By Richard J. Eggleston, Feb 21, 2021 Lewiston Review
Why is medical information as well as political and social free speech being stiﬂed? Throughout history, stating unapproved ideas has been risky, as even in the case of Sir Isaac Newton, or deadly, as in the case of Jesus Christ. With the advent of this unknown virus, diﬀerent ideas of prevention and treatment are expected to continually change. In the attempt to be “good” citizens, we actually judge each other because of conﬂicting scientiﬁc information. Citizens are turning on and turning in each other in ways that are very disturbing. We are confused and in need of scientiﬁc honesty.
Richard Eggleston, M.D., is a retired ophthalmolgist.
Films by Mikki Willis, Producer & Director
On May 4th, 2020, as part 1 of a documentary series called Plandemic, I released a 26 minute interview with whistleblower Dr Judy Mikovits.
Analysis by multiple independent groups have estimated that Part 1 has received “over one billion views,” making it the most viewed and banned documentary of all time.
If you were brave enough to share the controversial information, thank you! Because of you, the movie has been subtitled in numerous languages and is currently viral in other countries. As a result, a coalition of 27,000 plus scientists and doctors have gathered in support of a movement to reform our corrupt global healthcare system.
The plandemic website has been hacked. All uploads on YouTube and most other media outlets have been removed. The powerful vaccine lobby in collusion with all governments are behind this. A COVID vaccine seems to be their "final solution" (Bill Gates' words), now being heavily promoted. #PlandemicMovie
A Film by Andy Wakefield
A dramatic forensic examination of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and its consequences.
In 1986, pharmaceutical companies extorted the US Congress into giving it the best business model in the world: no lawsuits for vaccine products that are mandated by law to be injected into children - products that have never been properly tested for safety. Vaccines that are currently being rushed-to-market for COVID-19 require even less rigorous testing of their capacity to cause harm. Man and microbe, from Polio to COVID19 - A dramatic never more relevant forensic examination of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and its consequences. What happens when an ancient wisdom - a mother's intuition - is pitted against powerful interests in a race against time?
Director: Lori Martin Gregory
1993 TV Movie
The story of the discovery of the AIDS epidemic, and the political infighting of the scientific community hampering the early fight with it.
Director: Roger Spottiswoode
Ethical principles are the basis for ethical decision making. Principles like beneficence, reparation, nonmalefience, mercy, patient autonomy, veracity, justice and fidelity are the backbone of making good ethical decisions. Throughout the movie there are two main characters that represent ethical and unethical acts and/or decisions.
“And The Band Played On” is an example of this continual struggle. This occurs on both ends of the ethics spectrum. Dr. Robert Gallo, Alan Alda, and Dr. Don Francis, Matthew Modine, are the focus of his struggle between ethical and unethical decision making, respectively. This is a never-ending fight that, in the end, no one side seems to win at the cost of hundreds of lives.
Gallo and Francis do battle throughout the entire movie. Their conflict is Gallo wanting personal achievement and Francis wanting nothing more than justice. Gallo cares only about his fame and internationally acclaimed reputation. Francis, on the other end of the spectrum, is simply trying to fight the virus. Francis, working for the Center for Disease Control (CDC), dedicates himself to identifying and isolating the disease that is tearing through the gay community across the country. Desperate to locate the unknown disease, Francis works alongside the French doctors and scientists, who are also trying to understand, identify and isolate the unknown disease. Gallo losses his patience and refuses to work with Francis because Francis chooses to help and assist in the efforts of the successful French.
Dr. Robert Gallo, a pompous ass, continually seeks out public recognition for his medical efforts while working at The National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. It is a fact that Gallo is a doctor that is well respected and of high esteem. His inability to act ethically brings him constant tension and into conflict with the medical community. Gallo takes all the credit for discovering the retrovirus that causes AIDS. Because of this, a once moral fight turns into a legal fight that Gallo escapes on a legal technicality.
