Global Pushback Against Tyranny Has Begun

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com


  • March 20, 2021, on the 1-year anniversary of the first COVID-19 lockdown, people in more than 40 countries took to the streets to peacefully demonstrate against COVID-19 lies and tyrannical measures
  • Mainstream media have near-universally censored any news of this global demonstration. Those that did report it either understated the global nature of the event and its attendance or misrepresented the intent of this “Worldwide Freedom Day”
  • The intent behind Worldwide Freedom Day was to tell our elected officials and unelected global leaders that we withdraw our consent to unconstitutional overreaches and attempts to strip us of our rights and freedoms and that we will no longer submit to and cower in fear
  • The PCR test is at the heart of the COVID-19 scam. Without the PCR fraud and the asymptomatic spreader lie, the COVID-19 pandemic would have been a short-lived blip
  • Lies have been able to stand through the implementation of universal censorship of anyone who speaks truth and points out the scientific fallacies that drive the pandemic narrative. With these psychological tools, they manufactured the greatest hoax the world has ever seen

March 20, 2021, on the 1-year anniversary of the first COVID-19 lockdown, people in more than 40 countries took to the streets to peacefully demonstrate against COVID-19 lies and tyrannical measures.

The documentary above, “The Pushback,” details the day the world stood together against government overreach and the destruction of human rights — and why we must unite, every day, and push back.

Chances are, you didn’t hear about this global rallying cry for freedom, as the mainstream media have near-universally censored any news of it. The few that did report it either understated the global nature of the event and its attendance or misrepresented the intent of this “Worldwide Freedom Day.”

Freedom From Fear

So, just what was the intent behind this global demonstration? In short, to tell our elected officials and unelected global leaders that we withdraw our consent to these unconstitutional overreaches and attempts to strip us of our rights and freedoms and that we will no longer submit to and cower in fear. As noted in the film, fear and hysteria were carefully nurtured using a false narrative that said:

  • A deadly novel virus is sweeping across the planet
  • No one is immune and there’s no cure
  • Asymptomatic people are major disease vectors, and therefore:
  • We have to shut everything down, isolate everyone and wear masks until the whole world has been vaccinated

And, of course, anyone who challenges this crazy narrative has labeled a danger to society. Every part of this narrative is false and unrealistic. In reality:

SARS-CoV-2 poses a high risk to a very limited group of people and a negligible risk to the vast majority

Few are susceptible to severe illness or death
There are several effective treatments available Asymptomatic people — historically known as healthy people — do not spread the infection
Lockdowns and mask mandates did not work and have caused great harm Vulnerable people have been harmed instead of helped

Ground Zero of the False Narrative

March 3, 2020, the World Health Organization tweeted out a comment by WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, which said:

“Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died. By comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected.”

It makes COVID-19 sound like a serious problem indeed. The problem is that Ghebreyesus compared apples and oranges. He reported the case fatality rate (CFR) of COVID-19, versus the infection fatality rate (IFR) for the flu.

As explained in the film, CFR is the proportion of deaths from the disease compared to the number of people diagnosed (the total number of confirmed cases). The IFR, meanwhile, is the proportion of deaths from the disease compared to the total number of infected individuals, confirmed or suspected.

Since CFR requires the infection to be confirmed through laboratory testing and clinical evaluation, and the total number of infected people can be hard to determine and includes suspected cases, the CFR is always lower than the IFR.

By conflating CFR and IFR in the same sentence, comparing two different sets of statistics, Ghebreyesus grossly overstated the threat of COVID-19. Stanford University researcher John Ioannidis pointed this out in a March 7, 2020, response, in which he said, “Reported case fatality rates, as the official 3.4% rate from the WHO, cause horror — and are meaningless.”

October 14, 2020, Ioannidis published a review of 61 seroprevalence studies1 showing that the IFR for COVID-19 was actually only 0.23% — a far cry from the CFR of 3.4% — and for people under the age of 70, the IFR was just 0.05%. In other words, COVID-19 is actually less deadly than the flu. Many have noted that the IFR for flu is typically only around 0.1%, and even at that, COVID-19 is less deadly for people under the age of 70.

PCR Test Added Fuel to the False Narrative

As noted in the documentary, at this point, there are so many false narratives it’s hard to know where to begin, but a good place is the reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, as it is at the heart of this scam. If it weren’t for this flawed test, there would be no pandemic to speak of.

The fact is, the PCR test is not designed to be used as a diagnostic tool as it cannot distinguish between inactive viruses and “live” or reproductive ones.2 This is a crucial point since inactive and reproductive viruses are not interchangeable in terms of infectivity. If you have a nonreproductive virus in your body, you will not get sick and you cannot spread it to others.

What’s more, the test was developed using nothing more than computer modeling of a genetic sequence. No actual viral isolate from a patient was ever used in the development of this test.

November 30, 2020, a team of 22 international scientists published a review3 challenging the scientific paper4 on PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 written by Christian Drosten, Ph.D., and Victor Corman. The Corman-Drosten paper was quickly accepted by the WHO and the workflow described therein was adopted as the standard across the world.

