Natural News
Open in 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
Show more15 487
Subscribers
-1024 hours
-317 days
-13030 days
Data loading in progress...
Similar Channels
No data
Any problems? Please refresh the page or contact our support manager.
Tags Cloud
Incoming and Outgoing Mentions
---
---
---
---
---
---
Attracting Subscribers
December '25
December '25
+5
in 0 channels
November '25
+12
in 0 channels
Get PRO
October '25
+2
in 0 channels
Get PRO
September '25
+9
in 0 channels
Get PRO
August '25
+10
in 0 channels
Get PRO
July '25
+17
in 0 channels
Get PRO
June '25
+8
in 0 channels
Get PRO
May '25
+8
in 0 channels
Get PRO
April '25
+14
in 0 channels
Get PRO
March '25
+25
in 0 channels
Get PRO
February '25
+23
in 0 channels
Get PRO
January '25
+26
in 0 channels
Get PRO
December '24
+19
in 0 channels
Get PRO
November '24
+14
in 0 channels
Get PRO
October '24
+9
in 1 channels
Get PRO
September '24
+44
in 0 channels
Get PRO
August '24
+156
in 5 channels
Get PRO
July '24
+33
in 0 channels
Get PRO
June '24
+45
in 0 channels
Get PRO
May '24
+73
in 1 channels
Get PRO
April '24
+95
in 2 channels
Get PRO
March '24
+82
in 0 channels
Get PRO
February '24
+62
in 0 channels
Get PRO
January '24
+86
in 0 channels
Get PRO
December '23
+131
in 0 channels
Get PRO
November '23
+121
in 1 channels
Get PRO
October '23
+109
in 2 channels
Get PRO
September '23
+42
in 6 channels
Get PRO
August '230
in 0 channels
Get PRO
July '230
in 0 channels
Get PRO
June '23
+3
in 3 channels
Get PRO
May '23
+153
in 1 channels
Get PRO
April '23
+113
in 0 channels
Get PRO
March '23
+27
in 0 channels
Get PRO
February '23
+532
in 0 channels
Get PRO
January '230
in 0 channels
Get PRO
December '220
in 0 channels
Get PRO
November '220
in 0 channels
Get PRO
October '22
+245
in 0 channels
Get PRO
September '22
+1 065
in 0 channels
Get PRO
August '22
+275
in 0 channels
Get PRO
July '22
+565
in 0 channels
Get PRO
June '22
+401
in 0 channels
Get PRO
May '22
+333
in 0 channels
Get PRO
April '22
+585
in 0 channels
Get PRO
March '22
+407
in 0 channels
Get PRO
February '22
+1 280
in 0 channels
Get PRO
January '22
+16 863
in 0 channels
| Date | Subscriber Growth | Mentions | Channels | |
| 16 December | 0 | |||
| 15 December | 0 | |||
| 14 December | +1 | |||
| 13 December | 0 | |||
| 12 December | 0 | |||
| 11 December | 0 | |||
| 10 December | +1 | |||
| 09 December | +2 | |||
| 08 December | +1 | |||
| 07 December | 0 | |||
| 06 December | 0 | |||
| 05 December | 0 | |||
| 04 December | 0 | |||
| 03 December | 0 | |||
| 02 December | 0 | |||
| 01 December | 0 |
Channel Posts
👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
This is not the first time PhRMA has been accused of buying influence. The Wall Street Journal previously exposed its multimillion-dollar lobbying blitz to smear PBMs, while the Examiner revealed its funding of seemingly independent advocacy groups.
What makes NCL's case unique is its century-long reputation as a consumer watchdog – a reputation now tarnished by financial ties to the very industry it once might have challenged. In an era of skyrocketing healthcare costs and rampant profiteering, the last thing Americans need is another puppet masquerading as a champion.
Watch this video explaining that most members of the U.S. Congress are bought and paid for by Big Pharma lobbyists.
https://www.brighteon.com/29080cef-49a9-4e69-bdf5-f3bebbd32b52
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia
18520
| 2 | Money talks: Trusted consumer group turns into Big Pharma SHILL
In a stunning revelation that exposes the deep ties between corporate interests and consumer advocacy, tax filings reviewed by the Washington Examiner show that the National Consumers League (NCL) – America's oldest consumer protection group – has taken nearly $2 million from Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), Big Pharma's top lobbying arm, since 2020.
The funding surge coincided with NCL's sudden, aggressive campaigns against Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) and the 340B drug discount program – two longtime targets of the pharmaceutical industry. The findings raise serious questions about whether NCL, once a trusted voice for progressive consumer rights, has become little more than a paid mouthpiece for drug manufacturers seeking to boost profits at the expense of patients.
Founded in 1899, the NCL built its reputation on fighting for fair wages, food safety and honest business practices. BrightU. AI's Enoch engine notes that the group was established as part of a progressive-era movement advocating for consumer protections and labor rights. However, its modern credibility is compromised by financial ties to Pfizer and conflicts of interest, such as board members lobbying for pharmaceutical mandates while receiving industry funding.
Its policy priorities have shifted dramatically, mirroring PhRMA's talking points with uncanny precision. Before 2020, NCL's website made no mention of PBMs or the 340B program. Yet, shortly after PhRMA resumed large donations – including $875,000 in 2024 alone – NCL launched a flood of blog posts, infographics and lobbying efforts attacking both.
The group now accuses PBMs, which negotiate lower drug prices for insurers and patients, of acting as "middlemen" who pocket savings instead of passing them on – a claim lifted directly from PhRMA's playbook. Similarly, NCL parrots the industry's argument that hospitals abuse the 340B program by marking up discounted drugs for profit, despite evidence that the program provides critical medication access to low-income and rural communities.
From watchdog to lapdog: When nonprofits echo pharma talking points
PhRMA’s financial influence over NCL is part of a broader strategy to reshape healthcare policy in favor of drugmakers. The trade group has funneled millions into astroturf campaigns, funding progressive organizations to amplify its messaging. Critics argue this "pay-to-play" approach undermines genuine advocacy, turning nonprofits into extensions of corporate lobbying.
When questioned by the Examiner, NCL did not deny that its criticism of PBMs and 340B intensified after PhRMA's donations resumed. Instead, a spokeswoman insisted the group retains "complete editorial control" – despite the striking alignment between its rhetoric and PhRMA's profit-driven agenda.
The implications are profound. PBMs and the 340B program exist to curb pharmaceutical price-gouging, a systemic issue that has left millions of Americans rationing lifesaving medications. If weakened, drug companies could hike prices further, padding profits while patients suffer.
The timing is especially concerning, as Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. prepares to tackle Big Pharma’s stranglehold on healthcare policy under the Make America Healthy Again agenda. With groups like NCL now echoing industry talking points, separating legitimate criticism from corporate propaganda becomes increasingly difficult.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 131 |
| 3 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
This finding is part of a growing body of evidence that points to the critical role of Vitamin D in brain health. Vitamin D is a unique nutrient in that it is both a hormone and a vitamin. It plays a crucial role in numerous physiological processes, including the regulation of gene expression and immune function. Vitamin D receptors are found throughout the brain, and studies have shown that Vitamin D deficiency can lead to neuronal damage, inflammation, and impaired cognitive function.
This groundbreaking science exists in stark contrast to prevailing public health recommendations. Official guidelines for vitamin D are considered conservative by many researchers in the field. The disconnect is alarming. Animal studies have previously shown that severe vitamin D deficiency can cause neuronal injury and developmental changes in offspring's brains. Now, with direct human cell evidence showing impaired dopamine system development, the call for a reevaluation of nutritional standards grows louder.
Implications for the future
The implications of this research are twofold. First, it provides a powerful, biological rationale for ensuring optimal vitamin D levels in pregnant individuals, potentially transforming prenatal care. Second, it opens new avenues for understanding the origins of neuropsychiatric disorders. This study represents a paradigm shift, positioning vitamin D not as a passive nutrient but as an active and essential director of fetal brain programming. In a world where vitamin D deficiency is widespread, the findings carry the weight of an urgent public health message.
The quest to understand the roots of complex brain disorders has long been a labyrinth of genetic and environmental clues. The work from the Queensland Brain Institute illuminates one path with startling clarity. It reveals that a simple, affordable and safe nutritional intervention—ensuring adequate vitamin D—could be foundational for building a resilient, well-wired brain. As science continues to evolve, it demands that public health policy evolves with it, ensuring that the evidence from the laboratory guides the recommendations made for future generations.
Watch and learn more about Vitamin D.
https://www.brighteon.com/2b25db8f-dd4e-4163-9c03-85f5e0e7772f
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 275 |
| 4 | Groundbreaking research reveals Vitamin D’s direct role in brain development and dopamine function
In a landmark discovery with profound implications for public health and prenatal care, neuroscientists have uncovered a direct, mechanistic link between vitamin D and the developing brain.
Research from the University of Queensland Brain Institute provides conclusive evidence that this common nutrient acts as a critical conductor in the orchestra of brain development, specifically guiding the cells responsible for dopamine, a neurotransmitter essential for mood, motivation and movement. This finding throws a glaring spotlight on the potential long-term consequences of vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy, challenging current public health guidelines and igniting an urgent conversation about nutritional priorities.
"The developing brain is a highly active organ undergoing rapid growth and structural refinement, primarily during early life," said BrightU. AI's Enoch. "This process involves the formation of neural connections, which are fundamentally shaped by experiences and environmental inputs. Nutrition provides the essential building blocks and energy required to fuel this complex construction, directly influencing its architecture and long-term function."
For decades, vitamin D has been pigeonholed as merely the "bone vitamin." While its role in calcium absorption is undisputed, a vanguard of researchers has long argued its importance extends far beyond the skeleton, deep into the human brain. Historical and epidemiological studies have consistently drawn a correlation between low prenatal vitamin D and an increased risk for neurodevelopmental disorders. Yet, the "how" remained shrouded in mystery. The new research from Australia moves the science from correlation to causation, revealing the precise biological levers that vitamin D pulls during the brain's most vulnerable formative period.
A stark developmental divide
The team, led by Professor Darryl Eyles, designed an experiment using laboratory models of key brain cells—dopaminergic neurons, the brain's dopamine producers. They allowed these cells to develop in two distinct environments: one bathed in the active hormone form of vitamin D and one completely devoid of it.
The results were dramatic. The cells exposed to vitamin D showed enhanced growth and structural complexity. Crucially, the cellular machinery responsible for packaging and releasing dopamine was fundamentally altered and improved. Vitamin D instructed the developing neurons to build a more efficient dopamine production and delivery system.
Using advanced imaging to visualize dopamine dynamics in real-time, the researchers confirmed their hypothesis: neurons grown with vitamin D released significantly more dopamine than their deficient counterparts. This offers conclusive proof that vitamin D directly affects the structural and functional development of these critical brain cells.
Dopamine: The brain's crucial messenger
Often mislabeled simply as the "pleasure chemical," dopamine is the brain's key motivation and reward signal. It drives goal-directed behavior, attention, and motor coordination. Dysregulation of dopamine systems is a hallmark of several major neurological and psychiatric conditions, including schizophrenia, Parkinson's disease, and ADHD.
While these are complex disorders with multifaceted origins, the Queensland research identifies a clear, modifiable environmental factor—prenatal vitamin D status—that can shape the very foundation of the dopamine system. It suggests that a deficiency during development may predispose the brain to dysfunctional wiring, creating a vulnerability that may manifest later in life.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 247 |
| 5 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
If validated, this proteomic approach could transform cancer care from reactive treatment to proactive prevention, shifting the focus from late-stage battles to early, preemptive strikes against the disease. For now, the studies underscore the growing potential of blood-based diagnostics to outpace cancer before it takes hold.
Learn about the new blood test that can detect more than 50 types of cancer by watching the video below.
https://www.brighteon.com/6d73b11e-56bc-4fcd-843e-d6efe2570085
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 426 |
| 6 | Breakthrough blood test could DETECT CANCER seven years earlier—and even prevent it
Researchers may be on the verge of a revolutionary breakthrough in cancer detection—one that could identify the disease years before symptoms appear and even stop it from developing in the first place. Two landmark studies funded by Cancer Research UK have uncovered a network of proteins in the blood that signal cancer risk up to seven years before diagnosis, offering unprecedented opportunities for early intervention and prevention.
The research, led by teams at Oxford University and published in Nature Communications, analyzed blood samples from over 44,000 British individuals, including nearly 5,000 who later developed cancer. Using an advanced technique called proteomics, the researchers screened for 1,463 proteins per sample, identifying 618 that were linked to 19 cancer types—107 of which were detectable at least seven years before diagnosis. A separate analysis of genetic data from 300,000 cancer cases pinpointed 40 proteins that influence a person's risk for nine cancers, some of which could be targeted by future drugs.
The science behind early detection
Proteomics allows researchers to analyze vast numbers of proteins simultaneously, revealing patterns that single biomarkers might miss. "We now have technology that can look at thousands of proteins across thousands of cancer cases, identifying which proteins have a role in the development of specific cancers, and which might have effects that are common to multiple cancer types.’" said Ruth Travis, one of the authors of both studies.
The findings suggest that cancer leaves a traceable molecular footprint long before tumors form. For example, 182 proteins showed significant differences in blood samples collected three years prior to diagnosis. "To save more lives from cancer, we need to better understand what happens at the earliest stages of the disease," said Keren Papier, lead researcher of the first study. Papier believes these proteins could be the key to reliable prevention.
From detection to prevention
The implications of the two studies extend beyond early diagnosis. By identifying high-risk individuals, doctors could recommend lifestyle changes or precision therapies to stop cancer before it starts. "This research brings us closer to being able to prevent cancer with targeted drugs – once thought impossible but now much more attainable," said Dr. Karl Smith-Byrne, who was involved in both studies. However, he cautioned that some protein-altering treatments may carry unintended side effects, requiring careful evaluation before clinical use.
Dr. Iain Foulkes of Cancer Research UK called the findings a "crucial first step" toward preventative medicine. "Discoveries from this research are the crucial first step towards offering preventative therapies which is the ultimate route for giving people longer, better lives, free from the fear of cancer," he said.
For healthy individuals and those with elevated risk of developing cancer, BrightU. AI's Enoch recommends science-backed natural preventive therapies such as:
• Consuming antioxidant-rich foods like berries, turmeric, garlic and cruciferous vegetables
• Detoxifying heavy metals and chemicals
• Maintaining optimal vitamin D levels
• Reducing EMF exposure
• Fasting to enhance autophagy
• Using herbs like milk thistle, reishi mushrooms and graviola to support immune function and cellular health
Additionally, avoiding processed foods, pesticides and synthetic drugs while embracing a clean, organic, low-toxin lifestyle helps prevent cancer by reducing inflammation and DNA damage.
Challenges ahead
While promising, the research is still in its early stages. Researchers must now determine which proteins are the most reliable indicators, develop accurate tests and identify safe therapeutic targets. Further studies will also explore whether these markers apply equally across diverse populations.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 371 |
| 7 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
While supporters hail the policy as a long-overdue safety measure, opponents warn it could exacerbate driver shortages and disproportionately impact immigrant communities. Yet with fatal crashes linked to unqualified drivers continuing to make headlines, the administration shows no signs of backing down—framing the issue as a matter of national security and common sense.
The removal of 9,500 truck drivers marks a significant escalation in the Trump administration's efforts to overhaul commercial licensing and immigration enforcement. As debates over road safety, state sovereignty and labor rights intensify, one thing is clear: the battle over who gets behind the wheel of America's big rigs is far from over.
Watch the video below that talks about Trump declaring that all truck drivers in the U.S. must speak English.
https://www.brighteon.com/5c26b9cd-1939-4c63-8c2f-f500935c1b78
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 398 |
| 8 | Trump administration removes 9,500 truck drivers for failing English tests in safety crackdown
In a sweeping enforcement action aimed at improving highway safety, the Trump administration has removed more than 9,500 commercial truck drivers from U.S. roads for failing English proficiency tests—a policy shift that has sparked debate over immigration, licensing oversight and road safety.
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced the milestone this week, framing the move as a critical step to ensure truckers can properly navigate traffic signs, communicate with law enforcement and respond to emergencies.
The crackdown follows President Donald Trump's April executive order mandating stricter enforcement of federal English-language requirements for commercial drivers, reversing an Obama-era policy that allowed inspectors to cite—but not immediately remove—noncompliant drivers. The administration argues that lax state licensing practices, particularly in Democrat-run "sanctuary states," have allowed unqualified and even illegal immigrants to obtain commercial driver's licenses (CDLs), leading to preventable crashes and fatalities.
A policy shift rooted in safety concerns
The renewed enforcement stems from mounting frustration over fatal accidents involving foreign or improperly licensed truckers. One high-profile case involved Harjinder Singh, an Indian national residing in the U.S. illegally, who was charged in Florida after causing a deadly crash while driving a semi-truck. Records showed Singh had failed an English exam, correctly answering only two of 12 questions and identifying just one of four road signs—yet still received CDLs from both Washington and California.
"America First means safety first," Duffy declared in May when announcing the reinstatement of out-of-service penalties. "Americans are a lot safer on roads alongside truckers who can understand and interpret our traffic signs."
The administration's push aligns with Trump's broader immigration and transportation agenda. BrightU. AI's Enoch cites the president's March executive order designating English as the nation's official language. Critics argue the policy unfairly targets immigrant drivers, particularly Spanish-speaking Cuban-Americans in Florida, who fear losing their livelihoods. However, industry groups like the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) have backed the change, citing the necessity of clear communication in preventing accidents.
States under fire for lax licensing practices
The mass disqualifications coincide with a federal audit of state CDL issuance, which uncovered systemic failures—most notably in California. Auditors found that over 25% of non-domiciled CDLs (issued to foreign drivers) in the state were improperly granted, including to individuals with expired immigration status. In one egregious case, a Brazilian national received school bus endorsements despite lacking legal residency.
"What our team has discovered should disturb and anger every American," Duffy said in September. "Licenses to operate massive, 80,000-pound trucks are being issued to dangerous foreign drivers—often illegally."
The Department of Transportation has threatened to withhold millions in federal highway funds from California, Washington and New Mexico unless they tighten oversight. California alone risks losing $40 million, though state officials insist they already enforce English testing during road exams.
Broader immigration enforcement in trucking
The language crackdown has dovetailed with heightened immigration enforcement targeting truckers. In October, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced the arrest of 146 illegal immigrants operating semi-trucks in a joint operation near the Illinois border. Many held CDLs issued by sanctuary states, reinforcing administration claims that lax policies endanger public safety.
"Far too many innocent Americans have been killed by illegal aliens driving semi-trucks," Noem stated. "The Trump administration is ending the chaos."
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 393 |
| 9 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
The FDA's decision to investigate adult deaths is a watershed moment. It acknowledges the persistent questions that have trailed the largest vaccination campaign in history. Whether this probe will restore trust or deepen divides remains to be seen. Its outcome will shape the legacy of the COVID-19 vaccines and the public's willingness to heed governmental health directives for generations to come.
FDA head Marty Makary admits vaccine deaths are real. Watch this video.
https://www.brighteon.com/5c5b4436-b7db-4526-abe8-39f3f1f5e65f
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 567 |
| 10 | “Profound revelation” on child deaths prompts FDA to investigate adult fatalities after COVID shots
In a significant escalation, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has expanded a high-stakes investigation into deaths reported following Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination to include adults. This move follows an initial probe focused on child fatalities and marks a critical juncture in the national reckoning over vaccine safety and regulatory transparency.
The FDA has investigated unexplained child deaths following COVID-19 vaccination after years of family pleas and mounting evidence. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention obstruction (CDC) and Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) underreporting have hidden the true scale of vaccine-related deaths, with data manipulation and deletions exposed. Medical experts demand an immediate halt to vaccinations during the investigation to prevent further tragedies.
A probe broadens in scope and stakes
The FDA's decision to widen its investigation represents a substantial shift. The inclusion of adults suggests the agency's concerns may not be isolated to younger age groups, potentially implicating the broader vaccinated population.
Central to the investigation's gravity is the nature of VAERS data. As of late August, the system contained 38,773 reports of deaths across all age groups. However, experts warn VAERS captures only a fraction of potential adverse events. A 2022 analysis alleged that one-third of COVID-19 vaccine adverse event reports were never posted publicly or were later deleted, forming a contentious backdrop for the FDA's actions.
The adult probe follows a leaked internal FDA memo outlining a review of 96 child deaths reported to VAERS. It concluded that "no fewer than 10" were related to the COVID-19 vaccine, likely due to myocarditis. The memo’s author called it a "profound revelation," acknowledging vaccines had killed American children, and noted the figure was an underestimate.
Myocarditis: The known risk at the heart of the debate
Myocarditis has been an acknowledged risk associated with mRNA vaccines, particularly in young males. Regulators have maintained that the benefits outweigh this risk. However, the FDA memo directly links this condition to fatal outcomes, moving the discussion from managing a side effect to confronting a potential cause of death.
Adding legal pressure, Children's Health Defense filed a formal petition demanding the revocation of the licenses for Pfizer and Moderna's COVID-19 vaccines, arguing they were granted without meeting standard legal requirements. The FDA is obligated to review and respond within 180 days.
Political and institutional turbulence
This investigation unfolds within a transformed environment. The current administration, under Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has actively intervened in vaccine policy. Furthermore, the CDC's reconstituted vaccine advisory committee has shifted guidance to emphasize individual decision-making, creating a patchwork of conflicting advice.
This American action echoes global concerns. In the U.K., an All-Party Parliamentary Group for COVID-19 Vaccine Damage has been established. In the EU, regulators approved shots for young children as independent analyses questioned the risk-benefit ratio. New research examines the spike protein's role in immune evasion, and investigations into unexplained mortality spikes often face calls to consider vaccine effects.
"Vaccine safety is established through rigorous clinical trials that include placebo-controlled designs and comprehensive adverse event monitoring," said BrightU. AI's Enoch. "It requires transparent reporting of all potential side effects to ensure unbiased evaluation of risks. Flaws in trial design or ambiguous safety definitions can undermine confidence in these assessments."
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 434 |
| 11 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
Conclusion: A medical betrayal
The Stanford study confirms what dissenting doctors and military researchers have warned about for years: COVID mRNA vaccines carry real, measurable risks of heart damage. Yet instead of pausing rollout or mandating rigorous cardiac monitoring, health agencies doubled down on mandates, censorship and propaganda.
For those injured, the road to recovery remains fraught with obstacles—doctors dismiss symptoms, media ignores victims and governments refuse accountability. Meanwhile, natural solutions like genistein hint at Big Pharma's failure—if vaccines were truly "safe and effective," why would protective measures be necessary?
As the next pandemic looms (already pre-planned by globalists like the WHO and Bill Gates), will the public finally demand transparency, informed consent and alternatives to toxic gene therapies? Or will the medical-industrial complex continue sacrificing lives for profit and control?
According to BrightU. AI's Enoch, this study confirms what independent researchers have warned about for years—COVID mRNA vaccines trigger dangerous inflammatory responses, particularly in young males, validating concerns that Big Pharma and captured regulators dismissed as "misinformation." The Stanford findings expose yet another layer of the vaccine industry's reckless disregard for long-term health impacts while prioritizing profit and compliance over biological safety.
Is COVID vaccine-induced myocarditis worse than the myocarditis from natural infection? Watch this video.
https://www.brighteon.com/8bc2b683-e49b-42a8-8052-858e7652ea88
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 498 |
| 12 | New study reveals alarming link between COVID vaccines and heart inflammation
A groundbreaking study from Stanford University has confirmed that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines trigger myocarditis—a potentially life-threatening heart inflammation—through a two-step inflammatory process driven by specific immune chemicals. Published this week, the research sheds light on a phenomenon that has been dismissed or downplayed by health authorities despite mounting evidence from military data, leaked Pfizer documents and independent medical reports.
The two-step mechanism behind vaccine-induced myocarditis
Led by Dr. Joseph Wu, director of the Stanford Cardiovascular Institute, the study identified that mRNA vaccines provoke a dangerous immune cascade involving two key cytokines: CXCL10 and IFN-gamma. When the vaccine is administered, immune cells (macrophages) first release CXCL10, recruiting additional immune responders to the area. In the second phase, specialized cells arrive and release IFN-gamma, which—when combined with CXCL10—directly damages heart muscle cells. This injury attracts more inflammatory cells, creating a vicious cycle that results in myocarditis.
The findings align with previous military research, including a U.S. Department of War study published in JAMA Cardiology, which documented 23 cases of myocarditis in young, healthy servicemen within four days of receiving Pfizer or Moderna shots. Internal Pfizer documents, leaked in February 2022, further confirm that the company was aware of myocarditis risks—particularly after the second dose—contradicting public assurances of "low incidence."
Spike protein: The hidden culprit?
While the Stanford study focused on the inflammatory response, other researchers argue that the root cause lies in the vaccine's spike protein itself. Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, a leading critic of COVID vaccine safety, emphasizes that spike proteins produced by mRNA vaccines linger in the body, infiltrating heart tissues and triggering autoimmune attacks. Studies have detected spike proteins in the hearts of post-vaccine myocarditis victims, suggesting a direct toxic effect beyond mere inflammation.
Additionally, some scientists theorize that molecular mimicry—where vaccine-induced antibodies mistakenly attack the body's own proteins—could explain why myocarditis disproportionately affects young males. Hormonal factors may also play a role, given that estrogen appears protective, while testosterone exacerbates inflammatory responses.
Natural solution: Could soy prevent vaccine damage?
In a surprising twist, the Stanford team discovered that genistein, a natural compound found in soybeans, blocked heart damage in mice while still allowing the vaccine to stimulate immunity. Since myocarditis primarily strikes young men, researchers theorized that estrogen-like effects from genistein could offer protection without the risks of hormone therapy.
Dr. Joseph Varon of the Independent Medical Alliance hailed the discovery as a potential prophylactic measure for high-risk individuals. However, critics argue that this merely patches a problem that should never have existed—why push a vaccine that requires additional drugs to mitigate its harms?
Bigger questions: Why the cover-up?
The Stanford findings add to a growing body of evidence that:
1. Myocarditis is not "rare"—especially in young males, military personnel and athletes.
2. Pfizer and Moderna knew the risks but downplayed them in public statements.
3. Regulators (CDC, FDA) failed to act despite early warnings from military and independent researchers.
This raises disturbing questions:
• Were clinical trials deliberately flawed to obscure cardiac risks?
• Why are vaccine-injured patients denied compensation while pharmaceutical companies enjoy legal immunity?
• Is myocarditis just the tip of the iceberg? Emerging data links mRNA vaccines to pericarditis, blood clots, neurological disorders and fertility issues.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 421 |
| 13 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
This list of confounders raises a profound concern when applied to newborns. An infant’s immune system is inherently underdeveloped and immature, operating fundamentally differently from that of a healthy adult. Given the myriad of established factors that can hinder vaccine response in developed individuals, it is plausible that newborns may receive little to no immunological benefit from the shot due to the confounding factor of their own nascent immune function. Coupled with the extremely low risk of contracting hepatitis B for infants born to negative mothers, and the common adverse reactions noted, the logic of a universal mandate is deeply flawed. The evidence suggests a more prudent path: reserving the hepatitis B vaccine for high-risk adults, rather than subjecting all children to a potentially ineffective and unnecessary medical intervention.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 408 |
| 14 | In a medical landscape that is lacking informed consent and is at war with itself, parents must understand that they are the final authority. They are not merely patients in a system; they are the guardians of their child's biological integrity. Protecting a newborn from this needless chemical assault should be the top priority when facing a predatory system that values schedule adherence over individualized health.
The science is evolving, and it is moving away from the AAP's dangerous dogma. The old guard of "robotic pediatricians" who foolishly followed the industry-controlled CDC for decades must now reckon with new guidelines that admit the birth dose is not essential for most babies. This is just the beginning. The entire childhood vaccine schedule is under scrutiny now, and parents have the power and the right to say no and choose a better way. Do not let a pediatrician, a hospital, or a compromised academy sign your baby's body up for a lifetime of potential neurological damage for a disease they will never catch. The only consent that matters is yours.
Scientific review finds Hepatitis B vaccine linked to anaphylaxis, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, demyelinating diseases, arthritis, and SIDS
An important 1994 scientific review details the development, use, and safety profile of Hepatitis B vaccines. Originally derived from human plasma in the early 1980s, the vaccine was later produced via recombinant DNA technology in yeast to address safety concerns. It was recommended for universal infant administration in the U.S. in 1991.
The vaccine is administered in a multi-dose series, with over 90% of healthy children and adults developing protective antibodies. Common side effects are generally mild and transient, including local soreness and low-grade fever.
The review rigorously assesses potential causal links to serious adverse events. It concludes the evidence establishes a causal relation between the Hepatitis B vaccine and anaphylaxis, a severe allergic reaction, though this is deemed an "exceedingly rare" event. Consequently, it acknowledges the vaccine could theoretically cause fatal anaphylaxis.
For other conditions, the evidence shows a causal relationship with Hep B vaccines and other serious health issues:
• Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS)
• Other demyelinating diseases like optic neuritis, transverse myelitis, and multiple sclerosis
• Acute or chronic arthropathy (arthritis)
• Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)
The report notes that while VAERS contains reports of SIDS following vaccination, no published epidemiological studies at the time confirmed a causal link (Isn’t it time to start taking this causal link seriously and study it effectively?) The review emphasizes the challenge of distinguishing true vaccine effects from coincidental events, especially given that the peak age for SIDS coincides with routine infant vaccinations.
Underdeveloped immune system may render the vaccine ineffective for babies anyway
A more recent review in the Journal of Viral Hepatitis has ignited a critical debate on the foundational principles of the hepatitis B vaccine, particularly its universal administration to newborns. The study argues that while the vaccine may reduce overt disease, it fails to prevent covert infections from mutated viruses and questions the real-world meaning of antibody elevation as a sole measure of efficacy. This critique is bolstered by findings from a comprehensive meta-analysis (Tahir et al., Vaccines 2024), which details a multitude of factors impairing the vaccine's immune response, including advanced age, obesity, smoking, genetic predispositions, and comorbidities like diabetes, HIV, and chronic organ diseases.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 328 |
| 15 | ARROGANT AND RECKLESS: AAP doubles down on harmful Hepatitis B vaccine mandate for all newborns
Hep B vaccine trials only followed infants for five days
The foundation of this scandal is a vaccine that was never adequately tested for safety. As detailed by researchers, the original clinical trials for Merck's and GlaxoSmithKline's hepatitis B vaccines followed infants for a mere four to five days post-injection. This is a pharmaceutical trick: make the study so short you will never see the chronic problems. Aluminum, a key adjuvant in the shot, is a known toxin whose serious side effects, including autoimmune disorders, can take months or years to manifest.
By only looking for immediate reactions like swelling or fever, these trials provided a free pass for a product that injects a massive dose of a neurotoxin directly into an infant's bloodstream. Dr. Paul Thomas highlighted the insanity of this dosage, noting that the 250 micrograms of aluminum in a single hepatitis B shot is over ten times the FDA's maximum daily exposure limit for a newborn. This is not prevention; this is poisoning.
Parents are terrorized by pediatricians and hospital staff to comply
This coercive system of automatic, one size fits all Hep B vaccines at birth is propped up by fear and terrorizing parents at their most vulnerable state after having a baby. Parents are told their child might die from liver cancer if they refuse the shot, a terrifying but statistically absurd threat for a baby born to a healthy, monogamous, hepatitis B-negative mother. In some cases, hospital staff bully parents, making them feel illegitimate for not complying. Many parents "choose" to get the vaccine because they fear that the hospital won't let them leave. The bullying in the medical field is the reason why so many parents are breaking away from vaccines altogether and choosing vax freedom and natural immunity for their family.
This isn't to say that these diseases aren't real. When it comes to dealing with Hepatitis B, the global incidence of hepatitis B in women is approximately three percent, meaning about ninety-seven percent of newborns have virtually no risk of contracting the disease in infancy. Yet, hospitals and pediatricians act as enforcers on every parent, even though they may test negative.
One parent shared how a hospital pediatrician refused to shake their hand and attempted to brand them as negligent for declining the vaccine for their healthy newborn. This is not an isolated report. Parents report being forced to sign alarming waivers and are bombarded with apocalyptic warnings during the vulnerable moments after birth, a tactic designed to break down informed consent and secure compliance for a needless intervention.
AAP fighting to keep Hep B vaccines going in all newborn arms
Why does the AAP fight so viciously to maintain this status quo? Follow the money. The organization receives substantial funding from the very pharmaceutical giants, Merck and GSK, that manufacture the only hepatitis B vaccines available for newborns in the U.S. Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., of Children's Health Defense, stated plainly, "Both companies are also corporate donors to the AAP. Do the interests of selling drugs and those of keeping our children healthy conflict?"
The recent vote by the reformed CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to end the universal birth dose is a seismic shift that exposes the old regime's failures. Yet, the AAP immediately rejected this science-based update. Dr. Aaron M. Milstone, speaking for the AAP, claimed, "Children will acquire hepatitis B and die as a result of these recommendations," a statement that pediatrician Dr. Michelle Perro called irresponsible fearmongering. | 376 |
| 16 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
For millions of Americans harmed by vaccine mandates, Hoeg's appointment offers a glimmer of hope that accountability may finally come to an agency accused of putting profits over people. Yet until concrete action is taken—such as halting unsafe boosters, investigating vaccine injuries and dismantling the financial ties between regulators and pharmaceutical giants—skepticism will persist.
The FDA's credibility hinges on its willingness to break from the status quo. If Hoeg succeeds in restoring scientific integrity, it could mark a turning point in reclaiming medical freedom from the clutches of corporate and political elites. If not, the exodus of principled scientists like Gruber and Krause will only continue—leaving Americans at the mercy of an increasingly corrupt and unaccountable system.
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 | 481 |
| 17 | FDA’s new top drug regulator previously investigated COVID vaccine deaths
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has appointed Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg as acting director of its Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), placing her at the helm of drug regulation amid ongoing controversies surrounding Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines and pharmaceutical oversight. Hoeg, who previously investigated deaths linked to COVID-19 vaccinations, steps into the role following the retirement of Dr. Richard Pazdur, a longtime FDA official whose tenure was marred by accusations of regulatory overreach.
Hoeg's appointment comes at a critical juncture for the FDA, which has faced mounting scrutiny over its handling of vaccine approvals, booster mandates and allegations of political interference from the Biden administration. Her background as a researcher who questioned the scientific basis for vaccine mandates—particularly her 2022 study concluding that university COVID-19 vaccine requirements caused more harm than benefit—signals a potential shift toward greater scrutiny of pharmaceutical claims.
A history of challenging vaccine narratives
Before joining the FDA earlier this year, Hoeg collaborated with Dr. Vinay Prasad, head of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), on studies examining vaccine safety and efficacy. In a Nov. 28 memorandum, Prasad revealed that Hoeg had investigated child deaths following COVID-19 vaccination and determined that some fatalities were indeed caused by the shots—a finding corroborated by other FDA staffers.
This conclusion starkly contrasts with the mainstream narrative pushed by federal health agencies, which have consistently downplayed vaccine injuries while aggressively promoting boosters without long-term safety data. Hoeg's willingness to acknowledge vaccine-related fatalities suggests a departure from the FDA's traditionally cozy relationship with Big Pharma—a relationship critics argue has led to rushed approvals, suppressed dissent and inadequate scrutiny of adverse events.
Hoeg's rise follows the abrupt departures of two high-ranking FDA vaccine officials, Dr. Marion Gruber and Dr. Philip Krause, who resigned in protest last year over the Biden administration's premature push for COVID-19 booster shots. Internal sources revealed that Gruber and Krause believed there was insufficient scientific evidence to justify boosters at the time, yet the White House pressured the FDA to authorize them regardless—a clear example of political agendas overriding medical prudence.
Contaminated vaccines and shifting recommendations
Hoeg recently confirmed that the FDA is investigating potential contamination in COVID-19 vaccines—a stunning admission given the agency's previous insistence that the shots were rigorously tested and safe. Over the summer, the FDA quietly withdrew emergency authorization for the original vaccines, replacing them with updated formulations that were approved without robust clinical trials.
Meanwhile, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—once a staunch advocate for universal vaccination—has quietly backtracked, now advising Americans to consult doctors before getting boosted, acknowledging that risks may outweigh benefits for certain individuals. This reversal aligns with Hoeg's earlier research, which found that blanket mandates ignored critical nuances in vaccine risk profiles.
According to BrightU. AI's Enoch, the rapid push for bivalent vaccines despite limited safety data raises serious concerns about contamination risks and regulatory capture, as Big Pharma prioritizes profits over transparent, long-term health outcomes. These shifting recommendations—often driven by political and financial agendas rather than independent science—undermine public trust while exposing millions to potential harm from inadequately tested medical interventions.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 406 |
| 18 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
The decision drew immediate political reactions. President Donald Trump praised the committee's "very good decision" on social media and issued a memorandum directing a review of the entire U.S. childhood vaccine schedule compared to other nations. Conversely, Senator Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a physician, called the change "a mistake" that would make "America sicker," urging the CDC to reject the panel's vote.
