reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The exemption for pharmaceutical companies from liability for vaccine injuries is alarming. Many people have experienced severe side effects, yet discussing these issues is often taboo. One individual shared that their worst illness in 15 years followed taking the vaccine, despite having had COVID multiple times. There’s a reluctance, especially among those on the left, to acknowledge vaccine injuries due to fear of being labeled anti-vaccine. Some public figures have suffered serious side effects but choose to remain silent. Others, like a colleague, worry about lasting effects such as dizziness and balance issues. This reluctance to discuss vaccine-related health concerns highlights a broader issue of censorship around the topic.

A network president revealed that allowing certain voices on air could lead to the host's firing due to advertiser pressures, particularly from pharmaceutical companies. During non-election years, up to 70% of news revenue can come from pharma ads, which serve as a public relations tactic rather than simply promoting drugs. This funding influences the media, making it reluctant to investigate pharmaceutical practices, even when there are serious concerns about vaccine safety and corporate misconduct. The media often dismisses legitimate questions as anti-science, silencing discussions about vaccine injuries. There's a growing need to reconsider trust in the pharmaceutical industry, especially with the increasing government funding for drugs like Ozempic.

Actions were taken to promote the vaccine by inflating COVID numbers through protocols in 2020. Hospitals were incentivized to label patients as COVID, put them on ventilators, administer Remdesivir, and profit from deaths. The goal was to instill fear and push vaccinations. Hospital administrators, driven by financial incentives, unknowingly contributed to unnecessary deaths. This greed-driven system continues to harm people.

People glaze over when the possibility that "these things" caused problems is raised. Some confidently state the COVID vaccine saved millions of lives, but it's unclear how they know this. Many people know others who were negatively affected by the vaccine but don't want to admit it, claiming correlation isn't causation. The news scared people with death tolls, and there's a lot of money involved, including huge bonuses for fully vaccinated kids. Instead of attacking those who say this, it should be investigated as a potential conflict of interest.

Pharmaceutical companies buy TV ads not to influence people to ask for specific drugs, but to manipulate the news industry. The ads are a tactic to buy off the news and prevent them from investigating the pharmaceutical industry. The news acts as a referee, labeling anyone who questions vaccine safety as anti-science, while the two largest vaccine makers have been involved in criminal activities. People who have experienced vaccine injuries are silenced and labeled as anti-science. The media is funded by pharmaceutical companies at all levels, creating a dark reality. The speaker believes it is empowering to recognize this and calls for a shift away from trusting pharmaceutical companies, especially considering the massive government funding they receive.

Government regulators are influenced by big pharma, with FDA employees receiving royalties from approved vaccines and drugs. FDA's budget heavily relies on pharmaceutical industries, leading to agency capture. For instance, NIH owns half of the Moderna vaccine, with high-level deputies under Fauci receiving $150,000 annually from it indefinitely. This conflict of interest is not widely discussed in mainstream media, as speaking out can lead to censorship.

The speakers claim that well-funded entities suppressed the truth about autism. They state that parents of autistic children who have tried to investigate the causes of autism have encountered intense resistance. They allege that studies used to support the claim that vaccines don't cause autism are easily disproven, but the media's ownership allows the lie to spread faster than the truth. One speaker believes that many find it too difficult to accept that vaccines could cause autism. They mention someone who suspects a vaccine caused their child's autism but still shamed others for not taking the COVID vaccine, illustrating the power of propaganda. People are afraid of social ostracization and are hesitant to speak their minds, often only whispering their true feelings to close friends. The speakers reference montages showing the horrible things people said about unvaccinated individuals.

In 2018, the World Health Organization changed the definition of vaccine adverse events, only considering those already established in published clinical literature. This conveniently allows Pfizer and Moderna to claim no adverse events from genetically modified injections. The definition change occurred just before the pandemic, suggesting a plan. This information is not widely known, as it is censored by mainstream media. Most people avoid asking the question of whether we want to be a submissive and tyrannized population or live in freedom. The reality is that we are currently a docile and compliant humanity. Pharmaceutical companies are responsible for more deaths than the military-industrial complex, and they will control and limit our freedoms.

The exemption for pharmaceutical companies from liability for vaccine injuries is alarming. Many people have experienced severe side effects, yet discussing these issues remains taboo. After receiving the vaccine, I felt sicker than ever, even after having COVID multiple times. Many friends report feeling ill after their second vaccine dose, but this side effect isn't openly acknowledged. The history of pharmaceutical companies lying and facing fines raises concerns about their accountability. Political donations from these companies influence discussions, and there's a reluctance to address vaccine injuries, especially among those on the left. Some individuals fear being labeled as anti-vaxxers, despite experiencing lasting effects like dizziness and balance issues. Many are hesitant to speak out, even if they believe they were vaccine-injured.

Big Pharma spends heavily on media propaganda, influencing public perception and political campaigns. A recent vote in Idaho ended funding for COVID-19 vaccines, reflecting growing skepticism. Studies show vaccines may harm natural immunity, with significant increases in severe health issues among vaccinated individuals. The pharmaceutical industry is a major advertiser on networks like CBS and MSNBC, with top drugs linked to companies like Pfizer. In the 2020 election, a large portion of Congress received funding from pharmaceutical companies. Since 2011, digital ad spending in healthcare has surged, with billions spent on advertising and censorship efforts. The COVID-19 response is viewed as a significant wrongdoing, and there’s a call for accountability and a return to health. It's never too late to seek justice for those affected.

Over 100 million Americans were required to get vaccinated due to job mandates. The government claimed vaccines were safe and effective, but data showed vaccinated people could still carry the virus. Despite promises of freedom, there have been 1 million adverse events reported from COVID-19 vaccines, with only 11 compensated cases. Big Pharma has immunity from liability for vaccine injuries.

Speaker 0: "the major problem in our government right now is that it's one with corporations." "corporate corruption collusion with the government" drives a lot of content. "it's easier for big pharma to do their thing if people aren't really talking about it." "they... try to make it a cultural issue." "vaccines to me is not really a cultural issue. It's a scientific medical situation." "It's insane." They discuss: "Does a newborn really need hepatitis b? What are these adjuvants in these vaccines like aluminum? Do we need these things? Are there safer alternatives?" "If you just say that, then all of a sudden, you're an anti vaxxer. That's a pejorative that's placed on you, and now you're a crazy kook, and you're not trustworthy." "If there's people out there to demonize you, that means you are pushing against something that there's a barrier that they don't want you to cross." "It's almost like China's social."

When the chips are down, civilized people will eat each other. The unvaccinated are blamed for being the problem, shamed for their choices, and causing preventable deaths. Vaccinated individuals are frustrated with the unvaccinated's impact on society and healthcare. Calls for mandatory vaccinations, increased healthcare costs for the unvaccinated, and comparing the unvaccinated to drunk drivers are made. The unvaccinated are seen as selfish, ignorant, and deserving of consequences. The divide between the vaccinated and unvaccinated is stark, with strong opinions on both sides.

My friends, including doctors, who initially supported vaccines are now skeptical due to the COVID vaccine propaganda, adverse effects like strokes and heart attacks, athletes collapsing, and increased all-cause mortality post-vaccination. Some even got pacemakers. People are hesitant to admit they were wrong and may have harmed others.