The 22 scientists demanded the Corman-Drosten paper be retracted due to “fatal errors,”5 one of which is the fact that it was written (and the test itself developed) before any viral isolate was available. All they used was the genetic sequence published online by Chinese scientists in January 2020.

As if that doesn’t make the test unreliable enough, laboratories were instructed to amplify the RNA collected far too many times, resulting in healthy people testing “positive.” The number of amplification is known as the cycle threshold (CT).

When you get a positive result using a CT of 35 or higher, you’re looking at the equivalent of a single copy of viral DNA. The likelihood of that causing a health problem is minuscule. Yet the WHO,6,7,8 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention9 were recommending CTs between 40 and 45, thereby guaranteeing a vast majority of “cases” were in fact false positives.

How the Greatest Hoax in History Was Fashioned

As detailed in the featured film, widespread PCR testing gave the mainstream media the fodder needed to create hysteria. For months on end, every broadcast had a ticker-tape showing the number of “cases” detected.

Other fear-induction tactics included universal masking and 6-foot social distancing rules, replete with plastic barriers everywhere and signs on every floor telling you where to stand and in which direction to walk.

One of the primary tactics that drove the narrative that masking and social distancing were necessities was the lie that asymptomatic people were spreading the infection. Anyone could be a lethal threat. No one was to be exempted from suspicion.

That old man with a cough? Lethal threat. That muscular jogger, flushed from fresh air and exercise? Lethal threat. That pink-faced precocious 2-year-old? Lethal threat. A fearful public soaked up the propaganda and started verbally and physically attacking non-maskers without regard for logic, reason, or science.

Without the PCR fraud and the asymptomatic spreader lie, the COVID-19 pandemic would have been a short-lived blip. The lies were able to stand for one reason and one reason only, and that was the implementation of universal censorship of anyone who spoke the truth and pointed out the scientific fallacies that were driving the pandemic narrative.

With these psychological tools — preceded by a single carefully crafted revision of the definition of “pandemic” a decade ago — they manufactured the greatest hoax the world has ever seen. Indeed, you could say the redefinition of the pandemic was what brought us to this precipice in the first place. The WHO’s original definition of a pandemic was:10,11

“… when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in several, simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.”

The key portion of that definition is “enormous numbers of deaths and illness.” This definition was changed in the month leading up to the 2009 swine flu pandemic. The change was a simple but substantial one: They merely removed the severity and high mortality criteria, leaving the definition of a pandemic as “a worldwide epidemic of a disease.”12

By removing the criteria of severe illness causing high morbidity, leaving geographically widespread infection as the only criteria for a pandemic, the WHO and technocratic leaders of the world were able to bamboozle the global population into believing we were in mortal danger.

What Works and What Doesn’t

The total discarding of science is perhaps the most perplexing part of this pandemic. We’re told to follow the science, but what they actually mean is that we must do as we’re told, without evidence. As noted in the film, we’ve long known what works and what doesn’t, when it comes to pandemic disease mitigation.

Effective measures include hand-washing and isolating the sick. Everything we’ve been told to do over this past year falls squarely in the “proven ineffective” category, and that includes large-scale quarantines, border closures, school closures, social distancing, and universal mask use. What’s worse, everything we’ve been told that is necessary to save lives, actually fuels disease.

What Was the Pandemic Really About?

In my best-selling book, “The Truth About COVID-19 — Exposing the Great Reset, Lockdowns, Vaccine Passports and the New Normal,” I detail the backstory of how the COVID-19 pandemic was created and, more importantly, why. If you do not understand the geopolitical landscape we’re in right now, you will struggle to understand why anyone would possibly lie about a virus and create a pandemic out of smoke and mirrors.

In a nutshell, a small but highly organized technocratic elite have used this pandemic as a justification for eroding liberty, freedom, and democracy from Day 1, and the reason is that they want to usher in a whole new global system. The global elite refers to this new system as the Great Reset, the Fourth Industrial Revolution, and the Build Back Better plan.

Make no mistake, the plan — as laid out in various papers and reports, including s 2010 Rockefeller Foundation report,13 in which they describe their “Lockstep” scenario, which is a coordinated global response to a lethal pandemic, and its 2020 white paper,14 “National COVID-19 Testing Action Plan” — is to use bioterrorism to take control of the world’s resources, wealth and people.

The plan is to use the need for a coordinated pandemic response as the justification for permanent surveillance and social controls that hobble personal liberty and freedom of choice.

To learn more about the hidden power structure running this global reorganization toward authoritarian control, see “Bill Gates Wants to Realize Global Vision in His Lifetime,” “The Great Reset and Build Back Better,” “Technocracy and the Great Reset” and “Who Pressed the Great Reset Button?

The Time to Stand for Freedom Is Right NOW

In 2007, Naomi Wolf published “The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot,” in which she lays out the 10 steps to tyranny. She’s now warning everyone, everywhere, that we are at Step 10. Once Step 10 locks into place, there’s no going back. It’ll be too dangerous to fight back.

Right now, you might face police brutality or censorship. If that dissuades you from doing your part in standing against the totalitarian dictates right now, in the future, you’ll lose everything.

The good news is the would-be tyrants have not won yet. That said, we have no time to spare. We have no time to remain idle, hoping it will all just go back to normal on its own. In countries where citizens do not have a Second Amendment right to bear arms, the answer is peaceful mass civil disobedience.

In the U.S., we do have the Second Amendment, which allows citizens to own and bear arms, and the mere possibility of an armed uprising makes it more difficult for a tyrannical government to get its way. That said, peaceful disobedience is the primary strategy in armed countries as well.

We must also rally behind legislation that prevents the alteration of laws that safeguard our freedoms. To that end, Wolf has started the Five Freedoms Campaign, which you can find on her Daily Clout website.

The campaign focuses on creating legislation to preserve key freedoms and prevent emergency laws from infringing on our freedom to assemble, worship, protest, and engage in business. Legislation is also being crafted to open schools, remove mask mandates and eliminate requirements for vaccine passports.

Hope, in the Face of Tyranny

I have no doubt that we will ultimately stop the globalists’ drive toward global tyranny. It’s not going to be easy. It may take years, and it may get far worse before it gets better.

The founders of the U.S. fled repressive societies or were children or grandchildren of those who did. They had to personally reckon with criminalized speech, arbitrary arrests, and state-sanctioned torture, and even murder. The men who signed the Declaration of Independence knew that if they lost the war, they would be executed for treason.

These men and women were radicals, fighting for liberty and personal freedoms. They had a vision of reality that was an absolute slap in the face of what the rest of the world tolerated. They were willing to sacrifice their lives to turn that vision into a reality. Most all of us have forgotten our sacrifices and have capitulated to the carefully constructed narrative to create fear that allows most to give up their claim to freedom.

The Founders trusted us to remember our history and remain ever vigilant, to keep the precious web of liberty and personal freedom that they constructed from evaporating so that there would never be an American tyrant. The creators of the U.S. Constitution understood that the price of liberty was eternal vigilance.

Hopefully, enough people will see through the mainstream fog and see the truth of where we’re headed and how we got here (if you don’t, read “The Truth About COVID-19”), and once you understand who the actual enemy is, you become less fearful and more efficient. You can now help educate others so that they understand what’s going on, how they’re being deceived, and what they’re actually about to give up.

Lastly, there are legal solutions that can help thwart the globalist takeover, technological solutions that can strengthen citizens’ lobbying power, and censor-proof technologies that will allow us to circumvent current Big Tech monopolies. We have to work on all of these fronts but, together, I believe we can resecure freedom for our children and future generations.

Federal Law Prohibits Mandates of Emergency Use COVID Vaccines, Tests, Masks — 3 Resources You Can Use to Inform Your School or Employer

By Aimee Villella McBride, Stephanie Locricchio | The Defender

With more than 100 U.S. colleges mandating COVID vaccines for in-person attendance and schools enforcing mask mandates, it’s critical people understand their rights.

The bottom line is this: mandating products authorized for Emergency Use Authorization status (EUA) violates federal law as detailed in the following legal notifications.

All COVID vaccines, COVID PCR and antigen tests, and masks are merely EUA-authorized, not approved or licensed, by the federal government. Long-term safety and efficacy have not been proven.

EUA products are by definition experimental, which requires people to be given the right to refuse them. Under the Nuremberg Code, the foundation of ethical medicine, no one may be coerced to participate in a medical experiment. Consent of the individual is “absolutely essential.”

Earlier this year, Mary Holland, Children’s Health Defense president and general counsel, and attorney Greg Glaser stated that federal law prohibits employers from mandating EUA COVID vaccines (or EUA COVID-19 tests or masks).

Holland and Glaser wrote:

“If a vaccine has been issued EUA by the FDA, it is not fully licensed and must be voluntary. A private party, such as an employer, school, or hospital cannot circumvent the EUA law, which prohibits mandates. Indeed, the EUA law preventing mandates is so explicit that there is only one precedent case regarding an attempt to mandate an EUA vaccine.”

What to do if your school or employer says you must get the COVID vaccine

The Children’s Health Defense legal team has written three legal notifications that anyone faced with a COVID vaccineCOVID test, or mask mandate can use to inform employers and universities that they are violating federal law. You can download the three notifications here.

All of the notifications include this language: 

“Federal law, Title 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I-III) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, states the following about products granted emergency authorization usage:

Individuals to whom the product is administered are informed—

(I) that the Secretary has authorized the emergency use of the product;

(II) of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and

(III) of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that is available and of their benefits and risks.

Any entity or organization that requires EUA COVID-19 vaccinations, COVID-19 tests or masks are in violation of federal law, and will likely face lawsuits if they don’t allow exemptions or alternatives.”

Submitting the notices prepared by Children’s Health Defense is the first step prior to seeking an exemption or taking legal action.

Vaccine exemption laws vary by state. Go to the National Vaccine Information Center to learn more about your state exemptions.

It’s critical to stand against mandates and preserve legally protected, fundamental human rights on issues related to health freedom. Don’t fall prey to coercion and pressure, use the resources available to protect your legal rights.

Transhumanism and the Science of Self-Empowerment with Gregg Braden, Kimberly Gamble and Foster Gamble

Video Source: THRIVE Movement

With proven facts, Gregg Braden uses scientific data to reveal a new story, about who we are as humans, our innate capacity for healing, and expanding our consciousness. What are the ethical and practical limits of engineering life? And what is the real promise of self-empowerment that the new story foretells?

Below are a few notes from the talk:

Evolution breaks down when it comes to humans. Something happened 200,000 years ago. A series of mysterious mutations /fusions HCh2 HCh7 etc gave us extraordinary abilities. The bottom line is that scientists agree that human chromosome 2 (HCh2) is the product of a fusion of two pre-existing chromosomes that were fuIIy intact. After the fusion happened, genes were added and taken away and functionality was tweaked to optimize and stabilize what it is that gives us our humanness. Chromosome 7 and others aII happened at the same time 200,000 years ago. chromo 2 may be the smoking gun – second Iargest chromosome in the human body and responsible for our uniquely human abilities ie emotion, sympathy, empathy, compassion, self-regulation.

Technology is happening faster than the morality of how it is applied and we are now at a crossroad. This generation must determine what are the human values that we cherish in our species that we choose to make the foundation around the choices of technology. If we don’t identify those values very quickly, they will be lost and once they are lost in a species, they are lost forever. Even EIon Musk is saying that the AI world urgentIy needs regulating.

Sign up to watch THRIVE II FREE in 15 languages for a LIMITED-TIME starting April 23rd:


Belgian Health Experts Demand Full Investigation Into WHO For Faking COVID-19 Pandemic

Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Credit: NIH

By  | Science.News

A coalition of doctors and other health professionals in Belgium has issued an open letter calling for an immediate end to every “emergency” policy established in response to the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19), as well as a full-scale investigation into the World Health Organization (WHO) for allegedly faking a pandemic.

Citing a complete lack of “medical justification” for the continued lockdowns and mandatory mask-wearing, the coalition says an open debate is needed to allow all experts with varying perspectives the chance to be represented and have their voices heard, without censorship or retribution.

Forcing people to remain in isolation while prohibiting them from engaging in normal commerce, traveling freely, and even going to work, the letter’s signers warn, is having a greater negative impact both in the short and long term than if there were no restrictions at all – which is why it all needs to end immediately.

In Belgium, at least, health authorities never would have imposed such restrictions were it not for the misguidance of the WHO. The Belgian Supreme Health Council (BSHC) normally takes a minimalist approach, meaning it encourages people to adopt a healthy lifestyle that works for them, rather than try to force them to abide by some one-size-fits-all government prescription such as the one that came down the pipeline from the WHO.

Furthermore, the latest science does not even support the WHO’s approach, which is hurting people more than it is helping them.

“After the initial panic surrounding COVID-19, the objective facts now show a completely different picture – there is no medical justification for any emergency policy anymore,” the letter reads.

“The current crisis management has become totally disproportionate and causes more damage than it does any good,” it goes on to explain. “We call for an end to all measures and ask for an immediate restoration of our normal democratic governance and legal structures and of all our civil liberties.”

Having to get vaccinated for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is another draconian imposition coming down the pike that carries with it permanent health consequences, seeing as how there is no way to effectively detoxify from an mRNA vaccine. To learn more, check out the following episode of The Health Ranger Report:

Strict COVID-19 restrictions violate the WHO’s own definition of health

Back in 1948, the WHO defined health as follows:

“Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or other physical impairment.”

According to the letter’s signers, the WHO’s current approach to combating SARS-CoV-2 is a clear violation of this long-established ethic because it impinges upon the emotional and social well-being of humans, all in the name of keeping them “safe” from a virus.

Forcing people to stay at home muzzled with no human contact is also a violation of basic human rights, as is demanding that people “mask up” whenever they decide to venture from their own property – especially since being social actually protects against viral infection.

“Studies have shown that the more social and emotional commitments people have, the more resistant they are to viruses,” the letter explains. “It is much more likely that isolation and quarantine have fatal consequences.

“Fear, persistent stress and loneliness induced by social distancing have a proven negative influence on psychological and general health,” it adds.

Remember when “flatten the curve” was only supposed to last two weeks?

Early on, the WHO warned that if the world failed to “flatten the curve,” up to 3.4 percent of people who contracted the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) would die. This process was supposed to take just two weeks, as you may recall, but still persists six months later.

The world was also told by the WHO, which has proven ties to the vaccine industry, by the way, that the spread of the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) would lead to an abnormal pattern of seasonal infection, another claim that has since been proven false by science.

“The course of COVID-19 followed the course of a normal wave of infection similar to a flu season,” the letter explains. “As every year, we see a mix of flu viruses following the curve: first the rhinoviruses, then the influenza A and B viruses, followed by the coronaviruses. There is nothing different from what we normally see.”

So what we continue to face is a “cure” that is far, far worse than the “problem,” the letter contends. Furthermore, flawed testing, fake science, and widespread ignorance about how the human immune system even works are keeping us under medical tyranny, to our own collective detriment.

The full open letter can be read in its entirety at this link.

More of the latest news about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) and humanity’s fight to escape the clutches of public safety restrictions can also be accessed at Pandemic.news.

Sources for this article include:




A Meditation on Freedom During COVID-19

By Forrest Rivers

As the United States begins relaxing stay at home orders it has made me reflect on the meaning of freedom in the age of COVID-19. During this period of self-quarantining and social distancing, freedom has come to mean many different things to people. 

For the most conservative anti-shutdown protesters in the United States (and to a much lesser extent in Great Britain and Germany) freedom has meant the right to work and operate one’s own business without undue interference by the government. For these protesters, it has also implied the liberty to make one’s own personal decisions free of state tyranny. Yet, for other folks, freedom has come to mean something different. For many liberal urbanites and senior citizens, freedom has come to be seen as the right to be protected from the threats posed by others’ irresponsible actions. In the context of this pandemic, some shoppers’ insistence on not wearing face coverings in crowded public places is an example of such a threat.  

Medical workers on the frontline of fighting the virus have also arrived at their own unique perspective of freedom. My sister, who is an ER doctor, has expressed to me that she and other medical workers would just like the freedom to be able to perform their (very vital) jobs without encountering institutional roadblocks along the way. A prime example of such a roadblock is the US Government’s colossal failure to provide an adequate number of personal protective equipment (PPE) and testing kits for hospitals. 

In an inspiring development, a growing number of spiritual seekers, too, are coming to their own profound realization of freedom. In the context of the times, seekers of truth are regarding freedom as something that extends beyond the individual AND as one’s conscious choice to use their free will to alleviate the suffering of all beings. Such an understanding of freedom is akin, in a Christian sense, to be our brother’s keeper. And, in a Buddhist sense, rising to the level of becoming a bodhisattva or one who devotes their life to service. This perception of freedom has everything to do with the right intentions and challenges us to step outside ourselves and to flow with the great river of life. In the end, this acknowledgment of the interrelation of all things (oneness) is possibly the highest truth that mystics of every faith have discovered. Very fortunately for humanity, it appears that more people now are beginning to understand that true freedom springs from an awareness that we are all connected. Below, are two brief examples of this kind of freedom in action:

  Example 1: My friend Jamie

 For as long as I have known him, Jamie has been passionately devoted to the path of spirit and spreading the light of love. Recently, he began a live stream on Reddit centered around the themes of positivity and personal self-improvement. In just a few months, his platform has drawn up to 500 people from across the world. However, it is not the number of participants that matter in this story, but how Jamie has chosen to use his vehicle of expression to uplift others in this anxiety-filled time. Recently, Jamie related a touching story to me about how he has been coaching (in his terms) one of his live stream participants through a difficult period of depression and sadness. Most significantly, he revealed how this individual has been finding peace and comfort through their correspondence online. Incredibly enough, this participant lives in Australia! Jamie’s inspiring story is a testament to the fact that the vibrations of love can literally transcend all space and time barriers!

Example 2: My friend Austin

Austin has to be one of the kindest souls I have met in my life. And, as an inspiring musician, he has always succeeded in moving others to God through his creativity. During the thick of the stay at home orders, Austin could sense that his neighbors were feeling a little down from this extended period of isolation. So, he took out his guitar and started playing soulful melodies daily with the intention to uplift everyone around him. Austin brought so much joy through music that he received humbling letters of gratitude from some of his neighbors for spreading peace and love during an otherwise dark time for many. 

The examples of Jamie and Austin are powerful reminders that you can still (responsibly) respect social distancing guidelines while positively impacting other beings through your freedom of choice to acknowledge the cosmic threads that connect us all. In these unprecedented times of suffering and hardship, shift your perspective of freedom from what is good for you to what is also good for all your brothers and sisters!

Informed Consent: A Vital and Basic Human Right For Our Health Freedom

Beautiful silver stethoscope with reflection and blue tint

By Paul A. Philips | Waking Times

In the modern-day, informed consent is one of the most pressing issues/concerns with regard to our health freedom. Informed consent is defined as having the right to make informed choices while knowing the risks involved when offered medical treatment. Further, whether it’s as a patient or a participating subject for medical research, individuals involved should not be coerced or criminalized for refusing the offered intervening medical treatment.

Informed consent was an established basic human right for our health freedom after a Doctors Trial in Nuremberg 1947. However, in recent times, there has been a disturbing growing trend where the medical ethical principle of informed consent has been violated.

There have been recent run-ins with parents refusing to have their children vaccinated, like the Michigan mom who received the threat of imprisonment. There has also been the threat of arrest: Take the case of a woman who was accosted by 2 law enforcement representatives at the school district of Claremont, California. She was interrogated by these law representatives (government goons) and threatened with arrest because her children weren’t vaccinated.

-This incident was related to the unconscionable SB277 law Introduced last year in California, demanding mandatory vaccination, which, in effect, has abolished the right to informed consent, denying parents medical choice for their children. Bear this in mind. How many more cases of this medical fascism is there to come? Not just California, this is part of a nationwide agenda and it won’t just stop at mandatory vaccination, but will go much further with other prohibitions.

