An NHS Nurse’s Resignation Letter – “I am utterly dismayed and disheartened by my profession.”
(Tom: This is a letter written by a nurse in the UK but I have seen similar reports from other countries. The problem appears to be widespread. Politics, propaganda and vested interests have supplanted ethics, science and patient care.)
Dear Ms Sutcliffe and all Executive Directors,
I write to you today as a highly experienced nurse with 27 years service, to inform you that when my registration expires on 31.05.2021 I will not be renewing it and therefore I am resigning my registration and leaving the profession.
The reasons for this are many but to summarise I am utterly dismayed and disheartened by my profession and with you as our governing body at the complete lack of integrity that has been displayed since the beginning of the ‘Covid19 Crisis’.
The facts about the reality and truth of this alleged crisis are readily available for anyone to find and investigate for themselves, not least you, a body that should have been doing just this, seeking the truth and advocating for both your members and our patients, past, present and future. We are patient advocates not government puppets.
Under the guise of ‘Covid19’ (which has never been isolated or purified) a massive injustice has been served onto the people of this country and globally. It was and remains our duty as healthcare professionals to learn the truth and to be the voice of these people, yet there has been a deafening silence and a sickening desire to simply comply by you and so many of my colleagues that I can not and will not condone. Sadly in these times, for me to speak out about these injustices and to be a true advocate for my patients has meant me being bullied and ostracised by my colleagues, removed from clinical practice by hospital management who state they are unable to consider any evidence presented to them that questions the official narrative and state that they must simply comply with government ‘guidance’ regardless of any harm they may cause.
When did our profession cease to be based on evidence? When did we become order followers uninterested in the facts on which we base the care we give and devastatingly now on which we deny patients and their families care? To speak out about the many 1000s of people in this country alone that have had treatment and investigations delayed or have been left to die, has meant me living in constant fear of being ‘struck off’ the register for simply doing what I swore to do, speak and act for the benefit of my patients at all times.
I refer below to the first part of our code of conduct.
“Prioritise People
You put the interests of people using or needing nursing or midwifery services first. You make their care and safety your main concern and make sure that their dignity is preserved and their needs recognised, assessed and responded to. You make sure that those receiving care are treated with respect, that their rights are upheld and that any discriminatory attitudes and behaviours towards those receiving care are challenged”.
NMC Code of Conduct
This no longer seems to be at the forefront, of too many of my nursing and medical colleagues, minds and motives. I have witnessed personally and professionally many examples of the above ethos being completely disregarded and have been informed by patients and friends of their own experiences where their holistic needs have been disrespected and disregarded because ‘Covid19’ is a priority over, it seems, every other illness, and, a priority over the emotional, psychological and spiritual well being of both our patients and their families. Any nurse who can deny a child their families being with them when they are sick or dying totally contradicts the entire foundations of our profession, care. As does any nurse who denies end of life patients spending precious time with their loved ones, denying them entry into hospices for fear of ‘Covid’ transmission. Enforcing these restrictions rigidly and brutally, making families say their last goodbyes via the internet or knowing that families have slept in hospital/hospice carparks just so that they can feel close to their loved one at the time of death, because we have removed their right to hold their hands and be with them as they pass. The trauma that this must have caused people is unforgivable and not something I will ever condone and nor should you or anyone in our profession.
The devastating isolation of residents in care homes was, in my opinion, inhumane. It is equally unforgivable and unthinkable that such treatment could ever have been perpetrated by staff who allege to care for these people. The emotional trauma they and their families must have suffered is irreparable and I am ashamed to be associated with a profession that claimed this was to protect them. Holistic care now seems to be a thing of the past as does an individuals right go choose.
Mask exempt patients have been denied treatment in A&E and spoken to in such a manner that any healthcare professional found to be conducting themselves like this should be investigated and disciplined. Yet they are not, despite so much evidence in the public arena. Why are you seemingly supporting the actions of these health care professionals by omission of action, by your silent acquiescence?
Do you condone the behaviour of the nurses on your register that are bullying and coercing patients into wearing masks and to take the test?
What has happened to informed consent?
Where is the informed consent for masks?
Mask do not work and are potentially harmful. You should know this. Yet you remain silent and allow the people of this country to have this imposed on them despite the absence of any scientific supporting evidence. You remain silent while masks are imposed on children. Surely you have considered the devastating effect this will and has already had on their mental health and consequently their physical health?
The shaming of people who are mask exempt is actively encouraged.
Many of those that are mask exempt are too afraid to leave their homes for fear of the judgement and abuse they may receive. As a nurse I have been told by too many mask exempt patients of the distress they have suffered at the hands of others, healthcare professionals included. They have been bullied, shamed and coerced into feeling they must wear a mask even if this would be detrimental to them. Emotionally blackmailed, ” Wearing is Caring”. Disgraceful marketing campaigns displayed everywhere insisting that masks must be worn otherwise entry/service will be denied. Yet these masks are useless.
Bullies in all types of establishments, once again, healthcare settings included, insisting on proof/ disclosure of exemption and denial of the existence or validity of the ‘Equality Act 2010’. There are people that are simply not mentally robust enough to withstand the
discrimination, judgements and verbal assaults, so they either stay home ( meaning further social isolation/exclusion) or succumb to the bullying and wear masks despite it causing them physical or mental distress/ harm. This is totally unacceptable. Yet you remain silent.
Where is the informed consent for tests?
The tests are unforgivably inaccurate. The PCR test was never designed as a diagnostic tool, clearly stated by its inventor Kary Mullis. Surely you are aware of this too? If not why not? It is your responsibility to be aware of the facts. And if you are aware why are you silent? Why are you not challenging the Government policy in order to protect and do no harm?
