“Safe and Effective”? New Documentary, “An Inconvenient Study” Proves Harm and Lack of Informed Consent re Vaccinations

Del Bigtree (Min 15):  "What did we prove in [our] lawsits [against HHS, FDA and NIH]?  That the entire science behind vaccine safety was nothing but a complete fraud."

Five years ago, I would have thought anyone saying this was insane. I've had dozens of vaccines over my life and my wife and I made sure that our daughters were constantly up-to-date on the vaccines with the pediatrician. Now, after following independent media and congressional hearings, reading Aaron Siri's "Vaccines, Amen! (and see here) and watching the documentary, "An Inconvenient Study,"   I am convinced that Del Bigtree is making a highly credible claim.

Scientists can be corrupted by money and prestige, just like politicians, government officials, CEOs and any other human beings. I highly recommend that you completely ignore what corporate media currently peddles. Instead check out the above sources and make up your own mind.

If you are still skeptical, consider this: "David and Brenda McDowell got their triplets vaccinated with the pneumococcal shot, only for all three children to “shut off on the SAME DAY.”

If you think that you are well informed because you rely on official sources, consider the following an article published by "The Forgotten Side of Medicine." The title to the article: "Dissecting the Religion of Vaccines: How vaccines became the holy water of Western civilization."

Due to the high toxicity of vaccines, real studies inevitably show significant injury. The medical community’s strategy hence has been to block studies comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated from ever being produced.

As such, placebo-controlled vaccine trials are vehemently rejected as “unethical” because they deny (placebo) children a “life-saving” vaccine—despite it being far more unethical to inject every child with vaccines of unknown safety (or benefit). Yet when “ethical” studies show vaccine injuries are real, they’re rejected as “non-controlled” and met with demands for “controlled trials” (that are banned for “ethical” reasons). This absurdity continues as:

When “non-controlled” datasets indicate safety, rather than be questioned, they are widely publicized.

Large datasets that could “ethically” compare vaccinated to unvaccinated exist, but the public is never given access despite extensive efforts to obtain them (and most recently, the CDC deleted theirs so Secretary Kennedy could not get it).

When individuals independently conduct such studies demonstrating harm, studies get retracted and investigators are often targeted by medical boards.

Most recently, a physician agreed to conduct a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study to prove vaccines were safe and then publish the results regardless of what they showed. Once its data irrefutably showed vaccines were immensely dangerous, he refused to publish the study and apologetically admitted to a hidden camera he did that to protect himself.

Many other incriminating datasets are routinely buried. For example, a CDC whistleblower testified that the CDC buried data they collected showing vaccines cause autism, and when a court order finally forced the CDC to release their data used to track COVID-19 vaccine safety, it showed significant harm and that past publications of this data had hid that harm. Likewise, Senator Johnson, through chairing the Senate’s investigative committee, was able to obtain concrete proof the CDC had internal data of serious complications from the vaccine (e.g., myocarditis) but then suppressed this knowledge from reaching the public.

In short, an illogical status quo has been enshrined where “the absence of evidence” for vaccine harm is erroneously accepted as “the evidence of absence.”

This article further asserts that the vaccine industry has imposed upon us what amounts to a religion. Strong sounding stuff, right? Consider:

Story at a Glance:

•As more people awaken to the dangers of vaccines, they discover a persistent problem vaccine safety advocates have faced for decades: talking to vaccine zealots is like speaking to a brick wall.

•Regardless of the evidence presented, you cannot reach them—sometimes it feels like speaking to religious fanatics unwilling to consider the “blasphemy you’re spewing forth.”

•This is deliberate, as vaccines have been enshrined as the holy water which baptizes you into the faith of Western medicine and became the “miracle” the superiority of modern medicine is based upon.

•Because of this faith and the relentless propaganda accompanying it, a series of absurd and contradictory arguments have been established to assert vaccines are “safe” which would never be accepted anywhere else.

•As a result, all vaccine research is designed around the assumption vaccines must be safe, and all regulatory decisions sharing this bias—thereby making it nearly impossible to prove a vaccine is harmful, regardless of how many people it kills or injures.

•This article will review the absurd fallacies used to defend mass vaccination, the unsound mindsets that produce them, and the incredible opportunity we have to at last shift this dysfunctional dynamic.

Keep in mind the pathetically thin testing of vaccines that the industry insists that we inject into our children:

Until recent changes urged by Robert F. Kennedy, this was the vaccine schedule for children (on the right):

The corporate media is an accomplice to the lack of accurate information available to the American public. Consider this:

Did you know the news used to regularly air stories about people's lives being ruined by vaccines?

That all changed after Clinton let Pharma buy out the media.

Here I compiled 56 mind-blowing news segments they'd never air today.

Continue Reading“Safe and Effective”? New Documentary, “An Inconvenient Study” Proves Harm and Lack of Informed Consent re Vaccinations

Bill Gates, COVID, Epstein, Greed, Lying, Etc

No need for a lie detector on Bill  Gates.

"Abject Lie" is written on his forehead. Just dinner. "That's all." You might think my venom is due to his attempt to surreptitiously slip antibiotics to his wife after surreptitiously exposing her to venereal disease caused by his adventures with Jeffrey Epstein. No, that's merely the tip of the iceberg.

Sayer Ji lays it out. Go to Sayer Ji's article, "BREAKING: The Epstein Files Illuminate a 20-Year Architecture Behind Pandemics as a Business Model—With Bill Gates at the Center of the Network: Inside the JPMorgan–Gates–Epstein Pipeline: Donor-Advised Funds, Vaccine Finance, and the Architecture of Pre-Positioned Profit."

Also visit Ji's recent posts on X. Start here:

Dig into this post and the posts that follow for images of documents and links to many other documents that substantiate all of this).

We thought we have been electing the people who govern us, but George Carlin was so very correct when he said: "They own you," and he was speaking of the "Big Club," people like Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein, people we did NOT elect and whom we would never have elected. Yet this is just one example (out of millions) of what corrupt people can do to mold a 'democracy" in their own image and likeness.  Eric Weinstein reacts:

Weinstein continues in the comments to his own post:

I have the same question as Weinstein. In his comment to his own post, Weinstein continues:

[More . . . ]

Continue ReadingBill Gates, COVID, Epstein, Greed, Lying, Etc

About the Amount of Sleep you are Getting

About your sleep.  Post by Aakash Gupta:

This is one of the most important studies in sleep science. Van Dongen et al. ran the experiment that changed how we understand chronic sleep restriction. They had subjects sleep 4h, 6h, or 8h nightly for 14 days, testing cognitive performance every 2 hours. The 6h group’s reaction time deficits by day 14 matched subjects who had been awake for 24 hours straight. The 4h group? They performed like someone awake 48 hours. But here’s what makes this study terrifying.

The Stanford Sleepiness Scale ratings in Panel B plateau after day 3-4. Subjects stopped feeling more tired even as their cognitive performance continued deteriorating through day 14. Your subjective experience of fatigue is a lagging indicator that eventually just… stops updating.

This explains why chronic undersleeping feels sustainable. You’ve adapted to feeling tired. Your prefrontal cortex hasn’t adapted to being impaired.

The PVT (Psychomotor Vigilance Task) in Panel A measures lapses in attention. These are the moments where you’re staring at a screen and your brain simply checks out for 500ms. Every additional day of 6h sleep adds more lapses. The curve never flattens. Panel C and D show working memory and processing speed. Same pattern: continuous degradation with no subjective awareness.

The practical implications: If you’re sleeping 6h and think you’re functioning fine, you’ve lost the internal calibration to know you’re not. The subjects in this study would have told you they felt “okay” while performing like they’d pulled an all-nighter. For anyone doing cognitively demanding work, this means you cannot trust how you feel. You need to track objective markers: error rates, decision latency, problem-solving throughput.

Sleep need is biological, not negotiable. Most adults require 7-9 hours, and the research shows no population-level adaptation to chronic restriction. “I only need 6 hours” is almost always “I’ve forgotten what baseline cognition feels like.“

Continue ReadingAbout the Amount of Sleep you are Getting