the funeral process from death - many are angry now. I then get to see their loved ones body in its entirety. On post mortem cases i see the inside of them in its entirety. Caring for them is a privileged and caring is what i do. I'm pulling this new pathology directly out of their arteries whilst embalming them - only since the vaccine rollout, and no one wants to talk about it. I even tried speaking to baroness hallett for the covid inquiry and was totally ignored Why ? The video is these clots freshly removed, from a leg, two arms and the Aorta, of a man in his 30s, a man in apparently great condition - at least externally. The second still photo is when these very same clots are washed off and in a container of fluid. No coroner or pathologist, I repeat, no one, wants to discuss it with me or even acknowledge it, in fact they actively remove and conceal it from deceased before they release them to me and i have concise evidence of that. I have tried many times to raise the alarm. Everyone in the industry and healthcare system knows - all of them know. Dozens of other funeral professionals have contacted me to agree. Dozens of nurses and doctors as well, i have their details, all of them. Even four peers. They are all terrified. But not me, i am angry, and ill continue to shine my light on them all until the truth is admitted and those people held to account. When are you cowards going to stand up

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker presents an illustration of clots removed from a 30-year-old man, noting the largest clot came from the femoral artery while two of the smaller clots came from the radial arteries. The footage is described as zoomed in so viewers can see that these clots are not natural and have come from inside the arteries. The speaker emphasizes that these clots are not a normal finding inside a young man of 30 years old, repeatedly asserting that “these are not natural” and “these shouldn’t be inside this young man of 30 years old.” The presenter then remarks that the case is “imprisoned and deceased in The UK,” linking the observation to events or revelations associated with Richard Hirschman. The speaker indicates an attempt to examine the clots more closely, explaining the lack of equipment (no microscope) but insisting on the visible reality of clots sitting inside the arteries, and rhetorically questions whether this is normal. The final claim made is that the individual from whom the clots were removed was a jab recipient, tying the medical observation to vaccination. Throughout, the speaker frames the findings as alarming and abnormal, stressing the combination of young age, arterial clots, and a vaccination context, while invoking Hirschman’s revelations and noting the location as The United Kingdom.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So these are an illustration of the clots that we pulled out of a gentleman today who is 30 years old. The longest one has come from the femoral artery. The two smallest ones have come from the radial artery. I'm kind of zooming in. You can see these are not natural. These have come from inside the arteries. These are not a natural thing. These shouldn't be inside this young man of 30 years old. And there you go. So it is also imprisoned and deceased in The UK. And following Richard Hirschman's revelations, here you can see I'm gonna try and get as close as I can to obviously, haven't got a microscope or anything like that, but these are sitting inside this guy's arteries. Is that normal? No. It fucking isn't normal. It's not normal at all. And this guy was a jab recipient. So there you go.
TheOriginalSai
Posted - January 14, 2023 at 6:43 PM
Saved - October 3, 2023 at 9:52 AM

@TheOriginalSai - Sai

1. Thread: THE TRUTH ABOUT THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC FROM WITHIN THE NHS (EX DIRECTOR OF END OF LIFE CARE AT ONE OF THE LARGEST HOSPITAL TRUSTS IN THE UK) #NHS #Truth #Awareness #World #Freedom #Humanity #PowerToThePeople #Healthcare #COVID19 #CovidVaccine #VaccineDeath #Pandemic

View Full Interactive Feed