United Health Professionals Fight Back against Covid Terror Attack

Issue International alert

SOURCE: WedWideNews.com

Intro by The Masked Writer

A collective of healthcare professionals protesting the pseudo-science behind the Covid Terror attack orchestrated by subversive factions ‘operating under the cover of “government” has issued a warning (see below) that we urge you to read and consider as part of the process of arming yourself with understanding.

If you want to support them, here is their Facebook page: and email address: [email protected]

They urge all of us to circulate the International Alert Message put out by their group (see also below) to any healthcare professionals we may know and to copy, share, distribute it as widely as we canto publish it ourselves widely.

Among the signatories are physicians from many countries and several medical professors, including Austrian microbiologist Prof. Martin Haditsch who is affiliated with the German association of doctors, ACU2020, led by Dr. Heiko Schoning and Dr. Bodo Schiffmann.

ACU2020, led by Schiffmann and Schoning, have teamed up with a large group of Spanish-speaking doctors from various countries, called Medicos Por La Verdad. See Spanish and German Doctor Groups Team Up for International Investigation of CV ‘Scam’ [VIDEO].


The collective discusses the real danger of the virus, the manipulation of numbers, the role of the WHO, the consequences of confinement or wearing masks, and calls on governments to “lift all restrictions and obligations on citizens”. You can download and keep safe the full letter in English.

Healthcare professionals who wish to do so are invited to join the “United Health Professionals” collective at [email protected]. Please note that whilst the collective needs and values our support and help, membership of it is, of necessity, confined to health professionals only



STOP : terror, madness, manipulation, dictatorship, lies and the biggest health scam of the 21th century

We, health professionals, across several countries in the world :

1. We say: STOP to all the crazy and disproportionate measures that have been taken since the beginning to fight SARS-CoV-2 (containment, blocking the economy and education, social distancing, masks for all, etc.) because they are totally unjustified, they are not based on any scientific evidence and they violate the basic principles of evidence-based medicine. On the other hand, of course, we support reasonable measures such as recommendations for hand washing, sneezing or coughing into one’s elbow, use of a single-use handkerchief, etc.

This is not the first time that mankind has faced a new virus: it was H2N2 in 1957, H3N2 in 1968, SARS-CoV in 2003, H5N1 in 2004, H1N1 in 2009, MERS-CoV in 2012 and faces the seasonal flu virus every year. However, none of the measures taken for SARS-CoV-2 have been taken for these viruses.

We are told :

“But, SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious” and we say: This is FALSE, a statement that is rejected by internationally renowned experts. A simple comparison with other viruses shows that the contagiousness of SARS-CoV-2 is moderate. Diseases such as measles can be described as highly contagious. For example, a person infected with measles can infect up to 20 people, whereas a person infected with this coronavirus only infects 2 or 3, which is 10 times less than measles.

– “But, it’s a new virus” and we reply: H1N1 and the other viruses that were mentioned were also new viruses. Yet: we did not confine countries, we did not block the world economy, we did not paralyze the education system, we did not make social distancing and we did not tell healthy people to wear masks. Moreover, some experts say that it is possible that this virus was already circulating before, but that we did not realize it.

– “But, we don’t have a vaccine” and we answer: at the beginning of H1N1 we didn’t have a vaccine either, like in the time of SARS-CoV. Yet: we didn’t confine countries, we didn’t block the world economy, we didn’t paralyze the education system, we didn’t make social distancing and we didn’t tell healthy people to wear masks.

– But, this virus is much more deadly” and we answer: FALSE, because just compared to the flu and if we take into account the period between November 1 and March 31, there have been worldwide -when these measures were taken: 860,000 cases and 40,000 deaths, while the flu in the same period of 5 months infects, on average, 420 million people and kills 270,000. Moreover, the case-fatality rate announced by the WHO (3.4%) was largely overestimated and was rejected from the outset by eminent experts in epidemiology. However, even taking this case-fatality rate, we can see that this coronavirus is three times less lethal than the 2003 rate (10%) and 10 times less lethal than the 2012 rate (35%).

– “But, COVID-19 is a serious disease” and we say, “That’s not true. The SARS-CoV-2 is a benign virus for the general population because it gives 85% of benign forms, 99% of infected subjects recover, it is not a danger for pregnant women and children (unlike influenza), it spreads less rapidly than influenza and 90% of those who die are elderly (who must, of course, be protected like other populations at risk). This is why experts have called the claim that it is a serious disease “delusional” and stated, on August 19th, that “it is no worse than the flu”.

– “But, there are asymptomatic people” and we answer: in the flu too, 77% of infected people are asymptomatic and they can also transmit the virus. Yet: healthy people are not told to wear masks every year and there is no social distancing despite the fact that the flu infects 1 billion people and kills 650,000.

– “But, this virus causes saturation of hospitals” and we answer: It’s FALSE. The saturation only concerns a few hospitals but people are made to believe that the whole hospital system is saturated or that saturation is imminent, whereas there are thousands of hospitals in some countries. Is it reasonable and true to attribute, for example, to 1,000 or 2,000 hospitals a situation that concerns only 4 or 5 hospitals? It is also not surprising that some hospitals are saturated because they were epidemic outbreaks (such as Lombardy in Italy or New York in the USA). It should not be forgotten that hospitals in many countries have been overwhelmed (including intensive care units) during previous flu epidemics and that at that time there was even talk of : “tsunami” of patients in hospitals, “saturated hospitals”, tents erected outside hospitals, “war zones”, “collapsed hospitals” and a “state of emergency”. […]

2. We say: STOP to these crazy measures because, also, of their catastrophic consequences that have already begun to appear:

Suicide of anxious people as reported in China, development of psychiatric pathologies, paralysis of the educational path of pupils and university students, negative impacts and dangers on animals, neglect of other (especially chronic) diseases and increase of their mortality, increase of domestic violence, economic losses, unemployment, major economic crisis […], serious consequences on agriculture, destabilization of countries and social peace and risk of outbreak of wars. […]

3. We REFUSE the requirement for contact tracing applications as is the case in some countries because SARS-CoV-2 is a benign virus that does not justify such a measure. Moreover, according to international recommendations and regardless of the severity of a pandemic (moderate, high, very high), contact tracing is not recommended. During influenza epidemics, do we do contact tracing? No. However, the influenza virus infects many more people and has more at-risk populations than this coronavirus.

4. We say: STOP censoring experts and healthcare professionals to prevent them from telling the truth (especially in countries that call themselves democratic).

5. We agree with the experts who denounce the inclusion of screenings in case counts, even if the subjects are healthy and asymptomatic.

This has led to an overestimation of cases. It should be remembered that the definition of a case in epidemiology is: “the occurrence of many possible outcomes: disease, complications, sequelae, death. In so-called syndromic surveillance, a case is defined as the occurrence of non-specific events such as symptom clusters or reasons for seeking care, hospitalizations, emergency calls”. We therefore say: we must separate the screening of cases and stop mixing them up.

6. We agree with the experts who denounce the fact that no distinction is made between those who died from the virus and those who died with the virus (with co-morbidities), that the cause of death is attributed to SARS-CoV-2 without testing or autopsy and that doctors are under pressure to mark COVID- 19 as the cause of death, even if the patient died from something else. This leads to an overestimation of the number of deaths and is a scandalous manipulation of the numbers because during seasonal influenza epidemics, for example, this is not the way to work. Especially since 20% of COVID patients are co-infected with other respiratory viruses as well. After re-evaluation, only 12% of death certificates in one European country showed a direct causality of the coronavirus. In another European country, Professors Yoon Loke and Carl Heneghan showed that a patient who tested positive but was successfully treated and then discharged from hospital will still be counted as a COVID death even if he had a heart attack or was mowed down by a bus three months later. The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in one North American country acknowledged on July 31 that hospitals have a perverse financial incentive to inflate coronavirus death figures.

7. We agree with experts who have warned against the almost systematic intubation of some patients due to the mad fear of the virus. Protocols need to be changed because they have resulted in a high number of deaths.

8. We say that it is important that a review of the analytical and clinical performance of the tests put on the market be done, including virological tests. Many kits are currently being used when an important part of their performance (e.g., analytical specificity, especially for the four seasonal coronaviruses) has not been evaluated, which is serious because in addition to false negative cases, the literature reports worrying false positives, which may overestimate the number of cases and deaths. According to a professor of microbiology, the rate of false positives can reach 20%. Some scientific articles that report these cases of false positives have been censored. So we say: STOP to the obligation of screening tests because of this unreliability and lack of verification of their performance and because nothing in this coronavirus (which is a benign virus with a low lethality rate) justifies it. As we have said: influenza infects 1 billion people every year, 30 times more than the SARS-CoV-2, and yet no testing is required for travel.

9. We say to citizens: don’t be afraid, this virus is benign unless you are part of the at-risk populations. If the TV channels do the same thing with the flu, the numbers will be much higher than for the coronavirus! On average, television will report an average of 3 million cases and 2,000 deaths from the flu every day. And for tuberculosis, television will report an average of 30,000 cases and 5,000 deaths every day. The flu virus infects 1 billion people every year and kills 650,000, and tuberculosis infects 10.4 million people every year and kills 1.8 million. In addition, on TV they talk about “cases” when it is about screening and not about cases. […]

10. We say to citizens: hand washing is a reflex that we must have throughout our lives, whether there is coronavirus or not, because it is the most effective hygiene measure. But wearing a mask when we are not sick and practicing social distancing is not part of hygiene or the preservation of public health, but it is madness. Wearing a mask for a long time has several undesirable effects on your health and turns it into a nest of germs. “The virus can concentrate in the mask and when you take it off, the virus can be transferred to your hands and spread,” said Dr. Anders Tegnell, epidemiologist. When asked if people put themselves in more danger by wearing masks, Dr. Jenny Harries replied: “Because of these handling problems [of the masks], people can put themselves in more danger. …] You should know that the mouth and nose are not meant to be blocked. What you are wearing is a mask, in appearance, but a muzzle on your freedom, in reality. Especially since, as several experts, including Professor Yoram Lass, say, the epidemic is over in most countries and those who tell you otherwise are LIARS. By telling you that the epidemic is not over, by brandishing the threat of a 2nd wave (which is not based on any evidence), by asking you to wear a mask and to make social distancing, the goal is, in fact, to prolong the fear until a vaccine is made and to make it more acceptable to you.

11. We say to the airlines: several scientific studies have shown a link between excessive hygiene and the development of diseases such as allergic diseases, autoimmune diseases, inflammatory diseases or certain cancers. This is what we call in medicine: the hygienist hypothesis. So, stop the disinfection operations and remove the masks and ridiculous protective suits of your employees that we have seen in the media. Doing this is insane. Airports also need to stop temperature taking and quarantines. SARS-CoV-2 is not the black plague. You too, like citizens, have been manipulated.

12. We say to governments: lift all restrictions and obligations on citizens (state of emergency, compulsory wearing of masks, social distancing, etc.) because they are stupid and purely dictatorial and have nothing to do with medicine or hygiene or the preservation of public health. There is no scientific or medical reason for non-sick citizens to wear masks. Dr. Pascal Sacré, an anesthesiologist, said: “Forcing everyone to wear them all the time, while the epidemic disappears, is a scientific and medical aberration”. Professor Didier Raoult said: “The decision of confinement as well as the decision of masks…are not based on scientific data. […]. Professor Maël Lemoine also specified that the change of discourse on masks is: “political, not scientific”. In some Asian countries, people wear masks all year round (to protect themselves, among other things, from pollution). Has the widespread wearing of masks in these countries prevented them from having coronavirus epidemics? Does the generalized wearing of masks in these countries prevent them from having epidemics of influenza or other respiratory viruses every year? The answer is of course: no. […]

13. We say to the forces of law and order: the citizens owe you a lot because you are every day the guarantors of their security and the respect of law and order. But upholding the law does not mean blindly submitting to unjust orders. It was this mistake that led to the Second World War and the death of 50 million people. So we say to you: enforce the law but not injustice and dictatorship, refuse to impose these measures, refuse to verbalize your fellow citizens (when they are not wearing a mask for example), do not beat them, do not imprison them. Do not be the instruments of the dictatorship. […]

14. We say to the citizens: the law must be respected. But this does not mean blind submission to madness, injustice or dictatorship. It was this blind submission of citizens to unjust laws that led to the Second World War with the death of 50 million people. You were born free and you must live free, therefore: do not be afraid and if you are not sick: take off the masks, go out of your homes as you wish and without social distancing, but do it peacefully and without any violence. Professors Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, epidemiologists with great expertise in evidence-based medicine, say: “There is no scientific evidence to support the disastrous two-meter rule. Poor quality research is being used to justify a policy with huge consequences for all of us”.

15. We are saying that a total reform of the WHO is needed.

The successes of the WHO are indisputable: millions of lives have been saved thanks to smallpox vaccination programs and tobacco consumption has been reduced worldwide. But the major problem with WHO is that it has for several years been 80% funded by corporations (including pharmaceutical companies) and private donors (including a well-known foundation) and the evidence is mounting: false alarm on H1N1 under the influence of pharmaceutical lobbies, disturbing complacency towards glyphosate which the WHO had declared safe despite the victims of the herbicide, blindness to the consequences of pollution linked to oil companies in Africa, minimization of the human toll of the nuclear disasters from Chernobyl to Fukushima and the disasters of the use of depleted uranium munitions in Iraq or the Balkans, non-recognition of Artemisia to protect the interests of pharmaceutical companies despite its proven efficacy in the treatment of malaria.

The independence of the organization is compromised both by the influence of industrial lobbies -especially pharmaceuticals- and by the interests of its member states, in particular: China. The president of one country said: “I think the World Health Organization should be ashamed because they have become the spokesmen of China”. The Geneva institution, which had underestimated the Ebola threat (more than eleven thousand deaths) is furthermore accused of neglecting tropical diseases in favor of juicier markets. A survey conducted in 2016 (WHO in the clutches of lobbyists) delivered an edifying x-ray of the WHO, painting the portrait of a fragile structure, subject to multiple conflicts of interest. This investigation showed how private interests dominate public health issues at the WHO. It is not acceptable that the money that finances it comes mainly from one person and that it is infiltrated by lobbies. Recently, the WHO has become even more discredited by falling into the Lancet Gate trap when an ordinary student would have discovered the fraud.

At the time of H1N1: Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, chairman of the Health Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, criticized the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on WHO scientists and officials, saying it led to the situation where “unnecessarily millions of healthy people were exposed to the risk of poorly tested vaccines” and that, for one strain of flu, it was “much less harmful” than all previous flu epidemics. He was absolutely right, since later the vaccine killed 1,500 people with narcolepsy, 80% of them children, as we will see. He also blamed the WHO for fuelling fears of a “false pandemic”, called it “one of the biggest medical scandals of this century” and called for an investigation.

Indeed, the criteria for declaring a pandemic (such as severity) have been modified by the WHO under the influence of pharmaceutical lobbies so that they can sell vaccines to countries around the world. According to a report by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on the management of H1N1 influenza, including by the WHO: “Significant public funds have been wasted and there are unjustified fears about health risks…Serious shortcomings have been identified in the transparency of the decision-making processes related to the pandemic, raising concerns about the possible influence that the pharmaceutical industry could have exerted on key decisions related to the pandemic. The Assembly is concerned that this lack of transparency and accountability could lead to a decline in public confidence in the opinions of major public health organizations”. History is repeating itself today with exactly the same actors and the same companionship of fear. The former secretary general of the WHO’s public health department revealed in another survey (TrustWHO) that at the time of H1N1, nobody was afraid at WHO and that he does not know anyone at WHO who was vaccinated, including the former director general: the Chinese Margaret Chan. Although he is a senior WHO official, he and most of his colleagues were excluded from a meeting between the director-general and the pharmaceutical vaccine companies on the grounds that “this is a private meeting”?

16. We say that an investigation must be opened and that some WHO officials must be questioned, especially the one who promoted international containment (lockdown), which is a heresy from a medical point of view and a scam that has led the world astray. Indeed, on February 25, 2020: the head of the international coronavirus observation mission in China praised Beijing’s response to the epidemic. He said that China has succeeded by “old-fashioned” methods, stressed that “the world needs lessons from China”, that it should be inspired by them and that if he had COVID-19, he would like to be treated in China!

He also once described China as “very open” and “very transparent”. How can we believe these statements? How can we believe that if he had VIDOC-19, he would go to China for treatment? How can we believe that the world should be inspired by China and that the fight against the epidemic should be done with “old-fashioned methods”?

Indeed, the criteria for declaring a pandemic (such as severity) have been modified by the WHO under the influence of pharmaceutical lobbies so that they can sell vaccines to countries around the world. According to a report by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on the management of H1N1, including by the WHO: “waste of important public funds and existence of unjustified fears pertaining to the fact that he has managed to make the whole world swallow his salads. Because unfortunately: since his statements and the report he supervised (which states that Chinese methods are: “agile and ambitious”), the countries of the world have implemented disproportionate measures and have blindly followed the WHO by confining their populations. Fear and psychosis have been propagated by presenting SARS-CoV-2 as a very dangerous or mass-mortality virus when this is absolutely not the case.

…Canadian elected members of the House of Commons even summoned this WHO official to appear after he declined invitations to testify before the Standing Committee on Health. Even the acting leader of the Canadian Conservative Party questioned the accuracy of the WHO data on VIDOC-19. Indeed, to say that China has reduced the number of cases or has managed the epidemic well and smoothed the curve through containment is a complete lie and is not based on any evidence because no one is able to give a figure for the number of cases or deaths in China if they had not applied containment. […]

Madness has reached the point where in some countries: beaches were disinfected with bleach, mustached and bearded firemen were forbidden to work, Plexiglas were installed everywhere (even in school classrooms) as if it was the black plague, a train was stopped because someone was not wearing a mask, families deprived of seeing their dead (as if the virus was going to jump out of their bodies and bite them), septuagenarians who were fined for going out to throw out the garbage and even coins and banknotes from abroad were “isolated”!

How could countries accept falling into this level of madness, stupidity and dictatorship? Especially those that call themselves democratic. All this for a virus that causes 85% of benign forms and for which 99% of infected people recover. The WHO urged the world to copy China’s response to COVID-19 and it succeeded; every country in the world, blindly following the WHO, has become a carbon copy of China. Only a few countries have refused to foolishly imitate the others, such as Sweden or Belarus, which can be congratulated. […]

17. We say that we must stop blindly following the WHO because it is not a learned society and is far from being independent, as we have seen. Asked about the reason for the decision to make 11 vaccines compulsory, a former health minister of a European country replied: “It is a public health decision that responds, in fact, to a global objective of the WHO, which today asks all countries in the world to obtain 95% of children vaccinated for the necessary vaccines”.

We also recommend that governments choose the experts who advise them carefully and avoid those who have links with pharmaceutical laboratories. A great professor of infectiology made this remark about certain experts from a European country: “An eminent member of the Communicable Diseases Commission of this High Council thus received 90,741 euros from the pharmaceutical industry, including 16,563 euros from [a pharmaceutical laboratory that produces a molecule that competes with hydroxychloroquine]. It was this High Council that issued the famous opinion prohibiting hydroxychloroquine, except for the dying…I see no trace in this opinion of compliance with the procedure for managing conflicts of interest…If a member has a major conflict of interest, he must leave the meeting and not participate in the debates or in the drafting of the opinion…However, at the bottom of this opinion, there is no mention of conflicts of interest or of the number of qualified members who participated in the vote. This is a serious breach of the rules”. […]

18. We say to governments: no longer follow – in epidemics – the mathematical models that are virtual things with no link to reality and that have led the world astray on several occasions and have served as a justification for crazy containment policies. Indeed, a European university with strong links to the WHO had said that:

– 50,000 British people will have died from mad cow disease while in the end only 177 died.

– Bird flu was going to kill 200 million people while only 282 died.

– H1N1 was going to kill 65,000 British people, but only 457 died. The death rate was also exaggerated when H1N1 finally turned out to be much less dangerous, prompting many people to denounce the considerable money, time and resources spent on a mild flu. At the time, the press discovered that the university rector, who advised the WHO and governments, received a salary of £116,000 a year from the H1N1 vaccine manufacturer.

And today, it is on the basis of the same flawed model, developed for flu pandemic planning, that they gave their astrological predictions on COVID-19; they said that 500,000 will die in the UK, 2.2 million in the US, 70,000 in Sweden and between 300,000 and 500,000 in France! Who can believe these crazy figures? That’s why Professor Didier Raoult calls these models “modern form of divinations”.

Professor John Ashton also denounced these astrological predictions and the fact that they have a kind of religious status. Moreover, the press discovered that whoever in this university has incited governments to confinement/lockdown does not even respect what they were advocating. Here again, an investigation deserves to be carried out among certain officials of this European university. Professor Jean-François Toussaint said about confinement:

“We must at all costs prevent any government from ever taking such a decision again. All the more so since the instrumentalization of the pandemic with generalized confinement for half of humanity will only lead to the reinforcement of authoritarian regimes and the suspension of campaigns to prevent major fatal diseases. In France, simulations estimating that 60,000 lives have been saved are pure fantasy”.

The famous international slogan: “Stay at home, save lives” was simply a false statement. On the contrary, containment has killed many people.

19. We REFUSE the vaccination obligation and we REFUSE the obligation of a certificate of vaccination against coronavirus for travel for the following reasons:

The vaccine is not indispensable because 85% of the forms are benign, 99% of the infected subjects recover and children and pregnant women are not at risk. In addition, a large part of the population is already protected against CoV-2-SARS through cross-immunity acquired with seasonal coronaviruses. To say that we are not sure is A LIE and to cast doubt on the duration or effectiveness of this protection is a manipulation to protect the vaccine business plan.

– It is an RNA virus, therefore more prone to mutations and the vaccine may be ineffective.

– Vaccine trials are being rushed and there are calls to speed up testing procedures and dispense with the usual safety trials. Understanding the safety risks could lead to unwarranted setbacks during the pandemic and in the future.

– Previous coronavirus vaccine trials are cause for concern:

In 2004, one of the vaccines developed for SARS caused hepatitis in the animals on which it was tested. Another vaccine undergoing testing had caused severe lung damage in laboratory animals, making them more susceptible to future infections. Vaccines developed against another coronavirus, feline infectious peritonitis virus, increased the risk of cats developing the disease caused by the virus. Similar phenomena have been observed in animal studies for other viruses, including the coronavirus that causes SARS.

– Some vaccines are tested by companies that have no experience in vaccine manufacturing and marketing and use new technologies in medicine for which neither the benefits nor the health risks are known.

– The search for financial profit by many pharmaceutical companies at the expense of the health of populations (without, of course, generalizing on the whole).

The boss of a pharmaceutical company said to his shareholders during the H1N1 flu:

“This vaccine will be a significant opportunity in terms of revenues. It’s a nice boost for us, for the turnover and for the cash flow”.

The former Minister of Health of a European country said on May 23, 2020:

“When there is an epidemic like COVID, we see: mortality, when you are a doctor…or we see: suffering. And there are people who see: dollars...you have big laboratories that say: it’s time to make billions”.

On June 16, 2020, Professor Christian Perronne, a specialist in infectious diseases, said on Sud Radio (France) about the coronavirus vaccine: “We don’t need it…It’s a purely commercial story”. On August 7, the Nexus magazine website published the opinion of Dr. Pierre Cave, who said:

“The epidemic is over in France…as a doctor, I do not hesitate to anticipate the government’s decisions: We must not only refuse these vaccines [against COVID-19], but denounce and condemn the purely commercial approach and the abject cynicism that guided their production”.

– The scandalous ethical violations in many clinical trials:

Because Western countries do not allow them to violate ethical principles, many pharmaceutical companies (without generalizing about all of them) carry out their clinical trials of drugs and vaccines in developing or poor countries where experiments are conducted on people without their knowledge and consent. The report by Irene Schipper (SOMO briefing paper on ethics in clinical trials) showed shocking and very serious ethical failures; in one clinical trial, for example, African women contracted HIV and later became ill with AIDS. This clinical trial was funded by a well-known foundation and laboratory. In some countries, these scandalous clinical trials have been conducted with the complicity of local authorities against a backdrop of conflicts of interest.

– A pharmaceutical company: AstraZeneca has concluded an agreement with several countries that allows it to obtain immunity from any legal claims in case the vaccine should finally show harmful side effects. In other words, it is the states and not AstraZeneca that will compensate the victims, i.e. with citizens’ money! In this regard, we say to the citizens: Protest MASSIVELY against this scandalous, shameful and deeply unjust agreement until it is suppressed. You must refuse this IRRESPONSIBLE use of your money. Even Belgian experts have been “shocked” by this agreement.

– The scandals of dangerous or even deadly vaccines developed in times of epidemics and we will cite two examples (we are, of course, not anti-vaccine since this means questioning Edward Jenner’s discoveries):

The scandal of the H1N1 vaccine: it was tested on a small number of people and despite this, it was marketed as safe in 2009. But a year later, concerns were raised in Finland and Sweden about a possible association between narcolepsy and the vaccine. A subsequent cohort study in Finland reported a 13-fold increased risk of narcolepsy after vaccination in children and young people aged 4-19 years, with most cases occurring within three months of vaccination and almost all within six months. It was not until 2013 that a study published in the British Medical Journal confirmed these results for Great Britain, too37. In total, this dangerous vaccine caused 1,500 cases of narcolepsy in Europe alone, and 80% of the victims were children. A part of the NHS medical staff vaccinated was also affected by narcolepsy.

Peter Todd, a lawyer who represented many of the plaintiffs, told the Sunday Times: “There has never been a case like this before. The victims of this vaccine are incurable and for life and will need a lot of drugs. Among the child victims of the vaccine: Josh Hadfield (eight years old), who is taking anti-narcolepsy drugs costing £15,000 a year to help him stay awake during the day at school. …] The families went through a seven-year ordeal to win their case in court. And instead of the pharmaceutical company compensating them, the states did it, with the money of the citizens […].

20. We say: STOP all these crazy, dictatorial and certainly unhealthy measures, because of which tragedies occur every day, […] 60,000 cancer patients risk dying in England because of delays in diagnosis and treatment according to Professor Karol Sikora, 12,000 people in the world risk dying every day from hunger (according to Oxfam), the number of cardiac arrests has doubled in some countries, companies are going bankrupt, 305 million full time jobs are destroyed – particularly affecting women and young people – according to the International Labor Organization, a man has died because of the mask in the United States, etc. […]

21. We say to governments : EVERYTHING must return to normal immediately (including the reopening of hospital services, air transportation, the economy, schools and universities) and this global hostage-taking must stop because you have known, with supporting evidence, that you, like citizens, have been victims of the biggest health scam of the 21st century.

Professor Carl Heneghan said on August 23 that the fear that is preventing the country from returning to normal is unfounded, according to the Express. Professors Karina Reiss and Sucharit Bhakdi published a book in June called: “Corona: False Alarm? “45 . 45 The mayor of a city in Europe declared: “The climate spread on [the coronavirus] is particularly heavy and is becoming suspect. Doctor Olivier Chailley wrote a book called: “The virus of fear or how the whole world has gone mad”. Professor Sucharit Bhakdi (who also wrote a letter to Angela Merkel) said about the measures taken, including those of containment: “grotesque, absurd and very dangerous measures…a horrible impact on the world economy…self-destruction and collective suicide…”.

An international and independent investigation must be opened and those responsible must be judged.

22. We say to the citizens: to keep you in the herd, it is possible that some will try to discredit us by all means, for example, by accusing us of conspiracy or plotting, etc. Don’t listen to them, they are LIES because the information you have been given is: medical, scientific and documented.

23. We say to the citizens: this letter should not lead you to violence against anyone. React peacefully. And if a health professional who signs this letter will be attacked or defamed or threatened or persecuted: support him/her MASSIVELY. Dear citizens: many scientists, eminent medical professors and health professionals around the world have denounced what is happening and it is time to wake up! If you say nothing, new dictatorial measures “made in China” will be imposed. You must REFUSE this. We assure you that these measures have nothing to do with medicine or hygiene or the preservation of public health, it is dictatorship and madness. Dr. Anders Tegnell said: “The world has gone mad” by putting in place the confinements that “go against what we know about the management of virus pandemics”.

24. We invite health professionals from the WHOLE WORLD to be strong and courageous and to do their duty to tell the truth, to join us in the collective: United Health Professionals and to sign this letter by sending us the following 4 pieces of information: first name, last name, profession and country to: [email protected]

The list of signatories will be updated regularly.


Professor Martin Haditsh, microbiology, infectious disease and tropical medicine specialist, Austria

Ghislaine Gigot, general practitioner, France

François Pesty, pharmacist, France

Catherine Raulin, general practitioner, France

Laurent Hervieux, general practitioner, France

Geneviève Magnan, nurse, France

Jean-Pierre Eudier, dental surgeon, Luxembourg

Andrée Van Den Borre, dental surgeon, Belgium

Mauricio Castillo, anesthesiologist and intensive care physician, Chile

Marie-Claude Luley-Leroide, general practitioner, France

Daniele Joulin, general practitioner, France

Mohamed Zelmat, clinical biologist, France

Nadine Blondel, nurse, France

Hélène Banoun, clinical biologist, France

Estelle Ammar, speech therapist, France

Caroline Durieu, general practitioner, Belgium

Doris Stucki, psychiatrist, Switzerland

Jessica Leddy, licensed acupuncturist, United States of America

Fabien Quedeville, general practitioner, France

Michel Angles, general practitioner, France

Dominique Carpentier, general practitioner, France

Christophe Cornil, plastic surgeon, France

Pierre Brihaye, ear, nose and throat specialist, Belgium

Elizabeth Luttrell, certified nursing assistant, United States of America

Tasha Clyde, nurse, United States of America

Walter Weber, internal medicine and oncology specialist, Germany

Professor Pierre-Francois Laterre, anesthesiologist and intensive care physician, Belgium

Sylvie Lathoud, clinical psychologist, France

Karim Boudjedir, hematologist, France

Caroline Heisch, osteopath, France

Eric Blin, physiotherapist, France

Vincent Schmutz, dental surgeon, France

Zieciak WB, ears nose and throat surgeon, South Africa

Virginie Merlin, nurse, Belgium

Gabriel Brieuc, anesthesiologist, Belgium

Marie-José Eck, general practitioner, France

Patricia Grasteau, nursing assistive personnel, France

Christine Villeneuve, psychotherapist, France

Philippe Voche, plastic surgeon, France

Gérard Bossu, osteopath, France

Elaine Walker, emergency medicine physician, United States of America

Richard Amerling, nephrologist, United States of America

Phil Thomas, general practitioner, South Africa

Manfred Horst, allergologist and immunologist, France

Sybille Burtin, public health physician, France

Chantal Berge, nurse, France

Denis Agret, emergency medicine and public health physician, France

Mélanie Dechamps, intensive care physician, Belgium

Prosper Aimé Seme Ntomba, dental surgeon, Cameroon

Sandrine Lejong, pharmacist, Belgium

Professor Jan Zaloudik, surgical oncology, Czech Republic

Cerise Gaugain, midwife, France

Delphine Balique, midwife, France

Marion Campo, midwife, France

Olivier Chailley, cardiologist, France

Johan Sérot, physiotherapist, France

Arlette Fauvelle, pharmacist, Belgium

Farooq Salman, ear, nose and throat specialist, Irak

Olga Goodman, Rheumatologist, United States of America

Pascal Leblond, nurse, France

Sybille Morel, nurse, France

Marie-Thérèse Nizier, physiotherapist, France

Graziella Mercy, nurse, France

Pierre Maugeais, general practitioner, France

Carrie Madej, internal medicine specialist, United States of America

Victor Gomez Saviñon, cardiac surgeon, Mexico

Martin Boucher, nurse, Canada

Evelyne Nicolle, pharmacist, France

Agnès Dupond, general practitioner, France

Azad Mitha, general practitioner,

France Ines Heller, physiotherapist, France

Marie Laravine, nurse, France

Khaleel Kareem, anesthesiologist and intensive care physician, Irak

Tonya Davis, certified nursing assistant, United States of America

Mary Baty, dental hygienist, United States of America

Luis Angel Ponce Torres, physician, Peru

You can download the entire letter here in English.

All references for citations and publications can be found in the documents above.


Original article

People’s Media News




The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)


Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.


Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

About Steve Cook 2244 Articles
Director, UK Reloaded

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.