Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Loafergirl's avatar

I’m eternally grateful that my sons were smarter than me and refused the jabs for themselves and their children.

Expand full comment
Susan Sunlightrising's avatar

I'm glad to see major progress that mRNA vaccine is only volunarily available after a doctor consult, but NOT RECOMMENDED. The mRNA penetration of the Brain Blood Barrier is a major threat. Vital organs (Brain, heart, liver, testicles) with traces of mRNA even 2 years after mRNA vaccine are quite concerning. More birth defects in babies born to mRNA vaccinated moms is another serious warning. mRNA vaccines should be totally removed from the market given the severity of these injuries, but the uninformed will be able to still get a mRNA vaccine after a doctor's consult.

I say the uninformed with intention. In today's world, even with emails going back and forth between doctor and patient, it is rare to see serious information being shared with the average patient by the average MD in terms of what fully informed medical consent would actually require. It rarely occurs. Fully informed medical consent should include the complete published copy of the manufacturer's insert identifying all of the pages of scientific details reported to the FDA, and nothing less will do. However, why is it that the medical doctors who prescribe pharmaceuticals never seem to be in the loop to be given that all important manufacturer's print-out in order to provide that tiny print publication to their patient(s). Some medical offices seem to be able to obtain the details off the internet, but they are full size print and do not usually seem complete in terms of listing the chemical formula and all the side effects found during the study. Good MDs will also warn the patient about potential interactions or complications that may occur with other drugs or supplements the patient is taking, given the patient's drug and supplement list and given the patient's diagnoses. A good MD will also warn the patient if the drug has not been on the market long enough for any problems it may have to surface sufficiently.

The real problem emerges at the pharmacy when the patient is given a generic or even a brand drug which has been prescribed, but then the pharmacy states they cannot provide the manufacturer's insert. Instead one major US pharmacy usually gives the patient a one or two page printout that does not begin to inform the patient as to potential side-effects to actually watch-out for symptoms. Instead, it tells the patient if s/he suspects that the drug might be causing a side effect that they should contact their doctor, but they are unlikely to make the connection when they have not been informed of every side effect found during that drug's human trials. The pharmacist should have a limit not to exceed 24-hours to provide requested manufactuer's drug insert publication data when requested by a prescribed patient, and failure to be able to show that timely effort should result in a criminal felony for the pharmacist, and failure of the drug manufacturer to properly respond within 24-hours to the pharmacist or to the patient should result in a criminal felony and $100,000 fine per incident for the drug manufacturer, with 40% of that fine reverting back to the patient who was improperly treated.

Expand full comment
14 more comments...

No posts