Our sincere condolences to the Mendenhall family. Mr Mendenhall was a fierce advocate for health freedom whose brilliance, courage, integrity will be remembered for generations. 💔
Nobody wants to publicly take responsibility for Tracy Beth Hoeg's firing. RFK didn't know about it, the NYT reports. Hoeg coauthored the admin's childhood vaccination schedule policy and investigated COVID vaccine deaths in children.
BOOM!
The NIH researchers who were smuggling monkepox viruses into the US were part of the OneHealth network - the same network that EcoHealth were part of.
Who make pandemics to sell vaccines for pharma.
As if we didn't know already.
Good work @FeeRedfern@FrauHodl
Boo hoo. Cassidy was so rude to autism moms, so dismissive & condescending about their concerns. This went on 4 decades. Ask @HealthFreedomLA . That senator had no right making 100 demands of Kennedy. Cassidy’s ridiculous behavior at Kennedy’s confirmation hearings was the last straw. Autism families are organized & vote.
Paraquat has been banned in more than 70 countries but has remained legal in the United States, despite the fact “just 1 teaspoon of paraquat can cause death.”
https://t.co/0KjWqkzDr7
It worse than the SPLC.
Pharma makes a liability free, mandated oncogenic shot and funds the cancer societies to sing about the anti cancer properties of their vaccines.
The last three times I turned on NPR, it's been segments pimping pharmaceutical products and raging against vaccine non-compliance. You see what's happened here. Tax money cut off so they found another pipeline to your money.
“…HB775 undermines the protections established by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA), specifically 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-26(c), which requires healthcare providers to provide Vaccine Information Statements to the legal representative of a child before administering a covered vaccine. By allowing an unverified temporary custodian or caregiver to consent to medical treatment on a minor’s behalf, HB775 creates a pathway for children to receive vaccines without ensuring that the parent or legal guardian, the individual whom federal law contemplates as the child’s legal representative, has received the required information or authorized the vaccination.”
Read more and ask @LAGovJeffLandry to veto HB775 here 👇👇👇
https://t.co/dhZXhgcIdC
Additionally, current medical consent law recognizes those “authorized or empowered” first - acknowledging POA or court ordered medical decision making authority - THEN an order of hierarchy.
In loco parentis is AFTER parents. HB775 makes those standing in place of a parent, aka in loco parentis, EQUAL to the parent.
Current law also requires documentation by healthcare providers of attempts to find a person legally qualified to consent for someone else.
Again, all that changes with HB775.
https://t.co/rX2BpPQFSQ
This is the complete Senate Health and Welfare discussion of HB775.
Once again, the current law is misrepresented when Rep Chenevert states a minor may be treated as if they are an adult. The law states the minor must believe they have an illness or disease and THEN they can be treated as an adult.
Granted, that’s not ideal and should be amended, but it can be amended without allowing any person off the street to be able to take any child in for medical treatment, no questions asked.
Notice there is no discussion of the change from “any person who has been granted legal authority under the laws of this state for a minor under his care” to “any person professing to be serving as temporary custodian or caregiver of the person who has not attained
the age of majority at the request of a parent or legal guardian,” nor that healthcare providers “may rely in good faith on the representation of a person professing to be serving as temporary custodian or caregiver,” nor that the healthcare providers “shall have no affirmative duty to investigate, verify, or confirm the legal authority of the person professing to be serving as temporary custodian or caregiver.”
This was when the bill changed dramatically and there was zero discussion about it.
A hospital representative was overheard saying, “parents better know where their kids are.”
Indeed. If you thought the current law was bad, it’s about to get much worse.
As mentioned in our latest substack, if a teen disagrees with a parent about a medical treatment, now all they have to do is find a willing person to take them to seek treatment.
NOW is the time to ask @LAGovJeffLandry to veto HB775.
Here is the link to send an email to Gov Landry:
https://t.co/vZSnC4qxoz
Not only does civil law set the age of majority at 18, current medical consent law identifies a minor as anyone under age eighteen. 🤨
(9) "Minor" means a person under eighteen years of age.
https://t.co/RY62phIXjt
This is simply masterful writing👇
Read it if you want to learn the true story
Thank you so much, @anish_koka.
I know you're a fantastic cardiologist- and your patients need you- but, let's be honest: The mainstream media could really use the full time help of a writer like you.
An important part of this is the refusal of medical journals and mainstream
Media, which are almost solely for-profit businesses, to take it seriously.
If the public can get over the obvious fallacy that anything to do with health is altruistic and not profit-driven, then trust will decline further and the public will be better off.
"Remember, if there was a treatment, vaccines would not have passed."
Testifying before the Senate, Dr. Sabine Hazan (@SabinehazanMD) described her COVID-era clinical research and said early treatment data was repeatedly suppressed via retractions.
Who decides which science gets heard and which gets removed?
Oh let's not forget about "run, death is near" Remdesivir. BUT it brings up a great point that the vaccines should have never been EUA because there was a so-called "effective" ☠️ treatment.
FYI, they knew HCQ was effective against coronaviruses in 2015 so the Lancet published fraudulent Surgisphere data to quash the discussion. Nothing about COVID is on the up and up, especially the EUA process - the law was never followed.
This is the complete Senate Health and Welfare discussion of HB775.
Once again, the current law is misrepresented when Rep Chenevert states a minor may be treated as if they are an adult. The law states the minor must believe they have an illness or disease and THEN they can be treated as an adult.
Granted, that’s not ideal and should be amended, but it can be amended without allowing any person off the street to be able to take any child in for medical treatment, no questions asked.
Notice there is no discussion of the change from “any person who has been granted legal authority under the laws of this state for a minor under his care” to “any person professing to be serving as temporary custodian or caregiver of the person who has not attained
the age of majority at the request of a parent or legal guardian,” nor that healthcare providers “may rely in good faith on the representation of a person professing to be serving as temporary custodian or caregiver,” nor that the healthcare providers “shall have no affirmative duty to investigate, verify, or confirm the legal authority of the person professing to be serving as temporary custodian or caregiver.”
This was when the bill changed dramatically and there was zero discussion about it.
A hospital representative was overheard saying, “parents better know where their kids are.”
Indeed. If you thought the current law was bad, it’s about to get much worse.
As mentioned in our latest substack, if a teen disagrees with a parent about a medical treatment, now all they have to do is find a willing person to take them to seek treatment.
NOW is the time to ask @LAGovJeffLandry to veto HB775.
Here is the link to send an email to Gov Landry:
https://t.co/vZSnC4qxoz
🚨 The CDC doesn't require doctors to read the vaccine insert before administering shots. @ICANdecide is asking them to change that.
ICAN's legal team sent a letter to the CDC this month proposing specific, concrete changes to the agency's vaccine contraindications and precautions guidance, the list that governs when a doctor can and cannot grant a medical exemption. Here is what the letter actually says and why it matters.
📋 What the current guidance does: The CDC's contraindications and precautions list tells clinicians which conditions should prevent or delay vaccination. It also includes a separate table of conditions explicitly labeled as NOT valid reasons to defer vaccination, conditions the CDC says are "commonly misperceived" as exemption-worthy. That second table has grown over the years while the first has remained narrow, meaning the system is designed to shrink the space for clinical judgment, not expand it.
📄 What ICAN is proposing: The letter proposes that before each vaccine dose is administered, clinicians be required to screen patients against two sources that are currently not required:
1⃣ First, all contraindications, warnings, and precautions listed in Section 6 of the package insert for each relevant vaccine. These are the risks the manufacturer has already disclosed to the FDA. They are federal documents. They are not currently required reading before a shot is given.
2⃣ Second, all conditions listed on the VICP Vaccine Injury Table for each relevant vaccine. This is the federal government's own list of injuries it has already acknowledged are caused by vaccines, maintained by the same government that administers the immunization program. It is also not currently required screening.
⚖️ Why this matters: The CDC's current guidance actively instructs clinicians that certain conditions are not valid exemptions, even in cases where the manufacturer's own package insert lists those same conditions as warnings or precautions. A doctor following CDC guidance can be discouraged from granting an exemption for a risk that the manufacturer has already flagged in the product label submitted to the FDA.
🔍 What ICAN is asking for: The proposed language does not ask the CDC to expand exemptions broadly. It asks that the minimum floor for screening be the manufacturer's own disclosures and the federal injury table, both of which already exist, and both of which the current system allows clinicians to set aside entirely.
A clinician who has never been required to read the package insert before administering a dose has not been given the tools to practice informed medicine.
That is what this letter is asking the CDC to fix.
Full letter from ICAN lead attorney @AaronSiriSG: https://t.co/3sI0pLif1R
We can't do this work without your help, and we have a match this month! Consider helping us reach our goal. Every gift helps ICAN keep fighting for true Informed Consent and medical freedom.
https://t.co/g4wn4Fc2PL