TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Pediatricians are allegedly incentivized by HMOs to vaccinate patients. These HMOs buy and sell vaccines, making them a big business. The incentive is reportedly between $200 to $600 per fully vaccinated patient, provided a certain percentage of the practice is fully vaccinated. Some pediatricians purportedly make over a million dollars a year from these incentives. There are stories of pediatricians firing patients who refuse vaccination. Additionally, pediatricians allegedly lie to parents, claiming babies will die without vitamin K at birth or that individuals will die of cancer without the HPV vaccine.

There is no education in medical schools about vaccines, their contents, safety records, informed consent, or the vaccine injury compensation program. Congress removed all liability from pharma related to vaccine adverse events in 1986. Medical professionals are taught to memorize the vaccine schedule. Almost $4 billion has been paid to vaccine-injured patients since 1992. There appears to be a conflict of interest regarding payments to providers for completing vaccine schedules. Patients are being dismissed from practices due to vaccine safety concerns. Employers are forcing employees to receive the flu vaccine or face corrective action or job loss. There is a lack of informed consent; providers often give information sheets after vaccinating. There is a lack of transparency regarding vaccine complications, and patients are shamed for suggesting they were harmed by a vaccine. Unlike other adverse reactions to medications, vaccine adverse events are often dismissed.

Four companies—Pfizer, Merck, Blackstone, and Sanofi—produce all 72 vaccines and have a history of criminal behavior. Over the last decade, they collectively paid $35 billion in penalties for falsifying science, defrauding regulators, and causing harm. Merck's Vioxx, marketed as a headache pill, led to the deaths of up to 500,000 Americans due to heart attacks, while the company profited despite paying $7 billion in fines. No one was jailed for these actions. It’s difficult to believe these companies, known for dishonesty in other products, are suddenly trustworthy with vaccines. In the U.S., a law passed in 1986 prevents individuals from suing vaccine manufacturers, regardless of negligence or harm caused.

The Institute of Medicine reported in 2011 that over 150 vaccine-related injuries have not been studied, and the CDC has repeatedly been ordered to conduct these studies but has refused. The pharmaceutical companies producing vaccines, such as Merck, Sanofi, Glaxo, and Pfizer, have faced over $35 billion in penalties for misconduct. Trust in these companies is misplaced without solid scientific evidence. While vaccines should remain available for those who choose them, there is a need for rigorous scientific scrutiny. The FDA has misled the public in the past, as seen with Vioxx and opioids, raising concerns about their credibility regarding vaccine safety. The focus should be on ensuring public health, not pharmaceutical profits.

The speaker highlights several concerns regarding vaccines. They mention the lack of education on vaccines, including their contents, safety records, and informed consent. They also discuss conflicts of interest in payments to providers for completing vaccine schedules, as well as patients being dismissed from practices for vaccine safety concerns. The speaker expresses frustration with employers forcing employees to receive the flu vaccine and the lack of informed consent. They question the transparency of vaccine complications and the presence of adjuvants in placebo studies. The speaker also raises concerns about the increasing rates of autism spectrum disorder and other chronic diseases. They emphasize the need for unbiased research on vaccine safety and efficacy. The speaker announces the opening of their new medical practice to continue fighting for patient rights and uncovering the truth about vaccines.

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.

Congress investigated ACIP over two decades ago, finding conflicts of interest. In 2002/2003, four of five people who added the rotavirus vaccine had direct financial interest; one voted the rotavirus vaccine onto the schedule and sold his rotavirus vaccine for $186 million. Congress found that 97% of ACIP members had undisclosed conflicts. According to the speaker, a critical issue is adding new vaccines without pre-licensing safety studies. In 1986, there were 11 vaccines on the schedule; now, children must take 69 to 92 vaccines to stay in school in some states, none of which have been safety tested in pre-licensing placebo-controlled trials. The speaker states that the people in charge are now gone, and new, credentialed scientists and physicians will be brought onto the ACIP panel to do evidence-based medicine and make objective public health determinations based on science.

