TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

He was caring for a patient who was doing well, but suddenly transferred to the emergency room. Shortly after, the patient died, leaving the speaker questioning if the hospital's actions led to his death. The speaker is confused and upset, feeling that the patient shouldn't have died and suspecting foul play.

The speaker describes a frightening incident where their 9-year-old son suddenly started shaking and vomiting in the middle of the night. They were scared and ran out of the room, fearing for their son's life. The son later developed rashes but has been okay since then, although emotionally and mentally affected. The speaker is terrified to go back to the area and is concerned for their son's well-being. The incident has disrupted their son's life, as he couldn't attend his own party and is now withdrawn. The speaker also mentions the impact of COVID-19 on the children, with the school being shut down and some friends getting sick.

Families have approached me with concerns about their loved ones being moved from hospitals to care homes during the pandemic. Many elderly patients were not properly cared for and were not given their necessary medications, leading to their deterioration. The NG 163 protocol, similar to the Liverpool pathway, was reinstated, which involved the use of respiratory suppressants like midazolam and morphine. It is questionable why these medications were given to COVID-19 patients, as it worsens their respiratory condition. Many believe that their relatives were put on this pathway unnecessarily, hastening their end. I have received evidence on this matter and anticipate potential court cases.

The speaker refused a ventilator and remdesivir, citing concerns about their effects. Despite feeling fine, a doctor told them they would die. The speaker demanded a new doctor and criticized the lack of water and nutrition provided. They questioned the logic of being denied water but given water with MiraLAX. The speaker felt pressured to increase oxygen levels, which they believed was harmful. They were mistakenly labeled as "do not resuscitate" and had to clarify their code status to medical staff. Translation: The speaker rejected certain treatments, expressed dissatisfaction with medical care, and clarified their resuscitation status to healthcare providers.

The speaker shares stories of hospital negligence, emphasizing the dangers of leaving elderly patients alone. They criticize unnecessary treatments like vaccines and antacids, highlighting the harm caused by overmedication and lack of proper care. The speaker urges advocates to monitor patients closely, pointing out the hospital's lack of accountability. They stress the importance of advocating for patients' well-being and share personal experiences to raise awareness.

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.

The speaker shares their experience working in the COVID ICU at Elmhurst Hospital in Queens, New York. They emphasize that the situation was not limited to New York, but was happening nationwide, including in Florida. They describe witnessing a disturbing assembly line-like process where patients were treated poorly and family members were banned. The speaker criticizes politicians and government interference in the doctor-patient relationship. They mention financial incentives for admitting patients and the neglectful protocols followed. They recount seeing patients with severe bed sores and feces dried on their backs. The speaker reveals that full code patients were not being resuscitated and were ultimately placed in body bags.

Many people have approached me with concerns about their relatives being moved from hospitals to care homes during the pandemic. It seems that these elderly individuals were not properly cared for and were often not given their necessary medications. This led to their health deteriorating, with limited access to doctors. Additionally, a protocol called MG 163 was authorized, which reinstated the Liverpool pathway and the use of respiratory suppressants like midazolam and morphine. This medication combination worsens respiratory issues, and many believe it was unnecessarily given to their loved ones, hastening their end. I have received a lot of evidence on this matter, and it is likely that there will be court cases about it.

On May 22, 2021, my dad went to get his second dose of the COVID vaccine. Sadly, within 45 minutes of the injection, he became very ill and passed away six days later. I rushed to the hospital after receiving a call from my mom, who said he wasn't talking anymore. Despite not being on the visitors' list, I managed to see my dad with the doctor's permission. He didn't look well, but I didn't believe he was dying. I planned to go home, but before I could even get there, my mom told me he had passed away. I felt he waited for me to arrive and then leave. After his death, I tried to warn people, but no one took it seriously. Friends, family, and even public figures dismissed his death.

The speaker reflects on the death of their father and expresses conflicting emotions. They believe that their father was murdered by the medical system. The video discusses the use of Remdesivir as the standard treatment for COVID-19 in hospitals, despite its limited effectiveness and potential side effects. The speaker's father requested alternative treatments such as Ivermectin and high doses of vitamins, but these requests were denied. The speaker questions why hospitals adhere strictly to protocols and why patients are not given the right to try different treatments. The video ends with the speaker expressing their grief and longing for justice.

