Top 10 Reasons to #ExitTheWHO
Today (April 7, 2023) is the WHO's 75th birthday. Let's hope it is their last.
Everyone should CLICK HERE. If you live in the United States, CLICK HERE and HERE. Click on your country if you live in: Australia, Canada, Netherlands, United Kingdom. Call me directly if you have any questions James Roguski +1-310-619-3055
The Top 10 Reasons Why the Member Nations Should #ExitTheWHO:
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND CORRUPTION: The WHO is infiltrated by Big Pharma, Big Money, and Big Foundations and has been corrupted by financial donations from corporations and non-governmental organizations which influence WHO policy in ways that benefit the corporations and the organizations through a money-laundering and influence-peddling scheme of massive proportions. The WHO follows the dictates of it's so-called “relevant stakeholders” while ignoring the needs and desires of “We the People.”
VACCINE MADNESS: Influenced by vaccine manufacturers and vaccine pushers such as GAVI and Bill Gates, the WHO has lost sight of its core purpose of promoting health and has overemphasized the use of “vaccines” which have not improved health, but have actually degraded the overall health of billions of people around the world. Best practices designed to improve health are ignored in favor of actions ultimately designed to profit Big Pharma.
BUREAUCRACY AND WASTE: The WHO is dominated by bureaucrats and technocrats that are beholden to big Pharma, not knowledgeable health professionals that are dedicated to caring for patients and helping them maintain and improve their health. The WHO wastes enormous amounts of money on salaries for their bloated staff and travel expenses to such a degree that actual health related programs are chronically underfunded.
FEAR-MONGERING: The WHO has sounded the alarm and wasted time, effort and money by declaring FAKE Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEICs) such as Moneypox and Swine flu (H1N1) while failing to act swiftly or effectively to address Ebola and COVID-19.
HORRIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS: The WHO has made horrible and corrupt recommendations in support of the expanded use of pharmaceutical drugs such as opiates that have been responsible for untold millions of unnecessary deaths.
FALSE MODEL OF HEALTH: The WHO is overly dependent upon the petro-chemical based pharmaceutical, medical, hospital industrial complex which practices allopathic medicine that is designed to alter and mask symptoms rather than actually improve health. The WHO does not offer a forum for clinical and scientific discussion or debate and clearly marginalizes natural healing modalities.
POWER GRAB: The WHO is blatantly seeking to increase its power by pursuing a legally-binding proposed “Pandemic Treaty” and proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations.
MISTAKES: The WHO has repeatedly demonstrated that it is absolutely unwilling and incapable of learning from its mistakes of the past and is destined to continue wasting money while providing horrible advice based on the corruptive influence of Big Pharma and Bill Gates
OUT-OF-TOUCH: The delegates to the World Health Assembly are unelected, unaccountable, unknown to the people they purport to represent and completely out of touch with the needs and desires of the people of their respective nations.
SECRECY: The WHO operates in secrecy and lacks transparency. Far too much of what is done by the WHO remains hidden. What we know is horrible. What we don't know may be monstrous.
Please watch the video below…
1. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND CORRUPTION:
A conflict of interest occurs when private interests (financial, personal, or other non-WHO interest or commitment) interfere—or appear to interfere—with the ability of a WHO staff to act impartially, to discharge their functions and to regulate their conduct with the interests of WHO only in view.
Epidemic of Conflict of Interests
According to former World Bank geopolitical analyst Peter Koenig, about half of the WHO’s budget is derived from private sources — primarily pharmaceutical companies but also other corporate sectors including the telecommunication and agro-chemical industries. It also receives large donations from large philanthropic organizations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and GAVI. Twelve years ago, Gates had committed $10 billion to the WHO; after the US, his Foundation is its second largest donor providing 10 percent of its funding. His financial commitment aligned with his global ambition to “make this the decade of vaccines.” Koenig also believes that Tedros’s appointment was due to Gates’ influence. In fact, Tedros is a former Chair of GAVI’s Vaccine Alliance.
Most people assume wrongly that the WHO acts independently from national and private commercial interests for the welfare of the world’s population. However, its real mission is dubious. The organization has frequently been accused of conflicts of interests with private pharmaceutical companies and mega-philanthropic organizations such as the Gates’ Foundation. It is riddled with political alliances, ideologies, and profiteering motives.
