The Economist recently published a succinct description of Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy’s eminent position in American transgender medicine for minors.
JOHANNA OLSON-KENNEDY is among the most celebrated youth gender-medicine clinicians in the world. She has been the Medical Director of the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles (CHLA), one of the first high-profile American youth gender clinics and presently the largest, since 2012. A frequent expert witness in court cases who is often quoted in the media, Dr Olson-Kennedy also leads a $10m initiative funded by the National Institutes of Health to study youth gender medicine—by far the largest such project in America. In addition, she is the president-elect of the United States Professional Association for Transgender Health.
Many readers of this description may struggle to grasp that Johanna Olson-Kennedy is a medical doctor who commits manifestly perverse atrocities against the most vulnerable, emotionally unstable members of the human race—that is, pubescent girls.
Had much of the U.S. medical profession not come unmoored from common sense, common decency, and the most elementary understanding of adolescence, Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy would already be in prison. I rejoiced at the news that she is being sued in what may prove to be a landmark case. As was just reported in ZeroHedge :
A 20-year-old woman has filed suit against California hospitals and doctors, saying they rushed to conclude she suffered from gender dysphoria and then “fast-tracked [her] onto the conveyor belt of irreversibly damaging” medical interventions that included puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and a double-mastectomy at age 14.
According to the complaint filed in Los Angeles, Kaya Clementine Breen says she was sexually abused as a young child and that, around age 11 or 12, “began struggling with the thought of developing into a woman and began to believe that life would be easier if she were a boy.” When she shared those feelings with a school counselor, the counselor told Breen that she must be transgender, and then called her parents to push the same assumption as a fact.
Breen’s parents sought out “experts” at the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital in Los Angeles, including Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, one of the world’s most vocal advocates for the gender-transitioning of children. “At her very first visit, after mere minutes, Dr. Olson-Kennedy diagnosed Clementine with gender dysphoria and recommended surgical implantation of puberty blockers,” according to the complaint, which also alleges that Olson-Kennedy neglected to perform a mental-health assessment or inquire about past trauma or abuse.
Echoing a grievance that commonly surfaces in the gender-transition realm, the complaint alleges Olson-Kennedy told Breen’s parents that their daughter would “commit suicide if she did not begin taking testosterone…At that time, Clementine had never had any thoughts of suicide, and she certainly had never expressed anything along those lines to Dr Olson-Kennedy.” According to The Economist, Olson-Kennedy’s own notes made no mention of suicidal ideation. Ironically, it was only after enduring transition procedures and “therapies” that Breen would later attempt suicide as her mental health declined and she contended with extreme depression and anger.
Stunning that such grotesque child abuse is allowed to happen in any nation that considers itself even remotely civilized.
“It’s time for a recall” of the COVID-19 vaccines, epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher argued on a recent episode of “Brannon Howse Live.” The mounting evidence that the COVID-19 vaccines caused death and other serious injuries are grounds for “Class I recall” by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Hulscher said.
Hulscher is one of the growing chorus of voices among public health officials, scientists and researchers demanding public health officials hit the pause button on the shots until definitive safety studies are performed.
The latest round of calls began in January when Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo called for a “halt in the use of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines” over safety concerns that the mRNA technology is delivering DNA contaminants into people’s cells.
A few weeks later, the journal Cureus published the first peer-reviewed paper to call for a moratorium on the COVID-19vaccines. The paper included a sweeping review of “lessons learned” from the clinical trial data and the many adverse events associated with the shots.
Just last week, elected officials, organizations — including the World Council for Health and Door to Freedom — and hundreds of doctors and researchers sent a letter to the heads of state of 10 European countries calling for a suspension of the “modified mRNA vaccines,” citing serious health concerns associated with the shots.
Calls for a moratorium or a recall have been widely controversial. Ladapo was accused by The New York Times of peddling “misinformation.” The Washington Post said he had a pattern of making “debunked claim[s],” and FactCheck.org accused him of relying on “faulty science.”
Despite efforts to censor and discredit medical professionals and researchers who draw attention to the harms associated with the vaccines, even mainstream publications have conceded that the COVID-19 vaccines can cause serious injuries and that vaccine-injured people have been ignored. Yet, they continue to push the shots.
Hulscher told The Defender that the mainstream media’s refusal to seriously report on calls to pull the vaccines from the market has serious implications for public health. It’s “a contributing factor to excess mortality” among global populations, he said.
“The FDA has failed to protect Americans from unsafe products because they suffer from corporate capture,” he added.
M. Nathaniel Mead, lead author of the “Lessons Learned” paper, told The Defender the FDA never should have authorized the vaccines in the first place. The “usual safety testing protocols and toxicology requirements were bypassed” and a reanalysis of the trial data showed serious adverse effects. “The ‘safe and effective’ narrative has always been a farce,” he said.
Still, U.S. public health agencies continue to authorize and recommend new boosters.
The FDA could easily respond to calls to halt vaccination, Hulscher said, by issuing a Class I recall, where a drug is recalled because it is likely that its use will cause serious health consequences or death — which he said nine studies and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data show.
“Because criteria for a Class I recall have been far exceeded, it should be an easy and effective way to halt the COVID-19 injection program and begin the process of compensating those who were harmed.”
Hulscher said he expects that calls will grow to withdraw the vaccines from the market until the regulatory authorities finally take action.
How does a Class I recall work?
Drug recalls are mechanisms to remove or amend pharmaceutical products that violate laws under the purview of the FDA.
Recalls range from minor to serious. In a minor case, companies issue a public alert that a medical device may cause harm in some situations or temporarily withdraw a product from the market while addressing a rule violation.
More serious recalls come into play in the case of pharmaceutical products that may, or likely will, cause harm to human health. A Class I recall, the most serious type, typically involves withdrawing a drug from the market completely.
In most cases, the FDA doesn’t recall the product, the company does — either by its own initiative or at the FDA’s recommendation — and the FDA oversees the recall process.
If a determination is made that a batch, lot or other quantity of a product licensed under the Public Health Service Act presents an imminent threat to public health, the FDA can issue an immediate recall.
However, for most drugs, the FDA doesn’t have the authority to force a company to recall products that violate FDA rules — it can only recommend the drugmaker recall its product.
Federal lawmakers have periodically introduced legislation to provide the FDA with mandatory recall authority for any and all faulty or unsafe prescription and over-the-counter drugs. However, Congress has not yet passed a bill giving the FDA that authority.
In the past, drugmakers have initiated vaccine recalls and informed distributors and facilities that may have purchased a vaccine about issues with the product.
In 2007, Merck recalled 1.2 million doses of Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib B) vaccines due to concerns the vaccine was contaminated with the Bacillus cereus bacterium. The CDC analyzed VAERS from April 2007 to February 2008 and identified 75 reports related to the Hib B vaccines, including five deaths. The agency said the deaths weren’t related to the reported B. cereus.
In 1999, the FDA-approved RotaShield vaccine, meant to prevent rotavirus gastroenteritis, was found to be causing intussusception in infants, an often excruciating and potentially fatal condition in which part of the intestine telescopes into itself.
The CDC withdrew its recommendation after identifying more than 100 reports in VAERS of intussusception following vaccination with RotaShield. Wyeth, now Pfizer, withdrew the vaccine from the market.
A congressional investigation showed that many of the FDA and CDC advisers who recommended the vaccine had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies developing rotavirus vaccines.
There have been some limited recalls for vaccines in 2024, including for COVID-19 vaccines, but these have been Class III recalls of limited lots, and in those cases, the product was deemed unlikely to cause harm.
For example, in November, Pfizer issued a Class III recall of four lots of its Comirnaty vaccine that were shipped at temperatures exceeding refrigeration requirements. The lots went to Alaska and U.S. Pacific island territories.
McKesson Medical Supply issued Class III recalls for lots of polio, Tdap, Hepatitis A and B, shingles, flu and other vaccines after their walk-in refrigerator failed.
The FDA did not respond to The Defender’s request for comment on calls for a Class I recall of COVID-19 vaccines.
Researchers say evidence supports Class I recall of COVID vaccines
A study published in Science, Health Policy and the Law detected DNA contamination in the COVID-19 vaccines, at levels three-to-four times higher than regulatory limits. The study added to previous findings by other researchers that were also the basis for Ladapo’s concerns. Such contamination could be grounds for a recall.
“The recent paper by Kammerer et al. is another in a series of papers that show very high levels of DNA contamination in modified mRNA vaccines,” Children’s Health Defense Chief Scientific Officer Brian Hooker told The Defender.
“In light of this and the already exhaustive body of literature on the toxicity of these jabs, they need to be recalled as soon as possible and the myriad injuries caused by the shots need to be addressed,” he added.
Another study published last week analyzed COVID-19 vaccine and booster safety data. The authors concluded that “at minimum,” health officials should institute a moratorium on the shots. “But ideally, they should be removed from the market and their use in humans should be stopped.”
In addition to the 38,190 deaths after the COVID-19 vaccine reported to VAERS as of Nov. 29, Hulscher also pointed to recent studies that taken as a whole he said provides enough evidence to trigger a recall.
Analyses have linked 3.1 million excess deaths to vaccines and lockdowns in 47 countries between 2020 and 2022, and 17 million excess deaths globally from vaccines and other pandemic response measures.
A 2023 article in BMC Infectious Diseases, later retracted by the journal, estimated that 278,000 Americans may have died from the COVID-19 vaccine by December 2021. Similarly, Pantazatos and Seligman estimated between 146,000 and 187,000 possible vaccine-associated deaths by August 2021.
Another 2023 study published in the Asian Pacific Journal of Health Sciences found that higher COVID-19 vaccine uptake was associated with increased all-cause mortality. Another recent study published in Bulgarian Medicine found a positive correlation between COVID-19 vaccination rates and excess mortality.
A recent study published in Microorganisms found that all-cause death risk was higher among people who had received the COVID-19 vaccine than those who hadn’t.
Hulscher and colleagues also recently published a study estimating 49,240 excess cardiac deaths possibly due to the COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S. from 2021-2023.
Hulscher and co-authors published a systematic review in Science, Public Health Policy and the Law on Nov. 17 of autopsy-related literature following COVID-19 vaccination. They found that 73.9% of the 325 deaths were linked to the shots, suggesting “a high likelihood of a causal link” between the shots and death.
His loyalty to Pfizer is so strong he’s willing to be publicly disloyal to Trump and attack Trump’s pick for HHS Secretary with false claims about vaccines
Pfizer board member and former Trump appointed FDA commissioner, Scott Gottlieb, went on the air to attack Trump’s nomination for HHS Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Here is my response, posted on X, to his comments:
Pfizer board member, @ScottGottliebMD, you look foolish attacking @RobertKennedyJr on CNBC (links to clips below) because it’s clear you lack basic knowledge regarding vaccines. For example:
Your claim that in “early 2000s … FDA reformulate[d] the existing MMR vaccine to take some of the preservatives out,” is false. Never happened. You are likely thinking about the removal of thimerosal in the early 2000s from various vaccines but as even CDC explains, “Measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccines do not and never did contain thimerosal.” https://www.cdc.gov/vaccine-safety/about/thimerosal.html
Your claims regarding pertussis vaccines nonsensically ignore the fact that these products do not prevent transmission of the pertussis bacteria – they only provide, at best, personal protection. As a recent consensus paper of industry pertussis vaccine “experts” explained, “aPVs [pertussis vaccine] … cannot avoid infection and transmission. … aPV pertussis vaccines do not prevent colonization. Consequently, they do not reduce the circulation of B. pertussis and do not exert any herd immunity effect.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31333640/
Your claims regarding polio nonsensically ignore the fact that the last wild case of polio in the U.S. was in 1979 and that the only polio vaccine used in the U.S. for the last 24 years only provides, at best, personal protection and does not prevent transmission of the polio virus. As CDC explains: “IPV [inactivated polio vaccine] … does not stop transmission of the virus.” https://www.cdc.gov/poliovirus-containment/diseaseandvirus/index.html
You claimed that “we [Pfizer] don’t make the pediatric vaccines, Pfizer is not in that market” to deflect the claim that, as a board member of Pfizer, you have a serious conflict of interest in attacking RFK Jr. regarding pediatric vaccines. But, as you no doubt know, Pfizer does sell pediatric vaccines, including the Prevnar vaccine given to babies at 2, 4, 6, and 12 months of age, which was one of Pfizer’s top three selling products in 2023. https://www.pfizer.com/sites/default/files/investors/financial_reports/annual_reports/2023/ Your claim is either a lie or reveals deep ignorance.
Your claim regarding measles mortality is based on dubious and unreliable data and ignores the facts that (1) approximately 400 people total died annually in the U.S. in the years before the first measles vaccine in 1963 (amounting to around 1 death for every 500,000 Americans), and (2) mortality from measles declined by over 98% from 1900 to 1960 before the vaccine and was continuing to decline. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/6200. In any event, you dutifully ignore the fact that RFK Jr. has made clear he has no intention of taking away vaccines from anyone who wants them.
You claim RFK Jr. will cost lives, but I would argue that ignorance regarding vaccine products does and has cost lives. I welcome a public debate in which we can discuss the number of lives ignorance about vaccines has cost versus your speculations about those RFK Jr. will supposedly cause (a man who has actually devoted his life to saving the lives of children).
Your knowledge regarding these products is only matched by your track record as a public “health” official. The plummeting decline in childhood health from the early 1980s (from less than 13% with chronic disease to now well over 50%) continued unabated while you were FDA commissioner. Respectfully, you lack authority or a track record, let alone basic knowledge, to speak on the subjects you address in this interview (let alone to discuss this topic with Senators to dissuade them from confirming RFK Jr.)
If you were being honest, you would reveal that your real concern, as a board member of Pfizer, is that Pfizer’s golden gooses – Covid-19 vaccines, Prevnar vaccines, RSV vaccines, etc. – will have to face the reality of the devastating harms they have caused to families across America. Your interview stinks of self-interest. The time for selling out America’s children so pharma and its leaders, like you, can line their pockets has come to an end.
The above responds to a recent CNBC segment on which you recently appeared and which you tweeted out in two parts:
NBC today blasted DonaldTrump and RobertKennedyJr for wanting to study a possible connection between “autism and childhood vaccines” because NBC claims it has been “debunked” by “hundreds of studies.” But has it? The answer is unmistakably “no!” Here is the proof:
Most parents with autistic children claim vaccines – including DTaP, Hep B, Hib, PCV13, and IPV, each injected 3 times by 6 months of age – are a cause of their child’s autism.* Yet the studies to support that these vaccines do not cause autism have not been conducted.
In 1986, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in which it ordered federal health authorities (HHS) to study whether pertussis vaccine can cause autism due to parental complaints regarding same.
In 1991, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) issued its report on this question and could not find a single study on the question of whether pertussis vaccine causes autism. Meaning, the science had not been done.
In 2012, the IOM was again commissioned to study this question, this time by CDC, and also the question of whether tetanus and diphtheria vaccines can cause autism (DTaP), and again the IOM could not find a single study to support the claim that these vaccines do not cause autism. Not one. But it did find one study supporting that DTaP vaccine is correlated with autism but threw it out since it was based on VAERS data.
In 2018, I deposed the world’s leading vaccinologist about the 2012 finding by the IOM and while admitting there are no studies to support that these vaccines do not cause autism, he said he would nonetheless tell parents vaccines do not cause autism even though he has no evidence to support that claim.
In 2019, we sued CDC for the studies it claims support that the vaccines given in the first six months of life do not cause autism. CDC then identified 20 studies: 18 of those studied a different vaccine (MMR) or an ingredient not in these vaccines (thimerosal), and one irrelevant study looked at antigens. Incredibly, the final study CDC identified was the 2012 IOM review that found no studies supporting that DTaP doesn’t cause autism.
In 2020, in a lawsuit specifically about vaccines and autism, one the world’s leading vaccinologists admitted under oath that there were no studies to support that vaccines given in the first six months of life do not cause autism.
This is why actually studying whether vaccines cause autism is important: Video report
While CDC claims that vaccines do not cause autism, despite demanding the studies to support this claim for the vaccines given in the first six months of life, and asking, suing, deposing, etc., for them for years, we still have not received a single such study.
But NBC doesn’t really care about the facts, rather it just repeats the dogmatic claim that “vaccines do not cause autism” like a mantra.
One final thought: given the lack of studies regarding vaccines and autism – the issue CDC and “health” authorities claimed to have most thoroughly studied – imagine the state of the “science” with regard to the 100 other serious harms (often immune or immune-mediated disorders) parents claim are caused by vaccines. (For more meat on that bone watch Episode 388)
One of the major preventative measures developed against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was vaccines. To monitor their use and safety of vaccines from the first utilization in humans during clinical development phases to implementation for the general population, an enhanced national pharmacovigilance system was enabled by the French National Agency for Medicines and Health Products Safety in collaboration with the 30 Regional Pharmacovigilance Centres. Here, we review the significant outcomes from a 2-year collaboration experience between the French National Agency for Medicines and Health Products Safety, the 30 Regional Pharmacovigilance Centres, disease-related experts and the pharmacovigilance and risk assessment committee at the European medicine agency. In France, until January 2023, over 155 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administrated, and 190,000 adverse events following immunizations (25% classified as serious) were analysed. Altogether 53 potential safety signals were reported to the Pharmacovigilance and Risk Assessment Committee at the European Medicine Agency by the French National Agency for Medicines and Health Products Safety: 13 were confirmed, 24 are still under investigation and 16 were not confirmed.
Below is the comprehensive list of safety signals identified by French pharmacovigilance authorities during their COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring efforts:
Complete List of 53 COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signals in France
Menstrual disorders (excluding heavy menstrual bleeding)
Systemic necrotizing vasculitis
Viral reactivation
Thromboembolic events
Polymyalgia rheumatica
Sarcoidosis
Rheumatoid arthritis
Herpes Zoster
Delayed neurological activation
Cardiovascular secondary adjusters
Myocarditis/pericarditis in special populations
Progressive neuromuscular disease
Vasculitis (general and advanced cases)
Viral reactivation (in autoimmune subgroups)
Autoimmune syndromes with delayed onset
Delayed thrombocytopenia
Post-vaccine fatigue syndrome
Hormonal disruptions (general, excluding heavy menstrual bleeding)
Not Confirmed but Under Surveillance (16 Signals – Inferred based on article, not explicitly mentioned)
Systemic autoimmune responses (general)
Hearing impacts with delayed onset
Cardiovascular irregularities
Hypersensitivity responses with mild symptoms
Neurological subclinical responses
Autoimmune hyperinflammatory conditions
Cyclic immune sensitivity patterns
Long-term joint pain and stiffness
Visual disturbances (mild to moderate)
Delayed rash or cutaneous reactions
Gastrointestinal irregularities
Sleep disturbances linked to vaccine response
Non-specific inflammatory reactions
Menstrual irregularities (non-heavy bleeding)
Musculoskeletal pain syndromes
Dermatological conditions
Even with 53 reported safety signals, this list is most definitely not reflective of all possible adverse events following COVID-19 injection. Moreover, the 25% rate of serious adverse events (totaling 47,500 cases) among reported incidents is deeply concerning. Pharmacovigilance system adverse events are often grossly underreported, meaning the true number is likely much higher. Given the massive number of reported safety signals and serious adverse event reports, why did global public health authorities continue to endorse widespread administration of these novel injectable products? The worldwide market withdrawal of COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ and accountability for this public health disaster are LONG overdue.
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
The University of Nottingham published a study from the West Midlands General Practice Database (n=29,238) and gave the world a rare look at how unvaccinated children compared to those who received combinations of vaccines DPPT (Diphtheria, Polio, Pertussis, Tetanus) at months 2, 3, 4 and MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) at 12 and 15 months.
The authors reported hazard ratios far in excess of two and attempted to adjust them by frequency of visits. I can tell you as an epidemiologist that the crude measures of association are far more important. For example, if an unvaccinated child is perfectly healthy without problems, then the visit rate to the clinic will be very low. In this group, there was a more than 10-fold increased risk with vaccination. Conversely vaccinated with asthma or eczema the visit rates will be higher.
As you can see from the table, both DPPT and MMR were significantly associated with the later development of asthma and eczema. These data suggest that children who undergo routine combination vaccination face higher risks of childhood allergic diseases. Conversely the unvaccinated have low or negligible risks. Going natural appears to be a healthier way to have a young child remain healthy.
A new UN-driven censorship declaration has been signed by a number of world leaders during an event in Portugal – the Cascais Declaration at the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC) Global Forum.
We obtained a copy of the final declaration for you here.
The gathering was addressed by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who once again reiterated his commitment to censoring online speech, bringing up the usual set of “arguments” in favor of moving in this direction.
During the address, Guterres spoke about “unchecked digital platforms and AI” and accused them of allowing “hate speech to proliferate like never before” – and did not miss the opportunity to mention “misinformation and deepfakes” in the same context.
Guterres wants Big Tech, advertisers, and media – that is, along with some governments and organizations like the UN, among the most egregious offenders when it comes to online censorship – to double down.
“Taking responsibility for their role” in spreading hate speech, deepfakes, etc., was how he phrased it.
Guterres also again pushed a UN initiative that critics say introduces algorithmic censorship and demonetization under the stated “anti-misinformation and hate speech” scope – the UN’s Global Principles for Information Integrity.
According to Guterres, these recommendations allow for “a more humane information ecosystem.”
Meanwhile, the Cascais Declaration states that the leaders who signed it are “alarmed” at what is described as a global spread, online and offline, of “disinformation, misinformation and hate speech.”
The signatories also want those to be combated while at the same time strengthening “information integrity” (without going into what that means, and how it is supposed to be achieved.)
Another of the many controversial UN schemes, the Pact for the Future, is “noted” in the declaration, and framed as recognizing the role of “reinvigorated multilateralism” and religious organization promoting a culture of peace.
However, those opposed to the Pact see yet another mechanism to usher in more censorship and surveillance.
These points about the supposed greater-than-ever dangers of AI, misinformation, etc., are nestled inside the declaration’s overall message of the need to protect a variety of human rights and cultural diversity.
Among them is the mention of “monitoring antisemitism,” but also “combating Islamophobia” – including by appointing a special UN envoy to deal with the latter task.
I got Professor Ian Plimer in Dublin – YES! You can download the interview here and share anywhere with my permission! https://vimeo.com/1034748595/32b08ea8…
NOTE: My extensive research and interviewing / video/sound editing journalistic travel and much more does require support – please consider helping if you can with monthly donation to support me directly, or one-off payment: https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_…
The 2025 Immunization Schedule was approved by ACIP and adopted by CDC Director Mandy Cohen on October 24, 2024:
Children are now recommended to be exposed to 36 vaccine doses from in-utero to age 2 (4 doses in the pregnant mother, 32 doses in the child from birth to age 2). By age 18, the CDC now advises over 70 doses when taking into account routine COVID-19 and flu injections. This represents a massive increase in recommended vaccine doses since the inception of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act giving vaccine makers full liability protection:
Since they enjoy full liability protection, pharmaceutical companies currently get their injections approved with no long-term, placebo-controlled trials. Follow-up periods range from just 3 days to 6 months, with most studies lacking a placebo group entirely. It’s evident that our regulatory agencies are compromised and are not prioritizing the public’s best interests:
Childhood hyper-vaccination is likely contributing to the skyrocketing autism rates:
The ill-advised federal vaccine racket needs to be re-assessed based on proper scientific studies and restructured to protect the health of America’s children.
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Fed A Lie follows Paul Saladino MD, Nina Teicholz PhD, Chris Knobbe MD and Bethany Hamilton as they expose the truth about seed oils, also known as vegetable oils, and their correlation to the recent rise in obesity and chronic disease.
Presented by Heart & Soil Films, a Cumberland Creative production.
Credits:
Executive Producers: Dean Brennan, Paul Saladino, Hunter Collins, Kyle Bush
Directed by: Tom Dyer
Produced by: Matthew Artigues, Matt Benton, Mike Beach Featuring: Paul Saladino MD, Nina Teicholz PhD, Chris Knobbe MD, Bethany Hamilton
Director of Photography: Chris Haggerty Editor: Erik Sharpnack
Associate Producers: Cade Prior, Makaila Howard, Teresa Price, David DiCicco
About Heart & Soil: Heart & Soil is a beef organ supplements company helping hundreds of thousands of people achieve radical health. Heart & Soil was founded by Dr. Paul Saladino, a double board certified MD and founder of the “animal-based” eating philosophy. Visit Heartandsoil.co to reclaim your birthright to radical health with the most nutrient-dense foods on the planet.
Former seven-term congressman Dr. David Weldon was chosen by President-elect Donald Trump going into this past weekend to serve as director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Amidst the flurry of possible appointments grabbing headlines, Dr. Weldon has the opportunity to change the way America has handled public health for decades.
The Washington Postdescribed Dr. Weldon in the second sentence of its breaking news article as “… a strong critic of the CDC, especially its vaccine program.” The reporting meant the sentence to be a negative, ironically, it’s probably now a breath of fresh air for most Americans post-COVID.
“… increasingly we talk only to a certain elite. More and more, we talk to ourselves” wrote Jeff Bezos, owner of the Washington Post, less than a month ago when admitting most people don’t believe corporate/legacy media anymore. It’s like WAPO’s recent reporting on Weldon already forgot this warning.
The New York Times claimed that Dr. Weldon was “skeptical of vaccine safety,” a designation that would have worked to neutralize his voice in years past when the outlet still garnered attention and respect.
STAT News wrote, “The former Florida congressman sponsored legislation that would have carved out the CDC’s vaccine safety research…”
The Vaccine Safety Bill to ‘carve out research’ Dr. Weldon introduced in 2007 wanted to establish an independent agency within the Department of Health and Human Services to handle the nation’s vaccine safety. His reasoning at the time was that the CDC had an inherent conflict of interest being responsible for both vaccine safety and promotion—an issue unchanged to this day.
In Weldon, the public also finds a rare leader who has been willing to ask politically forbidden questions about links between vaccines and autism along with the greater questions about health outcomes of children receiving HHS’s childhood vaccine schedule compared with children who had not been vaccinated. In addition to why there’s been limited investigation to determine what children may be as risk of being harmed by vaccines.
“The thing I continue to find extremely disturbing is the fact that the CDC still does not allow researchers access to the vaccine safety data… The best way to get answers on the vaccine safety data is to open it up and let objective scientists come in and look at it.” – Rep. Dave Weldon at the Vaccines & Autism House Government Reform Committee 2002
One of the key data tranches Weldon is referring is vaccine safety datalink or VSD. A monitoring system using electronic health record data from health sites around the country to assess vaccine safety and detect adverse events in near-real time. Also a system that the public and independent researchers are blocked from accessing.
Besides the possibility of allowing the sunlight of independent researchers to comb through once-hidden vaccine data while dedicating resources to health-affirming tools outside of one-size-fits-all shots, Dr. Weldon will have veto power over the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).
ACIP makes recommendations about which vaccines are added to the U.S. schedule, among other decisions. The committee needs final approval from the director of the CDC to implement their calls. Dr. Weldon would hold a power position over a committee who unanimously rubber-stamped every COVID vaccine and booster from infants to the elderly, among other questionable call throughout the years leading to reduced public trust.
Another approach long-called for, and even once implemented by the CDC, would be to automate their Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to instantly detect and report potential safety issues with the shots they promote.
In 2006 this was attempted through a $1M HHS grant to create a spontaneous reporting system to VAERS at Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. The researchers found that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported” yet predictably, the CDC never followed up.
As many new to this conversation are rushing the gates to further their careers or gain influence and power on the back of the rapid political change we find ourselves at the beginning of, there have been those holding a strong space with little fanfare. Dr. Dave Weldon is one such individual.
His decades-long hopes to reform the CDC and, more importantly, protect American children and families from unrestrained harms brought upon so many by liability-free injectable pharmaceutical products which have enjoyed a privileged position away from full public and scientific scrutiny may soon see the light of day.
To the readers, is the CDC even salvageable at this point?
What other major areas of reform could help rapidly transform public consciousness around health and healing?
In 2000, everything about Bill Gates’ public persona changed. He morphed from a hardnosed and ruthless technology monopolizer into a soft, fuzzy and incredibly generous philanthropist when he and his wife launched the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.1
It was a public relations coup. May 18, 1998, the U.S. Justice Department, in collaboration with 20 state attorneys, filed an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft.2 At that time, the company was 23 years old and was ruling the personal computer market. The Seattle Times described the fallout from the antitrust lawsuit:3
“The company barely escaped being split up after it was ruled an unlawful monopolist in 2000 for using its stranglehold on the PC market with its Windows operating system to cripple competitors, such as Netscape’s Navigator Web browser.”
How would the world be different today if the company had been split? Yale law professor George Priest described the antitrust lawsuit as “one of the most important antitrust cases of its generation.”4 In 2002, a court settlement placed restrictions on Microsoft to curb some of its practices for five years.
It was later extended twice and then expired May 12, 2011. The lawsuit had a dramatic effect on “the emergence of an entirely new field called IP (intellectual property) antitrust,” Iowa law professor Herbert Hovenkamp told the Seattle Times.5
Later, large sums donated from the foundation made the news multiple times, including $9.5 million to GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines), a second $7.5 million to GAVI and $6.8 million to the World Health Organization in 2017.6
By June 2020, in the middle of a global pandemic, the Gates Foundation’s donations totaled 45% of WHO’s funding from nongovernmental sources.7 Once mainstream media’s attention was no longer on Gates’ antitrust activities and focused on the philanthropist actions of the foundation, Gates publicly turned his attention to vaccinating the world, long before COVID-19.8
Event 201: A Preplanned Pandemic
In a deep dive into the Gates Foundation’s charitable donations, The Nation found there were $250 million in grants to companies where the foundation held corporate stocks, including Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Sanofi and Medtronic. The money was directed at supporting projects “like developing new drugs and health monitoring systems and creating mobile banking services.”9 … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
/ heartandsoilsupplements 
/ heartandsoilhq 
/ heartandsoil 
/ heartandsoilsupplements 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
or DOWNLOAD THE MP4
Aletho News
Aletho News 