Laura Logan hosts a discussion with Dr. Sherri Tenpenny on vaccines, public health policy, and what they see as failures and harms within the system. The conversation weaves together personal history, policy details, scientific debates, and broader social concerns, intercut with promotional content for GiveSendGo. Key points and claims raised by Dr. Tenpenny - Vaccine ingredients and aluminum exposure: Tenpenny asserts that if someone receives every vaccine on the schedule, they would be injected with a total of about twelve thousand micrograms of aluminum, which she says is inflammatory to every organ system and can be stored in bones (60% of aluminum exposure). She notes aluminum is present in vaccines in order to replace mercury, which she describes as also a poison. - Early vaccine industry liability and the 1986 Act: The discussion explains that prior to 1986 there were liability concerns for vaccine makers due to injury lawsuits. Tenpenny recounts that in 1986 Congress passed a law giving the pharmaceutical industry liability immunity for vaccines, creating what she describes as a ramp in the vaccine schedule. She cites that by 1991 additional vaccines were introduced (Hep B at birth, Hib, chickenpox, Prevnar, Gardasil, Hep A, and more) and alleges this resulted in a rising autism incidence aligned with new vaccines. - The vaccine injury system: Tenpenny explains the Injury Compensation Act and the existence of VAERS as a tracking system, along with a separate pathway created under the PREP Act (the Preparedness and Readiness Act). She states that during the COVID era a separate program, the Covered Countermeasure Program (CICP), existed under the PREP Act, but it had no funding and a one-year statute of limitations, leading to under-compensation and very few adjudicated cases; she contrasts this with the earlier 1986 act, which funded vaccine injury compensation through the Federal Court of Claims and VAERS. - Perceived safety and effectiveness concerns: The speakers discuss studies suggesting that the flu shot might not prevent flu and that some studies indicate vaccines including pneumonia vaccines may be associated with higher risk of the conditions they aim to prevent. Tenpenny frames this as evidence of cracks in the vaccine program and argues that vaccines are linked to a broad spectrum of health issues, including autoimmune diseases, infertility, and cancers, which she says have been increasing. - Pediatric vaccination schedule and “pediatric poisoning program”: Tenpenny asserts that infants receive multiple injections early in life, with claims that by age two they will have thousands of micrograms of aluminum and other compounds that remain in the body, including in the brain. She characterizes the pediatric schedule as a systematic poisoning program for children and a parallel “adult assault program” for adults receiving vaccines. - COVID-19 vaccine controversy and health impacts: The conversation covers the COVID vaccines, including assertions about adverse effects such as myocarditis, strokes, kidney injury, autoimmune diseases, neurological issues, and cancers. Tenpenny describes long-term concerns (long COVID, autoimmune diseases) and claims of widespread injury and death, contending that the pandemic revealed how the health-care and pharmaceutical systems operate, including alleged corruption and profit motives. She discusses the difficult experiences of families during the pandemic, including restrictions on care and the use of alternate treatments like ivermectin in some cases. - The claim that COVID vaccines were not properly evaluated and that mandated vaccination reflected coercion: The speakers discuss mandates and the experiences of individuals in workplaces and educational institutions who faced pressure to receive vaccines, including religious exemptions and disputes about mandates. Tenpenny suggests a broader pattern of overreach in public health policy and questions about the balance between individual rights and mandates. - History and philosophy of public health programs: They discuss the Healthy People initiatives, arguing that the program’s goals have expanded in scope (from 15 goals to 1,200 for Healthy People 2030) and that the expansion is associated with greater surveillance and