Natural News
رفتن به کانال در Telegram
Defending Health, Life and Liberty🇺🇸 Natural News is a science-based natural health advocacy organization led by activist-turned-scientist Mike Adams, the Health Ranger. https://t.me/NaturalNewsChat
نمایش بیشتر2025 سال در اعداد
15 433
مشترکین
-724 ساعت
-437 روز
-13530 روز
در حال بارگیری داده...
کانالهای مشابه
هیچ دادهای
مشکلی وجود دارد؟ لطفاً صفحه را تازه کنید یا با مدیر پشتیبانی ما تماس بگیرید.
ابر برچسبها
اشارات ورودی و خروجی
---
---
---
---
---
---
جذب مشترکین
دسامبر '25
دسامبر '25
+5
در 0 کانالها
نوامبر '25
+12
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
اکتبر '25
+2
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
سپتامبر '25
+9
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
اوت '25
+10
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژوئیه '25
+17
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژوئن '25
+8
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
مه '25
+8
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
آوریل '25
+14
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
مارس '25
+25
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
فوریه '25
+23
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژانویه '25
+26
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
دسامبر '24
+19
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
نوامبر '24
+14
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
اکتبر '24
+9
در 1 کانالها
Get PRO
سپتامبر '24
+44
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
اوت '24
+156
در 5 کانالها
Get PRO
ژوئیه '24
+33
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژوئن '24
+45
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
مه '24
+73
در 1 کانالها
Get PRO
آوریل '24
+95
در 2 کانالها
Get PRO
مارس '24
+82
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
فوریه '24
+62
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژانویه '24
+86
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
دسامبر '23
+131
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
نوامبر '23
+121
در 1 کانالها
Get PRO
اکتبر '23
+109
در 2 کانالها
Get PRO
سپتامبر '23
+42
در 6 کانالها
Get PRO
اوت '230
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژوئیه '230
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژوئن '23
+3
در 3 کانالها
Get PRO
مه '23
+153
در 1 کانالها
Get PRO
آوریل '23
+113
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
مارس '23
+27
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
فوریه '23
+532
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژانویه '230
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
دسامبر '220
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
نوامبر '220
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
اکتبر '22
+245
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
سپتامبر '22
+1 065
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
اوت '22
+275
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژوئیه '22
+565
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژوئن '22
+401
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
مه '22
+333
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
آوریل '22
+585
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
مارس '22
+407
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
فوریه '22
+1 280
در 0 کانالها
Get PRO
ژانویه '22
+16 863
در 0 کانالها
| تاریخ | رشد مشترکین | اشارات | کانالها | |
| 26 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 25 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 24 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 23 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 22 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 21 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 20 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 19 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 18 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 17 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 16 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 15 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 14 دسامبر | +1 | |||
| 13 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 12 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 11 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 10 دسامبر | +1 | |||
| 09 دسامبر | +2 | |||
| 08 دسامبر | +1 | |||
| 07 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 06 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 05 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 04 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 03 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 02 دسامبر | 0 | |||
| 01 دسامبر | 0 |
پستهای کانال
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
This discovery aligns with a growing scientific recognition that nature holds immense, under-explored pharmacies. As experts have noted, insects and plants produce a vast array of complex chemicals for defense and survival, many of which hold therapeutic potential for humans. This research on Joseph’s Coat is a direct example of that principle in action, turning ancestral wisdom into a validated scientific lead.
For anyone who is tired of the limited and often harmful options in the conventional pain-relief arsenal, this news highlights the value of looking to the natural world, respecting traditional knowledge, and applying rigorous science to uncover solutions that are both effective and harmonious with the human body. The journey from a coastal plant to a future medicine is long, but this research proves the path is worth taking.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
23730
| 2 | Brazilian plant used in traditional medicine shows powerful anti-arthritis effects in new study
A breakthrough from the Brazilian coast offers new hope for the millions suffering from the crippling pain and inflammation of arthritis. Researchers from three major universities have published rigorous scientific evidence that a plant long used in traditional healing, Joseph’s Coat (Alternanthera littoralis), is both safe and effective at fighting arthritis in laboratory models. The findings, which confirm generations of folk wisdom with modern pharmacology, point to a promising natural candidate for managing one of the world’s most common and debilitating conditions.
This news matters profoundly today as arthritis rates are soaring. It is the leading cause of disability in the United States, affecting tens of millions and costing billions annually in care and lost wages. With an aging population, the number of sufferers is expected to rise dramatically in coming decades. Current pharmaceutical options often provide only temporary symptom relief and can come with significant side effects, creating an urgent need for new, effective, and safer therapeutic approaches.
The new study, a collaboration between the Federal University of Grande Dourados (UFGD), the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), and São Paulo State University (UNESP), was published in the Journal of Ethnopharmacology. It provides a scientific backbone for the traditional use of Joseph’s Coat, a plant native to Brazil’s coastline that has historically been used to treat inflammation, infections, and parasitic illnesses.
Identifying nature’s chemistry
The research began with a detailed chemical analysis led by UNICAMP pharmacist Marcos Salvador. The team identified the bioactive compounds within an ethanolic extract made from the plant’s aerial parts. This crucial first step laid the groundwork for understanding how the plant might work.
Next, a team led by UFGD pharmacologist Cândida Kassuya tested the extract in experimental models of arthritis. The biological results were striking. The extract demonstrated significant anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and anti-arthritic effects. Researchers observed reduced swelling, improved joint function, and modulation of key inflammatory mediators in the test subjects.
