Missouri Governor Mike Parson holds to the view that it is up to a doctor and his or her patient to make decisions that affect patient health, particularly given COVID-19, for which an experimental vaccine is being forced on the public via mandates in many jurisdictions. Vaccine mandates have become a partisan issue, with the GOP mostly opposing mandates. According to the Kansas City Star, Parson, who is Republican, has just “signed into law a bill that bars pharmacists from questioning doctors” who prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
Note how the Kansas City Star article references the two “controversial drugs,” but makes no mention of controversial vaccines.
Reuters published an article in 2021 that included a warning by lawyers that “the vaccine is so new that there’s virtually no definitive research on injury causation to cite.”
The article continued:
Indeed, the overwhelming majority of all litigants under what’s known as the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program have NOT succeeded.
Reports are now copious and mounting about sudden deaths associated with the vaccine, and vaccine injuries. In November 2021, the European Parliament released a German study “examining the autopsies of people who died shortly after vaccination.” The study suggested that “50% of these deaths were caused by the vaccine, which is also believed to be behind an unprecedented accumulation of lymphocytes found in the hearts, kidneys, livers and spleens of the deceased.”
According to the Daily Mail, doctors are trying to determine why so many healthy young people are suddenly dying in Australia. Young people are now urged to have their hearts checked to avoid Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (SADS). Although the article offers no reason for the sudden deaths, Australia imposed upon its citizens some of the most restrictive COVID rules in the world. Those who tested positive were sometimes required to be quarantined at facilities. By November 2021, over 10,000 Australians had filed coronavirus vaccine injury claims.
The American Council on Science and Health is now advising the obvious: “it’s good to be skeptical of scientists and the politicians who listen to them”; yet this didn’t seem so obvious at the height of the COVID crisis. The psychological mass coercion by governments, medical establishments and media was astounding, and questions were discouraged. Many are now denying that any “forced” experimental vaccination took place, while others are calling it “an American tradition.” Take, for instance, the New York Times article “Vaccine Mandates are an American Tradition,” which presents an argument that everyone already knows, but omits the most important aspect of subject at hand: the nature of the mRNA vaccine. It an experimental, gene transfer and expression vaccine which was developed hastily. The public was actually the test subjects. Note: the COVID vaccines were described in Clinical Trials.gov as an experiment to “Study to Describe the Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of RNA Vaccine Candidates Against COVID-19 in Healthy Individuals.” In other words, scientists studying the vaccine did not know about the “Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of RNA Vaccine Candidates Against COVID-19,” so they had to study it on the public.
Actual Study Start Date :
April 29, 2020
Estimated Primary Completion Date :
February 8, 2024
Estimated Study Completion Date :
February 8, 2024
It was never a secret that these mRNA vaccines were experimental. Mass fear took precedence over research, and all possible reasoned approaches. Mass immunity was never properly weighed, nor were other alternative treatments, including ivermectin and hydroxychoroquine. Citizens were forced to take part in an experiment with immense possible impact upon their personal health, or face severe punishment and/or marginalization. Not every jurisdiction went along to get along: Florida fought mandates tooth and nail.
There is no denying that COVID was a potentially serious illness that killed many. It does no good to downplay this, but many scientists warned that herd immunity (much like the flu) was an intelligent option to weigh, considering the low death rates, particularly among the most vulnerable.
The National Institute of Health surprisingly published a report by Dr. Russell L. Blaylock — a retired neurosurgeon and current clinical assistant professor of neurosurgery at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, as well as a visiting professor in the biology department at Belhaven College. In an article entitled “Covid Update–What is the Truth?,” Dr. Blayback began with a stunning rebuke of trusted authorities:
The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most manipulated infectious disease events in history, characterized by official lies in an unending stream lead by government bureaucracies, medical associations, medical boards, the media, and international agencies.[3,6,57] We have witnessed a long list of unprecedented intrusions into medical practice, including attacks on medical experts, destruction of medical careers among doctors refusing to participate in killing their patients and a massive regimentation of health care, led by non-qualified individuals with enormous wealth, power and influence.
Although governments and many institutions are asserting that no one was held down for forced vaccinations, they are manipulating the discourse, and refusing to admit the coercion and duress forced upon citizens who faced devastating job loss and marginalization for “not following the science.” Restrictions continue, with more vaccines on the way.
Dr. Paul Alexander, former Trump administration official at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services during the COVID-19 pandemic, became a victim of media bashing. The mainstream media has been doing a hatchet job on him in efforts to ruin his reputation and protect Big Pharma and globalist government.
Dr. Alexander stated
You must understand that most people (those I write about below) were and are scared about retribution and their research grants etc. They still are. Most if not all are. Their jobs, salary, grants, and to be honest, safety, guides their decisions. Few people are brave enough to stand up. Yet there are many who are run after the money and advancement.
He also issued a grave warning to parents:
I again warn. I am warning parents to be very careful with their healthy children. Their children. Stop and step back as to these vaccines. Your children bring near zero risk. They do not need these vaccines. Period. No one, no Fauci, no Walensky, no Francis Collins, no Albert Bourla et al. have prosecuted the case as to why your healthy zero risk child needs a vaccine that is proven ineffective and harmful. Your response should be NO! Under no condition! And be willing to defend that hill! There is no liability protection for your child if harmed by these vaccines.
Anyone should be at least wondering why is it that so many talented doctors and researchers have been willing to sacrifice their entire careers to warn about an experiment. And why the heavy-handedness by governments.
Physician and biochemist Dr. Robert Malone also stated unequivocally that alternate COVID treatments were suppressed to promote the vaccines.
ACT for America founder Brigitte Gabriel told her COVID story and the case of an upstart pharmacist on an anti-ivermectin frenzy HERE.
Amid information overload, one thing is obvious, or at least should be: questions need to be asked, questions that might include the fact that Omicron affected both the vaxxed and unvaxxed, amid continued government restrictions. Also, why were people not informed by media regularly that the vaccine was an experiment, one forced upon citizens trying to hold on to their jobs and freedoms?
Under Missouri’s new law, patients, responsible doctors and pharmacists will now be protected, and able make their private medical choices freely.
“New Missouri law protects doctors, bars pharmacists from questioning controversial drugs,” by Kacen Bayless, Kansas City Star, June 8, 2022:
Missouri Gov. Mike Parson on Tuesday signed into law a bill that bars pharmacists from questioning doctors who prescribe the controversial off-label drugs ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
The measure, which passed in the General Assembly last month, was attached to a bill that exempts military employees and contractors participating in a federal training program from licensing requirements if they hold licensing in another state. Parson’s office announced his signing of the legislation along with six other bills Tuesday.
The new law, which goes into effect in August, prevents state medical licensing boards from punishing or taking away the medical licenses of doctors who “lawfully” prescribe the two drugs. And it prevents pharmacists from contacting a doctor or patient “to dispute the efficacy of ivermectin tablets or hydroxychloroquine sulfate tablets for human use” unless the doctor or patient asks about the drugs’ effectiveness.
Sen. Rick Brattin, a Harrisonville Republican who is running running for Missouri’s 4th District in Congress, previously told The Star he added the language regarding ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine after he spoke with doctors who worried they would lose their medical licenses for prescribing the drugs. Brattin, who said he previously bought ivermectin for COVID-19 but has never taken it, described the drug as “politicized.”….
somehistory says
Normally, when a new medicine is in trials, no pregnant women are included. With the pfizer, there were 270 pregnant women who received the jabs….according to the released papers from pfizer….and the records for 238 of these women were “Lost” by pfizer….out of the remaining 42 women, the records for five are “pending.”
that leaves 37. Out of that 37, one baby was born alive. Whether that child is still alive, and whether that child is healthy or injured, is to date, not mentioned. The other 36 babies were either still=born or miscarried.
pfizer and the fda said at first that pregnant women or those who wished to be, should not get the jabs. they said if a woman wished to get pregnant, she should wait at least two months after the jab.
They cited rat data for that advice.
Later, the wording was changed to indicate that *no adverse effects* were found in the rat studies; they said for pregnant women it was deemed ‘safe’ and ‘effective’ just as for others….
So many lies. So many lives lost.
The babies killed by the trial jabs are not the only babies who have suffered and died due to the jabs being given to their moms.
Parents should heed the advice from the doctor (Dr. Alexander ) quoted above who said the parents should just say NO!
Rarely says
Interesting figures about the effect on the pregnancy.. Where did you get them?
somehistory says
Dr. Naomi Wolf who spoke with Dr. Glazov. She and her team of doctors, and other researchers, poured over the pfizer papers that have been released through court order. Dr. Wolf has a website.
gravenimage says
For what it’s worth, here’s an article from Reuters debunking these claims:
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-pfizer-documentpregnant/fact-check-pfizer-fda-document-does-not-show-covid-shot-caused-miscarriages-or-neonatal-deaths-in-all-injected-mothers-idUSL1N2U81ZL
somehistory says
I don’t trust rueters to tell the truth any more than biden or his staff.
Dr. Glazov, whose videos are posted on this very site, had Dr. Wolf present the evidence from the pfizer papers and these have been verified by others looking into the charges.
the papers were changed from the original….marked through…in order to cover for the deaths of the babies and the damage to the women’s ability to have children.
these deaths injuries and deaths to others are the reasons pfizer wanted to keep it all secret for seventy five years….when all us would be gone and unable to complain.
somehistory says
Perhaps their “fact-checkers” are hoping the “all” will give them cover when more doctors speak about what they have found to be True.
gravenimage says
Somehistory, here are babies who were born after their pregnant mothers were vaccinated:
https://www.massgeneral.org/news/press-release/study-shows-persistent-antibodies-in-infants-after-covid-19-vaccination-in-pregnancy
The claim that all babies die if their pregnant mothers are vaccinated does not appear to hold water.
somehistory says
g,
If you read what I wrote, you will not find that I said that ****all**** babies die after their mothers’ are jabbed. I never wrote it, never claimed it.
However, I believe the information that Dr. Glazov, Dr Wolf, and others have presented from the papers that pfizer was ordered by the Court to release to the public that shows that the women who were jabbed in the **trials** had babies dying and that they have failed to report on 238 of the women and their babies.
there were 270 in the trials…when there should not have been any as that goes against current protocol…and of those, pfizer gave the info on 42, except only a part of the info on five of these. Of the remaining 37 on which pfizer gave a full report, only one baby….one baby…survived to be born alive.
I never said that other women who have since been jabbed have all lost their babies.
One other point….not all of the vials in a lot (a portion, a pallet if you will) have been found to all be exactly the same mixture of stuff. Several doctors have tested vials from the same lot, and vials from different lots, and found different combinations of ingredients. This is said to be one of the reasons that many people have had no adverse effects, while others have been injured and some have died.
gravenimage says
OK
mortimer says
Both drugs proved to be highly effective in curing covid. They should now get on-label status.
Some patients got these medications and improved dramatically in hours and days
Roland says
Unbelievable! Conservative politicians don’t shy away from intrusive government in medical matters either! Restricting a pharmacist from expressing a professional opinion or performing his job as a professional? That violates the First Amendment!
Infidel says
First amendment? Are you insane? Normally, pharmacists are in business to make money, and are more than happy to fill up what doctors prescribe, w/o question. Doctors are at liberty to make off-label recommendations of various medications, and it’s not the role of pharmacists to question or override them
This had been going on well until Fauci and his gang decided, for whatever reason, to prevent doctors from prescribing certain meds. Probably b’cos the likes of Pfizer or Moderna would see a big loss if people turned away from those ‘vaccines’ and turned to therapeutics like these 2 or others. That’s the reason this Missouri law is needed. Other states should follow suit, and tell pharmacists to simply follow the doctors’ prescriptions and ignore the CDC, which is now too corrupt and politicized
somehistory says
the only interaction they have normally is if the patient goes in and asks the pharmacy to fax a request for a refill. and with the patient to make sure the patient understands how to take the med and side effects to watch for.. Only if a dr has given a script for a med that will be harmful to the patient due to taking another med from a different doctor, would the pharmacist be further involved…and then, tell the patient they needed to talk to the phys before taking both. they are not meant to dx a patient’s needs.
I worked for a large pharmacy and had to call doctors due to worker’s comp, but no one at that company tried to override the doctor’s orders for the patients.
As you point out, fauci was behind patients not being given these meds and it was because he was making money from the remdesivir and the jabs. these two that MO has listed, are a lot cheaper and they actually work.
Saydalii says
I don’t think either the doctor or pharmacist should be coerced or forced to fill or prescribe anything. Or not fill and not prescribe anything. Just leave it how it’s always been. But now we have the FDA/CDC basically threatening doctors and pharmacists to not fill any plaquenil or ivermectin scripts for COVID.
If a doctor wants to prescribe a script for COVID with those drugs, the pharmacist has every right to at least ask the doctor what and why they are using that, what’s the justification. And if they still don’t want to fill it then go to another pharmacy. Problem is most of the chain pharmacies have memos that basically put severe “company” requirements for those indications. I’m sure some just tell the pharmacies not to fill them if they are for COVID.
The precedent of a pharmacist not having the right to even “contact” the doctor regarding effectiveness is not a good one.
But I don’t see anything in the article about the pharmacist not being able to refuse to fill it. So now they will just flat out refuse and then when patient asks them to call the doctor to get the ok, they will just say it’s illegal for us to contact the doctor regarding it. Oh I love politicians.