Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Health

Dr. Peter Hotez predicts rampant spread of diseases once Trump takes office

Published

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Antonino Cambria

Dr. Peter Hotez says it will be ‘dangerous’ if the Senate confirms Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Prominent “vaccine scientist” Dr. Peter Hotez issued an eerie warning during an interview this week, listing a litany of diseases that may begin to spread starting on January 21, President-elect Donald Trump’s first full day in office.

Speaking with Nicole Wallace on MSNBC’s Deadline White House about how supposedly “dangerous” it would be for the country if the Senate confirms Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), Hotez began warning of diseases that will start to spread on January 21 while slamming vaccine skeptics. Hotez has a long history of attacking “anti-vaxxers” who have raised legitimate concerns about COVID and other vaccines.

“We have some big picture stuff coming down the pike starting on January 21. Mr. (Mike) Bloomberg mentioned H5N1 that I’m really worried about,” Hotez said. “It’s all over wild birds on the western part of the United States and going up in the north. It’s getting into the poultry, we’re seeing sporadic human cases, no human-to-human transmission yet, but that could happen. It’s in the cattle, it’s in the milk. And that’s just the beginning.

“We have another major coronavirus likely brewing in Asia; we’ve had Sars in 2002, Sars2, COVID-19 in 2019. And we know these viruses are jumping from bats to people thousands of times a year.”

“But there’s still more; we know that we have a big problem with mosquito-transmitted viruses all along the Gulf Coast. Where I am here in Texas, we’re expecting dengue and possibly Zika virus coming back or Oro Pouche virus, maybe even yellow fever, and there’s more. Then we have this sharp rise in vaccine-preventable diseases going up because, in part, the anti-vaccine activists,” Hotez said.

The scientist then reiterated that we might start to see these outbreaks on January 21 under the new Trump administration.

“All that’s gonna come crashing down on January 21st on the Trump administration. We need a really, really good team to be able to handle this,” Hotez said.

There have been several responses to Hotez’s strange comments, including by cardiologist and leading COVID establishment critic Dr. Peter McCullough, who said during an appearance on Live from Studio 6B on Real America’s Voice that Hotez and “vaccine lobbyists” are pushing an “agenda of fear.”

“To lay it down and say it’s all gonna happen the day Trump takes office, you can tell what the agenda here is. There’s an agenda of fear being pushed by the vaccine lobbyists to constantly keep Americans in fear about the next viral threat so they can hold power and because they know in their minds that the only thing they’ll offer is more vaccines,” McCullough said.

However, he did offer a response to the backlash from his statements on X, saying his comments were being misinterpreted by “extremist media.”

“(I) outlined the tough infectious disease challenges the Trump appointees will face and inherit when they begin in January. They twisted it to claim we will launch new viruses at them, as totally ridiculous as that sounds,” Hotez wrote.

Hotez was a major proponent of the COVID vaccines and has slammed vaccine skeptics. In a 2022 World Health Organization (WHO) video about “misinformation” surrounding the COVID vaccine, he called those who had concerns about the vaccine a major killing force.”

Last year, after an appearance by RFK Jr. on Joe Rogan’s podcast in which they discussed his concerns over vaccines, Hotez blasted them for “misinformation” in an X post. His post prompted Rogan to challenge him to debate RFK Jr. on his show. While RFK Jr. agreed to the debate, Hotez never responded.

 

Health

Canadians diagnosed with cancer in ER struggle to receive treatment as Liberals keep pushing MAiD

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

A study reveals Ontario emergency rooms struggle to manage cancer diagnoses, leaving patients without adequate follow-up care, while euthanasia remains readily available.

Research has found that Canadians diagnosed with cancer in the emergency room are often sent home without treatment; however, euthanasia remains readily available.

According to a study published September 8 by the National Library of Medicine, Ontario emergency room doctors are struggling to serve patients diagnosed with cancer while Liberals continue to push Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD).

“It’s kind of a little bit shocking to me that given how many people cancer affects and how devastating a diagnosis it can be to receive, that we haven’t figured this out better,” one doctor told researchers.

The study found that limited primary care access, specialist shortages, and long wait times have pushed patients to seek care from the emergency room. As a result, emergency doctors are giving out cancer diagnoses but are unable to provide sufficient follow up care. “We don’t often have enough information to know further what that means, in terms of prognosis, in terms of the type of treatments that they’re going to get,” another doctor revealed. “Then, to also add on the burden and say, ‘I also don’t know when you’re going to be seen’ is just a gut punch for them.”

According to the study, poor communication between EDs, primary care, and specialists often results in “lost” patients who are either delayed or prevented from receiving the proper care. Doctors called for standardized referral pathways, patient navigators, and better support to ensure timely follow-up.

The study discovered that the lack of timely care has resulted in “higher stages of diagnosis and increased mortality.”

At the same time, Liberals are focusing on expanding MAiD rather than addressing the medical staff shortage crises. In February 2024 after pushback from pro-life, medical, and mental health groups as well as most of Canada’s provinces, the federal government delayed the mental illness expansion until 2027. Liberals are also working to expand MAiD to children.

The most recent reports show that MAiD is the sixth highest cause of death in Canada. However, it was not listed as such in Statistics Canada’s top 10 leading causes of death from 2019 to 2022.

Asked why MAiD was left off the list, the agency said that it records the illnesses that led Canadians to choose to end their lives via euthanasia, not the actual cause of death, as the primary cause of death.

Continue Reading

Health

MAiD should not be a response to depression

Published on

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy MediaBy Daniel Zekveld

Canadians need real mental health support, not state-sanctioned suicide

If the law Parliament plans to roll out in 2027 had been on the books 15 years ago, Member of Parliament Andrew Lawton says he’d probably be dead. He’s not exaggerating. He’s referring to Canada’s scheduled expansion of medical assistance in dying (MAiD) to include people suffering only from mental illness.

Lawton, who survived a suicide attempt during a period of deep depression, knows what’s at stake. So do others who’ve shared similar stories. What they needed back then wasn’t a government-approved exit plan. They needed care, time, and something MAiD quietly discards: the possibility of recovery.

MAiD, medical assistance in dying, was legalized in Canada in 2016 for people with grievous and irremediable physical conditions. The 2027 expansion would, for the first time, allow people to request MAiD solely on the basis of a mental illness, even if they have no physical illness or terminal condition.

With the expansion now delayed to March 2027, Parliament will once again have to decide whether it wants to cross this particular moral threshold. Although the legislation was passed in 2021, it has never come into force. First pushed back to 2024, then to 2027, it remains stalled, not because of foot-dragging, but due to intense medical, ethical and public concern.

Parliament should scrap the expansion altogether.

A 2023 repeal attempt came surprisingly close—just 17 votes short, at 167 to 150. That’s despite unanimous support from Conservative, NDP and Green MPs. You read that right: all three parties, often at each other’s throats, agreed that death should not be an option handed out for depression.

Their concern wasn’t just ethical, it was practical. The core issues remain unresolved. There’s no consensus on whether mental illness is ever truly irremediable—whether it can be cured, improved or even reliably assessed as hopeless. Ask 10 psychiatrists and you’ll get 12 opinions. Recovery isn’t rare. But authorizing MAiD sends the opposite message: that some people’s pain is permanent, and the only answer is to make it stop—permanently.

Meanwhile, access to real mental health care is sorely lacking. A 2023 Angus Reid Institute poll found 40 per cent of Canadians who needed treatment faced barriers getting it. Half of Canadians said they outright oppose the expansion. Another 21 per cent weren’t sure—perhaps assuming Canada wouldn’t actually go through with something so dystopian. But 82 per cent agreed on one thing: don’t even think about expanding MAiD before fixing the mental health system.

That disconnect between what people need and what they’re being offered leads to a more profound contradiction. Canada spends millions promoting suicide prevention. There are hotlines, campaigns and mental health initiatives. Offering MAiD to people in crisis sends a radically different message: suicide prevention ends where bureaucracy begins.

Even Quebec, normally Canada’s most enthusiastic adopter of progressive policy experiments, has drawn the line. The province has said mental disorders don’t qualify for MAiD, period. Most provincial premiers and health ministers have called for an indefinite delay.

Internationally, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has condemned Canada’s approach and urged the government not to proceed. Taken together, the message is clear: both at home and abroad, there’s serious alarm over where this policy leads.

With mounting opposition and the deadline for implementation approaching in 2027, Parliament will again revisit the issue this fall.

A private member’s bill from MP Tamara Jansen, Bill C-218, which seeks to repeal the 2027 expansion clause, will bring the issue back to the floor for debate.

Her speech introducing the bill asked MPs to imagine someone’s child, broken by job loss or heartbreak, reaching a dark place. “Imagine they feel a loss so deep they are convinced the world would be better off without them,” she said. “Our society could end a person’s life solely for a mental health challenge.”

That isn’t compassion. That’s surrender.

Expanding MAiD to mental illness risks turning a temporary crisis into a permanent decision. It treats pain as untreatable, despair as destiny, and bureaucracy as wisdom. It signals to the vulnerable that Canada is no longer offering help—just a final form to sign.

Parliament still has time to reverse course. It should reject the expansion, reinvest in suicide prevention and reassert that mental suffering deserves treatment—not a state-sanctioned exit.

Daniel Zekveld is a Policy Analyst with the Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada.

Explore more on Euthanasia, Assisted suicide, Mental health, Human Rights, Ethics

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

X