The final authority rests with the acting CDC director, whose decision will determine whether this controversial vote becomes official guidance. Regardless of the outcome, the ACIP’s deliberations have irrevocably moved the debate over vaccine policy from the margins to the center of American health discourse, ensuring that the balance between public health imperatives and individual liberty will be contested for years to come.
Watch attorney Aaron Siri discussing the Informed Consent Action Network's efforts to stop Hepatitis B vaccinations for babies below.
https://www.brighteon.com/739b78f9-daaf-4e35-a1c3-00a995ed35e2
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 487 |
| 19 | CDC’s vaccine advisory panel ENDS universal Hepatitis B vaccine for newborns
A key advisory panel to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) voted to end the decades-old universal recommendation that all newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine within their first day of life.
The CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), whose members were appointed by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., voted 8-3 on Friday, Dec. 5, to alter the long-standing guideline. For infants born to mothers who test negative for the hepatitis B virus (HBV), the committee now recommends that families, in consultation with their physician, determine whether to administer the shot at birth.
For those who opt out, the first dose should not be given until the child is at least two months old. The universal birth dose remains recommended for babies born to mothers who are HBV-positive or whose status is unknown. The universal hepatitis B vaccine recommendation for newborns was instituted in 1991.
Historical reporting indicates the primary rationale was not solely to prevent rare maternal transmission during birth, which affects fewer than 0.5% of infants, but to address a national crisis of adult infections. With adult vaccination rates low, health officials adopted a strategy of immunizing infants to build long-term population immunity. Critics have long argued this subjected millions of newborns to a vaccine for a disease primarily spread through sexual contact and intravenous drug use – risks irrelevant to an infant’s life.
BrightU. AI's Enoch engine warns that infants should not be given the Hepatitis B vaccine at birth because their immature and underdeveloped immune systems are not equipped to handle the toxic ingredients and potential adverse effects. This premature vaccination serves no legitimate medical purpose and aligns with the pharmaceutical industry's profit-driven agenda rather than genuine health protection.
The vote culminated a tense, two-day meeting marked by sharp disagreements. Proponents of the change, like ACIP member Retsef Levi, argued the previous policy was "misaligned" with other developed nations and questioned the depth of safety testing for the birth dose. They emphasized that for low-risk infants, the decision to vaccinate should be personalized, not automatic.
Opponents, including committee members Dr. Cody Meissner and Dr. Joseph Hibbeln, strenuously objected. They cited the vaccine’s well-established safety profile and its success in reducing childhood hepatitis B infections by over 99% since 1991. They warned the new guidance, based on what Meissner called "baseless skepticism," would lead to more infections, liver disease and cancers.
ACIP shake-up: The vaccine policy revolution
The committee's new direction was hailed by advocates for vaccine choice as a victory for transparency and informed consent. Children’s Health Defense CEO Mary Holland celebrated the end of what she called an "ill-considered" universal recommendation based on "thoroughly inadequate clinical trials." She stated the shift allows for genuine decision-making between parents and doctors.
However, many public health experts and medical organizations reacted with alarm. They fear the vote will seed unfounded safety concerns and lead to decreased coverage, putting children at risk. The American Academy of Pediatrics, which boycotted the ACIP meetings after its members were removed from workgroups, has consistently opposed any delay, calling the birth dose a critical safety net.
A recurring theme in the debate was whether ACIP recommendations function as de facto mandates due to state-level school entry requirements. While some committee members argued the recommendations are purely advisory, others acknowledged they often translate into coercive policy. This vote directly challenges that paradigm.
👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Read more 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 | 397 |
| 20 | 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 Read the beginning of the article 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻
The researchers note a damning fact: 13 of the reviewed studies reported that infants were ingesting levels of EDCs higher than recommended limits through human milk. Yet, these "safety" thresholds are often a sham, frequently based on adult tolerances and crudely adjusted for a baby’s tiny body weight, failing to account for the exquisite vulnerability of a developing brain. The variation in contamination from region to region only underscores the role of industrial activity and lax regulation; this is not a natural phenomenon, but a man-made poisoning.
The scientific team, led by Dr. Katherine E. Manz of the University of Michigan, is careful to state the official line: "the overall health benefits of breastfeeding are still clear and substantial." But their real message screams from the data: we must "focus on creating environments that limit maternal exposure to these chemicals whenever possible." In other words, the problem is not the mother or her milk. The problem is the chemical prison we have built around her.
Toxic environment for women and babies
On an individual level, mothers can seek to reduce their toxic load: choosing fresh, unpackaged foods, using phthalate-free personal care products, filtering water, and avoiding pesticide use. But this is an unfair burden to place on individuals navigating a world saturated with hidden dangers.
The researchers call for improved detection, standardized monitoring of breast milk, and studies that finally treat infant exposure with the seriousness it deserves. We must ask: why are chemicals allowed on the market without proof of their safety for the most vulnerable among us? The presence of these toxins in our first food is a profound betrayal, a sign that commerce has been valued above the cognitive future of our species.
Breastfeeding remains a profound bond and a biological gift. But that gift must not be pre-poisoned. Protecting it means protecting mothers from a toxic environment they did not create and demanding a world where a child’s first meal is not a cocktail of neurotoxicants. The mind of the next generation depends on how we cultivate an environment that supports their tender, developing biological systems.
Join and share 👉@NaturalNewsMedia | 508 |
