Letter to the [[willfully ignorant]] Mandating Employer

Hello. Regarding the mandate for all employees. I have several questions on behalf of myself and colleagues that I trust you should be able to answer. If you cannot answer, please simply state such. I hold informed consent and education in high regard and strive to be vigilant of industry-biased and corporation funded “science” that has tarnished aspects and the history of western medicine; therefore, I appreciate the opportunity to address some global concerns. I have also attached references to peer-reviewed articles to add the breadth of data to my inquiry.

The below questions are based on the August 23, 2021 Summary Basis for Regulatory Action – Comirnaty (SBRA) found at https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download as well as the Prescribing Information (PI) found at https://www.fda.gov/media/151707/download (a) or https://www.fda.gov/media/144413/download (b). Additional supporting documents from the FDA are found at: https://www.fda.gov/vacines-blood-biologics/qa-comirnaty-covid-19-vaccine-mrna

First and foremost, as [[this employer]] moves into requiring COVID-19 vaccines for staff, is there a plan to explicitly carry Comirnaty once it is in production? There are currently two vaccines produced by Pfizer. The EUA authorization explicitly states that “As the vaccination provider, you must communicate to the recipient or their caregiver, information consistent with the “Vaccine Information Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers” (and provide a copy or direct the individual to the website www.cvdvaccine.com to obtain the Vaccine Information Fact Sheet) prior to the individual receiving each dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, including: FDA has authorized the emergency use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, which is not an FDA-approved vaccine. The recipient or their caregiver has the option to accept or refuse Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. The significant known and potential risks and benefits of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, and the extent to which such risks and benefits are unknown (PI(b), p.9-10).”

Next, I’d like to understand your clinical study methodology. It appears that safety and immunogenicity (BNT162-01) was based off a 24-patient sample in Germany (SBRA, p. 15, Table 6). It also states that no control group was used in the same table. Do we believe this methodology was sound and the sample size is adequate in representing our employees? Can you shed some light on how so? I am specifically interested in how a control group doesn’t apply here and how 24 participants from Germany is an adequate sample size for our target population. Again, this was the safety and immunogenicity study, so my concern is that safety took a backseat.

You will also find that study ID C4591001 to evaluate efficacy is ongoing and notes it had a placebo group that was first a dose-finding study, then stratified to include participates at high risk of acquiring COVID-19 for a duration of up to 7 days after the second dose without evidence of prior COVID-19 infection (SBRA, p.16; PI, p.18). I would like some clarity about this 7-day window after the 2nd dose as we have all been told people are not “fully vaccinated” until two weeks after the 2nd dose. I struggle to understand why we adopted 14 days when their efficacy study does not extend past 7 days. How does this short efficacy period justify the unknown risks thereafter?

Further, this study (C4591001) is no longer using a gold-standard placebo as it became unblinded December 14, 2020 and placebo groups were offered the EUA vaccine (SBRA, p.17). Does [[this employer]] find this approach worrisome? The PI(a) has a conflicting timeline and states that the participants were unblinded on December 11, 2020 (p.7). Is this study acceptable to validate the concerns of safety in the short-term for all employees? I can only see that it provides up to 6 months of data, nothing more. According to Peter Doshi, the editor of the BMJ, only 7% of the control group was still considered true placebo at the cutoff of the study by March 13, 2021 yet they were still counted in the placebo arm (https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/08/23/does-the-fda-think-these-data-justify-the-first-full-approval-of-a-covid-19-vaccine/).

The plan for Comirnaty’s “risk and associated uncertainties” mitigation is through labeling and postmarketing studies (SBRA, p.24). From what I can tell, this means that data is still unclear and mandating this product is an ethical challenge as people in studies should always be provided with fully informed consent free of coercion. I am sure you are aware that long-term safety data will not be known for several years from any of these products and the safety clinical trials are yet to start for COMIRNATY with an end goal for December 2022 based on the registry: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04815031. Emergency department employees provide individualized care to our patients, should we also be afforded the same treatment based on our individual health status and our willingness to consent to these yet known risks?

Section 13.1 of the PI(a) states that “Comirnaty has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, or impairment of male fertility” (p.15). With the use of a new mRNA technology in humans, one would postulate that genotoxicity and carcinogenicity are important factors to understand or at least evaluate prior to forcing it upon otherwise healthy people? Am I missing something?

My biggest concern is what is looming in the upcoming cold/flu season. We have no data on whether this product will cause antibody-dependent enhancement or “vaccine-associated enhanced disease” or “vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease” (SBRA, p.25) as acknowledged in all previous coronavirus and similar pathogen animal trials:

  1. A Double-Inactivated Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Vaccine Provides Incomplete Protection in Mice and Induces Increased Eosinophilic Proinflammatory Pulmonary Response upon Challenge (https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.06048-11)
  2. Cellular Immune Responses to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV) Infection in Senescent BALB/c Mice: CD4+ T Cells Are Important in Control of SARS-CoV Infection (https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.01281-09)
  3. Evasion by Stealth: Inefficient Immune Activation Underlies Poor T Cell Response and Severe Disease in SARS-CoV-Infected Mice (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1000636)
  4. Immunization with inactivated Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus vaccine leads to lung immunopathology on challenge with live virus (https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2016.1177688)
  5. Immunization with Modified Vaccinia Virus Ankara-Based Recombinant Vaccine against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Is Associated with Enhanced Hepatitis in Ferrets (https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.78.22.12672-12676.2004)
  6. Immunization with SARS Coronavirus Vaccines Leads to Pulmonary Immunopathology on Challenge with the SARS Virus (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0035421)
  7. Pathogenic priming likely contributes to serious and critical illness and mortality in COVID-19 via autoimmunity (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtauto.2020.100051)
  8. Structural Basis of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV Antibody Interactions (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2020.09.004)
  9. Two Different Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) Risks for SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies (https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2021.640093)
  10. Vaccine Efficacy in Senescent Mice Challenged with Recombinant SARS-CoV Bearing Epidemic and Zoonotic Spike Variants (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040080)

Was [[this employer]] aware of the problems in these trials prior to this policy change? I fear this outcome for staffing burdens this winter when challenged with similar respiratory pathogens. When faced with increased rates of infection, is it wise to add selective pressures onto these viruses to mutate around our interventions? Can you explain how these biologics do not contribute to immune escape nor cause an explosion of variants? Several world renown virologists hold these concerns forefront and are trying to sound the alarm. I know that [[this employer]] cares about mitigating risk for their employees, so I am wondering if these concerns were addressed or if you can share your position on these matters.

  1. Antibody-dependent enhancement of coronavirus (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.09.015)
  2. Two Different Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) Risks for SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies (https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2021.640093)
  3. COVID-19 Tragic Pandemic: Concerns over Unintentional “Directed Accelerated Evolution” of Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and Introducing a Modified Treatment Method for ARDS (https://doi.org/10.1002/ctm2.284)
  4. Out of the frying pan and into the fire? Due diligence warranted for ADE in COVID-19 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micinf.2020.06.006)
  5. Antigenic Evolution on a Global Scale Reveals the Potential Natural Selection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 by Pre-existing Cross-Reactive T-Cell Immunity (https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.599562)
  6. Structural Basis of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV Antibody Interactions (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2020.09.004)
  7. Health Care Policy Makers’ Response to COVID-19 Pandemic; Pros and Cons of “Flattening the Curve” from the “Selective Pressure” Point of View: A Review (https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v49i6.3356)
  8. Antibody Dependent Enhancement Due to Original Antigenic Sin and the Development of SARS (https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.01120)
  9. Review of COVID-19 Variants and COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy: What the Clinician Should Know? (https://doi.org/10.14740/jocmr4518)
  10. Is COVID-19 receiving ADE from other coronaviruses? (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micinf.2020.02.006)
  11. Vaccine-associated enhanced disease: Case definition and guidelines for data collection, analysis, and presentation of immunization safety data (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.01.055)
  12. Role of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) in the virulence of SARS-CoV-2 and its mitigation strategies for the development of vaccines and immunotherapies to counter COVID-19 (https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2020.1796425)
  13. What are the roles of antibodies versus a durable, high quality T-cell response in protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2? (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2020.100076)
  14. The SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant is poised to acquire complete resistance to wild-type spike vaccines (https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.22.457114)
  15. Epitope profiling reveals binding signatures of SARS-CoV-2 immune response in natural infection and cross-reactivity with endemic human CoVs (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109164)
  16. Vaccine- and natural infection-induced mechanisms that could modulate vaccine safety (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxrep.2020.10.016)
  17. Risk of rapid evolutionary escape from biomedical interventions targeting SARS-CoV2 spike protein (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250780)

With the clinical trial data cutoff date of March 13, 2021, there was no evaluation of this vaccination against this evolving “Delta” or subsequent variants. We lack supporting evidence to suggest that the biologics modeled off the old mutation has any effect on Delta, as that was not the dominant variant during the study period per the CDC’s own website (https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#variant-proportions). Could you provide me with the studies to support a decreased risk of infection for those previously vaccinated in light of the “breakthrough” infections? What is the take on current trends that show vaccinated can contract and spread disease? If this is so, can you clarify how this would be of benefit to [[this employer’s]] staff? We all work with these patients. We have seen the previously vaccinated COVID-positive ICU patient and fear that for ourselves as our risks are greater than the general population. Our risks will always be higher for potential ADE because we work in an environment that is not lacking in respiratory pathogens.

With the initiation of COVID-19 EUA products, have [[this employer’s]] staff had training on the use of VAERS to report adverse events surrounding vaccine administration or “breakthrough” infections that has now shifted to a health department data collection? This is mandated by the CDC and FDA, but I have met several providers and nurses that have never heard the term “VAERS” or Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, much less input any data into it. VAERS has been inundated with data that is unmonitored and ill organized since the use of the COVID-19 EUA products (https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/datasets.html?). If [[this employer]] evaluated these tools prior to the policy change, can this be shared with fellow employees? Since this is a policy mandate, will [[this employer]] accept any responsibility for negative health outcomes of those they mandated to take these products? As this policy seemingly removes personal choice, I was also wondering if there were any arbitration or mediation clauses that would impede a formal litigation process.

As far as efficacy, Comirnaty’s package insert explicitly states in Section 5.5 that it “may not protect all vaccine recipients” (PI(a), p.6) which is also reiterated on the FDA website. Since the US has not provided transparent data, we must use the United Kingdom’s data as it is organized by age, vaccination status, genomic sequencing of variant, and deaths in each group. The most recent is found here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1012644/Technical_Briefing_21.pdf, though there should be an additional update soon.

The groups suffering the most are above age 50. Delta is shown to be very contagious; however, the case-fatality rate for the Delta variant, of most concern currently, is the most interesting portion (p. 22-23). Fully vaccinated more than 14 days has 679 total deaths in a population of 73,372 total cases. This is a case-fatality rate of 0.93%. Compared to the unvaccinated that have a total death toll of 390 in a population of 183,133 which is a 0.21% case-fatality. So, with this data in mind, who is at more risk of adverse outcome? While unvaccinated have contracted more disease, the severity of the outcome (death) is not as high as those previously vaccinated. Is this data indicating vaccine-associated enhanced disease or am I mistaken? I have not seen any convincing arguments to the contrary and was hoping you held a different perspective on this data because its implications are grave.

Update: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1014926/Technical_Briefing_22_21_09_02.pdf The update follows the same trend with the following:
Vaccinated 14 days post-dose 2: Cases 113,823 with Deaths 1,091 (calculated case-fatality rate of 0.96%)
Unvaccinated: Cases 219,716 with Deaths: 536 (calculated case-fatality rate of 0.24%)

I am concerned that healthcare organizations are rushing to place these policies on their staff without solid scientific evidence, as it is not yet available. Why has mandating become acceptable when, even as nurses and providers, we are to give informed consent to our patients? Is our consent inferior to that of our patients? Can personal responsibility apply to these health choices? The following studies are a warning of the risks outweighing the benefits of vaccination and considerations for natural immunity. The great news is that your employees have spent countless hours in the presence of COVID-19 patients and may already have superior protection.

  1. The Safety of COVID-19 Vaccinations—We Should Rethink the Policy (https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9070693)
  2. Longitudinal analysis shows durable and broad immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection with persisting antibody responses and memory B and T cells (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100354)
  3. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03647-4)
  4. Longitudinal observation of antibody responses for 14 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clim.2021.108814)
  5. Is a COVID-19 vaccine developed by nature already at work? (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110335)
  6. What are the roles of antibodies versus a durable, high quality T-cell response in protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2? (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2020.100076)
  7. Risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection after natural infection (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00662-0)

I do not know all the details surrounding or informing this policy, but things are not adding up. Please do your best to support counterpoints with references like I have provided for you here. This is a serious discussion and has major implications for the individual and we need these answers.

Thank you for your time,

“just a nurse”

Disease is NOT Normal

STOP NORMALIZING asthma, chronic ear infections, eczema, food/seasonal allergies, and neurocognitive delays. What are we doing to our immune systems that is causing these OVER-REACTIONS in our children?

Vaccines contain adjuvants that are designed to create an immune RESPONSE. Perhaps these doses of adjuvants are creating an OVER response? With any pharmaceutical there is a possibility of overt action…

》too much blood pressure medication = low BP
》too much insulin = low sugar
》too much antibiotic = bye-bye biome balance, hello opportunistic virulent and resistant organisms
》too much immune system suppression = no immune response, risk for illness

What about too much immune system stimulation? What happens when your immune system is on high alert and you eat an allergenic food at the same time? What happens when you’re given this stimulation repeatedly as a newborn with an IMMATURE immune system that still prioritizes Th2 (inflammatory) response over a Th1 (antibody) response?

That sounds like chronic inflammation. Alike… asthma, chronic ear infections, eczema, and food/seasonal allergies. The neurologic disorders may be a byproduct of heavy metal exposure (we see this with Alzheimers and aluminum in brain tissues as well as brain disorders with Cobalt hips). There is potential here, too!

Newborn immune systems lack memory and are tolerant of antigens for a reason. Babies are born sterile. They are still learning boundaries and creating the flora in their bowels that will become a major component of their immune system for their lifetime. If their body created a Th1 response to every foreign substance, they wouldn’t survive in this world… as we live in symbiosis with the microbes on our skin, in our airway, and in our bowels. Newborns must be colonized with these organisms and build up those systems. How does chronic stimulation of the immune system fit into this matrix?

It does not make sense. Vaccines are given in several doses to “create antibodies” though we know that more are added because they are ineffective in doing that in the first 2-3 doses… probably due to lack of the Th1 response, eh? So, now we give these tiny bodies several doses of adjuvant along with a fragment of a genetic component or microbe without considering what complexes are made between those simultaneous IM exposures, nor do we even study them.

The ACIP, advisory council for immunization practices, does not perform nor require adequate studies! They STATE that fact in these meetings.

So, if you still think that the voice of several thousand concerned mothers and fathers is horsebalogna, your cognitive dissonance is strong. We don’t do this to create drama. We do this to create safer practices for future generations. Mothers and fathers should not have to prove that these practices are harmful. Robust scientific evidence (not industry jargon) should prove interventions to be SAFE before subjecting our most vulnerable populations to them. Concerns should be addressed with valid studies (again, not industry jargon).

Pharmaceutical studies are done on adult populations and medications are recalled for adverse events… I think it is time for a recall, but “biologics” are not considered ‘medications’ for that exact reason…

Are we trading short-term infection for long-term disease?

Are we damaging immune systems by overstimulating them in their development?

When do we start paying attention to the parents that witness their children’s struggle to breathe, eat, and feel well? A normal child should not battle painful skin, constant stomach disturbances, nor frequent episodes of intense ear infections. This was not our (parents born before 1995) reality of childhood and must be questioned.

Shalom, light, and love.

From Nazi War Crimes to Mandatory Vaccines: A loss of informed consent

We don’t perform drug trials on pregnant people or infants because it isn’t ethical. If a person cannot give their informed consent (fetuses, infants, and children), they cannot consent. This duty falls to the parent. Fetuses, infants, and children up to a certain age cannot tell us what symptoms they are experiencing. It would be unethical to place them in experimental drug trials. How much data could we obtain without extensive intervention? Not much. The risks don’t outweigh the benefits. So we don’t test medications on pregnant people, infants, and children… (like they did in Nazi Medical Experiments)

Instead, we freely administer vaccines to them and “monitor” postmarketing studies of which nobody participates. Even worse. Have you been pregnant? Were you vaccinated? Did they contact the manufacturer about your outcomes? Did they survey you at all? I’m guessing you did not participate.

If you were born in the 1990s or earlier, you were likely given 4 vaccines as a baby. 7 different diseases/antigens for 14 doses total. If you were born before 1983, you were given half that. If vaccines were effective, why did they completely reformulate ALL of our generation’s vaccines and replace them with new versions that are administered more often?

We don’t test babies, yet in 2018 we inoculate infants with 23 vaccines. That is 26 different antigens given 3-4x EACH by age 1. We put approx 85 doses of foreign genetic material mixed with other substances into an infant’s body within their first year of life. EIGHTY-FIVE. That is six times the number we got as infants! Is it of no wonder that parents are pausing to question this practice?

Remember, this is the body of an infant. Infants have immature immune systems. We know this. This is common knowledge. They don’t mount immune responses like adults, and we still don’t fully understand all the components of immunity. Yet, we are putting these substances into that infant and calling it SAFE AND EFFECTIVE. Why?! We are treading murky waters. We essentially force 85 doses of foreign viruses/bacteria into the most vulnerable immune system, in the name of protection that has not been proven. Correlation doesn’t equal causation… right? What’s more is, we don’t follow up with these children over time. We don’t measure outcomes. We have an opportunity to learn, but we destroy it by avoiding the topic.

There is no questioning vaccines because it is drilled into our (society, medical world) heads that all “vaccines are safe and effective.” This is a blanket statement no matter if the vaccine has been around 2 years or 2 days. Blanket. These claims are made without any data to agree or disagree with the statement. Again, we don’t do safety studies on infants and pregnant people. And, the postmarketing studies are buried. Vaccine inserts, that you’re never given at a pediatric visit, list adverse events under “postmarketing studies.” So there are documented risks, yet we are to believe and state to our patients that vaccines are generally SAFE? What?

Parents must know the risks. This is informed consent. Parents provide care for their kids, they love them more than any outside influence. Medical practitioners do not care for your kids as YOU care for them. They are not held responsible if an injury occurs post-vaccination. Parents must live with the injury, so PARENTS MUST MAKE THE DECISION. Informed decisions.

Many people call for mandatory vaccinations. This is not informed consent. When informed consent is lost, medical tyranny is imminent. No government agency should control your body. Ever. It’s dangerous, always has been, always will be.

With no safety trials (because they didn’t want to “leave babies unprotected”) the CDC recommends we inoculate EVERY BABY and refuses to acknowledge any adverse events or lifelong medical conditions in conjunction with the schedule. Not only recommend, they demand it from providers who pressure parents. This is not a system built to deliver safe and effective medical care. This is risky business. The risks are all for the parents and the business is all government.

We have a sick generation of kiddos with a medley of autoimmune conditions. Could it be, perhaps, we are destroying or negatively altering the mechanisms of immunity by creating a false response with immunizations in an immature immune system? Are immunizations confusing the body’s normal functions and causing an overreaction or permanent damage? Why aren’t we considering the implications of this practice in long-term health? How is it possible that injecting genetic components with excipients are not part of the health equation? Why aren’t medical practitioners questioning the CDC? Why aren’t we demanding answers? Blind faith is dangerous. Blind following is detrimental. (See Nazi Medical Experiments.)

May your mind be open, heart be brave, soul be wise, and spirit be strong.

Shalom, light, and love.


Sites to Consider:
How the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) approves new vaccines, video clips: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UzQqan3uF8

WWII links to Nazi Medical Experimentation:

Vaccine Schedules from the CDC:
1983: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/images/schedule1983s.jpg
1989: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/images/schedule1989s.jpg
2005: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5351-Immunizationa1.htm
2017: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/past/2017-child.pdf
Main page: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/resource-library/index.html


Your Clean Routine: Healthy or Harmful?

When I was newly pregnant with my firstborn, we made lots of changes at home. I was also taking microbiology. I learned many valuable things here about cleaning. Let’s be honest, my husband does most of the cleaning in our home… so HE learned lots. I help, I do…

Anyways. We are organisms, duh. But more importantly, we are COVERED in organisms. They live on us and in us. An average of 10lbs of our gut flora is microbiota. Fascinating. I’m sure everyone has heard of being “too clean.” That’s right. You destroy all your natural protections (including your environment, skin, and digestive tract) and you’ll be battling chronic illness. There was a study that showed 60% of contaminants in water when placed on the skin, were absorbed systemically. Skin is your first layer of defense; it’d be wise to protect it!

So what about our homes? I understand sanitizing public areas, ick, but what about our houses? As a general rule, our germs in our own homes won’t kill us, so there is no need to try and sanitize every surface. If you regularly have visitors or someone is sick, sure, take extra cleaning measures. But, there is really no indication for heavy cleaning products (antibacterials, antivirals, antiseptics, you get the point?) and too much in your toilets could kill your septic! That leads to additional maintenance and is toxic to the environment. No septic? You realize that water gets recycled? Help those microorganisms do their job, don’t kill them. We live in this environment, might want to help it flourish. What’s more is: this is about YOU!

You could be contaminating yourself with those cleaners in your immediate environment…
•If you won’t spray it on your skin, why is it on your floors and counters that you touch?
•If you won’t inhale it, why are you spraying it in your air?
•If you won’t pour it on your body, why do you wash your clothes in it?
•If you won’t ingest it, why do you use it to wash dishes? Those soaps and/or detergents touch the foods you consume and liquids you drink.
Think about it.

Those cleaners don’t entirely wash off, does anyone follow their surface cleaning routine with a power rinse? Do you really think detergents are completely washed off of your clothes (ever use scented?) or soap off your dishes? Those are questions you need to think about when you purchase cleaning products and chemicals at the store. READ THOSE LABELS. Google in the aisle if you must!

No, we didn’t immediately pick up recycling, start bicycling everywhere, and go green; but, we threw out so many harsh cleaning chemicals. Baby steps. We changed our detergents, soaps, and my beauty products. A basic (not antibacterial) soap and water is perfect for everyday cleaning of your home! We stopped using fluoridated toothpaste, a confirmed neurotoxin! No, we aren’t perfect and sometimes you unavoidably buy crappy products that look safe. Or, the company you trusted goes rogue to save money. It happens. Know better, do better.

I don’t know why I didn’t share some of this stuff sooner. I hope this helps you on your journey to better health habits. More to come…

Shalom, light, and love.


Sites to consider: