COVID-19
Dr. McCullough praises RFK Jr., urges him to pull COVID shots from the market
From LifeSiteNews
By Frank Wright
“I am behind what’s happening right now,” he said, of the likely inclusion of RFK Jr. and other “disruptors” such as Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy in the new administration. “I think the whole nation feels that we are finally getting back on track.”
In a video published November 15, prominent mRNA “vaccine” critic Dr. Peter McCullough responds to the Make America Healthy Again manifesto promised by the incoming Trump administration.
Welcoming the “tremendous … team selection” behind Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has been nominated to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, McCullough also pressed the need for deep reform of a “corrupt” system.
“The pandemic has called for a sweep of corruption out of [U.S. government] agencies,” he said, warning viewers that “we don’t want health to be as political as other areas.”
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been described as a “vaccine skeptic” and charged with being unsuitable for the leadership of the U.S.’s main health agency.
“He is really just a person without a health background who’s already caused great damage in health in the country,” Georges C. Benjamin, former executive director of the American Public Health Association, told the BBC.
The incumbent administration, by contrast, considers the transvestite Richard Levine as unquestionably qualified to be assistant secretary of health.
Levine was described as “a dangerous man spewing potentially deadly information” in support of “the idea that children can change their sex.”
Jennifer Bilek, the leading critic of the “transgender” cult of “synthetic sexual identities,” says Levine is a “quack” who was placed in his influential position by the powerful “Big Pharma” lobby.
Levine, who calls himself “Rachel,” is described by Bilek as “a man dressed as a woman who wants your kid to do what he did.”
His tenure is a case in point of the deep corruption which McCullough says must be swept out by the new administration. McCullough also mentions the growing evidence that so-called “transgender care” is “increasing mortality” – ending lives, despite its supporters claims that puberty blockers and mutilation saves them.
“This is gone now,” said McCullough, citing President Trump’s statement that Medicare and Medicaid will no longer fund “transgender care.”
“We are not going to have children subjected to this,” said McCullough. He concludes by saying that not only should the public be protected from the harmful dominance of health by Big Pharma, but “protecting children from ‘transgender health’” is also a laudable priority for the new administration.
McCullough, who is the chief scientific officer at the Wellness Company and world-leading expert on internal medicine, cardiovascular diseases, and clinical lipidology, stresses the need for leadership of Health and Human Services which can bridge the political divide in America – rather than reinforce it.
“For Health and Human Services – which is Medicare, Medicaid, NIH, CDC, FDA – we want somebody who is going to be able to work with both political leanings,” he said.
He says the new health leadership must work for the American people – and their health – against the vested interests of “Big Pharma.”
McCullough believes the “disruptive force” of RFK Jr. will play a “big role” in restoring the confidence of the American public in its discredited institutions.
“I am behind what’s happening right now,” he said, of the likely inclusion of RFK Jr. and other “disruptors” such as Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy in the new administration.
“I think the whole nation feels that we are finally getting back on track.”
McCullough puts the issue of the COVID-19 “vaccines” at the top of his list of priorities for RFK Jr.’s health leadership.
He reminds viewers that the “current ones on the market are not FDA-licensed,” explaining that “Biden ended the COVID-19 emergency years ago,” and so there is no public health reason to promote them.
“Nobody in America thinks we have an emergency,” he said, and “COVID-19 is like the common cold, so the vaccine boosters are not clinically indicated.”
Aside from being “medically unnecessary,” McCullough restates the so-called “vaccines” have had “great safety concerns, with injuries, disabilities and deaths.”
He notes that “sadly, the people who are in a sense forced to take them are sadly children – in order to fulfill the vaccine schedule and go to school.”
He called for the new government to “convene a safety review,” with “Pfizer, Moderna and Novavax at the table” with academics and former U.S. health agency leaders. What would be the message?
“They are coming off the market” is what McCullough says should be said about the experimental injections.
“I think America would be overjoyed,” he explained, if these so-called vaccines were taken off the market “for the reasons I have outlined.”
McCullough goes on to say that the issue is not restricted to the novel mRNA treatments, in demanding the removal of legislation which protects all scheduled vaccines from claims of injury.
This, he says, would compel vaccine manufacturers to have to “stand behind their products,” echoing RFK Jr.’s own claim that what he wants to see is the transparent and scientific review of all scheduled vaccines.
McCullough also notes that with the precursor supply chain for U.S. medicines captured by China, a Trump administration could repatriate drug manufacture to the U.S., providing a verifiable and secure provenance for American prescription drugs in future.
His endorsement of Kennedy marks the redemption arc of a man still labeled by U.S. and U.K. regime media as a “crank” for his criticism of the corruption of U.S. healthcare – and the dangers this represents to the American public.
Lambasted as an “anti-vaxxer” for refusing Dr. Anthony Fauci’s advice to “stick with the science” on vaccines, RFK Jr. was described by a former director of the CDC as “more science-oriented than a lot of his critics,” as what Kennedy is seeking is an evidence based review of vaccine safety.
Kennedy’s former campaign manager Dennis Kucinich said, “[RFK Jr.’s] position is to protect the people, to put people above profit.”
Kucinich explained, “Kennedy is not opposed to vaccines, he’s for vaccine safety. He’s concerned about the health effects of pesticides, about GMOs, which are now populating our agriculture.”
Kennedy warned in a tweet of June 2021 about a published link between myocarditis and pericarditis and the Pfizer and ModeRNA “vaccines.”
In 2023, he followed up with an an extensive list of injury concerns for the same injections, which included Bell’s palsy, blood clotting, and death.
A video from November 10, 2024, saw him explain his position on vaccines to NewsNation.
“I think most people don’t know what my stance is on vaccines. I’ve never been anti-vaccine. And I’ve said that hundreds and hundreds of times, but it doesn’t matter, because that is a way of silencing me,” he said.
RFK Jr. went on to explain how and why he was silenced and stigmatized – a method familiar to any “vaccine skeptic”: “Using that pejorative to describe me is a way of silencing or marginalizing me.”
He said his position was simple – and universally popular.
“I think virtually every American would agree with my stance on vaccines, which is that vaccines should be tested like other medicines.”
Donald Trump’s election victory has delivered a mandate for change, strongly desired by the public, which McCullough welcomes for its potential to safeguard the American people, and their children, from an industry captive to profit and protected by censorship and propaganda.
From the Shaun Newman Podcast
Dr. Gary Davidson is an Emergency Room physician who has spent 16 years at Red Deer Regional Hospital, where he also served as the head of Emergency Medicine for the central zone and Chief of the Emergency Department from 2016 to 2020. Additionally, Dr. Davidson holds the position of Associate Clinical Professor at the University of Alberta.
Dr. Davidson is the Author and Review Lead of Alberta’s Covid-19 Pandemic Response, providing critical analysis and recommendations on the province’s management of the health crisis.
Justice Centre President sends an open letter to Dr. Shelley Duggan, President of the Alberta Medical Association
Dear Dr. Duggan,
I write in response to the AMA’s Statement regarding the Final Report of the Alberta Covid Pandemic Data Review Task Force. Although you did not sign your name to the AMA Statement, I assume that you approved of it, and that you agree with its contents.
I hereby request your response to my questions about your AMA Statement.
You assert that this Final Report “advances misinformation.” Can you provide me with one or two examples of this “misinformation”?
Why, specifically, do you see this Final Report as “anti–science and anti–evidence”? Can you provide an example or two?
Considering that you denounced the entire 269-page report as “anti–science and anti–evidence,” it should be very easy for you to choose from among dozens and dozens of examples.
You assert that the Final Report “speaks against the broadest, and most diligent, international scientific collaboration and consensus in history.”
As a medical doctor, you are no doubt aware of the “consensus” whereby medical authorities in Canada and around the world approved the use of thalidomide for pregnant women in the 1950s and 1960s, resulting in miscarriages and deformed babies. No doubt you are aware that for many centuries the “consensus” amongst scientists was that physicians need not wash their hands before delivering babies, resulting in high death rates among women after giving birth. This “international scientific consensus” was disrupted in the 1850s by a true scientist, Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis, who advocated for hand-washing.
As a medical doctor, you should know that science is not consensus, and that consensus is not science.
It is unfortunate that your AMA Statement appeals to consensus rather than to science. In fact, your AMA Statement is devoid of science, and appeals to nothing other than consensus. A scientific Statement from the AMA would challenge specific assertions in the Final Report, point to inadequate evidence, debunk flawed methodologies, and expose incorrect conclusions. Your Statement does none of the foregoing.
You assert that “science and evidence brought us through [Covid] and saved millions of lives.” Considering your use of the word “millions,” I assume this statement refers to the lockdowns and vaccine mandates imposed by governments and medical establishments around the world, and not the response of the Alberta government alone.
What evidence do you rely on for your assertion that lockdowns saved lives? You are no doubt aware that lockdowns did not stop Covid from spreading to every city, town, village and hamlet, and that lockdowns did not stop Covid from spreading into nursing homes (long-term care facilities) where Covid claimed about 80% of its victims. How, then, did lockdowns save lives? If your assertion about “saving millions of lives” is true, it should be very easy for you to explain how lockdowns saved lives, rather than merely asserting that they did.
Seeing as you are confident that the governments’ response to Covid saved “millions” of lives, have you balanced that vague number against the number of people who died as a result of lockdowns? Have you studied or even considered what harms lockdowns inflicted on people?
If you are confident that lockdowns did more good than harm, on what is your confidence based? Can you provide data to support your position?
As a medical doctor, you are no doubt aware that the mRNA vaccine, introduced and then made mandatory in 2021, did not stop the transmission of Covid. Nor did the mRNA vaccine prevent people from getting sick with Covid, or dying from Covid. Why would it not have sufficed in 2021 to let each individual make her or his own choice about getting injected with the mRNA vaccine? Do you still believe today that mandatory vaccination policies had an actual scientific basis? If yes, what was that basis?
You assert that the Final Report “sows distrust” and “criticizes proven preventive public health measures while advancing fringe approaches.”
When the AMA Statement mentions “proven preventive public health measures,” I assume you are referring to lockdowns. If my assumption is correct, can you explain when, where and how lockdowns were “proven” to be effective, prior to 2020? Or would you agree with me that locking down billions of healthy people across the globe in 2020 was a brand new experiment, never tried before in human history? If it was a brand new experiment, how could it have been previously “proven” effective prior to 2020? Alternatively, if you are asserting that lockdowns and vaccine passports were “proven” effective in the years 2020-2022, what is your evidentiary basis for that assertion?
Your reference to “fringe approaches” is particularly troubling, because it suggests that the majority must be right just because it’s the majority, which is the antithesis of science.
Remember that the first doctors to advocate against the use of thalidomide by pregnant women, along with Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis advocating for hand-washing, were also viewed as “advancing fringe approaches” by those in authority. It would not be difficult to provide dozens, and likely hundreds, of other examples showing that true science is a process of open-minded discovery and honest debate, not a process of dismissing as “fringe” the individuals who challenge the reigning “consensus.”
The AMA Statement asserts that the Final Report “makes recommendations for the future that have real potential to cause harm.” Specifically, which of the Final Report’s recommendations have a real potential to cause harm? Can you provide even one example of such a recommendation, and explain the nature of the harm you have in mind?
The AMA Statement asserts that “many colleagues and experts have commented eloquently on the deficiencies and biases [the Final Report] presents.” Could you provide some examples of these eloquent comments? Did any of your colleagues and “experts” point to specific deficiencies in the Final Report, or provide specific examples of bias? Or were these “eloquent” comments limited to innuendo and generalized assertions like those contained in the AMA Statement?
In closing, I invite you to a public, livestreamed debate on the merits of Alberta’s lockdowns and vaccine passports. I would argue for the following: “Be it resolved that lockdowns and vaccine passports imposed on Albertans from 2020 to 2022 did more harm than good,” and you would argue against this resolution.
Seeing as you are a medical doctor who has a much greater knowledge and a much deeper understanding of these issues than I do, I’m sure you will have an easy time defending the Alberta government’s response to Covid.
If you are not available, I would be happy to debate one of your colleagues, or any AMA member.
I request your answers to the questions I have asked of you in this letter.
Further, please let me know if you are willing to debate publicly the merits of lockdowns and vaccine passports, or if one of your colleagues is available to do so.
Yours sincerely,
John Carpay, B.A., LL.B.
President
Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
Long Ignored Criminal Infiltration of Canadian Ports Lead Straight to Trump Tariffs
When America attacks
With $15 a day flat rate, Alberta transitions to publicly funded child care
Peavey Mart confirms all 90 stores will be closing
-
Business2 days ago
Long Ignored Criminal Infiltration of Canadian Ports Lead Straight to Trump Tariffs
-
Alberta2 days ago
With $15 a day flat rate, Alberta transitions to publicly funded child care
-
Canadian Energy Centre1 day agoWhy Canadian oil is so important to the United States
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoTrump’s Executive Orders Are Taking Massive Chunk Out Of Censorship State
-
Business2 days agoNo matter who’s in charge, Canadians want to ‘Axe the Tax’ immediately
-
Alberta1 day agoCBC watchdog accuses outlet of biased coverage of Catholic school trustee opposing LGBT agenda
-
Disaster2 days agoArmy Black Hawk Was On Training Flight
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoLiberals Hail Mary: To You From Failing Hands