exidu

exidu

exidu

subscribers

The clearest explanation of why the PCR test is not suitable for diagnosis in the words of its inventor, the 1993 Nobel Prize winner in chemistry, Kary Mullis.

La explicación más clara de por qué la prueba PCR no es apta para diagnóstico en palabras de su inventor el premio Nobel de química 1993 Kary Banks Mullis.
La reacción en cadena de la polimerasa, conocida como PCR por sus siglas en inglés (polymerase chain reaction) o como RCP, es una técnica de la biología molecular desarrollada en 1986 por Kary Mullis. Su objetivo es obtener un gran número de copias de un fragmento de ADN particular, partiendo de un mínimo.
Es lo que se está usando como herramienta básica de esta plandemia para dictaminar el número de "contagios", "infectados", "asintomáticos" etc. y en base a eso se están aplicando todas las medidas que atentan contra nuestra libertad y nuestros derechos.
El video se explica por sí mismo : Su inventor Kary Banks Mullis explica que no es una herramienta para diagnóstico, que la información que proporcionan no es relevante de cara a dictaminar si alguien está enfermo y que se puede encontrar cualquier cosa en cualquiera a base de ir ampliando esas muestras.

Recorded: Feb. 19, 2020

Eye opening statements by Dr. Larry Palevsky, MD!

What are your thoughts on this regarding Aluminum in vaccines?

Public Health Committee February 19th Public Hearing on Proposed Legislation Concerning Public School Immunizations.

CT Public health committee public hearing on H.B.5044 the removal of the religious exemption to vaccination for public school attendance. The video of the entire hearing (21 hrs 22 min) is available for anyone who missed it and wanted to see the testimony. I urge you to listen.

Vaccine and medical mandates in general will be one of the biggest topics of our time, are you willing to pay attention or get left behind?

Where there is risk there must be choice! Its time to end censorship around the discussion!

La editora del New England Journal of Medicine denuncia el control de los laboratorios sobre las publicaciones científicas y sobre el fraude en los estudios publicados.

The editor of the New England Journal of Medicine denounces the control of laboratories on scientific publications and on fraud in published studies.

Children’s Health Defense is proud to stand with organizations and countries as we work together to pushback on medical mandates, unsafe vaccines, and increasingly totalitarian governments.
In the coming months, these issues will be front and center in discussions around the world as people decide whether to cling tightly to their freedoms or blindly follow whatever edicts are put in place by corrupt government officials and profit-driven corporations.
The making of this video was accomplished through the teamwork of organizations and individuals who will not stand by and watch liberty be stripped away from citizens little by little until total tyranny reigns.
Please join us in standing up and demanding that our individual and medical freedom rights are forever protected. The time to be courageous is now.
Please share this video far and wide.

From the Imperial Model that triggered global panic, to the doctors, scientists, and journalists reporting unbiased #Covid19 data, we look at moments that made The HighWire a go-to source for reliable facts on COVID.

Sources:
https://unherd.com/thepost/coming-up-epidemiologist-prof-johan-giesecke-shares-lessons-from-sweden/
https://fee.org/articles/sweden-now-has-a-lower-covid-19-death-rate-than-the-us-here-s-why-it-matters/

That was one of the more extraordinary interviews we have done here at UnHerd.

Professor Johan Giesecke, one of the world’s most senior epidemiologists, advisor to the Swedish Government (he hired Anders Tegnell who is currently directing Swedish strategy), the first Chief Scientist of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and an advisor to the director general of the WHO, lays out with typically Swedish bluntness why he thinks:

- UK policy on lockdown and other European countries are not evidence-based
- The correct policy is to protect the old and the frail only
- This will eventually lead to herd immunity as a “by-product”
- The initial UK response, before the “180 degree U-turn”, was better
- The Imperial College paper was “not very good” and he has never seen an unpublished paper have so much policy impact
- The paper was very much too pessimistic
- Any such models are a dubious basis for public policy anyway
- The flattening of the curve is due to the most vulnerable dying first as much as the lockdown
- The results will eventually be similar for all countries
- Covid-19 is a “mild disease” and similar to the flu, and it was the novelty of the disease that scared people.
- The actual fatality rate of Covid-19 is the region of 0.1%
- At least 50% of the population of both the UK and Sweden will be shown to have already had the disease when mass antibody testing becomes available

Al final ya no encuentran como terminar la entrevista, y cortan abruptamente!

Roxana Bruno PhD en inmunología las vacunas contra el Coronavirus podría dejarnos estériles y causar enfermedades autoinmunes o Cancer

Fuente: https://cienciaysaludnatural.com/como-se-oculta-informacion-sobre-potenciales-riesgos-de-la-vacuna-contra-el-coronavirus/

Recoleccion firmas para VACUNACION NO OBLIGATORIA : https://cienciaysaludnatural.com/firmas-para-vacunacion-no-obligatoria/

29 of August 2020 : Thousands around the world are taking to the streets in protest of #Covid19 restrictions. Rallies scheduled in London, Berlin, New York, and Denmark.

It’s deja-vu all over again with the W.H.O. declaring “pandemics” that result in gold rushes for pharmaceutical companies who swoop in with vaccines to save the day. But are they actually saving anyone? Or do serious adverse events such as the very real narcolepsy epidemic that we saw in the swine flu “pandemic” of 2009—which many researchers tie to GSK’s Pandemrix—counter any perceived benefits of these rushed vaccines? The Jab breaks down what happened in 2009 and why it’s critical that we understand this today.

Recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, on July 16, 2020.

Examining the empirical basis for mandatory lockdown policies in both the physical and social sciences. We are concerned about the impact of COVID-19 lockdown / quarantines on our freedoms, human rights, physical and mental health, and economy. We are skeptical of an ongoing lockdown as an effective way to manage a coronavirus.

This is a non-partisan, non-casteist, non-governmental, multidisciplinary, global research evaluation.

Thomas E. Woods Jr. is an American author, historian and libertarian who is currently a senior fellow at the Mises Institute. Woods is a New York Times Best-Selling author and has published twelve books.

Sources : https://tomwoods.com/lockdown/

None

Estamos haciendo justo lo contrario para Protegernos y contener este Virus?

None

SHOW MORE

Created 2 months, 2 weeks ago.

63 videos

Category None

The Purpose of this Channel is to share information that helps create CRITICAL THINKING and avoid manipulation of Facts !