Dr. Don Francis must face multiple fights at one time. One of his toughest battles is between his memories while working on the Ebola Virus in Africa and his efforts on tackling the AIDS virus. The viruses seem to be very similar and cause him to lose hope and feel helpless. Francis feels he has lost control of the situation and that the virus has taken complete control. He has seen the effects that an infectious and unidentifiable disease can have on a group of people not willing to respect the deadly power of the virus.
The United States makes no effort to admit that there is a great danger with this unknown disease. Even after the virus is located the government continues to refuse to accept it and basically turns the other way. Because of this the majority of the public is completely unaware of the killing potential of the chemical makeup AIDS. Francis realizes he can’t take on an entire country and that he must learn to work the system regardless of how frustrating and uncooperative that system is. The political and bureaucratic red tape creates a vacuum strangling all the efforts of those trying to isolate the virus.
Throughout the film, the red tape constantly ruins any of the efforts to bring the medical field
closer to isolating the virus. Francis has to sit back and watch as members of the bureaucracy, Dr.Jim Curran, continue to make the findings sound more appealing and less deadly. He watches as new diseases arise in the U.S. giving him an understanding that funding for research and medical treatment will not be provided. This lack of funding makes it impossible to get microscopes and other medical equipment needed to research this deadly virus. Francis can’t understand why the red-tape bureaucrats will spend money on lawsuits rather than on research to save lives.
It is at this point in the movie we realize that AIDS could have been prevented if not in the very least controlled. Because of this lack of ethics,on behalf of the government and some arrogant members of the medical field, the virus was able to take millions of lives. Even after blood banks were made aware they were infecting thousands of people they refused to use the Hepatitis B test, which was found to be 88% effective in identifying the AIDS virus.
AIDS in 1993 was still considered to be a deadly virus. Today that is no longer the case. Technology and funding have given people hope. Patients, mothers, fathers, children, famous athletes and others can now live with this disease without feeling hopeless. The famous with the AIDS virus are now out starting foundations to raise funds to fight this deadly disease. People finally understand that with the vast improvements in AIDS research we can see a light at the end of the tunnel.
In conclusion, we, as medical professionals must always look to what is ethical. Our prejudices,egos and personal gratification cannot impact our moral decision making. Do you want to be remembered as a Dr. Gallo or a Dr. Francis? What kind of an impact can you have on an individual’s health by your decisions? Always keep in mind the ethical principles I mentioned above when choosing your course of action in a patient’s future.
Robert Kennedy, Jr.: The problem with the COVID vaccine, here’s the problem. They have all these vaccines, and they recognize that it’s going to be really hard to get a vaccine that does what people think it’s going to do. They have been reducing the standards to make it so they can pass a vaccine no matter what.
Theo Von: And what they think it’s going to do is make it so they don’t have to worry about COVID at all.
Kennedy: Right. If you get a shot, you’re protected, and you’re not going to transmit it. Particularly we want to make sure that the people who are vulnerable, so people with co morbidities and fragile elderly—that it’s going to keep them from dying.
What they did is—the testing protocols that they’re using do not require them to show any of those things. I’ll tell you how it works. They take 22,000 people and they give them the Pfizer vaccine. And they take 22,000 people and give them a placebo.
Then they wait. It’s double blind, so the way it’s supposed to work is neither the patients, the test subjects, the volunteers or the researchers know who got what.
Then you wait till a hundred people get sick from COVID. That takes a while because you had 40,000 people and it’s kind of hard nowadays to get sick from COVID. You’re not going to have the majority of those people exposed, so after a 100 people get sick, they stop the study and look at it.
Then they say, how many of those people got the vaccine and how many got the placebo? And if 50 percent of them got the vaccine and 50 percent got the placebo means there’s zero efficacy, and the vaccine doesn’t work.
In this case with Pfizer everybody’s excited because they stopped the study when 95 people got sick. Apparently 85 of those people were in the placebo group, which means the vaccine appears to be 90 percent effective.
