TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

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.

In 2020, there have been reports of neglect, violation of patient rights, and mistreatment in hospitals, including Sarasota Memorial Hospital. Families have shared stories of loved ones being deprived of basic care, given unnecessary drugs like remdesivir, and put on mechanical ventilation. The speaker questions how healthcare workers can continue these practices and go home to their families. Nursing quality is judged by patients, not by magazines or journals. The speaker urges nurses and doctors to reflect on their actions as the public is watching.

The speaker insists on a real inquiry into everything that happened during COVID-19, stating that those responsible must be held accountable, but currently are not. The speaker accuses authorities of wanting to move on from what they did during the "COVID hysteria," but the speaker believes their actions were not okay. They claim their charter of rights was not respected.

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.

Many nurses witnessed patients dying not from COVID, but from medical mismanagement like using remdesivir and ventilators. One nurse highlighted the lack of feeding tubes for ventilator patients. Placing patients on ventilators without feeding tubes led to starvation and death. The focus on ventilators instead of proper care caused harm, with many patients not surviving the treatment. Early intubation was pushed to contain the virus, resulting in high mortality rates for ventilated patients. The situation in hospitals was distressing and poorly managed.

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.

The speaker discusses the impact of COVID-19 on society, particularly in Scotland and the UK. They highlight the high number of infant and youth deaths in Scotland, as well as the overall increase in deaths under the age of 45. The speaker criticizes the government's handling of the pandemic, including the lack of attention given to care homes and the push for vaccinations. They also mention the misuse of masks in care homes and the manipulation of COVID-19 death data. The speaker calls for accountability and action from government officials, healthcare professionals, and law enforcement.

The speaker delivers a stark account of a grave moral failure in British history: for decades, children across the United Kingdom, some as young as four, were groomed, trafficked, raped, beaten, tortured, drugged, impregnated, criminalized, murdered, and psychologically destroyed by organized groups. These were not isolated incidents or expressions of sexual gratification; they were sustained campaigns of exploitation against terrified, vulnerable children who were systematically trapped. Children were degraded, humiliated, and controlled through violence, threats, drugs, alcohol, and terror. They were forced to fight to carry weapons, sell drugs, and commit murder, with some made to dig their own graves. Extreme abuses are described, including petrol poured over victims and set on fire, scriptures from the Koran read during gang rapes, young children placed inside microwaves, ovens, and freezers in attempts to murder them, ouija boards used to call spirits, and animals killed in sexual acts against children. Some were passed from rapist to rapist, and not all survived; survivors faced suicide, substance abuse, or murder. The abuse extended beyond sexual exploitation, reflecting a pursuit of power and domination and the systematic destruction of a child’s sense of self. The speaker emphasizes that, years later, professionals pressured survivors to take medication or risk losing custody of their children, and victims were told they were too damaged to care for their own kids. They were removed from families, placed into the care system, and trafficked, with rapists invited into the lives and custody of the next generation. Children born from these crimes were forced into contact with their mothers’ rapists by social workers and the family courts. The professionals who should have protected them did not, and some still do not. The inquiry is exposing the scale of institutional failure: warning signs, reports, patterns, and evidence ignored or destroyed; victims dismissed as troubled, promiscuous, or consenting; children in care raped by staff and sold to gangs; parents threatened with fines or arrests for attempting to safeguard their children. The speaker notes that whistleblowers were targeted and silenced, and politics played a role. Political parties sacrificed children for votes, and leaders hesitated to confront abuse due to discomfort or concerns about appearing racist or Islamophobic. The inquiry will follow evidence into institutions, systems, cultures of silence, and places where truth has been buried, with no race, religion, profession, or agency exempt from scrutiny. Survivors are acknowledged: they were children, not to blame but failed by the system. The true scale of what happened and continues to happen is described as too large for the inquiry to fully resolve quickly; many victims may never receive justice, but the inquiry aims to be ambitious in pursuing truth. The speaker thanks MP Rupert Loh for establishing the inquiry andextends gratitude to the participants, survivors, and the team for their bravery and resilience in confronting this evil crime.

Patients are being harmed due to severe medical mismanagement. Despite witnessing numerous instances of negligence, no one seems to care. Examples include incorrect intubations, inappropriate defibrillation of bradycardic patients, and failure to administer necessary blood transfusions. Nurses are overwhelmed, and critical care protocols are ignored, leading to preventable deaths. Even basic assessments, like listening to lung sounds, are neglected. The situation is dire, with patients not receiving proper treatment for COVID and suffering from complications that could have been avoided. Efforts to advocate for better care are met with indifference, and the healthcare environment feels increasingly hopeless. There is a desperate need for intervention to prevent further loss of life.

Patients are being harmed due to gross negligence and medical mismanagement. Despite witnessing numerous incidents, no one seems to care. Examples include incorrect intubations leading to death, inappropriate defibrillation on stable bradycardic patients, and nurses failing to monitor vital equipment. Basic standards of care are ignored, such as not administering blood transfusions when needed. Patients are sedated without proper treatment for their conditions, and critical assessments are overlooked. The environment feels like a twilight zone, where the urgency to save lives is dismissed. Attempts to advocate for better care have been met with indifference, and the situation appears dire, especially for marginalized communities. There’s a desperate need for intervention to prevent further harm.

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.

We represent three groups advocating for those affected by COVID vaccine injuries and bereavements: UK CV Family, Vaccine Injured and Bereaved UK, and the Scottish Vaccine Injury Group. Our inquiry highlights the need to acknowledge the real experiences of those impacted, who are neither anti-science nor anti-vaccine. We urge the inquiry to examine the production, regulation, and rollout of vaccines, including the communication of risks and the adequacy of post-rollout monitoring. Many individuals faced disbelief and stigma when reporting symptoms, and the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme is inadequate. Urgent reform is necessary to support the injured and bereaved, as their experiences must inform future vaccination programs. The inquiry must listen to these voices and propose meaningful changes to ensure better care and support for those affected.

The Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) was introduced in the 1990s to provide end-of-life care in hospitals. While it aimed to improve comfort and dignity, there were controversies surrounding its implementation. Families reported treatments being removed too quickly and patients being put on the LCP without consent. In 2013, the LCP was scrapped in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, but concerns remain that similar practices continue under different names. There are allegations that the sedative midazolam, which suppresses the respiratory system, is being used inappropriately on COVID-19 patients, potentially leading to premature deaths. Whistleblowers have raised concerns about the lack of consultation and the normalization of euthanasia in care homes.

The speaker insists on a real inquiry into everything that happened during COVID-19, stating those responsible must be held accountable, but currently are not. The speaker claims that authorities want to move on from their actions during the "COVID hysteria," but that this is unacceptable. They believe their charter of rights was not respected.

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.

Many nurses witnessed patients dying not from COVID, but from medical mismanagement like using remdesivir and ventilators. One nurse highlighted the lack of feeding tubes alongside ventilators, emphasizing the importance of proper care. Patients were intubated early, leading to high mortality rates. The medical system's focus on COVID treatments caused harm, with nurses bearing the brunt of patient care.

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 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.

Patients are being harmed and dying due to gross negligence in medical care. Examples include incorrect intubation, inappropriate defibrillation on stable patients, and mismanagement of blood transfusions. Staff are failing to provide basic care, such as monitoring vital signs and addressing acidotic blood levels, leading to preventable deaths. Despite being aware of these issues, management and other staff are unresponsive, dismissing concerns about patient safety. There’s a lack of accountability, with patients often receiving inadequate treatment, particularly in a facility serving marginalized communities. The situation is dire, and there is a desperate need for intervention to prevent further loss of life.

Although I am not a doctor, I’m a nurse. On the front lines we knew what was happening. When we asked for ibuprofen, they said no. When we asked why we weren’t giving steroids, the answer was “we’re just following orders.” Following orders has led to the sheer number of deaths in these hospitals. I didn’t see a single patient die of COVID. I’ve seen a substantial number die of negligence and medical malfeasance. When I was on the front lines of New York, I became globally known as the nurse in the break room sobbing, saying they were murdering my patients. Pharmaceutical companies had gone into those hospitals and decided to practice on the minorities, the disadvantaged, the marginalized populations with no advocates, because the very agencies that should protect them were closed while we were sheltering in place. While I was there, pharmaceutical companies rolled out remdesivir onto a substantial number of patients, which we all saw was killing the patients. And now, it’s the FDA-approved drug that is continuing to kill patients in the United States. As nurses, we’ve collected a descriptive amount of information that you may not get from the doctors. Doctors do quantitative data; we do qualitative data with a humanistic, phenomenological approach in nursing research. We’ve collected data from patients across the country for which we’ve helped patients through the American Front Line Nurses and the advocacy network so nurses could advocate for these patients. This data pool shows that as these patients get remdesivir, they have a less than twenty-five percent chance of survival if they get more than two doses. Now they’re rolling it out on children as well and into nursing homes or skilled nursing facilities as early intervention, even though doctors Pierre Corre and Merrick have demonstrated that there are cost-effective medications out there, and we are going to see the amplification of death across the country. We haven’t even touched on vaccines, which our expert panels have described; I won’t touch on that since many are far superior to me. Two days ago I flew out my first 10-year-old with a heart attack and had to fight the ER doctor because he said, “ten-year-olds don’t have heart attacks.” I argued for thirty minutes to force his hand to get an EKG and found a STEMI; the 12-lead EKG lit up. He said it wasn’t possible, and I said, “was just vaccinated yesterday. It is very much possible.” People contact me and the nurse advocates at American Front Line Nurses to help advocate, because there’s victim shaming—“it’s anxiety,” “it’s this.” But if they acknowledge it as a vaccine injury, the physician, the corporation, the hospital, the clinic may not get reimbursed, so it’s labeled as anxiety, neuropathy, or Guillain–Barré syndrome, when it’s very realistically a vaccine injury. I’ve traveled to South America, India, and South Africa, working in hot zones, stopping the spread of the virus and doing early intervention. Nowhere in developing nations do I see these issues that we see here in the United States. I’m a very proud American citizen from a family of immigrants. Our level of health care has deteriorated to substandard third-world-nation health care. You are better off in South America in a field hospital than in level-one trauma designer hospitals in the United States. As nurses, we are getting reports across the country from American frontline nurses about patients not getting food, water, or basic care. How come a patient hasn’t been fed in nine days? Why do I need a court order to force a hospital to feed a person who isn’t intubated and who would like food? If they’re on a ventilator, they’re not given water or basic care. We’re not allowed to take a BiPAP mask off to help someone eat. I’ve had patients who haven’t been bathed, haven’t been fed, and haven’t been given water, or been turned. This isn’t a hospital; this is a concentration camp. Nowhere in the United States do we isolate people for hundreds of hours with no human contact; it’s not allowed even in prisons. In hospitals, we isolate patients from their families for days, and you have to say goodbye over an iPhone, or you have to shuttle people in to see them. I was fired for sneaking a Hispanic family in to say the last rites to their family. Thank you, Senator Johnson, for giving nurses the opportunity to represent our patients, because we’re not often thought of as leading professionals, though we are the missing link between the doctors and the patients. Thank you for this time. Thank you for being a nurse.

The speaker received a phone call saying their dad was feeling unwell. They were told that their dad was agitated and had been shouting for help. They found him on his hands and knees trying to get to the toilet. The care home said they would introduce end-of-life medication, which shocked the speaker. They were allowed to visit their dad, but only at the door while wearing full PPE. They were not sure if their dad was COVID negative or if the restriction was to limit staff exposure. They were only able to see their dad lying on his side in bed.

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.