Dr. Peter McCullough, an internist, cardiologist and trained epidemiologist, not only sees patients every week but is the editor of two medical journals and has published hundreds of peer-reviewed papers. Prior to the pandemic, he was involved in the interface between heart disease and kidney disease — but that all changed.

McCullough is now a "hunted doctor" who's been threatened with disciplinary actions, including suspension or revocation of his medical license, by the American Board of Internal Medicine for the "dissemination of misinformation."¹ He stepped forward during the COVID-19 pandemic because he saw something very wrong was going on early in 2020, and he felt compelled to do something about it.

In the video above, you can view McCullough's October 2, 2021, presentation at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.² I urge you to set aside one hour to view it in its entirety, as it's packed with data that call into question the true motivations behind the mass injection campaign, which he believes should have been shut down in January.

A new study has found that though Covid-19 vaccinations lower the chance of hospitalization and death in the case of infections, those inoculated can spread the Delta variant as easily as those not.

Researchers looked at over 600 people in the UK over the course of a year for the study, done by Imperial College London and the UK Health Security Agency (HSA) and published this week in The Lancet Infectious Diseases journal.

"Although vaccines remain highly effective at preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19, our findings suggest that vaccination is not sufficient to prevent transmission of the Delta variant in household settings with prolonged exposures," the study declares.

In their analysis of "densely sampled household contacts exposed to the Delta variant," researchers found 38% of those unvaccinated got Covid, while 25% of those vaccinated got it.

Figures and statements from the recent FDA advisory board meeting totally destroy any argument for jabbing kids.
Findings from an FDA meeting are being used to raise alarms about the level of risk Covid poses for children, in order to push for the authorisation of the Pfizer vaccine for kids under eleven.

The real story of the statistics is that children face almost no danger from "Covid", and the experts at the meeting themselves admit the vaccines have unknown side effects, especially in the long term.

On October 26th, the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee held a meeting to vote on allowing Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) of Pfizer's Covid "vaccine" for children aged 5-11.

Getting approved by the VRBPAC is a key step on the way to the FDA issuing an EUA, and with the vote passing the Pfizer vaccine is expected to be approved for use on children in November.

The entire meeting was live-streamed, and you can watch the whole eight hours of it below, if you really feel the need:

A simple stomach bug could do a lot of damage. There are 100 million neurons scattered along the gastrointestinal tract — directly in the line of fire — that can be stamped out by gut infections, potentially leading to long-term GI disease.

But there may be an upside to enteric infection. A new study finds that mice infected with bacteria or parasites develop a unique form of tolerance quite unlike the textbook immune response. The research, published in Cell, describes how gut macrophages respond to prior insult by shielding enteric neurons, preventing them from dying off when future pathogens strike. These findings may ultimately have clinical implications for conditions such as irritable bowel syndrome, which have been linked to the runaway death of intestinal neurons.

Welcome to your prison comrade

A new Taiwanese study investigated wind farm noise on people in homes made of sandstone, concrete, iron or bricks. And they measured the low frequency noise inside and out, and with windows open and closed. Given the health risks involved, they advised that governments ought to set limits on how close towers can be, and recommend airtight windows that nobody opens much.

Perhaps someone should have done more studies like this before the world installed 750GW of wind power?

The same people that panic about the effect of a hot weekend on your grandchildren a hundred years from now, don't seem so worried about whether the wind towers destroy your sleep or put you at risk of heart attacks today.

Thanks to MasterResource.

From the introduction of a new paper in Taiwan on the effects of wind turbine noise on people:

LFN [Low Frequency Noise] exposure has been found to cause a variety of health conditions. Exposure to LFN from wind turbines results in headaches, difficulty concentrating, irritability, fatigue, dizziness, tinnitus, aural pain sleep disturbances, and annoyance. Clinically, exposure to LFN from wind turbines may cause increased risk of epilepsy, cardiovascular effects, and coronary artery disease.

It was also found that exposure to noise (including LFN) may have an impact on heart rate variability (HRV).

HRV — The variability of our heartbeats — is a sign of how healthy we are, and how relaxed we feel. To brutally oversimplify — stressed people have a more robotic predictable pattern, but relaxed people's hearts beat with more flexibility. Slower heart rates usually have more variation. It's a vast topic. HRV predicts mortality after heart attacks. It's even been connected with concentration and decision making ability, depression and anxiety.

We should not force COVID vaccines on anyone when the evidence shows that naturally acquired immunity is equal to or more robust and superior to existing vaccines. Instead, we should respect the right of the bodily integrity of individuals to decide for themselves.

Public health officials and the medical establishment with the help of the politicized media are misleading the public with assertions that the COVID-19 shots provide greater protection than natural immunity. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, for example, was deceptive in her October 2020 published LANCET statement that "there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection" and that "the consequence of waning immunity would present a risk to vulnerable populations for the indefinite future."

Immunology and virology 101 have taught us over a century that natural immunity confers protection against a respiratory virus's outer coat proteins, and not just one, e.g. the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein. There is even strong evidence for the persistence of antibodies. Even the CDC recognizes natural immunity for chicken-pox and measles, mumps, and rubella, but not for COVID-19.

Joe,

First, a quick summary. You reported that, after you were diagnosed with COVID, you took a drug called Ivermectin, which is a horse-dewormer. CNN played that up and slammed you. Of course, the drug is also certified for use in humans. CNN downplayed or ignored that.

Here's something you may not know. There are hundreds of thousands of women who take horse urine. I'm not kidding.

I don't think CNN knows about this. If they did, they would surely call these women the horse-urine crowd and mercilessly attack and mock them, right?

I now quote from a PETA page. You may want to feature this information on your podcast:

Every year, doctors prescribe hormone replacement therapy (HRT) — also referred to as menopausal hormone therapy — to hundreds of thousands of women experiencing menopausal symptoms. One of the HRT drugs that has historically been among the most widely prescribed is made from animal waste. The drug is Premarin, an estrogen-therapy drug currently manufactured by Pfizer (formerly Wyeth Pharmaceuticals), which also produces Prempro, an estrogen/progestin combination. Both drugs contain horse urine, specifically pregnant mare's urine (PMU). Not only has this form of HRT proved to be dangerous to humans, horses raised for their urine are also kept confined and pregnant, and their foals often end up in the slaughterhouse.

According to an industry report, 19 ranches in remote areas of Canada house approximately 1,300 pregnant mares who produce urine for Premarin and Prempro. For most of their 11-month pregnancies, these horses are confined to stalls so small that they cannot turn around or take more than a single step in any direction. The animals must wear rubber urine-collection bags at all times, which causes chafing and lesions, and their drinking water is limited so that their urine will yield more concentrated estrogen. Once the foals are born, the horses are impregnated again, and this cycle continues for about 12 years. PMU ranchers are expected to follow the 'Recommended Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Horses in PMU Operations,' but beyond the call for an 'inspection program,' adherence to these guidelines is not tracked nor enforced.

This is the 15th of the round-ups of Covid vaccine safety reports and news compiled by a group of medical doctors who are monitoring developments but prefer to remain anonymous in the current climate (find the 14th one here). By no means is this part of an effort to generate alarm about the vaccines or dissuade anyone from getting inoculated. It should be read in conjunction with the Daily Sceptic's other posts on vaccines, which include both encouraging and not so encouraging developments.

At the Daily Sceptic we report all the news about the vaccines whether positive or negative and give no one advice about whether they should or should not take them. Unlike with lockdowns, we are neither pro-vaccine nor anti-vaccine; we see our job as reporting the facts, not advocating for or against a particular policy.

The vaccine technology is novel and the vaccines have not yet fully completed their trials, which is why they're in use under temporary and not full market authorisation. This has been done on account of the emergency situation and the trial data was largely encouraging on both efficacy and safety. For a summary of that data, see this preamble to the Government's page on the Yellow Card reporting system. (Dr Tess Lawrie in June wrote an open letter to Dr June Raine, head of the MHRA, arguing that: "The MHRA now has more than enough evidence on the Yellow Card system to declare the COVID-19 vaccines unsafe for use in humans," a claim that has been 'fact checked' here.)

While the mainstream media is endlessly asserting that vaccination is safe and effective, there have been numberous documented side-effects from Covid shots that are not being pubicized. Indeed, anyone who has the audacity to speak publicly about these side-effects is maligned as a conspiracy theorist and anti-vaxxer.

Yet these effects appear in the literature; mainstream, peer reviewed journals. A number of doctors and scientists have spoken out, yet their voices are rarely heard by the population at large.

Join us on this episode of Objective:Health as we take an objective look at some of the clinical effects of Covid vaccinations.


And check us out on Brighteon!

For other health-related news and more, you can find us on:

♥Twitter: https://twitter.com/objecthealth
♥Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/objecthealth/
♥Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channel/objectivehealth
♥LBRY: https://lbry.tv/@objectivehealth:f
♥Odysee: https://odysee.com/@objectivehealth:f

And you can check out all of our previous shows (pre YouTube) here:

♥https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16H-nK-N0ANdsA5JFTT12_HU5nUYRVS9YcQh331dG2MI/edit?usp=sharing

Running Time: 00:41:10

Download: MP3 — 37.7 MB

In the video above retired nurse lecturer John Campbell, Ph.D., reports on a comparative analysis of molnurpirivir and ivermectin published in the Austin Journal of Pharmacology and Therapeutics.¹ The first is Merck's new antiviral drug and the second is the much vilified and maligned^2,3 antiparasitic drug used in humans since 1987⁴ and approved for human use in the U.S. in 1996.^5,6

Campbell compares the efficacy, safety and cost using available data for ivermectin published in peer reviewed studies and the first interim data for molnupiravir published by Merck. Molnupiravir, also known as EIDD-2801/MK-44827 has data published as early as October 2019 that showed it was a clinical candidate for monotherapy in influenza viruses.⁸

And yet, Merck's investigation into the oral antiviral medication against SARS-CoV-2 was not logged with Clinical Trials until October 5, 2020.⁹ While Gilead raced to release remdesivir, posting their first clinical trial February 5, 2020,¹⁰ Merck appeared to be slow off the mark. Gilead suspended or terminated the early trials for remdesivir. The reasons given included: