19571
Defending Health, Life and Liberty🇺🇸 Natural News is a science-based natural health advocacy organization led by activist-turned-scientist Mike Adams, the Health Ranger. https://t.me/NaturalNewsChat
Trump administration SUSPENDS federal grants to Princeton University amid antisemitism probe
The Trump administration has suspended dozens of federal research grants to Princeton University in New Jersey, escalating its crackdown on Ivy League institutions under investigation for alleged antisemitism.
Princeton President Christopher Eisgruber confirmed the freeze, revealing that agencies including the Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of Defense halted funding for multiple research projects. While the administration has not provided detailed reasoning, the move aligns with a broader federal campaign targeting elite universities over campus discrimination complaints.
Princeton now joins Columbia University, the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University in facing federal funding suspensions tied to antisemitism investigations. Eisgruber pledged cooperation with government inquiries but vowed to defend academic freedom.
"We are committed to fighting antisemitism and all forms of discrimination, and we will cooperate with the government in combating antisemitism," he wrote in a campus-wide email sent Tuesday, April 1. "Princeton will also vigorously defend academic freedom and the due process rights of this university."
The suspensions follow a March warning from the Department of Education to 60 universities, threatening enforcement actions if they failed to address alleged anti-Jewish bias. Princeton had already been under federal investigation since April 2024.
The probe was initiated after Zachary Marschall, editor-in-chief of Campus Reform, filed a complaint citing a pro-Palestinian protest at Princeton where chants such as "Intifada" were heard. Marschall accused the university of ignoring what he called antisemitic rhetoric.
From protests to punishment: The high-stakes battle over campus speech
The second Trump administration's aggressive stance reflects President Donald Trump's repeated vows to combat campus antisemitism, which he has linked to pro-Palestinian activism. Federal officials have characterized some student demonstrators as "pro-Hamas," while activists insist their protests target Israeli military actions, not Jewish people. The administration has also deported foreign students tied to protests and intensified scrutiny of Middle East studies programs.
Princeton, with a $34 billion endowment, received $456 million in federal grants last year – making the suspensions a significant financial blow. The Anti-Defamation League previously gave the university an "F" grade for its handling of antisemitism.
Meanwhile, Columbia recently agreed to federal demands – including revising disciplinary policies and its Middle East curriculum – to restore $400 million in frozen funds. Over in Massachusetts, Harvard now faces an audit of $8.7 billion in grants by a federal antisemitism task force.
Eisgruber, a vocal critic of the administration's tactics, previously condemned the Columbia sanctions as a "radical threat to scholarly excellence" in an essay published last month in The Atlantic magazine. He likened the current climate to the Red Scare of the 1950s, warning of eroding academic freedoms.
The administration is leveraging Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which bars federal funding to institutions that enable discrimination based on religion or national origin. While Princeton has not been formally accused of violating the law, the suspensions signal a hardline approach that could reshape campus speech policies nationwide.
Watch this clip about colleges facing backlash and potentially losing funding over allegations of antisemitism on campus.
https://www.brighteon.com/a3599a90-d301-4398-83a9-e6e0d774f863
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Defunding DEADLY mRNA jabs: Government funding for mRNA technology being scrutinized and sidelined until proven “safe and effective” for real
Funding Uncertainty for mRNA Research - Federal support for mRNA technology is under scrutiny, with NIH officials reportedly advising scientists to omit "mRNA" from grant applications, despite a $47 billion research budget.
Scientists Warn of Consequences - Nobel laureate Drew Weissman and others argue that cutting NIH support would stall progress, drive young researchers abroad, and disrupt decades of public research underpinning medical advances.
Political Forces - Under RFK Jr.’s HHS leadership — millions of lives could be saved by pulling deadly mRNA vaccines off the market until proven safe
Lies, lies, and more lies. That’s what the American people received from the CDC, FDA and Vaccine Industrial Complex about the mRNA “technology” used for Covid jabs. First, we were all told that the spike proteins would only be produced in the body for a few days, until the immune system could recognize them and build up antibodies to protect against the “novel” gain-of-function Fauci Flu. That was a bold-faced lie. The spike prions keep getting churned out by tricked and genetically modified cells forever. Follow the science on that to find out.
Next, we were all lied to about mRNA not leaving the site of the injection. The spike proteins travel throughout the vascular system and can join together using light technology, so they were right about “technology” but Bill Gates must have forgot to describe how the nanoparticles create rubbery clots that catapult cancer, heart disease, infertility and dementia. Just a sordid little detail he left out while pushing the toxic jabs vehemently on the world.
National Institutes of Health won’t clarify HOW it’s using nearly $50 billion of research budget because they are nefarious and corrupt to the core
If an agency has a three-letter abbreviation, chances are they are in the business of making humans sick for profits. Look no further than the National Institutes of Harm (NIH) for a great example of that. There will be no mRNA vaccine for pancreatic cancer, unless of course they are talking about the Covid jab causing pancreatic cancer because spike proteins lodge in the pancreas, and then cancer cells use those prions as a catapult and grow there, causing the organ to fail. Since you can’t live without your pancreas, that’s another vector for Big Pharma’s main goal of population reduction via dirty injections.
According to whistleblowers, NIH officials are secretly now REMOVING REFERENCES to mRNA from their grant applications because they are being scrutinized, especially since mRNA is turning out to be a global disaster of genocidal proportions.
Cutting vaccine funding could save millions of lives and spare millions of children from neurological and social disorders like autism, Asperger’s, asthma, severe allergies, digestive issues, and childhood cancer. It’s time to recall every single vaccine out there and run some in-depth, real science tests with independent labs in charge that aren’t funded and controlled by Big Pharma or the vaccine manufacturers themselves. No more wolves guarding the sheep. How dumb and careless this has been for decades.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Former CDC Director advocates for additional MMR dose for babies, going against decades of vaccine safety recommendations
The push for an extra MMR dose
Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky called for an additional MMR dose for infants aged 6-11 months, particularly in areas experiencing measles outbreaks. Walensky and her colleagues have argued in op-eds published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and STAT News that the current immunization guidelines should be revised. They propose that infants traveling to regions with a higher probability of measles exposure, whether domestically or internationally, should receive an extra MMR dose between the ages of 6-11 months. This recommendation is based on the uptick in measles cases in the United States.
Several infectious disease experts, including Dr. Mary Caserta, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the University of Rochester Medical Center, agree with Walensky's proposal. Caserta stated, "If we have data showing that there’s an increased risk of measles in the United States, I’m definitely in favor of reviewing our immunization guidelines to see what we can do to best protect our children."
However, the push for an additional MMR dose for young babies raises significant concerns, particularly regarding the lack of safety data. Heather Ray, a science and research analyst with Children’s Health Defense (CHD), pointed out that "many people assume the MMR vaccine is safer than the measles, mumps and rubella infections," but there are "serious red flags regarding the safety and research behind the vaccine."
Safety concerns and adverse events
The MMR vaccine has been associated with a range of adverse events, including febrile seizures, anaphylaxis, meningitis, encephalitis, thrombocytopenia, arthralgia, and vasculitis. According to documents released by Physicians for Informed Consent, the risk of permanent disability or death from the MMR vaccine may be greater than the risk posed by the diseases it aims to prevent. This is due to the fact that vaccine safety studies have not been conducted on a large enough scale.
Ray highlighted that the risk of serious adverse events following MMR vaccination is "concerning" and noted that "only a small percentage" of these events are reported in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). As of the end of January, there have been 41 deaths reported in VAERS following MMR or MMRV vaccination since 2015.
In fact, Walensky's recommendation comes on the heels of a suspected measles case in a 1-year-old child from Pima County, Arizona, that was revealed to be a reaction to the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, not an actual case of measles. This "rare" reaction would likely become more commonplace if MMR vaccines were given to infants younger than one year of age, as this has never been recommended due to the vaccine's risk of adverse events in babies with underdeveloped immune systems and low blood volume/body weight.
The mischaracterization of vaccine reactions
The case in Arizona highlights a troubling trend: the mischaracterization of vaccine reactions as measles cases. The Pima County Health Department acknowledged that reactions to the MMR vaccine are "rare and do not carry the same risk as community-acquired measles." However, the lack of clarity on the toddler's symptoms and the precautionary measures taken by health authorities suggest a potential overreaction to vaccine reactions.
Karl Jablonowski, a senior research scientist with CHD, criticized the CDC's childhood vaccine schedule as "aggressive — some would find it reckless." He emphasized that the recommendation against administering the live-virus MMR vaccine before 12 months of age is not a coincidence. "MMR is not recommended for younger than 12 months old because even the vaccine-zealous recommenders do not find the risks appropriate," Jablonowski said.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
COVID mRNA injections linked to genetic changes that increase brain tumor and leukemia risk
A groundbreaking study published in Molecular Systems Biology has uncovered alarming evidence that mRNA COVID-19 injections may cause persistent genetic changes linked to cancer and autoimmune diseases. The research, conducted by a team of 19 German scientists, found that the vaccines alter histone structures — key components of chromosomes — potentially leading to uncontrolled cell growth and chronic inflammation. This is explained in greater detail in the study, Role of Histone Post-Translational Modifications in Inflammatory Diseases.
The findings add fuel to an already raging debate over the long-term safety of mRNA technology, with experts warning that these genetic modifications could explain the surge in post-vaccine inflammatory conditions and cancer diagnoses worldwide.
Key findings from the original study
The study demonstrates that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines induce long-lasting epigenetic modifications in monocyte-derived macrophages, characterized by persistent H3K27ac marks at promoter regions. These changes are associated with:
1. Trained Innate Immunity – Enhanced pro-inflammatory cytokine responses (IL-1?, TNF-?, CCL3, CCL20) upon stimulation with pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs).
2. Epigenetic Memory – H3K27ac enrichment at promoters of immune-related genes persists for at least six months after vaccination.
3. Dynamic Reprogramming – A prime-boost regimen (two initial doses + booster) is required for sustained epigenetic alterations.
4. G-Quadruplex DNA Involvement – H3K27ac is linked to G4 DNA structures, which regulate chromatin accessibility and transcription factor binding.
Mechanisms linking mRNA vaccination to leukemia and brain tumors
While the study does not directly investigate cancer risks, the observed epigenetic reprogramming raises plausible concerns regarding long-term genomic instability:
Leukemia Risk (Epigenetic Dysregulation in Hematopoietic Stem Cells)
• H3K27ac alterations in myeloid progenitors – The study suggests that epigenetic memory extends to bone marrow progenitor cells, which could affect hematopoiesis.
• Prolonged pro-inflammatory signaling – Chronic IL-1? and TNF-? secretion may promote clonal expansion of pre-leukemic cells (e.g., through NF-?B activation).
• G4 DNA instability – G-quadruplexes are enriched in oncogene promoters (MYC, BCL2, KRAS) and telomeres. Disruption of G4 stability by persistent H3K27ac could lead to chromosomal translocations (e.g., BCR-ABL in CML).
Brain Tumor Risk (Microglial Activation & Neuroinflammation)
• Trained microglia (brain-resident macrophages) – If similar epigenetic reprogramming occurs in microglia, chronic inflammation could promote glioblastoma progression (IL-1? is known to support tumor microenvironment).
• Blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption – Pro-inflammatory cytokines (TNF-?, CCL20) may increase BBB permeability, facilitating oncogenic viral entry (e.g., EBV, CMV) or metastasis seeding.
It's now clear: mRNA vaccines trigger epigenetic changes tied to cancer
The study focused on macrophages, immune cells that circulate in the blood, and found that mRNA vaccines induced a specific histone modification known as H3K27ac. This alteration, which persisted for months after vaccination, has been previously associated with leukaemia, gliomas (brain tumours), and autoimmune disorders.
“When histones are disrupted, cells process DNA more aggressively, which can lead to tumour formation,” explained journalist Alex Berenson, who has extensively covered vaccine risks. The researchers also suggested these changes could extend to bone marrow cells, where leukaemia originates—a finding that may explain the spike in leukaemia cases in heavily vaccinated Japan.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Dr. Mary Talley Bowden drops bombshells about children being permanently damaged by mRNA jabs during Tucker Carlson interview
Babies being destroyed by COVID jabs in 2025
In a chilling revelation that has left many Americans questioning the safety and necessity of COVID-19 vaccines, Dr. Mary Talley Bowden recently appeared on Tucker Carlson’s show to discuss the alarming number of adverse events reported following vaccination. The conversation, which left Carlson visibly shaken, highlighted the stark disconnect between the data and the continued push to vaccinate children, even as evidence of potential harm mounts.
Before her appearance on Carlson’s show, Dr. Bowden, a Texas-based ENT specialist, had already made a name for herself in the medical freedom movement. Her outspoken criticism of vaccine mandates and her advocacy for early treatment options like ivermectin have earned her both praise and criticism. Despite facing backlash, including a suspension from Houston Methodist Hospital for challenging the prevailing COVID narrative, Dr. Bowden has remained steadfast in her commitment to the Hippocratic Oath. She has successfully treated over 6,000 COVID patients without a single death, a testament to her dedication and expertise.
During the interview, Dr. Bowden pointed to data from the CDC’s VAERS system, which has recorded over 38,000 deaths following the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines. Under normal circumstances, such a figure would have prompted the FDA to pull the shots from the market. Instead, the agency has pushed forward, adding the COVID vaccine to the routine childhood schedule. This decision is particularly concerning given that the vaccines are still under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for children under 12 and have not yet received full FDA approval.
Dr. Bowden’s revelation that 9 million American children have received the latest version of these COVID shots was met with disbelief by Carlson. “Actually?” he asked, clearly caught off guard. “Yes,” Bowden confirmed. “Still?” he pressed. “Yes. Yes. 9 million [kids]—12% [of US children have been injected].” The conversation took a darker turn when Carlson asked about the potential long-term consequences of these shots.
The long-term health implications are serious
Dr. Bowden expressed deep concern about the potential for increased cancer rates and other serious health issues in young people. “I don’t see a ton of cancer in my practice,” she said, “but I do have friends at MD Anderson, and they said they’ve never seen anything like it. The young people coming in with very advanced tumors, I think that’s what we have to be worried about now.” She explained that while it is difficult to get up-to-date cancer data, anecdotal reports are piling up, painting a troubling picture.
The lack of transparency and access to comprehensive data on the long-term effects of COVID vaccines is a significant issue. Dr. Bowden noted that while there may be people who have access to this data, it is not readily available to the public. This raises profound questions about accountability and the decision-making process that has led to the widespread vaccination of children with products that have not yet been fully approved.
A call for accountability
The interview between Dr. Bowden and Tucker Carlson has sparked a much-needed conversation about the safety and necessity of COVID vaccines for children. The fact that 9 million children have been injected with a vaccine that is still under EUA is alarming, especially given the reported adverse events and the lack of long-term data on its safety.
As a society, we must ask ourselves: What have we done? In our rush to vaccinate every man, woman, and child, have we compromised the long-term health of a population that never needed these shots in the first place? What data was ignored, and who made the decisions to ignore that data? These are questions that demand answers.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
The smallpox vaccine was not a medical miracle – its history was marred by scandals
The questionable legacy of the smallpox vaccine
In the annals of medical history, few debates have been as contentious as the one surrounding the smallpox vaccine. In 1868, Dr. Charles T. Pearce, an English physician and early opponent of mandatory vaccination, published a 120-page essay titled "Vaccination: its tested effects on health, mortality, and population." This essay, available in the Wellcome Collection, offers a damning critique of the smallpox vaccine, questioning its efficacy, safety, and ethical implications. Pearce's arguments, rooted in meticulous observation and data analysis, resonate with contemporary skepticism towards vaccines, particularly in light of the COVID-19 scandal.
Pearce's skepticism towards the smallpox vaccine stemmed from his observations of high mortality rates among vaccinated individuals. He noted that "a great number [of vaccinated people] being cut-off in the flower of their age, while those, belonging to the same families, having had small-pox arrived at maturity." This observation led him to conclude that vaccination, while potentially preventing smallpox, increased the risk of death from other diseases.
Pearce's concerns were not unfounded. He highlighted the case of Jenner's own son, who died of tuberculosis (then known as consumption) after being vaccinated. "It is a remarkable fact that Jenner’s first child, his eldest son, on whom he experimented, died subsequently of consumption," Pearce wrote. He also pointed out that "another of his subjects, the man Phipps, whom Jenner vaccinated, also died of consumption."
Pearce's investigations led him to believe that the smallpox vaccine was not only ineffective but also dangerous. He argued that the lymph used in the vaccine, transferred from person to person, was often contaminated. "The puling, sickly infants, the offspring of the debauched, the diseased, of the ill-fed and ill-clad poor of London, who are brought in crowds to the public vaccinator to receive a blessing," he wrote, "are too often, instead of a blessing, the recipients of the seeds of disease and of premature death."
Compulsory vaccination was a public health disaster back then, too
Pearce's critique extended to the compulsory vaccination policies of his time. He argued that these policies were not only ethically questionable but also detrimental to public health. "Since the Compulsory Vaccination Act came into force [in 1853] there has been an excess of 254,000 in infant mortality in seven years," he wrote. This alarming statistic suggested that compulsory vaccination was doing more harm than good.
Furthermore, Pearce noted a significant increase in deaths from measles and scarlet fever following the introduction of compulsory vaccination. He presented data from the Registrar General’s Report, 1865, showing a rise in annual deaths per million from these diseases. "In the years 1850-1854, annual deaths were 1,296.8 per million, rising to 1,515.6 during 1855-1859 and rising yet again to 1,668.0 for the years 1860-1864," he wrote.
Pearce's findings raise important questions about the unintended consequences of mass vaccination campaigns. His work suggests that the focus on eradicating one disease may have inadvertently exacerbated others, a concern that remains relevant today.
History repeating itself
The parallels between the smallpox vaccine controversy and the COVID-19 scandal are striking. Both situations involve widespread vaccination campaigns, government mandates, and significant public resistance. Pearce's criticisms of the smallpox vaccine echo the concerns of many who question the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
The dark legacy of the U.S. government’s UNETHICAL medical and military research
The history of medical and military research in the U.S. is marred by a series of unethical experiments conducted on unwitting human subjects. From secret radiation exposure to biological warfare tests on civilian populations, these disturbing experiments reveal a pattern of disregard for human rights in the name of scientific advancement and national security.
Early experiments: Cancer, syphilis and malaria
In 1931, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Investigations conducted experiments in which human subjects were deliberately infected with cancer cells – without their knowledge or consent. Around the same time, Dr. Cornelius Rhoads, under the auspices of government and civilian hospitals, began exposing patients to high doses of radiation to study its effects. Rhoads later became a key figure in the U.S. biological weapons program.
One of the most infamous cases of unethical medical research was the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, which began in 1932. The U.S. Public Health Service recruited 600 African American men, 200 of whom had syphilis, under the false promise of free medical care.
Researchers withheld treatment – even after penicillin became the standard cure in the 1940s – to observe the disease's progression. The study continued for 40 years, only ending in 1972 after public outcry.
In 1940, 400 prisoners in Chicago were infected with malaria to test experimental drugs. These inmates were subjected to painful symptoms without proper medical oversight, highlighting the exploitation of vulnerable populations in medical research.
Biological and chemical warfare testing on civilians
Between 1949 and 1969, the U.S. military and intelligence agencies conducted secret biological warfare tests in at least 239 populated areas – including New York City (NYC); Washington, D.C.; San Francisco; and St. Louis. These experiments involved releasing harmful bacteria and chemical agents into the air to study their dispersal patterns.
One of the most alarming incidents occurred in September 1950, when the U.S. Navy released Serratia marcescens, a potentially pathogenic bacterium, off the coast of San Francisco. The bacteria spread through the city, leading to multiple infections and at least one death.
During the 1950s and 1960s, the U.S. Army and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) conducted aerosol dispersion tests using the toxic compound zinc cadmium sulfide over populated areas in the U.S., Canada and Mexico. In 1953, 36 tests were performed on citizens of Winnipeg in Canada's Manitoba province, where the chemical was sprayed to assess its potential to induce cancer.
Military experiments on public spaces
The Vietnam War era saw some of the most brazen biological experiments. In one instance, the U.S. Army sprayed a bacterial mist at unsuspecting travelers in Washington, D.C.'s Ronald Reagan National Airport to test the effectiveness of biological agents in crowded spaces.
Government scientists also placed Bacillus globigii, a bacterium linked to food poisoning and infections, inside light bulbs and dropped them into the NYC and Chicago subway systems. The goal was to study how pathogens could spread in urban environments – without informing the public of the risks. The military also tested B. globigii in Hawaii, deploying it from a submarine into the port of Oahu to simulate a biological attack on a naval base.
In another shocking case, the U.S. military and the CIA released dengue fever-carrying mosquitoes in Georgia and Florida, leading to outbreaks of the debilitating disease. Similar tests were conducted in Puerto Rico, where civilians were exposed to biological agents without their knowledge.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
A 2023 preprint study detected levels of synthetic DNA in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 shots that were 18 to 70 times above regulatory limits. Similarly, a December 2024 peer-reviewed study supervised by FDA scientists found synthetic DNA contamination levels in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines that were 6 to 470 times above regulatory limits.
These revelations have prompted a reevaluation of the regulatory framework surrounding mRNA vaccines. Last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the creation of a sub-agency within the CDC dedicated to investigating vaccine injuries, a move that underscores the growing recognition of the potential risks associated with these vaccines.
The history of vaccine development is fraught with challenges and controversies. The rapid development and deployment of mRNA vaccines during the COVID-19 scandal, while hailed as a scientific triumph, have also raised ethical and safety concerns. The rush to vaccinate the global population has outpaced the traditional safeguards of long-term safety studies, leaving many unanswered questions about the long-term effects of these vaccines.
Jablonowski expressed his dismay at the findings, stating that the "unintended reprogramming of progenitor cells" is not something to be celebrated but feared. "With every advancement in knowledge of the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, we are again reminded of our own complacency about the blinded rush to push these products into every American," he lamented.
As the debate over mRNA vaccines continues, the question of trust in regulatory bodies and scientific institutions looms large. The findings of this study, and the subsequent calls for suspension or withdrawal of the vaccines, highlight the need for transparency, rigorous safety testing, and ethical considerations in the development and deployment of medical technologies.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
As The Defender previously reported, Dr. Ben Edwards attempted to get the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) to issue a statement on budesonide as a possible treatment for respiratory issues following a measles infection. However, the state's medical director, Dr. Scott Milton, stated that the DSHS's only recommendation for measles was the MMR vaccine, and he did not believe the health authorities would "go for" promoting budesonide.
Lyla's recovery is a beacon of hope in a landscape of medical uncertainty and systemic failures. Her story raises important questions about the state of our healthcare system and the need for a more open-minded, patient-centered approach to treatment. As we continue to face the challenges of infectious diseases, it is crucial that we learn from cases like Lyla's and advocate for better, more accessible treatments.
In the words of Dr. Bartlett, "We need to be open to all the tools in the toolbox." This sentiment echoes the growing awareness and demand for a more comprehensive approach to healthcare, one that prioritizes patient well-being and embraces a wider range of treatment options.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
This system is a stark contrast to other industries. If a defective car or medical device causes harm, manufacturers are held accountable in court. Yet, if a vaccine causes seizures, brain damage, or death, the manufacturer faces no liability. The financial burden of compensating victims falls on a government-managed fund, financed by a 75-cent excise tax on each vaccine dose. Essentially, the public—not the industry—pays for the harm caused by vaccines.
The VICP system is not a safeguard for children; it’s a liability shield for corporations. By shielding manufacturers from lawsuits, the NCVIA removed a critical incentive for ensuring vaccine safety and efficacy.
The lack of safety standards: A dangerous loophole
Vaccines are not held to the same safety standards as other pharmaceutical products. Most vaccines bypass rigorous, long-term, placebo-controlled clinical trials, relying instead on inadequate safety studies with alarmingly short follow-up periods. For example, Sanofi’s IPOL polio vaccine was licensed based on trials that monitored safety for only three days after injection—grossly insufficient to detect serious adverse effects or long-term risks.
The absence of true inert placebos in vaccine trials further exacerbates this issue. Instead, new vaccines are often tested against existing vaccines or their adjuvants, making it nearly impossible to identify safety concerns. This lack of proper scientific rigor undermines the integrity of vaccine safety research and leaves children at risk.
The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’s flawed design also discourages transparency. By funneling claims into a government-controlled system with minimal payouts, the vaccine industry avoids the scrutiny that comes with legal action. This shields them from public scrutiny and accountability while perpetuating a cycle of harm and injustice.
Should the system be reformed or dismantled altogether?
Critics argue that repealing the NCVIA would dismantle the VICP, leaving vaccine-injured families without recourse. However, a hybrid system is possible—one that preserves the VICP for those who prefer it while allowing direct legal action against manufacturers. This approach would reintroduce accountability, forcing vaccine companies to prioritize safety over profits.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has emerged as a leading voice in this movement, advocating for stricter safety standards and legal reforms. As the head of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Kennedy is in a unique position to push for legislative changes. His long-standing criticism of the vaccine industry’s lack of transparency and accountability makes him a bold advocate for reform.
