Philadelphia, United States
Joined January 2018
- Tweets2.8K
- Following3.3K
- Followers811
- Likes14K
Joe retweeted
This was only 20 years ago when the Mainstream Media ran news segments like this. Can't imagine them doing anything similar now...
Joe retweeted
🚨YouTube removed this interview explaining HOW VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM.
MIT's @stephanieseneff on VAERS, glutamate in MMR, aluminum, and why she thinks glyphosate makes them more harmful to the brain:
"The two are working synergistically together to cause harm."
Full video details 👉 read.sayerji.com/p/the-inter…. .
Joe retweeted
I'm a Board Certified anesthesiologist and have been in practice for 24 years. I just learned that the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia where I trained has launched a program to increase flu vaccine uptake among children by vaccinating them while under anesthesia.
The program is called "Close your Eyes. We'll Immunize"
This is stunningly irresponsible. Here's why:
Anesthetists are extremely risk avoidant and endeavor to minimize patient exposure to anything which carries potential side effects. This is particularly true of pediatric patients who very often have never been exposed to anesthetic medications. We simply cannot know how an individual child will respond to these drugs for the first time.
Every single medication we administer during an operation can potentially trigger untoward or allergic responses. When this occurs our primary responsibility is to stabilize the patient. Our secondary responsibility is to identify the offending agent. There is absolutely no justification of introducing another agent, in this case a flu vaccine, which carries a risk of harm and contributes nothing to the success of the operation.
Some of the more common side effects of flu vaccines are fever (11-16%) and less commonly, a rash (1%). There is also an non-zero risk of severe allergic reactions and high-grade fevers which can develop over the course of minutes.
What if a child under anesthesia receives a vaccine and develops a rash and/or fever? Is it from the antibiotic that the surgeon requested? Is it from the narcotic? The anxiolytic? The barbiturate?
Anesthetic gases can also (rarely) trigger a life threatening response called Malignant Hyperthermia which commonly presents as a high fever. Without subsequent testing we cannot know which agent was responsible. Most commonly the testing is never done and the child’s record will forever reflect the possibility that some or all of the drugs which were used are responsible for their reaction. This makes future anesthetic care significantly more challenging and will require the use of alternatives which may not be necessary.
Advocating for a flu vaccine while a child is anesthetized reflects the pervasive yet inaccurate attitude among the medical establishment that vaccines are perfectly safe. I simply cannot believe that my mentors would have ever supported this initiative when I was a resident there. Close your eyes indeed.
Joe retweeted
I used to think cholesterol was simple. High is bad. Low is good. Take a pill. Problem solved.
Then I read the Korean study. 14.9 million people. Nine years of follow up. No one on statins.
And the result was a U-shape.
Very low LDL. More cardiovascular death. Very high LDL. More cardiovascular death. The safest zone sat right in the middle.
How can both extremes kill you if the number itself is the problem?
Because the number was never the problem.
Low LDL weakens your blood vessel walls. Cholesterol builds every cell membrane in your body. It makes your hormones. Drive it to the floor and the body cannot maintain itself. The vessels get fragile. They rupture.
High LDL in someone with insulin
resistance, chronic inflammation, and a damaged arterial wall is dangerous. Not because LDL attacked the wall. Because it got trapped inside a wall that was already broken.
But here is what the system never tells you.
A lean, active person eating real food can have LDL of 300 and be one of the healthiest people in the room. High HDL. Low triglycerides. No inflammation. Clean insulin. The LDL is high because their body is running on fat and transporting energy efficiently. Not disease. Metabolism.
Same number. Completely different biology.
Two people sitting in the same doctor's office. Same LDL on the lab report. One needs intervention. One does not. But both get handed the same prescription.
Because the system was built to treat the number. Not understand the environment the number lives in.
Stop chasing numbers. Start understanding your body.
