Retired child and adolescent psychiatrist and American expatriate in New Zealand. In 2002, I made the difficult decision to close my 25-year Seattle practice after 15 years of covert FBI harassment. I describe the unrelenting phone harassment, illegal break-ins and six attempts on my life in my 2010 book The Most Revolutionary Act: Memoir of an American Refugee.
An organic, people-led, holistic healing initiative that aims to educate, support, and empower people to take responsibility for their own health.
Prevent rather than treat
Shift the paradigm from treating dis-ease to creating a whole-person prevention plan that encompasses all aspects of healing.
Take responsibility for your own health
Have the freedom to choose your own health path and take responsibility for what works best for you.
Do you believe that the future of healthcare in the US depends on our collective commitment to seek out and find new and better wellness solutions that more directly address the healing needs of individuals?
If so, then welcome to The People’s Health Alliance (PHA) United States of America (USA)
We are inspired and motivated by the incredible groundwork laid by The People’s Health Alliance of the United Kingdom (the-pha.org). Since April 2022, PHA-UK has created a worldwide movement to give ALL people a chance to make important life-changing decisions about their personal health and well-being, as well as that of their families and their communities. Similarly, here at PHA-USA, it is our belief that, when it comes to healthcare, all US citizens should be able to learn about and utilize as wide a variety as possible of health and healing modalities to address and resolve their specific healthcare needs.
Growing concern regarding the viability, accessibility, and effectiveness of the current healthcare system has forced us to think longer and harder about how to deliver quality healthcare here in the States. In response to that concern, PHA-USA is assembling a growing group of practitioners here in the US who represent a broad spectrum of health/wellness modalities; each presents a potential path to assist you on your healing journey. Additionally, PHA-USA is helping to establish regional ambassadors who will lead the efforts close to their communities to help create access for all seeking support on their journey of healing however that looks for the individual.
Whether they be allopathic or holistic practices, PHA-USA is here to provide resources, such as education, options, and a roadmap that will hopefully empower your decisions and steer you toward a higher level of health and well-being.
Here is what we know — each of us individually can make a difference in the health and well-being of ourselves, our families, our community, our country, and our world.
YOU decide
YOU choose
YOU guide YOUR journey
Whether you use PHA-USA for educational purposes, finding a local practitioner and utilizing their services, volunteering, donating, or just passing the link on to someone you know, you’ve done something amazing. For that, we are grateful to you for your service to others.
The PHA Principles:
Treat everyone with respect.
Act in the best interest of our clients and colleagues.
Work collaboratively and communicate effectively.
Take responsibility for our own actions.
Acknowledge that we are all equals regardless of role.
Remain lawful.
Empower people to take responsibility for their own health.
Commit to self-improvement and learning new things.
Peter Flaherty, who is chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center and also a shareholder in Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway company, was arrested during Berkshire Hathaway’s annual shareholder’s meeting last weekend for proposing that Warren Buffet should step aside as Chairman of the Board and CEO so someone else who was not tied to Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein could lead the company.
Flaherty said Buffet had donated tens of billions to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, adding:
“If ‘woke’ culture is a disease, then philanthropy is the virus. The Gates Foundation bankrolls the teaching of Critical Race Theory around the country, including that math is inherently racist.
The Gates Foundation offers a Gender Identity Toolbox which asserts that gender is the result of ‘socially and culturally constructed ideas.
This is a lie. Gender is not a cultural construct. It is a genetic and biological fact.
We know how much Bill Gates cares about children. He met and traveled with Jeffrey Epstein many times after Epstein was convicted of sex crimes.” (Source.)
“I was treated like any other criminal, fingerprinted, handcuffed,” Flaherty said. “I’ve always been courteous with decorum at the annual shareholder meetings. I didn’t raise my voice. I was not disruptive.”
Google co-founder Larry Page is apparently in hiding somewhere, and avoiding a subpoena, so the Virgin Islands is requesting to subpoena Google parent company Alphabet instead. (Source.)
Republican lawmakers are demanding answers after two young people participating in a transgender hormone study funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) committed suicide.
The study, entitled “Psychosocial Functioning in Transgender Youth after 2 Years of Hormones,” was published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) in January and examined the impacts of gender-affirming hormones (GAH) on “transgender and nonbinary youth” between the ages of 12 and 20.
According to the research article, 11 participants reported suicidal thoughts throughout the study and two died by suicide.
NIH gave $477,444 in a five-year grant to the Boston Children’s Hospital, the University of California at San Francisco, and the Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago for the study.
15 Republican lawmakers have sent a letter to Dr. Lawrence Tabak, the acting director at NIH, asking why the study was not terminated after participants reported adverse effects or, let alone when participants died.
“It is alarming that vulnerable young people died by suicide while participating in a taxpayer-funded study that will almost certainly inflict devastating physical harm on those who participated,” the letter stated.
“Rather than shutting the study down after such serious adverse events, the researchers published their paper, concluding that the study was a success because cross-sex hormones had altered subjects’ physical appearance and improved psychosocial functioning,” the lawmakers added, condemning the continuation of the experimentation.
Robert Kennedy Jr., a Democratic candidate for the 2024 United States presidential election, revealed that his account is till banned from Instagram and accused the tech giant of preventing him from accessing the site, despite him being a contender for the White House.
This makes him the only 2024 US presidential candidate that’s unable to post to the influential social media platform and currently being subjected to direct Big Tech censorship.
The other 2024 presidential candidates, Joe Biden (D), Marianne Williamson (D), Larry Elder (R), Nikki Haley (R), Asa Hutchinson (R), Vivek Ramaswamy (R), and Corey Stapleton (R), all have active Instagram accounts.
Kennedy was banned from Instagram in February 2021 for violating the platform’s strict speech rules related to the coronavirus and vaccines. The ban came after several Democratic senators and 12 state attorneys general demanded that Kennedy and other Covid vaccine skeptics be deplatformed by Big Tech. Before the ban, Kennedy had over 800,000 Instagram followers.
Instagram’s failure to reinstate Kennedy since announcing his presidential campaign means that he won’t be able to directly post his message to the social media platform’s sizeable audience of two billion monthly active users.
Large Japanese Study Shows No Benefit on Hard Outcomes
Influenza vaccination has become a mainstay in American medicine largely as measure to protect the elderly. However in recently decades the FluShot has been pushed on healthcare workers, the general adult public, and starting in 2017 the CDC ACIP Panel stated: “Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons age 6 months and older who do not have a contraindication.” I wondered if the FluShot even did was it was supposed to do originally in the elderly—protect against hospitalization and death. I was disappointed by real world data.
Uemura and coworkers from the Department of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Interfaculty Initiative in Information Studies, University of Tokyo, Japan reported on 83,146 individuals who were aged 65 years or older at baseline and were followed up between April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2020.
The multivariable analysis showed a lower incidence of influenza in vaccinated individuals (hazard ratio [HR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-0.51; P < 0.001), however the incidence of hospitalization for influenza did not differ significantly by vaccination status (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.53-1.18; P = 0.249). Protective effectiveness against incidence waned quickly after 4 or 5 months.
These data suggest the massive effort on vaccination in the general population is a waste of time and effort. If the frail and elderly get no overall direct reduction in hospitalization and death, influenza vaccination should be individualized based on pulmonary and systemic risks.
“In June 2020, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the World Health Organization’s [WHO] emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, said that transmission from asymptomatic people was ‘very rare,’” a “conclusion based on a number of countries doing very detailed contact tracing.”
A test that can accurately determine whether an individual with a positive PCR test result for COVID-19 is infectious was available as early as May 2020 — but public health authorities appear to have ignored it.
Researchers at Stanford University who developed the test also determined that the vast majority of asymptomatic individuals who tested positive — 96% — did not transmit the virus.
Investigative reporter and author David Zweig, a previous contributor to the release of the “Twitter files,” first reported on the test on his Substack.
[…]
“Transmission from asymptomatic people is far, far less common than we were led to believe,” Zweig wrote. “The novel test at Stanford that showed a very low rate of infectious asymptomatic people who had tested positive was available as early as May 2020.”