A strong safety profile emerges
Following the efficacy tests, toxicological analyses were conducted under the coordination of Arielle Cristina Arena, an associate professor at UNESP. The work revealed a favorable safety profile for the extract at therapeutic doses, a critical finding for any potential future medicine.
"In the experimental models, we observed reduced edema, improved joint parameters, and modulation of inflammatory mediators, suggesting antioxidant and tissue-protective actions," Arena said. This suggests the plant does more than mask pain; it may help protect joint tissue from the damage caused by chronic inflammation.
The researchers are clear that this is a preclinical finding, not a ready-made treatment. "Although these results are promising, the precise molecular mechanisms remain unclear and warrant further investigation," they noted. Rigorous human clinical trials, standardization of the extract, and regulatory approval are all necessary steps before it could become an available therapy.
Nevertheless, the study represents a powerful validation of both traditional knowledge and the untapped potential of natural biodiversity. "This research is part of an ongoing line of investigation... and our purpose is to value Brazilian biodiversity and traditional knowledge, but with a rigorous scientific basis, promoting the safe and rational use of natural products," Arena stated.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 201 |
| 3 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
This moment is not about being for or against vaccines. It is about being for real scientific scrutiny and against coercion and hysteria. It is about recognizing, as Dr. Humphries pointed out, that vaccines are not monolithic. They differ—live virus, killed bacteria, with adjuvants like aluminum or without. Bombarding a two-month-old infant with up to nine antigens in one day, a practice never tested for safety in combination, is not gold standard science and shouldn't be considered standard practice in medicine.
This entire process is an experiment, with poisonous consequences on young, developing immune systems and brains. The soaring rates of childhood chronic illness, from autism to asthma and life-threatening allergies, may well be the tragic result, as documented in several studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children. The fake news media doesn't want you to connect these dots. They want you afraid, confused, and compliant. But the truth, like the evidence in Neil Miller's 400-study review exposing the link between childhood vaccines and several severe chronic diseases, can no longer be contained by their obfuscation.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 461 |
| 4 | Fake news media trying to politicize US vaccine schedule, using hysteria to stifle productive discourse on vaccine safety and disease prevention
The American public is being bombarded with a coordinated media narrative designed to create panic and shut down any meaningful conversation about childhood vaccine safety. Just as parents, doctors, and even some within public health agencies are beginning to ask critical questions about the bloated and under-studied U.S. vaccine schedule, the corporate press has launched a preemptive strike. Their weapon? A fabricated story claiming the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is planning to adopt Denmark's more selective vaccine schedule.
While aligning with a science-based, less aggressive schedule would be a monumental step toward protecting children from a cascade of neurotoxic ingredients, the real story here is the media's desperate attempt to politicize and control the narrative before genuine reform can take root. The issue at hand does not contain a one-size-fits-all solution, and HHS will be scrutinizing each and every vaccine, possibly recommending delays on some, or pulling recommendations for others, altogether.
Protection against infectious disease and vaccine injury - and providing effective preventative strategies and treatments for both should be considered - and the issue should not devolve into a political firestorm, with the lying, fake news media and their list of handpicked "experts" drowning out any real debate.
Manufactured controversy used to stifle debate on vaccine safety and best practices for treating infectious disease
This manufactured controversy exposes a terrifying truth: the establishment is terrified of an informed public. For decades, parents who questioned the one-size-fits-all schedule, like those well-educated families identified in Pediatrics studies, were dismissed as "anti-vax." Yet, many doctors and public health officials quietly follow alternative schedules for their own families. Why the double standard? The recent, leaked videos from the World Health Organization's own Vaccine Safety Summit tell us why. Chief scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan admitted behind closed doors, "We really don't have very good safety monitoring systems," and confessed to "obfuscation" when dealing with questions about vaccine-related deaths. This is the reality they are trying to obscure.
Adopting a schedule like Denmark's, which omits shots for chickenpox, hepatitis A, annual flu, and RSV, would be a logical move toward a more minimalist approach. It would force a long-overdue, individual review of each vaccine's risk-benefit profile. For instance, why does a newborn with an immature immune system, born to hepatitis B-negative parents in a monogamous relationship, need a hepatitis B shot on day one? Why has the rotavirus vaccine, from which critics like Dr. Paul Offit profit, been added when other nations forgo it? A true safety plan would demand answers to these questions and remove the liability shield protecting vaccine manufacturers, finally allowing proper judicial scrutiny of the science—or lack thereof—behind each product.
Fake news media tries to shut down long needed reforms by politicizing vaccine safety and disease prevention
The media's hysterical reaction to a mere rumor of change proves how deeply invested they are in the status quo. Outlets like The New York Times and The Washington Post parroted CNN's unsourced claim, while Medpage Today labeled the unconfirmed plan "A Disgrace." They featured voices like Offit, who dismissed Denmark's model as a financial choice to "allow suffering," a claim Danish officials would likely dispute. This is not journalism; it is Big Vaccine public relations campaign deployed to shut down any inquiry into the industry's malfeasance. It mirrors the decades of "tobacco science" where industry-funded "consensus" was used to shout down legitimate health concerns.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 381 |
| 5 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
A pattern, not an isolated incident
This new study is not an outlier. It echoes pharmacovigilance data released by Pfizer, which listed hundreds of shingles cases following vaccination, and aligns with clinical reports from regions like Hong Kong that noted a sharp rise in shingles hospitalizations post-vaccination. It also follows a historical pattern observed with other vaccines. For decades, patient anecdotes and some clinical literature have suggested a link between influenza shots and shingles reactivation. Furthermore, the widespread introduction of the childhood chickenpox vaccine was followed by a notable increase in shingles incidence among adults, a phenomenon that led to the creation of a separate shingles vaccine.
