By Seth Hancock
TheLibertyLoft.com

Chicago, IL — “The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective.”—Aldous Huxley

A script from the Lake County Health Department in Illinois has come to light as teams of Community Health Ambassador, as the script calls them, prepare to go door-to-door in the Biden administration’s recent COVID-19 vaccine propaganda campaign.

Your government wants you to avert your eyes from its own information showing the largest number of deaths ever recorded for any vaccine and ignore the warning labels that even they, the government, has been forced to slap on their poison … err, vaccines.

Yes, your friendly Community Health Ambassador is simply there “to equip the person at the door with the information/resources they need.”

By Ben Zeisloft
DailyWire.com

Amid COVID-19 and lockdowns, the number of emergency room visits for suspected suicide attempts rose by 51% among teenage girls.

According to data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, hospitals observed massive increases over the past year in the number of young people attempting suicide.

As the agency reports:

During 2020, the proportion of mental health-related emergency department (ED) visits among adolescents aged 12–17 years increased 31% compared with that during 2019.

In May 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, ED visits for suspected suicide attempts began to increase among adolescents aged 12–17 years, especially girls. During February 21–March 20, 2021, suspected suicide attempt ED visits were 50.6% higher among girls aged 12–17 years than during the same period in 2019; among boys aged 12–17 years, suspected suicide attempt ED visits increased 3.7%.

Although the number of suspected suicide attempts dropped between spring 2019 and spring 2020, the rates began to drastically increase at the onset of COVID-19 and subsequent government lockdowns. 

By JD Ruker
TruthBasedMedia.com

Let’s put the conclusions up front. There is no reason for kids to wear masks. There’s no reason to keep them out of school, off of playgrounds, or away from anything else that kids should be experiencing. And there is absolutely, positively zero justification for injecting children with experimental drugs that have not been tested for long-term effects and that have a rapidly rising death toll associated with them.

Now, let’s begin with the obligatory “every life is precious, especially the lives of children.” Fine. And knowing this, the incredible spike in suicides among minors since pandemic panic theater began has proven to be exponentially more deadly in sheer numbers than Covid-19 is to young people. Keep in mind, I’m not talking about total suicides among minors. I’m simply referring to the dramatic increase in suicides. All of our actions to try to protect children from a disease that barely affects them is doing far more harm than good.

American media completely ignored a story from last week that is finally starting to make its rounds on conservative media sites. It detailed a study that analyzed the deaths of children and young people in England during the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic. The results were striking as they revealed two extremely important pieces of data.

First, England averages two Covid deaths per million children. Two. Per million. The second interesting fact is that children and young people have a 99.995% recovery rate from the disease. These numbers seem to jibe with U.S. raw data as well, though death attribution is more liberal here. If someone has the coronavirus in their system and they die, they’re generally counted as a Covid death regardless of what actually killed them.

Story at-a-glance

• Perhaps one of the greatest crimes in this whole pandemic is the refusal by reigning health authorities to issue early treatment guidance. Instead, they’ve done everything possible to suppress remedies shown to work, whether it be corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with zinc, ivermectin, vitamin D or NAC
• According to Dr. Peter McCullough, 85% of COVID deaths could have been prevented had early treatment protocols been widely implemented rather than censored
• It appears the intense censoring and suppression of early treatments was a strategy to promote as much fear, suffering, hospitalization and death as possible in order to prepare the population to accept a new genre of gene transfer technologies on a mass scale
• The overwhelming drive to get a “needle in every arm” is such that health authorities are not even acknowledging the fact that those who have recovered from COVID-19 and many groups have no possibility of benefiting from the vaccine, including younger individuals, pregnant women, women of childbearing potential, and those with immunodeficiencies
• Despite FDA warnings for myocarditis with Pfizer and Moderna and cavernous venous thrombosis with Johnson & Johnson, the vaccine cabal keeps propaganda on full blast

In this interview, Dr. Peter McCullough discusses the importance of early treatment for COVID-19, and the potential motivations behind the suppression of safe and effective treatments.

McCullough has impeccable academic credentials. He’s an internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist, a full professor of medicine at Texas A&M College of Medicine in Dallas. He also has a master’s degree in public health and is known for being one of the top five most-published medical researchers in the United States and is the editor of two medical journals.

By Rick Welsh
DJHFMedia.com

On Tuesday, President Joe Biden made a comment that he was going to send workers into neighborhoods going door-to-door to see if they have been vaccinated yet.

And probably rat you out if you answer no. The only proper response to that is “get the hell off my property.”

As such, Fox News’s Tucker Carlson, host of “Tucker Carlson Tonight” in response to Biden’s words gave his viewing audience some compelling information about COVID-19.

“The data shows that the median age of death for COVID is often older than life expectancy,” the Fox host said. “For real. If you want to get a sense at just how completely they have hyped this virus, turning it into something that the numbers show it is not, take a look, for example, at Ohio.”

Carlson then put up on the screen the median age of death due to COVID-19 in the state of Ohio being 80-years-old when the average life expectancy there is 73. This means that about half of the people who died from COVID lived longer than they were expected to live without catching the pandemic virus. They lived 7 years longer than the average life expectancy.

He went on to provide the numbers from other parts of the US as well as the numbers found in the United Kingdom (UK). In the UK, the median age of COVID deaths is 83 and the life expectancy is 81-years-old.

Stew Peters talks with Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, an extremely experienced medical expert. Topics include COVID-19, Delta Variant, Inoculations, Magnetism, Transmission, Shedding, Purpose and Plan.

By Daniel Horowitz
TheBlaze.com

We've spent over a year debating nonexistent evidence that masks effectively protect against the spread of viruses. However, there has been little debate and few published studies on potential harms of mask-wearing, a reality that has allowed zealous maskers to aggressively push their mandate as harmless, with no downside. Well, now we have a randomized controlled trial published in JAMA that raises serious concerns about this practice.

Researchers from Germany conducted a blinded randomized controlled trial of 45 children wearing masks and measured the baseline carbon dioxide levels during inhalation and exhalation behind various masks as compared to the levels of unmasked children. The results are very concerning:

We measured means (SDs) between 13 120 (384) and 13 910 (374) ppm of carbon dioxide in inhaled air under surgical and filtering facepiece 2 (FFP2) masks, which is higher than what is already deemed unacceptable by the German Federal Environmental Office by a factor of 6. This was a value reached after 3 minutes of measurement. Children under normal conditions in schools wear such masks for a mean of 270 (interquartile range, 120-390) minutes. The Figure shows that the value of the child with the lowest carbon dioxide level was 3-fold greater than the limit of 0.2 % by volume. The youngest children had the highest values, with one 7-year-old child's carbon dioxide level measured at 25 000 ppm. (Emphasis added.)

Why has nobody in our government bothered to study this before experimenting on children for a virus that doesn't affect them?

By Dr. Joseph Mercola
 

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• While Pfizer claims its vaccine is 95% effective, this is the relative risk reduction. The absolute risk reduction — which is far more relevant for public health measures — is actually less than 1%
• While benefits from COVID “vaccination” in children between the ages of 12 and 15 are rare and short-lived, side effects are common and long-term effects are completely unknown
• In the 12-to-15 age group, 75.5% experienced headache, along with a long list of other transient side effects. Serious systemic adverse events occurred in 2.4% of the trial subjects receiving Pfizer’s mRNA shot
• While Pfizer boasted a 100% efficacy rate in 12- to 15-year-olds, this conclusion is a statistical trick. Fewer than 2% of fully vaccinated children avoided COVID-19; 98% of them would not have gotten COVID anyway. So, the benefit is small
• Even if vaccinating children were found to reduce infection among adults, it would be unethical and against regulations to do so, because the FDA can only authorize the use of a medical product in a given population if the benefit outweighs the risk in that same population, and in children the benefits do not outweigh the risks

Many scientists and medical experts have warned that vaccinating children against COVID-19 is both unnecessary and risky in the extreme. The video below features comments by Peter Doshi, Ph.D., made during a June 10, 2021, public hearing by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.

Doshi is an associate professor at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy and the senior editor of The BMJ. He has previously pointed out that while Pfizer claims its vaccine is 95% effective, this is the relative risk reduction. The absolute risk reduction — which is far more relevant for public health measures — is actually less than 1%.¹ As such, the COVID-19 vaccine is of dubious benefit, to say the least.

If you choose to watch the video below I must warn you to stop after Doshi finishes and not view the presentation by Dr. Jacqueline Miller. She’s a paid shill pediatrician and the head of development for infectious diseases at Moderna. The reason I advise this caution is because if you understand reality, you will be shocked at how easily a physician can sell out and sacrifice even her own children in the delusional belief that Moderna’s shot provides any benefit to children.

Meanwhile, largely because of irresponsible beliefs and comments like Miller’s, harms are rapidly mounting, which skews the risk-benefit ratio even further. Considering the potential for harm, children should not get the COVID-19 vaccine, Doshi says, citing trial evidence from Pfizer — the very same evidence used to support its emergency use authorization application for 12- to 15-year-olds. In this trial, harms clearly outweighed the benefits.

UKColumn.org

The below paper is republished here after having been banned from medium.com, a platform that prides itself on its supposed openness.

COVID Vaccines: Necessity, Efficacy and Safety

Doctors for Covid Ethics

Abstract: COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers have been exempted from legal liability for vaccine-induced harm. It is therefore in the interests of all those authorising, enforcing and administering COVID-19 vaccinations to understand the evidence regarding the risks and benefits of these vaccines, since liability for harm will fall on them.

In short, the available evidence and science indicate that COVID-19 vaccines are unnecessary, ineffective and unsafe.

• Necessity: immunocompetent individuals are protected against SARS-CoV-2 by cellular immunity. Vaccinating low-risk groups is therefore unnecessary. For immunocompromised individuals who do fall ill with COVID-19 there is a range of medical treatments that have been proven safe and effective. Vaccinating the vulnerable is therefore equally unnecessary. Both immunocompetent and vulnerable groups are better protected against variants of SARS-CoV-2 by naturally acquired immunity and by medication than by vaccination.1 
• Efficacy: Covid-19 vaccines lack a viable mechanism of action against SARS-CoV-2 infection of the airways. Induction of antibodies cannot prevent infection by an agent such as SARS-CoV-2 that invades through the respiratory tract. Moreover, none of the vaccine trials have provided any evidence that vaccination prevents transmission of the infection by vaccinated individuals; urging vaccination to “protect others” therefore has no basis in fact.
• Safety: The vaccines are dangerous to both healthy individuals and those with pre-existing chronic disease, for reasons such as the following: risk of lethal and non-lethal disruptions of blood clotting including bleeding disorders, thrombosis in the brain, stroke and heart attack; autoimmune and allergic reactions; antibody-dependent enhancement of disease; and vaccine impurities due to rushed manufacturing and unregulated production standards.

The risk-benefit calculus is therefore clear: the experimental vaccines are needless, ineffective and dangerous. Actors authorising, coercing or administering experimental COVID-19 vaccination are exposing populations and patients to serious, unnecessary, and unjustified medical risks.