reSee.it - Related Video Feed

A healthcare worker is fed up with mask-wearing and inconsistencies in pandemic treatment across hospitals. They urge fellow healthcare professionals to speak out against government influence and lies in the media. It's time to tell the truth for the sake of their children.

My name is Gwen Olsen, a former pharmaceutical industry veteran. The industry focuses on maintaining diseases, not curing them. Psychiatric drugs keep patients reliant on medications for life. Many drugs are no more effective than placebos, with exercise often proving more beneficial. The pharmaceutical industry prioritizes profit over patient well-being, pushing unnecessary medications. It's crucial to educate yourself on alternative health options to avoid becoming a lifelong pharmaceutical customer. Take charge of your health, share knowledge, and prevent loved ones from falling victim to unnecessary medications. Thank you. Translation: The speaker, Gwen Olsen, discusses the pharmaceutical industry's focus on maintaining diseases rather than curing them, highlighting the ineffectiveness of many drugs and the importance of educating oneself on alternative health options.

The speaker discusses graphene and asserts it is present in many consumer products, including makeup, medications, food, and water, describing these graphene-containing particles as self-assembling, cell-like structures that can be detected with a magnet and by using hot or cold water. She demonstrates using an empty cup to show that the graphene is outside the capsule in kidney transplant medication. The medication is described as black, with the black being graphene, not the powder. She removes the powder from the capsule and drinks the powder, discarding the capsule. She notes that the graphene inside this medicine can be detected by heat, saying “these you can see only with hot water because my goodness take freaking forever to melt,” and shows the powder dissolving in hot water. The speaker emphasizes that she does not take the medication herself (claims it is her husband's) and asserts that the graphene appears as small black dots or black numbers on the medication. She urges viewers to perform the test themselves, stating that the powder takes about four to thirty minutes to melt, and she will not perform the test herself. She cautions that any product with black ink should be suspicious and expresses that she has not used makeup for about ten years. She mentions friends who continue to use makeup that shows graphene upon testing and states that they still use it despite her warnings. Testing protocol is explained: cold tap water is used for some tests, while hot water is required for others to reveal graphene. She tests multiple brands, including Charlotte Tilbury, Yves Saint Laurent, and Clinique, noting which products dissolve or reveal graphene under different conditions (cold vs. hot water). She shows a “trick” for powders where the particles must float to be visible; if they sink, they do not reveal graphene easily. She demonstrates with various products from those brands and observes the particles moving or settling, sometimes requiring longer waiting times for the dissolve, especially with certain powders that are drier or older. The speaker comments on the difficulty of testing some powders that dissolve slowly in hot water and notes the visibility of graphene in a dry powder during slow-motion testing. She points to a concealer powder from Charlotte Tilbury that is difficult to observe initially but becomes visible with patience, and she demonstrates with a Clinique product that is “very sensitive eyes.” Returning to makeup as an example, she shows that a mascara test reveals a large graphene blob in the makeup when tested, asserting the mascara’s graphene presence across the entire product. She demonstrates a substantial blob of graphene in the mascara and indicates that the graphene can travel to the eye. She also tests her medication again, explaining that a single drop or a few drops are insufficient to clearly show graphene movement, and she will reattach or extract more from the bottle to illustrate the presence of graphene. She concludes by urging viewers not to buy the “scrap” makeup and to choose unknown or smaller brands that may have less graphene content, encouraging verification of claims. She signs off with “See you, bye.”

Colleagues, we have unknowingly and involuntarily been exposed to the weed killer Roundup. Studies have consistently shown that Roundup, produced by Monsanto and Vyre, is highly toxic, potentially carcinogenic, and linked to liver cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. It is also responsible for endangering 93 percent of species. Even the commission's own report acknowledges the long-term risk Roundup poses to mammals, including humans. We have a crucial opportunity to remove this harmful product from our shelves. We must take a zero-tolerance approach and eliminate Roundup before it devastates nature and harms us further. Thank you.

The speaker, referred to as Snake venom guy, argues that the notion of snake venom being present in water is nonsense. They claim that there is no snake venom in the water. They recount a separate anecdote about a man who has been bitten by rattlesnakes 200 times and is now immune to snake venom. The speaker emphasizes that they are not advising others to go out and test this, but they present this as a factual point about immunity. Regarding exposure to venom, the speaker explains a sequence: if someone were exposed to venom in water (the alleged scenario), that exposure would result in immunity. They further claim that drinking snake venom has no effect, and that venom only becomes dangerous when it enters the bloodstream. The speaker likens the entry of venom into the blood to the way a vaccine operates, implying that venom only poses a danger once it reaches the blood. The speaker reiterates that there is no snake venom in the water. They also make a broader assertion about the snake venom topic by asserting that the person who discusses this venom story “works for the nicotine companies.” They describe these nicotine companies as “big tobacco in the pharmaceuticals.” In their framing, nicotine products are repeatedly mentioned, with the speaker underscoring “Every time, nicotine, nicotine, nicotine, all the nicotine products, pharmaceutical companies, and big tobacco.” In summary, the speaker disputes the presence of snake venom in water, asserts that a person bitten by rattlesnakes 200 times has become immune, and claims that exposure or consumption of venom would not be dangerous unless it enters the bloodstream, where it would act similarly to a vaccine. They conclude by connecting the individual involved in the venom discussion to nicotine companies, describing those entities as a fusion of big tobacco and pharmaceutical interests, repeatedly highlighting nicotine products in association with pharmaceutical companies and big tobacco.

a husband whose wife is now dying of liver failure on a ventilator in an ICU because she was trying to prove that Tylenol doesn't cause autism because of what Trump said on the news. That's a Harvard study. The issue is that she's between twenty three to twenty five weeks and she overdosed on Tylenol. She's not gonna come off that ventilator. Tylenol overdosing and death, is that if you aren't administered the antidote, it is a very slow and painful death. Tylenol as well as Benadryl and aspirin are the three most common OTCs that people will typically try to unalive themselves with. But now people are just taking massive amounts of Tylenol to prove Trump wrong. Weren't these the same people who put Harvard and Fauci and the pillars of science on a pedestal, and now they refuse to believe it.

Nicole has faced swift consequences for her actions. She has lost her job and now has several complaints lodged against her with the licensing board. This situation serves as a reminder of the repercussions that can arise from one's decisions.

A nurse is being escorted out of Kaiser Permanente Hospital for refusing to get vaccinated due to her religious beliefs. She expresses frustration at not receiving an explanation for why her religious exemption was denied. She emphasizes the importance of religious freedom and encourages others to consider what matters to them. The nurse has been placed on unpaid administrative leave and is willing to sacrifice her safety and security for her freedom. She has been a COVID nurse since the beginning of the pandemic and is determined to continue her work elsewhere. She urges viewers to think about their own values and the significance of freedom.

Tiffany Doper, the manager in the CCU, states that her team is in the COVID unit. Therefore, her team will be getting the first chances to get the vaccine. She then states that she is feeling dizzy.

Speaker 0 announces that they are retiring tomorrow, the last day of ten years working in a hospital, and shares key messages they believe others in the field should know. They reiterate their guidance: do not put your name on the donor registry, even though you can donate and share your life or organs; they note that their prior video with this point was taken down, but they are repeating it. They express strong, conspiratorial concerns about food safety, claiming they are being harmed by what is put in food because of a for-profit health care system aimed at making people sick to drive health-care spending. They pose questions about how cancer, diabetes, and other diseases are caused, attributing these to diet and processed foods, and urge stopping processed foods. They urge listeners to stop vaping and state a personal view that cigarettes might be a better option than vaping. They describe cases of people with pneumothorax resulting from vaping cartridges being used too aggressively, and warn that vaping can send someone to an early grave. They also suggest a cynical view about aging and social security, implying society does not want people to reach old age for financial reasons, and question what defense people have in the country, framing life as a basic wish to live without being obstructed. They advise always getting a second opinion after any medical diagnosis, emphasizing that doctors can be fallible and that one should seek multiple opinions to protect oneself. Despite these warnings, Speaker 0 expresses gratitude for the field of medicine, noting pride in learning, meeting amazing people, and the daily opportunity to help others. They describe waking up every day to assist someone as filling their heart and state a hope that more medical people feel the same. The address ends on a personal note about retirement, with Speaker 0 asking the audience to share what their day looks like as they retire the next day.

I was jailed for speaking out, do you agree? I don't want another lockdown. The speaker presents a book exposing research fraud behind vaccine mandates to a senator.

This is the vaccine that they're poisoning everyone with. Do not take it, it will kill you. As an investigator, I'm testing it out, but please don't take it. This vaccine will harm people. I had to warn them, even though they may call the police on me.

This is the vaccine that they're poisoning everyone with. Do not take it, it will kill you. As an investigator, I'm testing it out. Please don't take it, it will kill people. I had to warn them, even though they might call the cops on me.

I shared a nurse's story about REM medication causing patients to deteriorate rapidly. Patients with high oxygen levels would suddenly crash after receiving REM, leading to organ failure and death. The nurse suspected the combination of multiple medications being administered simultaneously was causing organ failure, not just the virus itself. The nurse raised concerns about the medication's impact on patients' health and the need for further investigation.

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.

After the peak of COVID, my employer mandated a rushed vaccine as a condition of employment. This has put my beloved job at risk. I believe that what goes into my body is my choice, and I refuse to comply. I've thought deeply about this, and I’ve drawn a clear line. Many others share my feelings but may be afraid to voice them. This is a fight worth having, and I will not quit. I’m prepared to sacrifice everything—my beliefs, family, livelihood, and love for my country—because I refuse to accept this threat to my life’s work.

After getting the shot at Shoppers, she texted me, then died 7 minutes later. I insisted the shot killed her healthy mom, but the coroner claimed it was natural causes without examining her. I knew they were lying.

Speaker 0 contends that the medical industry operates on a foundational lie. They claim that John D. Rockefeller bought all the major universities and major media companies early on, using his money to create his own curriculum for medicine. According to this view, the only way to obtain grants was to use that curriculum for medicine, and that curriculum was based on pharmacology. The assertion continues that pharmacology was rooted in the extraction of substances from oil, and that these medicines extracted from oil were discovered to be cancer-causing. It is claimed that those in power used their influence and media reach to debunk all forms of natural therapy. The statement then alleges that any doctor who dared speak up against them was completely discredited, had their lives destroyed, and some were assassinated and killed. The speaker adds a broader maxim: whatever you need in life will control you, and if you think you need your pills, you’ll be controlled by the pharmaceutical companies and the people who control them. The message concludes with an emotional reaction, “Anyway, fucking hell. Just calm down.”

A person confronts a pharmacist about their child developing myocarditis after receiving a COVID vaccine. The person is upset that the pharmacist did not inform them about the potential side effects. The pharmacist explains that they don't want to scare parents and that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. The person argues that no healthy children have died from COVID and accuses the pharmacist of not warning people about the dangers. The conversation becomes heated and the person threatens legal action. The pharmacist maintains that they cannot make decisions about what information to provide. The conversation ends with the person expressing anger and frustration towards the pharmacist.

Nicole Valens, a pharmacy manager at Safeway, store 18/92 in Cortez, announces her immediate resignation. She refuses to dispense what she refers to as poison to people, urging everyone to wake up to the harm it causes. Having witnessed customers die, she strongly advises against taking it.

I am Nicole Bellins, pharmacy manager at Safeway, store 1892 in Cortez. I am resigning immediately because I refuse to distribute what I believe is harmful. This substance is causing real harm to people, and I have witnessed customers suffer and even die as a result. It's time to recognize the dangers and avoid taking it.

The speaker describes discovering a post about testimony given on March 19 in Germany by a Pfizer employee regarding the Pfizer shots. They initially planned to summarize it but say they must put their feelings in the caption because they are too emotional to read aloud. They state, “I was a human lab rat, and they knew that. We were all human lab rats and they knew that.” They claim this information is emerging five years later and that documents were attempted to be sealed so they wouldn’t be seen, suggesting they could have been silenced “to be dead.” The speaker expresses validation and horror, noting that they still have doubt at times but insist, “They knew the whole time.” They describe being tortured and their injured friends being tortured by medical staff, gaslit and disregarded, with a sense that they were “lab rats” and that the medical system should have done no harm. The speaker says they are one of the lucky ones, alive, and describe learning how to stop listening to “their bullshit” and stop falling for their lies. They lament watching injured friends return to the pharmaceutical industry, calling it “the vomit,” and claim those injured don’t know what was done to them because “they didn’t even test it.” They urge viewers to watch the testimony, stating it will be linked in the caption along with the transcript. The speaker indicates they must get some sleep and expresses internal conflict: happiness that things are coming to light while they are still alive to see it, contrasting with the fear that it might not have happened. They acknowledge that many are vocal and not remaining silent. They thank supporters and encourage continued discussion and posting about the issue, asserting that although it is five years later and “old news,” people are still taking these shots. They exhort others to stay loud and persistent, saying the mask and the facade are cracking. The speaker closes with “Alright. Good night.”

"She passed away, so, she was mandated to take the COVID shot." "We were looking at potentially having a child." "I was 40 and she was 38." "She was the more the holdout in it." "She endeavored to try to achieve a form like informed consent through her workplace." "Over about six or seven months, they put the workers off who would not take the shot." "She left a 40 page log of the experience she had." "On November 31, it was her last day of work, and eleven days later she took her own life." "I was working night shift." "They smashed the back window, the front window, and they were able to get into the vehicle." "They told me she's gone." "In that moment, I lost my mind."

Speaker 0 introduces a disturbing video about Brandy Vaughan, an ex Merck employee and whistleblower who founded learntherestisk.org, stating she was found dead yesterday. The video documents intimidation tactics used to silence her and ends with her claim that mandatory vaccinations are for profit, not public health. The speaker notes Merck is the vaccine company that makes the MMR vaccine and explains they screened the video due to censorship and disappearing videos, urging sharing to keep the fight going for Brandy. Speaker 1 identifies herself as Brandy Vaughan and explains she has been an activist opposing SB 277 in California and questions how rights have deteriorated. She describes herself getting heat for speaking out, and she documents intimidation tactics used against her to silence her voice. She recounts her background: she worked for Merck in Santa Barbara from 2001 to 2003 selling Vioxx, which was eventually pulled from the market after it was shown to double the risk of heart attack and stroke and cause harm. After losing faith in the healthcare system, she traveled to Europe, returned with a six-month-old son, and faced bullying at a pediatrician’s office in San Francisco when requesting vaccine inserts and questions about vaccines. Four years ago, she began researching vaccines, concluded they were not very safe or effective, and chose not to vaccinate her son. When SB 277 surfaced in California, she decided to raise her voice against it, knowing she would face heat. She then details a series of intimidation incidents beginning with a break-in and home intrusion after returning from a Sacramento rally against SB 277. A key left on the doorstep was found open, despite having been hidden previously. She had recently installed a $3,000 alarm system; the alarm was triggered at 03:45, then the hallway sensor active at 03:46, and the dining room window opened and closed at 03:48. The intruders allegedly re-entered via the front door at 03:49 after disarming the alarm with the master code, which only she possessed. Security experts suggested the house was tapped, implying that everything she says and does could be listened to or watched, and they noted the back window was opened during the incident. After the break-in, the police checked for stolen items, found nothing missing, but two days later her computer, hidden above the microwave, was moved from its hiding spot to the middle of the floor. She left town for two weeks to go off the grid. Upon returning, she found a ladder left in front of the door, used to look into the bedroom window from the garage; a neighbor confirmed the ladder was new. Later, a Buddha statue in the garage was moved from its usual place, pictures were knocked over, and two days after that a duck appeared on her kitchen table, which she interpreted as a message signaling they were watching her due to conversations about staying at her house. Vaughan describes these events as intimidation and fear-inducing. She reiterates that the intimidation is designed to silence discussion of mandatory vaccination bills, which she claims have nothing to do with public health and everything to do with profit. She vows not to be silenced, emphasizes the importance of exposing what’s going on behind the bills, and frames the events as part of a larger ongoing struggle. She concludes that there is evil at play and hopes documenting the intimidation will prevent future silencing of others.

The speaker states they are "physically taking" the vaccine, not receiving it as intended. They claim the National Action Task Force will send the substance to a lab to test what "they're poisoning everybody with." The speaker says they have to leave because the police are being called. They express dislike for being combative but hate "that they're doing this to people," who are lined up to receive it. The speaker reiterates they are "taking" the vaccine "for the greater good of everyone" because they are going to test it in a lab to see what it is. The speaker states they are shaking and nervous.