➡ The text raises questions about the ethics and procedures of clinical trials, particularly those involving children. It questions who conducts and funds these trials, how safety and effectiveness are measured, and the potential consequences of government-approved medicines. The author expresses concern about the potential for increased government regulation and oversight, and emphasizes the importance of individual freedom and choice in medical decisions.

➡ Many parents are concerned about the safety of certain medicines given in schools. The goal isn’t to make harmful things safer, but to question and think critically to uncover the truth. This discussion will continue with a video about presidential candidate Kennedy. You can join the conversation at thehealthyamerican.org.

Hey friends, Peggy Hall here with you from the healthyamerican.org. I want to ask you a question. Do you really want safer cocktails? Do you think that actual, and I’m not talking about the ones that you drink, do you think that really is the issue here? This has been coming up over and over and over again for the last several years, even before all of the hogwash that was sloshed all over us. But this, I don’t know whether to call it a narrative or a meme or an issue or a talking point is really getting on my nerves.

And I believe that this is a huge distraction for the real issue at hand, which is medical freedom. Do you want medical freedom? Do you want the freedom to make your own medical choices for yourself and for your family? Or do you want the store clerk at Trader Joe’s to make those medical decisions for you? Or the flight attendant on Southwest Airlines? Or the cruise director on whatever cruise ship you’re going to take? Or your employer? Or your doctor? Or your child’s college administrator? Do you want those people making your medical decisions? Do you think that if the government came up with a safe cocktail, don’t you believe that that would be actually harder for you to fight this battle? So why in the non-spinning world is the narrative going on about having more safety and having more placebo trials and having more regulation? That is not the question.

That is not the issue in my opinion. I want to hear from you. And I am going to I actually want to hear from RFK Jr. And I would love to have that conversation with him if I ever have the opportunity to speak with him face to face. But because he has announced his candidacy for president and because so many people are standing behind him and saying that he is what did some people say? He’s the closest thing that the United States has to royalty. OK, do you want to live in a country where individuals are considered to be our superiors, our kings and queens? We don’t have royalty in this country for a reason because it’s a constitutional republic.

Now, I’m not saying RFK calls himself royalty. I have never heard that. But he does talk a lot about his uncle and his father. Well, I want to hear what he himself has done and what he plans on doing. And what I’ve heard a lot of is his desire for safer cocktails. Don’t take it from me. I’m going to show you a couple of clips. Many of you have asked me where I stand on the presidential candidates. And I think where I stand is not as important as where you stand and how you are drawing conclusions based on information, not just based on a name and a history.

If somebody is only talking about what their uncle and their father did, like that’s in the past. Let’s talk about the future. Right. Our life belongs to the future. So I’m going to have you here in his own words, what he believes in. And then I want to ask you, do you want safer cocktails or do you want medical freedom? Let’s start with this one. And I want you to take a look at this very interesting image here. So let me first share my screen and then I’m going to make enlarge this here for you.

And what do you see in this? Isn’t this weird, this background? This was at the University of Colorado Boulder, and it was a debate on fossil fuels. Now, if you’ve listened to my channel for any amount of time, you know that I believe this fossil fuel to be a misnomer. There is no evidence that oil comes from fossils. If that were the case, then why don’t we just raid all of the graveyards? It is an abiotic type of energy, meaning that it is created by the Earth and it is inexhaustible. So I do take issue with the title debate on fossil fuels.

However, this individual, Alex Epstein, who was in this debate with RFK Junior, has written a book about how we actually need this kind of fuel. It’s the best thing for our economy and for our planet. And I will leave links for Alex as well. But the point that I want to draw your attention to is this is so weird that this was in 2018 and look at they already they have the bandage over the mouth. I think that’s really weird. So was this a type of predictive programming? I have no idea why those mouths are obstructed.

Of course, I’ve never obstructed my breathing and I never plan on doing so. But this is in RFK’s own words about his stance on cocktails. So, again, hopefully you’ll be able to hear it. If not, you can read the subtitles and I will let you know what he says as well. A terrible investment for us to invest in carbon. It’s coming up. And by the way, I agree to this debate. I would love it if somebody would debate me on the subject of accident. It seems to be a great interest of yours. I challenge you to debate me on it.

And I’m going to tell you just what my position is. And my position is not any science. My position is exactly aligned with the National Academy of Science and the Institute of Medicine. People don’t know my position because people call me an anecdote, but I’m not. I’m proud. I had all my children. I believe it should be tested. Safety tested. People don’t know. You cannot sue a company that makes vaccines that injures you. No matter how egregious the injury is, no matter how negligent that company was, no matter how toxic the ingredient. Furthermore, they’re completely insulated, so there’s no incentive for them to make them safe.

Furthermore, they’re also exempt. They’re the only medicine that’s exempt from safety testing. All right. I’m going to come back to that, but there are a couple of things. And again, let me know in the comments if you were able to actually hear that or not with the new microphone. I’m not sure how all of that is working. But what I want to, let’s see, what I wanted to say about that is there’s a couple of things here. Number one, there is the ongoing narrative of testing for safety, of having these tests. Now, you may say, Peggy, that was several years ago.

That was before the cooties. And now he has changed his position. He even has a movement, an organization called Children’s Health Defense, which is all about health freedom. Well, that’s my question. Is it really about health freedom, medical freedom, or is the stance really toward more safety? And I want to give you a definition of medicine. In many of his comments, he is equating the cocktails with medicine, saying that just like every medicine, the cocktails should be tested. They should be safety tested just like every medicine. All right, cocktails are not medicine. And here’s why.

Medicine, the definition is this, the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease. Or it’s a compound or preparation used for the treatment or prevention of disease, especially a drug or drugs taken by mouth. So number one, these are things that are not taken by mouth. They are injected into your bloodstream. Anybody that has ever taken a Benadryl by mouth or had the unfortunate experience of going to an ER and having the Benadryl administered via IV, anybody that has taken an antibiotic by mouth or has had the unfortunate experience or maybe fortunate if it saved your life of having antibiotics, dripped into your system, into your bloodstream, you know that those are two very different things.

So I take issue with this equating the cocktails with medicine as if they are medicine. But more importantly, what I want to do is ask these questions. All right. And these are questions that I would like to know from anyone, including RFK. And as I say, I have not had the opportunity to meet him. If I have that opportunity, I’m going to ask him these very questions and I’m going to bring those up right here. So in this other video that I’m going to play for you later, he starts out by saying virtually every American would agree with me that we need more safety testing on these.

I use the word cocktail just to not have the algorithm shut me down here. As you know, YouTube likes to shut my videos down in the middle of my sentences. So I would like to know what evidence he is using for that statement. I find it a manipulative statement. I find it misleading. And I certainly don’t agree that there should be more safety testing. I don’t even care about the safety testing. What I care about is my medical freedom to make decisions for my body, for my family. If I had young children, I want that decision and not because these ingredients or these cocktails have been deemed safe.

So these are my questions. This is my question. Do you want medical freedom or do you want safer cocktails? So what exactly would these safety trials look like? That’s my question. What would the clinical trials look like? Who would conduct them? I just saw that Granny Gates and his foundation has let’s see. I can leave a link for you here below. It says that the Granny Gates Medical Research Institute, a nonprofit biotech spinoff of the Granny Gates Foundation dedicated to developing novel biomedical interventions to treat global health problems. This is one of the groups that is doing the safety testing.

How do you like them apples? Well, them are pretty rotten apples. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. I personally am not drawing any connection to RFK’s constant calling for safety testing of cocktails. I’m not making any connection to the Granny Gates Foundation that does this kind of testing. It would be horrible if they were in cahoots and I am not stating that whatsoever. What I am stating, actually what I am asking are questions. And that was one of the questions. Who is going to conduct these trials? Who is going to fund the trials of these safety, of the safer cocktails? What oversight would be needed? How many people are going to be in these trials, especially of childhood cocktails? Who exactly are going to be the guinea pigs? And how many guinea pigs are there going to be? And how are you ethically and morally okay with these cocktails being tested on these guinea pigs? That’s another question I have.

How many studies exactly would be needed? Just one by the Granny Gates Foundation? Or how many other agencies are going to be conducting these safety trials? Would it be that they would be getting, let’s say, I don’t know, government grants to run these? In other words, your and my tax dollars plus the money that they print out of thin air? Who exactly is going to be backing these trials? And for how long? How long do the trials run? What age of children, excuse me, guinea pigs, would these cocktails be tested on for their entire life? How many would they have? What are the ethics of testing these experimental injections, for example, on infants who have no ability to decline? Or even anyone up to the age of 18 who has no ability to decline becoming a human pincushion and guinea pig? Because perhaps, just perhaps, their family would be paid in order to participate in these safety trials that RFK Junior is apparently in favor of.

How do you actually measure safety and effectiveness? Is it by the number of people who die? How do you measure effectiveness in terms of whether or not these injections actually work? I’ve given the example before, and some of you have told me, Peggy, that’s not even how effectiveness is measured. They do not inject one group and have the other group with a placebo and then determine who gets sick and who doesn’t. What they do is they test the blood for antibodies. Anyone who has been aware and awake and alert over the last several years knows that there are many reasons why you could have antibodies in your blood anyway that have nothing to do with the injection.

So that does not seem like a very, how do I put it, scientific way to measure effectiveness? How do you determine the side effects that are related to these injections? And again, how is it ethical and morally, how is it ethically and morally right for government individuals, public officials, to be calling for these tests and as a way to convince people that now these injections are safe? Can you see where this is going or am I the only one that sees where this is going? Because once you have these safety tests and once the injection and the medicine that he likes to call it, he likes to equate the injections as medicine, then all bets are off.

Because once this medicine has been approved and it’s safe, now where is your stance? Now, how do you push back against this once the government deems that these are safe and effective? I’ve heard that phrase before. How are these clinical trials evaluated and confirmed? I’m sure that there’s no funny business whatsoever in any of these clinical trials. I mean, how could they ever want to falsify information? It seems to me that there would need to be, let’s say, more government, more regulatory agencies, more money, more oversight, bigger government, more tests, more studies, more rigmarole, more hogwash, more opportunities for graft and grift and fraud, or is that just me? Let’s go on, shall we? What impact, if there are studies that come out that show that this medicine is now safe because it’s been proven safe on all of the Guinea pigs, what impact is that going to have on the childhood schedule, for example, that comes from our friends over at the Cat Dog Cat Agency? Would the government, your child’s school or college, your employer, your medical professionals, the airline, the clerk at Trader Joe’s, would they now have the authority to require this medicine because it’s been safety tested and approved by the government, which we can trust completely without any questions whatsoever? So those are just a couple of questions that I have.

In one of the interviews that I need to line up for you in an upcoming video, RFK, and I quote, said that Cooties, although he used the other word, was a gift, I’m just reading from my notes, was a gift to wake people up to the disastrous approach of making products and delivering them to our country. And he goes on to cite regulatory problems, manufacturing problems, no oversight, and no proper safety trials. And he goes on to say, this is something that we need to change, and we need to change it immediately. We are going to make these systems work better.

And he says, this is what our legislative work is all about, vaccine policy work. Does that sit okay with you? Do you want governmental policies about these injections, or do you want it to just be like aspirin on the shelf or whatever other medical intervention you might undergo? I don’t want to have the government all up in my medical choices and my medical freedom. I actually don’t want more regulation. I don’t want oversight on manufacturing. And I certainly don’t want safety trials because that has never been as I pose these questions. I have never had those questions answered.

I’ve never even had them addressed. All I hear is about more safety. We need safer products. And he’s not alone in this. Look at all of the other big names out there that this is what they talk about. They talk about all of the ingredients, all of the side effects, how we didn’t know, rather than talk about the fact that you and I, and even they have the right to make their own choices over their bodies. They have the right of no consent to any medical intervention that they don’t want. In my view, this is like saying, well, kidney transplants are very safe and they’re very effective and they’re very necessary.

Therefore, every adult over the age of 40 is now mandated by the or fill in the government agency to donate a kidney because, you know, science and besides how selfish are you up to and you only need one? And it’s for the common good. Friends, that leads me to another topic that I’ve spoken about a lot on this channel, that there is no such thing as the common good in terms of our political system. Our political system was founded on individual freedom. And all y’all out there that are also not just talking about safety testing, but are talking about a return to democracy.

Excuse me. No, it should be a return to freedom. So I would like to hear these candidates speaking about restoring freedom. And individual freedoms and individual liberty and individual rights and individual choices. I don’t want to hear about public health. There’s no such thing as public health. There’s public sanitation. There’s keeping the streets clean. They’re certainly keeping the air clean. That’s something that I could get behind. They were certainly keeping the water clean and free from fluoride and other additives that they put in there. So yes, I am 100% in favor of public sanitation and a clean planet, absolutely.

But I am also in favor of medical freedom, freedom of choice, freedom from the government intervention, not more regulation, not more safety testing. And I know I’ve heard many of your responses saying, Peggy, at least we have to start there. Many parents out there don’t know about the dangers of these cocktails. And you know, you are absolutely right. There are many parents that don’t know about the dangers of these cocktails. But what the message should be, in my humble opinion, is that they should be reminded that none of these cocktails are required, at least now, in order to live freely in this society.

If you want to have your child in a government school, also known as public school, then the government does have authority in terms of requiring. And there is some wiggle room here. Obviously, you have the right to know consent, but they have a lot more sway in this area because they are government-sponsored schools. So you get your child out of school. And how is it that thousands upon thousands, maybe even millions, of parents are awake and aware to the dangers of this medicine? So no, the issue is not to make poison safer.

I don’t think that’s even possible. Let’s say you, friends, I look forward to hearing from you. I will bring you a video tomorrow where I share another video of this candidate, Kennedy, for the presidency. And I just want to make sure that you have asked yourself these questions. I am not here to tell you or convince you one way or another. I’m here to ask questions so that we can be critical thinkers and dig deeper to find the truth. All right. Thanks for being on board, everybody. Always a pleasure. You can find me over at thehealthyamerican.org.

See more of The Healthy American Peggy Hall on their Public Channel and the MPN The Healthy American Peggy Hall channel.