TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

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.

mRNA can modify DNA by replacing segments with synthetic versions, potentially making individuals patentable. Vaccinations have already begun, with nasal test swabs being used to deliver vaccines that could target the brain. As a doctor, I find this concerning. Masks are required over the mouth, supposedly to prevent the spread of COVID-19 through saliva. However, instead of swabbing the mouth, long Q-tips are inserted deep into the nasal cavity, which is close to the brain. There’s a thin bone plate separating the brain from the nasal sinuses, raising questions about the safety and purpose of these procedures.

A child born in a US hospital receives pharmaceutical interventions, like erythromycin ointment and a hepatitis B vaccine, without informed consent. The ointment prevents chlamydial infections, though mothers are tested for chlamydia. The hepatitis B vaccine is for a sexually transmitted/IV drug user disease, which babies are not exposed to. There is a huge economic incentive to get more vaccines on the schedule because the government pays hundreds of millions of dollars for mandated products. Once approved, these vaccines are paid for everyone, and questioning them is discouraged by trusted institutions. YouTube will censor and demonetize videos that show skepticism of vaccine efficacy or need, even without directly attacking vaccines.

The speaker advises reading hospital consent forms carefully, as signing them can imply agreement to unwanted conditions. One potential condition is the participation of residents, fellows, and students in patient care. The speaker also notes that consent forms may include agreement to testing for communicable diseases in the event of accidental exposure, which could include automatic COVID testing. The speaker cautions about blanket authorizations for release of information, pointing out that consent for payment purposes can also include authorization to release medical information to organ transplant services, potentially identifying the patient as a potential organ donor. The speaker also warns that the facility may record and photograph patients, with such media becoming the facility's property for any purpose. The speaker added stipulations to the form, asserting legal guardianship and requiring informed consent for all medical treatment, an itemized list of billing, and a list of any drugs administered.

Medical authorities are denying the existence of vaccine-related cancers, leaving patients without proper research or treatment options. Doctors are being threatened and silenced, with some losing their positions and labs for speaking out. Only a few doctors are raising the alarm, while the medical establishment ignores the issue. This denial extends to other vaccine injuries, such as myocarditis, which can lead to sudden cardiac arrest. The denial prevents the development of new treatments and solutions. The medical authorities' refusal to acknowledge vaccine injuries is causing harm and preventing the advancement of medical knowledge and care.

The speakers discuss the discrepancy between the disclosed plasmid map from Pfizer and what was actually found, suggesting that something important is being hidden. They claim that the vaccines being administered are different from what was tested in the trials, which may explain adverse reactions like anaphylaxis. They emphasize the need to raise awareness about this issue as it affects everyone. The speakers also mention that informed consent was not possible because people were not informed about the significant changes in vaccine manufacturing.

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.

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.

Many people mindlessly sign consent forms without knowing what they are agreeing to. The speaker shares a personal experience where their girlfriend decided to read through a contract before signing it at the doctor's office. She discovered that it simply stated she was giving consent for the doctor to treat her. The speaker emphasizes the importance of knowing what you are signing and suggests crossing out or questioning parts of a contract that you don't agree with. They also encourage practicing saying "no" and setting boundaries in order to be genuine to oneself. The speaker concludes by urging viewers to stop consenting to things without understanding the terms.

Since the Affordable Care Act, nurses must ask every patient about their flu and pneumococcal vaccines upon hospital admission. If a patient answers no, the hospital is required to offer these vaccines, regardless of the reason for their visit. Patients have the right to refuse, but this must be noted. For surgical procedures, patients may be asked to sign a consent form that includes the term "biogenics," which allows the administration of necessary treatments, including vaccines, even under anesthesia. Many patients may not realize they have received a vaccine unless they check their medical records. To protect themselves, patients should explicitly state their refusal of vaccines when signing consent forms, as hospitals are legally obligated to honor this request. Awareness of hospital policies is crucial for patient rights.

The speaker asserts that the vaccines given this morning in hospitals across America to newborns and others contain a long list of ingredients, including gelatin from boiled pig skin, chicken embryo protein, blood from the hearts of cow fetuses, human fetus DNA, oil extracted from shark liver, proteins from worm ovaries, monkey kidney DNA fragments, and then proceeds to mention the chemical ingredients formaldehyde, polysorbate eighty, potassium chloride, phenyl, borax, aluminum salts, mercury, and Triton X-100 (which is used in spermicides). The speaker emphasizes that potassium chloride is the ingredient used as the third injection when we execute people by lethal injection, noting that it is a smaller dose for infants, and explicitly states that they are not claiming it’s the same dose. The speaker then lists: formaldehyde, polysorbate eighty, and potassium chloride among the chemicals, followed by assertions that this combination includes substances the speaker believes people would not want to inject into their children. The speaker highlights the idea that parents should not inject their babies with something they don’t understand, and asserts that millions of Americans do exactly that every time they go to CVS or Long’s Drugs. The speaker paints a scenario where a 23-year-old assistant pharmacist—described as someone who doesn’t know what he’s mixing and doesn’t know what questions he’s supposed to ask—figures it out and gives your baby an injection, and notes that people go along with it.

Patients often struggle to understand medical information and may not ask questions due to feeling deferential. Normalizing confusion and encouraging questions can improve the informed consent process, which is currently lacking ethically.

Since the Affordable Care Act, nurses must ask patients about flu and pneumococcal vaccines upon hospital admission. If a patient hasn't received them, the hospital will automatically generate an order for the vaccines, regardless of the reason for the visit. Patients have the right to refuse, but this will be noted as a refusal. For surgeries, patients are asked about vaccines and must sign a consent form that includes the term "biogenics," which allows the hospital to administer necessary treatments, including vaccines, even under anesthesia. Many patients may not realize they received a vaccine unless they check their medical records. To protect themselves, patients can specify "no vaccines" on the consent form and initial it, which hospitals are required to honor. Awareness of these policies is crucial for patient autonomy.

We are unaware of what we are consuming in our food supply. Merck has been injecting mRNA into pigs since 2018, creating transmissible mRNA that can be passed on to those who consume it. Without informed consent laws, those who have refused mRNA vaccines may unknowingly receive them through their food. This technology could be used in plants and animals, leading to unintended vaccination through food consumption.

Speaker 0 explains that each brand of vaccine is different, including Moderna. Speaker 1 asks if they can see the safety studies for all the vaccines, but Speaker 0 says the information given to patients does not contain that. Speaker 1 asks which vaccine they are giving, and Speaker 0 confirms it is the one they are giving. Speaker 1 questions why the package insert is intentionally blank, and Speaker 0 says the safety studies are inside. Speaker 1 asks how this is informed consent, and Speaker 0 suggests talking to CVS. Speaker 1 expresses concern about not knowing what they are injecting, and Speaker 0 agrees it is a valid point. Speaker 0 admits they cannot answer which studies prove the vaccine is safe and effective.

"Okay. Since the Affordable Care Act came out since the Affordable Care Act came out, we are now as nurses required to ask every single patient when they come to the hospital if you've had your flu vaccine or your pneumococcal vaccine." "If you say no to either one of those, in the computer, an order will generate that says we need to give you this vaccine." "If you sign the consent saying I consent for you to give me biogenics, that basically means they can give you anything that they deem necessary, including vaccines." "They will give you a vaccine even when you're under anesthesia because you already signed the consent." "When you sign consent for surgery, you can specifically say, no vaccines. I don't want this." "Like, you can write an initial after what you say you do not want, and they have to honor that."

The speaker states they searched for years for a pre-licensing safety trial of the 72 vaccine doses effectively mandated for American children. They claim that every other medication requires a safety trial comparing health outcomes in a placebo group versus a vaccine group before FDA licensing. The speaker assumed this was also done for vaccines. They state they found out that vaccines were exempt from this requirement.

There is advanced technology used in drug delivery, but it has been used as an excuse. These technologies are capable of creating intricate snow globes and crystals, and if people knew their true potential, they would never allow anyone to implant something in their bodies that could control them completely, including their thoughts and biology. The lack of transparency and consent is concerning, as these products were put into pharmaceuticals without informing the public. It is alarming that something with the potential to turn people into the Terminator is seen as normal by some because it is used in drugs.

Many hospitals allegedly include waivers in admissions paperwork granting them permission to administer any medication without additional consent or notification. To avoid this, patients should demand printed admissions paperwork, read it carefully, and circle/cross out any waiver language, writing "I do not consent," then sign, date, and demand a copy. Upon reaching the assigned floor, patients should inform the charge nurse and every attending nurse (every shift) of their non-consent, presenting the printed copy. Any pushback should be reported to the house supervisor; further issues may require legal counsel.

Orthopedics is described as by far the most corrupt form of medicine, with oncology identified as next in line. The speaker claims that orthopedic consultants frequently work for device companies, and as a result, the choice of the implanted device in a patient’s body is often determined by the amount of money a company will pay them to select that device. The speaker emphasizes that patients should know the manufacturer of the device inside them because recalls occur, and many people later learn that their hip or other implant needed to be removed because their doctor did not inform them. The speaker asserts that listeners should understand this information, especially if someone they love goes to the hospital. The speaker argues for being proactive in hospital settings, stating that you should have someone at the gate and with you at all times, asking questions, because this is your health and you need someone fighting for it. They reference a favorite study in medicine that surveyed doctors about their patients, noting that the patients whom doctors and nurses liked the least were the ones with the highest survival numbers. From this, the speaker implies that interpersonal dynamics between healthcare providers and patients may influence outcomes, though the claim focuses on the correlation observed in the survey. Finally, the speaker advises that when you go to the hospital, you should not try to be friends with everybody; this is your health and you need to fight for it, and you need someone there who is fighting for you.

Doctors and politicians have promoted vaccines, but refuse to acknowledge potential harm. Many Americans who received the vaccine may face unknown risks. The truth must be revealed to prevent future harm from the mRNA platform.

What does it mean to be a doctor? In a post-COVID world, trust in medical institutions has eroded, prompting a reevaluation of the role of doctors. Being a doctor encompasses being a trainer, educator, and healer, grounded in truth and ethics. However, the rise of medical practices influenced by ideology, particularly regarding gender identity, raises concerns about informed consent and the responsibilities of medical professionals. Many argue that children cannot fully understand the implications of life-altering medical decisions. The conversation emphasizes the need for accountability in the medical field, advocating for legal protections against harmful practices and ensuring that informed consent is genuinely informed. There is a call to action for legislation to protect vulnerable populations, particularly children, from irreversible medical interventions.

The speaker argues that there was no informed consent regarding the COVID vaccine, as the government and pharmaceutical companies knew it wasn't a traditional vaccine. They hid potential adverse reactions and lack of evidence on transmission prevention. Despite good intentions, people were misled into taking it.

The speaker reveals that a vaccine funded by the WHO was discovered to be a fertility regulating vaccine. It was used without women's knowledge in South America in 1993. The vaccine caused idiopathic infertility, irregular periods, failed pregnancies, threatened abortions, premature labor, and other complications. These findings suggest a sinister agenda behind the vaccine's use.

Speaker 0: A child born in a hospital in The United States today, within an hours of coming from source into this body, the first thing that happens to them is pharmaceutical intervention without really asking, barely informed consent. That child's eyes are smeared with erythromycin ointment, and they're given a hepatitis B vaccine in their first day of life. And the hep B vaccine is for hepatitis B, which is a sexually transmitted disease, an IV drug user disease, of course, which babies are not gonna be exposed to, and yet every single baby in America is getting the intervention. So from the literally the day we are born, we're— Speaker 1: I these mean, why not test the pregnant mother for those? Speaker 0: They do. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 0: So They give it to the women who even if they have tested negative— Speaker 1: they give majority. Absolutely. So I don't understand why would you treat a child on his first day of life for illnesses you know for a fact he doesn't have, it isn't gonna get? Speaker 2: So a child's born let's just take the sign. The child's born. Hep B is spread by two routes, sexually transmitted disease or intravenous needles. So my one day old isn't going to be having sex or doing heroin right away. So what's the purpose of getting this on the schedule in the first day of life, the first hours of life? Speaker 0: And if you push, and I welcome anyone to do this with their doctor, you get to two things. You get to the American patients are too stupid to remember, so we need to do it right away. That's literally like what they say. And then my doctor told me that that a child at daycare could trip over a needle that has hepatitis B on it. That's literally what they get to. Speaker 2: That a needle could be on the playground that somebody just did heroin or something, threw the needle down, and it has hepatitis B blood on it. I asked the doctor, has there ever been in human history a case of hepatitis B two being transferred that way? They said no. It's only through intravenous needles and sex. So you actually to to just to steel man this, and, again, welcome anyone to respond, there is not actually a scenario absent of intravenous needles or sex, that a person gets hepatitis b. Speaker 0: There is not a reason for this to be given.