“To change the dialogue that we are innately already strong, and the goal is how do I not weaken my child's immune system”
Dr. Larry Palevsky discussing proper nourishment for children.

SAVE THE DATE!!🔥
September 9th Health Freedom for Humanity is inviting you to join an exclusive membership community!

Only in this membership will you have access to ALL of HFfH's event content AND....
-Live webinars and Q&A's with Alec Zeck and special guests
-Deep discounts on incredible courses from leaders in the health/freedom space
-Exclusive discounts on products and services from top companies in holistic/naturopathic health, food and supplements, biohacking, healthy apparel and more
-Invaluable Resources and films

To stay up to date on all things HFfH, including more info about the membership, please register for our newsletter and make sure to mark our email address as ‘SAFE’ so that it will not go to spam!

Sign up here:
https://healthfreedomforhumanity.org/newsletter/

Christine here. The voice chat I’m hosting is starting in 5min. You can click on the banner at the top of the channel to join. For those who haven’t attended one before they’re an informal chance to say hi, connect, acknowledge where we’re at and explore whatever topics or themes feels most relevant for us today.

Thank you everyone who joined in for the voice chat today. I appreciate the chance to come together, share ideas and experience and connect.

I’ll be back next week hosting another voice chat, Tuesday August 16th at 3pm Pacific, 5pm Central, 6pm Eastern or whatever time that converts to where you live. You’re welcome to join in for that.

~Christine

Terrain theory says that the things we already know make us sick— malnutrition, poisoning, high nnEMF exposure, etc.— are what’s making us sick.

Germ theory— “infections, contagious diseases, and various other conditions result from the action of microorganisms”

“Germ theory” isn’t even a proper theory. A scientific theory must adhere to the scientific method. Germ theory does not.

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results.

Key point: in accordance with the scientific method.

Which primary paper in virology adheres to the scientific method (clearly defined IV, IV shown to actually exist, accounting for confounding variables, proper controls, etc.), validating the hypothesis of pathogenic viruses?

Can anyone present ONE primary virology paper that adheres to the scientific method? Just one?

Nope.

I’ve asked repeatedly, haven’t seen one. People share papers, yes. But when you ask how that paper adheres to the scientific method, they mudsling.

So we’ve got that part of the germ theory puzzle out of the way. What about bacteria?

Bacteria OBVIOUSLY exists. Scientists have isolated/purified bacteria repeatedly.

But have they clearly demonstrated that any type of bacteria is, itself, a causative agent in so-called contagious diseases?

So let’s ask— can anyone find me one single primary bacteriology paper that strictly adheres to the scientific method validating the hypothesis that bacteria are disease causing agents?

I’m much less familiar with this part of the germ hypothesis (yes, hypothesis, because it doesn’t adhere to the scientific method so it’s still only a hypothesis), admittedly.

But every paper I’ve seen wherein purified bacteria (a properly identified IV 😁) is delivered to a healthy host via reasonable, natural means (meaning not injected directly into the stomach or poured into a cracked skull), the host does not express symptoms of disease.

So it’s not germ “theory.” Its germ hypothesis.

Analogy:

I make a new pregnancy test. I can determine its accuracy by using it on women who are pregnant and women who are not pregnant (verifying it with my own eyes). That is my reference point to determine its accuracy.

What is the reference point for PCR’s accuracy in showing the presence of a virus in a sample? Can’t be electron micrograph images of “the virus” as we’ve shown repeatedly (here’s one paper as an example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35372961/) that there are morphologically indistinguishable particles in people who are COVID negative.

What is the reference pooping for PCR’s accuracy in diagnosing disease? Can’t be “symptoms”, otherwise asymptomatic persons wouldn’t be an option.

Thanks to Dr. Steph Young for the reminder this AM.

Let’s hold these peeps accountable.

http://www.prosecutenow.io

Shared on Facebook, figured I’d share here too!

Also, ironically, I celebrated my 30th birthday during my 30 day ban.

So thanks for all those who wished me happy birthday.

On your birthday Facebook gives you the option to solicit donations for your favorite non-profit.
For obvious reasons I was unable to do this.

For my birthday, I ask that those who are willing/able to become a recurring or one-time donor to my non-profit, Health Freedom For Humanity.

For the past several months we’ve been working on something pretty amazing that we’ll launch on September 9th.

Head to:
Https://www.Healthfreedomforhumanity.Org/donate

And if you’d like to get involved with a local/state chapter OR start your own chapter, please head to Https://www.Healthfreedomforhumanity.Org/chapters

Thanks. ❤️

Deleted from Twitter again. Was probably reported by that virologist and his buddies.

The virologist is who got me deleted. My account was mass reported after this.

Correction! I messed up— we will see you Sunday at 11AM CENTRAL TIME!

https://unitelive.earth/s/PMEv0R