A Giant Korean Study of 15 Million People Just Blew a Hole in the “Lower LDL Is Always Better” Story
Imagine tracking almost 15 million adults for nearly nine years and counting every death from heart disease and stroke. That’s exactly what Korean researchers did with 14.9 million people who weren’t even taking cholesterol drugs. What they found doesn’t match the simple message that “the lower your LDL, the safer you are.” Instead, the risk formed a U-shape. People with very low LDL died more often from cardiovascular causes, people with very high LDL also died more often, and the sweet spot sat right in the middle.
For overall cardiovascular death the lowest risk landed between about 90 and 149 mg/dL. Below that range or well above it, deaths went up. The pattern changed depending on the exact problem. For heart attacks and blocked arteries the best zone was lower (around 70–114 mg/dL). For some types of brain bleeds the risk kept falling only when LDL stayed higher. In plain terms, driving LDL as low as possible protected against one kind of death while raising the risk of others.
When the scientists looked only at the higher range (100 to 300 mg/dL) they still saw a clear rise in heart-attack deaths as LDL climbed. Each jump of about 40 mg/dL raised the chance of dying from ischemic heart disease by roughly 26 percent. But that rise was weaker in women and in older adults than in younger men. Even people in their late 70s and early 80s still showed some extra risk from higher LDL for heart attacks and ischemic strokes, yet the overall picture never became “lower is always safer.”
The study is huge, it followed real people instead of just guessing from lab tests, and it only looked at folks who were not already on statins. That makes the U-shape harder to wave away. Doctors still treat high LDL when people already have heart disease or several risk factors, because the top end of the curve is real. But the data also show that pushing every healthy adult toward rock-bottom LDL numbers is not free. Too low carried its own price in this massive population.
The takeaway is simple and uncomfortable: LDL cholesterol is not a one-way street. In nearly 15 million Koreans the safest zone for dying of cardiovascular disease was not the lowest number on the lab report. Both extremes cost lives. That single finding from one of the largest studies ever done keeps forcing the same awkward question—how low is actually low enough, and for whom?
Joe retweeted
The @FDA just approved an mRNA flu shot in which 23 subjects died in the mRNA arm, versus 9 in the traditional flu-shot arm. That product is now being tested in children.
Joe retweeted
18 month old baby died one day after receiving the Moderna shot. People need to go prison for this.
@julie4butte5
Joe retweeted
BREAKING: Massive MAHA Coalition Representing 63 MILLION Followers Sends Open Letter to Trump and RFK Jr. Demanding REMOVAL of the mRNA Platform
168 prominent physicians, scientists, lawmakers, and public figures unite behind six demands for sweeping federal action:
1. BAN mRNA/gene-therapy-derived technologies for all vaccines
2. TERMINATE the PREP Act declaration for COVID injections
3. REPEAL the PREP Act
4. BAN pharmaceutical direct-to-consumer advertising
5. END federal healthcare incentives that promote medical coercion
6. END conflicts of interest at the CDC, FDA, NIH, and NIAID
I’m proud to stand among the signatories putting our names behind these demands.
Large medical freedom coalition with a social media footprint of over 63 million followers tells Kennedy and Trump “Remove mRNA shots or pay a political price.”
justthenews.com/government/w…
Joe retweeted
BMJ, perhaps the most famous medical journal, just published the lies about COVID vaccines. They knew the signals of harm, they silenced it.
US officials knew the main VAERS data-mining algorithm for COVID mRNA vaccines was broken by “masking” (Pfizer and Moderna reports drowned out other vaccines, so shared harms like myocarditis produced no alert) but kept using it and sidelined the FDA doctor who flagged the problem and offered a fix.
CDC and FDA had planned two methods (PRR plus FDA’s empirical Bayesian approach). CDC skipped PRR until 2022 and both agencies relied on the Bayesian method, which senior officials already knew was insensitive under the flood of mRNA reports. Career FDA safety officer Ana Szarfman and statistician William DuMouchel presented an updated algorithm in early 2021 that did detect signals; Peter Marks’s team declined to adopt it and told her to stop sending COVID analyses. Officials then cited the absence of signals when downplaying myocarditis, tinnitus, and other reports.
Link in comments.
Joe retweeted
“This is insane!” — A new vaccine is on the market called VAXELIS lt has 6 VACCINES in ONE SHOT for 6-WEEK-OLD BABIES...6 Infants Died In Trials.
How can this be allowed to happen ?
Dr. Jeff Barke
Joe retweeted
US health officials knowingly relied on a compromised algorithm to detect signals of harm from mRNA covid-19 vaccines and silenced efforts to fix it, finds an investigation by The BMJ
bmj.com/content/394/bmj-2026…
Joe retweeted
We are not going back.
In 2021, Pennsylvanians voted to amend the state Constitution after the Wolf–Shapiro COVID years. We limited the governor’s emergency declarations because we lived the lockdowns, the school mandates, and the enforcement.
We voted no, and no means no.
Josh Shapiro now wants that authority back — and more — through a ~500-page rewrite of PA Department of Health communicable-disease rules (Chapter 27).
The proposal adds “prevention, containment or mitigation” as grounds for disease-control measures. It would let DOH or local health enter apartments, buildings, schools, and other locations with only an official ID. It would require schools to give health officials private, unobstructed access to students — including during class — with no parental-presence requirement.
Public comment is open through September 21.
Read it. Comment. Send it to: [email protected]
Also file at irrc.state.pa.us — search IRRC #3490.
We voted no. We are not going back.
Joe retweeted
Anyone should have the right to say no to any medical procedure including vaccines and not need to have any reason.
That right to decline should not be tied to civil liberty infringement because we are free beings inherently and the constitution enshrines these God given inalienable rights. You cannot have informed consent without the free ability to decline.
So really exemptions should not even be needed. JUST the word NO. This is what needs to be changed legally and culturally. For the current climate of this messed up world yes, anyone should be able to religiously exempt.
I feel strongly that collectively we need to push past fighting for the right for exemptions and command, reclaim, and demand our inherent right to say no freely and without civil liberty infringement.
Joe retweeted
And while we were all distracted by trying to decode tyranny, this mFlusiva (mRNA-1010) shit got FDA approval (August 5, 2026).
It killed 2.6 times more people than were on "regular flu vaccines" - which they used a the control.
Let me repeat that: In the trials supporting mFlusiva (mRNA-1010) FDA approval, the comparator group received another licensed flu vaccine (an active control), not a saline placebo and 2.6 times people died on the RNA product. @jeffreytucker @brownstoneinst @P_McCulloughMD @SenRonJohnson
@RWMaloneMD @MaryBowdenMD @maryhollandnyc
@rustyrockets @thevivafrei @AaronSiriSG
Also, they used pooling to obscure and/or dilute signals.
Joe retweeted
Not the way I planned on spending my afternoon, but 7,600 comments should not be ignored! Bots, trolls and personal attacks notwithstanding, the critics of yesterday’s post were dominated by a large and vocal contingent who rushed to remind me that there’s “a difference between socialism and communism,” an obvious indication that they didn’t actually read the post.
Shelley Armour writes… “Mike! You know there is a difference between democratic socialism and communism, right?”
Hi, Shelley. Yes, I know there’s a difference, and I understand what the difference is. The larger point, and the fundamental flaw with your comment, is that you seem to believe the candidates within the Democratic Socialist Party are both “democratic and socialist" simply because that’s the name of their club. Well, maybe some of them are. I really couldn’t say. What I can tell you for sure is that more than a few have called for the complete dismantling of capitalism, free markets, representative government, property rights, borders, police, prisons, and the Constitution in general. My post referred to them, as well as a number of elected Democrats who have agreed to campaign on their behalf – including Gavin Newsom, who said, "The Democratic Party must accept the DSA in order to take back the Congress.” His words, not mine.
Tracey Steele writes…“Wow! I cannot believe Mike Rowe said this. He has a huge reach, and he is actually spouting the word “communism” like it’s the 1950s! Wow Wow Wow!”
Wow indeed, Tracey, and thanks for noticing the size of my reach! (Contrary to popular belief, size does matter!) To say it again, I am not the one “spouting” communism or conflating socialists and communists. The word is being “spouted” by members of the DSA who are using it to describe themselves. I am not accusing them; I am quoting them.
John Engles… Hey Rowe, what’s the difference between the Communists who want to run the country and the Nazi/fascist who currently is?
Several differences, John, but the only one relevant to this conversation is the fact that the communists currently running for office have clearly identified themselves as such. They do not dispute or reject the label. They embrace it. It is who they are, who they claim to be, and who they want to be. The president, on the other hand, has never claimed to be a Nazi or a fascist. That doesn’t mean he isn't, but it is worth noting he has rejected the accusation outright. Obviously, you are entitled to that opinion and the right to share it publicly, thanks to our Constitution. Unlike in a fascist, Nazi, or communist regime. (Also worth noting, Nazis and fascists are not the same thing.)
Chris Tomaloff writes… “Kinda like how the political right didn’t shout down the extreme rhetoric coming from their candidates?”
No, Chris, not like that at all. In the video I shared, we saw examples of prominent Democrats saying things like, “We need to elect more communists!” (Cea Weaver, Director of the NYC Mayor’s Office.) Mamdani himself literally tweeted, "Each according to their need, each according to their ability." That’s a direct quote from the Communist Manifesto.
But what exactly is the corollary from the right? Are prominent Republicans tweeting, “We need to elect more Nazis! We need to elect more fascists! Eat the poor!” I don’t think so. John Engles may think Trump is fascist and a Nazi, but Trump disagrees, and so do a majority of voters. Communists, on the other hand, say it loud and say it proud. I’m inclined to take them at their word.
Beto Ojeda… “Mike has always leaned to the Trumpian view of things but never states it, so as not to alienate anyone, but we know how to read between the lines. This “communist” talk is McCarthyism 2.0.”
I wasn’t around in the 1950s, Beto, but from what I’ve read, it was indeed a very difficult time to be a communist in this country. Lots of private citizens were dragged before Congress, made to take “loyalty oaths," and blacklisted in their places of work. I can’t justify it or condone it, but I can explain it. We had just fought a hot war against fascism and Nazism and just begun a Cold War against a communist regime. The existence of an organized Communist Party in this country at such a time strained the limits of tolerance. But do you really think we’re less tolerant today than we were seventy-five years ago? Do you really believe my comments about communists who claim to be communists are synonymous with another Red Scare? If you haven’t noticed, Chris, no one in the DSA, including the communists, is being dragged before Congress and made to swear a loyalty oath to the Constitution. Today, a communist in America can run for office…with the endorsement of the governor of California! And the tacit approval of a major political party! Seems to me we’re about as far from McCarthyism as we can get.
As for my desire not to alienate anyone, I suppose I am guilty of that. I run a foundation that is open to people of all political beliefs, and we’ve assisted lots of Americans who lean to the left. I also know for a fact that many Democrats have supported mikeroweWORKS historically, and I have no desire to run them off. But do you really have to “read between the lines” to understand where I’m coming from?
True, I’ve never endorsed a candidate or publicly encouraged people to vote. But I’ve been very transparent about the fact that I’m a registered Independent who favors policies and programs that often align with conservative principles. Obviously, I would not characterize those conservative principles as “Trumpian,” because a) they were around long before him, b) Trump is not a conservative, and c) I do not agree with or support everything the President says and does. So, is it possible, Beto, that your accusation is rooted in the fact that I have never publicly denounced the president to your satisfaction? Is it possible you think I'm a Trumper, simply because I've never called him a fascist, or a Nazi, or a liar, or a conman, or a traitor, or whatever else you believe him to be?
Gretchen Seipp… Mike, the fact that you still act as though you’re not political after all this time is a bit ridiculous. I still support your work and foundation because I believe in it, but the folksy act has worn thin.
Aw, shucks, Gretchen. Folksy? Lil' ole me?
Honestly, how am I acting as if I am “not political?” This entire conversation is the very definition of “political.”
Christopher Pugh… I would have voted for Mike Rowe and Freddie a few years ago before he went full-on MAGA, and I’m all in favor of his project, but it’s pretty clear the political direction that he’s moved in and the money trail that has influenced it.
It’s Freddy, not Freddie. (I don’t much care, but he’s a terrier and particular about such things.) As for the “full-on MAGA” moniker, is there something I did specifically to earn that designation? Is there some kind of general definition you can share? Or, are you coming from the same place as Beto? Is calling me “Full-On MAGA" your way of saying that I’ve failed to condemn Trump to your satisfaction?
For the record, MRW is supported by liberals and conservatives alike. I have no idea what “money trail” you are referring to. Also, regarding my personal politics, think about the implications of what I wrote. I said that the Democrats have been given a gift – an opportunity to appear reasonable by speaking the truth to their own party, just as Bill Maher has done. All they have to do is distance themselves from candidates who have called for the complete dismantlement of our Constitution. All they have to do is say, “Hold on, comrade. Our tent is not that big. We respect your right to hate America, but we don’t want you in our party, and we will not support your candidacy.”
If they say that, I think a lot of Independents would see them as they see John Fetterman, who has, in the eyes of many voters, become the most “rational” Democrat currently in office. If they don’t – if they actually welcome communist candidates into their party – then I’m afraid the Democrats, by default, will offer the American people a very simple choice in November – a party that disavows communism vs. a party that doesn’t. I think such a choice would be very positive for Republicans because I don’t think most Americans want to align themselves with a Democratic Party that welcomes communists. The question for you, Chris, is why would a “Full-On MAGA” like me encourage Democrats to act in a way that would disadvantage the Republican Party? And the answer is simple – it’s because I support the existence of a Democratic Party that believes America is still a fundamentally good place.
I think there’s a lot of room for improvement in our country, and I believe the best way to realize those improvements is for Democrats and Republicans to have continuous, robust and public debate about all the issues. But if one of those parties is affirmatively determined to transform our democratic republic into a communist state, then we’re no longer debating the various ways to make our country better; we’re debating the merits of destroying it. And really, what’s the point of tolerating that?
America is already a big tent, filled with hundreds of millions of people with wildly differing views and lots of political parties that represent those views. We’ve got the Green Party, the American Freedom Party, the Socialist Workers Party, the Constitution Party, and of course, the Communist Party USA, as well as the Democratic Socialist Party. America’s tent is so big, we can even tolerate fringe parties like the KKK, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, and so forth. Why then, does Gavin Newsom want to make room in the Democratic tent for socialists and communists? There’s only one reason, and he’s already spelled it out for us – he believes the Democrats need them to win back the Congress. I think it’s a bad bet for the Democrats and for America. And if a prominent Republican reached out to the KKK with the same “big tent” offer, you’d better believe my vote would be in play.
Michael Tillman… When are you going to throw your hat into the ring, Mr. Rowe?
Ha! When it no longer fits my head!
Joe retweeted
The Covid vaccine killed Victor Simoes 34 via Aortic Dissection.
Victor's parents proved it in lab work. The vaccine causes aortic dissections.
Joe retweeted
Data engineer @JohnBeaudoinSr spent years pulling 1.6 million death certificates and says many records were falsified to hide vaccine deaths. He's compiled evidence for a formal government filing and joins @AskDrDrew to walk me through it, LIVE at 7et nitter.cf/i/broadcasts/1vJpPPRvN…
Joe retweeted
Now that we know Jaylen Brown will officially be #7, let’s do a jersey giveaway! It’s been a minute!
To win:
1) Like & Retweet
2) Follow @JoshReynolds24
Winner selected tomorrow! Good luck!
***IMPORTANT***
Winner will NOT be DM’d from any other account & will NOT be asked to fill out a form. These are scam accounts pretending to be me. I will DM you from my account congratulating you & asking for details.