Changes to ACIP are occurring after over two decades of congressional investigation. In 2002/2003, a government oversight committee found conflicts of interest, citing that four out of five people who added the rotavirus vaccine to the schedule had direct financial interest in it. One individual voted the rotavirus vaccine onto the schedule and then sold his rotavirus vaccine in development for $186 million. That year, Congress stated that 97% of ACIP members had undisclosed conflicts. The speaker claims that adding new products to the schedule without pre-licensing safety studies is malpractice. In 1986, there were 11 vaccines on the schedule, but now children must take between 69 and 92 vaccines to stay in school in some states, and none have been safety tested in prelicensing placebo-controlled trials. The speaker states that the people in charge are now gone, and new credentialed scientists and physicians will be brought onto the ACIP panel to do evidence-based medicine and follow the science.

Vaccines are unique as the government defends companies against consumer claims in the vaccine injury program. Before 1986, only 3 vaccines were given, but now there are 19, totaling 84 injections. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act allowed companies to sell harmful products without consequences. This led to changes in clinical trials and regulatory treatment of vaccines. Regulatory agencies see themselves as partners with manufacturers. Translation: Vaccines are defended by the government against consumer claims. The number of vaccines has increased, and the law allows companies to sell harmful products without consequences. This has impacted clinical trials and regulatory treatment of vaccines. Regulatory agencies see themselves as partners with manufacturers.

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.

Pediatricians may be incentivized to administer vaccines due to revenue structures. One article claims that 50% of pediatricians' revenue comes from vaccines. Insurance companies like Blue Cross allegedly pay bonuses to pediatricians who maintain a 95% vaccination rate among their clients. This bonus structure may disincentivize pediatricians from accommodating alternative vaccination schedules, potentially leading them to dismiss patients who request them. These incentives may prevent doctors from prioritizing patient care due to financial considerations. The speaker claims that twenty years ago, 20% of doctors worked for corporations, but now 80% do, and these corporations prioritize revenue over patient well-being.

In 1989, 10 shots were given as part of the vaccine schedule. Compared to other Western countries, we give twice as many shots. The question is, do we really need all these vaccines? We should educate ourselves and make informed decisions as parents. We can't assume that those in charge of public health always have our best interests at heart. Some doctors seem hesitant to learn more about vaccines, which can save lives and prevent diseases. It's important to note that the pharmaceutical industry heavily influences medical schools and the American Academy of Pediatrics. Vaccines are a booming business, worth billions of dollars. We need doctors to prioritize prevention and overall health, even if it means taking a financial hit.

In 1989, the US had a shot schedule with twice as many shots as other Western countries. Parents should educate themselves about vaccines and make informed decisions. Some doctors may not prioritize learning about vaccines due to financial ties to pharmaceutical companies. The pharmaceutical industry controls medical education, focusing on vaccines rather than prevention or nutrition. Asking doctors to prioritize children's health over profit is challenging.

Vaccines may work for some in preventing diseases like measles, but they can also cause problems. Informed consent is important, so people should know all the possibilities, without influence from incentivized doctors. Some doctors may receive kickbacks for administering the full vaccine schedule. The number of vaccines is high; for example, 72 doses of 17 vaccines between birth and age 18. Many states mandate children receive 29 doses of nine vaccines to attend kindergarten, and multiple doses of 13 vaccines for daycare enrollment. The Hepatitis B vaccine, given on day one, is questioned, especially since it's for a sexually transmitted disease. The COVID vaccine is also considered unnecessary. Tetanus was misrepresented as dangerous. It is claimed that tetanus is not dangerous, and can be prevented by washing out an open wound.

Over 100 million Americans were required to get vaccinated due to job mandates. The government claimed vaccines were safe and effective, but data showed vaccinated people could still carry the virus. Despite promises of freedom, there have been 1 million adverse events reported from COVID-19 vaccines, with only 11 compensated cases. Big Pharma has immunity from liability for vaccine injuries.

The speaker highlights several concerns regarding vaccines. They mention the lack of education on vaccines, including their contents, safety records, and informed consent. They also discuss conflicts of interest in payments to providers for completing vaccine schedules, as well as patients being dismissed from practices for vaccine safety concerns. The speaker expresses frustration with employers forcing flu vaccines on employees and the lack of informed consent. They question the use of adjuvants in vaccine studies and the increase in autism spectrum disorder cases. The speaker emphasizes the need for transparency and understanding the potential link between vaccines and various chronic diseases. They announce the opening of a new medical practice focused on patient care and education.

