reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker asserts that hospitals are not allowed to vaccinate patients without their knowledge, yet an alarming shift is occurring inside the medical system. They claim the word vaccine is quietly disappearing from hospital consent forms and is being replaced with a broad, vague category: biologics or biogenics. Under this new classification, a hospital can technically administer vaccines or other biological products without explicit patient consent. Insiders are reportedly observing that new surgical and hospital consent forms no longer list specific treatments. They allegedly do not say vaccine or injection; they simply say biologics or biogenics, a category so wide it can include almost anything made from living organisms and their byproducts. The scariest part, according to the speaker, is that most people sign these forms without reading them because they trust the system, because they are in pain, overwhelmed, or seconds away from being put under anesthesia. This creates a setup where a patient can enter for a routine procedure, sign a consent form filled with vague terminology, go unconscious, and wake up having received something they did not directly approve. The speaker emphasizes that no medical system should be allowed to hide procedures behind intentionally unclear language. They urge spreading the message because, in their view, most people are unaware that this is happening.

The speaker discovered a nursing home was giving her unauthorized sedative pills, leading to her removal. The facility then gave her an inappropriate antipsychotic drug, claiming she had schizophrenia. A doctor warns of the dangers of unnecessary antipsychotic use in nursing homes, which can increase the risk of cardiac issues and falls. The misuse of these drugs in nursing homes has raised concerns due to the serious health risks they pose.

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 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.

Are you being pressured by your school or employer to get a COVID-19 vaccination? No one has the authority to force you to take experimental treatments. COVID-19 injections are not fully approved vaccines, and there are serious concerns about their safety and effectiveness. To protect yourself, you can access powerful documents from Solari that hold institutions accountable for any adverse reactions. These documents require institutions to acknowledge the risks and take personal liability for any harm caused. Simply fill out the forms with your information, send them via certified mail, and keep copies for your records. This process helps ensure your health decisions remain under your control.

When entering a hospital, be cautious about signing consent forms that give the hospital full control over your treatment decisions. Instead, insist on giving consent for each treatment individually to avoid being subjected to unnecessary procedures. By asserting your right to make decisions about your own care, you can ensure that you receive only the treatments you agree to and avoid being kept in the hospital longer than necessary.

Speaker 0 argues against using TSA scanners when traveling. They state that epic.org reached out to TSA members and asked for studies on the scanners, but there are no safety studies. They claim TSA workers are contracting large illnesses, “the big C,” because they work next to the scanners and because those scanners are operating on five g and x-rays. They assert that passengers are x-rayed without a blanket every time, that millimeter waves cook people, and that the scanners allow viewing people nude. They advise travelers not to go through TSA scanners, and to opt for a pat-down instead. They claim that if enough people refuse to go through the scanners, the program would end. They recount the origin story: an alleged Al Qaeda individual who came from Amsterdam to Detroit, leading to the rollout of scanners across America, with the requirement to remove shoes, belts, waters, valuables, and anything else. They imply that this incident sparked the widespread adoption of scanners nationwide. The speaker emphasizes that anybody told they need to go through these scanners should refuse and request a pat-down, labeling the scanners as “goofy.” They reiterate the call to opt out and not participate in the scanner process, presenting the narrative as a justification for avoiding the scanners.

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.

Young people and their families need detailed information on physical interventions to make informed decisions. These discussions may be challenging but are necessary.

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 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 hands a cease and desist notice to the pharmacist, warning them about liability for any injuries from COVID injections. The speaker mentions a register to track delivery, eliminating plausible deniability.

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.

Speaker 0 describes smart meters as more than just electricity meters, asserting they function as personal surveillance devices. They claim smart meters sense when devices are turned on or off, measure watt usage (even for small devices like an electric toothbrush), and transmit that data wirelessly through neighbors’ meters to the power company. The data allegedly records electric consumption every minute, stored forever on computers the public cannot access, revealing when someone is home, asleep, on vacation, hosting visitors, using lamps or tools, running a business from home, or bootlegging energy off the grid. The speaker asserts this creates a vivid profile of private living patterns and indicates at-home presence on the night of a murder. The speaker contends this is not electrical metering but personal surveillance—a warrantless search daily. They claim personal life information travels from the meter to the power company, to the government, police, and insurance companies, and to anyone who partners with the power company to access it. The speaker further asserts that even without a direct data-sharing agreement, information can be intercepted via the wireless signal from the meter, because smart meters are radio transmitters. They identify a one-watt radio station licensed by the FCC as the transmitter sending all electrical life details to a data center. Examples are given of authorities in Ohio, Texas, and British Columbia using smart meter data to pinpoint marijuana grow houses, enforce business licenses, and punish private home activities, implying surveillance beyond what residents accept. The claim is made that the power company can sell personal life data to anyone, and that unusual power usage patterns can be used as probable cause to raid a home for growing marijuana or running a computer server without a license. The speaker describes this level of surveillance as “about as big brother as it gets,” with utility workers going door-to-door to install meters. They express a personal opinion that smart meters should be removed from homes, arguing that power companies cannot claim the right to install surveillance devices on residences. They equate smart meters with wiretapping and note wiretapping is illegal in all U.S. states and federal territories. The speaker asserts that allowing a smart meter is tantamount to walking around with a constant webcam on one’s head and accuses the industry of relying on implied consent—the idea that permission is granted if the utility can change the meter, even if residents don’t understand the scope of what’s happening. As a practical step, the speaker advises telling utilities not to change the meter, noting that older meters were billed successfully. They claim to have sent a certified letter denying installation of a smart meter and mention a copy of their letter is available in the video’s description for viewers to adapt. They state post office certified mail is used to obtain a receipt. The speaker concludes that if the meters are installed on every house in America, it would cease to be America.

"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."

Patriot Nurse discusses what you should never say to a doctor or healthcare provider and which topics require careful handling when interacting with the medical system. She frames these issues within concerns about abuse and corruption in health care, and emphasizes the power imbalance between patients and licensed professionals in the United States, where mandatory reporting creates a fear-based compliance system. Key points she makes: - Mandatory reporting and tattletaling: Health care providers with licenses operate under mandatory reporting, creating a system where “if you see something, say something” can pressure professionals to report patients. This contributes to a power disparity at vulnerable moments for patients. Providers are not gods, and they are human and flawed. - Fifth Amendment-like mindset: Patients should apply a mental filter similar to exercising a fifth amendment right—do not incriminate yourself; you should not feel obligated to disclose information beyond what benefits you. - Mental health history questions: Asking about a history of mental illness can label patients. If a patient has remitted or recovered, there may be little need to disclose, though many clinicians emphasize the need for a good history and physical. A patient has sovereignty to share information at their discretion, and real nurses protect patient confidentiality and trust. - Firearms and weapons questions: The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association advocate screenings for firearms in the home. Patriot Nurse argues these are political organizations and cautions that information about weapons in the home can trigger mandatory reporting in ways that could lead to child protective actions. She says you are not required to fill out such paperwork, you can leave it blank, strike through, or refuse; if faced with tech prompts, you can request a hard copy and refuse to answer. Do not incriminate yourself, and do not feel compelled to answer what you do not want to disclose. - Parental dynamics and CPS risk: Interactions in the doctor’s office can influence family court involvement and CPS referrals. Family court is described as a major path for government control over children. Be cautious with statements in front of doctors about parenting, as it can lead to CPS involvement. - Postpartum and pregnancy-related screenings: She stresses the vulnerability of pregnant and postpartum women and notes a trend to refer to pregnant women as “pregnant people.” She warns that postpartum depression screenings can lead to CPS involvement if a woman answers in a way that triggers concern. She argues honesty can be penalized and emphasizes practical support from friends and family (help with meals, chores, errands) and non-drug interventions such as nutritional and hormonal considerations. She calls CPS involvement “evil” when women seek help and are judged by skewed screening results. - “Whatever you think is best” is dangerous: She warns against deferring decisions to clinicians, urging patients to ask questions and delay decisions if there is no immediate emergency. She stresses informed consent and the importance of thinking through options before acting, especially when a patient is ill or medicated. - Self-advocacy and preparation: No one will care for you or your family as much as you do. The more you know, the more you can converse as an equal with healthcare providers, reducing power imbalances. She promotes her online courses (four- and seven-hour medical prep) to build knowledge, reading ability, and self-advocacy, potentially avoiding unnecessary care and enabling better conversations if care is needed. - Caution about political biases in medicine: She references Charlie Kirk’s assassination and notes that some medical professionals, despite credentials, may hold hostile views toward conservatives; she urges care providers to align with your values when possible and to consider location and insurance limitations. - Final encouragement: Reiterate your fifth amendment rights, stay vigilant, and share the information with others who might benefit. She signs off as Patriot Nurse, inviting viewers to use the information to shield themselves and their families from what she describes as a potentially malevolent alliance between government and health care informers.

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.

You can't force me to do anything. Am I under arrest? If not, how can you make me do something? I'm a grown man and I know my rights. This situation needs to change; it's a revolution. I came here because I felt sick, but you can't just put a needle in my arm against my will. I want a lawyer before anything happens. I won't get on the bed; I'm not a prisoner. This is a free country, and I know what's right. You don't care about me; you're greedy and selfish. This isn't right.

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.

I do my best to help parents understand medical interventions they signed off on, but it's concerning when they can't provide necessary information.

No doctor can deny patients medications like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine if there has been a fair discussion. These drugs have been supported by numerous clinical trials and are recommended as first-line therapy in many government guidelines worldwide. Every American, including Texans, has the right to receive these drugs in the hospital after discussing with their doctor. It is unethical, immoral, and illegal for doctors to refuse patients and deny them shared decision-making and personal autonomy. We must not allow this to happen.