This is where you start to lose me . . . I so appreciate all your wisdom, but as someone in the traditional medical space with an open mind to how my training was inadequate and ignored root causes, I think that good public health may look differently at times from optimal individual health care (ie early pandemic—not enough time to get everyone metabolically healthy). I will completely agree that experts will get things wrong, but I hope most of them are doing the best they can. They may not have all the best information either, but when I read “seize global power” I just roll my eyes and think that’s a little over the top. But I’m open for some of you to change my mind. Give me good sources.
Meryl Nass MD & Kat Lindley MD are two physicians who are very vocal about what's happening with the WHO. I would recommend Dr. Nass's website for a deep dive into the facts around this -- https://doortofreedom.org/
At least see if that online workshop and see what you think and go to the FLCC and listen to some of those videos and go to the children’s health defund and listen to some of the other side and then make your own decision but there’s lots of information out there that you can get yourself on health freedom preston it’s really good to do that and expose yourself to all sides and then see what feels right inside your own belly. I started at the pandemic being a pro vaccine person because I had signed to sell my show that were pro vaccine and they made sense and slowly, but surely I could not ignore all the unfolding information in the new scientist and physicians that were saying much of the other side, so you gotta be open and you gotta listen, and you can’t lean on mainstream media who are completely supported by big Pharma and back many of the people who now quit being anger Person for those media are now taking ivermectin and going over to the other side so at least listen to all sides but there’s plenty for you to do the research. I don’t need to do any more research for you. You now need to do the research for you, but But Thanks for reaching out
Thank you for the resources! I’m not asking you to “do more research” for me—sharing new resources is great. I guess I’m trying to understand where we go from health experts not looking at all the information to accusing them of essentially having evil intentions in taking over the world? I am trying to say that I am starting to see how money keeps so many damaging systems in place, and I am eager to learn more and join the fight; but do you realize that statements like that can make people lose the curiosity that you’ve helped develop?
It would be great for you to listen to that free online workshop and then I would love to hear your comments based on that it’s not that most people have evil intent. It’s that people are fearful of losing their licenses and being attacked and they are told what to do by their associations that are sponsored by money interest. It’s not necessarily evil intent of the individuals.
The list of things that the WHO is looking to do with their new proposals is an overreach into each country's sovereignty. When I look at the list below of what they are proposing, it may be that 'seize global power' isn't too far off. I would rather my country, and preferably my state was making these broad decisions rather than the WHO.
The proposed WHO Pandemic Agreement and IHR amendments gravely threaten our rights and freedoms as they stand to:
* Change IHR recommendations from “non-binding” to legally binding, meaning all member countries must comply.
* Create requirements for health documents that could be used to restrict access and travel as the WHO sees fit.
* Require surveillance of online information and censorship of information deemed “misinformation.”
* Coerce extreme lockdown measures, including creating “quarantine of suspect travelers, preferably in facilities away from the point of entry," aka “quarantine camps” seen during the COVID-19 pandemic in China and elsewhere.
* Allow the WHO to declare an emergency at will.
* Require member nations to use certain “relevant health products” like vaccines, drugs etc., while others are prohibited during emergencies.
Not a big talker in round tables here , but I did send a heads up to my senator Patty Murray.
Roundtable is for the speakers who are attending... For us, we can to sit back and just be listeners....
This is where you start to lose me . . . I so appreciate all your wisdom, but as someone in the traditional medical space with an open mind to how my training was inadequate and ignored root causes, I think that good public health may look differently at times from optimal individual health care (ie early pandemic—not enough time to get everyone metabolically healthy). I will completely agree that experts will get things wrong, but I hope most of them are doing the best they can. They may not have all the best information either, but when I read “seize global power” I just roll my eyes and think that’s a little over the top. But I’m open for some of you to change my mind. Give me good sources.
Meryl Nass MD & Kat Lindley MD are two physicians who are very vocal about what's happening with the WHO. I would recommend Dr. Nass's website for a deep dive into the facts around this -- https://doortofreedom.org/
and her substack https://merylnass.substack.com/ is also a great resource.
At least see if that online workshop and see what you think and go to the FLCC and listen to some of those videos and go to the children’s health defund and listen to some of the other side and then make your own decision but there’s lots of information out there that you can get yourself on health freedom preston it’s really good to do that and expose yourself to all sides and then see what feels right inside your own belly. I started at the pandemic being a pro vaccine person because I had signed to sell my show that were pro vaccine and they made sense and slowly, but surely I could not ignore all the unfolding information in the new scientist and physicians that were saying much of the other side, so you gotta be open and you gotta listen, and you can’t lean on mainstream media who are completely supported by big Pharma and back many of the people who now quit being anger Person for those media are now taking ivermectin and going over to the other side so at least listen to all sides but there’s plenty for you to do the research. I don’t need to do any more research for you. You now need to do the research for you, but But Thanks for reaching out
Thank you for the resources! I’m not asking you to “do more research” for me—sharing new resources is great. I guess I’m trying to understand where we go from health experts not looking at all the information to accusing them of essentially having evil intentions in taking over the world? I am trying to say that I am starting to see how money keeps so many damaging systems in place, and I am eager to learn more and join the fight; but do you realize that statements like that can make people lose the curiosity that you’ve helped develop?
It would be great for you to listen to that free online workshop and then I would love to hear your comments based on that it’s not that most people have evil intent. It’s that people are fearful of losing their licenses and being attacked and they are told what to do by their associations that are sponsored by money interest. It’s not necessarily evil intent of the individuals.
I will be traveling to Portugal that very evening. Will there be a transcript or video?
The list of things that the WHO is looking to do with their new proposals is an overreach into each country's sovereignty. When I look at the list below of what they are proposing, it may be that 'seize global power' isn't too far off. I would rather my country, and preferably my state was making these broad decisions rather than the WHO.
The proposed WHO Pandemic Agreement and IHR amendments gravely threaten our rights and freedoms as they stand to:
* Change IHR recommendations from “non-binding” to legally binding, meaning all member countries must comply.
* Create requirements for health documents that could be used to restrict access and travel as the WHO sees fit.
* Require surveillance of online information and censorship of information deemed “misinformation.”
* Coerce extreme lockdown measures, including creating “quarantine of suspect travelers, preferably in facilities away from the point of entry," aka “quarantine camps” seen during the COVID-19 pandemic in China and elsewhere.
* Allow the WHO to declare an emergency at will.
* Require member nations to use certain “relevant health products” like vaccines, drugs etc., while others are prohibited during emergencies.
Thank y k! Dlb