Pediatricians and general practitioners receive financial incentives to vaccinate early and often, which has distorted pediatric care. Pediatricians get incentives for having a high percentage of children in their practice up-to-date on federally recommended vaccines. The American Academy of Pediatrics advises pediatricians to drop families who don't adhere to the CDC schedule. A pediatrician with a large practice can earn hundreds of thousands of dollars by having a 90% or 95% vaccine uptake rate, in addition to other bonuses. This is legal, but it shouldn't be, because it's premised on the idea that vaccines are harmless and only good, which is false.

The speaker states the vaccine recommendation panel has been under attack for 20 years. A 2002 congressional investigation allegedly found 97% of panel members had conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical industry. One instance cited four out of five members working for a company when they approved its vaccine, and one voting member held a patent on that vaccine, later sold for $186 million. The speaker says the goal is to ensure the panel consists of individuals without conflicts of interest who are not profiting from their votes. The speaker claims that since the panel's inception in 1986, the vaccine schedule has expanded from 11 doses of five vaccines to 69 to 92 doses of 19 vaccines, none of which have been tested for safety. The speaker asserts this is malpractice and aims to ensure all vaccines are tested for safety so physicians and patients understand the risk profile and benefits of each vaccine.

Laura Logan hosts a discussion with Dr. Sherri Tenpenny on vaccines, public health policy, and what they see as failures and harms within the system. The conversation weaves together personal history, policy details, scientific debates, and broader social concerns, intercut with promotional content for GiveSendGo. Key points and claims raised by Dr. Tenpenny - Vaccine ingredients and aluminum exposure: Tenpenny asserts that if someone receives every vaccine on the schedule, they would be injected with a total of about twelve thousand micrograms of aluminum, which she says is inflammatory to every organ system and can be stored in bones (60% of aluminum exposure). She notes aluminum is present in vaccines in order to replace mercury, which she describes as also a poison. - Early vaccine industry liability and the 1986 Act: The discussion explains that prior to 1986 there were liability concerns for vaccine makers due to injury lawsuits. Tenpenny recounts that in 1986 Congress passed a law giving the pharmaceutical industry liability immunity for vaccines, creating what she describes as a ramp in the vaccine schedule. She cites that by 1991 additional vaccines were introduced (Hep B at birth, Hib, chickenpox, Prevnar, Gardasil, Hep A, and more) and alleges this resulted in a rising autism incidence aligned with new vaccines. - The vaccine injury system: Tenpenny explains the Injury Compensation Act and the existence of VAERS as a tracking system, along with a separate pathway created under the PREP Act (the Preparedness and Readiness Act). She states that during the COVID era a separate program, the Covered Countermeasure Program (CICP), existed under the PREP Act, but it had no funding and a one-year statute of limitations, leading to under-compensation and very few adjudicated cases; she contrasts this with the earlier 1986 act, which funded vaccine injury compensation through the Federal Court of Claims and VAERS. - Perceived safety and effectiveness concerns: The speakers discuss studies suggesting that the flu shot might not prevent flu and that some studies indicate vaccines including pneumonia vaccines may be associated with higher risk of the conditions they aim to prevent. Tenpenny frames this as evidence of cracks in the vaccine program and argues that vaccines are linked to a broad spectrum of health issues, including autoimmune diseases, infertility, and cancers, which she says have been increasing. - Pediatric vaccination schedule and “pediatric poisoning program”: Tenpenny asserts that infants receive multiple injections early in life, with claims that by age two they will have thousands of micrograms of aluminum and other compounds that remain in the body, including in the brain. She characterizes the pediatric schedule as a systematic poisoning program for children and a parallel “adult assault program” for adults receiving vaccines. - COVID-19 vaccine controversy and health impacts: The conversation covers the COVID vaccines, including assertions about adverse effects such as myocarditis, strokes, kidney injury, autoimmune diseases, neurological issues, and cancers. Tenpenny describes long-term concerns (long COVID, autoimmune diseases) and claims of widespread injury and death, contending that the pandemic revealed how the health-care and pharmaceutical systems operate, including alleged corruption and profit motives. She discusses the difficult experiences of families during the pandemic, including restrictions on care and the use of alternate treatments like ivermectin in some cases. - The claim that COVID vaccines were not properly evaluated and that mandated vaccination reflected coercion: The speakers discuss mandates and the experiences of individuals in workplaces and educational institutions who faced pressure to receive vaccines, including religious exemptions and disputes about mandates. Tenpenny suggests a broader pattern of overreach in public health policy and questions about the balance between individual rights and mandates. - History and philosophy of public health programs: They discuss the Healthy People initiatives, arguing that the program’s goals have expanded in scope (from 15 goals to 1,200 for Healthy People 2030) and that the expansion is associated with greater surveillance and control over personal lives. Tenpenny claims that this is part of a broader trend toward data collection and governance of individual health and behavior. - The economics and incentives around vaccines: The conversation notes how physicians are compensated in part through vaccine administration, implying financial incentives influence clinical decisions. Tenpenny emphasizes the profit motive behind vaccines and the pharmaceutical industry’s financial interests, citing extreme examples like the one boy in a photo who allegedly became heavily medicated due to vaccines. - The role of media and information control: They discuss the influence of advertising in media since the 1990s and the difficulty of reporting critically on vaccines when major advertisers are pharmaceutical companies. They also mention AI and misinformation concerns, including examples of AI fabricating sources and the need to verify information. - Personal stakes, accountability, and political possibilities: Tenpenny discusses personal cost for challenging the vaccine paradigm, including an earlier period of potential licensing scrutiny and professional pushback. She names figures such as Fauci and Birx, argues that accountability has not yet occurred, and expresses hope that public interest in accountability could shift through advocacy and political leadership, citing RFK Jr. as a potential ally though acknowledging political and institutional obstacles. - Treatment and detoxification approaches: For those who have already received vaccines, Tenpenny outlines two separate tracks: detoxification for childhood vaccines and detox for COVID vaccines. For detox, she mentions products such as PureBody Extra (PBX), a zeolite-based supplement she says helps remove metals like aluminum and mercury from the body. She notes it is usable across age groups and even for pets, and she personally uses it. She also discusses non-specific detox approaches such as vitamin D optimization, lymphatic stimulation, exercise, and a diet focusing on avoiding white foods and reducing inflammation. She cautions that there is no proven blood or urine test to quantify spike protein after a COVID vaccine, and that detox strategies aim to support overall health rather than remove embedded spike protein from tissues. - The role of faith and resilience: The interview includes discussions of faith as a guiding force for Tenpenny, including her personal journey toward Christian faith in 2020. They reflect on fear, hope, forgiveness, and the idea that one can act with integrity and do the right thing even when faced with controversy or personal cost. They discuss existential questions about meaning, purpose, and moral responsibility, including the belief that life has a spiritual dimension that informs how to respond to public-health challenges. - Community and parenting: The conversation emphasizes the importance of community networks for new parents, including seeking mentorship from experienced parents and trusted health advocates, and maintaining parental agency in decisions about vaccines, medical interventions, and child-rearing. They discuss the value of critical thinking, asking questions, and avoiding blind trust in professionals or institutions. - Closing notes and resources: Tenpenny provides her websites and a Substack for ongoing information, including dr10penny.com, dr10penny.substack.com, and 10pennywalkwithgod.substack.com, as well as her X profile busy doctor t. The episode closes with a call to viewers to stay informed and to seek second opinions, while thanking the audience for supporting independent journalism. Overall, the dialogue centers on a critical, conspiratorial framing of vaccines, public-health policy, and the medical establishment; it weaves together testimonies about personal experience, policy history (notably the 1986 Act and the PREP Act), alleged systemic failures in compensation for vaccine injuries, criticisms of COVID-19 responses and vaccine mandates, and practical detoxification and faith-based guidance. The promotional content for GiveSendGo lightly interrupts the core discussion, but the majority of the exchange remains an extended argument about vaccine safety, accountability, and the perceived influence of big pharma on health care and public policy.

In the early 1980s in the United States, there were only three routine vaccines: DTP, MMR, and OPV, totaling seven injections for childhood, plus the adult and pregnancy schedules, which did not exist at the time. Manufacturers of these three products either stopped making them or went out of business due to injuries and the financial liability associated with those injuries. Typically, when a product harms people, a company would respond by making a better, safer version. The speaker notes that, for vaccines, Congress chose a different path. Instead of compelling manufacturers to improve safety or compensate victims, the United States Congress decided to provide immunity from liability. In 1986, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which granted immunity to manufacturers for liability not only for those three early vaccines but for virtually all other vaccines made thereafter, including all childhood vaccines. The speaker emphasizes the contrast between the standard industry response to harm (improve the product) and the legislative approach taken with vaccines (immunity from liability). The implication highlighted is that this immunity allowed vaccine manufacturers to continue selling products despite injuries, shaping the broader vaccine landscape beyond the initial three vaccines.

- There's no proof unvaccinated children start epidemics. Some practitioners claim unvaccinated children are healthier. - Some believe vaccine dangers are becoming clearer, questioning the assumptions of protection and preventing spread. - Breast milk is claimed as sufficient vaccination. - Some vaccines contain egg protein, gelatin from pigs, and human albumin, which could be problematic if the individual is unhealthy or develops antibodies. - Some vaccines contain MRC-5 human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue. - Human DNA in vaccines is typically fragmented. - Thimerosal, a toxic substance containing mercury, is in some vaccines and can cause reproductive and developmental toxicity. - Some medical professionals were unaware that RhoGAM contained thimerosal or that thimerosal meant mercury. - Injecting aluminum into babies has never been tested for safety. - Mercury, formaldehyde, and antifreeze are claimed to be in vaccines. - These substances allegedly go to the brain, causing encephalopathy. - Over $3.5 billion has been paid in damages to children injured by vaccines. - A doctor describes a large reaction to a vaccine in a child, likely due to aluminum. - A mother shares her son's story of developing hives, joint swelling, fever, seizures, and autism after vaccinations; the vaccine court awarded $55,000. - Some medical professionals were unable to speak out against vaccines due to conflict of interest. - Some believe autism and vaccines are linked, citing a personal experience.

If analysis of public data sets reveals a connection between government-promoted vaccines and autism, it would constitute a tort, potentially impacting many injured individuals. However, the 1986 National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program grants vaccine companies immunity from liability, regardless of recklessness or product toxicity. While childhood vaccination schedules have expanded from three vaccines to potentially 69-92 doses between conception and age 18, this increase may contribute to an epidemic of immune dysregulation and various diseases like diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, seizure disorders, ADD/ADHD, speech/language delays, tics, Tourette's, narcolepsy, autism, peanut allergies, anaphylaxis, and eczema. These injuries are listed as potential side effects on vaccine inserts, yet the CDC has allegedly failed to adequately study suspected vaccine injuries, despite recommendations from the Institute of Medicine. It's claimed that the CDC has deliberately derailed such studies, and scientific publishers often reject studies critical of vaccines. There is a need to remove the taboo around discussing this issue and conduct honest research.

Vaccine manufacturers are uniquely protected from design defect claims, unlike manufacturers of other products like planes, cars, and drugs. This immunity was granted in 1986 through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act due to the harm and liability caused by the original three routine childhood vaccines (MMR, OPV, and DTP). Instead of requiring manufacturers to create safer products, Congress granted them immunity. This immunity applies to all subsequent routine childhood vaccines. The number of CDC-recommended injections has increased from three in 1986 to 29 today. Pharmaceutical companies developing these vaccines know they won't be liable for injuries. Unlike typical drug trials, vaccine trials often lack placebo controls, have short safety review periods (days, weeks, or up to six months), and are underpowered. These trials cannot confirm the safest product.

A law called Vika was passed in 1986, making it illegal to sue vaccine companies, regardless of recklessness or negligence. As a result, the number of mandated vaccines has increased from 3 to 79, none of which have been safety tested. The speaker claims that vaccines are exempt from pre-licensing safety testing, a claim that Anthony Fauci publicly denied. When President Trump appointed the speaker to run a vaccine safety commission, the speaker asked Fauci to provide safety studies on vaccines. Fauci claimed he left them in his office and never sent them. Subsequently, the speaker and Aaron Siri sued Fauci. After a year of stonewalling, HHS provided a letter stating that there has never been a pre-licensing safety study of any vaccine on the childhood schedule.

Vaccine manufacturers are uniquely protected from design defect claims, unlike manufacturers of other products like planes, cars, and drugs. This immunity was granted in 1986 through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act because manufacturers of the three routine childhood vaccines (MMR, Polio, and DTP) faced excessive liability and potential bankruptcy due to harm caused by their products. Instead of requiring safer products, Congress granted immunity, allowing manufacturers to continue selling vaccines regardless of potential harm. This immunity extended to all future routine childhood vaccines. Consequently, the CDC schedule has expanded from 3 injections in the first year of life in 1986 to 29 today. Pharmaceutical companies developing these vaccines know they won't be liable for injuries. Unlike typical drug trials, vaccine trials often lack placebo controls (except for the COVID-19 vaccine), have short safety review periods (days, weeks, or up to six months), and are underpowered, making it difficult to confirm product safety.