Here’s the problem: The way they measure whether you have COVID is you have one positive PCR test and you have one symptom. That could be a cough, it could be a fever, it could be a chill, it could be a headache.
Then you have COVID. So what they’re testing the vaccine for IS NOT what we want to know: DOES IT PREVENT YOU FROM DYING? Does it prevent you from being hospitalized? We will never know because they have geared back the studies—Peter Doshi who’s the editor of the British Medical Journal, he said this in a New York Times editorial, he said, “These studies were designed to succeed. You cannot fail.”No matter how bad the vaccine is, it’s going to pass. …
It all involves corruption. There is no oversight.
Kennedy: Normally if I got sick, then I’d stay home and I wouldn’t infect anybody, but if I’m feeling like a million bucks I become a super spreader like Typhoid Mary. That’s what apparently this vaccine does. If stops you from knowing it, but you continue to transmit it.
THE OTHER PROBLEM is they’re only testing them for a month, two months. You’re not going to see bad side effects till maybe a year out. A lot of these injuries that you get from vaccines have very long incubation periods: autoimmune disease like diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, Graves’ disease, Crohn’s disease, IBS, or food allergies.
And what Pfizer is doing which is very dishonest, is as soon as it finishes the study, it unblinds it, so everybody knows you got the vaccine, you got the placebo.
Then it takes all the people in the placebo group, and it gives them the real vaccine.
So now we completely are unable to tell whether there’s long term injuries—
Von: It’s like cover your future tracks.
Kennedy: Exactly. It’s a trick that they’ve used in the vaccine industry. That’s the same thing that they did with the Gardasil vaccine. It makes it impossible for anybody to ever know whether the reason they’re getting sick is because of that vaccine or whether it was just bad luck….
Kennedy: The problem is the entire sort of medical cartel is now feeding at the tit of Big Pharma.
The universities are getting all their money from sponsoring clinical trials.
The regulatory agencies are subject to what we call regulatory capture. They’ve become sock puppets for the industry that they’re supposed to regulate. You see that everywhere.
I’ve been suing regulatory agencies for 40 years, EPA and the state agency, for example, famously in Louisiana is utterly run by the oil industry and is corrupt.
The corruption is particularly acute in HHS [Health and Human Services] and the reason for that is that the agencies are really part of the industry.
Half of CDC’s budget goes to buying and selling vaccines. FDA, half of its budget comes from the pharmaceutical companies.
And with NIH [National Institutes of Health] which is the other big agency, they are collecting tens of millions or hundreds of millions of dollars on vaccine patents. So they work on the vaccine at the outset, they transfer the patent to Gilead or Pfizer.
The Moderna vaccine was completely developed by Tony Fauci, he hands it to a private group, they put 2 billion dollars of federal money into allowing them to develop it, and then Tony Fauci’s agency keeps half the profits from the vaccine.
I’ve sued EPA many times for being a captured agency, but what would it be like if EPA made half of its profits selling coal? It’s the same thing.
These agencies are not independent agencies. They’re completely captured. All of the other institutions of government that should stand between a greedy corporation and a vulnerable child have been compromised.
Congress gets more money, lobby money, from the pharmaceutical industry than any other industry. They give them double what oil and gas does. I’m talking about lobbyists.
There’s more pharma lobbyists on Capitol Hill than there are Congressmen, Senators and Supreme Court justices combined.
The regulatory agencies have been captured.
The press is utterly captured, and that’s because in 1997 we passed a law in this country, or the FDA changed the regulation to make it legal for the first time for television and radio and newspapers to advertise pharmaceutical products on the air direct to consumer.
There’s only two countries in the world that allow that. Everybody agrees, it’s a terrible thing to do.
Posted by Age of Autism on November 16, 2020
This is what’s coming. Fox Business aired an interview with Robert Kennedy, Jr. and U.S. Rep. Buddy Carter (GA) regarding the development of the COVID vaccine in an obvious attempt to promote the vaccine and downplay worries about side effects.
Fox anchor, fast- talking, Lisa Kennedy Montgomery refused to let Kennedy explain that the pharmaceutical industry has no liability for damage from the much-touted COVID vaccine and therefore little incentive to produce a truly safe one. She wasn’t about to allow him to raise any concerns about the vaccine. She adamantly claimed that the vaccine makers do have liability for injuries.
Montgomery’s performance clearly demonstrated that she had done absolutely no background research before this interview. She knew nothing about how the vaccine industry operates.
Rep. Carter, who’s also a pharmacist, also neatly ignored the reality that Kennedy pointed out, namely that no one is responsible for any damage or death resulting from this vaccine.
Instead Carter assured viewers that the drug industry and the FDA only produce and approve safe and effective products. (It seems he missed the damage from Vioxx, conservatively 60,000 deaths.)
Carter didn’t response to Kennedy’s charge that no one has any idea what the long term side effects of this vaccine may be.
NOTHING Kennedy brought up was addressed. He talked about the expectations of the COVID vaccine. Officials have publicly admitted that the vaccine won’t have the potential to prevent transmissibility, hospitalizations, or deaths from coronavirus.
In Kennedy’s own words: WHAT’S THE POINT?
It was appropriate that Fox Business aired this interview. The real purpose of producing millions of vaccines with little to no health benefit is BUSINESS, BIG BUSINESS, and that’s what it’s all about really.
Nov 13, 2020, Children’s Health Defense
In a recent FOX interview featuring RFK, Jr., host Lisa Kennedy Montgomery insisted erroneously that vaccine makers are held accountable for vaccine injuries.
FOX BUSINESS REFUSED TO LISTEN TO RFK JR.
Montgomery: Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer now says it is ready and waiting on FDA approval to begin distributing its new coronavirus vaccine. It is one of 150 vaccines simultaneously in development around the globe.
There are some major challenges. The vaccine has to be kept at 94 degrees below zero…
There’s also a lot of resistance from folks who say they are very suspicious of this and other vaccines, but is there solid reason to worry?
Joining me now to discuss, we have Children’s Health Defense president, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Georgia Republican Congressman Buddy Carter who received the Pfizer trial vaccine.
Congressman Carter was asked about his experience taking a trial vaccine. He has received two doses of the vaccine, but it is a double blind study so he doesn’t know if he received the actual COVID vaccine.
Montgomery: All right. So Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., I know that you have an issue in general with vaccines and their safety, what might be in them, the side effects that vaccines might cause. There are a lot of people who share your concern, and that concern has only grown with coronavirus.
So what is it specifically about the coronavirus vaccine that concerns you so much?
Kennedy: One of the many companies that are developing vaccines come up with a vaccine that does what we all want a vaccine to do, which is you take a shot, you have immunity—long term immunity, and the shot is safe and it prevents transmissibility, prevents hospitalizations and deaths, and I would be the first one to get in line to take it.
I want to commend Congressman Carter for standing up for this.
The problem with this particular vaccine is really the design of this study. The British Medical Journal, and associate editor Peter Doshi has written articles about this specific criticism in the BMJ and in the New York Times, in which he shows that the design of the study is not designed to answer any of those questions.
We don’t know that this vaccine prevents transmissibility. If it doesn’t prevent transmissibility, then it’s not going to end the lockdown. In fact it will turn us all into asymptomatic carriers and perhaps make the disease much worse.
The study is not designed to show that it prevents deaths or hospitalizations.
Finally, the study is not designed to show that it prevents injuries, at least longer term injures.
Many of the injuries that are associated with vaccination are developmental injuries, autoimmune injuries, allergic diseases have long diagnostic horizons. They have long incubation periods. You won’t see them over a 45 day period.
We should be willing to trade speed for safety when it comes to developing a coronavirus vaccine, according to Fox Business
Montgomery: I understand that, but for a lot of people who have lost family members or those who have gotten sick themselves, they know we can’t wait 14 years which is the average amount of time that it takes for a vaccine to go from development to market.
So far the mumps vaccine has been the fastest, that was done in about four years.
So Congressman, can you address some of those concerns? Did you have any of those worries yourself about the fact that we may be asymptotic carriers? Did that worry you?
There’s nothing to worry about
Carter: …It is phenomenal that we are getting this vaccine in this quick of time. But if you look at the way it’s being done, I’m very confident, in fact I’m so confident I’m doing it myself, that it will be safe, and it will be effective. That’s very important.
You were right. Generally it does a much longer time to come up with a vaccine, but what they’re doing, what the FDA is doing, first of all, it’s all hands on deck, this is all they’re working on right now
Secondly, they are overlapping phases. Normally what you would do is you would have one phase, then have a review period, then start the next phase.
They’re eliminating that review period. They’re still doing the review, but they’re just having the company go ahead and start the next phase.
Another thing they’re doing is they’re having the companies go ahead, make the vials, make the syringes—everything you need, so that when it is approved, you can immediately get it to market. That’s extremely important.
Montgomery: We talked on this show with NanoViricides which is a company that’s hoping that nanotechnology is the future of vaccines because that way you’re not injecting an actual live vaccine, or even a dead vaccine into someone.
Through nanotechnology you are targeting exactly what you want to suppress, unlike the flu vaccine which is like throwing a handful of spaghetti at a wall.
So Robert, would you be in favor of something like that if the technology completely shifted? Would you be more trusting of that sort of virus prophylaxis?
Kennedy: I want to see double blind placebo studies out of the same studies we force every other medicine to go through.
The problem with this vaccine is the one that Pfizer is currently putting out—and Tony Fauci says this—the vaccine does not prevent transmissibility.
IF it doesn’t prevent transmissibility, what’s the point?
It’s not going to stop the lockdown.
IF the vaccine does not prevent hospitalization, what’s the point?
If it doesn’t prevent deaths, what’s the point?
The way this study is designed is to show that this vaccine prevents minor symptoms of COVID in people under 55 years old.
Those are not the people we’re concerned about. Those are not the people who are dying from COVID.
The people who are dying are the fragile elderly—
Montgomery: --and the immuno-compromised. That’s absolutely true.
But Congressman Carter, to Pfizer’s point there’s no way they would invest two billion dollars in their own research and development in order to sicken the globe. When you have private market forces at work, they want to succeed, and they don’t succeed by harming people.
They don’t succeed with vaccination failure. Would you like to speak to that?
Kennedy: There are no market forces here. There’s no liability here if they injury somebody.
Montgomery: They go out of business. That’s the thing about the free market the liability you take on entirely yourself because if it doesn’t work, you go out of business and you lose everything.
Kennedy: You made an erroneous statement here. These companies have no liability
Montgomery: Yes, they do.
Kennedy: They have no liability
Montgomery: Yes, they do, and if they injury you there are class action lawsuits. All you have to do is watch any news channel, especially this one.
Kennedy: I’m sorry, but you’re wrong…. I’m sorry but you’re totally wrong.
Congressman Carter got to talk next and he explained that the FDA approval process is a “very strenuous process.”
Carter: These scientists are not going to allow a medication, a vaccine on the market that’s going to harm people. …
Vaccines are one of the most lifesaving innovations that we’ve ever had in medicine.
There is no excuse why we should not bring this to market. That it will be safe and effective, as approved by the FDA
There’s no excuse that shouldn’t get this to market as soon as possible. It will save lives.
Montgomery: I think it’s okay to be skeptical of vaccines. I think it’s okay to be skeptical of the FDA, but I do share your optimism that through the private free market we will find a way to defeat this virus.