“Yet the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] and other health authorities did nothing,” Zweig said.
Zweig appeared Thursday on The Hill’s “Rising,” where he told the show’s hosts:
“At Stanford, they developed a test in May of 2020, the very beginning of the pandemic, that actually could find out whether or not you were infectious.
“After you had taken a regular PCR test, if it showed you were positive, they could determine whether or not that positive test meant you could actually infect others or not.”
Zweig wrote that while the standard PCR test commonly administered during the COVID-19 pandemic “detects whether someone has the virus … it cannot detect whether the person is capable of infecting others.”
The test developed by Stanford researchers, however, was able to accomplish this. As Zweig explained:
“SARS-CoV-2 is a positive or ‘plus-stranded’ RNA virus. For it to replicate it must do so with a minus strand.
“Brilliantly, the Stanford test looks to see if the minus strand is present. If it is then that indicates the virus is actively replicating, which means it’s potentially infectious. If the minus strand is absent then the virus is not replicating. (It is not possible to transmit the virus if it is not replicating.)”
Benjamin Pinsky, Ph.D., medical director of Stanford’s Clinical Virology Laboratory and medical co-director for Point of Care Testing, was one of the researchers involved in the development of the test. He told Zweig the purpose of the test was to help hospital clinicians accurately determine if patients were infectious or not.
“The minus strand test gave a definitive answer one way or another,” Zweig wrote. But although the test was available as early as May 2020, the CDC did not publish the researchers’ paper about the test until February 2021.
The paper, published in the Emerging Infectious Diseases journal, stated that the analytical validation for the test was conducted “during May-June 2020.”
By publishing the paper in early 2021, federal agencies “certainly were aware that this test existed” even prior to its publication date, Zweig told “Rising.”
“This raises serious questions for those in charge of the CDC, NIH [National Institutes of Health], and NIAID [National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases] for why resources were not allocated toward making this test broadly available,” Zweig wrote on his Substack, adding:
“Though the test was developed for use in hospitals, its utility outside of a medical setting is obvious.
“Regular people could have paid for the test to find out after they got over a bout of COVID whether they were still infectious or not, enabling them to go to work, visit relatives, and so on. Millions of kids could have tested out of isolation.”
Zweig told “Rising” that while it’s unclear why the paper wasn’t put out more broadly, “the fascinating part is we had this tool to give us an answer to a question that was merely conjecture for the entire pandemic.”
What’s more, according to Zweig, Stanford researchers “later looked at data from this test from July of 2020 through April 2022, and answered the question health authorities neglected to answer,” finding that “only 4% of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients were shown to be infectious.”
Zweig noted, however, that this percentage did decrease during the “Omicron wave,” where the infection rate among asymptomatic patients “peaked at about 25%.”
Using the classroom environment as an analogy, Tayyar told Zweig, “The probability of a kid in class who is not sick actually being infectious is very low.”
Tayyar noted that while public health officials did not adopt the Stanford test, Stanford itself stopped conducting admission screen testing. He said there was no evidence that this resulted in an increase in transmission of COVID-19.
“The CDC could have immediately conducted a huge study to actually answer the question health officials had only been conjecturing about — what percentage of positive people without symptoms have the capability of infecting others,” Zweig said, but opted not to.
Instead, Zweig wrote, during the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic, “The specter of asymptomatic transmission undergirded not just policies on masks, but on distancing, and quarantines as well.”
According to Zweig, Dr. Anthony Fauci referred to the purported threat of asymptomatic spread to justify his “180 on community mask recommendations.” For instance, Fauci told The Washington Post in July 2020:
“We didn’t realize the extent of asymptotic spread … as the weeks and months came by, two things became clear: one, that there wasn’t a shortage of masks, we had plenty of masks and coverings that you could put on that’s plain cloth … so that took care of that problem.
“Secondly, we fully realized that there are a lot of people who are asymptomatic who are spreading infection. So, it became clear that we absolutely should be wearing masks consistently.”
