Holy shit….
Trump just dropped a red-pill nuclear bomb on Truth Social.
He posted a video showing NIH Geneticist and Biochemist outlining that vaccines have toxic chemicals like Mercury in them, and can cause autism.
Trump just called vaccines “poison”…
MUST WATCH!
JUST IN: RFK Jr. says Tylenol isn’t just linked to autism—but also ADHD and liver toxicity in kids.
So why is Tylenol still on store shelves while Ivermectin isn’t?
“Because Big Pharma owns our politicians,” RFK Jr. says. “And I’m telling them to get lost.”
🚨 WOW —Tumors literally liquefied by sound waves. No scalpel. No chemo. No radiation. None of those horrible side effects.
This is histotripsy: focused ultrasound blasts destroy cancer cells mechanically in minutes, sparing healthy tissue completely.
Please repost, like, and share your thoughts in the comments.
Follow for more updates.
One of the world’s top cancer researchers just dropped a bombshell most oncologists don’t want you to hear:
Dr. Thomas Seyfried (MIT-trained professor who’s published 200+ peer-reviewed papers) says the century-old habit of immediately biopsying tumors could actually be spreading the disease in some cases.
In this explosive 2:36 clip, he explains:
• Why “Stage 1–4” grading is based on how scary the tumor looks under a microscope AFTER you’ve already poked it
• How dozens of published studies show needle biopsies (breast, colon, liver, lung) can seed cancer cells along the needle track
• His radical but logical alternative: “Don’t poke the bear. Starve it first with metabolic therapy until it’s weak and docile, then remove the entire shrunken tumor in one clean surgery.”
• After that, use non-invasive PET/CT/MRI to confirm it’s gone — no risky needle required.
His exact quote: “We already beat it down… if you stab it early you’ll call it aggressive. If you shrink it first, the pathologist says ‘this isn’t even dangerous.’ Same tumor, totally different story.”
This isn’t fringe — it’s published biology being ignored by standard protocols.
Watch the full 2:36 clip and decide for yourself if the current “diagnose → biopsy → treat” sequence is backwards.
Do you think patients should at least be told this approach exists before deciding on a biopsy? Let me know in the comments.