So many photos on the internet would be illegal. People of Walmart like a poster in article said comes immediately to mind.

You want a good journalistic source for this? Journeyman Pictures. They've had the best reputation for excellent reporting, journalism with integrity and tackling hard issues for decades in Australia. Their documentaries, often featuring Australias best journos, have been shown regularly on some of our most respected news programmes. And Australian journalism has long been respected as being about the best in the world. They have a series on their Youtube channel called Perspectives on the Pandemic. It's about 15 episodes, released over more than a year. I recommend watching any and all to get a proper perspective, but I'll point directly to the interview with Dr Sucharit Bhakdi: "Bhakdi's parents are Thai diplomats." "Bhakdi studied at the Universities of Bonn, Gießen, Mainz and Copenhagen, and at the Max Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics in Freiburg." (Wikipedia). He's been criticised for his stance, but he's certainly not alone and together these possess quite a lot of creditibility. Take a look at his Wikipedia if you like, but note that where the criticisms are noted there is little given in support for those criticisms. Even for just the simple fact that you get the mainstream collective telling you "scientific consensus" while there are so many heavy weights saying "no" (and also saying the obvious that everyone is naive to, that "there is no such thing as scientific consensus - that's not how science works - it doesn't give answers - it doesn't establish mandates - it only gives information and only when it considers everything") should tell you enough as to why they need to be heard. They are also not giving bare minimum information: they will walk you through every bit of it. The opposite of what you're getting from the mainstream and even your government. There is no doubt what the right thing to do is. Other notable, high performance names to introduce yourself to the crowd with are Pierre Kory and Robert Malone. But the list is loooong. Science can NEVER tell us what to do. It can only tell us what our options are, and right now we're not being allowed to know them. Anytime you hear anyone, ever, ever again, in any context, claim "scientific census" you can be certain that they are obfuscating or simply have no credibility. It is the most unscientific idea ever propagandised.

No. "Well, legally I'm obliged" can just as often be the problem. Another problem is people conflating advice with obligations - the dogooder who does what they're told (but aren't required to) by people who can't possibly know the outcome or the danger, being a current situation that comes to mind. Especially that the current situation has a whole other argument being made largely by highly credentialed people, many of whom have been involved in making the original recommendations and authoring the treatments, but who are now being silenced and cancelled essentially because governments have already committed billions to programmes that were started a year ago when we knew less than nothing, and relative insights are only now recently being published. They don't want to be seen left standing there with a bag full of billions of dollars worth of dangerous product that they rushed through - it's a bit embarrassing for them. One example is Australia - Resists helping other countries with vaccine aide. Focused heavy investment in Astra Zeneca. People start learning what the policy makers have been reassuring can't and won't happen. Damage control. No longer giving it to the young. Only giving it to the elderly, because mathematically higher chance of dying anyway, easy excuse to obfuscate the actual risk to them - let them die to cover our arses. Reassurance, reassurance, reassurance. Now not hearing full, honest risk of others. Government still needs to look like the good guy. Vaccine aide given to poor countries: 20 million doses of Astra Zeneca. "We invested x amount of dollars helping poorer countries through the pandemic." Still minimal information. "Just do this, don't ask questions." Meanwhile, all the people with the best credentials are screaming from the rooftops, but they just get drowned out by those needing to look good for the next election: and everyone in both houses were involved in making those decisions. They're covering their arses. The policy makers are invested, also. Fauci is even financially invested, but they all have reputations and future investors and grants to consider. The highly credentialed people have no less to lose, but they are not backing down. Their concern is your health, safety, wellbeing and longevity. Their concern is what is right. These others have committed too heavily and covered up too much to let it come to light now. So even those who are truly naive to what even you and I can access - and that's not very believable - still have an interest in obstructing proper scientific process. But, the governments and policy makers, though - guilty as sin. All covering their arses. There are alternative treatments that are cheap and safe and effective, and the risk of the current course of action is being obfuscated. So, "I listen to the authority" and even "well, by law I'm obliged" is as wrong as wrong can be. The spike protein IS the reason why the vaccines might kill you. And the risk increases with every injection, as the illness is the body's exaggerated response (like an injected auto-immune disease). It is getting into the bloodstream (it shouldn't, intended to stay at injection site), so it gets everywhere it shouldn't - heart, brain - causes an exaggerated inflammatory resoponse - cells produce spike, spike protudes, cell dumps garbage, immune cell recognises garbage, attacks cell, but happening too aggressively, causing damage to epithelial tissue (e.g. veins, arteries) and resulting in internal bleeding (e.g. brain bleeds, aneurysm) or inflammaiton of heart and cardiac arrest. And with each shot the response seems to be getting larger - as expected, as a vaccine would hopefully work. And, they expect you to get it yearly now. They know all this. This is now about money and votes and reputation, and, because they do know this, felony indictment. What they highly credentialled people, advisors to WHO, CDC, etc., all virologists, epidemiologists, microbiologists and so forth, is: we have good data but on several candidates but are being rejected because of no clinical trials, and clinical trials aren't happening. Let's investigate these candidates. They are: Ivermectin (used as a prophylactic to prevent diseases like river disease); hydroxychlorquine (I don't know too much about this one, but this is their pick); and fluvoxamine (an SSRI - small enough to cross blood/brain barrier, so covering that base). These aren't idiots. They're the highest credentialled people in the field, with excellent reputations, but laymen are calling them foilhats because the news, government, FB, Twitter, YT, Google, et all are manipulating them for mostly political reasons. It's for the reputation of politicians, the reputations of the authority bodies, the reputation of the policy makers, the reputation of the manufacturers, and the reputation of vaccines themselves that their willing to needlessly risk so many lives. Do what you do. Just don't say nobody warned you.