https://librti.com/view-video/uninformed-consent
Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact CheckedThe documentary above, “Uninformed Consent,”1,2,3 takes a deep dive into the COVID-19 narrative — who’s controlling it and how fear was (and continues to be) used to push novel, unproven gene transfer technology onto, and into, people of all ages, and the simultaneous theft of private wealth and the destruction of small businesses, across the globe.
The film is written and directed by Todd Michael Harris (Matador Films). Odessa Orlewicz, a pro-freedom activist in British Columbia and founder of the Canadian social media platform Librti, and Ted Kuntz, retired psychotherapist and president of Vaccine Choice Canada, co-produced the film.
Weaving in and out of the heart-wrenching story of one man’s loss, interviews with doctors and scientists explores the loss of human rights in the name of biosecurity, and how the “elite class” profit from it all.
Interspersed are compilations of media lies and the bewilderingly contradictory dictates of government officials, as well as footage from protests and examples of people collapsing on live television after getting the jab.
The COVID jabs are a crime against humanity, and it’s a crime in progress. For many who are aware of what’s going on, everyday reality is like watching an intentional, slow-motion train wreck.
As noted by B.C. physician Dr. Stephen Malthouse, who is interviewed in the film, “divide and conquer” is an age-old war strategy. During Hitler’s reign, anti-Semitism was normalized through propaganda in which Jews were likened to “lice,” and were accused of carrying typhus. The same exact strategy was used during the COVID pandemic.
Those who dutifully wore their face masks and got the jab were hailed as good and moral citizens, while the rest were labeled as murderous, disease-carrying, amoral egotists, who’d by their selfishness forfeited their right to life.
Irrational hatred against anti-maskers, “anti-lockdowners” and “anti-vaxxers” was relentlessly fueled and “normalized” by government officials, health authorities and media, right from the start.
Those who dutifully wore their face masks and got the jab were hailed as good and moral citizens, while the rest were labeled as murderous, disease-carrying, amoral egotists, who’d by their selfishness forfeited their right to life.
Family members were pitted against family members. Friends against friends. Coworkers against coworkers. Employers against employees. Most of us who opted out of this grand genetic experiment have been shunned and berated by people we love.
Adding insult to injury, we all paid for this abuse. Billions of taxpayer dollars were spent on propaganda, anti-vax harassment and pro-vax advertising. The pain of this intentional divide and conquer strategy was too great to bear for many.
The personal story that Harris returns to again and again throughout the film is that of a grieving husband whose wife committed suicide. She suffered relentless bullying and harassment from coworkers and superiors for refusing the jab, and when she was finally placed on unpaid leave, she took her own life.
How many suicides are the pandemic puppet masters and their brainwashed minions responsible for? Nobody knows, but it’s likely quite a few. And make no mistake: The hateful rhetoric fed into everyone’s brains and acted out by the weak-minded was intended to cause harm.
It was intended to cause distress, and many now carry the cross of having bullied someone to death, whether they’re aware of it or not. Sadly, many have not yet learned their lesson, and efforts to demonize certain groups continues. Now, the targeted opposition are those who ask questions that Big Pharma and government refuse to answer, or point out blatant contradictions in the narrative.
Terms like “conspiracy theorist” and “conspiracy theory” are applied to everything and everyone who questions the official and clearly ridiculous narrative. And, the demonization continues even as so-called “conspiracies” are repeatedly shown to be true.
For example, the suspicion that we’d be forced to take these gene therapy shots multiple times a year, for years on end, was labeled a “conspiracy theory,” yet it didn’t take long before boosters were rolled out, and now they’re coming out with shots for newer variants as well, which will result in another round of shots.
Similarly, “conspiracy theorists” warned that people who got the jab would have to continue getting boosters or lose their precious “fully vaccinated” status, and that’s exactly what happened.
In fact, the concept of vaccine passports being used to shut people out of everyday society was initially dismissed as a paranoid conspiracy theory, yet it didn’t take long before governments were doing exactly that.