Kennedy has called for vaccines to be held to the same safety standards as other pharmaceutical products, including long-term, placebo-controlled trials. This would ensure that vaccines are proven safe before being mandated for widespread use.
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 was a grave mistake that must be corrected, the scientific dictatorship disbanded. It’s time to end the protectionist policies that prioritize industry profits over child safety. Holding vaccine manufacturers accountable, enforcing rigorous safety standards, and restoring justice for vaccine-injured families are matters of urgent moral and public health importance.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
For years, Dr. Bhattacharya has been at the forefront of this battle. As a critic of pandemic-era restrictions, he co-authored the “Great Barrington Declaration,” which advocated for focused protection of vulnerable populations rather than broad lockdowns. His efforts have been met with significant resistance, including censorship and personal attacks.
The Biden administration's alleged collusion with social media companies to censor dissenting views on COVID-19 policies, lockdowns, and mask and vaccine mandates has been the subject of multiple lawsuits. In a landmark case, the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that Bhattacharya and other plaintiffs were indeed censored, though it remanded the case to the lower court for further proceedings.
Reform and transparency
In his nomination hearings, Bhattacharya committed to changing the culture of censorship at NIH. “Over the last few years, top NIH officials oversaw a culture of cover-up, obfuscation and a lack of tolerance for ideas that differ from theirs,” he said. “Dissent is the very essence of science. I’ll foster a culture where NIH leadership will actively encourage different perspectives.”
He emphasized that scientific progress requires tolerance for a broad range of perspectives. “I want to make sure that all the ranges of hypotheses are supported,” Bhattacharya told committee members. He also highlighted the harms caused by censorship of non-establishment perspectives, including the negative impacts of pandemic-era measures such as lockdowns on child development and the spread of the virus.
The NIH’s recent actions, including the cancellation of grants targeting "vaccine hesitancy," are a significant step in the right direction. However, as Toby Rogers, Ph.D., a scholar at the Brownstone Institute, pointed out, more needs to be done. “Cancelling contracts is a good start. We also need to fire the people responsible, prosecute any criminal actions, repeal any laws or policies that enabled this to happen, and allow the public to access all government records concerning the censorship program.”
The fight for free speech and scientific integrity is far from over, but the NIH’s recent actions under Dr. Bhattacharya’s leadership mark a promising beginning. As the agency continues to reassess its funding practices and promote open scientific discourse, the hope is that it will set a new standard for transparency and accountability in health research.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
"If I was wrong, I would have expected the drug companies whose products I am maligning to have sought and secured a court injunction to stop me repeating these allegations," Dr. Yeadon said. "Neither of those things have ever happened. What has happened instead is that I have been extraordinarily censored and smeared sideways. And I think I offer that to you as strong evidence that I may be 'over the target,' at least in relation to these injectable products that have definitely injured and killed many people."
Dr. Yeadon's testimony adds a layer of complexity to the debate, suggesting that the scientific establishment and media have a role to play in the accountability process. Social media platforms like YouTube and the BBC, for instance, could face legal action for censoring critical voices and suppressing vital information.
The European Court of Justice's ruling marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing saga of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. It underscores the need for transparency, accountability and a reevaluation of how medical professionals are held responsible for their actions. As the legal and financial implications unfold, the medical landscape may see profound changes, potentially leading to a future where human doctors are no longer the primary providers of healthcare.
For now, the ruling serves as a stark reminder of the potential consequences of rush-to-market medical interventions and the importance of careful, evidence-based decision-making in healthcare.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
World Health Organization in crisis, prepares for DOWNSIZING after U.S. withdrawal and funding problems
The globalist World Health Organization (WHO) is now facing an existential crisis, following funding cuts and U.S. President Donald Trump's announcement that Washington will withdraw from the global health body.
A confidential memo obtained by Reuters reveals that the Geneva-based agency under the United Nations is preparing to slash its budget by 21 percent and reduce its workforce. The memo comes after the U.S. – the WHO's largest donor – formally withdrew under Trump in January. Since then, the WHO has desperately scrambled for alternative funding – including a failed public begging campaign.
The internal WHO memo, dated March 28 was signed by Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. Tedros bluntly admitted in the document that the organization has "no choice but to reduce the scale of our work and workforce" following the U.S. departure.
According to the memo, the budget for 2026 to 2027 will be cut from an initial $5.3 billion to $4.2 billion. Layoffs are also expected across all levels, including senior leadership in Geneva. The WHO employs 25 percent of its 9,473-strong staff in its Swiss headquarters alone.
Trump justified Washington's withdrawal from the WHO by accusing the global health body of mishandling the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and kowtowing to China. The withdrawal, Reuters mentions, has left a staggering $706 million shortfall in the agency's 2024 to 2025 budget.
The WHO's panicked response was epitomized by Maria Van Kerkhove, its technical lead for COVID-19, who took to social media pleading for public donations. Unfortunately, her public fundraiser with an ambitious $1 billion goal raised a paltry $23,000 – proof that global goodwill toward the WHO has evaporated.
China pays pennies, U.S. blows billions
In an executive order signed shortly after taking office in January, Trump condemned the WHO's "unfairly onerous payments" imposed on the U.S. while letting China contribute a fraction of what America did.
While Washington was expected to provide $442 million in voluntary funding for 2024 to 2025, Beijing pledged a mere $2.5 million. Even in mandatory contributions, the disparity was glaring: The U.S. paid $264 million compared to China's $181 million.
The WHO's credibility has been further eroded by its obsequious deference to Beijing during the pandemic. Despite China's obstruction of investigations into COVID-19's origins, WHO officials initially praised China's lockdowns as "the most ambitious, agile and aggressive disease containment effort in history." Later, under Chinese pressure, the agency dismissed the lab-leak theory as "extremely unlikely."
As Van Kerkhove herself admitted to Science magazine in January, China has repeatedly stonewalled requests for information on early cases and lab research. Yet, the WHO continues to shield Beijing from accountability.
The U.S. exit has sent shockwaves through global health programs, particularly those combating HIV, tuberculosis, and other infectious diseases, which relied heavily on American funding. But Trump’s order makes clear that Washington will redirect resources to more accountable partners, bypassing the WHO's inefficiencies.
With its budget imploding and its reputation in tatters, the WHO now faces a reckoning. As the agency scrambles to prioritize its dwindling resources, the world is left questioning whether the WHO – a body that prioritized politics over science – deserves to survive at all.
Watch WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus falsely claiming that the global health body didn't impose medical tyranny during the COVID-19 pandemic in this clip.
https://www.brighteon.com/a95873ea-3c35-46d6-a7ec-e5f7915069cc
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
As the world grapples with the aftermath of the COVID-19 scandal, questions linger about the true cost of mass vaccination. Are we poised on the brink of another health catastrophe, or are these concerns mere overblown anxieties? The answer may lie in the data: in the rising cancer rates, the excess deaths, and the lingering disabilities that shadow the vaccinated population.
As Dr. Soon-Shiong aptly put it, "This is existential." The narrative of the COVID-19 scandal is far from over, and the pages of history are yet to be written. One thing is clear: the legacy of this era hinges on our ability to confront the truth, no matter how inconvenient it may be. The COVID-19 scandal has unveiled disturbing levels of medical experimentation, driving medical systems into a state of perpetual fraud and coverups of iatrogenic error.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Oncologist warns of ‘terrifyingly aggressive’ cancers in children, linked to immune suppression from COVID vaccines
The rise of "turbo cancers" and a medical betrayal
For the first time in modern medical history, children as young as eight are being diagnosed with aggressive colon cancer—a phenomenon so rare it was virtually unheard of before 2021. But now, elite oncologists are breaking ranks, exposing what they call a "global epidemic" of fast-moving cancers directly linked to COVID-19 vaccines. The same medical authorities who once demanded blind faith in these shots have gone eerily silent as the bodies pile up.
Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, a pioneering cancer researcher who developed the FDA-approved drug Abraxane, recently dropped a bombshell during an interview with Tucker Carlson. "We have to face reality," he said, bluntly connecting the dots between mRNA vaccines and the surge in deadly cancers. His warning follows a flood of reports from frontline doctors witnessing bizarre, rapid-onset tumors in young patients—cases that defy decades of medical understanding.
Meanwhile, Dr. Angus Dalgleish, a renowned oncologist from the University of London, has called for an outright ban on mRNA vaccines, declaring they have no place in medicine outside of terminal cancer cases. "The fact that mRNA can integrate [into DNA], even if it doesn’t most of the time, makes it unjustifiable to use on young people, especially children," Dalgleish told the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation. His research found mRNA fragments inside tumors, suggesting the shots may be fueling cancer growth.
The scientist elaborated further, explaining that the mRNA from COVID-19 vaccines has been observed to “incorporate” into cancerous cells.
Dr. Dalgleish highlighted that researchers have identified traces of mRNA within cancerous tumors, noting that this genetic material plays a role in their rapid growth and the aggressive spread of these cancers. He asserted, “Cancer caused by mRNA vaccines is a known outcome.” Dr. Dalgleish issued a cautionary note, emphasizing that mRNA vaccines should not be utilized as a preventive measure against cancer, as they are implicated in its causation.
A manufactured crisis and the silencing of dissent
The timing of these cancers is undeniable. Before 2021, childhood cancers like glioblastoma and advanced colon cancer were statistical anomalies. Now, pediatric oncology wards are filling with cases that progress at terrifying speeds—what doctors now call "turbo cancers." Yet instead of investigating, public health agencies and pharmaceutical giants have doubled down on censorship, smearing dissenting experts as "conspiracy theorists" while quietly updating vaccine injury compensation programs to include cancer claims. The term "turbo cancer" isn't even a recognized medical term, yet doctors continue to report terrifyingly aggressive cancer cases, in adults and young children without a history of medical issues.
The parallels to past medical scandals are chilling. Just as Big Tobacco buried evidence linking smoking to lung cancer for decades, the COVID vaccine pushers—from the FDA to Pfizer—are gaslighting the public while children suffer. "We know [the cancer] is caused by [mRNA vaccines]," Dalgleish stated unequivocally.
History repeats itself when profit outweighs ethics. The same institutions that lied about opioids, asbestos, and Agent Orange are now dismissing vaccine injuries as "anecdotal." But with elite doctors like Soon-Shiong and Dalgleish risking their careers to speak out, how long can the facade hold? As grieving parents demand answers, one question burns: If vaccines are safe, why are the architects of this experiment refusing to debate their critics in the open?
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Kennedy reinstates essential HHS programs, ensures continuity amid cuts
In a move demonstrating measured governance, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the reinstatement of critical personnel and programs mistakenly cut in a sweeping federal workforce reduction this week. While the Trump administration’s broader initiative — spearheaded by government efficiency czar Elon Musk — aims to eliminate bureaucratic bloat, Kennedy has taken steps to preserve essential services, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) lead-monitoring program. The decision underscores his commitment to safeguarding public health while trimming excess, even as disgruntled agency staff and progressive critics resist the reforms.
Some terminated employees will continue working through June 2 to ensure an orderly transition, HHS confirmed, minimizing disruption to vital health services. Yet Kennedy’s selective reversals highlight a key principle: fiscal responsibility must not come at the cost of frontline health protections.
Correcting missteps, preserving priorities
Kennedy clarified that the layoffs, which initially slashed 10,000 positions across HHS agencies like the FDA, CDC, and NIH, were never intended to gut indispensable programs. “Personnel that should not have been cut were cut — we’re reinstating them, and that was always the plan,” he told ABC News. The CDC’s lead poisoning prevention branch, which monitors toxic exposure in children, was among the first flagged for restoration — a decision applauded by local health officials reliant on its support.
Milwaukee Health Commissioner Mike Totoraitis, whose team urgently needed CDC assistance to address lead contamination in schools, voiced cautious relief. “If our program is reinstated, that is fantastic news. We need this for our nation,” said Erik Svendsen, the branch’s former director. HHS later clarified the program’s functions would continue under consolidated offices, ensuring no lapse in protecting children from preventable harm.
Kennedy’s approach mirrors promises made during the restructuring’s rollout: an 80% reduction in redundant administrative roles — IT, HR, and communications — while maintaining core services. "And one of the things that President Trump has said is that if we make mistakes, we're going to admit it and we're going to remedy it, and that's one of the mistakes," he said.
Streamlining without sacrificing safety
Critics, including ousted bureaucrats and unionized federal employees, have protested the cuts outside agency headquarters, accusing the administration of recklessness. But Kennedy insists the reforms target inefficiencies, not expertise. For instance, the FDA’s drug-review divisions and NIH research grants remain largely untouched, while bloated middle-management layers face elimination.
Temporary extensions for some employees further reflect pragmatism. “This decision is focused on ensuring that the transition is as seamless as possible, minimizing any disruption to the agency's mission and operations,” said HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon. The measured phaseout contrasts with apocalyptic predictions from opponents, who falsely claimed vaccines or infectious disease tracking would suffer. Instead, Kennedy’s team has identified redundancies — like 15 separate CDC communications offices — as prime candidates for consolidation.
A healthier, leaner future
The HHS overhaul, while contentious, signals a long-overdue reckoning with bureaucratic sprawl. Taxpayer savings from the cuts — reducing HHS staffing from 82,000 to 62,000 — will be redirected to high-impact initiatives, including Kennedy’s proposed “Administration for a Healthy America.” By retaining critical programs like lead surveillance and reinvesting in public health infrastructure, the secretary is proving fiscal conservatism and effective governance need not be at odds.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Walensky acknowledged that implementing a third MMR dose would incur costs but argued that it "can be cost-effective compared with the resources required to treat infections and contain outbreaks." However, Jablonowski countered that this approach is a "knee-jerk reaction to fear" and that "the manufacturing of fear is a multi-billion-dollar-a-year industry."
Dr. Peter Kasson, a professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology, emphasized the severity of measles, stating that it can "ravage the immune system and brain, causing long-term damage." While measles is indeed highly contagious, David Speicher, a molecular virologist and epidemiologist at the University of Guelph, noted that "the risk of getting that severe disease is low and the risk of transmitting or getting infected in a population where most of the population is immunized for measles is also extremely low."
As the debate over the necessity of an additional MMR dose for young babies continues, it is crucial to weigh the potential benefits against the risks. The case in Arizona serves as a reminder that vaccine reactions can be mistaken for actual infections, raising questions about the accuracy of diagnoses and the precautionary measures taken.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Immunologist Jessica Rose, PhD, noted that repeated mRNA injections could induce epigenetic reprogramming in stem cells, potentially causing long-term immune dysfunction. “We’re seeing chronic inflammatory conditions in pharmacovigilance data,” she said. “This isn’t theoretical—it’s happening.”
Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher warned that the study highlights “immune dysregulation” that could lead to chronic disease and cancer. “These findings should have halted the vaccine rollout immediately,” he said.
Despite the study’s damning conclusions, neither the FDA nor the CDC has issued new warnings. Meanwhile, Japan—one of the most mRNA-vaccinated nations—has seen a statistically significant rise in leukaemia cases, raising urgent questions about causation.
Karl Jablonowski, PhD, a senior researcher at Children’s Health Defense, criticized the study authors for downplaying risks. “Their blind faith in mRNA technology is dangerous,” he said. “Unintended genetic reprogramming isn’t a benefit—it’s a catastrophe waiting to happen.”
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
The FDA’s decision to add COVID vaccines to the routine childhood schedule, despite the lack of full approval and the mounting evidence of potential harm, is deeply troubling. It is time for a serious conversation about accountability and the need to re-evaluate the current vaccination strategy. In the words of Dr. Bowden, “We have to be worried about now.” The time for action is long overdue. It is imperative that we remove these products from the market until their safety and efficacy can be unequivocally proven.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Pearce's observation that "Vaccination as at present practised is a mockery" resonates with those who argue that the COVID-19 vaccines were rushed to market without sufficient long-term safety data. His concerns about the contamination of the vaccine lymph find a parallel in the debate over the ingredients and potential side effects of modern vaccines.
Moreover, Pearce's emphasis on the ethical implications of compulsory vaccination is relevant to the ongoing debate over vaccine mandates. His argument that "vaccination is a crime against nature, and ought not to be enforced" speaks to the heart of the issue: protecting the balance between individual freedom and the insane demands of public health collectivism, hellbent on repeating medical interventions that do more harm than good.
As we reflect on the history of the smallpox vaccine, it is clear that the debate over vaccination has been going on for over a century. Pearce's essay, though written over 150 years ago, offers a powerful critique that continues to resonate today. His work challenges us to question the narratives surrounding vaccination and to consider the broader implications of mass vaccination campaigns.
In the end, the question remains: are vaccines the saviors they are often claimed to be, or are they part of a larger, more complex story? Instead of medical professionals putting vaccines on a pedestal, it's time for medical responsibility and true informed consent on every issue of vaccination. The real history of vaccination needs to be told, and skepticism is needed, not blind worship.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Legacy and accountability
Many of these experiments remained classified for decades, only coming to light through Freedom of Information Act requests and investigative journalism. While some victims and their families have sought justice, most received no compensation or acknowledgment from the government.
These unethical experiments raise critical questions about medical ethics, government transparency and human rights. They serve as a grim reminder of what can happen when scientific research is conducted without oversight or consent – a warning that remains relevant today as new technologies and military strategies emerge.
Watch this video about the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.
https://www.brighteon.com/0ce10ab6-77a7-429c-8eea-b53c5ce1cdc8
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Multidrug-resistant Candida auris: The SILENT KILLER in America’s hospitals
In the shadowy corridors of America's healthcare facilities, a new and deadly threat is silently spreading. Candida auris, a drug-resistant fungus, is rapidly becoming one of the most formidable adversaries faced by health officials today.
Described by some medical professionals as akin to "having cancer," this insidious pathogen is not only resistant to most treatments but is also spreading at an alarming rate, posing a significant risk to public health.
First detected in U.S. hospitals in 2016, C. auris initially seemed like a minor concern with only 52 cases reported across four states. However, the situation has since spiraled out of control. By 2023, the number of infections had skyrocketed to 4,514, affecting 38 states.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) declared it an "urgent threat" in 2023, but the situation has only worsened. States like Georgia and Florida are now experiencing a rapid increase in cases, raising the alarm bells even louder.
C. auris is a type of yeast infection that is notoriously difficult to treat. It is resistant to most standard disinfectants and antifungal drugs, making it a formidable foe in hospital settings.
This resistance extends to common antifungal medications like Diflucan, and even second-line treatments such as Mycamine are ineffective in 10 percent of cases. The fungus can colonize the skin and survive on surfaces like medical equipment and bedrails for weeks, making it a persistent threat.
The consequences of a C. auris infection can be devastating. The fungus can enter the body through cuts or medical devices such as breathing tubes and catheters, leading to severe infections.
Identifying an infection can be challenging as symptoms often mimic those of other infections – including fever, chills and aches. In some cases, infected wounds may show redness, warmth and pus. The fungus can also cause infections in the bloodstream and vital organs, which can be fatal if not treated promptly.
Once it spreads to the bloodstream, it can cause life-threatening conditions. Approximately one in three people who contract C. auris succumb to the infection. Those with prolonged hospital stays or who require invasive treatments are particularly vulnerable.
The spread of a lethal superbug
The fungus is not only spreading within hospitals, but is also beginning to affect the community. Nevada health officials have warned that C. auris may be spreading beyond healthcare facilities for the first time in U.S. history. This development is particularly concerning given the fungus's ability to survive on surfaces and its resistance to many common disinfectants.
The threat of C. auris is not confined to the United States. Since its discovery in Japan in 2009, it has spread globally, causing outbreaks in hospitals and long-term care facilities worldwide. Meanwhile, the Public Health Agency of Canada has labeled it a "disease of public health significance."
Researchers are working tirelessly to develop new treatments and improve detection methods. Healthcare facilities are adopting more stringent cleaning protocols, using specialized disinfectants designed to kill the fungus. Dr. Timothy Connelly of Memorial Health in Savannah, Georgia, emphasizes the importance of using "List P" disinfectants, which are specifically designed to combat C. auris.
C. auris represents a significant challenge to global health. Its resistance to treatment, coupled with its ability to spread easily in healthcare settings, makes it a formidable adversary. However, with continued research, improved infection control measures and heightened awareness, it is possible to mitigate its impact and protect vulnerable populations.
Watch this news report about deaths from C. auris infections in 2021.
https://www.brighteon.com/78ff7851-11a2-47c2-a1ff-590c96436784
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
German researchers find link between mRNA vaccines and GENETIC CHANGES that precede CANCER and AUTOIMMUNE DISORDERS
The mRNA scandal leads to cancer and autoimmune disease explosion
In the wake of the COVID-19 scandal, a groundbreaking study by 19 German scientists has shed new light on the potential long-term risks associated with mRNA vaccines. Published in the prestigious journal Molecular Systems Biology, the research reveals that these vaccines may cause persistent genetic alterations, leading to an increased risk of cancer and autoimmune disorders. This revelation has ignited a firestorm of debate, raising critical questions about the safety and ethical implications of these widely administered vaccines.
The study focused on the effects of mRNA vaccines on macrophages, immune cells that play a vital role in defending the body against pathogens. The researchers found that the vaccines altered a key component of these cells' chromosomes: the histones. Histones are DNA-binding proteins that give DNA its three-dimensional structure, a fact emphasized by Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at Children's Health Defense. "Most scientific studies on histone modification primarily focus on the manifestation of disease," Jablonowski noted.
The study identified a specific change known as "histone 3 lysine 27 acetylation" (H3K27ac), which was observed in the macrophages of vaccinated individuals. This alteration, according to journalist Alex Berenson, is linked to several types of cancer and has been the subject of increasing scientific scrutiny. The researchers found that these changes persisted for many months after vaccination, suggesting that similar alterations may be occurring in monocytes, a type of white blood cell that produces macrophages.
Berenson highlighted the significance of these findings, stating that the alterations are epigenetic, meaning they occur around DNA's core and can activate genes in ways that promote tumor growth. "The risk here is, of course, prolonged and excessive inflammation, which might contribute to tissue damage or chronic inflammatory conditions," he explained.
The broader implications
Epigenetics, the study of how behavior and environment can cause changes that affect gene expression, is at the heart of this debate. Immunologist and biochemist Jessica Rose, Ph.D., emphasized that the study confirms existing concerns about the risks of mRNA vaccines. "Repeat injection leads to a boatload of immunological modifications," she said. "If the systemic reach goes far enough, such as to stem cells, then repeated injection could potentially induce epigenetic changes in these cells."
This is particularly concerning given the role of hematopoietic stem cells, which are known to develop innate immune memory in response to certain stimuli. The potential for these cells to be reprogrammed by mRNA vaccines raises the specter of long-term health consequences, including chronic inflammatory diseases and oncogenic processes.
Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher echoed these concerns, stating that the study adds to the growing body of evidence describing the potent immune dysregulating effects of mRNA injections. "This raises serious concerns about long-term immune homeostasis and the potential for chronic inflammatory disease, autoimmune sequelae, and even oncogenic processes," he warned.
A call for re-evaluation
The study's findings have strengthened calls for the suspension or withdrawal of mRNA vaccines. A petition filed earlier this year with the FDA by a group of scientists argues that the vaccines are unapproved gene therapies and are contaminated with DNA plasmids. This petition, along with several recent studies, has fueled the debate over the safety of these vaccines.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Budesonide emerges as lifeline for measles patients amidst hospital system turmoil
In a heartening turn of events, a 4-year-old girl named Lyla from West Texas has made a remarkable recovery from secondary pneumonia following a measles infection, thanks to the timely administration of budesonide. This case highlights the urgent need for better-equipped hospital systems and more informed medical professionals in the face of infectious diseases. The story of Lyla's treatment, which took place at Covenant Children's Hospital in Lubbock, exposes the systemic failures and lack of preparedness that have plagued the medical community, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.
A mother's desperate plea for effective treatment
Lyla was admitted to the emergency room of Covenant Children's Hospital on February 28, suffering from severe breathing difficulties. Her condition was critical, and her parents, MaryAnn and Henry, were deeply concerned. Just two days earlier, another child, a 6-year-old girl, had died from pneumonia following a measles infection at the same hospital. The deceased child had not received any breathing treatments before her untimely death.
MaryAnn and Henry, who chose not to vaccinate their children due to concerns about vaccine injuries, had been using natural remedies to support their children's recovery from measles. However, when Lyla's respiratory issues worsened, they knew they needed more than natural remedies. "I started noticing she wasn’t breathing as well," MaryAnn recalled. "She was breathing very heavy on her chest and her fever was coming back."
Desperate for help, MaryAnn contacted her former doctor at Covenant Medical Center, who had saved her life 12 years earlier. "I trusted you with my life 12 years ago, and I trust you with my daughter’s life now," she pleaded. The doctor arranged for Lyla to be airlifted to Lubbock Covenant Children's Hospital, where she would receive the care she desperately needed.
Hospital System failures exposed
Upon arrival at the hospital, Lyla's parents faced a series of distressing encounters with hospital staff. Henry recounted an exchange with a head nurse who questioned his knowledge of his daughter's condition, asking, "Are you a doctor?" in a condescending tone. When Henry offered to show photos of his children with measles, the nurse demanded proof, revealing a troubling lack of trust and empathy.
Even more alarming, hospital staff denied Lyla food and water for nine hours, citing concerns that she might vomit if her condition worsened. This decision left Lyla hungry and thirsty, adding to her parents' distress. Henry questioned the decision, asking the ER doctor, "Is there any medical reason that this child shouldn’t eat or drink?" The doctor responded, "No. Why would we deny this child anything? She needs to eat and drink as much as she wants to get better."
Budesonide: A game-changer in respiratory treatment
Lyla's turnaround came when Dr. Richard Bartlett, a West Texas emergency room physician with extensive experience in treating respiratory inflammation, intervened. Bartlett, who had successfully used budesonide during the COVID-19 pandemic, persuaded Lyla's doctor to try the treatment. "I’ve never lost anyone with COVID," Bartlett told the doctor. "Can we try it on this patient?"
Budesonide, a generic, widely available inhaled corticosteroid, has a long history of safety and effectiveness in easing respiratory inflammation. After just three treatments, Lyla's condition improved dramatically. Her oxygen levels rose, and she was able to go home within 36 hours of her first budesonide treatment.
Lyla's story is a testament to the power of basic, effective treatments like budesonide, which can be used for any infectious disease affecting the respiratory tract. It also underscores the need for hospital systems to be better prepared and for medical professionals to be more informed about the full range of treatment options available.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
How the Vaccine Industry escaped accountability for nearly FOUR DECADES, endangering children’s lives for false hopes of protection
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA), enacted in the late 1980s, was designed to shield the vaccine industry from legal liability and financial ruin, rather than protecting children from harm caused by vaccines. Signed into law under the guise of ensuring vaccines remain accessible, the act established a unique federal compensation system that places blame solely on parents of vaccine-injured children. This system, criticized for its unfairness, redefines vaccine injuries in a way that makes it nearly impossible for families to receive justice. While the act claims to prioritize the well-being of children, critics argue it prioritizes corporate interests over public health and parental rights.
The origins of the NCVIA stem from a time when the vaccine industry faced mounting lawsuits over vaccine-related injuries and deaths. Instead of addressing the root causes of these harms, the act created a no-fault compensation program administered by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Parents of vaccine-injured children are directed to a bureaucratic system, often referred to as a "kangaroo court," where the burden of proof is stacked against them. The strict definitions of vaccine injuries and convoluted criteria for compensation leave countless families denied the justice they deserve, burying their stories under a system designed to protect industry profits.
Key points:
• The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 granted vaccine manufacturers immunity from lawsuits, shielding them from accountability for injuries caused by vaccines.
• The act funnels vaccine-injured families into the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), a flawed system that rejects nearly half of claims and denies justice to countless children and families.
• This law prioritizes industry profits over child safety, allowing poor-quality vaccines to flood the market without rigorous safety standards.
• Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has emerged as a leading voice in the fight to reform this corrupt system, advocating for stricter safety measures and accountability for vaccine manufacturers.
The legislative shield that continues to harm children four decades later
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 was not established to protect children but to protect vaccine manufacturers from legal accountability. This law, championed by Congress and the pharmaceutical industry, created a false narrative of public health triumph while quietly enabling Big Pharma to evade responsibility for vaccine-related injuries, deaths, and long-term health consequences. Since its inception, this corrupt system has left thousands of vaccine-injured children without justice, funneling their cases into a flawed compensation program that rejects the majority of claims. As the vaccine industry continues to profit from a liability-free environment, the call for systemic reform grows louder.
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was born out of a series of lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers in the 1980s, particularly over the Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis (DTP) vaccine. Parents of injured children began winning significant settlements, threatening the financial stability of pharmaceutical companies. Rather than addressing the root cause of the injuries, Congress sided with Big Pharma, passing the NCVIA to grant manufacturers unprecedented legal immunity.
Under this law, injured individuals are forced into the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), a bureaucratic nightmare that rejects more than half of claims. Families seeking justice are met with a labyrinth of red tape, arbitrary criteria, and a grossly insufficient compensation fund. Meanwhile, vaccine manufacturers operate with impunity, free from legal consequences regardless of the harm their products cause.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
The NIH reckoning: Battling censorship and restoring free speech in health research
Amid intensifying scrutiny over government involvement in influencing public discourse, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has launched an internal inquiry that could reshape how it funds research with implications for free expression. This move comes as the agency braces for a free-speech reckoning under its new chief, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.
An urgent call for transparency
According to STAT News, agency officials, in preparation for the swearing-in of incoming director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, recently directed staff to identify any existing contracts potentially linked to "any form of censorship at all or directing people to believe one idea over another related to health outcomes." The request, which carried a deadline of noon Wednesday, signaled a sweeping reassessment of federally funded messaging campaigns.
Included in the NIH’s internal email were instructions to flag agreements tied to vaccine promotion or public health narratives emphasizing the “dangers of Covid or not wearing masks.” The directive also advised employees to search for terms such as “media literacy,” “social media,” “social distancing,” and “lockdowns” — all terms frequently associated with the suppression of dissenting viewpoints during the pandemic.
Canceling grants for "vaccine hesitancy"
This review comes on the heels of similar actions that preceded abrupt funding withdrawals. Earlier in the month, NIH notified researchers that at least 33 grants aimed at combating “vaccine hesitancy” would be canceled, with another nine slated for reduction or revision.
Hours after NIH director Bhattacharya was confirmed, the agency tackled one of his priorities — ending ‘censorship’ in science. The early morning email, marked “URGENT,” asked contracting officers at the NIH to respond by “noon today” with information on any contract that “may be related to any form of censorship at all or directing people to believe one idea over another related to health outcomes.”
Dr. Bhattacharya’s journey
President Donald Trump’s selection of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya to lead the National Institutes of Health signals a renewed commitment to transparency, scientific freedom and reform. A Stanford professor with dual training in medicine and economics, Bhattacharya has long emphasized data-driven decision-making and compassionate public health policy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, he became a national figure for challenging the dominant narrative on lockdowns and mandates, arguing they caused unintended harm.
Bhattacharya’s advocacy came at a cost. He was censored on major social media platforms and became a plaintiff in a landmark lawsuit alleging that the federal government colluded with Big Tech to suppress dissenting views on public health. Internal documents revealed that his views were intentionally downranked or hidden, despite being grounded in credible research and expertise. Rather than backing down, he fought back — defending not just his own speech, but the principle that science must remain open to challenge.
In October, Jay Bhattacharya posted on X: “If you favor government control of misinformation, you are an enemy of free speech.” This statement underscores his commitment to free expression and scientific integrity.
Why this matters today
The NIH’s internal inquiry and the cancellation of grants targeting "vaccine hesitancy" are significant steps in a larger battle for free speech and scientific openness. This issue gained prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic, when dissenting views on public health measures were often silenced or marginalized. Critics argue that such censorship not only stifles scientific debate but also erodes public trust in health institutions.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
European Court of Justice: Healthcare professionals who promoted or administered COVID-19 vaccines are CRIMINALLY LIABLE for any harm caused
In a groundbreaking decision that could reshape the medical landscape, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that healthcare professionals who promoted or administered COVID-19 vaccines are civilly and criminally liable for any harm caused. This ruling, announced in early 2025, underscores the profound implications of medical professionals who participated in the mass vaccination campaign, a move that has long been a source of controversy and debate within the medical community.
A prophetic warning
Back in 2020, Dr. Vernon Coleman, a noted medical writer and health freedom advocate, issued a stark warning. He foretold that doctors who prescribed the then-experimental COVID-19 vaccines would face severe legal consequences, including lawsuits and potential imprisonment. Dr. Coleman's warning was grounded in his belief that the vaccines could cause significant harm, a stance that was met with skepticism and criticism from mainstream medical institutions.
"Back in 2020, I warned that doctors who prescribed the then-new and experimental covid-19 vaccine would likely be sued (and also imprisoned) if it turned out, as I expected, that the vaccine caused harm to those who were injected," Dr. Coleman wrote in his new book, The End of Medicine. "I warned that doctors' insurers would not be able to cope and that thousands of doctors would go bankrupt."
The European Court of Justice ruling
The ECJ's recent ruling validates Dr. Coleman's predictions. The court determined that healthcare professionals had the autonomy to refuse the vaccines and, therefore, bear full responsibility for their actions. This decision has far-reaching consequences, not only for individual doctors but also for the broader healthcare system.
According to the ruling, doctors who urged people to be vaccinated or who administered the vaccines are both civilly and criminally liable. The court emphasized that physicians were not compelled to prescribe or administer the vaccines and thus must take responsibility for their choices. This ruling could exonerate those doctors who opposed the vaccines or criticized them and faced disciplinary actions.
"This ruling could result in those doctors who were subject to disciplinary proceedings because they opposed vaccinations, or because they criticized the vaccines, being exonerated," Dr. Coleman noted.
The financial implications
The financial ramifications of this ruling are staggering. If patients claim severe and permanent damage from the vaccines, the potential damages could run into millions of pounds, dollars, or euros per patient. Dr. Coleman estimates that the total financial burden could bankrupt the vast majority of doctors in countries such as the U.K., U.S., Canada, Australia and the EU.
"It seems likely that the sum per patient could run into millions of pounds/dollars/euros," Dr. Coleman stated. "I doubt if doctors' insurance companies would have enough money to satisfy millions of claims (with each patient demanding millions of pounds) and so the vast majority of doctors in the U.K., the U.S., Canada, Australia, the EU etc., etc., would go bankrupt."
Accountability and the Media
The ECJ's ruling also raises questions about the accountability of other entities that played a role in the vaccination campaign. Dr. Mike Yeadon @DrMikeYeadon, a former Pfizer executive, has been vocal about his belief that the COVID-19 vaccines were "deliberately designed intentionally to injure, kill and reduce fertility."
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Decentralize TV: Dr. Leonard Coldwell reveals shocking, heavily censored truths about CANCER, healing and the medical mafia complex
Renowned holistic health expert and cancer patient advocate Dr. Leonard Coldwell revealed shocking truths about the medical-industrial complex, the root causes of disease and the innate healing power within each individual during his appearance on "Decentralize TV."
His discussion with the Health Ranger Mike Adams and Todd Pitner, the program's hosts, exposed how the system profits from keeping people sick rather than curing them.
Coldwell, whose personal journey began when his mother was diagnosed with terminal liver cancer, shared how he defied medical predictions and healed her naturally – even extending her life by nearly five decades. His experience led him to develop the Instinct-Based Medicine System (IBMS), a revolutionary approach that identifies and eliminates the root causes of illness rather than merely suppressing symptoms.
"Cancer is not really an illness," Coldwell explained. "It's a condition. It's an accumulation of symptoms."
Coldwell, who holds the title of the most blocked healer from social media, continued that chemotherapy and radiation only mask symptoms while destroying the body. True healing, he added, comes from addressing the root cause – often chronic stress, emotional trauma or self-sabotage. Cancer and other autoimmune diseases stem from internal conflict, where the body attacks itself due to unresolved emotional or psychological distress.
The medical mafia's deadly agenda and the power of self-healing
Coldwell didn't hold back in condemning the pharmaceutical and medical industries. He cited Dr. Gary Null's seven-year study that concluded that modern medicine is the leading cause of death in the Western world.
"The main cause of illness is the pharmaceutical industry," he said. According to Coldwell, Big Pharma doesn't want cures for people – only repeat customers.
He also debunked the germ theory as "fraudulent," explaining that so-called viruses are actually exosomes – the body's natural detoxification process. When a cell becomes toxic, it expels waste in tiny sacs. Given this, sickness is just the body cleaning itself – but modern medicine calls these sacs "viruses" to sell fear and vaccines.
Ultimately, Coldwell asserted that only the individual can cure themselves. He explained to Adams and Pitner that the same person who made you sick – you yourself – is the same one who can heal you. Coldwell also stressed the importance of instinct, calling it "God talking to us" and urging people to trust their intuition rather than blindly following medical authorities.
Debunking the lies about nutrition and toxins
Coldwell also tackled dietary myths, explaining that processed foods, fluoride and artificial medications poison the body. Nicotine itself isn't addictive, but the chemicals in cigarettes create dependency.
He also noted that coffee is anti-aging and prevents dementia; Coldwell himself drinks eight to 12 cups daily. Sugar cane juice in its raw, organic form can reverse cancer in just 21 days.
Ultimately, Pitner raised a critical point: Fear is the real pandemic. Coldwell agreed, noting that the media, governments and Big Pharma use fear to control people. In turn, demons and evil entities feed on this fear and become stronger.
His solution? Reject fear, embrace self-confidence, and take control of your health. True healing comes from within – through instinct, self-love and natural remedies.
Watch the full interview between Dr. Leonard Coldwell, Todd Pitner and the Health Ranger Mike Adams on "Decentralize TV" below.
https://www.brighteon.com/98e29c8e-f4f8-43a1-b632-214cce0d7581
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
COVID-19 scandal linked to CANCER SURGE: Billionaire researcher sounds alarm
The COVID-19 Scandal and its cancerous aftermath
In a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, a transplant surgeon and biotech billionaire, issued a stark warning that has sent shockwaves through the medical community. He posits that the COVID-19 scandal, marked by medical tyranny and mass iatrogenic error, may be responsible for a surge in aggressive cancers, particularly among younger individuals. This alarming assertion has sparked a heated debate, with scientists and policymakers scramble to address the potential link between mRNA vaccines and an unprecedented rise in cancer cases.
Dr. Soon-Shiong, a pioneer in cancer immunotherapy and the founder of ImmunityBio, has spent decades studying the human immune system's response to cancer. In the interview, he shared harrowing anecdotes of encountering metastatic cancers in children and young adults — cases he described as "terrifyingly aggressive." These observations, he argues, are unprecedented in his five-decade medical career.
"I never saw pancreatic cancer in children," Dr. Soon-Shiong recounted during the interview. "The greatest surprise to me was a 13-year-old with metastatic pancreatic cancer." He also cited instances of young children diagnosed with colon cancer and ovarian cancer in women in their 30s — phenomena he attributes to the COVID-19 scandal.
The science behind the scare: inflammation and immune suppression
Dr. Soon-Shiong's hypothesis hinges on the idea that both the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines could be driving an increase in cancer cases by triggering chronic inflammation and immune system exhaustion. The virus is known to cause a massive inflammatory response, which some cancers exploit to grow and metastasize.
Furthermore, he points to emerging research suggesting that the spike protein in the virus and vaccines might interfere with critical cellular processes, potentially suppressing tumor-suppressor proteins. While these findings are preliminary, they add a layer of biological plausibility to his concerns.
The broader health crisis: excess deaths and disabilities
Independent research firms, such as Phinance Technologies, have identified worrying trends in post-COVID health outcomes. Their data reveals a significant increase in excess deaths and disabilities among working-age populations, particularly those who received vaccines. Between 2021 and 2022, the U.S. saw a 23% rise in excess deaths among 25-64-year-olds and a 24.6% increase in disabilities in the workforce—statistics that raise eyebrows, especially since these groups are typically healthier than older populations.
Edward Dowd, co-founder of Phinance Technologies, notes a concerning correlation between the vaccine rollout and these adverse health outcomes. "The healthiest segment of the population… saw a greater relative increase in disabilities after Q1 2021," he observed, suggesting that the vaccines may have had unforeseen consequences.
While some oncologists, such as Dr. Angus Dalgleish from St. George’s, University of London, echo Dr. Soon-Shiong's fears, others remain skeptical. Infectious disease experts argue that there is insufficient evidence linking vaccines to cancer, though they acknowledge the need for further research into long-term health effects.
In a statement to FactCheck. org, one expert dismissed the claims, stating, "There isn't evidence to date that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer or lead to worsening cancer." However, this dismissal overlooks the increasing anecdotal reports from clinicians who have observed cancer progression in patients post-vaccination.
Has medical tyranny become the New Normal?
Dr. Soon-Shiong's warnings raise profound ethical and moral questions. What are the limits of medical innovation, especially when it involves unprecedented interventions like mRNA vaccines? Can we afford to overlook potential long-term health consequences in our haste to combat a global crisis?
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
As Attkisson noted in 2023: "You probably haven’t heard much about these incendiary findings." Why? Because admitting failure would collapse a $6 billion flu vaccine industry. How many more buried studies will it take before we stop trusting "experts" who refuse to follow the science?
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia