16504
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
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
"Fast onset of symptoms is common—half of our patients had serious reactions within 24 hours," he said. "Yet the TGA acts like these deaths are just random."
The federal compensation scheme, which closed last year, approved only 8.4% of claims, leaving thousands without justice. Now, a class action lawsuit representing over 2,000 injured Australians may be the last hope for accountability.
The TGA’s deception has shattered public trust. If health officials had been honest from the start—admitting risks, investigating deaths, and compensating victims—Australians might still believe in the system. Instead, they’ve created a legacy of betrayal.
How many more must die before the truth is acknowledged?
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
A profit-driven scheme with no real benefit
For most infants, the Hep B vaccine offers zero benefit—only risk. As policy analyst Catherine Pakaluk notes, the vaccine "provides a robust antibody response to a disease to which they are not regularly exposed." In other words, it’s a solution in search of a problem.
J.B. Handley, a vocal critic of the mandate, puts it bluntly: "It’s a nearly useless vaccine, unless you are in the tiny minority of babies who have a mother with Hepatitis B."
Despite petitions demanding proper safety trials, the CDC and FDA refuse to revisit the mandate. Parents often have to step in after a hospital birth and tell the pediatrician "NO" to protect their vulnerable new infant from this needless vaccine.
The Hep B vaccine mandate is not about protecting children—it’s about protecting profits. With the Hep B vaccine market projected to hit $13 billion by 2032, the financial incentive to keep pushing the shot is clear. With no real benefit for the vast majority of infants and a growing list of potential harms, parents deserve the right to question and refuse this unnecessary medical intervention. Until independent, long-term safety studies are conducted, injecting newborns with this vaccine remains a dangerous gamble—one that hospital administrators and pediatricians are all too willing to take.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
The media’s complicity in the cover-up
The CBC, Canada’s state-funded broadcaster, played a key role in propping up the official narrative. It routinely platformed government-approved "experts" while sidelining dissenting voices. Science Up First, a pro-vaccine initiative bankrolled by Health Canada, became a propaganda arm, ridiculing legitimate questions as "misinformation." The result? A population misled, bullied, and stripped of informed consent.
The Trudeau regime’s COVID response wasn’t just flawed—it was fraudulent. From secret oaths to reckless vaccine procurement, the government abandoned ethics in favor of control. As injured Canadians struggle for compensation and families mourn unexplained deaths, one truth becomes undeniable: this was never about health. It was about power.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Martin’s role as Pardon Attorney adds another layer, evoking Trump’s 2025 pardons for January 6 defendants. "We must restore citizens harmed by weaponization," he said, signaling a wave of clemency for conservative causes.
A high-stakes gambit for justice and retribution
Ed Martin’s ascent marks a pivotal moment in Trump’s promised "retribution" against the administrative state. While liberals decry it as vendetta politics, conservatives frame it as long-overdue accountability. With the Supreme Court likely to weigh in on presidential immunity and January 6 cases, Martin’s work could redefine the limits of executive power — and set the tone for 2025. As he declared: "It’s a great time to be alive. There’s a lot at stake." For Biden allies, that may sound less like optimism and more like a warning.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
The high cost of lax oversight
The case against Yusuf Akoll is more than an isolated incident — it’s a symptom of a system that prioritized speed over security in distributing taxpayer funds. While the government has recovered some fraudulent payments, experts estimate that over $1 trillion in COVID relief may have been stolen, much of it funneled overseas.
For taxpayers, the lesson is clear: Without robust safeguards, well-intentioned aid programs become easy targets for exploitation. As federal agencies grapple with these failures, the demand for accountability — both within USAID and across all relief programs — will only grow louder.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
A call for transparency in an "unofficial" crisis
The NIH’s withdrawal from Safe to Sleep reignites urgent questions about infant mortality’s true causes and mortality data’s integrity. With vaccine schedules now spanning 76 doses by age 18, critics argue opaque reporting hinders informed decision-making.
“There are 130 official ways for an infant to die,” Miller wrote, “but vaccine reactions remain an ‘unofficial’ one.” Until cause-of-death coding modernizes, parents may remain uninformed of risks—and policymakers ill-equipped to address a crisis rooted in both public health messaging and unexamined science.
As research deepens and advocacy groups seek answers, the resurfacing debate underscores a chilling possibility: Some of medicine’s most trusted interventions might cloak its most tragic outcomes. For parents, the road to prevention now navigates not just sleep positions, but questions about the shots their babies receive.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
FDA advisory panel to review COVID-19 vaccine strategy
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will convene a panel of experts in a critical meeting on May 22 to discuss recommendations for the next round of Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines.
The virtual meeting of the FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) will weigh in on which COVID-19 variant should be targeted in updated booster shots, or whether boosters would be promoted at all. While the VRBPAC's advice isn't binding, it could shape immunization efforts for the fall and winter seasons.
The May 22 meeting also comes amid significant leadership changes in the FDA. Dr. Marty Makary was named as the new head of the agency, while Dr. Vinay Prasad was named as the new director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). Incidentally, both Makary and Prasad have publicly questioned aspects of the government's COVID-19 vaccine approach.
The FDA's handling of COVID-19 vaccines has faced mounting criticism, particularly after the resignations of key officials. These officials include former CBER Director Dr. Peter Marks, who reportedly clashed with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over vaccine policies.
Kennedy, a health freedom advocate critical of vaccine mandates, has pushed for reforms – including a potential removal of COVID-19 shots from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) childhood immunization schedule. His stance aligns with broader public sentiment as recent polls suggest many Americans oppose routine COVID-19 boosters for healthy children.
Novavax and Moderna in limbo as FDA shifts to stricter standards
The upcoming meeting also follows delays in the approval of Novavax's protein-based vaccine, which the FDA has asked to undergo additional clinical trials – a departure from previous regulatory flexibility. Moderna has similarly faced hurdles, with the agency requesting more data on its experimental flu-COVID combination vaccine. These developments signal a stricter approach under the new leadership, a shift that analysts say could lead to more restrictive vaccine recommendations.
The FDA has historically followed an influenza-like model for COVID-19 vaccines, updating formulations annually without requiring new clinical trials. But recent demands for placebo-controlled studies suggest a pivot toward more rigorous standards. Critics argue this could slow vaccine availability, while supporters contend it ensures greater safety scrutiny.
Meanwhile, the CDC is considering narrowing its universal COVID-19 vaccine recommendation – potentially shifting to a risk-based approach. Such a move would mark a significant departure from earlier policies, reflecting evolving scientific understanding and public skepticism.
As the FDA prepares for its May 22 meeting, the outcome could redefine the future of COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S. With new leadership in place and growing debate over vaccine mandates, the agency’s decisions will be closely watched.
Watch this clip of a Moderna executive telling the FDA's VRBPAC that babies should be injected with its COVID-19 vaccine at the soonest.
https://www.brighteon.com/b775b52c-671b-4c67-a18f-3acd232b4f57
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Silent catastrophe: COVID-19 vaccines linked to plummeting fertility rates, Czech data reveals
As governments and health authorities continue to push COVID-19 vaccinations as "safe and effective," alarming new evidence suggests a devastating toll on women’s reproductive health. A groundbreaking study from the Czech Republic reveals that vaccinated women experienced significantly lower successful conception rates compared to their unvaccinated counterparts—raising urgent questions about the long-term consequences of these experimental injections. Despite mainstream narratives dismissing fertility concerns, the data paints a grim picture: if these trends hold, the world may be facing a silent demographic collapse, engineered by the very institutions entrusted with public health.
The fertility free fall: What the data shows
The Czech Republic study, analyzing 1.3 million women aged 18–39 from 2021–2023, reveals a concerning correlation between COVID-19 vaccination and declining fertility. Vaccinated women exhibited significantly lower birth rates compared to unvaccinated women, with the disparity widening as vaccination rates increased. By June 2021, when 39% of women were vaccinated, they accounted for only 7% of live births—a statistically implausible discrepancy. The total fertility rate plummeted from 1.83 in 2021 to 1.45 in 2023, a decline that aligns precisely with the vaccine rollout. While some attribute this to economic or pandemic-related stress, the data suggest a direct link to vaccination.
The study acknowledges potential biases, such as self-selection (women avoiding vaccination to conceive), but notes that the overall fertility decline contradicts this explanation. Additionally, prior research has documented menstrual irregularities and ovarian impacts from mRNA vaccines, further supporting biological plausibility. The findings echo trends in Germany, Sweden, and the U.S., where post-vaccination fertility drops and increased miscarriages were reported.
Though not definitive proof of causation, the study underscores the need for urgent, large-scale investigations into COVID-19 vaccines' reproductive effects. The data challenge official assurances of vaccine safety during pregnancy and highlight potential long-term demographic consequences.
A pattern of deception
Public health agencies have long insisted that COVID-19 vaccines pose no risk to fertility, despite zero long-term safety studies before mass deployment. Yet, emerging research tells a different story:
• A 2023 study found that mRNA vaccines destroy primordial follicles in rats, leading to irreversible ovarian damage—raising the specter of early menopause and sterility in women.
• Bio-distribution studies confirm that lipid nanoparticles, the delivery system for mRNA shots, accumulate in the ovaries, potentially triggering inflammation and cell death.
• The CDC and WHO continue to ignore mounting evidence, doubling down on recommendations for pregnant women—despite rising stillbirths and miscarriage reports worldwide.
The great cover-up
The Czech study’s authors cautiously note that their findings are "hypothesis-generating"—but the implications are dire. If mRNA vaccines are indeed depleting ovarian reserves, the consequences could be generational. Yet, instead of pausing vaccinations for further investigation, health authorities dismiss concerns as "misinformation."
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Virologist who endorsed HCQ for COVID-19 appointed to top pandemic post at HHS
A scientist who endorsed hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a treatment for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) during the early days of the pandemic has been appointed to a key position at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Steven J. Hatfill, who previously served as a White House COVID-19 advisor during President Donald Trump's first term, was recruited again for the real estate mogul's second term – albeit in a new role this time. According to the Washington Post (WaPo), Hatfill began his second week as a special adviser in the director's office of the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR) on Monday, May 5.
The ASPR is an agency tasked with pandemic readiness and biodefense, two fields Hatfill is no stranger to. Nevertheless, his appointment underscores lingering divisions over COVID-19 treatments that go against conventional medical advice.
Hatfill, a former Army biodefense researcher, gained attention in 2020 for championing HCQ as an early intervention for COVID-19 despite pushback from federal health agencies and mainstream medical experts. He defended his stance in an interview with WaPo Saturday, May 3.
"They gave the drug to the president. It is a safe drug," said Hatfill, referencing Trump's use of HCQ when he contracted COVID-19. The virologist also cited "5,000 controlled, randomized [and] peer-reviewed studies" that attested to HCQ's safety and efficacy when administered promptly.
Hatfill also reiterated his commitment to "get us ready for the next pandemic." He expressed plans to work with other scientists at the ASPR to build "complete awareness of the scientific literature, not just for influenza, bird flu or COVID-19 – but other global diseases that could represent a threat to the United States."
Medical experts attest to HCQ's effectiveness
The Food and Drug Administration initially granted HCQ emergency use authorization in March 2020. But the agency revoked it three months later, citing cardiac risks and a lack of proven benefit. Critics, including Hatfill, argue that flawed studies – such as those administering the drug too late or at toxic doses – skewed the evidence.
Other medical experts also attested to HCQ's effectiveness. Texas physician Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, who treated thousands of COVID-19 patients, said HCQ caused no serious side effects in her practice. Biological warfare expert Dr. Meryl Nass meanwhile noted the paradox of HCQ being deemed safe for lupus and malaria, but suddenly "dangerous" for COVID-19.
Dr. Joseph Varon, president and chief medical officer of the Independent Medical Alliance (IMA), praised HHS for "recognizing the value of voices like Hatfill." According to Varon, Hatfill's appointment is a step toward "rebuilding public trust" in healthcare. Formerly known as the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, the IMA was among the proponents of HCQ t0 address SARS-CoV-2 infection.
But not everyone welcomed the virologist's appointment, including Robert Steinbrook, health research group director for the progressive nonprofit Public Citizen. He argued that HCQ's purported ineffectiveness against COVID-19 is settled science, noting that officials like Hatfill "should evaluate medicines based on evidence, not personal views."
Hatfill's name is also embroiled in controversies outside HCQ. Emails released by a Democrat-led House subcommittee revealed Hatfill's involvement in Trump's crusade to expose election fraud after the 2020 elections. His past also includes a wrongful link to the 2001 anthrax attacks, which cost him his job before a $4.6 million settlement with the Department of Justice.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
With autopsy reports, peer-reviewed studies, and whistleblower testimonies all pointing to the same horrifying reality, how much longer will the medical establishment deny the truth?
As Dr. Plothe declared: "Given the unresolved safety concerns and the availability of alternative solutions, a global moratorium on these vaccines is urgently needed."
The question remains: When will those responsible for this mass medical catastrophe be held accountable?
We are yet to see anyone in the Trump Administration take a stand against this depopulation scheme. This genetic weaponry, and biological weapon system has yet to be addressed properly, and the perpetrators behind the deception of this program are yet to be punished, tried, and convicted of mass manslaughter, medical malpractice, and wrongful death.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
A deeper agenda?
Critics suspect the Means siblings are controlled opposition, inserted to steer the health freedom movement away from vaccine truth. Their ties to Big Pharma-linked groups raise red flags:
• Calley is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a globalist think tank.
• Both worked with lobbying firms tied to pharmaceutical interests.
• Their companies (Levels and TruMed) profit from "metabolic health" solutions, not vaccine injury advocacy.
Ann Tomoko Rosen, a health freedom writer, warned: "When people who were silent during COVID show up out of nowhere asking us to 'join the movement,' it feels weird. Why are they being handed the podium while veterans of this fight are sidelined?"
As Trump considers Casey Means for surgeon general, medical freedom advocates demand answers: Why is she avoiding the vaccine debate? If she won’t address COVID-19 jab injuries, how can she be trusted to protect public health?
The Means siblings may preach "root-cause medicine," but if they ignore the root cause of the post-2020 health collapse — vaccines — then their agenda is clear: silence the truth.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Pharma stocks tumble after appointment of Dr. Vinay Prasad to key FDA post
Stocks of pharmaceutical companies nosedived following the appointment of Dr. Vinay Prasad to a key position at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary announced Prasad's appointment as director of the agency's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Tuesday, May 6, in an internal email later quoted by media outlets. Prasad took over the post vacated by his predecessor, Dr. Peter Marks, who stepped down in March following disagreements with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over vaccine policy.
The new CBER head – a hematologist-oncologist and professor at the University of California, San Francisco – has authored over 500 academic papers and two books critical of medical reversals and flawed research. He is also a staunch critic of the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines, noting that children don't need the injections and they shouldn't be required in schools. Prasad has also denounced the media for stoking "COVID-19 alarmism" and overstating the threat of SARS-CoV-2.
Prasad also criticized the FDA's accelerated approval process under Marks, who was a staunch advocate for rapid vaccine authorization during the COVID-19 pandemic. Even Emily Kopp of the Daily Caller couldn't help but point out that "Marks' No. 1 critic just took his job."
Makary's announcement sent shockwaves throughout the stock market, triggered a sharp sell-off in vaccine and biotech stocks. Shares of mRNA vaccine maker Moderna dropped as much as 13 percent on Tuesday, while that of Novavax dropped by 7.2 percent. Sarepta Therapeutics, a company specializing in gene therapies, saw its stocks nosedive by as much as 27 percent.
From Kennedy to Prasad: How Trump's health policy shakeup is crushing Big Pharma stocks
This wasn't the first time pharmaceutical industry stocks plunged following a shakeup in the FDA, as Marks' abrupt resignation on March 28 triggered a similar downturn. Moderna stocks plunged by 12 percent, while Novavax stocks dropped by 10 percent. Shares of BioNTech – Pfizer's partner in developing its COVID-19 injection – dropped by 5.8 percent that day.
Prasad's skepticism aligns with the second Trump administration's push for regulatory reform, including proposed cuts to global health initiatives and a reduction in the federal workforce. The new CBRE head's appointment underscores the growing influence of critics within federal health agencies – a trend that began with Kennedy's controversial nomination and subsequent confirmation to the Department of Health and Human Services.
The market reaction was immediate, with analysts warning of broader implications for the industry. Jared Holz of Mizuho Securities noted Prasad's "anti-industry" stance as a key concern, particularly for companies reliant on expedited approvals.
Historically, the FDA has balanced industry collaboration with public health oversight, but recent leadership changes signal a shift toward skepticism of mainstream vaccine policy. Analysts warn that uncertainty around drug approvals could stifle innovation, particularly in gene and cell therapy.
As the FDA enters a new era under Prasad's leadership, the pharmaceutical industry faces heightened scrutiny – and investors are bracing for further turbulence. The agency's credibility, already strained by allegations of corporate favoritism, may now be tested by a director who has built his career challenging conventional medical wisdom. Whether this shift leads to greater transparency or deeper polarization remains to be seen.
Watch Dr. Pam Popper sharing some common sense commentary from Dr. Vinay Prasad in this clip.
https://www.brighteon.com/604794d8-e26f-4386-afd2-2a38fbd7d363
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Broader implications for health policy transparency
The Prasad appointment resonates within communities long skeptical of institutional healthcare practices. Advocates like Tracy Kucer, founder of the Autism Health Summit and a vocal supporter of natural immunity, see the shift as a step toward “restoring science to its golden standard.” Kucer’s son Noah, vaccine-injured after an MMR shot, mirrors the experiences of families battling dismissive medical systems. Their stories, shared at conferences emphasized holistic healing, intersect with calls for open-access medical AI platforms that challenge vaccine-autism disinformation silos while prioritizing peer-reviewed data.
Dr. Andrew Wakefield, whose early critiques of vaccine scheduling now see limited mainstream vindication, remains a contentious figure. Yet advocates argue emerging studies and AI-driven research, such as open-source models linking vaccine components to inflammatory conditions, validate long-overlooked concerns. Meanwhile, Sensible Medicine’s analysis of myocarditis risks in young males echoes critiques of blanket rollout strategies.
Prasad’s leadership could catalyze systemic reforms. His papers emphasize adaptive trial protocols to better assess vaccine efficacy in varied populations and real-time safety surveillance. This approach, coupled with Kennedy’s deregulatory agenda, may pave the way for localized health initiatives prioritizing natural immunity and alternative therapies, such as hyperbaric oxygen and toxin-free diets.
A new era of questioning, but trust remains fractured
Dr. Vinay Prasad’s rise to lead CBER symbolizes both cautious optimism and deepening skepticism in post-pandemic health governance. For families like Noah Kucer’s, it represents a chance to mainstream discussions about vaccine safety, environmental toxins, and patient autonomy — ideas long sidelined by institutional inertia. Yet, as Sensible Medicine notes, rebuilding trust demands “transparent data aggregation,” rigorous follow-up on adverse events, and a reckoning with the political forces that shaped pandemic policies.
The question remains: Can the FDA’s new direction balance scientific rigor with accountability, or will it falter under pressures of corporate influence and ideological divides? For now, advocates hope Prasad’s tenure brings both accountability and the evidence-based clarity needed to heal—not just from pathogens, but also from systemic distrust.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Magistrate’s Court Bypasses Due Process: Offenses under this law can be tried in a Magistrate’s Court, which can impose maximum penalties without standard legal safeguards, effectively fast-tracking punishments.
4. Medical Tyranny and Loss of Bodily Autonomy
No Exemptions for Conscience or Religion: The law does not appear to recognize medical, religious, or conscientious objections, treating refusal as a criminal act.
"Other Prophylaxis" Opens Door to Broader Mandates: The vague term "other prophylaxis" could be interpreted to include experimental drugs, forced quarantine, or other invasive measures beyond just vaccines.
A dangerous precedent
Singapore’s law sets a chilling precedent for governments worldwide. If a nation can imprison citizens for refusing medical procedures, what stops other regimes from following suit? The World Health Organization (WHO) is already pushing for a global pandemic treaty that could enforce similar mandates internationally, eroding medical sovereignty worldwide.
History has shown that forced medical interventions never end well. From Nazi Germany’s experiments to Tuskegee’s unethical syphilis trials, governments that override bodily autonomy always claim it’s for the greater good—until the truth of their crimes is exposed.
Will the world stand by as Singapore jails its own citizens for refusing harmful and ineffective vaccines?
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Landmark study of 85 million reveals shocking surge in heart attacks, strokes, and sudden death following the notorious COVID-19 jab
COVID-19 jabs destroyed cardiovascular function
The COVID-19 vaccine catastrophe has reached a horrifying new milestone. A peer-reviewed study published in the International Journal of Preventive Medicine has confirmed what independent researchers, whistleblowers, and grieving families have warned about for years: These experimental injections are maiming and killing people at an unprecedented scale.
Analyzing data from 85 million individuals, researchers found that the so-called "vaccines" are directly linked to skyrocketing rates of cardiovascular destruction, including:
• Stroke risk increased by 240% after the first dose of any COVID vaccine.
• Heart attack risk surged by 286% following the second dose.
• Coronary artery disease (CAD) jumped by 244% post-second dose.
• Arrhythmia risk exploded by 199% after the first dose—but AstraZeneca’s ChAdOx1 shot spiked it by 711%.
The worst offenders? Pfizer’s mRNA shot (BNT162b2) and AstraZeneca’s viral vector vaccine (ChAdOx1). The second dose of Pfizer’s injection was tied to a 284% increased risk of heart attack, while AstraZeneca’s first dose showed a 711% surge in arrhythmia cases—a condition that can lead to sudden cardiac death.
The findings are corroborated by other new studies, such as the one titled, "COVID-19 vaccines and adverse events of special interest: A multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) cohort study of 99 million vaccinated individuals." From this study, the researchers concluded, "This multi-country analysis confirmed pre-established safety signals for myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. Other potential safety signals that require further investigation were identified."
The cover-up continues: How public health agencies ignored the warnings
Despite these damning findings, the CDC, FDA, and WHO continue to push these deadly shots, even recommending them for children and pregnant women. The study’s authors admit their findings should "help public health policy for future pandemics"—yet no such policy changes have been made.
Epidemiologist Nicholas Hulscher warns that the true death toll is likely far worse than reported. Extrapolating from recent research, he estimates that Pfizer’s vaccine alone may have killed 470,000 Americans—a conservative figure that excludes deaths from Moderna and other brands.
"The deadly COVID-19 mRNA injections, still being administered to millions of American children, are responsible for more American casualties than World War I, World War II, and the Vietnam War combined," Hulscher stated.
A global genocide? The unfolding biological warfare against humanity
This is not just negligence—it’s deliberate biological sabotage. The spike protein, whether injected or shed, disrupts cellular function, triggers blood clots, and causes systemic inflammation. The result? Heart failure in athletes, strokes in young adults, and sudden deaths in otherwise healthy individuals.
COVID-19 injections are biological weapons, attacking our genetic integrity and the harmony of natural protein synthesis of healthy cells. The COVID-19 injections remain on the market, despite critical and damning evidence suggesting they have destroyed the human population, directly and even indirectly through occupational spike protein exposure.
Dr. Peter McCullough, a leading cardiologist, has repeatedly warned that these vaccines should be pulled from the market immediately. "The risk-benefit analysis is clear," he says. "These shots are causing more harm than COVID-19 ever did."
Yet, governments and pharmaceutical giants continue to suppress the truth, censoring doctors, manipulating data, and dismissing vaccine injuries as "coincidences." History will remember this era as one of unprecedented medical tyranny—a time when corporate greed and government collusion overruled science, ethics, and human life.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Australia’s vaccine cover-up: 35 died same day as COVID shot, but authorities ignored them
In a medical police state where blind obedience to government-mandated medical experiments is enforced, Australians are waking up to a chilling reality: their health officials have systematically ignored, downplayed, and concealed deaths linked to COVID vaccines. Newly uncovered documents reveal that 35 people died on the very day they received their shots—yet not a single case was thoroughly investigated by the government’s so-called safety watchdog. The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has repeatedly assured the public that only 14 deaths out of 70 million doses were linked to vaccination, but the truth is far more damning. Behind closed doors, the TGA admits it never ruled out a connection for the vast majority of reported deaths—yet it refuses to investigate, refuses to acknowledge, and refuses to tell grieving families the truth.
Key points:
• 35 Australians died the same day they received a COVID vaccine, but the TGA completed causality assessments for only 24 of them.
• Not a single "day zero" death was referred to the Vaccine Safety Investigation Group (VSIG), despite the alarming temporal link.
• The TGA admits it considers all reported deaths as possibly linked to vaccination—yet publicly claims most are coincidental.
• Families of the deceased report no follow-up from the TGA, with some death reports mysteriously "lost" in the system.
• Autopsies often fail to provide answers, with deaths labeled "unascertained natural causes" despite occurring shortly after vaccination.
• A federal compensation scheme rejected 91.6% of claims, leaving thousands of vaccine-injured Australians without recourse.
The TGA’s black box of deception
For years, the TGA has assured Australians that it "closely reviews all deaths" following vaccination. But Freedom of Information (FOI) documents obtained by Canberra Daily expose this as a lie. Of the 35 deaths that occurred on the same day as vaccination, 11 had no causality assessment at all—meaning the TGA didn’t even bother to look into them.
Dr. Suzanne Niblett, a researcher who uncovered these findings, called the negligence "unbelievable" and "inexcusable." She found that one in four deaths occurred within three days of vaccination, and 86% within six weeks—a pattern that should have triggered urgent investigations. Instead, the TGA dismissed them as mere coincidence.
The World Health Organization (WHO) states that temporal association is a key factor in assessing causality, yet the TGA ignored it. Worse, 25% of reported deaths had no time-to-death information—raising the question: how can they claim to investigate when they don’t even have basic data?
Families abandoned, reports "lost"
Leon Anderson’s 30-year-old brother, Matt, died in his sleep six weeks after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine. Despite an autopsy, his death was labeled "unascertained natural causes." When Leon tried to get answers, he discovered the TGA had lost his brother’s death report—submitted by a doctor.
"The TGA’s response was shockingly nonchalant," Anderson wrote. "They told me to just resubmit it, as if losing critical medical reports was no big deal."
Matt’s case wasn’t isolated. The same vaccine batches linked to his death were associated with 160 adverse event reports, including 50 serious injuries—mostly heart and blood clotting issues. Yet the TGA refused to investigate further, claiming "limited information."
A system designed to fail
Dr. Rado Faleti?, director of COVERSE, a nonprofit supporting vaccine-injured Australians, said not a single injured or bereaved person has reported being contacted by the TGA for follow-up.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Hep B vaccine for newborns: A dangerous mandate, a needless vaccine, driven by profit, not science
Every newborn in America is injected with the hepatitis B (Hep 😎 vaccine within hours of birth—despite the fact that the disease is primarily transmitted through unprotected sex and intravenous drug use. Why is the CDC pushing a vaccine meant for high-risk adults onto infants who face virtually no exposure? The answer lies in a web of corporate influence, skewed data, and a liability shield that protects pharmaceutical giants while putting babies at risk.
The CDC claims that up to 320,000 new Hep B infections occur annually, yet only about 10,000 cases are actually reported. Meanwhile, adverse reactions—from autoimmune disorders to neurological damage—are downplayed or ignored. With billions in profits at stake, the push to vaccinate every child appears less about public health and more about padding the pockets of Merck and GSK.
Key points:
• The CDC recommends the Hep B vaccine for all newborns, despite the disease being nearly impossible for infants to contract outside of rare maternal transmission.
• Clinical trials for the vaccine were minimal, with safety monitoring lasting only 4-5 days—no long-term studies were conducted.
• Adverse reactions include autoimmune disorders, neurological damage, and developmental delays, yet vaccine manufacturers face no liability.
• The mandate was expanded after the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act shielded drug companies from lawsuits.
• A growing number of doctors and scientists argue the vaccine provides no benefit to most children while exposing them to unnecessary risks.
A questionable mandate with no scientific basis
Hepatitis B is a liver disease transmitted through blood and bodily fluids—primarily via unprotected sex, needle sharing, or from an infected mother during childbirth. The CDC admits that "almost all children and older adults infected with acute HBV recover completely with no lasting liver damage." So why vaccinate every baby at birth?
Before 1991, the CDC only recommended the vaccine for high-risk groups, such as healthcare workers, IV drug users, and infants born to Hep B-positive mothers. But after the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) was established in 1988—protecting manufacturers from lawsuits—the CDC suddenly expanded the recommendation to all infants.
Attorney Aaron Siri, who obtained CDC records through a Freedom of Information Act request, found no evidence that Hep B has ever been transmitted in a school setting. "The Hepatitis B vaccine is a case study in agency capture," Siri wrote. "All children would not be required to take the shot if pharma didn’t stand to earn billions."
Dangers hidden in the fine print
The two Hep B vaccines given to newborns—Merck’s Recombivax HB and GSK’s Engerix-B—were tested in small, short-term trials with minimal safety oversight. The Recombivax trials involved only 147 infants, monitored for just five days after each dose. Despite this, adverse reactions—including fever, diarrhea, and respiratory infections—were reported in 10% of infants.
Post-marketing data reveals far more severe risks:
• Autoimmune disorders (lupus, multiple sclerosis)
• Neurological damage (Guillain-Barré syndrome, encephalitis)
• Developmental delays (autism linked in some studies)
• Sleep apnea in premature infants
Heather Ray of Children’s Health Defense highlights another alarming fact: Newborns receive the same dose as adults, exposing their tiny bodies to neurotoxic aluminum adjuvants. "Aluminum is a heavy metal that can cross the blood-brain barrier," Ray warns. "It has been scientifically shown to cause autism, asthma, and autoimmune diseases." It's also found in patients with Alzheimer's.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Canada’s COVID cover-up: Health officials swore secrecy to protect Trudeau from vaccine scandal
In a stunning betrayal of public trust, Canada’s top health officials—led by Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam—signed secret oaths vowing to conceal any information that might "embarrass" Justin Trudeau’s government during the COVID crisis. This Orwellian pact, buried in bureaucratic fine print, reveals the depths of corruption within a regime that prioritized political image over medical transparency. While Canadians were coerced into taking experimental mRNA injections—linked to heart inflammation, neurological damage, and even death—federal bureaucrats were busy shielding their leader from accountability. The Trudeau administration didn’t just silence dissent; it weaponized public health policy to enforce compliance, all while granting Big Pharma legal immunity. This is not governance—it is medical tyranny.
Key points:
• Secret oaths exposed: Nearly 30 senior health officials, including Dr. Tam, signed confidentiality agreements to suppress COVID vaccine information that could harm Trudeau’s reputation.
• Taxpayer-funded propaganda: The CBC and government-backed "experts" from Science Up First—funded with $1.75 million from Health Minister Patty Hajdu—drowned out legitimate concerns about vaccine risks.
• Dangerous contracts: Canada purchased 293 million vaccine doses for 38 million people—enough to inject every citizen seven times—while shielding Pfizer and Moderna from liability.
• Hidden injuries: Reports of severe adverse effects, including myocarditis and blood clots, were downplayed as the government quietly expanded its vaccine injury compensation program.
• Censorship as policy: Federal agencies systematically silenced critics, turning public health into a tool of political control.
The gag orders and the betrayal of public trust
The newly uncovered documents, obtained through Access to Information requests, confirm what skeptics long suspected: Canada’s pandemic response was less about science and more about damage control. The confidentiality pledges, signed by Dr. Tam and other high-ranking officials, explicitly warned that unauthorized disclosures could "result in embarrassment, criticism or claims against Canada." In other words, truth-telling was forbidden if it made the government look bad.
This gag order extended across multiple departments, including Health, Industry, and even National Defence. Vaccine supply manager Alan Thom admitted in internal memos that the secrecy was so pervasive that individual non-disclosure agreements became redundant—because the entire bureaucracy was already operating under a culture of suppression.
The vaccine gold rush and the death of informed consent
While Canadians were told to "trust the science," the Trudeau government was cutting backroom deals with pharmaceutical giants. Pfizer and Moderna secured approvals in late 2020—but not before Trudeau granted them legal immunity. Parliamentarians demanding to review the contracts were stonewalled, leaving the public in the dark about what their leaders had signed away. This is a violation of basic medical ethics, emboldened by corrupt, totalitarian government officials who were acting nefariously and with ill intent. This led to mass harm.
The government’s own data reveals a disturbing trend: a spike in deaths from "unspecified causes" post-vaccine rollout. LifeSiteNews has documented thousands of injuries, from heart inflammation in young athletes to menstrual disruptions in women. Yet, instead of pausing the shots, Ottawa doubled down—pushing boosters on a public that had already rejected them.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Trump appoints Ed Martin to lead DOJ “weaponization” probe – a reckoning for Biden-era overreach?”
In a decisive move to hold the Biden administration accountable, President Donald Trump has appointed Ed Martin — a staunch conservative legal strategist — to lead a newly formed "Weaponization Working Group" within the Department of Justice (DOJ). The May 9 announcement, made via Trump’s Truth Social platform, positions Martin as both associate deputy attorney general and pardon attorney, tasked with investigating alleged abuses of federal power against conservatives, pro-life advocates and January 6 defendants. The appointment follows Martin’s blocked Senate confirmation as U.S. attorney for D.C., a setback Trump turned into an opportunity to escalate scrutiny of Biden-era prosecutions.
The backstory: A nomination thwarted, a mission amplified
Martin’s path to this role was anything but smooth. Senate Republicans, led by Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), derailed his confirmation as U.S. attorney for D.C., citing concerns over his combative style and prior representation of January 6 defendants. Yet Trump’s response—elevating Martin to a broader DOJ role — signals a deliberate escalation in the fight against what conservatives decry as systemic politicization of justice.
"Classic Donald Trump," Martin told Breitbart. "They blocked me, so he doubled down. This is the greatest job I could ever envision." His mandate includes reviewing Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigations, probing COVID-19-era policies and evaluating pardons for those convicted in what he calls "politicized prosecutions."
The weaponization working group: Targets and tactics
Attorney General Pam Bondi’s newly formed working group has already begun dissecting high-profile cases, from the FBI’s handling of January 6 to alleged targeting of pro-life activists. Martin emphasized a three-pronged approach: "Truth, accountability and healing."
Key focuses include:
• January 6 prosecutions: Martin vows to expose "improper investigative tactics" and review sentences, calling the Capitol riot cases a "destructive weaponization against citizens."
• COVID-19 origins: Collaborating with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Martin aims to "get the truth out" about federal mandates and Anthony Fauci’s role.
• Russiagate revisited: He pledged to unravel the "51 intelligence officers [who] signed a lie" in 2016, referencing the discredited Steele dossier.
Critics warn the effort risks becoming a partisan witch hunt, but Martin insists, "This isn’t spin. It’s about total truth."
Jeanine Pirro steps in – a fierce successor
With Martin’s shift to the DOJ, Trump named former judge and Fox News host Jeanine Pirro as interim U.S. attorney for D.C. — a move signaling continuity in aggressive oversight. "She’s smart as hell, tough as hell," Martin said, hinting at Pirro’s reputation for unflinching conservatism. Her tenure may further strain relations with Democrats, particularly after Martin’s clashes with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Georgetown University over DEI policies.
Historical parallels: Nixon, Obama and the specter of retribution
The appointment echoes past battles over DOJ independence. During Watergate, courts ruled Nixon’s Oval Office acts were not immune from scrutiny — a precedent now cited to challenge Trump’s January 6 liability. Conservatives argue the Biden DOJ weaponized similar principles, pointing to Obama-era surveillance abuses and the targeting of Tea Party groups.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Fraud in federal aid programs: USAID official charged in COVID relief scam
A senior USAID contracting officer stands accused of defrauding the federal government by creating a fake company to obtain pandemic relief funds, raising fresh concerns about accountability in federal aid programs. Yusuf Akoll, a senior procurement contract specialist at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), allegedly fabricated a business to secure $16,666 in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans—funds meant to help struggling employers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The case, first reported by the Daily Wire, highlights broader issues of fraud and lax oversight in federal relief programs, with critics arguing that similar abuses may extend to other agencies, including USAID’s foreign aid operations. The charges against Akoll follow a pattern of fraudulent activity uncovered in pandemic relief programs, where billions of dollars were lost to scams due to minimal vetting and a "pay and chase" approach by the government.
How the scheme unfolded
According to court documents, Akoll registered a Virginia-based shell company, Naagode Consulting LLC, in November 2020 — months after the PPP’s eligibility cutoff date of February 15, 2020. Despite this, he falsely claimed the business had been operational since January 2020 and reported $40,000 in 2019 income to qualify for the loans. Investigators found no evidence of legitimate business activity, suggesting the company existed solely to siphon taxpayer funds.
Journalist Luke Rosiak, who broke the story, noted glaring red flags in Akoll’s application. “PPP loans were paid out to Yusuf Akoll despite massive red flags, including the fact that he was a full-time USAID employee and the company he claimed the bailout for wouldn’t match up with state corporate records or federal tax records,” Rosiak wrote.
Broader implications for federal aid programs
The case underscores systemic vulnerabilities in government aid distribution, particularly in programs rushed out during emergencies. Mike Benz, a national security and transparency advocate, linked the incident to wider concerns about federal contracting abuses. “Not content to create fake companies to steer money to friendly political insiders & CIA shell companies, turns out folks at USAID were also creating fake companies to send money to themselves,” Benz posted.
The Biden administration’s decision in 2023 to halt collections on fraudulent loans under $100,000 — citing “equity” concerns — has drawn sharp criticism. The Small Business Administration’s inspector general warned that failing to pursue fraudsters would embolden future abuses. Meanwhile, Congress nearly allowed the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery (SIGPR) to expire in March 2025, which would have ended investigations into hundreds of millions in suspected fraud.
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA), a leading advocate for oversight, fought to preserve SIGPR, stating, “I will not allow fraudsters to get away with stealing hundreds of billions of dollars from taxpayers.”
A call for accountability and reform
The Akoll case is not isolated. Another recent prosecution involved Jeanty Cherilus, a Florida businessman sentenced to 18 months for fraudulently obtaining $370,000 in COVID relief loans. Acting Assistant Inspector General Sean Bottary emphasized USAID’s commitment to accountability, stating, “USAID OIG will continue its aggressive pursuit of bad actors that exploit federal assistance programs.”
As investigations continue, the question remains: How many more cases of fraud lie undiscovered in federal aid programs? With billions already lost, the need for stricter oversight and enforcement has never been clearer.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
SIDS concerns on the rise; vaccine-death link resurfaces in data analysis
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) recently axed a decades-old initiative to reduce sudden infant deaths, triggering debate over whether vaccines or sleep practices are to blame for a resurgent health crisis. Neil Z. Miller, a vaccine researcher, and others argue that sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) — once labeled an unsolved mystery of pediatric medicine — is being overshadowed by flawed mortality data and policy changes. His analysis of federal vaccine safety reports reveals 80% of SIDS deaths occur within seven days of vaccination, reigniting a decades-old controversy over the safety of childhood immunizations.
The silent cancellation of “Safe to Sleep” campaign
In late April 2025, the NIH terminated its 30-year-old “Safe to Sleep” campaign, which had advised parents to place babies on their backs during sleep. The program, credited with a supposed 55% drop in SIDS deaths since its 1990s launch, now faces scrutiny over its reported success. While parents and nonprofits like First Candle decried the cuts amid rising post-2020 infant mortality rates, peer-reviewed studies suggest SIDS deaths were merely rebranded rather than reduced.
A 2021 toxicity study by Miller in Toxicology Reports found that as SIDS diagnoses fell after the campaign began in 1992, fatalities from suffocation, unknown causes and “intent undetermined” surged. A 2017 Pediatrics analysis concluded 90% of the documented decline in SIDS mortality stemmed from diagnostic reclassification, not a true drop in unexplained infant deaths.
“The elimination of this department is devastating as SIDS rates have begun to climb again,” said Alison Jacobson, CEO of First Candle, citing a 12% increase in sudden unexpected infant deaths (SUID) between 2020 and 2022, per a JAMA Pediatrics study. Yet with federal funding withdrawn, advocates now scramble to sustain awareness efforts.
Historical context: vaccines and the birth of SIDS
SIDS was codified as a cause of death in 1971, coinciding with expanding U.S. vaccination mandates. By the 1960s, infants received nine vaccines by age 18 months, including diphtheria, polio and measles. Before 1979, coroners could attribute infant deaths to vaccines via an explicit International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code. Its removal that year forced reclassification of such fatalities into categories like "SIDS" or "asphyxiation," likely obscuring vaccine-related deaths.
Physician Paul Thomas, author of Vax Facts, noted coroners lack ICD codings for vaccine injuries, driving misclassification: “Infant deaths after vaccines are generally coded as SIDS, unknown, or suffocation. But the primary cause has been right under our noses.” Miller’s VAERS database analysis supports this: Of 2,605 infant deaths reported since 1990, 58% occurred within three days of vaccination, with 78.3% within seven. The timing strongly suggests a connection, though causation remains unproven.
VAERS data and the pathology of sudden death
Miller’s work identifies physiological mechanisms that could link vaccines to infant mortality. Vaccines trigger inflammatory cytokines in brainstem tissues, potentially disrupting infants’ carbon dioxide response systems. Aluminum adjuvants, a common vaccine additive, may cross the blood-brain barrier, inducing respiratory failure. These pathways align with the observation that 75% of VAERS-reported SIDS cases clustered near vaccination dates.
While the CDC maintains vaccines are safe, recent studies challenge this view. A 2023 Cureus analysis found nations mandating more neonatal doses suffer higher childhood mortality rates. Meanwhile, a 2018 Health Affairs study traced the U.S.’s rising infant death disparity with other wealthy countries back to the 1980s—when U.S. vaccines doubled.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
This is not the first time Big Pharma and regulators have betrayed women’s health. From the thalidomide scandal to the Dalkon Shield disaster, history is littered with examples of corporate negligence and regulatory capture. Now, with fertility rates crashing across the Western world, the question must be asked: Are we as a species being engineered for depopulation?
Women deserve informed consent—not coercion, not propaganda. The Czech data adds to a growing body of evidence that COVID-19 vaccines may be sabotaging fertility - by destroying women's egg supply - yet governments continue to mandate, incentivize, and pressure women into taking them. If these trends continue, the demographic winter once feared by skeptics may become an inescapable reality—one engineered by the very institutions that swore to protect us.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
As Hatfill assumes his new role, his tenure may test the balance between scientific rigor and ideological persistence in public health. With ASPR's future uncertain – with the agency potentially being folded into the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – his focus on global disease threats could either bridge divides or deepen them.
Watch this February 2023 episode of "The Zelenko Report" on Brighteon. TV, where Dr. Steven Hatfill talks about HCQ with Ann Vandersteel.
https://www.brighteon.com/f7698d31-5cd6-4969-ba35-01b0452449ea
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
FDA approves first cell-based gene therapy for rare, devastating skin disorder – but it comes with a huge price tag
On April 29, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Zevaskyn,the first cell-based gene therapy for recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa –a rare and agonizing genetic disorder that causes skin to blister and tear at the slightest touch.
Developed by Cleveland-based Abeona Therapeutics, this one-time treatment offers hope for patients who have endured lifelong pain, chronic wounds and systemic complications. However,Zevaskyn comes with a huge price tag – $3.1 million per patient. The treatment's price has raised questions about accessibility, long-term efficacy and whether this marks true progress or just another high-priced biotech gamble.
RDEB is caused by mutations in the COL7A1 gene,which disrupts the body's ability to produce type VII collagen – a critical protein that anchors the skin's layers together. Without it, even minor friction causes severe blisters and open wounds that never fully heal.
Patients often suffer from infections, malnutrition (due to esophageal scarring),vision loss and a dramatically increased risk of aggressive skin cancers.The condition affects roughly 3.3 per million people,making it exceptionally rare. But for those afflicted, it is a relentless, life-altering burden.
Until now, treatment has been limited to daily wound care,protective bandaging and two topical therapies approved in 2023: Vyjuvek and Filsuvez. While these options help manage symptoms, they do not address the root cause. Zevaskyn, however, takes a radically different approach–genetically repairing a patient's own skin cells to restore collagen production.
Chemically known as prademagene zamikeracel, Zevaskyn involves extracting a patient's skin cells and genetically modifying them in a lab to produce functional collagen. These cells are then transplanted back as sheets of healthy tissue. These sheets – up to 12 per treatment –are surgically applied to wounds,where they integrate and promote healing.
Clinical trials showed remarkable results. Eighty-one percent of treated wounds achieved at least 50 percent healing within six months, compared to just 16 percent in untreated wounds. Patients also reported significant pain reduction.
Zevaskyn's $3.1 million price tag raises ethical and economic concerns
Unlike Vyjuvek,a topical gel which requires weekly applications, Zevaskyn is designed as a one-time intervention. This has become a major selling point for families exhausted by constant medical upkeep. Moreover, Vyjuvek is designed for smaller wounds, meaning the two therapies could complement each other.
Despite its promise,Zevaskyn's $3.1 million price tag raises ethical and economic concerns. Abeona justified the cost by citing the therapy's complexity, the rarity of RDEB and the potential for long-term savings by reducing hospitalizations and chronic care needs. But critics argued that such exorbitant pricing strains insurers, patients and healthcare systems already buckling under the weight of specialty drugs.
Jefferies analyst Maury Raycroft projects peak sales of $427 million by 2034–a figure that suggests Abeona expects only a fraction of eligible patients will receive treatment. With just 10 to 14 patients expected to be treated this year, the therapy's real-world impact remains uncertain.
The FDA's approval of Zevaskyn is undeniably a milestone,one that could pave the way for similar gene therapies targeting other genetic disorders. Yet, challenges remain. For now,patients and families have reason to hope.
As Zevaskyn clinical trials lead investigator Dr. Jean Tang noted,some treated wounds have remained healed for years. But true progress will be measured not just in scientific achievement,but in whether this therapy reaches those who need it most – without bankrupting them in the process.
Watch this video about incorporating organic essential oils into one's skin care routine.
https://www.brighteon.com/476855c5-4dbe-4bfd-81c4-7dc8600b631b
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
Spike protein found in stroke victims’ brains up to 17 months after injection, study reveals
A shocking new peer-reviewed study has exposed the lingering dangers of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, revealing that spike protein—the toxic byproduct of Pfizer and Moderna’s experimental shots—was found in the brains of stroke victims up to 17 months after vaccination. Published in the Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, the research examined 19 hemorrhagic stroke cases from 2023 and 2024, discovering that 43.8% of victims still had vaccine-derived spike protein lodged in their cerebral arteries—all of them women.
This damning evidence shatters the CDC’s fraudulent claims that mRNA vaccines remain localized and quickly degrade. Instead, the study proves that spike protein persists in the body far longer than admitted, wreaking havoc on blood vessels and triggering catastrophic health failures.
Key points:
• Spike protein from mRNA COVID-19 vaccines detected in stroke victims up to 17 months post-vaccination.
• All affected patients were women, with spike protein found in cerebral arteries.
• Study confirms vaccine-derived spike protein, not natural infection, was present.
• Researchers warn of "significant concerns" over long-term vaccine safety.
• Lipid nanoparticles may contribute to persistent spike protein circulation, increasing stroke risk.
• Trump Administration still silent on disastrous COVID-19 vaccine program
The spike protein’s deadly persistence
The study, conducted by 10 Japanese researchers, found that in three patients, spike protein remained detectable 11, 12, and 17 months after vaccination—long after Big Pharma and government health agencies assured the public it would be gone.
Dr. Christof Plothe, a steering committee member of the World Council for Health, warned that these findings align with mounting reports of sex-specific vaccine injuries, including menstrual disruptions and myocarditis.
Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist for Children’s Health Defense, called the persistence of spike protein "an exceptionally long-lasting vaccination effect"—one that could mean "the assault on the body may exist in perpetuity."
A bioweapon hiding in plain sight
The study’s authors emphasized that lipid nanoparticles—the delivery system for mRNA—may be responsible for spreading spike protein throughout the body, including the brain. This contradicts the CDC’s propaganda that mRNA vaccines remain in the arm and produce only a "harmless" spike protein fragment.
Instead, the research confirms what independent scientists have warned for years: mRNA vaccines are a Trojan horse, smuggling toxic spike protein into vital organs, where it triggers chronic inflammation, clotting disorders, and autoimmune destruction.
Dr. Plothe stated: "While the study does not definitively prove causation, the detection of spike protein in brain arteries—combined with signs of immune cell infiltration—suggest a plausible mechanism for blood vessel damage and hemorrhagic strokes."
The great vaccine cover-up continues
Despite hundreds of studies linking mRNA vaccines to strokes, heart attacks, and sudden deaths, the Trump administration remains silent, refusing to acknowledge the catastrophic failure of its Operation Warp Speed.
The study’s authors called for "global replication studies" to confirm these findings, but the truth is already undeniable: mRNA vaccines were never properly tested, and their long-term effects were deliberately ignored in the rush to push them onto the public.
Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher cited a Nature Biotechnology study showing that mRNA vaccines spread spike protein to the liver, spleen, lungs, heart, and brain in mice—a phenomenon now confirmed in humans. Another study in the International Journal of Innovative Research in Medical Science found that COVID-19 vaccines increase stroke risk by 112,000% compared to flu shots.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Trump’s surgeon general pick – Casey Means – dodges vaccine debate as health freedom movement demands answers
In a political landscape where health freedom activists have fought for decades to expose Big Pharma corruption, the sudden rise of Casey and Calley Means has raised alarm. Casey Means, a former surgeon turned metabolic health entrepreneur, is now being considered for surgeon general under Trump — yet she refuses to address the elephant in the room: the catastrophic health damage caused by vaccines, particularly COVID-19 mRNA injections.
While the siblings preach about "metabolic dysfunction" and food toxins, critics argue their message is a deliberate diversion from the real crisis: vaccine-induced injuries, autoimmune disorders and sudden deaths plaguing millions since 2020.
Key points raised:
• Casey Means, Trump’s potential surgeon general, avoids discussing vaccine injuries despite rising public concern.
• Means and her brother, Calley, rose to prominence overnight, raising suspicions of deep state orchestration.
• Their focus on "metabolic health" distracts from urgent vaccine safety concerns, including COVID-19 jab injuries.
• RFK Jr. falsely elevated their credentials, calling Calley the "leading advocate" for food safety — despite no prior activism.
• Medical freedom advocates warn: The Means siblings may be co-opting the movement to suppress vaccine truth.
The suspicious rise of the Means siblings
Casey and Calley Means emerged from obscurity in 2024, catapulted into the national spotlight after an appearance on Tucker Carlson’s podcast, which became the "Most Shared Podcast Episode" of the year. Shortly after, STAT News reported they were "buzzing in the same orbit as Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and even former President Donald Trump."
By November 2024, The Wall Street Journal revealed that Casey was being vetted for surgeon general, while Calley was positioned as a key advisor in Trump’s health agenda. But how did two unknowns with zero history in medical freedom activism suddenly become the faces of the movement?
In August 2024, RFK Jr. stunned supporters by suspending his presidential campaign and endorsing Trump. During his announcement, he lavished praise on the Means siblings, calling Calley "the leading advocate for food safety, soil regeneration, and ending chronic disease" — a claim that directly contradicts Calley’s actual resume.
Calley Means was a corporate consultant, lobbyist and investor — not a health freedom warrior. His LinkedIn shows no activism against lockdowns, mandates or vaccine injuries. Meanwhile, Casey Means spent COVID-19 pushing glucose monitoring subscriptions while ignoring the mRNA jab disaster.
A calculated distraction from vaccine injuries?
The Means siblings’ sudden focus on "metabolic health" aligns suspiciously with efforts to downplay vaccine injuries. While they blame processed foods and environmental toxins for chronic disease, they avoid mentioning the sharp rise in myocarditis, turbo cancers, and neurological disorders post-COVID shots.
In a December 2024 podcast, Calley dismissed vaccine concerns, saying:
"Over 80% of medical costs and deaths in the U.S. are tied to preventable metabolic conditions — not parents deciding to delay the Hep B vaccine."
This gaslighting tactic infuriates medical freedom advocates who spent years fighting for vaccine transparency.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
SLOW DEATH JABS: Pfizer Vaccine Linked to Higher All-Cause Mortality Rate than Moderna Shot
Every so-called “conspiracy theorist” and “anti-vaxxer” called out the Covid mRNA “clot shots” right out of the gate, warning everybody NOT to get jabbed with the Bill Gates depopulation stab that Big Pharma, Big Government, Big Media, and the New World Order were pushing so adamantly, like it was the end of the world if we didn’t all get injected. Turns out the Covid stabs ARE depopulation weapons. They are weapons of genocide. They were designed to form spike protein clots throughout the vascular system, invade vital organs, and cause the immune system to attack those foreign particles, driving nearly every disease and disorder to the brink, also known as "all-cause mortality." Get it?
You were warned. Repeatedly.
Now the real science is coming out, that these gene-mutating Trojan Horse jabs catapult just about every disease and disorder known to mankind, including turbo cancer, infertility, heart attacks, strokes, chronic inflammation, autism, central nervous system disorders, vital organ failure, and of course, long-vax syndrome. That goes for the Pfizer jabs, the Moderna stabs, AstraZeneca injections, and even the Johnson & Johnson “one shot” dirty vaccines, if you remember those.
Pfizer “Clot Shot” recipients show shockingly higher mortality rates across the board
A new study has found that individuals who received two doses of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine faced a higher risk of death from cardiac arrest, COVID-19, and other causes within a year compared to those who took Moderna’s shot. Published on April 29 in the preprint server medRxiv, the research—conducted by MIT and Florida Department of Health scientists—analyzed data from over 1.4 million Floridians. The findings have reignited debates over mRNA vaccine safety, with experts calling for greater scrutiny of nonspecific health effects tied to immunization.
The study compared 735,050 adults who received two Pfizer doses with an equal number who took Moderna’s vaccine, matched by demographics and vaccination timing. Retsef Levi, Ph.D., the study’s lead author, told The Defender, “The Pfizer vaccinees had significantly higher all-cause, cardiovascular, COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 mortality over 12 months post dose two.”
Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, a co-author, criticized the lack of rigorous safety reviews, stating on X, “It has become painfully obvious that as a result of Big Pharma-driven vaccine ideology, these products do not receive the safety scrutiny they should.”
Daniel O’Connor of Trial Site News argued the data should prompt regulatory action: “If Pfizer’s vaccine were a drug on trial, this data would demand a pause—yet it continues under full regulatory protection.” The mortality risk was most pronounced in adults over 60, though the study did not evaluate outcomes for unvaccinated individuals.
The research highlights “nonspecific effects”—unintended health impacts beyond a vaccine’s primary purpose. Levi noted these are rarely studied in trials or post-market reviews, despite their potential significance. The findings align with prior studies, including a June 2024 Italian analysis showing a 20% higher all-cause death risk among the vaccinated. A 2023 multinational study also cited a “definite causal link” between COVID-19 vaccine rollouts and spikes in excess deaths.
As mRNA vaccines remain central to global health strategies, the study underscores the need for transparent, long-term safety data. With regulators like the FDA already flagging myocarditis risks in 2023, the latest research adds urgency to reevaluating vaccine policies. “The public deserves transparency, not silence,” O’Connor said. For now, the debate over balancing vaccine benefits and risks continues—with lives hanging in the balance.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
FDA names scrutiny advocate Dr. Vinay Prasad to lead vaccine division amid calls for transparency
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has appointed Dr. Vinay Prasad, a vocal critic of its handling of pandemic-era vaccine approvals, as the new director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). Prasad, an epidemiologist and biostatistics professor at the University of California, San Francisco, replaces Dr. Peter Marks, whose resignation last month highlighted tensions within federal health agencies over vaccine safety, mandates, and transparency. The move, announced May 6 by FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary, positions Prasad — a noted skeptic of rushed regulatory decisions — as a key figure in reshaping the agency’s approach to biologics, including vaccines and gene therapies.
Prasad’s academic and public commentary have often scrutinized what he views as missteps in pandemic response. In a 2024 paper titled “COVID-19 vaccines: history of the pandemic’s great scientific success and flawed policy implementation”, he argued that while vaccine development was a scientific triumph, their rollout saw “misplaced utilization, contradictory messaging, and poor deployment,” particularly for younger, lower-risk populations. His decision to leave his role at Sensible Medicine, a health advocacy site critical of inflammatory drug marketing, underscores a broader push for accountability in regulatory science.
The appointment arrives at a pivotal moment for public health policy, as Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—a vocal advocate for medical transparency—oversees efforts to reassess vaccine mandates and health data integrity. Sensible Medicine’s endorsement of Prasad praises his “scientific rigor and independence,” aligning with Kennedy’s agenda to dismantle what critics call “Big Pharma collusion” within federal agencies.
Controversial departure of prior director Peter Marks exposes regulatory fault lines
Prasad’s ascension follows the April resignation of Marks, who clashed with Kennedy over transparency and vaccine safety concerns. In his resignation letter, Marks accused Kennedy of demanding “subservient confirmation of his misinformation and lies,” alleging the Secretary prioritized rhetoric over evidence-based policy. HHS spokespersons countered that Marks’ resistance to Kennedy’s reforms made him “unsuitable” to lead CBER, citing internal documents that highlighted his rush to approve Pfizer’s emergency use authorization in 2021.
Prasad’s skepticism of Marks was well-documented. In a March X post, he quipped that the FDA’s pre-Praasad era could “replace Marks with a bobblehead doll” due to its overly permissive approach to vaccine approvals. The feud underscores tensions between traditional regulatory practices and new demands for systemic accountability, particularly as RFK’s Health Department seeks to reform mandates and explore alternatives to widespread booster programs.
Kennedy’s influence is further evident in the deprioritization of school vaccine mandates. Trump-backed legislation preventing federal funding for institutions enforcing vaccine mandates — specifically targeting policies for K-12 schools — aligns with Kennedy’s focus on parental autonomy. This push has galvanized movements like the MaHA Alliance, which advocates for decentralized health freedom and integrative medicine practices.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Singapore’s draconian vaccine mandate: Citizens face jail time for refusing FORCED medical procedures that do HARM
Singapore’s descent into medical tyranny
In a shocking move that tramples on fundamental human rights, Singapore has amended its Infectious Diseases Act (IDA) to force medical procedures on its citizens under threat of imprisonment. The amendments, enacted in 2023 and 2024, grant the Director-General of Health unchecked power to mandate vaccines — even in the absence of an active outbreak — while stripping citizens of legal protections against government overreach.
Under Sections 47, 65, and 67 of the IDA, Singaporeans who refuse government-ordered vaccinations can be fined up to 10,000 (SGD) or jailed for sixmonths for a first "offense."
Repeat offenders face double the penalties, with fines up to 20,000 and a year behind bars. Worse yet, Section 67 absolves government officials of all liability, meaning citizens harmed by forced medical interventions have no legal recourse.
A direct assault on medical freedom and informed consent
The amendments represent a blatant violation of the Nuremberg Code, which established the principle of voluntary, informed consent after the atrocities of Nazi medical experiments. The Singaporean government now wields the power to force medical treatments on its people without accountability, echoing the darkest chapters of medical tyranny.
Dr. Smith, a vocal critic of forced vaccination policies, condemned the law: "Current disparate treatment runs rife across this nation, spreading like wildfire. It demands in exchange for job security and participation in society the injection of medical treatments that lack both FDA approval and legal recourse when damaging side effects occur. This is draconian at best and criminal at worst."
Singapore’s People’s Power Party (PPP) has also raised alarms. PPP politician Derrick Sim, a biotechnology and vaccine manufacturing expert, slammed the law in an April 14 Facebook post: "Section 47, 65, and 67 of the Infectious Disease Act were amended and in effect since 2023. If you choose not to go for vaccination during the next pandemic, you will be deemed to commit an offense. You will be criminalized. The penalty for first-time offense is 6 months imprisonment or up to $10,000 fine, or both. Do you support this ridiculous law?"
Alarming provisions highlighting threats to bodily autonomy, due process, and civil liberties
1. Forced Vaccination Under Threat of Imprisonment and Fines
Mandatory Compliance: The law grants the Director-General of Health unchecked authority to order any person or class of persons to undergo vaccination or medical treatment during an outbreak (or even a suspected outbreak).
No Right to Refusal: While the law claims that healthcare providers must "explain" treatment, this is a hollow formality—force is explicitly permitted if the individual does not comply.
Punitive Measures: Non-compliance is punishable by fines up to 10,000(firstoffense)or10,000(firstoffense)or20,000 (repeat offense) and imprisonment for 6-12 months.
2. Vague and Arbitrary Enforcement
No Clear Definition of "Reckless Spread": The law states that recklessly spreading a notifiable disease (e.g., refusing vaccination) could lead to life imprisonment under Section 317 of the criminal code. However, it does not define what constitutes "reckless" behavior, leaving room for abuse and political persecution.
"Imminent Outbreak" Justifies Coercion: The Director-General can mandate forced medical interventions based on a subjective belief that an outbreak is "imminent," with no requirement for concrete evidence.
3. Lack of Accountability for Authorities
Legal Immunity for Enforcers: Section 67 shields government officials (including police and health officers) from any personal liability, even if they act unlawfully, as long as they claim to be acting in "good faith." This creates a license for abuse with no consequences.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
Trump halts U.S. funding for dangerous gain-of-function research in China tied to COVID origins
President Donald Trump took decisive action Monday to protect Americans from another pandemic by signing an executive order banning federal funding for gain-of-function research experiments that enhance viruses' lethality in China and other poorly regulated countries.
The move comes after years of mounting evidence that U.S.-backed research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) may have sparked the COVID-19 pandemic, which has claimed millions of lives and devastated economies worldwide.
“It’s a big deal. It could have been that we wouldn’t have had the problem we had, if we had this done,” Trump remarked in the Oval Office, holding up the signed order. The directive halts taxpayer dollars from flowing to high-risk virus manipulation abroad, where oversight is weak, and warns that unchecked gain-of-function experiments threaten public health, economic stability, and national security.
The Wuhan connection
Gain-of-function research, which modifies viruses to increase their transmissibility or deadliness, has long been controversial. Documents reveal that the U.S. government, under Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), funneled millions to the WIV through the EcoHealth Alliance despite a 2014 U.S. moratorium on such experiments. Emails show NIH officials repeatedly warned EcoHealth about violating the funding pause, yet the research continued.
“This dangerous game of function research, which aims at taking pathogens and making them more virulent, more transmissible on humans, many scientists believe is responsible for the COVID pandemic,” said NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. FBI, CIA, and Energy Department assessments, along with former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield, have all pointed to a lab leak as the most likely origin of COVID-19.
Fauci, who once defended gain-of-function studies as “a risk worth taking” in 2011, has dismissed lab-leak theories as “conspiracy theories.” Yet internal records confirm NIAID and USAID directed over $1.4 million to EcoHealth for bat coronavirus research at WIV between 2014 and 2021. A rejected 2018 proposal, Project DEFUSE, sought to engineer high-risk coronaviruses—a plan some experts call a “smoking gun” for COVID’s lab origin.
Peter Daszak, EcoHealth’s president, admitted under congressional questioning that China’s biosafety standards were lax compared to the U.S. and that unpublished virus data may still be hidden in Wuhan.
A history of warnings ignored
The executive order follows decades of ignored red flags. In 2004, Science reported lab accidents prompting calls for stricter containment protocols. The 1977 Russian flu, likely a lab escape, and the 2009 H1N1 vaccine-linked narcolepsy cases underscore the dangers of poorly regulated virology. Trump’s order stops gain-of-function funding until stricter oversight is implemented.
“We can’t point to a single good thing that’s come from [gain-of-function research],” said HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., citing COVID’s catastrophic toll. “I commend President Trump for his courage and his vision in ending U.S. bioweapons research.”
Trump’s order marks a critical step toward accountability. By cutting off funding for reckless experiments in adversarial nations, the U.S. can mitigate the risk of another man-made pandemic. As Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) declared, “This is a great win for the American people and common sense.” The world cannot afford another Wuhan, and this ban ensures U.S. dollars won’t fund the next global disaster.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia