G N Stein

[Nicolas Hulscher, MPH @NicHulscher]

NEVER FORGET: Fauci and ex-CDC Director Walensky urged ALL pregnant women to take the mRNA gene therapy while they were privately discussing miscarriage risks.

Now, CDC data show miscarriages were reported 11,300% MORE OFTEN after COVID shots vs. flu shots.

That's diabolical.

[Dr. Jack Kruse Decentralized Medicine Maxi 🔆 @DrJackKruse]

You are all playing a role in this Fabian blueprint. The more you comply the closer we get to the Tapering of the Ponzi scheme. https://t.co/1xEPc3j1xh

Few see it, so you need to watch the psy-ops you have all lived through so you can put Windex on your glass eyes. Time to wake up.

[Emerald Robinson ✝️ @EmeraldRobinson]

Just got a call.

Obama put a retired Army guy in charge of all security clearances inside the government. Back in 2010.

That guy has about 900 people working for him.

That guy has never been fired.

He's still in charge.

[Children’s Health Defense @ChildrensHD]

The DARK MAHA Report from @nicoleshanahan exposes what’s been happening behind the scenes with geoengineering. Here’s what you need to know.

-Shanahan says her source held high-level security clearances and worked with the DoD, DOE, NOAA and Intelligence Community for more than a decade.

-Geoengineering didn’t disappear, it was rebranded. “Geoengineering” became “climate intervention.” “Solar radiation management” became “solar radiation modification.” “Stratospheric aerosol injection” became “stratospheric aerosol intervention.”

-Taxpayer money is still funding the research. Shanahan says federal grant data show millions flowing to universities and institutions participating in geoengineering under these newer terms.

-NOAA, NASA, NSF, USGS and DOE are among federal agencies participating in solar radiation modification.

-The government has studied weather modification for decades. A 1979 NOAA report documented nearly 100 projects including hurricane modification.

-ExxonMobil, Shell, and BP have all lobbied for solar radiation modification as a convenient solution to climate change, allowing them to continue emissions-heavy operations without regulatory consequence.

-Bill Gates-backed FICER helped fund geoengineering research. His researcher David Keith has publicly acknowledged serious mortality risks but says it’s worth continuing.

-Independent medical research has raised serious concerns about human exposure to what’s being used in stratospheric aerosol injection: including aluminum, barium, and strontium compounds.

Federal agencies, universities, private companies, major corporations. They’re all hiding it because they know the public would not react positively.

We need @potus and Congress to take action on this now.

[A Midwestern Doctor @MidwesternDoc]

Right now, the most-prescribed Alzheimer's drugs cause brain bleeding or swelling in over a quarter of patients while leaving the disease nearly untouched.

Meanwhile, a neurologist has shown that amyloid may actually be protective. It turns out nearly everything we've been told about Alzheimer's is inaccurate.

And at the same time, a proven way to treat the real cause is being ignored.

The reason you were never told the truth is that the field runs on research now shown to be fraudulent. We waste billions of dollars each year researching the wrong thing.

Here are the treatments they buried: https://t.co/7s81iOHe6z

[Aaron Siri @AaronSiriSG]

Secretary Kennedy asked for comment on how to revise the CDC vaccine schedule. Here is what we submitted on behalf of @ICANdecide on that score:

I. Every Vaccination Recommendation and Decision Should be Based on Shared Clinical Decision-Making (SCDM)

The central principle is straightforward: vaccines should be treated like every other medical intervention administered to an individual patient. The appropriate approach, therefore, is SCDM, where there is no “default” decision to vaccinate, but where “the decision about whether or not to vaccinate may be informed by the best available evidence of who may benefit from vaccination; the individual’s characteristics, values, and preferences; the health care provider’s clinical discretion; and the characteristics of the vaccine being considered” with no “prescribed set of considerations or decision points in the decision-making process.”[1]

This process should apply to every vaccine—period. HHS should therefore not treat SCDM as a special category reserved for a subset of vaccines or classes of vaccines; it is the appropriate clinical process for every vaccine decision. We urge HHS to adopt and implement this principle across the entire federal vaccine recommendation framework.

A. Ethics and Informed Consent Demand SCDM

The RFI states that personal autonomy, informed consent, and the values and preferences of patients and parents “apply across all vaccine recommendations, including routine ones.” However, with the current categories, most of which are “default” decisions to vaccinate, that statement has no practical effect. A federal recommendation should not predetermine the medical decision of any particular patient.

This principle is consistent with ordinary clinical practice and ethics. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (“AHRQ”) describes SCDM as a collaborative process in which patients and clinicians make healthcare decisions informed by evidence, clinical expertise, and the patient’s values, goals, and circumstances.[2] The American Medical Association likewise recognizes informed consent as fundamental to medical ethics.[3] The fact that a vaccine is recommended by public health authorities does not eliminate the need for individualized clinical assessment or informed consent. Each patient’s medical history, risk factors, prior reactions, values, and preferences may affect the appropriate decision in ways a population-level recommendation cannot capture.[4]

The current federal framework classifies a majority of vaccine recommendations as a “default” decision to vaccinate. Other medical frameworks reject this approach: Clinical Practice Guidelines, for example, are designed to inform clinician-patient decision-making by presenting the evidence and the likely benefits and harms of available options, without dictating a one-size-fits-all course of care.[5]

There should not be any “routine” or “risk-based” recommendations. Population-level criteria cannot capture every clinically relevant characteristic of each patient, and applying them directly to individual decisions risks creating the false impression that harm-benefit tradeoffs are uniform across everyone who meets a given classification. In reality, individuals within the same risk group often differ substantially in their risk for the relevant outcome and in the balance of benefits and harms of treatment. Population-level classifications should never substitute for the individualized evaluation of all relevant patient attributes that determines whether an intervention offers a true net benefit to a specific patient.[6]

A clinician should never administer a vaccine based on a government recommendation but rather should only administer every vaccine based on SCDM which allows for informed consent and an evaluation of each individual’s medical history, competing risks, and personal values.

B. Many Childhood Vaccines Do Not Prevent Infection or Transmission and/or Have Limited or Uncertain Community-level Impact

While all vaccines should be administered based on SCDM, without any exception, CDC’s existing guidelines already provide that most vaccines should be SCDM because they do not meaningfully prevent transmission. As CDC’s guidance provides: “ACIP makes shared clinical decision-making recommendations when individuals may benefit from vaccination, but broad vaccination of people in that group is unlikely to have population-level impacts.”

For example, DTaP, Tdap, IPV, and MenACWY do not meaningfully prevent transmission, as detailed in the following link with supporting citations: https://t.co/GDMW14ps3R. Also see an FDA Briefing Document, dated September 20, 2024, titled Use of Controlled Human Infection Models to Support Licensure of Pertussis Vaccines which explains that “aP [acellular pertussis] containing vaccines induce helper T cells (TH2) memory and neutralizing antibody responses that effectively prevent symptomatic disease but fail to prevent colonization and carriage.”[7]

In a similar vein, HPV is almost exclusively transmitted through sexual contact, and, in most cases, an 11-year-old is not sexually active and may not face any meaningful near-term exposure risk. The decision to vaccinate at age 11 versus later should therefore be based on individualized considerations—anticipated timing of exposure, medical history, and parental values—rather than a uniform community-wide transmission concern. Hence, even putting the significant risks of this product aside, HPV vaccines should be recommended pursuant to SCDM so that clinicians and parents can evaluate risks, benefits, and timing for the individualized child, rather than applying a one-size-fits-all approach.

As a final example, studies reflect that influenza vaccine has not been shown to meaningfully prevent transmission among children[8] and influenza vaccination during pregnancy involves widely varying clinical circumstances and risk profiles, and patients differ in their medical history, prior vaccine reactions, trimester-specific considerations, and personal values. A meaningful recommendation therefore requires an individualized discussion of expected risks and benefits, available alternatives, and the patient’s preferences—not a reflexive “routine” assumption. This approach is consistent with an evidence-based framework that prioritizes informed consent and individualized care, especially where community transmission benefits are not the driving rationale for giving this vaccine during pregnancy.

The bottom line is that every vaccine should forthwith be moved to the SCDM category so that they will be administered through counseling based on the individual’s circumstances. HHS should eliminate all categories except for SCDM and treat all vaccines like every other drug or medical procedure.

Sources:
[1] https://t.co/jxfmuSfvqD
[2] About Shared Decision Making, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (last visited Aug. 25, 2026), https://t.co/c7Exm71fv9.
[3] Opinion 2.1.1 Informed Consent, American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics (last visited Sept. 3, 2026), https://t.co/kR5ULfPEpd.
[4] Anil Makam and Oanh Nguyen, An Evidence-Based Medicine Approach to Antihyperglycemic Therapy in Diabetes Mellitus to Overcome Overtreatment, Circulation (Jan. 10, 2017), https://t.co/3qbYPzZzoK.
[5] Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust, National Academies (2011), https://t.co/zatzHYKLG4.
[6] David Kent, et al., The Predictive Approaches to Treatment effect Heterogeneity (PATH) Statement, Annals of Internal Medicine (Nov. 12, 2019), https://t.co/VBRQxMpS7m.
[7] VRBPAC, FDA Briefing, September 20, 2024, https://t.co/QCqA4tlA5b.
[8] See, e.g., https://t.co/PsA58jsDiG; https://t.co/rVQ3VvUed1.

[Emerald Robinson ✝️ @EmeraldRobinson]

1. The CIA has human assets at every corporate media outlet in America.

These "reporters" exist to smear anyone who investigates crimes that implicate our intel agencies.

Now @ErinBanco at @Reuters wants to "cover" election fraud.

But Reuters is not a real news org.

[Steve Baker @SteveBakerUSA]

“It feels worse than incompetence, right?”

I shared our evidence (all that we had at the time) with @EagleEdMartin, at his private office on November 7, 2025. At that very moment Shauni Kerkhoff’s home was being searched by the FBI. The next morning we published the infamous story naming Miss Kerkhoff as our POI1.

Ed and his staffer were very gracious and gave me a full hour of their time. His last words to me were:

“I see it. I think you have more right than wrong. But you will never get any help from the Department of Justice.” (Just as he was getting no help from the very DOJ he was then working for.)

[Steve Baker @SteveBakerUSA]

🚨What did @FBI know … and when did they know it?🚨

1 - On January 13, 2021, Wray’s FBI surprisingly pulled their surveillance team off the home of “person of interest #3,” despite the fact that photos had been produced from that team of an individual who looked like and dressed like the J5/J6 b*omber.

2 - As early as May of 2025, Patel’s FBI was reporting to members of Congress a potential Capitol Police connection to that infamous pipe b*mber.

3 - On October 16, 2025, the FBI Congressional liaison told the Congressional committee investigating J6 that a law enforcement phone number “pinged” within two meters of both b*mb drop locations near the DNC and RNC discovery locations. That FBI liaison said that because of that, “We now know it was law enforcement” who planted those devices.

4 - Three weeks later, on November 8, I named a possible forensic match to the person the FBI had failed to identify, for almost five years … even with their $11 billion annual budget.

5 - Five days later, FBI had a surveillance team on the home of Brian Cole Jr.

6 - Three weeks after that, FBI/DOJ arrested the autistic, highly OCD young black man … Brian Cole Jr. … on December 4, 2025. With no attorney present, they subjected this special needs man to a four hour interrogation, coercing him to waive Miranda, without an attorney present.

7 - Today, almost no one believes the FBI/DOJ narrative on Cole’s arrest and prosecution.

On December 4, 2025, “THIS” FBI knew the J5/J6 b*mber was a Capitol Police officer, yet they arrested Brian Cole Jr. and knowingly charged him with a crime he did not commit.

Those are the facts we know. Facts my critics, nor FBI/DOJ cannot make go away.

[Steve Baker @SteveBakerUSA]

I’m thankful even more voices are joining the conversation about the injustice being done to Brian Cole Jr. It seems that we are reaching a point of critical mass, where @TheJusticeDept will no longer be able to ignore us.

Now … who will be the first among the legacy media and larger conservative media to break the embargo to cover this story properly?

Who will be among the next round of whistleblowers to break ranks and expose what is being covered up at the FBI, CIA, DOJ, and Capitol Police? (☎️ me)

Who will be the first civil rights leader or organization to speak up for Brian Cole Jr.?

When will we hear from the White House? Why will Bongino no longer speak about or take questions on the one subject he was most passionate about before and during his term as Deputy Dan?

We still have more to do. We need your continued support in liking, sharing, commenting, and saying the name of Brian Cole Jr. across all of social media. It’s making an impact.

Thank you 🙏

[Robert F. Kennedy Jr @RobertKennedyJr]

We invite parents, healthcare practitioners, military members and others to comment on our petition to the FDA calling on the agency to immediately remove COVID vaccines from the market.

https://t.co/qRyByqdAL7

[G N Stein @gmnstein]

@SenFettermanPA @redsteeze @yechielleiter Now do the innocent children and civilians in Gaza.

[Toby Rogers @uTobian]

Winning the midterm elections was a two-foot putt. All Republicans had to do was:
• Pull the Covid shots.
• Not start a trade war.
• Not start a war with Iran.
• Arrest the pedophiles.
• Cut spending.
None of that happened. Instead we got the opposite of all that. 🤔

[“Sudden And Unexpected” @toobaffled]

I thought this was just another conspiracy? 🤷🏼‍♀️

⚠️ They could be "the new asbestos" for people exposed hours on end in homes, schools, offices or hospitals, leading scientists have warned 💡

Neuroscientist Professor Glen Jeffery described LED technology as a “clear and present public health emergency” comparable to the toxic building material asbestos which was widely used before its health risks were understood. Prof Jeffery and his University College London (UCL) colleague Dr Bob Fosbury fear prolonged exposure to LEDs may disrupt with the way cells generate energy.

https://t.co/jdpnzRv9mS

[Health Freedom Defense Fund @theHFDF]

BREAKING:

Medical freedom just won a massive legal victory.

An Idaho daycare tried to exclude children whose parents declined certain vaccines.

But a federal court just shot down their case, cementing Idaho’s landmark Medical Freedom Act as the law of the land.

This is a groundbreaking victory.

The 2025 Medical Freedom Act blocked businesses, schools, and state entities from denying services based on private medical decisions.

Including vaccination.

A federal court just cemented that medical freedom is now the law of the land in Idaho.

Our Founder and President Leslie Manookian led the campaign to get Idaho’s Medical Freedom Act in 2025.

This ruling proves that local and state action is the best way to win our fight for medical freedom.

And we’re a proud member of a new coalition seeking to bring Idaho’s Medical Freedom Act to as many states as possible in 2027.

Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador declared in response to this ruling:

“Parents make medical decisions for their children.”

“A daycare does not.”

“The Legislature protected that choice in the Medical Freedom Act.”

“And the court upheld it.”

“Daycares can tell parents what they believe about vaccines and health, but they cannot turn a child away because of a parent’s medical decision.”

“That decision belongs to families, and I’m pleased the court agreed.”

@LeslieManookian @Raul_Labrador

[Nicolas Hulscher, MPH @NicHulscher]

BREAKING: Massive MAHA Coalition Representing 63 MILLION Followers Sends Open Letter to Trump and RFK Jr. Demanding REMOVAL of the mRNA Platform

168 prominent physicians, scientists, lawmakers, and public figures unite behind six demands for sweeping federal action:

1. BAN mRNA/gene-therapy-derived technologies for all vaccines
2. TERMINATE the PREP Act declaration for COVID injections
3. REPEAL the PREP Act
4. BAN pharmaceutical direct-to-consumer advertising
5. END federal healthcare incentives that promote medical coercion
6. END conflicts of interest at the CDC, FDA, NIH, and NIAID

I’m proud to stand among the signatories putting our names behind these demands.

[The Vigilant Fox 🦊 @VigilantFox]

A 35-year-old man who received three Pfizer mRNA shots, two of them from “E batches.”

Within a few months, the man developed a heart tumor that doubled in size EVERY 10 DAYS.

When surgeons removed the tumor, it measured 9 x 7 x 5 centimeters, nearly the size of a baseball.

This is unheard of. It usually takes more than 900 days for a sarcoma to grow that big. This one was found just 170 days after his first shot.

The tumor had fragments of Pfizer’s spike DNA all over it.

@NicHulscher: "This is literally the smoking gun of turbo cancers."

[G N Stein @gmnstein]

@Bob_Iaccino Yes, turn them all off.

[Steve Baker @SteveBakerUSA]

I taped this with Chris Farrell of @JudicialWatch yesterday at their DC studios. Please share.

[Aaron Siri @AaronSiriSG]

On the topic of splitting up the MMR vaccine into 3 separate vaccines, everyone should know that in 2012, two Merck virologists came forward and explained that around 2005 when Merck sought to change the label on its MMR vaccine and approval for ProQuad (a combination MMR and varicella vaccine), it “falsely certified as having an efficacy rate that is significantly higher than it actually is.” (Complaint ¶ 1.)

As detailed in the whistleblower lawsuit, Merck obtained a license for its mumps vaccine in 1967. (Comp. ¶ 16.) In the late 1990s, to obtain approval for ProQuad and change the label on its MMR vaccine, Merck needed to reconfirm its claims of efficacy for its mumps vaccine made thirty years prior. (Comp.. ¶ 22.) Merck’s virologists working on testing the efficacy of the mumps vaccine revealed that after Merck could not demonstrate a 95% efficacy for its mumps vaccine, the results were simply fraudulently falsified to achieve this result. (Comp. ¶¶ 15-131.)

As explained by Merck’s virologists, Merck took blood samples pre-vaccinated with the mumps vaccine and then exposed them to the mumps virus. (Comp. ¶¶ 25-28.) When a test against a live strain of mumps would not yield a 95% efficacy, Merck tried to improperly obtain this rate using an attenuated strain of the mumps virus. (Comp. ¶¶ 29-30.) When this still would not achieve 95% efficacy, Merck tried different virus dilutions, different straining procedure, and even more liberal antibody counting techniques. (Comp. ¶¶ 31-32.) The Merck lab even improperly added animal antibodies to the blood samples and still could not achieve a 95% efficacy rate. (Comp. ¶¶ 33-39.)

When it was clear that even improper testing techniques could not produce the desired result, the test reports were simply falsified. (Comp. ¶¶ 40-51.) According to the Merck virologists, to document the desired efficacy rate, Merck destroyed result sheets and falsified various documents. (Id.) The Merck virologists claim this fraud was done with the direct authority and approval of Merck’s senior management. (Comp. ¶¶ 52-58.)

Now you know.

This may explain why outbreaks of mumps still regularly occur in highly vaccinated populations. See, e.g.:
https://t.co/YgTukQi0eg(317 cases; 89% had received at least 2 MMR doses); https://t.co/i7vsAVGixp(281 cases; high two-dose coverage among university-affiliated cases, with community spread); https://t.co/dKYuleKBM2(301 student cases; all patients with complications had received at least 2 doses); https://t.co/b4YB8ePKPG(42 cases; all patients had ≥2 documented MMR doses; campus two-dose coverage exceeded 99%); https://t.co/PtJBYPwsKt(29 cases; 76% had received the recommended 2 dose); https://t.co/W0IqwV4pZd(CDC: “experts aren’t sure why vaccinated people still get mumps…).

Complaint: https://t.co/hbnjc7YNfa