These inaccurate tests have been used to justify injustices on the people on a scale that is nothing short of criminal.
They have been used to fabricate a health threat and bring this country to its knees through fear.
These tests have been used to label healthy, asymptomatic individuals as a potential threat to the lives of others and to facilitate world governments in rolling out Draconian measures/restrictions on their people, the people they were elected to serve.
So-called asymptomatic cases have never in the history of respiratory disease been the driver for the spread of infection. Rather it is symptomatic people who spread respiratory infections – not asymptomatic people.
Why have you not challenged this?
The measures imposed on us all are responsible for the destruction of lives, livelihoods, mental health and the very essence of what makes us human, our connections to one another, making people, and sickeningly, children, fearful of each other. Dehumanisation.
It has all been ‘marketed’ as protecting the vulnerable.
What about all the other vulnerable members of our society? I am sure I don’t need to list them.
Are their needs no longer important?
The fact that Healthcare professionals across the UK are refusing patients treatment and investigations if they are mask exempt and if they refuse a test and/or being told that they will be removed from treatment and investigation lists if they refuse the test is unethical medical tyranny.
I have personally been party in my professional capacity to my colleagues proudly stating how they have informed patients that if they refuse a test they will be removed from the waiting list. I asked a senior colleague to show me where in the admission process we asked patients for their informed consent for mask wearing. I was told, that patients are
told they must wear a mask and they know if they do not then they will not be admitted to the hospital and therefore they will not get treatment, so they wear a mask. I witnessed all surgical patients being expected to wear surgical masks post surgery and even some Consultant Anaesthetists insisting patients requiring oxygen therapy must wear surgical masks beneath their oxygen delivery masks, without any evidence of efficacy or potential harm this may cause. I saw my own colleagues enforcing this, without any evidence to back up this new practice.
Do you condone this?
Again, if you do not then why are you silent?
Where is the informed consent for the experimental vaccines?
Do you have the supporting evidence that the vaccines are safe and do not cause harm?
In the absence of this evidence why are you not challenging Government roll out of the vaccine?
Why are you not speaking out about the Government proposals to make it a requirement for healthcare professionals to have the vaccine ? Surely consultation is necessary? Why are you not in consultation with the Government on this matter?
I called your helpline and was told that you were not in consultation and would simply follow the guidance of the Government.
Why are you not advocating for your members and the people of the UK?
Are you aware of the many devastating adverse reactions that are being experienced by people who are having this experimental vaccine? Are you aware of the deaths caused by this experimental vaccine?
Why have you not challenged this?
To be a healthcare professional who asks questions now is to be labelled ‘uncaring’ a ‘firebrand’ or a ‘conspiracy theorist’.
This is wrong, we have a duty to question.
We have a duty to be informed, to inform and to provide care that does no harm and is consented to via informed consent.
I assume you agree.
Yet part of our training on radicalisation now includes those people who question the official government narrative on ‘Covid 19’ as having been potentially radicalised into extreme views.
This is wrong. Do you support this?
Are your members that are in support of the vaccine roll out and are administering these vaccines fully aware of all the facts of each vaccine?
Are they providing patients with all these facts? If not why not?
I would suggest that this is in the very least negligence by any party to be not appropriately informed and to not appropriately inform.
Are you aware that Dr Reiner Fuellmich has initiated legal proceedings against the CDC, WHO and the Davos Group for crimes against humanity and violations of the Nuremburg Code?
“Fuellmich and his team present the incorrect PCR test and the order for doctors to describe any comorbidity death as a Covid death – as fraud.
In addition to the incorrect tests and fraudulent death certificates, the “experimental” vaccine itself violates Article 32 of the Geneva Convention…
Under Article 32 of the 1949 Geneva Convention, “mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not required for the medical treatment of a protected person” are prohibited.
According to Article 147, conducting biological experiments on protected persons is a serious breach of the Convention.
The “experimental” vaccine violates all 10 Nuremberg codes – which carry the death penalty for those who try to break these international laws”.
Soren Dreier
09.05.2021
You will of course be aware that a ‘Covid’ death, is a death from any cause within 28 days of a positive test.
A test that is inaccurate and deaths whose primary (actual) cause could have been anything, yet the people of the UK have had their businesses, lives and health destroyed based on these figures.
And still you remain silent.
Below is an article written by
Dr Mike Yeadon
May 10, 2021
Why are we being lied to about Covid? There’s no good reason
BE in no doubt, among the reasons that voices and opinions like mine are never heard in the main media is extreme censorship more suited to China than a liberal democracy. Please allow me to illustrate with an example close to my heart why it is high time for us to change our response.
Ivermectin is one of the WHO’s ‘essential drugs’ which all countries should have access to. It’s very cheap as its patent has long expired; it’s one of the most-used drugs in world history; it’s extraordinarily safe; it is often life-saving against parasitic infections. It is also one of the best-established pharmaceutical treatments for Covid-19, showing benefit in every stage of the disease, in multiple independent clinical trials of varying quality. On
January 3, 2021, Dr Tess Lawrie attempted to alert the Prime Minister to the potential of Ivermectin. Her video was pulled from YouTube within hours of posting, though it survives on Vimeo. The paper by the FLCCC group of US intensivists (whose survival rates for severe Covid-19 are best in class) that was the inspiration for Dr Lawrie’s work was accepted after extensive open peer review (including two career employees of the FDA) and ‘provisionally accepted’ by the ‘open science’ journal Frontiers in Pharmacology. The screenshot of the abstract tweeted by Clare Craig attracted more than 100,000 views. Then, mysteriously, it was rejected and pulled by the Frontiers editor in chief. It is still in cached form though the Ministry of Truth has been at work and placed it in a memory hole, so no trace survives on Frontiers’ own website.
