Robert W Malone, MD

👆👆👆 This is great news coming out of HHS - the EUAs for COVID are being terminated in a year's time Thank you Sec. Kennedy. 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

Justice Clarence Thomas is a true hero. Robert's and Barrett and their ilk (including the country club Republican congresscritters) belong in the dustbin of history 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

As predicted... Sad state of affairs. 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

US Supreme Court UPHOLDS BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS by striking down President Trump’s executive order Congress must act! THIS IS A BLOW TO THE FUTURE OF OUR REPUBLIC. The Supreme Court’s decision will harm America for DECADES to come Subscribe and share 👉 @StormIsUponUsJM

🧵 Most Americans think "Generally Recognized As Safe" means the FDA reviewed an ingredient and signed off on it. It often means almost the opposite. How the government quietly redefined what we call "food." --- Pick up a loaf of bread. The label runs 20 or 30 items. Yogurt is full of gums, stabilizers, emulsifiers, and flavor systems. Salad dressing reads like a chemistry experiment. Who decided this was normal? Not consumers. Not farmers. Not physicians. --- That "GRAS" status on thousands of ingredients works like this: Manufacturers commission their own safety studies, hire their own experts, and conclude their own ingredient is safe. Sometimes they never even notify the FDA before it reaches store shelves. --- Imagine a drug company running its own safety studies, picking its own panel, declaring its own drug safe, then selling it with no mandatory FDA review. Americans would be outraged. Yet that is roughly how thousands of food ingredients reach your table. --- Congress created GRAS in 1958 to do the opposite. The goal was to spare salt, butter, vinegar, and flour from pointless red tape. Foods already proven by centuries of human consumption. It was meant to protect real food, not to industrialize it. --- Today the food supply holds roughly 10,000 to 12,000 intentionally added ingredients. Most were never created for your health. They were created for longer shelf life, cheaper production, and cross country shipping. Rational business goals. Not public health goals. --- We have already seen where this leads. Artificial trans fats carried GRAS status for decades. Cheap, stable, good texture. Then the science caught up: heart disease, raised LDL, inflammation. The FDA finally pulled their status. The damage was already done. --- The lesson was not that regulators got one ingredient wrong. The lesson is that they asked the wrong question. Never "do Americans actually need this in their food?" Only "can it be manufactured safely?" Those are profoundly different questions. --- This is where MAHA comes in. Banning a few dyes and preservatives one at a time may be worthwhile. But it leaves the underlying philosophy fully intact. Lipstick on a pig. --- The real question is not "Generally recognized by whom?" It is "Benefiting whom?" Consumers? Farmers? Public health? Or an industrial food system that has become extraordinarily good at making America sicker? Full essay: https://www.malone.news/p/how-government-quietly-redefined 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

The problem being -that the current Senate has no interest in fixing itself or the United States of America. They are making too much profit - to do the work to repair a broken system. 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

Long ago and far away - Jill and I used to drive, as well as farm with draft horses, as well as breed and show them. Learned from the best - the Amish. I took our senior stallion and won first with him at the 2006, World Percheron Congress. Won 2nd in the carriage class with a homebred team at the 2010 World Percheron Congress. Great memories. --- Our farming with those big ole drafts, was what brought us into the regenerative farming world - before it was a "thing." 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

Homesteading: The Dog Days of Summer https://www.malone.news/p/homesteading-the-dog-days-of-summer-f8d 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

👆👆👆 This is confusing... "Rubio stated that while Kennedy is allowed to play a "leading role" in determining next steps, the State Department is reclaiming management of the relationship with Gavi to drive the issue to a resolution acceptable to Congress and global health goals." So is State driving this, or HHS? 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

In its zeal to promote universal vaccination, @ gavi, the Vaccine Alliance has neglected the key issue of vaccine safety. When vaccine safety issues have come before GAVI, it has treated them not as a patient health problem, but as a public relations problem. During the COVID-19 pandemic, GAVI partnered with the World Health Organization to recommend best practices for social media companies to silence dissenting views and to stifle free speech and legitimate questions during that period. GAVI should consider the best science available, even when that science contradicts established paradigms. It should define success not just in terms of the number of vaccines delivered, but on their rigorously measured overall impacts. I call on GAVI to re-earn the public trust and to justify the $8 billion dollars that America has provided in funding since 2001. Until that happens the United States won’t contribute more to GAVI. Business as usual is over. Please follow us @ZFoundation

How can the US gov & health organizations regain trust of the public? Dr. Robert Malone @RWMaloneMD gives The National News Desk his take and his prediction as to what will come of Dr. Anthony Fauci. "What I'd like to see is his pension revoked… also setting him up for civil liability…" ➡️ @RealTimeDailyNews

Will we ever truly know the origins of the COVID-19 virus? Former CDC Advisor and early pioneer of mRNA vaccine technology @RWMaloneMD tells @ DeeDeeNews "The CCP and the People's Liberation Army came in early and destroyed the records" and that he "does not rule out the possibility of intentional release." ➡️ @RealTimeDailyNews

Mainstream media today is reporting about 1,500+ dead in Venezuela. When are they "allowed" to say that 50,000+ (up to 100K) are dead and who controls that narrative? 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

👆👆👆 Excellent top-level analysis 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

USAID had 64 years and $2 trillion to end world hunger. The Left is acting like all they needed was 1 more year. By ending USAID the funding for Communism and was drastically cut. Less Communism did more to end world hunger than anything USAID did during its entire existence. ➡️ @RealTimeDailyNews

Sunday Strip: Hold My Beer https://www.malone.news/p/sunday-strip-hold-my-beer 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

👆👆👆 Worth sharing 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

Voting has consequences. Canada voted for socialism, higher taxes, more regulations, less freedom. Business investors decided to go elsewhere. This is why Canada would be ranked near the bottom compared to every state in the USA. ➡️ @RealTimeDailyNews

Everyone is reading the Supreme Court's Roundup decision as a fight about glyphosate. Much of MAHA called it a betrayal. The more I studied the opinion, the more I concluded it is not really about glyphosate at all. 🧵 --- The justices did not weigh epidemiology. They did not rule on whether glyphosate causes cancer. They did not pick IARC or EPA as the better science. They answered a narrow legal question with enormous consequences. --- The question: when EPA approves a pesticide label under FIFRA, can a state jury later decide the manufacturer should have warned more strongly? The Court's answer was largely no. EPA-approved labels now preempt most state failure-to-warn claims. --- Why does that reach beyond Roundup? State failure-to-warn lawsuits have been one of the few mechanisms that surface emerging risk. Tobacco. Asbestos. Lead paint. PFAS. Discovery forced disclosure. Experts testified under oath. Regulators defended their conclusions in open court. --- That pathway just narrowed dramatically. When an EPA label preempts the claim, EPA becomes the gatekeeper for deciding when evolving science justifies a new warning. That authority no longer rests with juries hearing new evidence. It rests with one federal agency. --- So here is the real question, and it is a constitutional one: Can Congress create a system in which a single federal agency becomes the exclusive gatekeeper for whether evolving scientific evidence ever reaches an American jury? --- This is hard to square with two decisions constitutional conservatives celebrated. Dobbs returned power to the states. Loper Bright said courts, not agencies, interpret statutes. Here, an agency's determination became the basis for closing the courthouse door. --- Note who stood where. The Biden administration did not embrace the broad preemption argument. The Trump administration did. Ironically, the Biden position sat closer to conservative legal principles: preserve juries, respect state common law, do not expand the administrative state. --- The decision assumes EPA will revisit labels as science evolves. Look at the record. Glyphosate entered review in 2009. EPA reaffirmed "not likely carcinogenic" in 2020. The Ninth Circuit faulted that analysis. EPA withdrew it. More than fifteen years in, still no final determination. --- Meanwhile the science moved past cancer. Researchers are now studying endocrine disruption, the gut microbiome, metabolic disease, reproductive and developmental toxicity, neuroinflammation, and cumulative exposure to many chemicals at once. The questions themselves have changed. --- Freeze the courts to EPA's pace and you freeze more than yesterday's conclusions. You freeze yesterday's understanding of which questions even deserve investigation. That is a dangerous place for science and for public health. --- One more point. If EPA's science now forecloses jury claims, EPA's independence is no longer just a regulatory issue. It is a civil-justice issue. The FDA has faced years of scrutiny over capture and the revolving door. EPA has largely escaped it. This decision should end that. --- This case is not really about glyphosate. It is about who decides when science has changed, and whether Americans keep access to the courts when new evidence emerges. Full analysis: https://www.malone.news/p/the-supreme-court-puts-the-epa-between 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD

👆👆👆 True story 📌Follow and Share👇🏻 🔬🧬 @RWMaloneMD