The hottest Vaccine Mandates Substack posts right now

Harvard University faced controversies related to COVID policies and academic freedom.
Academia's shift towards ideological conformity over truth-seeking has accelerated, affecting discussions on COVID-related topics.
Challenges persist in the acceptance and handling of COVID vaccine mandates and policies.

During the pandemic, extreme measures like lockdowns and vaccine mandates were imposed with little debate or explanation.
The biomedical security state involves magnifying risks, imposing control on citizens, justifying surveillance and merging public health with military-industrial complex.
The global elite aim to establish a new world order using entities like the World Economic Forum and International Monetary Fund, pushing for international pandemic treaties and digital IDs.

New evidence highlights concerns about COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and waning protection
Studies point to potential side effects and risks associated with COVID-19 vaccines
Debates surrounding COVID-19 vaccine mandates, policies, and administration continue

COVID extremists may finally face consequences for their actions.
Government and media experts spread misinformation to influence public behavior.
Attempts to restrict first amendment rights could lead to consequences.

The Covid Litigation Conference II is happening in Las Vegas, where lawyers discuss COVID related legal issues, like vaccine mandates and wrongful terminations.
Experienced attorneys like Robert Barnes and Tricia Lindsay will be part of the conference, shedding light on the legal battlefield surrounding COVID.
The conference also aims to address illegal and fraudulent activities related to COVID that have affected people in the US, indicating a move towards justice and accountability.

Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

Public health officials may contradict themselves on the topic of natural immunity and vaccine mandates.
There can be examples of public health doublespeak where individuals argue one position publicly but advise the opposite in private.
It's essential to question the trustworthiness of public health officials and the impact of their decisions on public trust.