Intended for a Special Issue on ‘repurposed drugs’ for Covid-19, various guest editors were so incensed at this behaviour that they resigned in protest. They concluded that ‘these unfortunate events constitute gross editorial misconduct by Frontiers.’ Fortunately this major paper is now published by the American Journal of Therapeutics and can be read below.
This nevertheless successfully delayed by nearly six months its circulation to leading public health bodies starting mid-November. A copy was sent to Sir Jeremy Farrar (boss of the Wellcome Trust and member of Sage) who passed it on to Professor Peter Horby (also on Sage), amongst others, on November 18, 2020. So the efficacy of Ivermectin must be well known to the Government’s advisers, but they have done nothing about it. Likewise, the formal and rigorous meta-analysis performed by Dr Tess Lawrie’s team at the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd has been communicated to Matt Hancock, but without reply.
I am telling you about this, because all that governments, their scientific advisers, big Pharma and regulatory agencies will tell you is that Ivermectin doesn’t work in Covid-19. They are lying. I am inviting any of them to sue me, but they won’t, for I would win easily.
If Ivermectin was more widely used, there’d be no need for vaccines.
To date, despite the brains, expertise and stature of those scientists questioning the official Covid-19 narrative, as a group they have quite patently been ineffective. And this is unlikely to change while, as polite professionals, they won’t say: ‘This is corruption and they’re lying deliberately to scare the people.’ Furthermore, unwittingly, they have been playing the parts intended by those, including our own Government and their advisers, who control the global Covid narrative.
They judged correctly that we polite Brits wouldn’t accuse them of outright lying, even though they often do exactly that. Boris Johnson’s recent piece to camera, telling us that it was lockdown and not vaccination which reduced cases and deaths, is a case in point.
Yet it’s certain this isn’t true, and also certain he and his advisers know it isn’t true.
The government’s advisers are not fools. Some may be, but the upper echelons are very smart. They believe polite people won’t say ‘not only are you lying but you’re doing it in concert with other, non-democratic actors’, because that’s conspiracy theory stuff, right? Powerful people never use their influence to benefit their interests, do they? Hmm. The only thing that’s different is scale and the power their public positions give them. Other than that, they’re just another a bunch of grubby criminals, ripping off unsuspecting people.
Truth is our most powerful tool. And that truth is that we’re being lied to.
The truth also, however hard it is to believe it, is that there is unequivocal and clear evidence of planning and co-ordination. Not to face this fact is to have your head in the sand. Where it’s leading is easy to discern, once people are willing to lift their internal censoring and look objectively at the evidence.
First, though, the lies. It’s abundantly clear now that pretty much everything that the public has been told and continues to be told is between untrue and downright lies.
I offer as a shortlist that:
-PCR mass testing reasonably reliably distinguishes infected and infectious people from others;
-that masks reduce transmission of respiratory viruses;
-that transmission of infection in the absence of symptoms is an important contribution to epidemic spreading;
-that lockdowns as executed reduce hospitalisation and deaths;
-that no matter how small the remaining susceptible population and no matter that virtually no people who, if infected, might die remain unvaccinated, the position is perilous;
-that no pharmaceutical treatments are available;
-that variants are different enough to warrant border closures and require new vaccines; -that the gene-based vaccines are safe and effective;
-that ‘vaccine passports’ will increase safety while having no material impacts on freedom of choice in a liberal democracy.
It is impossible to believe that intelligent, well-connected and well-briefed senior advisers to governments don’t know that almost all, if not all, of the above are simply not true.
It is not a matter of opinion in almost all cases. These statements, which have been explicitly stated and used in justification for the extraordinary interferences in the lives of citizens in democratic countries, are mostly demonstrably wrong, as defined by there being multiple well-conducted, peer-reviewed studies showing the contrary.
To continue with the pretence that there’s scientific uncertainty, and it is therefore understandable that an adviser might offer nuanced advice, is wrong and misleading. This perhaps is where the mainstream media has been most culpable.
It is not reasonable to expect typical viewers and readers of speeches, articles and editorials – whether by scientist sceptics or by critical commentators – to appreciate that, when we point out that what’s happening doesn’t make sense, we mean ‘the executive is knowingly and deliberately harming the country and its citizens’. We are mostly not saying this, leaving it to the audience to sum up for themselves. But in my view the audience are
reluctant to do this. They want to believe in government and perhaps above all they want a quiet life. To disbelieve is so much harder than to believe.
So in recent weeks I’ve made a clear decision no longer merely to point out what it is that governments and their advisers and spokespersons around the world are doing is wrong, scientifically unjustified and harmful, but to join the dots in an attempt to provide potential explanations of why they’re doing these things.
It is time for all Doubting Thomases to take a lead and state unambiguously that ‘government and its advisers are telling us things that are manifestly untrue and maintaining restrictive, damaging measures for which there’s no justification’. By not doing so they are playing into the hands of those who I firmly believe are engaged in a determined series of crimes against humanity.
Why do I say this? Simply because there is no benign interpretation of the acts of commission and omission consistently imposed upon us and no explanation of the statements which are flatly wrong other than an intention to deceive the population.
Looking around us now, we see that the prevalence of the virus in the community is effectively zero. Note that the authorities have never conceded and determined the operational false positive rate of PCR mass testing. Subtracting any reasonable estimate of oFPR and we observe no cases at all. This was true for months as indicated by the positive rate in lateral flow tests.
No variant of the virus differs by more than 0.3 per cent from the original sequence, and numerous academic immunologists have stated strongly that there is no possibility that booster/top-up/variant vaccines are required. Yet we get daily ‘fear porn’ on this topic. The European Parliament just voted through the basic outlines of a vaccine passport system. It’s a racing certainty that the UK will soon follow.
Mask regulations continue in force and many psychologists believe some people are so traumatised that they will continue to wear them indefinitely, even though they are useless.
The economy and currency may already be damaged beyond repair. Yet there’s another six weeks minimum until the last restrictions are scheduled to be lifted.
Almost no one is dying ‘with’ Covid-19 now, and the attribution methodology overestimates this anyway. Yet hospitals and primary health care remain far less accessible than they should be, inevitably resulting in causing or storing up avoidable non-Covid-19 deaths, to say nothing of the suffering and misery of the millions awaiting treatments for painful and worrying illnesses.
Most terrifyingly, it appears we will soon be required to possess VaxPass apps if we wish to continue to access our lives.
This system can run effectively only if everyone is vaccinated. This is a monstrous concept, because it is known that all four vaccines in use in Europe contain a fatal design flaw: they cause the fusogenic, pro coagulation spike protein to be expressed wherever the vaccine is taken up. In some people, especially those so young that they’re at no measurable risk of death if infected by the virus, vaccination results in their deaths from thromboembolic events. Permitting the inexpert population to walk into this trap is
unconscionable: there will be thousands of further vaccine-induced deaths of young people.
I invite thoughtful people to ask that difficult question: ‘Why are they doing this?’
It is my deduction and conclusion that the only motivation that fits all the observations is the intention to ‘herd’ every citizen into a VaxPass system. This is a completely novel system. Never before have all individuals been represented in a single, interoperable database as a unique digital ID, accompanied by an editable health-related field. Whoever controls that database, and the algorithms which govern what it permits and denies, has literally totalitarian control of the entire population. There is no personal threshold crossing or transaction which doesn’t fall to those operating that system.
At the very least, the public deserves to be warned that this is coming. I do not expect conventional judicial processes to protect us in any way. Every institution has already failed the people of the UK.
Given that numerous government decisions (as instructed by Sage) have arguably already led to many avoidable deaths, I think it’s only reasonable to consider what the prize is that leads intelligent people to do the things they’ve done and continue to peddle.
The possible answers to this question are all bad. I cannot conceive of a situation where we will shortly be permitted to resume our normal lives. There is not the slightest hint of that in any case.
I have found it impossible to come up with a benign interpretation of the events. No one works as carefully and for so long as evidently has been done, across the world, only suddenly to stop. Why?I’ve asked hundreds of people and not a single one has (a) pointed out where my logic fails or (b) come up with a benign interpretation.
My own conviction is that the purpose is, at minimum, to establish a system of totalitarian control which will mean the extinguishing of liberal democracy.
It almost doesn’t matter what the next steps might be, but they could, for example, have been sold to numerous people as the only solution to ‘anthropogenic global warming’: the amount of resources we’ll be permitted to produce and consume will be set by some unseen controllers. It is possible they could go a step further than this, and see reducing population or depopulation as another route to solving the perceived problem of AGW.
Consider the elimination of the class of the inquiring journalist, the censorship of all mass media. The relentless smearing and exclusion of those who ask too many awkward questions. The astonishing waste of public money, which apparently the foreign exchange markets are unperturbed about. The destruction of SMEs which provide a third of all jobs and a substantial proportion of tax revenues. The relentless lying. The misinformation. The use of psychological operations to frighten and subdue. The utter disregard for those vaccinated with ‘vaccines’ that are way too unsafe for their role. The bending past illegality of the use of incorrect information to persuade pregnant women to get vaccinated. The numerous breaches of the Nuremberg Code, since no one is being explicitly told that these vaccines are experimental and so recipients are being unwittingly enrolled in an unprecedentedly large and unmonitored Phase 3 clinical trial. The announcement that, soon, our minor children are to be vaccinated.
Add in the ‘top-up vaccines’. They’re not vaccines. Whoever has been vaccinated has no need of further vaccination. Immunology is perhaps my strongest suit, so I am certain of this. Is it impossible that in those one billion vials which has already told us its manufacturing, there is some gene sequence which will instigate one of a few dozen pathologies, with onset times ranging from near-immediate to a short number of years? I assure you, biotechnology has awesome power, and it can be used for good or ill.
I think I’ve made a decent case that what governments and their advisers have done easily amounts to conspiracy. The same ‘mistakes’ have been made everywhere. The same tricks and manipulation. Those who claim this is all coincidence are coincidence theorists.
I argue that unless this is pointed out to the public before any possible ‘vaccine passports’ system is established, we’ve all collectively failed to discharge our duties to be courageous, to take chances, to risk looking foolish: I am absolutely committed to continuing to speak out for as long as I have breath in my body”.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ClareCraigPath/status/1366680939368243203
“Dr Mike Yeadon has a degree in biochemistry and toxicology and a research-based PhD in respiratory pharmacology. He has spent over 30 years leading new medicines research in some of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, leaving Pfizer in 2011 as Vice President & Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory. That was the most senior research position in this field in Pfizer. Since leaving Pfizer, Dr Yeadon has founded his own biotech company, Ziarco, which was sold to the worlds biggest drug company, Novartis, in 2017”
I ask you, are you aware of Ivermectin and the work of Dr Tess Lawrie? If not why not?
