Dr. Tenpenny has years of experience in researching the motives of the global response by governments, global institutions and private interests, and exposes perhaps the most alarming aspect of the Covid-19 crisis yet! And No, it’s not the virus, it is the blank check issued to the vaccine and drug manufacturers, which not only provides unlimited funding, but also provides blanket immunity to Big Pharma for any harm attributed with the treatments produced during the declared emergency, including all drugs and vaccines.
This blanket immunity is provided by the US government under the PREP Act and provides the drug and vaccine manufacturers the ‘Ultimate Blank Check’ during a declared emergency. In the video below, Dr. Tenpenny points out, the vaccine and drug manufacturers have zero incentive to produce a safe product, as the declared emergency not only rolls back regulatory standards and removes them from any and all liability, but it also ensures the government will purchase their products.
This is an unprecedented level of immunity which raises many questions and safety concerns.
Dr. Sherri J. Tenpenny is an osteopathic medical doctor, board certified in three medical specialties. Widely regarded as the most knowledgeable and outspoken physician on the adverse impact that vaccines can have on health, Dr. Tenpenny has been a guest on hundreds of radio and national television programs (including the Dr. Oz Show and the Today Show Australia). She has lectured at Cleveland State University and Case Western Reserve Medical School, and has been a speaker at conventions, both nationally and internationally, as a recognized expert on a wide range topics within the field of Integrative Medicine including breast health, breast thermography, women’s hormones, medical uses of iodine and the adverse effects vaccines have on health.
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny states, “There are NO randomized, controlled trials (RCT) with verified outcomes that show a benefit to healthcare workers or community members for wearing a mask or a respirator. There is no such definitive study. Likewise, no study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public (documented below). Furthermore, if there were any benefit to wearing a mask, because of the blocking power against droplets and aerosol particles, then there should be more benefit from wearing a respirator (N95) compared to a surgical mask. There is not. Neither masks nor respirators protect; cloth coverings are essentially worthless. It should be noted that the surgical masks are primarily designed to protect the environment from the wearer, whereas the respirators are supposed to protect the wearer from the environment. (Balazy, et al).
Conclusion Regarding Masks They Do Not Work By Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, AOBNMM, ABIHM http://www.Vaxxter.com www.Courses4Mastery.com
There are NO randomized, controlled trials (RCT) with verified outcomes that show a benefit to healthcare workers or community members for wearing a mask or a respirator. There is no such definitive study.
Likewise, no study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public (documented below). Furthermore, if there were any benefit to wearing a mask, because of the blocking power against droplets and aerosol particles, then there should be more benefit from wearing a respirator (N95) compared to a surgical mask. There is not.
Neither masks nor respirators protect; cloth coverings are essentially worthless. It should be noted that the surgical masks are primarily designed to protect the environment from the wearer, whereas the respirators are supposed to protect the wearer from the environment. (Balazy, et al).
Coronavirus are <0.125 microns in size. Masks and respirators filter particles 0.30 to 0.80 microns in size. Masks cannot possibly work. No bias-free study has ever found a benefit from wearing a mask or respirator in this application.
I agree with Dr. Sherri Tenpenny – “Those who have eyes to see and ears to hear need to wake up! Then wake up others.” Don’t let them give you a vaccine that will make you sick and who knows the side affects it will have. It is time to stop the globalists and their depopulation scandals!
Dianne Marshall
People reacted to this story.
Show comments Hide commentsDave Burton. I would have agreed with you earlier about only crackpots touting vaccines do not prevent infections. However, this is not the case with the COVID 19 response for some reason. Dr. Faucci, the CDC, FDA, and all of the drug companies currently cranking out EUA vaccines for COVID 19 (Phizer, Moderna, J&J, Astrazenica, etc.) ALL REPORT that their vaccines do NOT prevent infection. They have high efficacy to reduce harm when infected, reducing deaths, reducing hospital stays but NONE of them actually protect from infection or prevent the infection or prevent you from spreading the COVID when infected. This was very shocking to hear. WHY should I or anyone else be actively seeking any of these current vaccines if they have no proof at all that they will prevent me (to any %) from getting infected and then spreading it to more vulnerable people and compounding the problem further? Yes, human trials and purposeful exposure after vaccination in clinical trials are frowned on, but it’s a world-wide pandemic and emergency, than surely there can be strict allowances made for patients who volunteer. If they’re going to forego major safely procedures for EUA anyway, why not also forego banned human trials (exposure)? Otherwise all this time, effort and money may all be for not. The fact remains, they have NO proof scientific or otherwise that any of these current COVID vaccines prevent infection. THIS is exactly the point of an immunizing vaccine. I’m dismayed. It’s like your son or daughter who just wrecked your car beyond repair (totalled) and saying “Well, at least I stopped and filled up the tank for you!”
If some crackpot tells you that “vaccines do not prevent infections,” you need to ask him how many cases of polio or smallpox he’s seen lately. The claim that “vaccines do not prevent infections” is utterly idiotic.
Masks are are closer call. Those who think masks do not help stop the spread of the disease reach that conclusion on the basis of the fact that virus particles are much smaller than the pores in even the best masks. That is true: the virus particles are much smaller than the pores in masks.
Nevertheless, studies show conclusively that masks do help to reduce the spread of viral diseases, when they are worn generally, or worn by people who are infected.
So, how can that be?
It’s probably because masks stop many of the moisture droplets which a person releases when he breathes, and especially when he coughs or sneezes. The moisture droplets are much, much larger than virus particles. Virus particles are mostly within moisture droplets, so when the moisture droplets stick to the mask, so do the virus particles.
However, moisture droplets don’t last long. Most of them evaporate within a minute or less. If they were floating in the air, we’re then left with much smaller free-floating particles, containing virus plus whatever other crud was dissolved & suspended in the moisture droplets.
Masks are probably much less effective at protecting against free-floating, dry particles, which are tinier than the pores in the masks. So it is likely that if a person is not infected, wearing a mask doesn’t give him much protection. As this article correctly notes, “surgical masks are primarily designed to protect the environment from the wearer,” not vice-versa.
So it might be that merely having infected people wear masks would be just as effective as having everyone wear them — if that were possible.
But it isn’t. Here’s the kicker: this disease causes many asymptomatic infections. The CDC estimates that as many as 40% of all cases might be asymptomatic, or nearly so, for the full duration of the infection, and all infections are initially asymptomatic, as well.
So the only way to ensure that infected people wear masks is to require everyone to wear them. Unless a person can somehow be 100% certain that he is not infected, he should be wearing a mask around other people, for their protection, not his.
The only class of people who can be almost completely sure that they are uninfected is those who have already been infected, and have recovered. There are very few documented cases of people getting infected twice, so far. So people who have been infected within the last six months, and then recovered, and have no lingering symptoms, and who have repeatedly tested negative, are probably safe to be around, without masks.
That’s only about 3% of Americans, so far.
Having those people wear masks probably doesn’t reduce the spread of the disease, directly.
Even so, I think they should wear masks, for social reasons: to encourage the other 97% of people to wear masks. When everyone does something, the social pressure increases on those who are reluctant to do it, to conform.
That effect can be either good or evil, but in the case of mask-wearing, it is good.
Masks are not a panacea, though, and “6-foot social distancing” is woefully inadequate indoors. If you are indoors with other people, a high percentage of the air molecules you inhale have probably already been inside someone else’s lungs very recently. We know that because indoor atmospheric CO2 concentrations are often at least twice outdoor levels, because of people exhaling CO2.
The CO2 is harmless, but when the indoor CO2 level is over twice the outdoor level, it means that when you inhale that air, most of the air molecules which you inhale were recently exhaled by someone else! Not just a few of the air molecules, most of them!
So wearing masks and maintaining 6′ “social distances,” though useful, is not adequate stop the spread of the disease, indoors. That is why it is very important to avoid conditions in which many people gather together, indoors.
It is a shame that, at every level of government, the American response to this disease (and the responses of most other countries) has been catastrophically inept.
That’s not a partisan statement: Democrats and Republicans have both proved that they are grossly incompetent. Even after several other countries demonstrated how the disease can be controlled, by efficiently identifying those who are infected, and quarantining them until they are no longer infected, in the United States, government authorities have stubbornly refused to make a serious effort to do so, in any State, red or blue. The result has been more than 300,000 unnecessarily lost American lives, so far.
If we’d handled this disease competently, like South Korea did, we’d have lost less than 5000 lives to it. Instead, we’ve lost 314,629, so far.
Averaged over the week of Dec. 8-15, we lost an average of 2530 American lives per day to this disease. Yet there’s still no significant effort by public officials to identify and isolate those who are infected, until they develop serious symptoms, and have probably already spread the disease to others.
There’s not even been any serious effort to stop the most important ways that the disease rapidly spreads, like public transit. For example, the governor of New Jersey ordered that public trains, subways and buses be filled to only half-capacity. That means a Covid patient in a subway car can only infect about 45 other people at a time, instead of 90 at a time. I cannot imagine how any thinking person can believe that is adequate, when many carriers remain unidentified and unquarantined.
In New York, believe it or not, they didn’t even do that.
It doesn’t help that many so-called experts are giving catastrophically bad advice to the public, and to public officials. I wrote an article about one of the worst examples, here:
https://www.wnd.com/2020/09/dr-scott-atlas-dead-wrong-handling-covid/