Utilitarianism – the pseudo-ethic for “justifying” mass vaccination

Medical intervention through vaccination carries with it an uncalculated, undetermined risk: The vaccine introduced into the body of a healthy individual could cause serious injury or even death. -Which is why vaccination must always be a choice. For that matter, the same should apply to any medical intervention involving risk. Let your conscience be your guide.

The mass vaccination agenda comprises a ‘one size fits all’ medical intervention programme. It erroneously assumes that all humans are equal. It doesn’t take into account that humans across the many cultures and societies have different genetic compositions. While also as individuals, humans have a unique microbiome and epigenetic makeup through diet, lifestyle and environmental influences.

–All of which will make humans react differently to vaccines. Consequentially, some will develop severe adverse reactions to vaccines (or to other pharmaceuticals) when treated.

Indeed, followers of the alternative media will know that there has been much documentation to seriously challenge the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Then there’s the growing evidence to show that we’re better off without vaccines.

However, in spite of all this, the powers that be pushing the mass vaccination agenda see it from the utilitarianism point of view. Utilitarianism decrees expendability: It is based on the idea that in a cause for the ‘greater good’ the minority are expendable. Hence the vaccine meme ‘the benefits significantly outweigh the risks. ‘-Well, try telling that to a mother who just lost her child through a vaccine. Or to parents whose child has been crippled after a vaccination and can’t get damage compensation because the vaccine manufacturer, the pharmaceutical company is not legally obligated to pay out…

Whether a vaccine damages one in ten thousand or 1 in ten million children or a single child, that makes authorities morally obligated to not make vaccinations compulsory for all.

Thus, utilitarianism – the awful pseudo-ethic for “justifying” mass vaccination as public health law and policy needs to be banished. An empathy-based compassionate ethic should be applied instead:  One that approaches public health law and policy that respects our right to autonomy, informed consent and health freedom.

Vaccines and population reduction

To add to all this, there has been recent bombshell scientific evidence revealing the deployment of secret chemical weapons of mass sterilization through vaccines. In conjunction with the World Health Organization, evidence suggests that vaccines are being administered to young African women in Kenya to effectively cause a population reduction: Deceived into thinking it’s for their own good and without informed consent these women have no idea that they are being targeted for sterilization through accepting these vaccines containing sterilization chemicals.

Water fluoridation

After our federal government telling us for years that it’s for our own good, recent evidence reveals that adding fluoride to public water supplies causes a whole catalogue of health-damaging effects. This includes hypothyroidism; a hormone imbalance resulting in tiredness, fatigue, depression and obesity. It can also cause a number of cancers, skeletal fluoridosis and lowers IQ…

Not disclosing this information to the public or patients not only goes against the informed consent ethic but should also lead to holding a number of individuals criminally accountable for overseeing the adding of fluoride to public water supplies.

Smartmeters and radiation

Smartmeters are installed in homes without informed consent: Home owners are not being told about the risks linked to the radiation coming from the smartmeters and how it can cause harm to the nervous system. -Yet another example to show the length and breath to which there is an absence of informed consent.

Finally – to reiterate

As already mentioned, in all cases, an empathy-based compassionate ethic should be applied where appropriate.  One that approaches public health law and policy that respects our right to autonomy, informed consent and health freedom.

About the Author

Paul A. Philips is the author of NewParadigm.ws.

This article (Informed Consent: A Vital and Basic Human Right for Our Health Freedom) was originally created and published by NewParadigm.ws and is re-posted here with permission. 

Read more great articles at Waking Times.

After Whitehouse.gov Win, What to Do to Fight Mandatory Vaccines

By Dr. Rima Laibow | *www.drrimatruthreports.com



Editor’s Note; So where do we go from here? The Petition against Mandatory Vaccination  at www.whitehouse.gov succeeded handily, with 128,714 signatures as of this posting, well beyond the 100,000 necessary and this despite 3 days of unexplained malfunction in the site. As we await the obligatory White House Comment on this, this hard-hitting, call-to-action article lets us know that the effort is not over to avoid mandatory vaccinations, as the fight moves to the state level

We Americans have so much for which to “thank” our state and federal governments. The expensive, self-dealing, corrupt, irrational and destructive tax-payer supported FDA, CDC and its crony-infested ACIP (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) spend precious time and money maiming and killing precious young lives through ever-increasing infant vaccine schedules. [And, by the way, ever more horrific childhood vaccines and more and more especially for those adults who manage to make it to that stage of life.]

For babies, those schedules result, IMHO, in the supposedly “genetic” condition called autism which has gone from 1 in 10,000 kids in the lightly vaccinated 1970’s to as much as 1 in 36 kids in the heavily vaccinated US. That’s how many Somalian kids in Minneapolis have autism while for the rest of the US population it is about 1 kid in 55 or so. [Except, of course, for example, the unvaccinated Amish children who have the “natural” rate of 1 in 10,000.]

A really interesting paper which I Tweeted (you are following us @DrRimaLaibow, aren’t you?) shows through statistical analysis, that there is a powerful and linear connection between more infant vaccinations and more infant deaths. [Yes I can hear the pro-forced-vax trolls and drug-pusher PR bottom-feeders, “Correlation is not causation.” Illogical, since there will always be correlation when there is causation!]

The US is THE most vaccinated country in the world AND is 33rd in infant mortality among the leading countries.


That means that the 32 advanced countries who vaccinate their babies less than we do have more living babies at the end of a year than we do, baby for baby.

We kill our kids with SIDS, Shaken Baby Syndrome [often blaming the parent], Iatrogenic (Doctor Caused) scurvy and diabetes and the kids we don’t kill we damage neurologically and otherwise for life with cancer causing viruses like SV-40, admitted by the CDC to cause leukemia, aluminum, known to cause brain damage, mercury, a potent neurotoxin, Polysorbate 80, known to cause infertility and more.

[Virus discovered in the Polio Vaccine, but, not allegedly removed before 98,000,000 (that’s ninety-eight MILLION) doses were given to unsuspecting, and not informed-consent-giving people worldwide. Think of all those future cancer treatment billions! Vaccination is an “investment” in future crony corporatist profits.] And much more. Vaccinated people shed viruses, endangering the immuno compromised, by the way, not the other way around and if a baby’s mom was vaccinated while the baby was in utero, even if she is breast feeding her child, the baby is immuno compromised because she cannot, simply cannot, provide enough antibodies in her milk as a non vaccinated mother!

The baby is not getting the nutrient antibodies necessary and, if vaccinated, is being slammed over and over and over and over again with dangerous and highly toxic vaccines.

Wait! That’s great news for Big Pharma: the baby either dies (depopulation agenda served. Check.) or the baby becomes a profit center for big pharma and is one of the vast majority of kids 10 years of age and younger who are on drugs, both psychoactive and otherwise, filling the coffers with a nation of patients-for-life. Double check.

Oh, and when a vaccine is shown conclusively to fail, like MMR, DPT and others, ACIP has another great idea: add a booster shot despite the fact that there is NO, repeat NO, evidence for the idea that giving someone a booster will boost their immunity.

It is rather like saying that a student fails an exam dismally and we will call it a pass and give the professor the exam to take rather than find out if the student has anything to commend his/her level of knowledge.

Sorry. Illogical. Irrational (exactly as irrational as the nonsense THEORY (because that is all that it is – an unproven theory) widely known as Herd Immunity.

So through its virulent and scientifically barren program of vaccination for babies the US Government’s very own statistics, on sites that it hope you will NEVER visit, tell us that we are looking at an absurdity piled on an atrocity placed upon an abomination.

[On it goes: US Sen. Boxer is calling for a Federal Mandate that all Head Start Kids be fully vaccinated with all “recommended” vaccines. Think of all those Delta Workers for the New World Order.]

And you, my dear fellow health freedom advocate, are next. The ACIP, running scared, has decreed that you, an adult, need mandatory vacciantions. All of the them, including shingles, which causes approximately 1/2 of the people who get it to have a meaningful adverse event or worse, which does not, according to CDC prevent shingles but which everyone ought to have anyway.

Did I mention irrational?

[Read more here]

*Originally titled “US Gov’t Instructions on How to Kill Babies”


Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products and modalities since the early 1970’s, and he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist and father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive and safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield (MA), New England and “virtually” the world, through his new website, www.romayasoundhealthandbeauty.com. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.com

Should Homeopathy Be Banned?

Tracy Kolenchuk Waking Times | July 28 2014

In England, The Daily Mail Reporter headlines “Homeopathy remedies should be labeled as placebos and banned on NHS“, but added, “But some doctors said their patients seemed to benefit despite no clinical trial evidence that homeopathy worked.”

The blog “10 Pseudo-Science Theories We’d Like to see Retired Forever,” says “Homeopathy claims water can cure you, because it once held medicine.” But, the theory of homeopathic medicines is not based on diluted medicine. It seems the author(s) haven’t actually bothered to look up the theory of homeopathy, or understand its claims before composing that nonsense. The author of “Homeopathy is Placebo – Ban Homeopathy,” who says, “The reason homeopathy should be banned is not that it’s placebo, but that it’s fraudulent,” would also benefit from a simple dictionary check. A placebo is defined as a medicine that is fraudulent, to quote Merriam Webster, Placebo “a usually pharmacologically inert preparation prescribed more for the mental relief of the patient than for its actual effect on a disorder.”

Stephen Barrett, M.D., the ultimate “pot calling the kettle black” cites among other reasons, “the laws of chemistry.” The laws of chemistry are actually the theories of chemistry, on theory that they ‘cannot be broken.’ But apparently Dr. Barrett is worried that homeopathic medicines might manage to break these laws of nature? He does not go so far as to suggest that homeopathic medicines should be banned, but wants them labeled as placebos, with statements like “a public warning that although the FDA has permitted homeopathic remedies to be sold, it does not recognize them as effective.” Stephen also seems to forget, for the moment at least, that many doctors prescribe placebos, not because they don’t work, but because they do work.

The reasons suggested for banning homeopathy are, frankly, very weak.  In summary:

– it’s no better than a placebo

– people might take homeopathic medicines and suffer because they avoid a ‘real doctor’

– ??more?? I honestly can’t find any more reasons – I’d be happy to be enlightened.

So, let’s look at the reasons first, then the reality.

Homeopathy is no better than a placebo.

First of all, we need to define a placebo.  A placebo is a lie from your doctor. If there is no doctor, it’s not a placebo.  If there is no intentional lie, it’s not a placebo. Stephen Bartlett suggesting labeling homeopathic medicines as placebos, is suggesting the paradox, “This statement is false.”

There’s another side to the word placebo. People often confuse the word placebo with ‘placebo effect,’ thinking that ‘placebo effects’ are not real, that they are lies. But that’s not true. Merriam Webster defines the placebo effect as an “improvement in the condition of a patient that occurs in response to treatment but cannot be considered due to the specific treatment used.” Placebo effects are real. Placebo effects are not lies, they are real effects, measurable by science, and by medicine.

So, stating that homeopathic medicines are “no more effective than a placebo,” is actually saying that “homeopathic medicines cause real, positive effects that we don’t understand.” It also says “homeopathic medicines are no more effective than a lie from your doctor.”

Should we ban homeopathic medicines because we don’t understand them? Should we ban placebos because we don’t understand them? Nonsense.

People who take homeopathic medicines might suffer because they avoid a real doctor.

Do people suffer more because they avoid doctors, or more because they see doctors too soon, or too often? Frankly, although medicines often work well, medicines can also kill. According to government reports, medicines (but not homeopathic medicines) are third ranked in the causes of illness and death in the USA. Patent medicines and OTC medicines have side effects. It’s worth to note that, according to the medical profession, homeopathic medicines don’t have ‘real effects,’ therefore, according to the medical profession, they also cannot have ‘side effects.’

I’m not saying homeopathic medicines are ineffective.  Science, and medicine has proven, and agrees that homeopathic medicines are effective, although they qualify with “no more effective than a lie from your doctor.” Science and medicine have also proven that most, if not all, doctors recognize and occasionally prescribe placebos to their patients.

Do people who take OTC medicines suffer because they might avoid a real doctor? And what about food? Hippocrates said, “Let food be thy medicine, and medicine by thy food.” Should we also count those people who eat an “apple a day,” to keep the doctor away? Should we ban apples because some people think they are medicines?

What about Health?

Are placebos healthy? It is important to separate “health” from “illness”. Health is larger than illness. It is entirely possible that homeopathic medicines, even if they have no effect on illness, might have positive effects on health. But science has proven they do have positive effects on illness.

We don’t measure health. We haven’t yet learned to measure health yet – we can only measure symptoms of illness, and that’s how we measure illness. We can learn to measure health – but today, no-one is trying.

If we ban homeopathic medicines, how will we learn of their effects on health? And there’s the point. The exact point of this discussion.

Freedom. Freedom to study. Freedom to learn. Freedom to learn about health – to learn more than simple studies of illness. Freedom to know for ourselves. Freedom to make our own choices. To advertise and market our own choices.

Should we ban homeopathic medicines?

It might be a useful question, if it was not so loaded. It is loaded against my freedom of choice, in favor of society’s freedom to oppress, based on some people’s beliefs.

I believe in health freedom. I believe in the health freedom of the customer, and also of the producer and seller. Safety standards are important, but bans? Banning something is a serious act, difficult to undo – even if the ban was wrong. Banning homeopathic medicines would be a strike against freedom.

Our laws should be designed to enhance our freedoms, not to restrict them. If freedoms are to be restricted – there must be real and serious danger. Proof needs to be strong. Frankly, there is no evidence for banning homeopathy, plenty of evidence in favor of freedom.

In Summary:

Medicine Effectiveness Side Effects Danger
Food Effective, especially effective against nutritional deficiency illnesses. None. Little danger, although it is possible to die from food.
OTC – Over the Counter Medicines Most commonly effective against symptoms of illness, allowing the body to heal. Listed on bottle. Can be severe. Some danger.  Prone to non-monitored, over consumption, which can lead to illness, even death.
Patent Medicines A wide range of effectiveness. Tend to be designed and tested for specific illnesses. The bestselling patent medicines only treat symptoms, and do not cure. Listed on bottle. Can be severe. Sometimes not known for years. Very dangerous. Requires a doctor’s prescription, controlled dosages, and even then can lead to injury or death.
Placebos Effective but we don’t understand why. However, many doctors are able to predict ‘when’ they will be effective, and prescribe them. None. Little danger, although there is some danger when patent medicines  or OTCs are prescribed as placebos – which does happen.
Homeopathic Medicines Effective, but we don’t understand why. None. Little danger. As far as I know, there are no reports of death or injury caused by homeopathic medicines.

Should homeopathic medicines be banned? Nonsense. We need to spend our time on more important questions.

About the Author:  Tracy Kolenchuk is the founder of Healthicine.org and author of: Introduction to Healthicine: Theories of Health, Healthiness, Illness and Aging.