Post

@Plandemic3Movie

@DelBigtree

@jimmy_dore

@drpaulmarik1

@RobertKennedyJr

@Plandemic3Movie

More from @VigilantFox

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

@VigilantFox

Jun 25

You may have missed this news recently - the health insurance system in America is so broken, that the Trump administration is quietly rewriting the Affordable Care Act and buried deep in a monstrous 1,000+ page document is a ploy to let health insurance companies start lending money to patients to pay for their medical care.

That's right: if you get hit with a devastating diagnosis or an unexpected emergency, your "insurance" company won't just pay the bill... they'll offer you a loan instead. So you can go deeper into debt to the very same industry that's already failing you.

Let me say that again. You pay health insurance so that you'll be insured in a time of a health crisis. Already, health insurers are denying nearly 20% of claims and out of pocket expenses keep rising. So instead of them paying your bill, which is what you pay the insurance for, they'll now be incentivized to deny even more bills or raise out of pocket expenses in order to cash in on the interest they'll be collecting.

A third of American households are already drowning in medical debt — and now insurers get to pile on even more, with interest. While these companies rake in billions in profits, everyday people will be trapped paying back loans for the care they thought was "covered." This isn't fixing healthcare.

This is turning your health insurer into your loan shark — and making an already predatory, dysfunctional system even more financially crushing for ordinary Americans. Classic "you get sick, you go broke" American healthcare — now with extra debt servitude.

On the plus side, there is a company that is providing a solution to this problem. CrowdHealth, a member focused health care company is saving Americans tens of thousands of dollars, and in May of this year 100% of medical bills were funded.

No loans needed. No exorbitant premiums. No crazy out of pocket expenses. A model that is actually working, is not throwing Americans into bankruptcy because of an unexpected health event, is saving people money, and getting them the health care they need.

Andy Schoonover from CrowdHealth joins us now to discuss.

A billionaire recently mused that the ultra-wealthy get the top doctors, the best lawyers, the elite tutors, and wondered aloud what it would take to give every American that kind of access. Andy’s answer is that it already exists, just not the way Reid Hoffman imagines it.

Inside CrowdHealth, your income doesn’t decide your doctor. “Whether you’re making $30,000 a year or $3 million a year, you have access to the same doctors.” Members up and down the economic ladder have walked into Mayo, MD Anderson, Stanford, Cleveland Clinic.

The real threat to that access isn’t money. It’s bureaucracy. As government plans expand, the best doctors are quietly heading for the exits. Mayo Clinic recently dropped a slate of Medicare Advantage plans rather than swallow the government’s reimbursement rates. Andy’s read on the pattern is blunt: “Free markets tend to exit stage left and the government bureaucracy enters as the main character.”

His prediction is that within a decade the top doctors stop taking insurance entirely. CrowdHealth’s bet is that members who already pay doctors directly are built for exactly that world.

But cash-pay only matters if the money actually arrives when you’re the one in the hospital bed. So how does a crowd of strangers guarantee your bill gets paid?

Health insurance in America is broken.

Over 200,000 Americans go bankrupt because of medical bills every year—and many of them already had insurance. On average, 20% of claims are denied, leaving families stuck paying massive out-of-pocket costs after spending thousands on premiums.

But there’s an alternative.

CrowdHealth is a community-powered model that has helped members fund over 40,000 medical bills at a fraction of the cost of traditional insurance.

So far, 30,000+ members have been helped, saving an estimated $73 million in medical costs.

CrowdHealth isn’t insurance. It’s a way to step outside the broken system and take control of your healthcare.

Get started today for $99 per member per month for the first three months.

Go to joincrowdhealth.com/promos/pulse and use code PULSE.

Read 8 tweets

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

@VigilantFox

Jun 25

RFK Jr. once said: “They’re making $60 billion a year selling us vaccines, but they’re making $500 billion a year selling the remedies for the injuries caused by vaccines.”

“This is a really great business plan for [pharmaceutical] companies. You make people sick, and then you sell them the lifetime cure.”

This interview, which originally aired on September 17, 2020, was removed by YouTube for “medical misinformation.”

But was it really “misinformation,” or was RFK Jr. leading viewers to an inconvenient truth?

In just about every industry, a great product makes you rich beyond belief, except one: medicine.

The rules for enrichment work differently here. And the reason why is exactly what they don’t want you to know. 🧵

There’s a principle that I’m sure you’re familiar with: once you see it, you can’t unsee.

No industry built to solve a problem ever actually solves it. Think about it—a cure for the problem is a death sentence for the paycheck. The cancer charity that beats cancer has to close its doors. The dating app that finds you a partner just lost a paying user.

So problems don’t get solved. They get managed. Indefinitely.

And nowhere has this been turned into more of an art form than medicine.

We’re taught to see healthcare as a race toward cures. Brilliant minds, billions in research, all pointed at making disease disappear.

But that’s not how it works.

Let’s take a look at how the business model actually works. It’s actually pretty simple.

A cured patient stops paying. A managed patient pays forever.

When those two incentives collide, take a guess at which one usually wins.

Read 21 tweets

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

@VigilantFox

Jun 24

Did you know that the death rate from measles declined by 98% BEFORE the measles vaccine was introduced?

“This is all on the CDC website… That decline had nothing to do with vaccines.”

So, if vaccines didn’t do it, what caused that decline from 1900 to 1963?

The answer is better nutrition, better sanitation, clean water, etc., according to Attorney @AaronSiriSG.

Yet “science” wants you to believe that vaccines saved the day.

But that’s not even the biggest vaccine deception. It’s what happens before they approve these shots for human use. 🧵

Faith in vaccines is just that. Faith.

Complete trust. Allegiance to duty. Belief in something for which there is no proof.

Medicine has carefully crafted a myth that it and only it rescued humanity from the dark ages of deadly disease. The kind of disease that was lurking around every corner, ready to wipe us off the map for all of eternity.

And because medicine so valiantly rescued us from erasure, it deserves ultimate supremacy. It should never be questioned. It can do no wrong.

A central part of medical mythology is the belief that vaccines ended infectious disease. And because it is indeed mythology and its adherents are acting on faith alone, it requires no proof and can simply dismiss any and all evidence against that bold claim.

But the evidence is not lacking. Far from it.

Despite medicine’s best efforts to hide and obscure it, those seeking the truth can plainly see it.

In this short presentation, Secretary Kennedy lays it out for all to see. There is no evidence that vaccines were responsible for the decline in infectious disease that has so aggressively been credited to them.

It is pure mythology.

Read 30 tweets

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

@VigilantFox

Jun 23

In 2014, 300 scientists warned Anthony Fauci would start a global pandemic.

Following the high-profile escape of three bugs from U.S. labs, these 300 scientists sent a letter to President Obama, urging him to shut down Anthony Fauci's gain-of-function research.

Obama issued a moratorium and shut down 18 of the worst projects by Anthony Fauci. In the end, he really didn't shut them down. Instead, Obama moved the research offshore to places like Ukraine, the former Soviet State of Georgia, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China.

Now, it is widely accepted that COVID-19 originated from that very lab in Wuhan, China.

Those 300 scientists were right about Fauci…

But the big question is, why are people like him so obsessed with creating dangerous pathogens in the first place? 🧵

Bioweapons research is always sold with the same simple promise:

We have to make pathogens more dangerous so we can learn how to stop them.

Honestly, that sounds insane when stated plainly.

But somehow this logic has funded a massive industry for decades, and the safety record is far worse than most people realize.

The public hears “pandemic preparedness” and imagines top scientists working tirelessly to prevent the next disaster.

But it’s not that simple.

The deeper problem is that this research often involves collecting dangerous pathogens, modifying them, storing them, passing them through animals, testing their behavior, and hoping the lab never makes a mistake.

And there are a lot of mistakes that can be made.

Read 30 tweets

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

@VigilantFox

Jun 22

Erica Drum was told her son Jackson would never breathe on his own again.

A hockey hit launched him headfirst into the boards. Broken neck & spine. Paralyzed.

Odds of recovery: 1 in 1,000,000

Jackson is now walking and has recovered every fine motor skill he lost.

What happened?

His loving mother took a chance on a substance called DMSO. And what followed was nothing short of a miracle.

ERICA DRUM: “[Doctors] said there was no hope of recovery… He is vent-dependent, feeding tube-dependent. We were told he is never going to eat or drink or be able to breathe independently.”

“I had a friend, and she’s like, ‘Hey, I know of this thing [DMSO] that’s supposed to help spinal cord injuries, and it helps reduce the swelling.’ And I’m like, ‘Okay, well maybe we can try that.’ Because at this point, we didn’t have any options.”

“We decided to try [DMSO] topically. We bought like a little rollerball one… We started that on day four or five, and by day seven, I would poke his feet or his legs, and he would open his eyes [despite being on intense painkillers].”

“And then there was a PT working with him, and she felt his hip flexor fire. And they’re like, ‘Oh my gosh.’ He went from an Asia A to an Asia C, which usually is not supposed to happen.”

“You’re either a severe spinal cord injury with no sensation, nothing, like an Asia A. You don’t go from an A to a C. From there, he was Asia C. And I’m still rubbing this stuff on him every chance I get.”

“I mean, I would rub that thing on him probably ten times a day. What’s interesting is I was able to rub it on the left side of his body more than his right side. His left side is definitely stronger.”

“The right side is slowly coming back. His hand grip on this side was like 1 pound probably four months ago. And now it’s up to 20 pounds. He literally has every single fine motor skill. It’s a matter of us now strengthening them.”

“He hasn’t used his wheelchair in three weeks… We moved to the arm crutches. And now in therapy, he’s working on walking without the arm crutches.”

“We were like ventilator-dependent, medication-dependent… And now we’re down to just the baclofen.”

“My son is one of the only people I’ve met that does not have the nerve pain with his condition. So he is off of all nerve pain meds.”

Jackson’s doctors can’t explain how he went from a quadriplegic to a walking, self-sufficient person again.

But his mother attests it was the DMSO.

The thing is, Jackson isn’t the only person with a story like this. 🧵

Jackson’s story is an incredible example of exactly why DMSO is so hard to dismiss.

A nerve injury recovery that looks impossible on the surface starts to make more sense when you look at what DMSO appears to do inside damaged tissue.

It doesn’t behave like a normal painkiller.

It acts more like a cellular reset.

And once you see what it can do… you can’t unsee it.

This information comes from the work of medical researcher @MidwesternDoc. For all the sources and details, read the full report below.
midwesterndoctor.com/p/how-dmso-hea…

Read 25 tweets

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

@VigilantFox

Jun 19

In 2016, Del Bigtree convinced a top infectious disease doctor to do something public health has avoided for decades: conduct a study comparing the health outcomes of vaxxed vs. unvaxxed children.

Dr. Marcus Zervos vowed to publish the results no matter what.

The results were devastating for the vaccinated, and Dr. Zervos ultimately chose not to publish the study.

When confronted about it, he said bluntly: “Publishing something like that, I might as well retire. I’d be finished.”

Here’s what the study revealed:

• Vaccinated children were 4.29 times more likely to have asthma.

• Three times higher risk for atopic diseases (like eczema).

• Nearly six times higher risk for autoimmune disorders, a category that includes more than 80 different diseases.

• 5.5 times higher risk for neurodevelopmental disorders.

• 2.9 times more motor disabilities.

• 4.5 times more speech disorders.

• Three times more developmental delays.

• Six times more acute and chronic ear infections.

• Among nearly 2,000 unvaccinated children, there were zero cases of ADHD, diabetes, behavioral problems, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, tics, or other psychological disorders.

The study’s conclusion was equally striking. It states: “[I]n contrast to our expectations, we found that exposure to vaccination was independently associated with an overall 2.5-fold INCREASE in the likelihood of developing a chronic health condition when compared to children unexposed to vaccination.”

When science uncovers an inconvenient result, it often gets buried, or the data is twisted until it produces the outcome “The Science” wants.

How do you think Vioxx, a migraine and arthritis pain drug, made it to market?

An estimated 100,000 people died before the manufacturer (Merck) finally decided it was too dangerous to keep prescribing.

And Vioxx wasn’t an isolated case.

Roughly 1 in 3 drugs approved by the FDA get pulled or receive a major safety warning LONG AFTER they get prescribed to millions of people.

If Vioxx could be approved without the danger being flagged during trials, what else is on the market today that people assume is safe?

Perhaps the most important question is: how do they get away with rigging these trials in the first place? 🧵

The medical establishment built its reputation on one phrase: the gold standard.

Randomized controlled trials were sold as the cleanest way to separate real medicine from wishful thinking.

But once a trial costs tens of millions of dollars, the question changes.

Who can afford to define what everyone thinks is the “truth”?

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can indeed be extremely useful.

They can detect small effects that individual doctors would never notice, like a slight increase in heart attacks or a modest reduction in symptoms across thousands of patients.

Clearly that has real value.

The problem begins when RCTs become the only evidence medicine is allowed to recognize.

Because once that happens, medicine stops asking a simple and important question: What actually helps patients?

Instead, it starts asking what can be patented, standardized, funded, pushed through regulators, published in major journals, and written into treatment guidelines?

That shift changes everything.

Read 31 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @VigilantFox

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!