
More Truth And Sanity From The Man In The Street Than Our Government!

Tom's Blog on Life and Livingness
Doctor Truth Bombs A Vaccine Propaganda Commercial In Italy
I applaud and respect those who have the courage to step up and tell the truth against a system devoted to lying.
The Victorian Mental Health Act is under review and it currently allows for children to be electroshocked, restrained, secluded and forcibly drugged without the need for any parental consent. This law removes parental and patient rights and it is proposed that when drafted, the bill will not released to the public for input and is instead sent straight to Parliament for voting on.
he Victorian Mental Health Act is under review and it currently allows for children to be electroshocked, restrained, secluded and forcibly drugged without the need for any parental consent. This law removes parental and patient rights and it is proposed that when drafted, the bill will not released to the public for input and is instead sent straight to Parliament for voting on.
Electroshock (ECT) is the application of hundreds of volts of electricity to the head to induce a grand mal seizure, (convulsion). It can cause brain damage, memory loss and even death.
So torturous is ECT that one Australian woman forced to undergo electroshock, close to 100 times against her will, said she has had security guards wheel her down to the treatment room holding her down so she didn’t escape. “I felt like I was being wheeled down to the gas chamber really,” she said. She would even eat from stashed food to avoid the general anaesthetic and when staff found her food, she resorted to eating grass to avoid the electroshock.
16 years ago, the World Health Organisation stated, “There are no indications for the use of ECT on minors, and hence this should be prohibited through legislation.”
Despite this clear directive, the current Victorian Mental Health Act still allows children under 18 to be able to consent to electroshock if deemed to have the “capacity to give informed consent.”
Children under 18 are not allowed to drink, drive unsupervised or vote, but they can choose such drastic treatment. And worse still, parental approval is not needed at any stage, including when the case goes before the Mental Health Tribunal for final approval. Electroshock can also be given to involuntarily detained children, again without any parental consent.
Instead of banning restraint, it is proposed to phase it out within 10 years. Former Austin Hospital Director of Mental Health Dr. Richard Newton, said he would estimate one death each year in Victoria in circumstances involving restraint, forced sedation and seclusion. There were a staggering 170 episodes of bodily restraint (mechanical and physical) on children aged 0-12 in 2019/20.
CCHR has written the enclosed Fact Sheet on the key problem area and there is further information on our website: cchr victoria.org.au
Submissions (feedback) close on 1 August 2021. Please as a matter of urgency, help protect our children by sending a submission to mhwa@health.vic.gov.au In your submission you need to say that you are commenting on “Treatment, care and support.” Please demand the draft law is made available for public comment in your submission.
Please also let your colleagues and others know so they too can take action. Thank you for all you are doing to protect our children.
Kind Regards
Kim Cullen
Citizens Committee on Human Rights Victoria
Nutrition linked to Covid outcomes. Most severely and critically ill patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 are at nutrition risk. The patients with higher nutrition risk have worse outcome and require nutrition therapy.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32613660/
Well the cat really is out of the bag with this one! How in the name of heaven are they going to be able to continue the lockdown scam now that this is admitted? Of course anyone who listened to Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, say it cannot detect infection, knew all along that number of cases bases on the PCR test was a complete lie. How will the Premiers tackle this one?
Vaccine apologists and big pHarma shills will say we are getting smarter and faster with more modern technology.
Those who know the truth about the true unadulterated cause of disease reduction know that the drop in mortality from deaths was largely prior to the introduction of vaccines and due to cleaner drinking water and better sanitation.
Those aware of a large amount of data concerning the current scamdemic are aware of another major piece of the puzzle that is missing from the slide – that the “vaccine” was being developed well before the disease was let loose. All part of the plan.
Two of my physics professors at Queen’s University (Dr. Stewart & Dr. McKee) were the original developers of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) for medical applications. They and a number of other Queen’s physicists also worked on improving the accuracy of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) for observing metabolic activity within the human body.
As a graduate student working in the Dept. of Epidemiology, I was approached by a group of nurses who were attempting to organize a protest against male infant circumcision in Kingston General Hospital. They said that their observations indicated that babies undergoing the procedure were subjected to significant and inhumane levels of pain that subsequently adversely affected their behaviors. They said that they needed some scientific support for their position. It was my idea to use fMRI and/or PET scanning to directly observe the effects of circumcision on the infant brain.
The operator of the MRI machine in the hospital was a friend of mine, and he agreed to allow us to use the machine for research after normal operational hours. We also found a nurse who was under intense pressure by her husband to have her newborn son circumcised, and she was willing to have her son to be the subject of the study. Her goal was to provide scientific information that would eventually be used to ban male infant circumcision. Since no permission of the ethics committee was required to perform any routine male infant circumcision, we did not feel it was necessary to seek any permission to carry out this study.
We tightly strapped an infant to a traditional plastic “circumstraint” using Velcro restraints. We also completely immobilized the infant’s head using standard surgical tape. The entire apparatus was then introduced into the MRI chamber. Since no metal objects could be used because of the high magnetic fields, the doctor who performed the surgery used a plastic bell with a sterilized obsidian bade to cut the foreskin. No anesthetic was used.
The baby was kept in the machine for several minutes to generate baseline data of the normal metabolic activity in the brain. This was used to compare to the data gathered during and after the surgery. Analysis of the MRI data indicated that the surgery subjected the infant to significant trauma. The greatest changes occurred in the limbic system concentrating in the amygdala and in the frontal and temporal lobes.
A neurologist who saw the results postulated that the data indicated that circumcision affected most intensely the portions of the victim’s brain associated with reasoning, perception and emotions. Follow up tests on the infant one day, one week and one month after the surgery indicated that the child’s brain never returned to its baseline configuration. In other words, the evidence generated by this research indicated that the brain of the circumcised infant was permanently changed by the surgery.
Our problems began when we attempted to publish our findings in the open medical literature. All of the participants in the research including myself were called before the hospital discipline committee and were severely reprimanded. We were told that while male circumcision was legal under all circumstances in Canada, any attempt to study the adverse effects of circumcision was strictly prohibited by the ethical regulations. Not only could we not publish the results of our research, but we also had to destroy all of our results. If we refused to comply, we were all threatened with immediate dismissal and legal action.
I would encourage anyone with access to fMRI and /or PET scanning machines to repeat our research as described above, confirm our results, and then publish the results in the open literature.
Paul D. Tinari, Ph.D.
Director
Pacific Institute for Advanced Study