The speaker explains that they discovered a do not resuscitate (DNR) order in their grandmother's file after her death. They had heard rumors about it but had never seen it until they provided a statement to the inquiry team. The speaker's name was on the DNR order, but it was not their signature. The care home had discussed the possibility of a DNR notice with the speaker, but the speaker had explicitly stated that they did not want to authorize it. The DNR order was incomplete because the section asking if the patient was aware of it was left blank.

The speaker's son was diagnosed with an infection, but the nurse practitioner refused to give medication. The speaker questioned this decision and began recording the interaction. The situation escalated, with security being called. The speaker expressed frustration and threatened to share the video with others.

They are witnessing medical negligence and deaths in a hospital, with patients not dying from COVID. Instances include incorrect intubation, wrong medications, and lack of proper care. Despite efforts to advocate for patients, the situation remains dire. The speaker expresses frustration at the lack of action and concern for the patients' well-being.

In 2014, the livable care pathway was abolished due to its harmful nature. In April 2020, Matt Hancock and the NHS authorized NGINICE guideline 163, which some believe caused the accelerated or induced death of patients through the prescription of midazolam and morphine. A gathering was held in June where bereaved relatives shared their distressing experiences of their loved ones' end-of-life care in hospitals. The government was unresponsive to inquiries about the number of elderly and vulnerable individuals moved from hospitals to care homes during the first wave of COVID-19 and the subsequent deaths within specific time frames. Emma will now share her father's story, adding to the numerous accounts of similar experiences over the past year.

Care Home Relatives Scotland and CHRS Lost loved ones discuss the negative impact of COVID-19 restrictions on care home residents. The restrictions led to reduced quality of life and dignity, affecting residents' well-being and human rights. Many residents were deprived of contact with loved ones, leading to feelings of isolation and confusion. Families shared heartbreaking stories of residents feeling like prisoners due to lack of essential contact. It is crucial to consider the emotional toll on those who died alone and longing for connection.

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.

The speaker shares a disturbing experience where patients died and their bodies were stacked in freezer trucks, but not from COVID. Autopsies were banned and there were price hikes for ventilators and deaths. Feeling unable to speak up, the speaker decided to go undercover and recorded conversations for four weeks. They play a clip of a doctor who didn't properly care for a patient, wrote her death certificate before she died, and lied to her family. The speaker believes it's important for the public to know about these unethical practices. They question why the hospital staff didn't act differently if family or ethics committees were present. The speaker asks for opinions on what the right thing to do in that situation would be.

The speaker expresses concern about the death of a patient and questions if the hospital staff may have caused it. They discuss the lack of proper care and negligence in the hospital, with patients not being coded and families being misled. The speaker decides to go undercover and record their experiences. They mention the inappropriate use of ventilators and the lack of qualified staff. The video also touches on the financial incentives for admitting patients and the suppression of alternative treatments. The speaker highlights the importance of early treatment and criticizes the focus on ventilators.

The speaker says medical staff only offer new opioids and express sympathy without addressing their requests. The speaker has been asking for eye drops for six hours due to burning eyes and is unable to lower their neck because of a lump. They have been requesting a CT scan since the previous night. The speaker believes staff are trying to tire them out with opioids to prevent them from reporting the situation. A doctor said the speaker could be in trouble for recording, even though the speaker claims to only record voices, not images, of the nurses.

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.

The speaker expresses concern about someone's health, noting their poor color and fast breathing. They feel that their concerns are not taken seriously and that their mother is unwell. They are frustrated that they have to wait two days to speak to someone and ask for the doctor to wait. They repeatedly plead for the person not to take someone away.

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.

On October 6th, my mother and I were reviewing our messages and pictures. She started experiencing breathing difficulties and her oxygen levels were at 86 to 88. The nurses claimed it was normal for someone with COPD, but my mother knew it wasn't because she had COPD for 20 years. On the 9th, her condition worsened and she became critical.

The speaker discusses the challenges of standing up for their rights and the impact on their family. They mention the burden on their spouse and the fear of being forced into a long-term care facility. The speaker contemplates MAiD but their child believes that only God should decide when one lives or dies. The family's struggles and the speaker's determination for change are highlighted throughout the conversation.

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.