When it was founded in 1948, the WHO relied on funding from its member states; their contributions were assessed based on their national income and population. The funds were not earmarked for any particular policy. In those days, the WHO was an independent organization. But over time, the WHO leadership traded its independence and with it, its integrity, for big money.
Currently, 80% of the WHO budget relies on earmarked donations; primarily from the U.S. government, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Big Pharma. The WHO revenue in 2016-2017 was $5.139 Billion, of which only $927 million came from assessed contributions by member states; these “core” funds cover the WHO’s general expenses. By contrast, $4.422 Billion were provided by major donors; and these funds are earmarked for activities that serve the donor’s financial interests. These major donors dictate and control the WHO policies, ensuring that WHO policies further their interests.
Over the past decade, the world’s richest man has become the World Health Organization’s second biggest donor, second only to the United States and just above the United Kingdom. This largesse gives him outsized influence over its agenda, one that could grow as the U.S. and the U.K. threaten to cut funding if the agency doesn’t make a better investment case.
The result, say his critics, is that Gates’ priorities have become the WHO’s. Rather than focusing on strengthening health care in poor countries — that would help, in their view, to contain future outbreaks like the Ebola epidemic — the agency spends a disproportionate amount of its resources on projects with the measurable outcomes Gates prefers, such as the effort to eradicate polio.
Concerns about the software billionaire’s sway — roughly a quarter of WHO’s budget goes toward polio eradication — has led to an effort to rein him in.
Millions of dollars given by major pharmaceutical companies to the World Health Organization (WHO) raise questions of compliance with the organization’s guidelines on interactions with commercial enterprises.
Currently, WHO’s relations with commercial enterprises are guided by the “Guidelines on interaction with commercial enterprises to achieve health outcomes” (http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/78660/1/ee20.pdf?ua=1).
In 2014, WHO received $6,158,153 from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). It received $5,785,000 and $8,266,284 in 2012 and 2013 respectively from GSK.
Novartis AG donated $5,300,000 in 2014 and $4,500,000 in 2013.
Hoffmann-La Roche donated $6,158,153 in 2014 and $4,806,492 in 2013.
The purposes of those donations were not disclosed.
In 2015 GSK donated $4,094,000, Novartis donated $2,834,000, Roche donated $2,165,000 and Eli Lilly Company Foundation donated $1,218,000. All four companies earmarked their donations for specific areas set out in the agreements with the WHO Secretariat.
These donations raise prima facie concerns about the violation of provisions of the Guidelines which state that commercial enterprises working with WHO are expected to conform to various WHO policies including the ethical promotion of medicinal drug products.
According to paragraph 11 of the Guidelines, “Commercial enterprises working with WHO will be expected to conform to WHO public health policies in the areas of food safety, chemical safety, ethical promotion of medicinal drug products, tobacco control, and others”.
The financial contributions from these pharmaceutical companies raise prima facie concern with regard to the violation of paragraph 15 of the Guidelines that states: “Funds may not be sought or accepted from enterprises that have a direct commercial interest in the outcome of the project toward which they would be contributing, unless approved in conformity with the provisions on clinical trials or product development, set out below”.
These financial contributions thus raise doubts about the implementation of the Guidelines by the Secretariat. How can the WHO Secretariat be expected to scrutinise the conduct of the pharmaceutical companies concerned while accepting financial resources from them?
2. VACCINE MADNESS:
Writing in a 2006 issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Dr. Marc Girard uncovered “scientific incompetence, misconduct or even criminal malfeasance” over the intentional inflation of vaccines’ benefits while undermining toxicity and adverse effects. Dr. Girard testified as a medical expert before a French court in a criminal trial against the WHO after French health officials obliged the organization to launch its universal Hepatitis B vaccine campaign. The campaign resulted in the deaths of French children. Girard gained access to confidential WHO documents. He noted that the WHO’s “French figures about chronic liver diseases were simply extrapolated from the U.S. reports.” He further accused the WHO serving “merely as a screen for commercial promotion, in particular via the Viral Hepatitis Prevention Board (VHPB), which was created, sponsored, and infiltrated by the manufacturers.”
Now during the Covid-19 pandemic, as early as July 2020, the WHO approved of China’s first vaccine for emergency use, long before it had undergone proper clinical trials and much earlier than Moderna’s and Pfizer’s mRNA vaccines’ approval.
While much information concerning World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations on vaccines, particularly against hepatitis B, remains secret, there is sufficient evidence in the open literature to suggest scientific incompetence, misconduct, or even criminal malfeasance. The benefits are overstated and toxicity greatly understated. Influenza vaccine recommendations falsely imply that the available vaccines could help prevent avian influenza.
Only between 5-15% of the overall population catches the seasonal flu and only 10% of these are of type A and B, which we can vaccinate against.
This means that only 1% of all people catch type A or B influenza. If these people are vaccinated with the right type of flu, they might benefit from the vaccine.
Unfortunately, according to the big Cochrane meta-analysis, the vaccine for influenza is highly ineffective. So maybe one in a thousand can be helped to avoid a week in bed, or get this year’s flu shortened.
Unfortunately vaccinations are not free of adverse effects, because the adjuvants needed to provoke an immune response to a “dead” virion is provoking not only a response to the virus, but also to the body’s own cells and molecules. This gives a perfectly rational explanation for the many side effects we see from vaccination, both local and systemic, with local inflammation, local or systemic muscle pain, vasculitis, neuritis, encephalitis or narcolepsy as the severe adverse effects. The local adverse effects come with every second vaccine or so (50%), while the more serious systemic effects are seen in one patient out of 1,000.
If you vaccinate 1,000,000 people you may protect 1,000 from influenza, but you can cause 1,000 people to have systemic side effects, sometimes worse than the influenza itself. Such a poor risk/benefit ratio should lead to the conclusion that the vaccine is not a rational medicine. It has no general use.
Polio eradication is by far WHO’s best-funded program, with at least $6 billion allocated to it between 2013 and 2019, in great part because around 60 percent of the Gates Foundation’s contributions are earmarked for the cause.
But the focus on polio has effectively left WHO begging for funding for other programs, particularly to prop up poor countries’ health systems before the next epidemic hits.
Vaccine Adverse Effects Monitoring System Needs Overhaul
The WHO’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety is responsible for administering vaccine programs in poorer, developing countries. It is also responsible for gathering data on incidents of vaccine injuries. Any deaths following vaccination campaigns are ignored and ruled as coincidental. This policy is based on an erroneous assumption that if no one died during a vaccine’s clinical trials, then the vaccine should be regarded as automatically safe and unrelated to any deaths that might occur later. Consequently, the WHO’s monitoring system is seriously flawed and requires a major overhaul.
One of the more controversial incidences was the WHO’s collaboration with the Bill Gates’ GAVI campaign to launch the Pentavalent vaccine (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, HIP and Hepatitis B) in Africa and later in South and Southeast Asia. In India, health officials recorded upwards to 8,190 additional infant deaths annually following GAVI’s Pentavalent campaign. The WHO’s response was to reclassify its adverse event reporting system to disregard “infant” deaths altogether. Dr. Jacob Puliyel, a member of India’s National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization concluded,
“deaths and other serious adverse events following vaccination in the third world, that use WHO-AEFI classification are not recorded in any database for pharmaco-vigilance. It is as if the deaths of children in low (and middle) income countries are of no consequence.”
WHO’s Double Standards of Vaccine Safety
During the WHO’s Global Vaccine Safety Summit convened in December 2019, a scandal erupted. Days before the summit, one of the WHO’s medical directors for vaccination, Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, who is now its chief science officer, appeared in a public advertisement touting the unquestionable safety of vaccines and ridiculing parents who speak out against vaccination. She assured viewers that the WHO was in control of matters and monitored any potential adverse risks carefully. However, during the Summit, Dr. Swaminathan acknowledged vaccine health risks and stated, “We really don’t have very good safety monitoring systems.” Another Summit participant, Dr. Heidi Larson stated,
“We have a very wobbly ‘health professional frontline’ that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. When the frontline professionals are starting to question or they don’t feel like they have enough confidence about the safety to stand up to the person asking the questions. I mean most medical school curriculums, even nursing curriculums, I mean in medical school you are lucky if you have half a day on vaccines.”
Later in September 2021, the Indian Bar Association sued Dr. Swaminathan for misleading the Indian government about Ivermectin to treat SARS-2 infections. The Association accused her of leading a disinformation campaign that resulted in “mass murder.” Covid-19 deaths exploded ten-fold due to Swaminathan’s claims that the drug was ineffective.
WHO’s Depopulation Efforts with Vaccines
Without doubt, the most nefarious activity conducted by the WHO is its alleged support and distribution of vaccines to poorer developing countries that may have been intentionally designed to decrease population rates. Back in 1989, the WHO sponsored a symposium at its Geneva headquarters on “Antifertility Vaccines and Contraceptive Vaccines.” The symposium presented proposals for vaccines that were later discovered to have been laced with the sterilizing hormones HCG and estradiol; the former prevents pregnancy and triggers spontaneous abortions and miscarriages, and the latter can turn men infertile.
In 2015, the Kenyan Conference of Catholic Bishops reported its discovery of a polio vaccine laced with estradiol that was manufactured in India and distributed by the WHO. A year earlier, Dr. Wahome Ngare from the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association uncovered a tetanus vaccine specifically being administered to women, also distributed by the WHO, that contained the HCG hormone. All of the polio vaccine samples tested contained HCG, estrogen-related compounds, follicle stimulating and luteinizing hormones, which will damage sperm formation in the testes. Even more disturbing, this vaccine was going to be administered to children under five years of age.
This was not the first time the WHO made efforts to use vaccination campaigns for depopulation. A decade earlier, in 2004, the WHO, UNICIF and CDC launched a vaccination campaign to immunize 74 million African children during a polio outbreak. The initiative encountered a serious obstacle. In Nigeria, laboratory tests on the WHO’s vaccine samples resulted in the presence of estrogen and other female hormones. And in the mid-1990s, a tetanus vaccine being administered to Nicaraguan and Filipino girls and women in their child-bearing years was discovered to contain HCG, which accounted for a large number of spontaneous abortions that were reported by Catholic health workers.
Illegal Vaccine Experiments
In 2014, The Economic Times of India published a report that provided details of a joint venture between the WHO and the Gates Foundation to test an experimental Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccine on approximately 16,000 tribal girls between the ages of 9 and 15 unwittingly. The experiment was conducted in 2008; many of the girls, the report states, became ill and some died. This was Merck’s Gardasil vaccine.
The following year the WHO and Gates Foundation conducted a similar experiment on 14,000 girls with Glaxo’s HPV vaccine Cervarix. Again “scores of teenage girls were hospitalized.” Investigations led by Indian health officials uncovered gross violations in India’s laws regarding medical safety. In numerous cases there was no consent and the children had no idea what they were being vaccinated for. The Indian Supreme Court has taken up a case against the duo for criminal charges.
3. BUREAUCRACY AND WASTE:
According to internal documents obtained by The Associated Press, the United Nations health agency routinely has spent about $200 million a year on travel expenses, more than what it doles out to fight some of the biggest problems in public health, including AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined.
Before the current COVID-19 pandemic, there was the H1N1 swine flu scare in 2009. The WHO’s declaration of a pandemic was solely based more on fear mongering than empirical evidence. The fabrications are believed to have originated from the WHO’s senior consultant on viral outbreaks who happens to carry the reputation of being one of the world’s leading pandemic alarmists: Dr. Albert Osterhaus, nicknamed “Dr. Flu.” At the time, Osterhaus was head of the Department of Virology at Erasmus University in the Netherlands. When the swine flu scare appeared, he was also the president of the European Scientific Working Group on Influenza (ESWI), an organization funded by the major vaccine manufacturers including Baxter, MedImmune, Glaxo, Sanofi Pasteur and others. Osterhaus was responsible for transforming an otherwise potentially bad flu season into a global pandemic.
The British Medical Journal reported that the WHO failed to report conflicts of interests within its H1N1 advisory group. The journal’s Editor-in-Chief Fiona Godlee wrote, “WHO must act now to restore its credibility, and Europe should legislate.” The former head of the prestigious Cochrane Database Collaboration’s vaccine studies, Dr. Tom Jefferson, told a Der Spiegel interviewer, “the WHO and public health officials, virologists and the pharmaceutical companies… built this machine around the impending [H1N1] pandemic. And there’s a lot of money involved, and influence and careers, and entire institutions.”
