reSee.it - Related Video Feed

I'm running out of time. You seem to be pro-vaccine but have started a group, Children's Health Defense, which sells baby clothing with anti-vaccine messages, like "unvaxxed, unafraid" for $26. Can you assure us that your organization will stop selling these products? I have no control over that organization; I resigned from the board. You founded it just a few months ago. Are you supportive of these onesies? I support vaccines and want good science. Will you tell your organization to stop selling those items?

The speaker discusses a sequence of beliefs and reactions about moles on the skin. They claim they were fact-checked after previously stating that moles are an accumulation of toxins in the skin region, and that claim was deemed not true. They recount telling people they could apply a mixture of organic coconut oil or castor oil with a little pearl directly on the mole, which would cause the mole to break apart and disintegrate. The speaker argues that fact-checkers opposed the idea of toxins in the skin and suggested it is a tactic to sell petroleum-based chemicals to keep people returning to professionals, implying that moles are simply a buildup of toxins and can be completely removed, including in areas not exposed to the sun. The speaker asserts that moles appear in areas not exposed to the sun due to toxins accumulating in the skin, and maintains that toxins are responsible for spots on the skin, which remain there. They claim that applying pearl with coconut oil or castor oil directly to the mole will cause it to break apart. If moles were not an accumulation of toxins, the speaker argues, they wouldn’t break apart with this treatment, and there wouldn’t be a fact-check criticizing the toxins claim. Additionally, the speaker mentions having been fact-checked many times and notes one particular fact-checker who allegedly won an Emmy Award for fact-checking, describing him as “the guy who fact checked my page” and noting that their page has been repeatedly targeted by fact-checks, which the speaker characterizes as comical nonsense. The overall tone presents a confrontation with fact-checking and a defense of the toxin-based explanation and at-home remedy narrative.

The speaker discusses the misconception that sunlight causes skin cancer, emphasizing that lack of sun exposure can actually increase the risk. They explain that UVB is not the main culprit, but rather UVA. Sunscreens that only block UVB can lead to vitamin D deficiency, increasing cancer risk. Excessive use of sunscreen with harmful chemicals can harm the skin and potentially cause skin cancer. The speaker advises against washing off vitamin D-producing oils on the skin immediately after sun exposure. They also highlight the importance of maintaining healthy skin bacteria by avoiding excessive use of soap.

The speaker discusses chemical exposure and endocrine disruption, focusing on atrazine and common consumer products. Atrazine is described as a herbicide and the second most used herbicide in North America, after glyphosate. The speaker notes atrazine is illegal in Europe and claims that in Europe it’s not allowed at all. They state that “they’ll call it male feminization” when animals are exposed to atrazine, giving an example: a frog exposed to two hundred nanograms per deciliter of atrazine becomes female, turning a male frog female. The implication is that such exposures reflect effects seen in many Americans. Beyond atrazine, the speaker mentions plastic water bottles and the presence of fragrance and parabens that rub onto the skin, leading to skin absorption of these chemicals. The discussion then shifts to sunscreen chemicals, specifically oxybenzone, described as by far the most widely used chemical in sunscreen and an estrogen endocrine disruptor that acts like estrogen in the body. A study is cited: after publishing a book, a study on oxybenzone and one application of sunscreen found that seven days later, oxybenzone levels in people’s blood were above government safety limits. This observation is presented as applying to an adult who used oxybenzone once, with some people applying sunscreen five days a week to children or more, contributing to multiple daily applications. The speaker ties this to personal care products that claim to keep the face protected from the sun, implying frequent use leads to higher exposure. Key points emphasized include the prevalence of atrazine use in North America, its alleged legal status in Europe, the concept of “male feminization” in animals due to atrazine exposure, and the broader concern about everyday products—plastic bottles, fragrances, parabens, and sunscreen (notably oxybenzone)—as sources of estrogenic or endocrine-disrupting chemicals, with a cited study showing one application of sunscreen resulting in blood levels exceeding safety limits after seven days. The overall narrative links environmental chemical exposure to potential reproductive and hormonal effects, highlighting concerns about consumer products and regulations across regions.

In the past, medical advice on eggs, aspirin, and other issues has been corrected without retracting articles. However, during the COVID pandemic, poorly researched articles were used to attack individuals like us. Now, as COVID cases decrease, these articles are being withdrawn from public view. If evidence is being buried, shouldn't that raise a red flag for you?

In the US, 23 sunscreen brands were pulled from the market for allegedly containing cancer-causing properties. The law regarding sunscreen filters hasn't changed in over 20 years, which is why European sunscreens are considered better due to more modern filters. Filters in skincare are not the greatest ingredient. Damaging the skin constantly with treatments like retinol and peels makes it vulnerable, allowing the sun to penetrate harder, leading to pigmentation, aging, inflammation, and potentially cancer. Instead of constant sunscreen use, it's better to strengthen the skin through hydration, nutrition, telomerase activation, and exosomes to make it the best it can be and reduce inflammation.

New research shows sunscreen chemicals can enter your bloodstream after one day of use. Check sunscreen ingredients for chemicals like Avobenzone and oxybenzone. These chemicals, along with Eskamsel and Octocrylene, can be absorbed into your skin and bloodstream. Over 80% of sunscreens in the US are potentially unsafe, leading to hormone disruption, skin allergies, and cancer risk. Mineral sunscreens with zinc oxide create a barrier on your skin, reflecting sunlight away. They are considered a healthier option compared to chemical sunscreens. Translation: New research suggests that sunscreen chemicals can enter your bloodstream quickly. Check sunscreen labels for harmful chemicals like Avobenzone and oxybenzone. These chemicals, along with Eskamsel and Octocrylene, can be absorbed into your skin and bloodstream, posing health risks. Mineral sunscreens containing zinc oxide create a protective barrier on the skin, reflecting sunlight away and are considered a safer alternative to chemical sunscreens.

Chemical filters in sunscreen, like oxybenzone, avobenzone, and octinoxate, have raised concerns due to potential toxic effects. Studies suggest oxybenzone, an endocrine disruptor, can interfere with hormone systems, potentially leading to reproductive issues, hormone imbalances, and cancer. The EU Scientific Committee for Consumer Safety has outlined health issues linked to these UV filters. These chemicals may not completely wash off, absorbing into the bloodstream and accumulating over time. Evidence suggests widespread exposure, with 97% of people having oxybenzone in their urine. Given the recommendation for daily, liberal, and frequent sunscreen application, even for children as young as six months, there are concerns about toxicant exposure, especially since children are particularly sensitive to toxic injury. It's important to make informed choices to protect our health.

I was shadow banned for discussing a study from the EPA. The study found that non-organic strawberries had such high pesticide content that the juice extracted from them could be used for respraying.

I angered big pharmaceutical companies with my claims on sunscreen dangers, leading to being deplatformed and accused of spreading misinformation. Scientific evidence shows 73% of sunscreen ingredients are linked to hormone disruption, pregnancy risks, and cancers. Despite providing evidence to the Wall Street Journal, they didn't share it, possibly to maintain their narrative. I believe in sharing truth and facts objectively without censorship.

If any doctor ever tells you to stay out of the sun, you should fire that doctor immediately. 1,200 scientific research papers prove that the sun is crucial for our health, that you should never use sun protection products if you want to be healthy, And that you should go to the sun between eleven and one at the highest noon. Skin cancer is not an issue. There's only one important skin cancer. That's melanoma. And melanoma is protected thanks to the sun. The sun does not create melanoma, the sun protects us from melanoma according to science. That immediately should tell you that doctors have been lying to you. Because according to their logic, when they tell you to stay out of the sun because of melanoma, you should have melanomas on the face, shouldn't you?

A 2020 study found that chemical sunscreens are absorbed into the blood plasma at levels 100 to 500 times greater than the FDA's upper threshold, even with a single application. Certain chemical compounds, including oxybenzone, octocrylene, and octinoxonate, may cause endocrine disruption or affect the nervous system. Oxybenzone's structure is similar to bisphenol A, which is banned in plastic bottle linings. Data indicates these chemicals have been found in breast milk, amniotic fluid, blood plasma, and urine. Mineral sunscreens are recommended as an alternative.

In May 2019, the FDA reported that sunscreen chemicals penetrate the bloodstream after just one day of use, exceeding FDA standards. Oxybenzone reached that level after only two hours. These chemicals alter metabolic machinery, burden the liver and kidneys, and cause sickness.

Most skin cancers are caused by wearing sunglasses. People in London and Prague wear sunglasses even when there's no sun, which proves marketing is legalized lying. Women shouldn't use makeup with sunblock. Sunburn isn't as bad as dermatologists claim; it means you're not building a good solar callus. Trees don't wear clothes or sunscreen. Humans are the only animals that believe blocking the sun is smart. You should never block the sun. The key protection is upregulating melanin production in your skin and eyes. To do this, stop wearing sunglasses.

Most sunscreens block UVB rays, which prevents burning, but this doesn't mean UVA rays are blocked. UVA rays penetrate deeply, causing DNA damage, inflammation, and potentially cancer. Sunscreens with UVB-blocking chemicals create a false sense of security, leading to increased sun exposure and UVA penetration. To protect yourself, use broad spectrum sunscreens.

The speaker discusses how various products like acne products, hand sanitizers, and sunscreens have been found to cause cancer. They emphasize the importance of being cautious about what is put on the skin since it gets absorbed into the body. The speaker advises against using products with harmful ingredients and suggests opting for natural alternatives. They highlight the contradiction of products being labeled as toxic if consumed orally but deemed safe for skin application. The speaker asserts their past claims about the dangers of these products and urges people to be mindful of what they expose their bodies to.

According to the National Cancer Institute, melanoma has increased over 200% since sunscreen was introduced in 1940. Spray sunscreens like Banana Boat contain isobutanes, fragrances, and benzoates derived from fossil fuels. These chemicals disrupt the endocrine system, prevent proper sun absorption, and fry the skin. Isobutane, also found in lighters, is absorbed through the skin, the body's largest organ. Many sunscreen brands use similar toxic ingredients, which are harmful despite their convenience.

The speaker discusses the relationship between sunlight, sunscreen, and skin cancer. They argue that lack of sunshine, rather than sunlight itself, causes skin cancer. They mention a new study that suggests it is UVA, not UVB, that causes cancer. They explain that using sunscreens that only block UVB can lead to vitamin D deficiency, which increases the risk of cancer. They emphasize the importance of maintaining normal vitamin D levels to reduce the risk of cancer. The speaker also criticizes sunscreens for containing potentially harmful chemicals that can be absorbed into the bloodstream and cause liver and skin damage. They advise against washing off vitamin D from the skin with soap after sun exposure. Additionally, they mention the importance of maintaining healthy skin bacteria.

I realized we are poisoning people instead of protecting them through geoengineering. Whistleblower protections are not enforced. Disinformation sites like Metabunk and Contrail Science try to debunk us. Geoengineering, funded by tax dollars, is the biggest issue we face. Overexposure to toxins from food, water, and vaccines is harming us. Our bodies can't handle these toxins.

I am a toxicology expert who has worked on designing experimental molecules for medicines. Based on my expertise, I firmly believe that the materials used in these vaccines were intentionally designed to cause harm, injury, and reduce fertility. I will be presenting this argument in court soon. Therefore, I strongly advise against taking these injectables or any future mRNA-based materials as they are all dangerous. Additionally, we have all been deceived from the beginning, as there was never a true pandemic or public health emergency. The media and unreliable diagnostic tests have spread lies and propaganda.

Speaker 0 argues that it was not until the 1960s, with the SPF push, that people were told not to go out in the sun. The claim is that Big Pharma created SPF and told people to avoid sun exposure, promoting petroleum-based sunscreens with many chemicals perceived as linked to illnesses the sunscreen is meant to prevent. The speaker asserts that, once you look at lawsuits, there are many cases claiming sunscreen causes skin cancer because of the chemicals baked into the skin for hours. The speaker describes observing people at pools and beaches who spray sunscreen all over their bodies and then questions why they experience acne, hormonal issues, low energy, fatigue, and infertility, suggesting that these problems stem from absorbing chemicals through the skin, noting that the skin is the largest organ. The claim is made that sunscreen makes no sense and that the sun heals, while pointing to the government’s ongoing efforts to block sunlight. The speaker asks why the government spends so much time blocking the sun and offers a rationale: if there were lots of sunshine, people would have revolutions. According to the speaker, cold weather keeps people indoors, watching Netflix and cuddling up, reducing the likelihood of revolt, whereas abundant sunshine would incite revolts, which is presented as the reason behind extensive sun-blocking efforts. Throughout, the speaker ties sunscreen use to broader social and political manipulation, presenting a narrative where the sun’s healing properties are real, sunscreen chemicals are harmful, and public policy is driven by a desire to suppress dissent. The overarching theme is that the sun is beneficial and that the promotion of sunscreen by Big Pharma in the 1960s represents a deliberate attempt to control people and prevent revolutions.

The Wall Street Journal questioned why sunscreen is not used. The speaker promotes a tallow-based sun balm as a healthier alternative to chemical sunscreens. They were fact-checked by the Journal, revealing conflicts of interest with scientists funded by Johnson & Johnson. The speaker suspects financial motives behind sunscreen recommendations.

The FDA issued a report in May 2019 stating that sunscreen chemicals penetrate the bloodstream, exceeding FDA standards after only one day of use. Oxybenzone reached that level after only two hours. These chemicals change your complex metabolic machinery, put a load on your liver and kidneys, and make you sick. Sunscreen sales have increased 38 times in the last 30 years. Since 1982, the incidence of melanoma has doubled.

If ingredient labels were accurate, sunscreen could warn of neurotoxicity issues like dizziness, seizures, depression, migraine, headache, and insomnia, and endocrine disruption, including reproductive and sexual abnormalities with long-term use, due to undisclosed fragrance chemicals and phthalates. Sunscreen labels could also state an increased risk of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and allergic contact dermatitis, including skin irritation, redness, and tightness, with ingredients like Octisalate and Octocrylene. Daily moisturizing lotion labels could warn of an increased risk of breast cancer and endocrine disruption, such as early puberty, decreased sperm count, and impaired mental development, with ingredients like parabens, such as methyl and propylparaben. Extra caution should be taken with leave-on products.

I've recently learned about the push for early COVID-19 treatments, particularly Ivermectin, which I initially thought was beneficial. However, I've discovered that it may be a harmful fertility toxin, affecting conception and fetal development. This raises questions about the motives behind its promotion. Additionally, many supplements marketed for health may actually hinder the body's ability to eliminate Ivermectin, creating dangerous drug interactions. This suggests a troubling connection between these products and the ongoing health crisis. It's essential to be cautious with pharmaceutical products and supplements, as the implications could be significant.