control over personal lives. Tenpenny claims that this is part of a broader trend toward data collection and governance of individual health and behavior. - The economics and incentives around vaccines: The conversation notes how physicians are compensated in part through vaccine administration, implying financial incentives influence clinical decisions. Tenpenny emphasizes the profit motive behind vaccines and the pharmaceutical industry’s financial interests, citing extreme examples like the one boy in a photo who allegedly became heavily medicated due to vaccines. - The role of media and information control: They discuss the influence of advertising in media since the 1990s and the difficulty of reporting critically on vaccines when major advertisers are pharmaceutical companies. They also mention AI and misinformation concerns, including examples of AI fabricating sources and the need to verify information. - Personal stakes, accountability, and political possibilities: Tenpenny discusses personal cost for challenging the vaccine paradigm, including an earlier period of potential licensing scrutiny and professional pushback. She names figures such as Fauci and Birx, argues that accountability has not yet occurred, and expresses hope that public interest in accountability could shift through advocacy and political leadership, citing RFK Jr. as a potential ally though acknowledging political and institutional obstacles. - Treatment and detoxification approaches: For those who have already received vaccines, Tenpenny outlines two separate tracks: detoxification for childhood vaccines and detox for COVID vaccines. For detox, she mentions products such as PureBody Extra (PBX), a zeolite-based supplement she says helps remove metals like aluminum and mercury from the body. She notes it is usable across age groups and even for pets, and she personally uses it. She also discusses non-specific detox approaches such as vitamin D optimization, lymphatic stimulation, exercise, and a diet focusing on avoiding white foods and reducing inflammation. She cautions that there is no proven blood or urine test to quantify spike protein after a COVID vaccine, and that detox strategies aim to support overall health rather than remove embedded spike protein from tissues. - The role of faith and resilience: The interview includes discussions of faith as a guiding force for Tenpenny, including her personal journey toward Christian faith in 2020. They reflect on fear, hope, forgiveness, and the idea that one can act with integrity and do the right thing even when faced with controversy or personal cost. They discuss existential questions about meaning, purpose, and moral responsibility, including the belief that life has a spiritual dimension that informs how to respond to public-health challenges. - Community and parenting: The conversation emphasizes the importance of community networks for new parents, including seeking mentorship from experienced parents and trusted health advocates, and maintaining parental agency in decisions about vaccines, medical interventions, and child-rearing. They discuss the value of critical thinking, asking questions, and avoiding blind trust in professionals or institutions. - Closing notes and resources: Tenpenny provides her websites and a Substack for ongoing information, including dr10penny.com, dr10penny.substack.com, and 10pennywalkwithgod.substack.com, as well as her X profile busy doctor t. The episode closes with a call to viewers to stay informed and to seek second opinions, while thanking the audience for supporting independent journalism. Overall, the dialogue centers on a critical, conspiratorial framing of vaccines, public-health policy, and the medical establishment; it weaves together testimonies about personal experience, policy history (notably the 1986 Act and the PREP Act), alleged systemic failures in compensation for vaccine injuries, criticisms of COVID-19 responses and vaccine mandates, and practical detoxification and faith-based guidance. The promotional content for GiveSendGo lightly interrupts the core discussion, but the majority of the exchange remains an extended argument about vaccine safety, accountability, and the perceived influence of big pharma on health care and public policy.

Countries with high vaccine uptake had major COVID outbreaks. Doctor Robert Malone said the vaccine is leaky, so it won't end the pandemic. Sharing this info led to hate and slander. People close to me turned on me publicly. Now we know who the cowards are, who would side with Nazis. Those who stayed silent are cowards too. Top comics shame anyone questioning big pharma and corrupt government.

- The discussion opens with a critique of how public health authorities in the United States and much of the media discouraged experimentation with COVID-19 treatments, instead pushing vaccination and portraying other approaches as dangerous. The hosts ask why treatments were sidelined and treated as heretical to question. - Speaker 1 explains that the core idea was to stamp out “vaccine hesitation,” which he frames not as a purely scientific issue but as a form of heresy. He notes a broad literature on vaccine hesitancy and contrasts it with the perception of the vaccine as a liberating savior. He points to a Vatican €20 silver coin (2022) commemorating the COVID-19 vaccine, described by Vatican catalogs as “a boy prepares to receive the Eucharist,” which the speakers interpret as an overlay of religious iconography with vaccination imagery. They also reference Diego Rivera’s mural in Detroit, interpreted as depicting the vaccine as a Eucharist, and a South African church banner reading “even the blood of Christ cannot protect you, get vaccinated,” highlighting what they see as provocative uses of religious symbolism to promote vaccination. - They claim that the Biden administration’s COVID Vaccine Corps distributed billions of dollars to major sports leagues (NFL, MLB) and that many mainline churches reportedly received money to push vaccination, with many clergy not opposing the push. The implication is that monetary incentives influenced public figures and organizations to advocate for vaccines, contributing to a climate in which questioning orthodoxy was difficult. - The speakers discuss the social dynamics around vaccine “heresy,” using Aaron Rodgers’ experience with isolation and shaming in the NFL and Novak Djokovic’s experiences in Australia to illustrate how prominent individuals who questioned or fell outside the orthodoxy faced punitive pressure. They compare this to a Reformation-era conflict over doctrinal correctness and describe a psychology of stigmatizing dissent as a tool to enforce conformity. - They argue the imperative driving institutions was the belief that the vaccine was the central, non-negotiable public-health objective, seemingly above other medical considerations. The central question they raise is why vaccines became the sole priority, seemingly overriding a broader, more nuanced evaluation of medical options and individual risk. - The conversation shifts to epistemology and the nature of science. Speaker 1 suggests medicine often relies on orthodoxies and presuppositions, rather than purely empirical processes. He recounts a Kantian view that interpretation depends on preexisting categories, and he uses this to argue that medical decision-making can be constrained by established doctrines, which may obscure questions about optimization and safety. - They recount the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and discuss Sara Sotomayor’s dissent, which argued that liability exposure is a key incentive for safety and improvement in vaccine development. They argue that the current system creates minimal liability for manufacturers, reducing the incentive to optimize safety, and they use this to question how the system encourages continuous safety improvements. - The hosts recount the early-treatment movement led by Peter McCullough and others, including a Senate hearing organized by Ron Johnson in November 2020 to discuss early-treatment options with FDA-approved drugs like hydroxychloroquine. They criticize what they describe as aggressive pushback against such approaches, noting that McCullough faced professional sanctions and lawsuits despite presenting peer-reviewed literature. - They return to the concept of orthodoxy and dogma, arguing that the medical establishment often suppresses dissent, citing YouTube removing a McCullough interview and the broader pattern of silencing challenge to the vaccine narrative. They stress that the social and institutional systems prize conformity and punish those who deviate, creating a climate of distrust toward official health bodies. - The discussion broadens into metaphysical and philosophical territory, with references to the Grand Inquisitor from Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov. They propose that elites—whether religious, political, or scientific—tend to prefer “taking care” of people through control rather than preserving individual responsibility and free will. The Grand Inquisitor tale is used to illustrate a recurring human temptation: to replace personal liberty with a protected, paternalistic order. - They discuss messenger RNA (mRNA) technology as a central manifestation of Promethean or Luciferian intellect—humans attempting to “read and write in the language of God.” They describe the scientific arc from transcription and translation to mRNA vaccines, noting Francis Collins’s The Language of God and the idea of humans “coding life.” They caution that mRNA vaccines involve injecting genetic material and point to the symbolic and ritual power of vaccination as a form of modern sacrament. - The speakers emphasize that the mRNA approach represents both a profound scientific achievement and a source of deep concern. They discuss fertility signals and potential adverse effects, including myocarditis in young people, and cite the July 2021 NEJM case study as highlighting safety concerns for myocarditis in adolescent males. They reference the FDA deliberative-committee discussions, noting that some influential voices publicly questioned the risk-benefit calculus for young people, yet faced pressure or dismissal within the orthodox framework. - They describe post-hoc investigations and testimonies suggesting that adverse events (like myocarditis) might have been downplayed or obscured, and they assert that public trust in health institutions has eroded as a result. They mention ongoing debates about whether vaccine-induced changes might affect future generations, referencing studies about transcripts of mRNA in cancer cells and liver cells, and they stress the need for independent scrutiny by scientists not “entranced” by the vaccine program. - The dialogue returns to the broader human condition: a tension between curiosity and restraint, knowledge and humility. They return to Dostoevsky’s moral questions about free will, responsibility, and the limits of human knowledge, concluding that scientific hubris can lead to dangerous consequences when it overrides open inquiry and accountability. - In closing, while the guests reflect on past missteps and the need for integrity in medicine, they underscore the ongoing questions about how evidence is interpreted, how dissent is treated, and how society balances scientific progress with humility, transparency, and respect for individual judgment.

Most people have taken the vaccine, which can feel like a horror movie scenario. If you got the vaccine, you might worry about potential risks, especially if you were previously in favor of it. The push to vaccinate all ages, including pregnant women, has raised concerns due to studies showing a high rate of miscarriages. This research could lead to feelings of shame and guilt among those who received the vaccine.

The speaker expresses confusion over why there was such intense obsession and hysteria surrounding Ukraine. They mention losing friends over the topic and being confronted by someone who was mad at them for their views on Ukraine. The speaker also discusses the influence of the pharmaceutical industry in controlling media coverage through advertising. They admit to not having expertise in vaccines but had reservations about taking them. When they expressed their concerns, they faced backlash. The speaker questions the motives behind the strong push for vaccines and suggests there may be a powerful force influencing society. The other speaker briefly mentions that the vaccine is safe and effective in preventing serious illness and death.

Financial analysts have found that money can influence people's decisions regarding vaccination. One analyst shared an anecdote about a friend who initially dismissed their concerns but changed their tune after seeing a video of the analyst discussing the issue with Steve Bannon. The friend became alarmed when they learned that the analyst was meeting with hedge fund professionals to raise funds for their cause. This incident made the friend realize that even Wall Street is starting to pay attention to the issue. The analyst emphasized that when money is involved, people's priorities can shift, and even those who have been vaccinated may change their stance if it means making a profit.

"Raise your hand if you or someone you know personally had a serious adverse event to this vaccine. Raise your hand. Yep. Almost every single hand in this room was raised. 'For the con artists out of the media, it's either what's going on here?' 'Now let's go a step further. ... believe the vaccine contributed to the death of somebody that you know.' Raise your hand. '100%. Yep. Look around the room. Two people.' 'We are we're not even allowed to talk about this.' 'You just saw thousands of hands get raised, and I was very careful with how I asked the question.' 'I mean, it's beyond anything we've ever lived through in our life, and we're not even allowed to talk about it.' 'Thought police' ... 'When we're not allowed to talk about something... They got you then.' Wow. That was great video."

The speakers claim the push for a COVID vaccine was motivated by money, and they believe there's a connection between the vaccine and subsequent deaths and blood clots. They express frustration that people aren't acknowledging this connection. One speaker shares a story about a veteran who was allegedly told that the hospital treating him was not allowed to connect his adverse side effects to the vaccine, even when listed as side effects. They say corporations don't want to talk about it because they mandated the vaccine. They believe people who got vaccinated don't want to admit they made a bad decision, leading them to deny any link between the vaccine and increased mortality rates, strokes, cancer, and heart attacks. One speaker recalls being gaslit by a former prime minister who denied coercing anyone into getting vaccinated, despite restrictions placed on the unvaccinated. Another speaker says they were misrepresented on CNN during their own recovery from COVID.

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.

During COVID, some people saw the actions of figures like Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates, the WHO, and Klaus Schwab, and wondered why more people didn't notice. This narrative has been ongoing since at least 1910, aiming to discredit chiropractors, naturopaths, nutritionists, and functional medicine doctors. Pharmaceutical companies pay doctors kickbacks and fund the schools that educate them. These doctors often sit on government boards, creating a system that protects its members and exploits vulnerable, sick individuals. Pharmaceutical companies, which educate doctors, prioritize profit over people's well-being, and are unconcerned about the millions of deaths they may have caused as long as they profit.

We all felt fear during the pandemic. Some doctors criticized those who didn't get vaccinated. The hate comes from the top down, influencing behavior. Canadians were targeted in a psyops operation by the military to create fear and compliance. Misinformation about masking affected trust in public health officials. Some people believe the vaccine doesn't work.