According to a financial forecast published by JP Morgan, the collaboration between the WHO and Osterhaus’s ESWI to orchestrate the pandemic would have profited the pharmaceutical industry up to $10 billion.
In 2010, the EU’s Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe launched an investigation into the evidence that the WHO had created “a fake pandemic” in order to financially benefit the pharmaceutical giants’ vaccine market and to strengthen the influence private drug interests have over the health organization. The Assembly’s chairperson Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg charged the WHO’s fake pandemic as “one of the greatest medical scandals of the century that resulted in “millions being needlessly vaccinated.”
5. HORRIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS:
In 2000, the WHO issued an opioid guideline, Achieving Balance in National Opioid Control Policy: Guidelines for Assessment.
According to the Congressional Report, the WHO Collaborating Centre for Policy and Communications in Cancer Care at the University of Wisconsin Pain & Policy Studies Group revealed that from 1999 to 2010, it had accepted over $1.6 million from Purdue. The WHO began to seek input on the formulation of its guidelines in 2007 and 2008, when it sought the input of organizations known to have financial relationships with the opioid industry, ensuring a pro-opioid industry bias to its report.
The WHO collected industry-supported opioid information feedback which was incorporated into its updated opioid guidelines. The WHO collected the information in the form of a Delphi Study whose methodology relied on reaching a consensus among participants. In other words, the WHO was formulating a uniform pro-opioid propaganda narrative that promoted the expanded use for opioids, hence an expanded market for Purdue, its international arm Mundipharma, and Endo Pharmaceuticals. This guideline was the basis for the later WHO document, Ensuring Balance in National Policies on Controlled Substances: Guidance for Availability and Accessibility of Controlled Medicines (2011).
The U.S. Congressional Report – Corrupting Influence: Purdue & WHO (2019) lays bare the pivotal, aggressive, and long-term role played by the WHO, to influence physicians beyond the U.S. to expand their opioid prescribing. The WHO was recruited quite early to provide credibility to recommendations that expanded the use of opioids.
As Congresswoman Katherine Clark, a co-author of the report, noted:
“The web of influence we uncovered paints a picture of a public health organization that has been manipulated by the opioid industry. The WHO appears to be lending the opioid industry its voice and credibility, and as a result, a trusted public health organization is trafficking dangerous misinformation that could lead to a global opioid epidemic. [The company’s] exponential increase in opioid sales and profits documented that their marketing strategies worked. Trusted public health organizations convinced doctors that opioids were safe and effective.”
6. FALSE MODEL OF HEALTH:
We believe that WHO is biased regarding pharmaceutical drugs. This is evident to us, when we compare the recommendations in the WHO’s drug directories – i.e. “WHO’s model list of essential medicines with the recommendations from independent researchers analyzing the positive and negative effects of drugs and vaccines, like for example Cochrane reviews.
Cochrane reviews are an acknowledged source of knowledge in medicine, because these meta-analyses come from the Cochrane organization’s 3,000 independent physicians and researchers who in their unselfish service for humanity are documenting the effect of almost all the pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines and also of hundreds or more of different types of non-drug medicine, including a variety of alternative treatments.
The results from the Cochrane reviews, which most researchers regard as a much more reliable source of information on medicine than the data coming from the pharmaceutical industry itself, clash harshly with the recommendations of WHO in its drug directories. The Cochrane meta-analyses have systematically found less effect and more harm from the pharmaceutical drugs than the pharmaceutical industry does, when it documents its own products, also when the industry’s own data is used.
Many drugs listed in the WHO drug directories, like “WHO’s model list of essential medicines”, have no value as medicine according to Cochrane reviews, since the drugs are dangerous, often harmful, and without significant beneficial effects for the patient. You can even say that the lack of effect and the danger of the drugs are well documented!
The pharmaceutical industry has gained control over the WHO system, leading to an extreme bias towards the use of not only ineffective and unnecessary influenza vaccines and medicines, but also to the use of antipsychotics, antidepressant, antianxiety and other psychopharmacological drugs, cytotoxic anti-cancer chemotherapy, and a number of other drugs, which according to independent meta analyses and Cochrane reviews are found to be without significant beneficial effect – and often harmful.
We recommend a fundamental revision of the WHO-system that has proven itself weak to the interests of the pharmaceutical industry.
7. POWER GRAB:
The Pandemic Treaty would authorize the WHO complete control over both governments’ and civil societies’ internal preparedness over actions and policies to tackle future pandemics. What the Treaty offers is a new rules based order completely determined by an international organization with a horrible track record of conflicts of interests with the pharmaceutical industry and hegemonic governments and billionaires.
The Treaty would hold every WHO member nation accountable for following the organization’s dictates. On a global scale, all power over dictating the rules for pandemic preparedness would be centralized in the organization. The WHO would also be the final arbiter and judge over medical related misinformation that it solely believes undermines public health. As we have witnessed during the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO was repeatedly wrong about the benefits of face masks and lockdowns, the benefit-risk ratio of the mRNA vaccines — which are now causing more injuries and deaths than the virus — and safe and effective treatments.
The WHO will be responsible for countermeasures against social media critics. In other words, the organization will be responsible for censorship. It would also have he authority to regulate both domestic and international travel, coordinate vaccination passports, and oversee the digitalization of populations’ health forms and documentation. In brief, the WHO Pandemic Treaty is the harbinger of a medical dictatorship.
Empowering the WHO to be the architect of a single, uniform global structure for administering pandemic responses is a deeply distrubing proposition. There are simply too many glaring reasons and examples for not trusting the WHO to have any control over our lives.
Please view the nearly 100 articles that I have written on substack about the WHO’s lust for power, control and money.
The WHO’s level of incompetence has resulted in serious misinformation about pandemics, medical risks of vaccines and other health-threatening chemicals. For example, during the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, the organization reported it could not find any evidence of human transmission. However, the WHO also repeatedly kowtowed to China’s demands and unscrupulously accepted whatever statistics and statements the Chinese Communist Party health ministry provided.
Responding to a petition signed by over 700,000 signatories demanding the resignation of the current WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom, Japan’s Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso told the Japanese parliament that the organization “should be renamed the Chinese Health Organization” for favoring China’s policy to stall and obstruct international investigations and for lauding unsubstantiated praise on the country’s transparency and handling of the pandemic.
9. OUT-OF-TOUCH (PURPOSELY):
On April 12-13, 2022 the World Health Organization conducted a set of public hearings in which they invited the general public to submit comments regarding the possibility of a “Pandemic Treaty” in written form. The WHO also encouraged the general public to apply for the opportunity to present their comments via Zoom for two minutes. I was personally able to speak directly to the WHO on April 13, 2022.
Months later, the WHO finally made the written public comments available. With less than a week’s notice, the WHO received 33,884 comments from around the world. Well over 99% of the comments clearly were opposed to giving the WHO any more authority, power, control or money via any form of treaty and were generally opposed to even the idea of attempting to negotiate such an agreement.
The WHO, is not accountable to public scrutiny – as non-profits are. The internal documents of the WHO are not available under Freedom of Information, and most of the WHO’s financial contracts are secret. In essence, the WHO became a vassal of, and the global marketing agent for Big Pharma and its aggressive drug and vaccine market expansion agenda. Time and again, the WHO has demonstrated its allegiance to its financial backers; adopting that have vastly enriched Pharma – even as the widespread, use – and misuse – of multi-drug cocktails and multi-virus vaccines – have caused epidemic number of serious adverse side-effects, hospitalizations, chronic illnesses, and deaths.
Now, the WHO is conducting secret negotiations in regards to the proposed Pandemic Treaty and the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations.
1. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND CORRUPTION:
2. VACCINE MADNESS:
3. BUREAUCRACY AND WASTE:
5. HORRIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS:
6. FALSE MODEL OF HEALTH:
7. POWER GRAB:
9. OUT-OF-TOUCH (PURPOSELY):
by James Roguski
The old system is crumbling, and we must build its replacement quickly.
If you are fed up with the government, hospital, medical, pharmaceutical, media, industrial complex and would like to help build a holistic alternative to the WHO, then feel free to contact me directly anytime.
All content is free to all readers.
All support is deeply appreciated.
James Roguski’s newsleter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.