The concept of “silent spread” was so influential that Dr. Deborah Birx, the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator from Feb. 27, 2020, to Jan. 20, 2021, named her book “Silent Invasion: The Untold Story of the Trump Administration, Covid-19, and Preventing the Next Pandemic Before It’s Too Late” after it, Zweig said.
“The entire apparatus of our pandemic response — which, most consequentially, kept millions of healthy children out of full-time school for more than a year — was based on this notion,” Zweig wrote.
Other studies also showed that asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 was uncommon.
“In June 2020, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the World Health Organization’s [WHO] emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, said that transmission from asymptomatic people was ‘very rare,’” a “conclusion based on a number of countries doing very detailed contact tracing,” Zweig wrote.
However, “the next day, after criticism from some health professionals, WHO officials walked back her statement, and Van Kerkhove said it was a ‘complex question,’” Zweig added.
And an editorial published in The BMJ in December 2020 stated that “Searching for people who are asymptomatic yet infectious is like searching for needles that appear and reappear transiently in haystacks.”
However, these findings were overshadowed by research claiming that a substantial percentage of COVID-19 infections were caused by asymptomatic individuals.
According to Zweig, such findings “supported the health authorities’ messaging … justified various community interventions” and were “covered everywhere.”
“[Many] of the actions we were told — or compelled — to take, including an acceptance of all those closed or half-empty schools, had little to no benefit,” Zweig wrote. “Schools — as they did in Sweden — and most of society could have simply followed the classic advice ‘if you’re sick, stay home,’ and we would have ended up in the same place.”
An FBI surveillance contractor infiltrated the chatrooms of two airline industry groups opposed to vaccine mandates to collect intelligence on the groups’ organizing activities, investigative journalist Lee Fang reported.
The contractor, Flashpoint, which in the past infiltrated Islamic terror groups, now focuses on “anti-vaccine” groups and other domestic political organizations, according to Fang.
In a webinar presentation for clients last year, which Fang analyzed on his Substack, Flashpoint analyst Vlad Cuiujuclu demonstrated his company’s methods for identifying and entering encrypted Telegram chat groups.
He explained how the company attempted to join chatrooms of transportation workers resisting the COVID-19 vaccine mandates.
Fang described the presentation:
“‘In this case, we’re searching for a closed channel of U.S. Freedom Flyers,’ said Cuiujuclu. ‘It’s basically a group that opposed vaccination and masks.’
“As he clicked through a database, Cuiujuclu showed a chat group on Telegram sponsored by Airline Professionals For Justice, another group formed by airline industry workers opposed to the mandate. The forum, he added, provided useful insights, including Zoom links for meetings of the grassroots organization.
“‘Private chats,’ said Cuiujuclu, ‘require for you to have an invite link,’ which he noted can often either be found by scrolling through public forums or by ‘engag[ing] the admin of that channel.’”
Flashpoint also offers clients artificial intelligence and internet scraping tools.
According to Fang, the firm is a leader in the “threat intelligence industry,” a growing number of security and surveillance firms that create fake online identities to infiltrate Discord chats, WhatsApp groups, Reddit forums and dark web message boards to gather information for clients, including corporations and the FBI, to monitor potential threats.
Joshua Yoder, president of US Freedom Flyers, said he is aware that Flashpoint infiltrated private chat groups associated with his organization.
“Tradecraft and other strategies are often used to gain inside knowledge of conservative organizations with the intent to disrupt, mislead and otherwise thwart effective campaigns.
“Infiltration is a tactic used by the deep state to prevent the truth from being told by attempting to destroy the advancement of the message. The team at US Freedom Flyers has been successful in recognizing these attacks and we have taken decisive actions to protect the organization and our members.”
US Freedom Flyers brought a lawsuit against Atlas Air, one of the largest air cargo carriers in the aviation industry, in May 2022.
Fang told The Defender the targeting of American citizens resisting the vaccine mandates fits into a long history of surveillance being used to subvert democracy. He said:
“There is a long sordid history of informants and surveillance contractors working to undermine democratic engagement in this country.
“The push against regular citizens opposed to COVID-19 vaccine mandates has come in many forms: censorship, demonization and in this case, surveillance.”
The growing market for spying on domestic dissent
Flashpoint advertises its surveillance success on its website, providing examples of its work undermining environmental activism, G20 protests and protests against the aviation industry.
The webpages describing these activities were taken down after Fang published his investigation, but they can be found on the Wayback Machine internet archive.
For example, Flashpoint described its capacity to monitor activists organizing against pollution and the aviation industry. The website said:
“By monitoring the situation and assessing tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP’s), Flashpoint was able to assess the impact of upcoming protests, and determine that these groups would likely continue to protest and attempt to impede airport construction and expansion projects through direct action. …
“Based on this information, Flashpoint customers were able to take actions to help control the impact to business operations, and to ensure the safety of their employees and facilities as well as the safety of those protesting.”
Flashpoint was founded by Evan Kohlmann, former NBC News contributor who investigated Islamic terror groups and whom The Intercept described as “the U.S. government’s go-to expert witness in terrorism prosecutions.”
Jack Poulson of Tech Inquiry, a group that researches the surveillance industry, told Fang that “Flashpoint has been selling its chatroom infiltration services to companies and governments for years.”
But, he said, it has shifted its focus from “surveilling Muslims after September 11” and “followed the money into both the Pentagon’s information warfare programs and the business of monitoring domestic protest groups.”
These acquisitions come in addition to “a steady stream of contracts to Flashpoint in recent years from the FBI, the Department of Defense, Treasury Department, and Department of Homeland Security, among other agencies,” Fang wrote.
Remember the endless media hysterics about COVID being “dangerous to unvaccinated pregnant women”?
A recent report MBRRACE-UK throws doubt on such statements. It covers 2018-2020, so the year of 2020 was a part of the COVID pandemic.
In the UK, in 2020 (before COVID vaccines), only NINE women died from (or with) COVID-19 during pregnancy or up to six weeks after giving birth.
Remember that in 2020, all pregnant women in the UK were unvaccinated. COVID was at its worst in 2020.
COVID was quite rampant in the UK at the time. According to Our World in Data, the UK had 94,194 COVID deaths in 2020. However, only nine deaths out of those involved pregnant women.
ONS reports that England and Wales had 613,936 live births in 2020.
So,
Pregnant women’s COVID deaths (9 total) were less than one in ten thousand overall COVID deaths.
Pregnant women’s deaths (9 total) were less than one in 68,000 (sixty-eight thousand) births.
In other words, for every pregnant woman who died of COVID in 2020, over 68,000 did NOT die.
Every death is a tragedy, especially those of future mothers. Those nine deaths were tragic for the families involved. I am very sorry for each of the nine women who died with COVID in the UK in 2020. I am relieved, however, that the number of deaths among pregnant women was far less than what the media intimated.
Was COVID a great danger to pregnant women? The numbers above suggest that the chance of dying from COVID for unvaccinated women in 2020 was very remote, as there was less than one COVID death per 68,000 births.
To me, this cannot be considered “particularly dangerous.” Pregnant women are young (most are under 40), and Covid is not particularly deadly to that age category.
So, those who believed that COVID-19 puts future mothers’ lives at tremendous risk were lied to. Pregnant women were given false information to nudge them to get vaccinated.
The evidence that convinced me this vaccine is both ineffective and dangerous.
Whooping Cough is a disease that killed 5000 -10,000 people between the years 1900 and 1934 according to the Centre for Disease Control. From 1970-1988, only 5 -10 people died each year of whooping cough (also known as pertussis/diphtheria). What is the cause for this decline? Mainstream institutions tell us that this is because of the introduction of the vaccine. However, the national vaccination program did not begin until the 1940s in the United States and not until 1957 in England. By this time, whooping cough had already been reduced by 92-99% in the population1.
Dr. Gordon T Stewart explains in his 1981 report on infectious disease:
“Historically, the dominant and obvious fact is that most, if not all, major communicable diseases have become less serious in all developed countries for 50 years or more. Whooping cough is no exception. It has behaved in this respect like measles and similarly to scarlet fever and diphtheria, in each of which at least 80% of the total decline in mortality, since records began to be kept in the United Kingdom in 1860, occurred before any vaccine or antimicrobial drugs were available and 90% or more before there was any national vaccine programme.”2
This is the primary argument that tells me that the vaccine was not responsible for eradicating Whooping Cough.
What is Whooping Cough?
In a report by Dr. WC Rucker, Assistant Surgeon General in the United States Public Health Service, explains whooping cough in 1911.
“The disease is not infrequently complicated by inflammation of the lungs, and the violent coughing which occurs is apt to produce a harmful dilation of the lung tissue itself. It is by no means uncommon in underfed children for the disease to be followed by a tuberculosis of the lungs. Cases of paralysis complicating whooping cough have been reported, and the changes in the eye due to haemorrhages into that organ produced by coughing have also been noted. It is thus seen that whooping cough, which is estimated killed over 10,000 American children in the year 1911, is a disease seriously affecting the public health and demanding earnest attention.”
Whooping cough is also known as pertussis. The vaccine used to “prevent” whooping cough is called the DTP (Diptheria,-Tetanus Toxoid Pertussis) vaccine.
Does the Vaccine Work to Prevent Whooping Cough?
If we believe the vaccine provides protection to children from the disease, we would expect that vaccinated children would develop the disease less frequently than unvaccinated children. Unvaccinated children should be getting the disease more often. Let us see what the data indicate:
A new pre-print paper published at bioRxiv reveals that long after a person gets “vaccinated” for the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) with an mRNA series of injections, the spike proteins generated as a result of the shots persist in their brain tissue.
Researchers out of Germany and Denmark evaluated brain tissue samples both in mouse models and post-mortem humans, looking for the presence and distribution of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. They specifically looked at the skull-meninges-brain axis.
They found that spike protein from the shots accumulates in the skull marrow, brain meninges, and brain parenchyma, further explaining that the “injection of the spike protein alone caused cell death in the brain, highlighting a direct effect on brain tissue.”
Even long after a “positive” covid test and infection has passed, spike proteins continue to remain lodged in the human brain. Researchers say these lingering spike proteins could contribute to long-term neurological symptoms such as brain “fog” and brain tissue loss.
“The spike protein was associated with neutrophil-related pathways and dysregulation of the proteins involved in the PI3K-AKT as well as complement and coagulation pathway,” the paper explains.
“Overall, our findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 spike protein trafficking from CNS borders into the brain parenchyma and identified differentially regulated pathways may present insights into mechanisms underlying immediate and long-term consequences of SARS-CoV-2 and present diagnostic and therapeutic opportunities.”
Do covid jab spike proteins EVER leave the body?
Up until recently, the federal government, along with some state and local authorities, were pressing Americans to continue getting repeated covid shots and “boosters,” claiming that doing so was the only way to prevent this type of toxic buildup from occurring.
It turns out that the more covid shots a person takes, the more these spikes proteins and who-knows-what-else gets distributed throughout the body, including inside brain tissue, resulting in potentially very serious long-term health problems.
Early on, the world was promised that the contents of these shots dissipate not long after they are injected, leaving behind nothing more than immunity and protection against covid. We now know that this was all a lie, and that the contents of the shots do linger, perhaps forever, while the protection does not.
Walter Chestnut from WMCResearch.org was warning about this back in 2021 following the launch of Operation Warp Speed. He stated that the “robust immune response” the shots supposedly produce, at least according to government officials, “may come at a lethal cost” – and he was right.
It turns out that numerous peer-reviewed studies even back then revealed that spike proteins from the injections lodge themselves throughout the body and stay there, deactivating a person’s telomerase, causing premature aging and possibly death.
As telomeres shorten over time, they expose a person’s DNA to increasing levels of corruption, which is when aging symptoms really start to appear. In the case of covid shots, their spike proteins appear to accelerate the breakdown of telomerase, resulting in rapid aging and premature death for many.
Posted BY: | NwoReport
