reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Many are questioning the safety of childhood vaccines, including COVID vaccines, due to potential side effects. The Midwestern Doctor suggests that some vaccines have minimal benefits but documented side effects, leading to increased infections and new side effects. This cycle has resulted in the creation of more vaccines, driving profits for pharmaceutical companies. COVID vaccines are criticized for their risks outweighing benefits. Doctor Pierre Kory, a COVID vaccine critic, now questions the safety of childhood vaccines after reading the Midwestern Doctor's analysis.

The discussion around vaccines is often oversimplified, leading to distrust in government recommendations. For instance, the hepatitis B vaccine is given to newborns, despite the disease primarily spreading through drug use and sexual contact. This raises questions about the necessity of immediate vaccination. While vaccines are generally beneficial, there should be room for individual choice and discussion. The COVID vaccine presents similar complexities, especially regarding its necessity for healthy children. It’s crucial to have open debates about vaccine safety and efficacy, rather than adhering strictly to consensus. Science evolves, and we should remain open-minded about potential links between vaccines and conditions like autism and schizophrenia, as we still lack definitive answers. Ultimately, it’s about following the science without preconceived notions.

When searching for vaccines online, you'll often come across anti-vaccine misinformation. Social media platforms like Facebook amplify this misinformation. Amazon is a major platform for anti-vaccine books, with only a few pro-vaccine books available. Anti-vaccine groups have also become politically active, spreading false information to state legislators. Unfortunately, there is a lack of pro-vaccine advocates in the country, with only a handful of academics defending vaccines. Many parents who are hesitant about vaccines can be convinced through conversations explaining the evidence that vaccines do not cause autism.

The exemption for pharmaceutical companies from liability for vaccine injuries is alarming. Many people have experienced severe side effects, yet discussing these issues is often taboo. One individual shared that their worst illness in 15 years followed taking the vaccine, despite having had COVID multiple times. There’s a reluctance, especially among those on the left, to acknowledge vaccine injuries due to fear of being labeled anti-vaccine. Some public figures have suffered serious side effects but choose to remain silent. Others, like a colleague, worry about lasting effects such as dizziness and balance issues. This reluctance to discuss vaccine-related health concerns highlights a broader issue of censorship around the topic.

Speaker 0 asserts that there is no safe vaccine on the childhood schedule and labels themselves an anti-vaxxer because no vaccine has been properly tested for safety. They state that, in the book Vax Facts, you are more likely to die from the vaccine than from the disease for which there is a vaccine, and that this is true for every single vaccine on the childhood schedule. They acknowledge that death from the vaccine is still a death and “super rare,” but claim you are much more likely to die from the vaccine. They ask which do you want: a greater chance of dying from the vaccine or a lesser chance of dying from the disease, noting that for many of these diseases, the risk is zero.

I used to believe in vaccines, but after researching, I now think they are unnecessary and harmful. I believe they should be banned due to risks of neurological illness, autoimmunity, and allergies. My journey led me to question the necessity of vaccines, especially in the first world. I even learned about a study in Africa showing higher mortality rates in vaccinated children. I think vaccines will eventually be banned worldwide due to the harm they cause.

People glaze over when the possibility that "these things" caused problems is raised. Some confidently state the COVID vaccine saved millions of lives, but it's unclear how they know this. Many people know others who were negatively affected by the vaccine but don't want to admit it, claiming correlation isn't causation. The news scared people with death tolls, and there's a lot of money involved, including huge bonuses for fully vaccinated kids. Instead of attacking those who say this, it should be investigated as a potential conflict of interest.

Some people who raised concerns about vaccine side effects were silenced to prevent vaccine hesitancy. Vaccines are crucial for older individuals but may not be as critical for younger people. While vaccines have saved lives, some individuals have experienced significant side effects. It is important to acknowledge these issues despite the benefits vaccines provide.

Vaccines eradicated smallpox and polio. The speaker was taught that vaccines are safe, effective, and necessary, and there's no reason to question it. Medical school rotations reinforced that vaccines are safe and effective, and the speaker was told to ignore the inserts because that's lawyer jargon. Medical school provided no education about vaccine contents, safety records, informed consent, or the vaccine injury compensation program. The speaker assumed the science was settled and didn't question vaccines.

Vaccines are seen as bioweapons that harm the immune system, especially in young children. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are owned by Rockefeller, who was involved in eugenics. The motive behind vaccines is to make more money and speed up the death rate. Mandatory vaccines are considered first-degree murder as they invade the body with poisons. Vaccines overwhelm the immune system with multiple germs and viruses at once, unlike real-life exposure. This excessive burden is particularly harmful to children.

Many are questioning the safety of childhood vaccines after concerns over COVID vaccine side effects. The Midwestern Doctor suggests that vaccines like MMR and DPT have minimal benefits but documented side effects, leading to more infections and new side effects. This cycle has resulted in the creation of more vaccines, boosting profits for big pharma. The Doctor warns that the risks of COVID vaccines outweigh any benefits. Doctor Pierre Kory, a COVID vaccine critic, now questions the safety of childhood vaccines after reading the article.

I believe in safe vaccines, robust science, and independent regulators. The problem with vaccines is that they have become profitable, leading to an increase in the number of vaccines given to children. In 1986, a law was passed that protects vaccine companies from being sued, removing their incentive to make vaccines safer. The four companies that make all 72 mandated vaccines have a history of wrongdoing. There is a body of science that supports my position, but I won't go into it here. The few studies that exist are flawed and written by industry and the CDC. The Institute of Medicine has criticized the CDC for not properly studying the link between autism and vaccines. Big tech companies like Facebook are censoring vaccine information. I am not anti-vaccine, but I advocate for safe vaccines.

Vaccines are seen as bioweapons that harm the immune system, especially in young children. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are owned by Rockefeller, who was involved in eugenics. The motive behind vaccines is to make more money and speed up the death rate. Mandatory vaccines are considered first-degree murder as they invade the body with toxins. Vaccines overwhelm the immune system with multiple poisons and viruses, causing it to struggle and fail. This is not how real life works, where exposure to germs and viruses is usually one at a time.

Some people love the vaccines, while others hate them. The speaker acknowledges that vaccines have saved lives, but also mentions concerns about their safety. Reports vary on the effectiveness and problems with the vaccines, but the speaker claims to have saved 100 million lives. They argue that those who get very sick and go to the hospital are usually the ones who haven't taken the vaccine. The mainstream media is accused of stifling information about adverse reactions. The speaker believes the vaccines have saved millions of lives but criticizes the media for pausing the Johnson and Johnson vaccine over a small number of cases.

I wouldn't label myself as anti-vaccine, but after watching your interviews and the guests you host, I'm disappointed. I believe you are anti-science and not pro-vaccine. Supporting vaccines like MMR or pertussis doesn't change the fact that denying the science behind the COVID vaccine makes you anti-vaccine. Rejecting COVID vaccine science equates to being anti-science.

Vaccines are seen as bioweapons that harm the immune system, especially in young children. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are owned by Rockefeller, who was involved in eugenics. The motive behind vaccines is to make more money and speed up the death rate. Mandatory vaccines are considered first-degree murder as they invade the body with toxins. Vaccines overwhelm the immune system with multiple poisons and viruses, causing it to struggle and be unable to cope. This is not how real life works, where exposure to germs and viruses is usually one at a time.

World governments have harmed millions without apology. Vaccines are linked to autism, ADHD, and other health issues. The more shots kids get, the more likely they are to have these conditions. The truth is often silenced in mainstream media.

Doctors are generally educated and capable of understanding evidence, yet many have made incorrect statements about vaccines, causing harm. It's surprising that most American doctors haven't acknowledged their mistakes. Personally, I wouldn't trust a doctor who continues to misrepresent COVID information. One doctor I know treated me after I experienced vaccine-related issues. She recognized early on that something was wrong and treated her patients with steroids when others wouldn't, leading to better outcomes. Unfortunately, many people lack access to compassionate and knowledgeable doctors like her. It's hard to overlook the lack of accountability from many in the medical field, as credibility hinges on acknowledging past errors and the reasoning behind them.

Doctors can be wrong, but natural immunity should be considered. Vaccines have side effects, and not everyone needs them. Misinformation fuels skepticism, weakening public health systems. Science evolves, and vaccines can have ill effects on some. Judicious vaccination could reduce vaccine damages. COVID vaccines are important, despite risks. The COVID vaccine is the most tested in history. Personal experiences shape opinions on vaccination. It's crucial to have open discussions on this topic. Translation: Doctors can make mistakes, but natural immunity should be taken into account. Vaccines have side effects, and not everyone requires them. Misinformation leads to skepticism, weakening public health systems. Science evolves, and vaccines can have negative effects on some individuals. Careful vaccination could decrease vaccine-related harm. COVID vaccines are vital, despite potential risks. The COVID vaccine is the most tested in history. Personal experiences influence views on vaccination. It is important to have open conversations about this subject.

My friends, including doctors, who initially supported vaccines are now skeptical due to the COVID vaccine propaganda, adverse effects like strokes and heart attacks, athletes collapsing, and increased all-cause mortality post-vaccination. Some even got pacemakers. People are hesitant to admit they were wrong and may have harmed others.

Vaccines are seen as bioweapons that harm the immune system, especially in young children. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are owned by Rockefeller, who was involved in eugenics. The motive behind vaccines is to make more money and speed up the deaths of people. Mandatory vaccines are considered first-degree murder as they invade the body with toxins. Vaccines overwhelm the immune system with multiple poisons and viruses at once, which is not like real-life exposure to germs. This excessive amount of toxins is detrimental, particularly to children.

- The discussion opens with a critique of how public health authorities in the United States and much of the media discouraged experimentation with COVID-19 treatments, instead pushing vaccination and portraying other approaches as dangerous. The hosts ask why treatments were sidelined and treated as heretical to question. - Speaker 1 explains that the core idea was to stamp out “vaccine hesitation,” which he frames not as a purely scientific issue but as a form of heresy. He notes a broad literature on vaccine hesitancy and contrasts it with the perception of the vaccine as a liberating savior. He points to a Vatican €20 silver coin (2022) commemorating the COVID-19 vaccine, described by Vatican catalogs as “a boy prepares to receive the Eucharist,” which the speakers interpret as an overlay of religious iconography with vaccination imagery. They also reference Diego Rivera’s mural in Detroit, interpreted as depicting the vaccine as a Eucharist, and a South African church banner reading “even the blood of Christ cannot protect you, get vaccinated,” highlighting what they see as provocative uses of religious symbolism to promote vaccination. - They claim that the Biden administration’s COVID Vaccine Corps distributed billions of dollars to major sports leagues (NFL, MLB) and that many mainline churches reportedly received money to push vaccination, with many clergy not opposing the push. The implication is that monetary incentives influenced public figures and organizations to advocate for vaccines, contributing to a climate in which questioning orthodoxy was difficult. - The speakers discuss the social dynamics around vaccine “heresy,” using Aaron Rodgers’ experience with isolation and shaming in the NFL and Novak Djokovic’s experiences in Australia to illustrate how prominent individuals who questioned or fell outside the orthodoxy faced punitive pressure. They compare this to a Reformation-era conflict over doctrinal correctness and describe a psychology of stigmatizing dissent as a tool to enforce conformity. - They argue the imperative driving institutions was the belief that the vaccine was the central, non-negotiable public-health objective, seemingly above other medical considerations. The central question they raise is why vaccines became the sole priority, seemingly overriding a broader, more nuanced evaluation of medical options and individual risk. - The conversation shifts to epistemology and the nature of science. Speaker 1 suggests medicine often relies on orthodoxies and presuppositions, rather than purely empirical processes. He recounts a Kantian view that interpretation depends on preexisting categories, and he uses this to argue that medical decision-making can be constrained by established doctrines, which may obscure questions about optimization and safety. - They recount the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and discuss Sara Sotomayor’s dissent, which argued that liability exposure is a key incentive for safety and improvement in vaccine development. They argue that the current system creates minimal liability for manufacturers, reducing the incentive to optimize safety, and they use this to question how the system encourages continuous safety improvements. - The hosts recount the early-treatment movement led by Peter McCullough and others, including a Senate hearing organized by Ron Johnson in November 2020 to discuss early-treatment options with FDA-approved drugs like hydroxychloroquine. They criticize what they describe as aggressive pushback against such approaches, noting that McCullough faced professional sanctions and lawsuits despite presenting peer-reviewed literature. - They return to the concept of orthodoxy and dogma, arguing that the medical establishment often suppresses dissent, citing YouTube removing a McCullough interview and the broader pattern of silencing challenge to the vaccine narrative. They stress that the social and institutional systems prize conformity and punish those who deviate, creating a climate of distrust toward official health bodies. - The discussion broadens into metaphysical and philosophical territory, with references to the Grand Inquisitor from Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov. They propose that elites—whether religious, political, or scientific—tend to prefer “taking care” of people through control rather than preserving individual responsibility and free will. The Grand Inquisitor tale is used to illustrate a recurring human temptation: to replace personal liberty with a protected, paternalistic order. - They discuss messenger RNA (mRNA) technology as a central manifestation of Promethean or Luciferian intellect—humans attempting to “read and write in the language of God.” They describe the scientific arc from transcription and translation to mRNA vaccines, noting Francis Collins’s The Language of God and the idea of humans “coding life.” They caution that mRNA vaccines involve injecting genetic material and point to the symbolic and ritual power of vaccination as a form of modern sacrament. - The speakers emphasize that the mRNA approach represents both a profound scientific achievement and a source of deep concern. They discuss fertility signals and potential adverse effects, including myocarditis in young people, and cite the July 2021 NEJM case study as highlighting safety concerns for myocarditis in adolescent males. They reference the FDA deliberative-committee discussions, noting that some influential voices publicly questioned the risk-benefit calculus for young people, yet faced pressure or dismissal within the orthodox framework. - They describe post-hoc investigations and testimonies suggesting that adverse events (like myocarditis) might have been downplayed or obscured, and they assert that public trust in health institutions has eroded as a result. They mention ongoing debates about whether vaccine-induced changes might affect future generations, referencing studies about transcripts of mRNA in cancer cells and liver cells, and they stress the need for independent scrutiny by scientists not “entranced” by the vaccine program. - The dialogue returns to the broader human condition: a tension between curiosity and restraint, knowledge and humility. They return to Dostoevsky’s moral questions about free will, responsibility, and the limits of human knowledge, concluding that scientific hubris can lead to dangerous consequences when it overrides open inquiry and accountability. - In closing, while the guests reflect on past missteps and the need for integrity in medicine, they underscore the ongoing questions about how evidence is interpreted, how dissent is treated, and how society balances scientific progress with humility, transparency, and respect for individual judgment.

Most doctors can't tolerate being called quacks or having their reputation destroyed. "can we stop giving vaccines to my sick patients, to people who are having, chemotherapy while they're having chemotherapy to my patient before I've even seen them on the ward? Can we just can we just hold this up and give it to them on the day of discharge?" That was my request in the beginning. "do you know that they're giving COVID vaccines to six month old children now?" "We know how bad it is. We know that it ruins stem cells in pregnant women. They don't give stem cells to their babies. The industry is upset because the placentas no longer have stem cells." "There were two snake genes in there." "Nope. We gotta put it on the vaccine, the baby vaccine schedule, because any doubts whether or not well funded about the vaccination must not be allowed to exist." "Well, that that's been the case since, you know, basically, the the medical profession was infiltrated in the early nineteen hundreds by, you know, high level interests that that didn't want us thinking for ourselves and carrying along with the natural cures that actually work."

Speaker 0 discusses the idea that a new consensus about serious side effects from COVID vaccines is causing people, including medical experts, to reexamine other vaccines given in childhood. He references an anonymous Substack author under the name the Midwestern doctor, who provides a thoughtful assessment of widely accepted childhood vaccines. According to the Midwestern doctor, many vaccines have negligible or nonexistent benefits but have documented side effects. He cites MMR, DPT, flu, and tetanus vaccines as examples. The author argues that after bacterial childhood vaccinations were introduced, this approach led to the infection and other bacterial infections becoming more common and mutating into more dangerous strains that affected many people who were not previously susceptible, and created a variety of new side effects from the infections not seen before. He contends that the response to these infections worsening has been to develop new vaccines for them, which, in his view, has further accelerated this downward spiral and also generated big pharma profits. In conclusion, regarding COVID vaccines, the Midwestern doctor writes that “these recent publications and the data sets that Dowd's estimate Ed Dowd's estimate is based upon show clearly and unambiguously that the risk of the COVID vaccines greatly outweigh any possible benefit they might have.” Doctor Pierre Corre, who has gained prominence as a COVID vaccine critic, posted on X that the article calls him to rethink his acceptance of the manufacturer consensus about the childhood vaccine schedule. Corre is quoted as saying, “before COVID, I didn't think there were serious issues with the childhood vaccines, but now, like many, I've come to question that assumption.”

Vaccines are seen as bioweapons that harm the immune system, especially in young children. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are owned by Rockefeller, who was involved in eugenics. The motive behind vaccines is to make more money by causing faster deaths. Mandatory vaccines are considered first-degree murder as they invade the body with toxins. Vaccines overwhelm the immune system with multiple poisons and viruses, causing it to struggle and be unable to cope. This goes against the natural process of dealing with one germ or virus at a time.