Why are you not pressuring the Government to at the very least consider this?
Why are you not questioning government policy and demanding their evidence to support their policies?
Instead through your silence you have and continue to allow them to aggressively enforce, social distancing, social isolation, closure of businesses and places of spiritual practice, ineffective and harmful masks, hand sanitiser and the roll out on an uninformed public of experimental vaccines?
They trust us and you are failing them through your silence and unquestioning complicity.
Dr Mike Yeadon and Dr Tess Lawrie are not alone in questioning what is happening yet all and anyone that does question are aggressively censored. Their work removed and labelled dangerous misinformation. All debate and reasonable discussion immediately quashed.
Do you not stop to wonder why? You should. You have a moral and professional responsibility to do so.
In my opinion anyone now that knows that something is very wrong with what we are being told, even merely suspects something is very wrong and does nothing, remains silent, condoning these injustices and encourages the vilification or actively vilifies or attempts to silence those speaking for truth and justice is morally bankrupt. So, do what you will or won’t with this letter but now you are in possession of it and if you choose to ignore the issues presented then you can no longer claim nescience but are being wilfully ignorant.
It is with immense sadness that I end my nursing career but I will not be a part of these crimes against humanity and against the patients I/we should be protecting and I do not consent or wish to be governed by a body that silently complies with Government tyranny and bases their judgement as to whether I am fit to practice as a nurse on my levels of compliance or in my case, non- compliance with tyranny.
I echo Dr Mike Yeadon in saying I will fight for truth, freedom, medical freedom and the health, rights and freedoms of others so long as I have breath in my body.
Yours sincerely
(Sent by email)
Emma
Why Life Jackets Should Be Mandatory!
ICU Doctor Describes Nightmarish COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries In Letters To FDA, CDC, Lawyer Says Agencies Haven’t Replied
Dr. Patricia Lee, M.D., an ICU doctor based in California, issued a shocking letter to the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claiming she has observed more vaccine injuries from the controversial COVID-19 vaccines than she has in the last 20 years working as a doctor.
In the letter, she describes observing “entirely healthy individuals suffering serious, often fatal, injuries,” her attorneys noted in a follow-up email. These include “transverse myelitis, resulting in quadriplegia, pneumocystis pneumonia, multi-system organ failure, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, post partum hemorrhagic shock and septic chock, and disseminated CMV and CMV viremia.”
“I can no longer silently accept the serious harm being caused by the Covid-19 vaccines,” Dr. Lee concluded. “It is my sincere hope that the reaction to this letter will not be to focus on me, but rather to focus on addressing the serious safety issues with these products that, without doubt, you have either missed or are choosing to ignore.”
Since the issuing of the original letter, her attorneys have sent another letter to the CDC and FDA saying that the agencies’ “failure to respond is highly concerning,” adding that they are seeking a response so they can “arrange a discussion and information gathering session between Dr. Lee and the appropriate representatives at the CDC and FDA.”
Medication Equals Health Is Nuts!
Information to Help with Medical-Product Mandate Exemptions and More
A collection of valuable information full of important points, including many resources (such as example exemption letters, other documents, and much more) to help with potential exemptions from employment, school, and maybe even military, mandates. The purpose here is to educate and give you tools to help you construct strong arguments and presentations in opposition of being pushed (manipulated/coerced) to take a pharma product you may not be comfortable taking or the use of which you do not freely give true informed-consent.
https://truthhealthfreedom.substack.com/p/information-to-help-with-medical
Australian Covid Deaths Commorbidities
When you consider there are a reported thousand people a week committing suicide due to the stress imposed by the lockdowns this makes no sense at all.
The Error at the Base of the Nebulized Peroxide Controversy
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
The Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America and the media are now warning against using nebulized hydrogen peroxide for respiratory viruses such as SARS-CoV-2
There is absolutely zero evidence that supports the idea that properly diluted hydrogen peroxide nebulization is hazardous. On the contrary, several health benefits have been demonstrated, both clinically and anecdotally
Recent research shows COVID-positive patients who irrigated their sinuses with a saline-iodine solution were 19 times less likely to be hospitalized for COVID-19 than the national rate
Another recent paper recommends nebulizing 1.5% hydrogen peroxide twice daily as an at-home treatment for COVID-19, and by hospitalized patients who do not yet require intensive care
Nebulizing with normal saline, hypertonic 3% saline, hydrogen peroxide and iodine have all been shown to safely improve respiratory infections. I recommend diluting peroxide with normal saline for a 0.1% concentration, and adding one drop of Lugol’s iodine
September 22, 2021, The Washington Post published an article citing warnings from the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America (AAFA),1 which triggered a frenzy of media articles warning against using nebulized hydrogen peroxide for respiratory viruses such as SARS-CoV-2.
“A leading asthma patient group has issued a warning against an unproven coronavirus treatment circulating on social media that is leading some people to post videos of themselves breathing in hydrogen peroxide through a nebulizer.
The Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America called the action ‘concerning and dangerous’ in a Tuesday blog post,2 emphasizing that it will neither treat nor prevent the virus and is harmful to the lungs. ‘DO NOT put hydrogen peroxide into your nebulizer and breathe it in. This is dangerous!’ the foundation wrote.”3
According to the AAFA,4 “Hydrogen peroxide can be used as a cleaner and stain remover, and can cause tissue damage if you swallow it or breathe it in.” In their blog,5 the AAFA also cites the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, which notes that:6
“Hydrogen peroxide can be toxic if ingested, inhaled, or by contact with the skin or eyes. Inhalation of household strength hydrogen peroxide (3%) can cause respiratory irritation. Exposure to household strength hydrogen. peroxide can cause mild ocular irritation. Inhalation of vapors from concentrated (higher than 10%) solutions may result in severe pulmonary irritation.”
Front Group Blames Me for Peroxide ‘Misinformation’
According to The Washington Post, the Great Reset front group known as the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) has identified me as the source and driver behind the trend to nebulize hydrogen peroxide as an antiviral prevention and treatment for respiratory viruses:7
“In April 2020, Mercola posted a video saying ‘hydrogen peroxide treatment can successfully treat most viral respiratory illnesses, including coronavirus,’ according to the advocacy group Center for Countering Digital Hate …
Imran Ahmed, chief executive of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, said he blames Mercola for advancing hydrogen peroxide as a coronavirus treatment.
He called hydrogen peroxide ‘a really volatile chemical and a bleaching agent,’ and expressed concern that even saline-diluted solutions could be harmful if used instead of legitimate treatments or vaccines.
‘This is not just about the primary effect of telling people that hydrogen peroxide can affect covid. It means people will reject other therapies when they are in trouble,’ Ahmed said. ‘It means people get sick and, rather than getting the treatment they need, they will start looking on Amazon for a nebulizer and hydrogen peroxide.’”
What the ‘Experts’ Are Missing
There’s just one really major problem with this suppression attempt, and that is that they’re assuming people aren’t following instructions. From the get-go, my instructions have been quite clear.
It is really important to dilute the hydrogen peroxide with saline to get a 0.1% solution, as indicated in the chart below; 99.9% of what you’re inhaling is literally harmless saline, not peroxide. As I’ll discuss further below, saline may even have distinct health benefits of its own. The Washington Post, to their credit, did include my response to their inquiry for this story:8
“In an email, Mercola said: ‘The solution you are referring to is primarily saline, with highly diluted hydrogen peroxide. It is important to ensure that people use saline to dilute the hydrogen peroxide to 0.1%; 30X lower concentration than the standard peroxide found at the local pharmacy. High concentrations of hydrogen peroxide should not be used.’”
To the reporter’s shame, he did NOT include any of the scientific references I included in my response. He’d asked if I was “aware of any peer-reviewed research supporting the use of nebulized hydrogen peroxide to treat COVID” and I sent him five scientific papers discussing the use of saline with hydrogen peroxide mixtures. He didn’t even mention the existence of these studies, so I’ll review them here.
Saline-Iodine Irrigation Reduces Hospitalization by 1,900%
The first paper, posted on the preprint server medRxiv in mid-August 2021, titled “Rapid Initiation of Nasal Saline Irrigation: Hospitalizations in COVID-19 Patients Randomized to Alkalinization or Povidone-Iodine Compared to a National Dataset,”9 sought to determine whether irrigating the nasal passages within 24 hours of a positive PCR test would reduce the risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 among patients over the age of 55.
Patients were randomly assigned to irrigate their nasal passages with one of two regimens. One used a mixture of 2.5 milliliters of 10% povidone-iodine (an antimicrobial) and standard saline. The other used a mixture of saline with half a teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate (an alkalizer).
All irrigated their nasal passages twice a day for 14 days. The findings were then compared to patient outcomes found in a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention database. According to the authors:
“Of 79 patients assigned to nasal irrigation … 0/37 assigned to povidone-iodine and 1/42 patients in the alkalinization group had a COVID-19 related hospitalization (1.26%) …
There were no statistical differences in outcomes by irrigation unit used, of those with symptoms, resolution was more likely in the povidone-iodine group (19/25) than the alkalinization group (15/33 …).
Conclusion: Patients who initiated isotonic saline nasal irrigation after a positive COVID-19 PCR test were 19 times less likely to be hospitalized than the national rate. Further research is required to determine if adding povidone-iodine to irrigation reduces morbidity and mortality of SARS-CoV-2 infection.”
Why did the reporter not bother to include this extremely timely paper? Was it because it shows simple saline irrigation reduces your risk of hospitalization with COVID-19 by 1,900%?
Peroxide Reduces Hospitalization Rate and Complications
The second paper The Washington Post ignored was published in April 2020. This paper, “Might Hydrogen Peroxide Reduce the Hospitalization Rate and Complications of SARS-CoV-2 Infection?” noted:10
“The efficient inactivation of coronaviruses (eg, SARS and MERS) on inanimate surfaces using hydrogen peroxide (H2O2 0.5% for 1 minute) was assessed by Kampf et al.
Based on their findings, and after reviewing the current literature concerning hydrogen peroxide, we propose that hydrogen peroxide, as an antiseptic agent, could play a pivotal role in reducing the hospitalization rate and COVID-19-related complications.
The antiseptic efficacy of hydrogen peroxide 3% against SARSCoV-2 on oral and nasal mucosa can be reasonably hypothesized. The antiseptic action is due not only to the known oxidizing and mechanical removal properties of hydrogen peroxide but also to the induction of the innate antiviral inflammatory response by overexpression of Toll-like receptor 3 (TLR3).
Thus, the overall progression of the infection from the upper to the lower respiratory tract can be reduced.
Therefore, we advise an off-label use of H2O2 3% and 1.5 % (10 volumes) by oral and nasal washing respectively, performed immediately after the onset of the first symptoms and the presumptive diagnosis of COVID-19 and during the illness in home quarantine or by hospitalized patients not requiring intensive care.
We propose a regimen of gargling 3 times per day for disinfection of the oral cavity and nasal washes with a nebulizer twice daily (due to a greater sensitivity of the nasal mucosa).”
The authors stress the safety of hydrogen peroxide on mucous membranes, noting that it is frequently used in otolaryngology (ear, nose and throat medicine). They also present evidence showing no tissue damage is incurred in the mucous membranes after gargling with 3% peroxide for six months.
“In our opinion, the effectiveness of this regimen will be verified through a significant reduction of the rate of hospitalization and respiratory complications in patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 with and without mild-to-moderate symptoms,” the authors said.11
So, we have one study showing nasal irrigation with saline dramatically reduces your chances of coming down with severe COVID-19, and another paper recommending the use of 1.5% to 3% hydrogen peroxide for gargling and nasal irrigation at first symptoms, and the safety thereof. But what about INHALING saline and hydrogen peroxide? Does inhalation suddenly make these two ingredients dangerous?
Saline Nebulization Helps Clear Airway Infections
Starting with saline, inhaling nebulized saline is certainly not a health hazard. Quite the contrary. In February 2020, researchers found nebulizing normal saline may actually be safe and effective treatment for acute viral bronchiolitis (a viral infection in the small airways of your lungs).12
In clinical trials that evaluate nebulized drugs, saline is typically used as a placebo, but a systematic review and meta-analysis concluded it produced consistent clinical improvements, and should be considered an active treatment for this condition.
An even earlier double-blind study,13 published in 2007, assessed the effectiveness of nebulized hypertonic saline in the treatment of viral bronchiolitis in infants. Here, they found that nebulizing with 3% hypertonic saline, in conjunction with standard therapy, reduced the length of hospital stays by 26% in infants with moderately severe infection, compared to nebulizing with standard saline (0.9% sodium content).
Hypertonic saline, which has a higher salt content than normal saline, is a known mucolytic, meaning mucus thinner.14 Salt attracts water. When inhaled, the salt attracts water, thereby thinning any mucus lodged in your airways. This makes the mucus easier to expel when you cough. According to the authors:15
“The treatment was well tolerated, with no adverse effects attributable to the use of HS [hypertonic saline]. The use of nebulized 3% HS is a safe, inexpensive, and effective treatment for infants hospitalized with moderately severe viral bronchiolitis.”
A similar study but done on adults with COPD was published in October 2017 in the CHEST Journal.16 Here, the drug albuterol was mixed with either hypertonic saline or standard saline. The hypertonic saline mix was more effective and provided greater relief than normal saline, although both had a beneficial impact.
In addition to that, 1.5% hypertonic saline has also been shown to be 100% effective in blocking SARS-CoV-2 replication, without any side effects.17,18 Its mechanism of action is surprisingly simple: When you breathe it in, the extra salt forces your cells to expend ATP to rebalance their electrolyte gradient. Viruses also need ATP to replicate, so by using up ATP, the cells have far less ATP left for viral replication.
Why Didn’t WaPo Review the Science?
The Washington Post ignored all of these studies as well, and opted to cite the CCDH’s concerns instead. According to Ahmed, “even saline-diluted solutions could be harmful if used instead of legitimate treatments or vaccines.” I’d like Ahmed to actually name a “legitimate” early at-home treatment.
To this day, not a single early treatment has actually been green-lighted by public health authorities. Patients are simply told to do nothing, wait at home until they are unable breathe, and then go to the hospital. This is patient abandonment and reprehensible criminal medical negligence, plain and simple.
To dissuade patients from nebulizing with saline at first signs of respiratory infection is unbelievably ignorant, considering how safe it is. And again, my recommendations have always been to dilute the hydrogen peroxide to a 0.1% solution, which means you’re inhaling 99.9% saline. That said, what do we know about nebulizing peroxide? Is there anything to warrant concern?
Peroxide Nebulization and COVID Resolution
For this, let’s turn to the documentation from two medical doctors who have used nebulized peroxide extensively in their practices. In a May 10, 2021, Orthomolecular Medicine press release,19 Dr. Thomas E. Levy — board-certified in internal medicine and cardiology — discussed the use of this treatment for COVID-19 specifically.
During a trip to Colombia, he’d met a family friend who was coming down with what appeared to be a common cold, or possibly influenza. Having treated his own chronic sinus problem with nebulized peroxide for nearly a year, he just so happened to have all the necessary paraphernalia with him.
After nebulizing with straight over-the-counter 3% hydrogen peroxide for 15 minutes, she was feeling significantly better. The treatment was repeated the following day, and the day after that, “she was completely well.” It is important to note that Dr. Levy and I disagree on the concentration to use. He prefers 3% and I believe lower concentrations of 0.1% are more appropriate.
When Levy left Colombia, he let her keep the nebulizer, and some three months later, COVID-19 emerged as a pandemic. During 2020, Levy’s Colombian friend ended up treating 20 individuals with COVID-19 infections (seven of them had been tested and tested positive), most of whom were “significantly ill” with labored breathing by the time they saw her.
All of them significantly improved after nebulizing with 3% hydrogen peroxide for 30 minutes three times a day for two days, followed by a 50/50 peroxide-saline mixture three times a day for three days.
“At the end of five days, all 20 patients appeared to have achieved complete clinical cures,” Levy said. Levy has in fact written an entire book on peroxide nebulization called “Rapid Virus Recovery,” which you can download for free from MedFox Publishing.
More Evidence Supporting Peroxide Nebulization
Dr. David Brownstein, along with six other co-authors, has also published an informative case history on nebulized peroxide for COVID-19. This case report paper, titled “A Novel Approach to Treating COVID-19 Using Nutritional and Oxidative Therapies” was published in the journal Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law, in July 2020.20 You can download the PDF here.
Is nebulized peroxide diluted with saline, with or without iodine, dangerous? No. There’s no evidence to suggest there’s a danger to this protocol, unless you radically violate recommendations on dilution.
Of the 107 confirmed COVID-19 patients treated, 91 (85%) used nebulized peroxide diluted with normal saline, plus Lugol’s iodine. As explained in Brownstein’s paper:
“A solution of 250 cc of normal saline was mixed with 3 cc of 3% hydrogen peroxide providing a final concentration of 0.04% hydrogen peroxide … Additionally, 1 cc of magnesium chloride (200 mg/ml) was added to the 250 cc saline/hydrogen peroxide bag. (This was mixed in the office for the patients.)
Patients were instructed to nebulize 3 cc of the mixture three times per day or more often if there were breathing problems. Usually one or two nebulizer treatments were reported to improve breathing problems.
A total of 91 COVID-19 subjects (85%) utilized the nebulized solution. They reported no adverse effects. We have been using nebulized saline/hydrogen peroxide at this concentration for over two decades in his practice.
Hydrogen peroxide is continually produced in the human body with substantial amounts produced in the mitochondria. Every cell in the body is exposed to some level of hydrogen peroxide.
The lungs are known to produce hydrogen peroxide. Nebulized hydrogen peroxide has been shown to have antiviral activities. Hydrogen peroxide can activate lymphocytes which are known to be depleted in COVID-19.”
Iodine Irrigation for COVID-19
In an August 18, 2021, fully referenced preprint paper,21 Leo Goldstein also reviews the scientific literature supporting gargling and nasal irrigation with povidone-iodine (PVP-I). He points out that:
“PVP-I has been used for decades as a broad-spectrum antiseptic in dentistry and otolaryngology, so its use for COVID-19 is not re-purposing. PVP-I has been widely used in India to prevent nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 … Gargling with PVP-I was recommended by Japan’s Ministry of since the 2009 pandemic flu, and by the government of China since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.”
Goldstein also cites clinical trials showing PVP-I nebulization prevented hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19 by as much as 90%.
“Application of 0.5%-1.0% PVP-I solution to the nasal cavity, oral cavity, nasopharynx, and oropharynx, 2-4 times per day, is an excellent prophylaxis and adjuvant treatment of early COVID-19,” Goldstein writes, adding:
“Its use would also prevent or sharply decrease transmission of the virus from contagious persons. Povidone-Iodine (PVP-I) is available over the counter. This is the conclusion from the available literature, including physicians’ recommendations.”
Mexico City Case Study
Lastly, we also have a case series22 from Mexico City, where nebulized hydrogen peroxide was safely used with good effects. As detailed in the abstract:
“Knowledge of the antiseptic effects of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) dates back to the late 19th century, and its mechanisms of action has been amply described. Globally, many physicians have reported using H2O2 successfully, in different modalities, against COVID-19.
Given its anti-infective and oxygenating properties, hydrogen peroxide may offer prophylactic and therapeutic applications for responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.
We report a consecutive case series of twenty-three COVID-19 patients … who had been diagnosed by their primary care physician … and twenty-eight caregivers in the Mexico City Metropolitan Area who received a complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) telemedicine treatment with H2O2 taken by mouth (PO, at a concentration of 0.06%), oral rinse (mouthwash, 1.5%), and/or nebulization (0.2%) …
The patients mainly recovered well, reporting feeling ‘completely better’ at 9.5 days on average. Two (9%) were hospitalized prior to joining the study, and one did not fully recover … Given its low cost and medical potential and considering its relative safety if used properly, we suggest that randomized controlled trials should be conducted.”
Final Verdict
So, is nebulized peroxide diluted with saline, with or without iodine, dangerous? No. There’s no evidence to suggest there’s a danger to this protocol, unless you radically violate recommendations on dilution. Even nebulization with 3 or 7% hydrogen peroxide appears to be quite safe, but it would be a very serious hazard to use peroxide of greater concentrations.
Food grade peroxide up to 35% concentration can be obtained and should NEVER be used topically or internally. It MUST be diluted or severe injury can occur. Your safest bet is to use 3% food grade peroxide and dilute it as indicated in the chart provided above, so you end up with a solution of 0.1%.
As for nebulizing saline, be it normal 0.9% saline or hypertonic 3% or even 7% saline, there’s virtually no risk to this at all. It is important to note that even infants have safely nebulized 3% hypertonic saline in clinical studies, with no adverse effects. So, I stand by my recommendation to use nebulized peroxide for any suspected respiratory infection, and the earlier you start, the better.
There is no danger in doing it every day if you’re frequently exposed, and likely there are additional health benefits, as even at a 0.1% solution, it will rapidly raise your blood oxygen level. It may also improve your bowel movements, which may be a result of eliminating respiratory pathogens that were having negative impact on your microbiome.
From: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/10/12/nebulized-peroxide-controversy.aspx
A Friend Wrote:
I was communicating to a friend and it suddenly occurred to me that we grasp a computer getting a virus as a hideous back door unwanted intrusion, and a body getting a virus and once again a hideous back door unwanted intrusion, but it never really had occurred to me before that our culture now has a virus, not the covid virus that affects the body of people, the insidious control mechanism is like a virus that has insidiously by passed the awareness of the average intelligent person.