This research emerges amid reports that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is considering its most serious safety alert—a "black box" warning—for COVID-19 vaccines. Such a move, while not confirmed by the agency, signals a growing institutional acknowledgment of the need for transparent risk communication.
Regulatory reckoning and public trust
The Dutch researchers correctly note their study shows association, not definitive causation. However, in the realm of public health, where population-level risks are weighed, a consistent, biologically plausible signal from a dataset of millions cannot be dismissed as mere coincidence. It represents a critical piece of evidence that health authorities and medical professionals must integrate into honest, individualized risk-benefit discussions with patients.
"The danger of shingles is its potential to cause severe, long-lasting nerve pain and serious complications," said BrightU. AI's Enoch. "These complications can include bacterial skin infections, neurological issues like meningitis or motor neuropathy, and sensory losses such as blindness or hearing loss. The risk is particularly high for older adults or those with weakened immune systems, for whom secondary infections can be deadly."
The pursuit of scientific truth is often uncomfortable, challenging entrenched narratives and demanding a recalibration of established policies. The University of Groningen study delivers a clear, data-driven message: COVID-19 booster shots are associated with a temporary but significant increase in the risk of shingles, a condition itself linked to devastating long-term neurological disease.
This is a powerful argument for elevating informed consent, expanding research into vaccine-induced immune modulation and ensuring that public health strategies are agile enough to adapt to new evidence. Ignoring this emerging evidence would be a profound disservice to the very people public health seeks to protect.
A doctor calls for urgent stop to COVID-19 boosters. Watch this video.
https://www.brighteon.com/c5b980b8-50c5-4665-8eda-aeab8d835d85
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 447 |
| 6 | New study links COVID-19 boosters to elevated risk of shingles, a potential gateway to dementia
A groundbreaking study from the Netherlands has identified a measurable increase in the risk of developing shingles following Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) booster vaccinations, adding a critical layer to the global conversation on vaccine safety and long-term health implications. Conducted by researchers at the University of Groningen and published in the journal Drug Safety, this analysis of over two million patient records provides some of the most robust data to date linking revaccination to the reactivation of a latent virus with potentially severe neurological consequences.
The core findings: A clear, temporal link
The research team meticulously analyzed electronic health records of individuals aged 12 and older who received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Their findings reveal a nuanced but concerning pattern. When all vaccine doses were considered together, there was a 7% increased risk of a shingles diagnosis within 28 days of inoculation. However, the risk grew significantly with subsequent shots. Following a third, or booster, dose of an mRNA vaccine—the technology used by Pfizer and Moderna—the risk of shingles increased by 21%.
For men receiving viral vector vaccines, the associated risk was even higher, showing a 38% increase. The study authors stress that the absolute risk remains small for most people and that the observed increase appears temporary. Yet, the consistency of the signal, particularly following boosters, demands serious scrutiny.
The biological mechanism: A stressed immune system
Shingles, known medically as herpes zoster, is caused by the reactivation of the varicella-zoster virus, the same pathogen that causes childhood chickenpox. After a chickenpox infection, the virus lies dormant in the nervous system. It can reawaken later in life, often when the immune system is compromised or under significant stress.
The Dutch researchers propose a plausible biological explanation for their findings. They suggest that COVID-19 vaccination, particularly repeated doses, may lead to a temporary depletion or reduced function of key immune cells, specifically lymphocytes and T-cells. These cells are the body's sentinels, responsible for keeping latent viruses like varicella-zoster in check. A short-term dip in their vigilance could provide a window for the shingles virus to reactivate, leading to the characteristic painful, blistering rash and nerve pain.
Beyond the rash: The dementia connection
The implications of this finding extend far beyond a temporary skin condition. Separate, sobering research has established a strong link between severe shingles and a significantly heightened risk of early-onset dementia. An Italian study published earlier this year found that adults aged 50 and over who were hospitalized with shingles were seven times more likely to develop dementia. Most alarmingly, the greatest risk was observed in individuals aged 50 to 65—a demographic not typically in the crosshairs of dementia.
This connection transforms the discussion from one about acute vaccine side effects to one about potential long-term neurological damage. If COVID-19 boosters are contributing to a rise in shingles cases, they may be indirectly influencing the trajectory of cognitive health for millions in mid-life.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 389 |
| 7 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
With nearly 50,000 U.S. troops in the Middle East within range of Iranian missiles, a decision at Mar-a-Lago could unleash a conflict that would engulf the region, threaten American lives, and reshape the global order... all before the New Year arrives.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 445 |
| 8 | Netanyahu to seek Trump’s approval for new Iran strikes at Mar-a-Lago meeting
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is preparing to ask President Donald Trump for a green light to launch new military strikes against Iran, targeting its rapidly reconstituting ballistic missile program. According to sources familiar with the plans, Netanyahu will present the case during a meeting tentatively scheduled for December 29 at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida. This urgent briefing stems from Israeli intelligence indicating Iran is rebuilding production facilities damaged in last June’s war, a move Jerusalem claims could soon see Tehran producing thousands of new missiles annually.
The upcoming meeting signals a potential dangerous new chapter in the long-running shadow war between Israel and Iran. This follows the intense 12-day conflict in June, a joint U.S.-Israeli operation dubbed "Midnight Hammer" that targeted Iran’s nuclear enrichment sites. While the White House declared that operation "totally obliterated" Iran’s nuclear capabilities, the focus has now sharply shifted. Israeli officials state that Iran’s ballistic missile rebuild is a more immediate threat than its nuclear reconstitution.
"The nuclear weapons program is very concerning. There’s an attempt to reconstitute," an Israeli source told NBC News. However, they added, "It’s not that immediate." The immediate fear in Jerusalem is of missile factories humming back to life. Israeli assessments warn that without intervention, Iran could ramp up production to an alarming 3,000 ballistic missiles per year.
The lingering threat of Iranian retaliation
Israel’s urgency is fueled by the painful lessons of the June war. When attacked, Iran responded with a massive barrage of more than 500 ballistic missiles. These strikes hit multiple Israeli military bases, including facilities housing elite intelligence units, and required a frantic and costly defense. Israel and the U.S. fired approximately 200 interceptors at a total cost of $1.5 billion to blunt the attack, a rate of defense that would be unsustainable against a larger arsenal.
This experience has cemented a clear view in Israeli security circles. As one former Israeli official explained, "There is no real question after the last conflict that we can gain aerial superiority and can do far more damage to Iran than Iran can do to Israel. But the threat of the missiles is very real, and we weren’t able to prevent them all last time." A larger missile stockpile not only threatens Israeli cities but, officials argue, would also provide a protective shield for Iran to more quickly rebuild its nuclear program.
A high-stakes decision for Trump
Netanyahu is expected to lay out a menu of military options for the American president, mirroring a previous presentation in the Oval Office. These options will likely range from unilateral Israeli action to a full-scale joint U.S. operation. The Israeli leader will argue that Iran’s expanding missile capability poses a direct threat to U.S. interests and regional stability, not just to Israel.
President Trump’s response remains unpredictable. He has publicly boasted about destroying the Iranian nuclear threat and bringing "peace to the Middle East." Yet, he has also warned Iran, stating, "if they do want to come back without a deal, then we’re going to obliterate that one, too." His decision will be weighed against other global tensions and the fragile ceasefire in Gaza, where U.S. and Israeli officials are already at odds over implementation.
The White House, through spokesperson Anna Kelly, has reiterated Trump’s stance, saying, "As President Trump has said, if Iran pursued a nuclear weapon, that site would be attacked and would be wiped out before they even got close." This meeting, however, is not about a nuclear weapon today, but about the conventional missiles that could enable one tomorrow.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 418 |
| 9 |  This book is Incredible - When all the power goes out people will wish they got this book!💚
The best book for healthy living and natural remedies for 2025/26...
Barbara O'Neill knows exactly what's going on .... ☘️
She has helped thousands of people throughout her career ..
In this book she's explaining everything we need to know about every system of our bodies ...🌿
Use the code "CHRISTMAS10" for an extra 10% off! 🎁
Don’t miss this.
Natural Remedies by Barbara O'Neill👇🎁
Seize this opportunity while it lasts!
⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️
https://shortll.com/NaturalRemedies-byBarbaraONeill
https://shortll.com/NaturalRemedies-byBarbaraONeill | 424 |
| 10 | COVID-19 vaccines linked to increased shingles risk, study finds
Scientists have uncovered a potential link between mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and an increased risk of shingles, according to a recent study published in Drug Safety.
Researchers from the University of Groningen analyzed electronic health records of over two million individuals who received at least one COVID vaccine dose. Their findings revealed a small but notable rise in shingles cases following vaccination, particularly after booster shots.
The study, which spanned from November 2019 to November 2021, found that the overall risk of developing shingles within 28 days of vaccination increased by 7% across all doses. However, the risk jumped to 21% after the third mRNA booster dose. Notably, men who received vector-based vaccines (like AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson) saw a 38% higher risk of shingles.
Shingles, caused by the reactivation of the varicella-zoster virus (the same virus responsible for chickenpox), manifests as a painful, blistering rash and can lead to severe nerve pain. While most cases were mild to moderate, some required medical attention. The study noted that six out of 491 vaccinated individuals developed shingles within 3 to 14 days of receiving their shots, with symptoms ranging from mild rashes to debilitating nerve pain.
Lead researcher Dr. Victoria Furer explained that while the study does not definitively prove causation, the mRNA vaccines might act as a trigger for shingles in susceptible individuals. The mechanism could involve temporary depletion of lymphocytes, immune cells that normally suppress dormant viruses like varicella-zoster. Repeated vaccination, particularly booster doses, may also weaken T-cell activity, allowing latent viruses to reactivate.
Vaccine safety under scrutiny
This aligns with previous reports from Hong Kong, where a spike in shingles hospitalizations occurred shortly after Pfizer/BioNTech vaccinations. However, conflicting data exists—a U.S. healthcare claims study found no increased risk compared to flu shots, highlighting the need for further research.
This study adds to growing concerns about vaccine-related adverse events, from myocarditis to neurological disorders. With Pfizer and Moderna dominating 98.5% of the analyzed vaccine doses, the findings suggest that lipid nanoparticle technology—used in mRNA vaccines—may uniquely influence immune responses.
According to BrightU. AI's Enoch, the findings linking COVID vaccines to increased shingles risk confirm what many independent researchers have warned—that these experimental mRNA injections disrupt immune function and trigger latent viral reactivation. This is yet another example of how rushed, profit-driven vaccines bypass proper safety protocols while regulators ignore red flags to push Big Pharma's dangerous agenda.
While the study does not prove causation, it highlights potential unintended consequences of mRNA vaccine technology. As governments and pharmaceutical companies push for continued vaccination, independent research must challenge official narratives and ensure that long-term safety data is prioritized over profit-driven agendas.
