Proposed legislation introduced on March 5th would strip COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers of liability protections, enabling U.S. residents injured by these shots to sue the companies. The bill would retroactively remove protections from the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) for COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers.

HHS has stated that the PREP Act declaration “has been a key tool for ensuring that Americans have broad access to critical COVID-19 countermeasures including vaccines, tests, and treatments” and “has provided flexibilities and protections for those individuals and entities who have been involved in providing these critical tools that have helped the United States get to a better place with COVID-19.”

A better place for who exactly? Can you see through the propaganda?

'So many people have not been paying attention to what's going on with our food today.'

Alfie Oakes at our Freedom Summit shared his thoughts on the changes to food production and the wisdom of eating God's food.

The battle against high LDL-C (commonly labeled as “bad” cholesterol) has long been fought with statins - drugs that cut down cholesterol production in the liver. As of 2021, the global statins market was estimated at around $15 BILLION, and is expected to reach $22 BILLION by 2032.

Nicholas Norwitz, a Harvard medical student who holds a doctorate in metabolism and nutrition from the University of Oxford, has explored uncharted territory in cholesterol management through his innovative experiment.

If Oreos can be more effective at lowering cholesterol than statins, how many natural alternatives can outperform the commonplace drugs sold to us by Big Pharma?

The Publicis Groupe, one of the world’s largest PR firms, recently agreed to pay a $350 million settlement over claims that its false and misleading marketing contributed to the opioid epidemic.

Publicis is officially partnered with NewsGuard “to fight the ‘infodemic’ of misinformation about COVID-19 and its vaccines.” NewsGuard has a tool called BrandGuard that sends out “exclusion lists” to advertisers that target alternative media.

What Publicis and NewsGuard call “misinformation” is simply information that contradicts Big Pharma’s propaganda. History tells us that companies driven by profit interest make poor truth tellers.

According to medical journalist Robert Whitaker, the widely-made claim that antidepressants work for nearly 7 out of 10 real-world patients is based on research misconduct and scientific fraud.

The STAR*D Study (Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression), published in 2006, was the largest and longest-running antidepressant effectiveness trial ever conducted.
The authors claimed an overall cumulative remission rate of 67%.

However, a reanalysis of the STAR*D data in 2010 revealed serious problems. Had the study protocol been followed, the cumulative remission rate would only have been 35%.

Who is Dr. Tedros, the Director General of the World Health Organization?

Dr. Tedros has a record tarnished by scandal, terrorist and communist ties, and a history of allowing those under his care to die.

We must do everything we can to oppose the “Pandemic Treaty” with the W.H.O.

Please REPOST and SIGN the petition at WhoControlsWho.com

According to a settlement on March 21st, the FDA has agreed to remove social media posts and webpages that urged people to stop taking ivermectin to treat COVID-19.

“This landmark case sets an important precedent in limiting FDA overreach into the doctor-patient relationship.” - Dr. Mary Talley Bowden

This is a major victory for every doctor and patient across the United States. Repost if you agree!

Ultimately, every parent will make a decision about whether or not to vaccinate. Unfortunately, most of the time, it's an uninformed decision because there's been a deliberate misinformation campaign aimed at making you believe vaccines are far more effective than they actually are.

When you have a naturally acquired infection, you're really exercising your immune system quite profoundly, developing authentic, lifelong immunity in the process, which is radically different from the type of artificial and temporary immunity you get from a vaccine.

Developed nations like the U.S. that require the MOST vaccines tend to have the HIGHEST infant mortality. Why is this not front-page news?

Researchers analyzing data from Medicare detected an elevated stroke risk among the elderly following receipt of a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine made by Pfizer and Moderna.

The researchers looked at people who received an influenza shot at the same time as a COVID shot and saw that the elevated risk only persisted among people who received the vaccines simultaneously. They also found an elevated risk of nonhemorrhagic stroke among people who received an influenza vaccine and did not get a COVID shot.

According to the researchers, the “clinical significance of the risk of stroke after vaccination must be carefully considered together with the significant benefits of receiving an influenza vaccination.”

With higher stroke risk and several studies showing that the influenza vaccine is only 16% effective, what exactly are the “significant benefits”?

According to the CDC, people 65 and older should get ANOTHER dose of the latest round of COVID-19 vaccines.

Since the vaccines were first rolled out in late 2020, the CDC has repeatedly advised Americans to get repeated doses after initially saying “only 1 or 2 were needed”.

The CDC did not provide ANY research on the safety of giving seniors two shots within one year. Where is the science backing up the CDC’s claim?

Scientists focus primarily on antibodies to measure immunity, yet the immune system is far more complex.

The cornerstone upon which the vaccine industry has been built - the indispensable role of antibodies - is NOT as critical as we’ve been led to believe in our fight against measles.

Is it possible that some vaccines may be creating more problems than benefits? This is likely the case with the measles vaccine.

Modified and natural RNA stimulate different responses in the body.

The mRNA used in the COVID-19 shots has been modified from its naturally occurring form to prevent degradation by the immune system when injected.

In a review published in April, researchers argue that modification to mRNA causes immune suppression that may contribute to cancer development.

Pfizer’s COVID-19 drug Paxlovid did not work for many vaccinated people, according to a new paper from the company’s scientists.

“It was embarrassing to watch the administration and many ID doctors recommend this without any credible data,” Dr. Vinay Prasad wrote, criticizing the government for spending north of $12 billion for courses of the treatment without much trial data.”

Taxpayer dollars were wasted to make a donation to Pfizer. Let that sink in.

Toddlers and other young children faced a higher risk of seizures shortly after the COVID shots, according to a new FDA study.

Despite the finding of elevated risk, the researchers claimed that “based on the current body of scientific evidence, the safety profile of the monovalent mRNA vaccines remains favorable for use in young children.”

Would those researchers feel the same if their own children experienced these side effects?

Although many doctors have observed the positive effects of ivermectin in treating their patients, the media have specifically highlighted data from a few selected randomized control trials that have concluded it is ineffective in treating COVID.

However, some critical aspects were OVERLOOKED in those trials. Improper dosing was a major issue.

Why was ivermectin treated so unfairly in these clinical trials?

In a new study, five Japanese scientists used an entire dataset of the country’s 123 million population to study excess cancer mortalities coinciding with mass COVID vaccination.

The study presented the numbers for all-cause death, but also looked into the details of deaths caused by cancer. It found that of the 20 types of cancer, six of them had statistically significant excess mortalities in 2021 and further increased in 2022.

What is so special about the six specific cancer types?

The COVID shots may have contributed to an increase in deaths from neoplasms like cancer during the 2021–22 pandemic period, according to a recently published study that called for more research on the issue.

While the MC/UC (multiple cause/underlying cause) cancer death rate ratio was “relatively stable” between 2010 and 2019, it jumped in 2020, and continued to rise in 2021 and 2022.

Could the adverse effects of the COVID shots be a possible factor for this increase?

In 2021, there was a sudden increase in neoplasm deaths and excess all-cause mortality involving 15 to 44-year-olds, according to a recent preprint. Most of the deaths noted cancerous neoplasms as an underlying cause.

“There have been several case reports of rapidly growing malignant neoplasms in humans following COVID-19 vaccine administration,” the authors wrote.

Various mechanisms have been proposed for why the COVID shots may be linked to cancer.

The spike protein from SARS-CoV-2 potentially promotes cancer by interfering with anti-cancer activities, according to a recent preprint cell study from Brown University.

The study further implied that COVID-19 mRNA and protein vaccines may yield similar effects.

Several recent studies have shown a rise in cancer that coincides with the COVID-19 pandemic.

CDC officials found evidence that the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 shots caused multiple deaths before claiming that there was no evidence linking the vaccines to any deaths.

CDC officials, in a letter to The Epoch Times dated June 13, 2023, said that there were no deaths reported to VAERS for which the agency determined “the available evidence” indicated Moderna or Pfizer vaccination “caused or contributed to the deaths.”

What will it take for the CDC to finally admit that these shots have caused harm?

A now-retracted narrative review published in the journal Cureus called for a global moratorium on COVID-19 shots, citing significant increases in serious adverse events among those who received the injections, along with an "unacceptably high harm-to-reward ratio."

The review found "for every life saved, there were nearly 14 times more deaths caused by the modified mRNA injections."

Any guesses as to why the paper was retracted?