“Conspiracy theorists” also warned that the COVID jab didn’t prevent infection or spread, and that too is now an indisputable fact. As of early February 2022, Israel reported that 80% of serious COVID cases were among the fully vaccinated.4
“Conspiracy theorists” warned that giving the experimental shot to teens and young children would be unconscionably dangerous, as they have a negligible risk for COVID complications, and now even mainstream media from time to time admit that teens and young adults are suffering above normal rates of heart inflammation.
Between January 2021 and August 2022 (a period of 19 months), at least 1,249 athletes have suffered cardiac arrest or collapse, and 847 have died after COVID injection, worldwide.5 Historically, the annual average of sudden death in athletes was between 296 and 69.7
“Uninformed Consent” scrutinizes many of the elements of the pandemic response, such as the irrational idea that early treatment for COVID-19 is nonexistent and/or futile, and the equally irrational idea that the only solution is to inject everyone on the planet with an experimental product, without regard for individual levels of risk.
In interviews with doctors and scientists — such as Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Peter McCullough, B.C. family physicians Dr. Stephen Malthouse and Dr. Charles Hoffe, Dr. Tess Laurie and government drug policy researcher Alan Cassels — Harris shines a bright light on the medical establishment’s sudden wholesale abandonment of the Hippocratic Oath.
He also looks at the lawless culture of the drug industry and its capture of regulatory agencies and media — a development that has effectively eliminated any protection the public would have had, and should have, from predatory behavior and dangerous products. Harris also reviews:
I hope you’ll take the time to watch “Uninformed Consent,” and share it with others. Harris specifically tried, he says, to create a film that would help open the eyes and minds of those who still cannot see what’s happening, or don’t fully believe what they’re seeing.
To close things out with something that is not covered in this film, if you for whatever reason got one or more jabs and suffered an injury, know there are good doctors and scientists working on solutions.
First and foremost, never ever take another COVID booster, another mRNA gene therapy shot or regular vaccine. You need to end the assault on your system. The same goes for anyone who has taken one or more COVID jabs and had the good fortune of not experiencing debilitating side effects.
Your health may still be impacted long-term, so don’t take any more shots. When it comes to treatment, there still aren’t many doctors who know what to do, although I suspect we’ll see more doctors specializing in COVID jab injuries in the future.
Doctors who have started tackling the treatment of COVID jab injuries in earnest include Dr. Michelle Perro (DrMichellePerro.com), whom I’ve interviewed on this topic. Perro is a pediatrician who over the past couple of years has also started treating adults injured by the jab. Another is Dr. Pierre Kory (DrPierreKory.com).
Both agree that eliminating the spike protein your body is now continuously producing is a primary task. Perro’s preferred remedy for this is hydroxychloroquine, while Kory typically uses ivermectin. Both of these drugs bind and thereby facilitate the removal of spike protein.
Kory also believes there may be ways to boost the immune system to allow it to degrade and eventually remove the spike from your cells naturally, over time. One of the strategies he recommends for this is TRE (time restricted eating), which stimulates autophagy, a natural cleaning process that eliminates damaged, misfolded and toxic proteins. Another strategy that can do the same thing would be sauna therapy.
As a member of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), Kory helped develop the FLCCC’s post-vaccine treatment protocol called I-RECOVER. Since the protocol is continuously updated as more data becomes available, your best bet is to download the latest version straight from the FLCCC website at covid19criticalcare.com8 (hyperlink to the correct page provided above).
In previous articles, I’ve also covered a number of treatments and remedies that can be helpful for COVID jab injuries, such as:
•Hyperbaric oxygen therapy, especially in cases involving stroke, heart attack, autoimmune diseases and/or neurodegenerative disorders. To learn more, see “Hyperbaric Therapy — A Vastly Underused Treatment Modality.”
•Pharmaceutical grade methylene blue, which improves mitochondrial respiration and aid in mitochondrial repair. At 15 to 20 milligrams a day, it could potentially go a long way toward resolving some of the fatigue many suffer post-jab.
It may also be helpful in acute strokes. The primary contraindication is if you have a G6PD deficiency (a hereditary genetic condition), in which case you should not use methylene blue at all. To learn more, see “The Surprising Health Benefits of Methylene Blue.”
•Near-infrared light, as it triggers production of melatonin in your mitochondria9 where you need it most. By mopping up reactive oxygen species, it too helps improve mitochondrial function and repair. Natural sunlight is 54.3% infrared radiation,10 so this treatment is available for free. For more information, see “What You Need to Know About Melatonin.”
Comments are closed for this blog post
(NaturalHealth365) As time progresses, it is becoming increasingly clear that those who turned down the COVID-19 shot are on the right side of history. In hindsight, it wasn’t prudent to inject oneself with an experimental shot pushed by untrustworthy “health” agencies. Making matters worse is the fact that the top pharma companies are now rolling out jabs for each COVID-19 variant.
As detailed in this piece, it is time for those who pushed the vax on others to apologize to the unjabbed. Healthcare workers who refused the injections were recently awarded more than $10 million in a settlement. The settlement is the first of its type in the context of the coronavirus vax.
The settlement will be paid by the Chicago North Shore University Health System. Exactly $10.3 million will be paid to healthcare employees due to the mandating of the coronavirus vax for employment. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of 500+ employees who selflessly served in the healthcare sector up until the point at which North Shore University Health System unlawfully discriminated against them.
Furthermore, the court ruled the employer overrode religious exemptions when mandating that employees receive the jab to maintain employment. The sad truth is that hardworking North shore employees were terminated from employment after refusing a shot containing aborted fetal matter.
As long as the Federal District Court approves the settlement, the money will be paid to the North Shore employees. Those employees will receive a notice of the financial settlement after approval from the federal District Court.
The settlement agreement terms state North Shore is required to alter its illegal policy that does not allow any religious accommodation. The policy is to be modified to conform to the law. Furthermore, religious accommodations for North Shore employees are to be provided in each of the company’s buildings. Unvaxxed employees with an approved exemption from the shot for religious reasons are to be considered for open positions at all North Shore Facilities.
The terms of the settlement agreement also state that employees of the company who lost their job after refusing the jab for religious reasons are to be considered for rehire if applying within 90 days of the time when the federal District Court approves the final settlement. Making the victory even sweeter for the jab-refusers is the fact that the agreement mandates that the returning workers retain their prior level of seniority.
The specific payout from the settlement hinges on the submission of claim forms by the deadline. However, North Shore will likely end up paying about $25,000 to each employee who refused the jab for religious reasons.
The company will also pay $3,000 to employees who were required to take the shot to retain their employment with the company if their refusal was rooted in religious beliefs. The lawsuit has 13 lead plaintiffs, each of whom will receive an additional $20,000 financial compensation for spearheading the litigation as the class representatives.
Sources for this article include:
Because With All the "Advancements," We're Only Getting Sicker
There are small and growing niches of people like you and I who don't fall in line with the medical establishment's version of "healthcare," and that's a wonderful thing.
But why aren’t all our “medical breakthroughs” making us healthier?
Why are we getting sicker and sicker despite taking more and more drugs?
It’s time we take a critical look at what we are calling “medicine”:
HOWEVER, there is another way. A system of medicine that has been suppressed for decades.
Dr. Peter Hotez, dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, has repeatedly dismissed the idea of a lab accident or deliberate spread, calling it “an outlandish conspiracy theory.” He’s also a fierce critic of the ongoing Congressional probe into gain-of-function research, decrying it as a “threat to American biomedical science.”1
Well, Hotez, the lab leak denialist and Congressional probe critic, has now been outed as a funder and project leader of risky gain-of-function research on coronaviruses at the now-infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
Hotez’s dismissal of the lab escape theory is particularly ironic considering he received a $6.1 million grant2 from the National Institutes of Health in 2012 for the development of a SARS vaccine in case of an “accidental release from a laboratory,” “deliberate spreading of the virus by a terrorist attack,” or a zoonotic spillover event. According to the grant abstract:3
“We have identified a highly promising lead candidate vaccine antigen, the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV spike (S) protein that can induce potent neutralizing antibody response and protection against SARS-CoV infection.
Our objective is to develop a highly effective and safe recombinant RBD-based SARS vaccine that can be used in humans for prevention of future SARS outbreak and for biodefense preparedness.”
The research under that grant took place from 2012 until 2017. After spending five years preparing for the possibility of an accidental or deliberate release of SARS, why would Hotez think a lab leak of SARS-CoV-2 was out of the question?
Clearly, Hotez is no stranger to the possibility of lab leaks. Could it be that his dismissal of the lab leak theory, and the Congressional inquiry into gain-of-function research, is based in fear that he may be implicated in SARS-CoV-2’s creation? As reported by U.S. Right to Know (USRTK):4
“While casting concerns about Wuhan’s labs as ‘fringe,’ Hotez has not mentioned his own connection to a project involving a laboratory-generated chimeric SARS-related coronavirus that has come under Congress’ microscope. The project was helmed by Zhengli Shi, a senior scientist and ‘virus hunter’ at the Wuhan Institute of Virology nicknamed the ‘Bat Lady.’
As part of his NIH grant, Hotez subcontracted funding for research on combined or ‘chimeric’ coronaviruses, a scientific paper5 shows. Hotez’s grant6 underwrote two of Shi’s collaborators on the project.
In the 2017 paper7 co-funded by Hotez, Shi and her colleagues generated a recombinant virus from two SARS-related coronaviruses: ‘rWIV1-SHC014S.’ It’s not clear whether the paper co-funded by Hotez should have been stopped under a temporary ‘pause’ on gain-of-function work before 2017.
However, some independent biosecurity experts have said research on this chimeric virus in some ways epitomizes lapses in NIH oversight of risky research in the years before the COVID-19 pandemic.
A prior study8 of one of the coronaviruses that comprised the chimera, WIV1, found it to be ‘poised for human emergence.’ Another prior paper9 on the other coronavirus, SHC014, stated that its future study in lab-generated viruses may be ‘too risky to pursue.’
‘The work here should have been at the very least, heavily scrutinized,’ said David Relman, a Stanford microbiologist and biosecurity expert. ‘This work should have been heavily reviewed for [gain-of-function], and probably should have been subject to the pause prior to December 2017.’”
As explained in USRTK’s report10 and revealed in the 2017 paper11 titled, “Cross-Neutralization of SARS Coronavirus-Specific Antibodies Against Bat SARS-Like Coronaviruses,” another funding source of this joint project was the EcoHealth Alliance. The NIH grant12 behind EcoHealth’s part of the study has already come under scrutiny, as it involved the creation of chimeric coronaviruses at the Wuhan lab. As reported by USRTK:13
“Specifically, an EcoHealth Alliance grant report14 obtained by congressional investigators demonstrated that a WIV1-SHC014 chimera generated thousands of times the viral load and enhanced lethality in mice with human airway cells. This prompted concerns among some biosecurity experts, scientists and members of Congress.
In response to questions from congressional Republicans, NIH acknowledged15 that the research was out of compliance with its own regulations on gain-of-function research.’
In this limited experiment, laboratory mice infected with SHC014 WIV1 bat coronavirus became sicker than those infected with WIV1 bat coronavirus,’ the letter read. ‘As sometimes occurs in science, this was an unexpected result rather than something the scientists set out to do.’”
So far, Hotez has not been forthcoming about his apparent conflict of interest. On the contrary, he’s denied that his NIH grant supported Shi’s controversial research project at the WIV.
In an August 9, 2022, Twitter post,16 Ebright pointed out that such denials are provably false, as funding from NIH grant AI09877517 (Hotez’s grant) is acknowledged as a funding source in Shi’s paper,18 “Cross-Neutralization of SARS Coronavirus-Specific Antibodies Against Bat SARS-Like Coronaviruses.”
Hotez’s conflicts of interest are all the more pertinent when you consider he’s on The Lancet COVID-19 Commission, where he co-chairs the COVID-19 Vaccines and Therapeutics task force.19 Richard Ebright, a professor of chemistry at Rutgers University, told USRTK:20
“The construction and threat-characterization of rWIV1-SHC014 was — unequivocally — gain-of-function research. It is a conflict of interest that, to my knowledge, has not previously been disclosed to The Lancet Commission … and that surely will be of interest to The Lancet Commission.”
As coincidence would have it, EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak was also on the Lancet Commission back when its COVID Origins task force was initially set up.21 Daszak was eventually “recused”22 from the Origins task force after his conflicts of interest were brought to light, garnering widespread criticism and lack of trust. The task force has now closed down permanently.23
Daszak was also selected by the Chinese to be part of the World Health Organization’s initial task force to investigate the origin of SARS-CoV-2. That task force has also been dismantled due to conflicts of interest and less than credible results, and has been replaced with a new working group.
Like Hotez, Daszak also went on record, early on, dismissing the lab-origin theory as “pure baloney,”24 and he was the mastermind behind the publication of a “scientific consensus statement” signed by 27 scientists, condemning the lab leak theory as “conspiracy theory.”25,26
Overall, it looks like Hotez and Daszak are reading from the same scripts. They’re also clearly funding the same controversial and highly risky research that likely played a major role in the COVID pandemic.
Hotez has made headlines a number of times through the years, typically delivering some kind of hateful rhetoric. Hotez has publicly stated he wants to “snuff out” vaccine skeptics,27 for example, and in May 2021 called for cyberwarfare measures to be deployed against people who share vaccine safety information, and he did this in the highly reputable science journal Nature, no less.28
Over the years, Hotez has repeatedly spewed vitriol at parents of vaccine-injured children and called for physical harm and imprisonment of people who don’t agree with the one-size-fits-all vaccine agenda, so it was rather funny when he whined and complained about getting bombarded with “anti-vaxx hate speech” in response to his cyberwarfare call.29
Hotez is not above casting an evil eye on other scientists either. As reported by independent journalist Paul Thacker in an August 9, 2022, Substack article titled, “Peter Hotez Sees Aggression Everywhere But in the Mirror”:30
“Patrolling scientific discourse, Hotez has a knack for discovering ‘antiscience’ in anyone who disagrees with him. Jeffrey Sachs, economics professor at Columbia University and chair of an international commission on COVID-19, charged in a wide-ranging interview31 last week that the National Institutes of Health and allied scientists were impeding an investigation into how the COVID-19 pandemic started.
Since the pandemic’s beginning, virologists have been attacking anyone who asks hard questions about what might have started this outbreak. Predictably ... Hotez went on the assault, tweeting that Sachs, as leader of the Lancet Commission, did not represent the views of science.
Much like a Pentagon general wrapping himself in freedom and the flag to demand more federal monies for another foreign war ... Hotez has been shrouding himself in the mantle of science to denigrate anyone who questions taxpayer funding for dangerous virus research by the National Institutes of Health.”
Sachs was in fact the one who shut down the Lancet Commission’s COVID Origins task force, a decision he says began with concerns about conflicts of interest between Daszak and the WIV, but in addition to that, Sachs claims he also came to realize that Daszak was “not always telling the truth.” The final straw came when Sachs sacked Daszak and members of the task force suddenly attacked him for being “antiscience.”
My own experience was to witness close up how they’re ... trying to keep our eyes on something else ... away from even asking the questions that we’re talking about. ~ Jeffrey Sachs, The Lancet COVID-19 Commission Chair
Shortly thereafter, a Freedom of Information Act request brought previously hidden NIH documents to light, and Sachs realized that those who were attacking him also had undisclosed ties that made their ability to get to the truth doubtful at best. At that point, he decided to disband the whole task force.
“My own experience was to witness close up how they’re ... trying to keep our eyes on something else ... away from even asking the questions that we’re talking about,” Sachs said in his Current Affairs interview.32
“Although Sachs did not name specific task force members who assailed him, it’s not hard to imagine who they were,” Thacker writes. Pulling up the archived webpage for the now-defunct task force, we find no fewer than seven members with direct professional and/or financial ties to Daszak: Peter Hume, Gerald Keusch, Supaporn Wacharapluesadee, Danielle Anderson, Linda Saif, Stanley Perlman and Sai Kit Lam. (In his article, Thacker details those ties.)
Curiously, rather than supporting Sachs — or at bare minimum feigning concern about Daszak’s dishonesty and this extraordinary level of conflicts of interest — Hotez has defended Daszak, shooting down any and all critique with a single word: “Antiscience.” As noted by Thacker:33
“Anyone interested in joining the Hotez crusade against antiscience, should be forewarned: his scripture can be difficult to follow. The registry of the sinful often changes, with names of heretics rotating in and out of sermons, depending on political expediency.
In late 2020 when members of QAnon seemed to be hiding under every American bed, Hotez preached that members of the online conspiracy were mixing with anti-vaxxers and neo-Nazis to create a ‘globalizing anti-science confederacy or empire.’
A year later, QAnon fell out of the news, prompting Hotez to refocus ... The threat of anti-science aggression now arose from three sources: far right members of Congress and conservative news outlets; an online ‘disinformation dozen’; and Russian propaganda ...
Four months later — surprise!!! — Hotez discovered antiscience was more complex and multifaceted. Forgetting to cite Russia, Hotez identified a ‘troubling new expansion of antiscience aggression’ and railed in PLOS Biology against the three new horsemen of the antiscience apocalypse:34
1.Far-right members of the US Congress;
2.The conservative news outlets and;
3.A group of thought leaders who provide intellectual underpinnings to fuel the first two elements.
Cobbling together a set of disconnected thoughts, Hotez centered the threat to science on various accusations made against the NIH’s Anthony Fauci, as well as media reports on Peter Daszak. The essay touched on Nazis — of course!!! — and ended with a plea for swift and positive action that included ‘federal hate-crime protections’ for scientists who were being criticized.”
In his article, Thacker goes on to review several other bizarre incidences involving Hotez. Most recently, he called scientific experts invited to testify before Congress “fringe elements” testifying and promoting “outlandish conspiracies.” So much for Ph.D.’s and med school. He also accused Sen. Rand Paul of promoting conspiracies.
“With a final flourish, Hotez proposed a new threat to science a couple days back: gain of function ‘conspiracy guys’ allaying themselves with antivaccine activists. But it’s not hard to imagine that Russians and Nazis will make another appearance in a Hotez tweet or essay soon to come,” Thacker concludes.35
Here’s the take-home: The reason Hotez protects Daszak and rails against “antiscience” is because it protects Fauci, and Fauci is the one Hotez is really beholden to. He’s received millions of dollars in grants from the NIH — and so has Daszak and a lot of other people who conduct completely unnecessary and dangerous research.
If Daszak goes down for illegal research, so does Fauci, and with him, the biggest research purse strings in America, if not the world. Ending gain-of-function research would have the same withering effect on funding — and hence careers — which is why anyone who questions the sanity of gain-of-function research is “antiscience” and should be cyberattacked on sight. So, all that hateful rhetoric? It all comes down to protecting self-serving interests. Who would have guessed?
LINK TO MOVIE HERE
Uninformed Consent - Official Full Documentary Release - Watch Now!...
© 2024 Created by carol ann parisi. Powered by