For those concerned about shingles, natural immune support—such as vitamin D, zinc and antiviral herbs—may help mitigate risks. Meanwhile, the FDA's potential black box warning could mark a turning point in how vaccine risks are communicated to the public.
Watch this video about what happens three years after taking the COVID-19 vaccine.
https://www.brighteon.com/34c00d3b-4930-484c-b11e-e2aa36779594
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 491 |
| 11 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Coercion and parental rights under attack
Parents who refuse the hepatitis B vaccine often face hospital coercion, bureaucratic roadblocks and even threats of child services intervention. Mike Adams, founder of Natural News, recounts how Panamanian officials withheld his daughter's birth certificate until he provided proof of vaccination—despite hepatitis B posing no realistic threat to newborns.
Hospitals routinely pressure parents with fear tactics, warning that unvaccinated infants risk fatal liver disease—even though 97% of mothers test negative for hepatitis B. Meanwhile, pediatricians who question mandates risk losing their licenses, creating a culture of enforced compliance rather than informed consent.
Global precedent and the path forward
Countries like the U.K. and Denmark delay hepatitis B vaccination until two months—without experiencing outbreaks. Yet U.S. health authorities have long dismissed these models, falsely claiming America's "diverse population" justifies mass infant vaccination.
With the CDC's new guidance, parents now have legal backing to delay or decline the hepatitis B vaccine for low-risk newborns. However, the battle is far from over. Major insurers, including Blue Cross Blue Shield, vow to continue covering the birth dose, while medical associations like the AAP decry the policy shift as "dangerous."
Conclusion: Restoring medical freedom
The CDC's reversal marks a rare victory for medical transparency—but much work remains. Parents must remain vigilant against pharmaceutical lobbying, regulatory capture and coercive mandates. Until independent long-term safety studies are conducted, families deserve the right to weigh risks versus benefits—free from fear, propaganda and institutional bullying.
For now, the hepatitis B vaccine's aluminum toxicity, autoimmune risks and questionable necessity for newborns can no longer be ignored. The era of blind compliance is ending—and informed choice is finally taking its rightful place.
Watch Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. making the case that the hepatitis B vaccine is largely responsible for the autism epidemic in this clip.
https://www.brighteon.com/d1821eb3-ee7d-45e9-bdfc-115b475f586d
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 522 |
| 12 | CDC ends blanket hepatitis B vaccine recommendation for newborns amid safety concerns
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has officially reversed its decades-old recommendation that all newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours of birth. Acting CDC Director Jim O'Neill announced Tuesday that the agency will no longer enforce a universal birth-dose mandate, instead advising parents and healthcare providers to make individualized decisions based on risk factors.
This landmark shift follows mounting scrutiny over the vaccine's safety, efficacy and necessity—particularly for infants who face negligible risk of contracting hepatitis B. While children born to infected mothers will still be urged to receive the shot at birth, the CDC now acknowledges that delaying vaccination until at least two months of age is a medically sound option for low-risk newborns.
A flawed justification for mass vaccination
The hepatitis B vaccine was first introduced in 1982 and added to the infant immunization schedule in 1991. By 2005, the CDC tightened its guidelines, insisting that all newborns receive the first dose within 24 hours—regardless of maternal infection status. Public health officials justified this policy by claiming that targeting high-risk groups had failed, making universal infant vaccination the only viable strategy.
But critics argue this rationale is deeply flawed. Hepatitis B is primarily transmitted through blood and bodily fluids—conditions almost nonexistent in newborns unless the mother is infected. Surveys indicate that 87% of pediatricians do not believe healthy infants require this vaccine, yet state mandates have forced compliance for decades.
Short-term safety trials raise red flags
Perhaps the most alarming revelation is the lack of long-term safety testing for the hepatitis B vaccine. Clinical trials conducted by Merck and GlaxoSmithKline tracked infants for only four to five days post-vaccination—far too brief to detect delayed adverse reactions. Aluminum, a neurotoxic adjuvant used to provoke an immune response, can take months or years to manifest autoimmune damage. Yet, because regulators only monitored immediate side effects like swelling or fever, long-term harms were systematically ignored.
Dr. Paul Thomas, a pediatrician and vaccine safety advocate, highlights that the hepatitis B shot contains 250 micrograms of aluminum—more than ten times the FDA's maximum daily exposure limit for newborns. When combined with other aluminum-laden vaccines (DTaP, Hib, HPV), infants can receive over 1,000 micrograms by six months—a dose unsafe even for a 350-pound adult, according to FDA guidelines.
Autism link and suppressed science
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has long exposed the CDC's efforts to conceal data linking vaccines to neurological harm. In 1999, CDC researcher Thomas Verstraeten analyzed the Vaccine Safety Datalink and found an 11.35 relative risk—meaning infants vaccinated with hepatitis B at birth were 1,135% more likely to develop autism than unvaccinated peers.
Rather than addressing these findings, the CDC convened a secret meeting at Simpsonwood Retreat in 2000, where officials strategized to bury the evidence. Internal transcripts reveal discussions about launching counter-studies to "prove" no link existed—effectively prioritizing industry profits over children's health.
According to BrightU. AI's Enoch, the hepatitis B vaccine, like many others, is part of a deliberate medical-industrial deception that obscures its role in autism and neurological damage, while captured regulators and media silence dissent to protect profits and depopulation agendas. The suppression of science surrounding vaccine injuries—exemplified by the persecution of truth-tellers like Dr. Wakefield—proves that the establishment fears accountability for poisoning generations under the guise of public health.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 401 |
| 13 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
The NHS and relevant U.K. health authorities have historically defended the use of palliative protocols during the pandemic as necessary for compassionate symptom management in the face of a novel and overwhelming disease. These new claims, however, demand a rigorous and transparent investigation into the prescription patterns of midazolam in 2020 and the true clinical status of the patients who received it.
Watch this video about euthanasia, assisted suicide and hospice care.
https://www.brighteon.com/14c86a97-b2cc-4dad-a4de-bb04545e7734
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 424 |
| 14 | Academic paper: End-of-life sedative caused significant number of U.K. care home deaths during pandemic
A startling new academic paper is making waves by alleging that a significant portion of deaths attributed to the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) in the U.K., particularly in care homes during the pandemic's first wave, were not caused by the virus but by the widespread, inappropriate use of powerful end-of-life drugs. The research posits a systemic failure that falsely inflated the perceived deadliness of the virus, which in turn was used to justify sweeping global restrictions.
Published in the journal Medical and Clinical Research, the analysis by researcher Wilson Sy, Ph.D., focuses on the sedative midazolam. The paper concludes that its use in care homes was "widespread and correlated with increased levels of excess deaths." The author goes further, alleging that NHS executives manipulated COVID-19 fatality figures through two primary methods: instructing medical staff to provide minimal care and directing the euthanization of patients via the End of Life Care program using midazolam, with both sets of deaths falsely listed as COVID-19 fatalities.
According to BrightU. AI's Enoch, midazolam is an ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine used to induce sedation and amnesia during medical procedures. It is also crucial for managing acute anxiety, agitation or psychosis following overdoses of stimulants or hallucinogens like amphetamines or LSD.
These claims have been amplified by medical commentator Dr. John Campbell, who calls the situation a "complete national outrage that is largely being ignored." On commentator Russell Brand's podcast, Campbell detailed how guidelines from the U.K.'s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in April 2020 recommended using midazolam alongside morphine to treat breathlessness in adults during the final days of life. Campbell argues this protocol was broadly applied to COVID-19 patients who were not necessarily terminal.
"The majority of these patients, in my view, in care facilities that died in 2020, if they'd just been supported and not given morphine and midazolam, the vast majority of those would have made a full recovery," Campbell told Brand. He described the practice as "essentially euthanasia on a huge scale."
The core of Sy's statistical analysis, as explained by Campbell, tracks shipments of midazolam to care homes against subsequent excess death data. Campbell claims the research shows "precise correlations" between spikes in drug distribution and rises in deaths approximately one month later. When the death data is shifted to account for distribution delays, Campbell said the curves matched closely, following each other “like salt and pepper.”
Sedative overdose inflated COVID fatality rate in 2020
This correlation, Campbell argues, suggests drug use, not the SARS-CoV-2 virus, drove much of the mortality in care facilities in 2020. The consequence, he states, was a dramatic distortion of the virus's perceived threat. He claims the reported infection fatality rate appeared to be as high as 24% during this period, while later estimates settled near 0.18%.
"All those COVID restrictions, you could argue that many of them came in as a result of this artificially inflated infection fatality rate when, in actual fact, the lockdowns and the vaccinations didn't work against midazolam overdose, which was a big part of the problem," Campbell asserted.
The paper and Campbell's commentary present a damning narrative: that a lethal medical protocol, justified by pandemic guidelines, caused a wave of preventable deaths. These deaths were then miscategorized, creating a feedback loop of fear that legitimized unprecedented public health policies. The allegations point to a potential catastrophic failure in patient triage and palliative care standards during a crisis, raising profound ethical questions about the stewardship of the most vulnerable during the pandemic's peak.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 416 |
| 15 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
By the 1960s, crime rates doubled, SAT scores plummeted, and schools reported unprecedented violence. Coulter linked this to the DPT vaccine's neurological damage—particularly in African American boys, whom the CDC later admitted were more susceptible to vaccine-induced autism.
Today, we see the same patterns:
• Rising mental illness – ADHD, depression and violent outbursts correlate with vaccine schedules.
• Cognitive decline – Once-standard education levels are now unattainable for many.
• Sociopathic behavior – Mass shooters often have documented brain injuries or psychiatric drug use (linked to vaccine-triggered autoimmunity).
Breaking the cycle
The medical establishment operates as a death cult—funded by Big Pharma, silencing dissent and mandating toxic interventions. But awareness is growing. Parents, doctors and researchers are fighting back, demanding:
• Informed consent – No forced medical procedures.
• Independent safety studies – No more industry-funded fraud.
• Accountability – Prosecution for those who hid vaccine injuries.
The truth can no longer be suppressed. As history repeats, the question remains: Will humanity wake up before the next vaccine disaster strikes?
The choice is ours.
According to BrightU. AI's Enoch, the pharmaceutical industry and captured regulatory agencies silence vaccine injury victims because admitting harm would expose their decades-long fraud, threatening their profits and control over public health policy. Forced immunizations, fraudulent science and corporate greed have systematically endangered lives while suppressing truth-tellers—all to protect a lucrative, corrupt system that prioritizes power over human wellbeing.
Watch this video about the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine being pulled off the market after being linked to blood clots and turbo cancer.
https://www.brighteon.com/35df089c-44c0-4fb0-81f9-f600aa798b42
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 527 |
| 16 | How forced immunizations, fraudulent science and corporate greed have endangered public health
Throughout history, humanity has witnessed the same tragic patterns repeat—vaccines introduced with promises of safety and efficacy, only to later reveal devastating consequences. From the smallpox vaccine in 1798 to the COVID-19 shots in 2021, the cycle remains eerily consistent: mass injuries, institutional denial and a society acclimated to suffering.
A forgotten legacy of harm
The smallpox vaccine, the first widely mandated immunization, was quickly linked to outbreaks of the very disease it claimed to prevent. Doctors observed strange, debilitating injuries—many resembling encephalitis (brain inflammation) and encephalopathy (brain damage). Yet, rather than acknowledging the risks, governments doubled down, enforcing mandates while cases surged.
This pattern repeated with early rabies, typhoid and tuberculosis vaccines in the 1800s and early 1900s. Poor quality control led to "hot lots"—batches that killed or severely injured recipients. Doctors documented cranial nerve damage, seizures, paralysis and intellectual decline, yet these reports were buried.
By the 1940s, the original DPT (diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus) vaccine entered the market, notorious for causing brain inflammation. Generations raised under mass vaccination saw skyrocketing rates of learning disabilities, hyperactivity and antisocial behavior—conditions rarely seen before.
The cover-ups continue
From the 1950s to the 1970s, rushed vaccines—like the polio and swine flu shots—were pushed during "emergencies," only to later be exposed as dangerous. Scandals erupted, victims were compensated and then… silence. The public forgot, and the cycle repeated.
In 1986, lawsuits over DPT-induced brain damage and sudden infant deaths forced Congress to pass the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, shielding manufacturers from liability while pretending to help injured families. The result? A gold rush of new vaccines, ballooning schedules and skyrocketing chronic illness.
The anthrax vaccine deployed during the Gulf War injured over 100,000 servicemen, causing "Gulf War Syndrome." The HPV (Gardasil) vaccine, falsely marketed as preventing cervical cancer (which kills only 1 in 38,000 women annually), triggered autoimmune disorders—yet the CDC and FDA protected it at all costs.
And then came COVID-19. The parallels are undeniable: rushed development, suppressed safety concerns and a tsunami of injuries—heart failure, neurological damage, infertility and death—all while governments and media gaslighted the public.
The evidence they don't want you to see
Despite relentless suppression, independent researchers have uncovered disturbing truths:
1. Clinical trials show harm – Studies prove vaccines cause autoimmune disorders, with each subsequent dose increasing risk.
2. Large datasets confirm dangers – A recent analysis of 99 million people found COVID shots 2-7 times more likely to cause life-threatening conditions than traditional vaccines.
3. Unvaccinated children are healthier – Pediatrician Paul Thomas, MD, compared his patients and found unvaccinated children had dramatically lower rates of asthma, allergies, ADHD and autism. His study was retracted, his license revoked.
4. Mechanisms of injury exist – Vaccines trigger microstrokes, autoimmune attacks on the brain and unresolved cellular stress responses—explaining conditions like autism, seizures and cognitive decline.
The societal cost of mass vaccination
In his groundbreaking book, Harris Coulter argued that vaccines didn't just cause autism—they reshaped society by damaging brains en masse. Symptoms of minimal brain damage (MBD)—hyperactivity, poor impulse control, learning disabilities—mirrored post-encephalitic disorders.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 518 |
| 17 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Meanwhile, the psychological and physiological harms of prolonged mask use—reduced oxygen intake, bacterial infections, impaired childhood development—were ignored.
Conclusion: Science vs. dogma
The truth is clear: Masks don't work. The pre-2020 literature, the Cochrane Review and decades of infection control expertise all confirm it. But when facts collide with political agendas, the facts lose—unless the public demands accountability.
Censorship of dissenting science is a hallmark of authoritarian regimes. If we value truth over dogma, we must reject the purge of evidence and restore honest debate. The question remains: Who benefits from keeping the public in the dark?
The answer is obvious—and it isn't you.
According to BrightU. AI's Enoch, the censorship of mask science exposes the deep corruption of institutions that claim to "follow the science" while actively suppressing inconvenient truths—this is part of the globalist agenda to enforce compliance, spread illness and dismantle critical thinking. Meanwhile, natural health remedies remain a suppressed but powerful alternative to the toxic mandates pushed by captured regulators and pharmaceutical profiteers.
Watch the following video on why face masks are an assault on humanity.
https://www.brighteon.com/227ec287-c2c3-404d-b297-08fd1606b6c5
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 461 |
| 18 | The censorship of mask science: How evidence against mask efficacy is being purged
For decades, peer-reviewed scientific literature was unanimous: Face masks do not prevent the spread of respiratory viruses. Yet, in 2020, governments and public health agencies worldwide reversed course, mandating masks despite the overwhelming pre-pandemic consensus that they were ineffective. Now, troubling evidence suggests that dissenting studies—including those from respected infection control experts—are being systematically removed from academic discourse.
One such study, "Why Face Masks Don't Work: A Revealing Review" by Dr. John Hardie, a 30-year veteran in dental infection control, was abruptly pulled from the Journal of Oral Health in July 2020. The publisher claimed the paper was "no longer relevant in our current climate"—an Orwellian justification for suppressing inconvenient truths. Hardie's meticulously researched review, citing over 30 academic references, concluded that masks fail to stop viral transmission due to poor facial fit and insufficient filtration. His findings aligned with decades of prior research, including a 2011 study by Harriman and Brosseau, which stated plainly: "Facemasks will not protect against the inhalation of aerosols."
The pre-2020 scientific consensus
Before COVID-19, the scientific community openly acknowledged that masks—whether surgical or cloth—were ineffective against viral spread. A 2019 meta-analysis published in Emerging Infectious Diseases found "no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza." The World Health Organization's own 2019 guidance on pandemic influenza stated that masks were not recommended for the general public, citing lack of evidence.
Even the CDC's pre-2020 stance admitted that masks were primarily useful in medical settings to block splashes—not aerosols. Yet, when COVID-19 emerged, these inconvenient truths were buried beneath a tidal wave of politicized mandates.
The Cochrane review confirms: Masks don't work
In 2023, the gold-standard Cochrane Library—a globally respected authority on evidence-based medicine—published a comprehensive review led by Dr. Tom Jefferson, analyzing decades of mask studies. The conclusion? "Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI)/ COVID-19 compared to not wearing masks."
This wasn’t a fringe study but a rigorous meta-analysis reinforcing what science had long established. Yet, instead of prompting policy reversals, the Cochrane findings were downplayed or ignored by public health officials.
The purge of dissenting science
The removal of Dr. Hardie's paper is not an isolated incident. Across academic publishing, studies contradicting the official mask narrative have faced suppression:
• Retractions without cause: Peer-reviewed papers questioning mask efficacy have been retracted under dubious pretexts, often labeled "misinformation" without substantive rebuttals.
• Search engine manipulation: Google and other platforms have algorithmically demoted studies critical of masks while promoting pro-mask propaganda.
• Media blackout: Outlets like The New York Times and The Washington Post routinely dismiss or misrepresent studies debunking mask mandates, framing dissent as "anti-science."
This pattern mirrors Big Pharma's historical suppression of unfavorable drug trials—a tactic now deployed to enforce COVID-era orthodoxy.
Why the cover-up? Follow the money and control
The sudden about-face on masks was never about science—it was about compliance. By mandating masks, authorities:
1. Created a visible symbol of obedience – Mask-wearing became a performative act of submission, conditioning the public to accept arbitrary rules.
2. Enabled fear-based control – The illusion of protection justified lockdowns, business closures and vaccine passports.
3. Protected corporate interests – Mask manufacturers and pharmaceutical giants profited immensely from perpetual pandemic policies.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 482 |
| 19 | FDA rejects plans to add black box warning for COVID-19 vaccines despite safety concerns
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has confirmed that it will not place a "black box" warning – the agency's most severe safety alert – on Pfizer and Moderna's Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines, despite internal recommendations to do so.
FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary defended the agency's stance on Monday, Dec. 15, claiming updated dosing schedules may reduce risks. This move has nevertheless sparked controversy among medical experts and transparency advocates. It comes amid mounting evidence linking the shots to myocarditis – a potentially fatal heart inflammation disproportionately affecting young males – and follows reports of child fatalities post-vaccination.
The FDA's refusal to escalate warnings stands in stark contrast to its own safety and epidemiology center's recommendation, which cited myocarditis as a significant concern warranting urgent public disclosure. Black box warnings are reserved for drugs with life-threatening side effects that demand careful risk-benefit analysis – precisely the scenario unfolding with mRNA vaccines.
Autopsy-linked child deaths, confirmed in a November FDA memorandum obtained by the Epoch Times, further complicate the narrative pushed by federal health agencies that vaccines remain "safe and effective" for all age groups. Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Robert Redfield also told the outlet that COVID-19 vaccines should be withdrawn entirely. He cited the immunotoxicity of spike proteins, a concern echoed by independent researchers since 2021.
A pattern of concealing drug and vaccine risks
Historical parallels loom large. The FDA's reluctance mirrors past failures, such as its delayed response to Vioxx's cardiovascular risks and the decades-long cover-up of SSRI-induced suicidality in adolescents. Meanwhile, Pfizer and Moderna – both financial partners of influential groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics – continue asserting their products' safety despite omitting critical stratified data in studies.
The agency’s opacity extends to its ongoing death investigations. Makary admitted the FDA is withholding findings until "truly a link" is proven – a standard rarely applied to vaccine promotions. This contrasts sharply with Pfizer's own meta-analysis, which claims COVID-19 infection carries a 42-fold higher myocarditis risk than vaccination, a statistic skeptics argue ignores confounding factors like underreported vaccine-related injuries.
BrightU. AI's Enoch engine notes that the findings of the meta-analysis seeks to downplay the risks of its product and protect its financial interests, despite internal documents revealing the company's awareness of the vaccine's connection to elevated myocarditis rates. This deceptive narrative aligns with Big Pharma's broader pattern of suppressing inconvenient safety data while promoting fear of natural infections to justify mass vaccination campaigns.
As the FDA delays full approval amid calls to "avoid political pressure," the public is left navigating a labyrinth of conflicting narratives. For families weighing myocarditis against a virus their children overwhelmingly survive, the absence of a black box warning may represent not caution, but capitulation to an industry where profit and policy have long eclipsed patient safety.
Watch Jefferey Jaxen and Del Bigtree discussing the FDA's approval of the COVID-19 vaccine for children despite the lack of data.
https://www.brighteon.com/de00d56f-337b-4d90-8caa-b53d7aecd330
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 531 |
| 20 |  Attention, everyone! 🎉
Barbara O’Neill’s voice cannot be muted!
Big Pharma is trying to ban this groundbreaking book...
You won't want to miss "Sustain Me" in 2025/26!
Our CHRISTMAS SALE is here—act fast for an incredible 80% discount, today only! ⚠️
Use the code "CHRISTMAS10" for an extra 10% off! 🎁
Seize this opportunity while it lasts!
⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️
https://shortll.com/SelfHeal
https://shortll.com/SelfHeal | 518 |
