reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @DrNoMask
reSee.it AI Summary
I asked Dr. James Thorp to explain the study on fetal demise and miscarriage, focusing on how it was used to influence pregnant women and the unborn. I wanted to understand how the findings were distorted to support a particular agenda. Full congressional hearing linked.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Senator Ron Johnson asks Dr. James Thorp "Describe that study on what you call fetal demise, miscarriage, and how it was originally presented as evidence to push this on the most vulnerable, as you're saying, pregnant women and the unborn and how did they distort that study to make that point?" full congressional hearing below Stop the Shots!
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses a New England Journal of Medicine study from April 21, 2021, and an accompanying op-ed by Eric Rubin, Stephen Morrissey, and Rochelle Walensky, alleging they made false and fear-mongering statements about the risks to pregnant women, unborn children, and newborns if they didn't get vaccinated. This was allegedly done despite evidence suggesting pregnancy reduced maternal mortality and data showing the COVID-19 vaccine was the deadliest and most injurious vaccine ever released.
The speaker claims the study, authored by 21 federal employees including Tom Shimabukuro, was biased. Out of 827 pregnant women in the study, they highlight a claimed miscarriage rate of 12.6%, which they argue is abnormally high compared to the normal rate of 3% at a normal booking visit. They allege that 700 of the women received the vaccine in their third trimester, but were artificially placed in the first trimester data. This allegedly skewed the miscarriage rate for women vaccinated in the first trimester to 82%, which is the same miscarriage rate seen in the Pfizer post-market data.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And I'm gonna probably interrupt you because I want everybody to understand what you're talking about in this study because it takes we're talking about numbers here. But describe that study on what you call fetal demise, miscarriage, and how it was originally presented as evidence to push this on the most vulnerable, as you're saying, pregnant women and the unborn. And how did they distort that study to make that point? Go ahead.
Speaker 1: Thank you, senator Johnson. So the study in question is a New England Journal of Medicine on 04/21/2021. And in that same day, the digital edition, there were two publications that were extraordinarily concerning. Both of them interestingly coming at a time when vaccine hesitancy was being was increasing. So the Shimabukuro study was a separate study in addition to an op ed.
The op ed was by the New England Journal of Medicine editor in chief, who was Eric Rubin, and the managing editor, who was Stephen Morrissey, and then director of the CDC, Rochelle Walensky. And they made statements that were false. They made statements that was fear mongering, insinuating that pregnant women, if they didn't take the vaccine, would put their lives in harm, their preborn lives in harm, and their newborn lives in harm when they knew absolutely the opposite was true.
Speaker 0: How how did they know that?
Speaker 1: Well, they know that for several reasons, senator. Number one, the study by Pinells and colleagues who is a maternal fetal medicine specialist from University of Texas Houston published a very large study documenting that pregnancy in of itself reduced the maternal mortality by as much as seventy five percent during pregnancy compared to non pregnant women. That study was available. Also, doctor doctor Shimabukuro, Tom Shimabukuro, and then director of the CDC, this was seven weeks after the Pfizer five point three point six post marketing data in ten weeks that showed the COVID nineteen vaccine was the deadliest and most injurious vaccine ever released with forty two thousand eighty six injuries, including one thousand two hundred and twenty three dead. They had that information.
They still pushed it on pregnant women.
Speaker 0: So so so let's get to the the number where there's seven hundred individuals included in the statistic that shouldn't have been included. So describe that. I mean, talk about this study.
Speaker 1: Right. Well well, there's bias there's bias in the title. Okay? Just look at the title. There's bias in the 21 authors, all of whom were federal federal employees and Tom Shimabukuro, a safety officer in the FDA itself.
Then you go to the numbers. We we look at four we're looking at about numbers of of over 4,000 in a ten week period. And then all of a sudden, it's just how do we arbitrarily go to ten weeks in this v safe smartphone collection system? And then what happened to all the other patients? We go down to eight hundred and twenty seven patients.
What happened to
Speaker 0: So you got eight hundred and twenty seven patients that were that became pregnant or were pregnant in this in terms of again, it's not really study, but I mean, they're just analyzing data. So you got 827. Right. Okay. So these were women who were pregnant.
Speaker 1: Right. Eight hundred and twenty seven that completed the pregnancy completed a pregnancy in ten weeks.
Speaker 0: Which is not necessarily a born child, but the pregnancy is
Speaker 1: Or a miscarriage.
Speaker 0: Right. Okay.
Speaker 1: Now, they claimed a twelve point six percent miscarriage rate.
Speaker 0: Which is pretty kind of a normal
Speaker 1: No. It's not.
Speaker 0: What what what's a normal miscarriage rate?
Speaker 1: Three percent when you have a normal booking visit.
Speaker 0: And so so there are it's already an abnormal miscarriage rate in that eight hundred and twenty seven.
Speaker 1: That's correct.
Speaker 0: Okay. And so Now describe exactly how they
Speaker 1: Okay. So we have eight hundred and twenty seven patients. Right? And they talk about a twelve point six percent miscarriage. But a miscarriage of those eight hundred and twenty seven, seven hundred of those mothers had their vaccine in the third trimester.
That's way beyond the window when a woman has a miscarriage. So they artificially took those seven hundred patients and put them in the first trimester. No. The hundred and four patients that had the miscarriage, that goes to the hundred and twenty seven. A hundred and four over a hundred and twenty seven, you're looking at a, you know, eighty two percent miscarriage.
So the key is the percentage of women that got the vaccine in the first trimester had an eighty two percent miscarriage. And by the way, that's the exact same miscarriage rate that was seen in the Pfizer five point three point six post market.
Speaker 0: So I would I I would argue that proves both points in the title of this hearing. The corruption of science, the corruption of federal health agencies.
reSee.it AI Summary
I found the Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan interview intriguing. Tucker's theory resembles the plot of 'Transcendence' with Johnny Depp, where a group of humans distrusts AI and tries to prevent its takeover. I’ve shared a scene from the movie for reference.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
The Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan interview was pretty interesting. In this clip Tuckers theory sounds like the plot to the movie 'Transcendence' with Johnny Depp. Where there's a group of humans that don't trust A. I. and try to stop it from taking over. I attached a scene from the movie below. full Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson podcast below https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfTU5LA_kw8
Video Transcript AI Summary
There's a significant concern about AI potentially controlling humanity, which is fundamentally wrong. We created machines to assist us, not to dominate us. If AI poses a threat to human existence, we have a moral obligation to act decisively against it. The comparison to nuclear weapons highlights the need for caution and humility in our technological pursuits. While some argue that evolution and adaptation are evident, skepticism remains about the completeness of Darwin's theory. Ultimately, we should question whether the technologies we pursue, like AI, are truly beneficial, especially when economic pressures drive reckless development. The current state of California exemplifies this, as it struggles with homelessness despite significant spending, raising doubts about the effectiveness of its strategies.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But I would say the party agree with this. There's a spiritual component here for sure. People will worship AI as a god. AI, Ted Kaczynski was likely right, will get away from us. We will be controlled by the thing that we made.
All those are bad. Like, that's just bad, and we need to say unequivocally it's bad. It's bad to be controlled by machines. Right. Machines are helpmates.
Like, they we created them to help us to make our lives better, not to take orders from them. So I I don't know why we're not having any of these conversations right now. We're just acting as if this is like some kind of virus, like COVID that spreads across the world inexorably. There's nothing we can do about it. Just wait to get it.
It's like, no. If we agree that the outcome is bad, which and specifically it's bad for people, we should care what's good for people. That's all we should care about. Is it good for people or not? If it's bad for people, then we should strangle it in its crib right now.
Right. And why don't just blow up the data centers? Like, I don't and why is that hard? If it's actually going to become what you just described, which is a threat to people, humanity, life, then we have a a moral obligation to murder it immediately. And since it's not alive, we don't need to feel bad about that.
Speaker 1: Well, you could say the same about the atomic bomb. Right? Yes. You could. And you could say that we have to develop it like Oppenheimer felt before the Nazis did.
Speaker 0: I'd love that. How'd that work? How'd that work? Well I love, by the way, that people on my side I'll just say I'll just admit it. On the right, you know, I've spent the last to 80 years defending, dropping nuclear weapons on civilians.
Like, are you joking? Right. That's just like prima facie evil. If you can't well, if we hadn't done that, then this, that, the other thing, that was actually a great savings slip. No.
It's wrong to drop nuclear weapons on people. And if you find yourself arguing that it's a good thing to drop nuclear weapons on people, then you are evil. Like, it's it's not a it's not a tough one. Right? It's not a hard call for you.
It's not a hard call for me. So with that in mind, like, why would you want nuclear weapons? It's like just a mindless, childish sort of intellectual exercise to justify, like, oh, no. It's really good because someone else will get how about no? How about, like, spending all of your effort to prevent this from happening?
Would you kill baby Hitler, you know, famously? Right. So I don't know why we're sitting back and allowing this to happen if we really believe it will extinguish the human race or in Like, how can that be good? Well, if God creates everything, if God created the universe and God creates people, God probably creates
Speaker 1: a process. And we think that we are very important because we are very important to us. But are are we very important in the universal sense? Not really. Like, if the Earth just imploded and disappeared, if the sun went supernova and our whole solar system was blown to bits, the universe still exists.
Speaker 0: It depends how wide your for sure. In in our in the end, as Conan O'Brien, the famous philosopher, once said, every grave goes unvisited, which is true, and that's an important perspective. Pull out the lens a little bit. Does it really matter? No.
It doesn't.
Speaker 1: But it does matter.
Speaker 0: Do your kids how about this? Do your children matter?
Speaker 1: Yes. Sure.
Speaker 0: Do their lives matter? Would you die for them? Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yes. Of course. Everything matters. If you're not comfortable, it matters. If you're sitting here, like, you don't wanna wear headphones, like, let's not wear headphones.
That matters. Everything matters. The the I mean, at
Speaker 0: But what matters most, like
Speaker 1: Right. Is it that is the evil. Right? The evil is the it's the same thing as saying the necessary evil of dropping nuclear bombs on civilians is if you don't do that, then there'll be more evil. Then more things will happen.
It's kinda the same thing. Like, it doesn't it doesn't Well,
Speaker 0: it comes from the same place, which is hubris. Like, imagining your god, you have unlimited power, and you have omniscience. You can imagine what the future's gonna be. You can't. You're a fucking idiot.
You're a person. Like, you can't even make your wife happy.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: Like, the limits of your power are really obvious. The limits of your wisdom, same. So, like, don't jump into shit, big things, whose outcomes you can't predict with certainty. Like, you can't know. Go in with humility.
I guess that's what I'm saying. Right? So Yeah. And do what you can knowing that you're probably gonna screw it up and you probably won't achieve your goal, but, like, you should try. And on the AI question, everyone I've ever talked to about I'm hardly an expert.
I don't own a computer. Okay? But, everybody I've ever talked to and there's many people. I was like, yeah. It's you know, could get away from us and enslave us.
Well, let's say no to slavery. How's that? Is that a tough one? Not for me. Yeah.
I mean and maybe a good use of nuclear weapons would be to hit the data centers. No. I'm I'm sure. Like, why is that crazy?
Speaker 1: It's not. It's not if you think that human beings are the end of this evolutionary chain.
Speaker 0: What else is? Some supercomputer in a data center outside Dulles airport? No. I mean, you know what I mean? Like Right.
I don't actually think that individuals I don't think I'm that important. My life is that important. I don't. I will die. I know that, and I try to keep that in mind every day.
Speaker 1: But you're important to everybody that you that cares about you. You're important to the people around you.
Speaker 0: If we don't think if we don't think people are important, then what do we think is important? I guess that's what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: Not necessarily that we don't think people are important, but if if if evolution is real and if there is this constant I don't know. But it's it's it's visible. Like, you can measure it in certain animals.
Speaker 0: You can measure adaptation. Yeah. But there's no evidence that in fact, I think we've kinda given up on the idea of evolution. The theory of evolution is articulated by Darwin. It's, like, kinda not true.
Speaker 1: In what in what sense?
Speaker 0: Well, in the most basic sense, the idea that, you know, all life emerged from a single cell organism and over time and there would be a fossil record of that, and there's not. And
Speaker 1: There's not a fossil record of, transitionary species, like species that are adapting to its environment and they don't
Speaker 0: record of adaptation, and you see it in your own life. I mean, I have a lot of dogs. I I see adaptation in dogs, you know, through the Sure. Litter to litter. But, no, there's no evidence at all that none.
0. That, you know, people, you know, evolve seamlessly from a single cell amoeba. No. There's not. There's not.
There's no chain in the fossil record of that at all. And that's why you don't actually hear people you hear them make reference to evolution because the theory of adaptation is clearly, obviously, true. But Darwin's theory is totally unfair. That's why it's still a theory almost 200 years later. You know?
No. We have not found that at all. And I can't even guess. I mean, I have my own theories on it, but they're not proven.
Speaker 1: What are your theories?
Speaker 0: God created people, you know, distinctly and animals. I mean, I think that's, like I think what every person on Earth thought until the mid 19th century, actually.
Speaker 1: Right. But that
Speaker 0: It's not a new idea.
Speaker 1: They they didn't have computers. They didn't have a a general understanding that we have today of the process.
Speaker 0: Do you think we understand more now? Yes. Really?
Speaker 1: You don't think that we understand more today?
Speaker 0: Way less. We understand so little that we're actually sitting here allowing, like, a bunch of greedy, stupid, childless childless software engineers in Northern California to, like, flirt with the extinction of mankind. So no pre previous generations would be like, what? No. Stop.
And, we're not doing that because we won't
Speaker 1: have done that even with the nuclear bomb. I mean, obviously, the Manhattan Project was done in secrecy, but they wouldn't have stopped it because the imperative of getting this weapon before Hitler got the weapon was what it was that was what it was.
Speaker 0: Done by then. The Russians had pretty much extinguished any hope that that would continue. But
Speaker 1: But but not But but giving us You
Speaker 0: know, we're in the middle of the logic of war. I
Speaker 1: mean Commencement of the Manhattan Project.
Speaker 0: For sure. And but the logic was the same, and it was, you know, 4 years of gotta beat the other guy, got it. And I don't I don't mean to sound too judgmental about the bomb. I know why they built it. Okay?
But you just wonder why nobody in the middle of that thought, is this really and some of them did think it.
Speaker 1: I'm sure they did.
Speaker 0: Yes. They did.
Speaker 1: I mean, Oppenheimer himself.
Speaker 0: Of course. Large organizations don't respond to the moral qualms of individuals very well. So that was whatever. It's it's well known what happened. But, no, we should pause and ask, is the machine we're building worth having?
And nobody seems to do that. And there are all kinds of economic forces which nobody ever mentions that drive that heedlessness, that stupidity. Like, California, for example, is completely the state both of us have lived in, is like like collapsing. Yeah. And they're betting everything on AI for the the tax base is gonna be dependent on this technology working.
Speaker 1: Is that what they're betting on? Of course.
Speaker 0: That well, that AI is Did
Speaker 1: you see the the the most recent thing about the amount of 1,000,000,000 of dollars they spent on the homeless problem with no trackable results?
Speaker 0: They've had massive results. They've increased the homeless population dramatically. If you pay for something, you get more of it, and that would include Fentanyl addicts. Oh, absolutely. It's been a wild success.
I actually talked to Kevin Newsome the other day. Did you really? Yeah. And, what's that like?
Speaker 1: Does he smell like sulfur?
Speaker 0: It was by phone. I was talking on the phone. Such a weird, just smell like that was too fast
Speaker 1: for me. Sulfur and hair greasy. Yeah.
Speaker 0: No. But I was making I was making fun of I shouldn't even make fun of it because it's so tragic. But what's happened to the state and people living on the street? And what is
reSee.it AI Summary
I noticed that Senator Chuck Grassley released more body cam footage from July 13, 2024. In the clip, they discuss his range finder, mention there are "at least 8" bullet shells, and talk about his phone. Towards the end, an agent indicates where the sniper was located who killed the shooter. I boosted the sound to capture the background conversation and added captions for clarity. You can watch the full video through the provided link.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Did you see Senator Chuck Grassley released more body cam footage from July 13, 2024? In the clip they talk about his range finder, how many bullet shells there are "at least 8", and his phone. At the end an agent comes up and points at where the sniper was that killed the shooter. I boosted the sound to hear what was said in the background and added captions. full video below https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-releases-additional-bodycam-footage-from-moments-after-trump-assassination-attempt
Grassley Releases Additional Bodycam Footage from Moments After Trump Assassination Attempt | U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
WASHINGTON – Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is making public the full extent of bodycam footage...
grassley.senate.gov
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared body cam footage released by Senator Chuck Grassley, featuring a sniper named "Greg" who captured images from a window behind the shooter. Congressman Eli Crane visited the same roof and window, and I enhanced the audio and added captions for clarity.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Have you seen this body cam footage released today by Senator Chuck Grassley? In the clip they talk about a sniper named "Greg" who was in the window behind the shooter and took pictures and sent them out. Congressman Eli Crane went to that roof and to the window that "Greg" was in and filmed it. I boosted the sound and added captions so you can hear it. H/t 👇 https://t.co/8Ehrwpo2FH https://t.co/GHEK8wtWtQ https://t.co/mHIyWx7acf
Video Transcript AI Summary
The video discusses a suspicious device incident in Beaver County. A sniper sent pictures of a suspect seen setting down a book and walking away. The owner of the bike was not the suspect. Shots were fired, resulting in one deceased shooter and three injured victims. Questions arose about security measures during the incident. The speaker expressed the need for clear information to be relayed to authorities. The video ends with a call for oversight to prevent similar incidents in the future.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So we don't know. Got it. So this is the guy that that are that
Speaker 1: Yes. So they sent us a yes. Beaver County is my 14. They're trying to pick it up. This is him.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: Treating that
Speaker 0: as suspicious device. Correct.
Speaker 1: One second. I believe the sniper that seen these and sent the pictures is right inside his building. Michelle, is Greg in there? Alright.
Speaker 0: So if
Speaker 1: you go to that window that's open, he yelled for Greg. That's the sniper that sent the original pictures and seen them come from the bike and set the book back down and then lost sight of them.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: He's the one that sent the pictures out. I don't know if you have the same ones I did.
Speaker 0: I think I did. Yeah. He's, like, got his glasses on and he's,
Speaker 1: So we had to picture that I got that.
Speaker 0: I got that. Okay.
Speaker 1: And then this was this is his bike with the stuff. And our sniper seen him walking away from that, I believe. Okay. But he would be right inside that window. He's the one that physically seen this, sent the pictures, and called it out.
Speaker 0: Okay. So so and we have somebody detained. Correct?
Speaker 1: There was people detained on this side. Right. Our guy
Speaker 0: that was just up here told me that there's a guy that changed. He's the owner of the bike.
Speaker 2: And I
Speaker 1: said, no. No. I think that's
Speaker 0: the owner of the bike. Yeah. Yeah. I have a main
Speaker 1: We've been up here, so we wouldn't know that if we were for a very know. Thank
Speaker 0: you. Yeah. I mean, do I I Okay. I was I talked to it again. They were that's the people detained with building.
The American Water was notified they offer Maybe they were there. Maybe they were there.
Speaker 1: Start somebody Other than that, I haven't heard anybody. Well, I think it you know, it's
Speaker 0: Got me pulled up around today? The guys that saw them filming were like, oh, they were filming us and then filming the guy up on the roof and then filming us. And then when shots started firing, they I tried to run away. It was like, it's not what everybody would do to have a phone. You know?
I'm not saying they weren't for it. But you know what I mean? Like, that's
Speaker 2: insulting error right now. Right?
Speaker 0: Right. So so I got no problems with paying
Speaker 1: I can't be in that area. You got a squad looking for
Speaker 0: It's saying these guys find out what they know, who they are, whatever. I'm trying to get clear information to relay that to DC. Branch of souls
Speaker 1: to the water tower.
Speaker 0: We have 1 shooter deceased.
Speaker 1: I know. We've got
Speaker 0: 3 victims in the crowd. Is that did you guys hear that?
Speaker 2: Not that I'm not sure.
Speaker 0: So I heard 1 deceased, 2 white flaggers. 2 I
Speaker 1: know 2 helicopters just take off.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Okay.
Speaker 1: I don't know how many Hello? Vehicles.
Speaker 0: We're just We have access to the road. Where does water valves?
Speaker 1: Any, LE?
Speaker 0: No. That's different. I will try to get Tom.
Speaker 1: In the van. Yes, sir. Yeah. He's in there. He did he survive?
Copy.
Speaker 2: Guys, I'm up here on the building where the, supposed to sniper to get shot. It's not that steep at all. Just had a 7 year old man back here climb up on the, on the roof easily. See that water tower behind me? Had secret service or anybody had sniper teams up there.
This guy wouldn't have made it, 5 feet up this roof. He would have been taken out. Behind me, you see the windows that, Secret Service was supposedly in the 2nd floor of this building behind. It makes you wonder why they, weren't able to quickly dispatch the individual. And then behind me, back over here where those red roofs are, that's where the stage was set up.
That's where the president was giving a speech from. Lot of questions here in Butler. But we look forward to do an oversight and, getting to the bottom of it and making sure it never happened to
@DrNoMask - DrRay
"FDA Approves Long-Acting Monoclonal Antibody Infusion Every 3 Months to Protect Immunocompromised From COVID-19" Dr. Peter McCullough full article below https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/fda-approves-long-acting-monoclonal?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1119676&post_id=144960417&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=2juw10&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Video Transcript AI Summary
Dr. Peter McCullough discusses the FDA approval of a long-acting monoclonal antibody for immunocompromised individuals to protect against COVID-19. Most Americans have natural immunity by 2024, reducing the risk of severe illness. The FDA authorized Pemvigard for pre-exposure prophylaxis in immunocompromised individuals. The Canopy trial showed a 70% risk reduction in symptomatic COVID-19 with Pemvigard. The McCullough protocol suggests additional agents can help even severely immunocompromised individuals recover safely.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm doctor Peter McCullough, and this is the courageous discourse substack. Title, FDA approves long acting monoclonal antibody infusion every 3 months to protect immunocompromised from COVID 19. Subtitle, pemvivart, late addition to armamentarium after most have natural immunity by 2024. Most Americans, including the immunocompromised, have had at least one episode of acute SARS CoV 2 infection and therefore have negligible risk of hospitalization and death on a subsequent infection. However, those who are very vulnerable and have not encountered COVID 19 could benefit from a new longer acting monoclonal antibody recently approved by the US FDA.
And certiographical abstract from a previous substation showing negligible risk for hospitalization and death in the omicron era, which we've been in since January of 2022, is well documented prior COVID 19 as shown as in blue. The FDA has authorized Pemvigard, otherwise known as Pembarda by the company, Inviet, for emergency use in the prevention or pre exposure prophylaxis of COVID 19 in adults and adolescents who are 12 years of age and older who have moderate to severe immunocompromised because of medical conditions or receive certain immunosuppressive medications. It is an alternative to the failed COVID 19 vaccines. Pembivart, which was formerly known as BYD222, is a half life extended monoclonal antibody. The EUA of Pemviguard is based on, data from the Canopy clinical trial, which, demonstrated positive results.
The Canopy trial is an ongoing phase 3 trial that enrolled patients to receive either Pemdegard or placebo. Cohort a was an open label single arm trial, which enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with moderate to severe immunocompromised facing relevant SARS CoV 2 variants, including the jn one variant that was the most recent one we had in the analysis of neutralizing antibody titers and the primary in immunobridging, endpoint for cohort a. The results indicated an expected 70% risk reduction in the development of symptomatic COVID 19 between treatment and the placebo arms. Now keep in mind, they didn't have a placebo arm in the immunocompromised group, so they had to use, rates of COVID 19 from, you know, a different group, and it's an estimated effect size, with additional agents in the McCullough protocol, even the most severely immunocompromised should get through the illness without risk.
FDA Approves Long-Acting Monoclonal Antibody Infusion Every 3 Months to Protect Immunocompromised From COVID-19
Pemvibart Late Addition to Armamentarium after Most Have Natural Immunity by 2024
petermcculloughmd.substack.com
@DrNoMask - DrRay
@P_McCulloughMD @VivekGRamaswamy Shout out to @adamscrabble for posting the clip that was missing from the debate. Listen to Viveks answer. https://t.co/oZRKN9qHjQ
Video Transcript AI Summary
The video discusses the issue of vaccine liability and the need for accountability. It mentions Operation Warp Speed, which developed a COVID vaccine in record time but protected drug companies from lawsuits. Critics argue that the government's compensation program for vaccine injuries is bureaucratic and lacks transparency. The speaker expresses the need to repeal the protection for vaccine manufacturers and emphasizes the importance of free speech and open debate on vaccine mandates. They also criticize crony capitalism and call for an end to corruption in government, including restrictions on lobbying and joining company boards after serving in government positions. The video ends with a question to Governor Christie about vaccines.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The marketplace begins with probably capitalism, and that's the answer.
Speaker 1: Okay. Through Operation Warp Speed, the Trump administration and private industry developed a COVID The Trump administration and private industry developed a COVID vaccine in record time. The program protected the drug companies from virtually all lawsuits over vaccine injuries. Vaccine. The government has a program to compensate for such harm, but critics say it is a black hole of bureaucracy.
12,000 claims filed, 10% decided, only 8 payouts so far, in a forum with no right to counsel, no hearings, no appeals. Mr. Trump says he's very proud of warp speed. Should he be?
Speaker 0: Well, this question specifically on liability goes back to actually Reagan. And Reagan is a president vaccine. Who I admire, many of us do. I think that reviving that spirit is in many ways gonna be good for this country in so many ways. But one of the areas where he erred was this vaccine.
To say that one kind of manufacturer, a vaccine manufacturer, cannot be sued for their product liability. So I have pledged it is part of my legislative agenda. We will repeal that, just like we will repeal every other form of crony capitalism. People who have been harmed by those vaccines vaccine. Deserve accountability.
They cannot be forgotten Americans. And I think one of the top lessons we learned from that COVID pandemic is that free speech in this country is most vaccine. If we had been allowed to openly debate the merits of those vaccines, They would have been never mandated in the way that they were. And in general, I don't think that we should want capitalism and democracy to share the same bed anymore. It's time for a clean divorce.
Let companies be companies, but I don't like the crony capitalism. This dates back a long time in both parties. And I think that we need to end the lobbying. And I personally believe That if you have been working in the government, you should not lobby that government for 10 years. If you have been a government elected official doing deals with companies, Be they Boeing or be they pharmaceutical companies, you should not join the board of that company for 10 years after.
The former chairman of the FDA, the leader commissioner of the FDA, Ended up on the board of Pfizer. Nikki Haley did deals with Boeing, ends up on the board of Boeing. I don't care if it's a Republican or a Democrat. We need some basic principles that vaccine. End the corruption in government.
That's how we got the health insurance exemptions. That's how we got the pharmaceutical product liability exemptions.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: We end the corruption.
Speaker 2: Alabama. Vaccine. Final question before closing statements, and we wanna get you all in, so we're gonna give you 45 seconds for this last one. Governor Christie, we're gonna start with you. Vaccine.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
"New Self Replicating “sa-mRNA Vaccine” Approved For Mass Production" full clip below https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu1xVO8YYZY https://t.co/G6fIIE8iO6
Video Transcript AI Summary
Japan has approved the world's first self-amplifying mRNA vaccine, developed by Meiji Seika Pharma. The vaccine, called Kasevi, uses self-amplifying mRNA technology, which is different from the mRNA vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna. The traditional mRNA vaccines contain modified mRNA that instructs cells to produce spike proteins, while the self-amplifying mRNA vaccines integrate genes for spike proteins and replicase, allowing the RNA to replicate itself inside cells. This leads to increased production of spike proteins and potentially more antibodies. The self-amplifying mRNA technology requires less RNA to be injected, potentially reducing side effects.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Weeks ago, Japan became the 1st country in the world to approve a new type of self amplifying mRNA vaccine, otherwise known as an SA mRNA vaccine. Specifically, a company called Meiji Seika Pharma that's based out in Tokyo, they released a statement on November 28th announcing the fact that They've been given official government approval to manufacture and market a Replicon vaccine, which is the first ever to use self amplifying mRNA technology. Here's part of what their statement said. Quote, Meiji Holdings announces that its subsidiary, Meiji Saka Pharma, has received approval for the manufacturing and marketing of Kasevi for muscular injection, A self amplifying mRNA vaccine against COVID nineteen from the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare in Japan. Kostavi is indicated for prevention of nineteen by primary immunization, two doses, and booster immunization in adults.
This is the world's 1st approved replicon vaccine applying self amplifying mRNA technology. Now obviously, I'm sure that almost everyone watching this video right now has the very same question in their mind. What in the world is a self amplifying mRNA vaccine? Well, to answer that question, let's compare this new vaccine to the quote unquote normal mRNA vaccines, like the ones from Pfizer and Moderna. Here's how the Normal mRNA vaccines work.
Whether it's Pfizer or Moderna, this is the basic outline. You have a strand of modified mRNA, which contains In it, a sequence for making the spike protein of the SARS CoV two virus. That's the part in red. And the strand of RNA is protected by a layer of lipid nanoparticles which dissolves in the process of getting the RNA strand into the body cells. Then once the RNA strand is delivered into the human cell, The cell's machinery takes it it manufactures the spike protein that's encoded in the RNA.
And that spike protein then leads ultimately to the immune response. Now, of course, that's an extremely simplified version of how that process works. But that is generally how it works. That is how the typical mRNA vaccines that have been on the market for Past 3 years now, that's how they operate. However, these new self amplifying mRNA vaccines, they take this process to another level by integrating the genes that are needed to replicate the RNA.
Here's how that looks. The self amplifying RNA vaccine contains 2 separate genes. 1st, there's the gene for the spike protein, that's the part Red. But then also, secondly, it contains the gene for a protein called replicase, which is what allows the RNA to self replicate. That's the part in yellow.
And so the way it works is that once this vaccine enters the human cell, the gene that's marked in yellow gets encoded by the body cell into the protein called Replicase. And that protein then allows for the vaccine's RNA to be copied over and over and over again. And as you can see, using this self amplifying method, the end effect is that the cell now has significantly more of this RNA inside of it. This then leads to significantly more production of the spike protein and then subsequently, in theory, more antibodies. In Summary, here is how an article over in Nature Magazine described the difference between the conventional mRNA vaccine and this new SA mRNA vaccine.
Quote, conventional mRNA based COVID shots consist mainly of the genetic instructions for a viral protein that are surrounded by regulatory sequences. A cell's machinery produces the protein for as long as these instructions persist, and that protein, known as an antigen, stimulates an immune response. By contrast, saRNA JAPS go a step further by integrating the genes needed for the replication and synthesis of the antigen encoding RNA, effectively establishing a biological printing press for fabricating the vaccine inside cells. Now in terms of these supposed benefits of using this new Self amplification technology, the researchers who developed it, they say that the main benefit is the fact that because the RNA portion of the vaccine copies itself over and over and over again, well, you don't need to inject as much RNA into a person's arm. And therefore, at least in theory, there should be fewer side effects.
reSee.it AI Summary
The risk of mRNA spike protein transfer through blood transfusion remains uncertain. Lack of published cases and knowledge about the preservation process raises concerns about the safety of vaccinated individuals donating blood. Further research is needed. (280 characters)
@DrNoMask - DrRay
"There has not been a bonified case of transference of messenger RNA of spike protein published during blood transfusion. And so we don't know how many people freshly vaccinated donate blood and during the blood filtering and preservation process we don't know if the blood supply's at risk" Dr. Peter McCullough Medical Freedom Panel June 9, 2023 Full testimony below
Video Transcript AI Summary
There is no evidence of mRNA or spike protein transfer through blood transfusion. The risk of contamination in the blood supply from vaccinated donors is unknown. A group of pathologists expressed concerns to the American Association of Clinical Blood Banking and American Red Cross, but no action was taken. Switzerland has a checkbox for vaccine disclosure, but the American Red Cross declined to implement one. Interestingly, the American Red Cross is reorganizing their data entry forms to include more terminology for gender and sexual preferences.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There has not been a bona fide case of transference of messenger RNA or spike protein published during blood transfusion, And so we don't know how many people freshly vaccinated donate blood. And during the blood filtering and preservation process, we don't know if the blood supply is at risk. I I let a group of pathologists writing the, the American Association of Clinical Blood Banking and American Red Cross in 2021 expressing our concerns about contamination of the blood supply, and they responded back recognizing our concerns. They did nothing over it. I can tell you the country of Switzerland at least has a checkbox, so people have to disclose whether they took a vaccine.
We pressed the American Red Cross just for a checkbox and They've declined to do that. Now they are reordering all of their data entry forms right now at the American Red Cross. This is interesting. There are all the reforms are being reoriented, but we can't get the checkbox on whether or not they took a COVID vaccine and when, but they're reorganizing everything to have more terminology for gender, transgender, and different sexual preferences.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Listen to Dr. Peter McCulloughs answer to this Senators question "For instance with the spike proteins, are they there forever once they're in your body?" Medical Freedom Panel June 9, 2023 Full testimony below https://senatormastriano.com/medicalfreedompanel2023/
Video Transcript AI Summary
Research conducted by Bruce Patterson at InCelDx reveals that spike proteins can remain in the body for extended periods. In severe COVID cases, the s one segment was found in white blood cells for up to 15 months after infection. Even after vaccination, the full-length spike protein, including the s one and s two segments, was detected in white blood cells for at least 9 months. Another study from Stanford, led by Roelkern and colleagues, discovered messenger RNA, the genetic code for the spike protein, in lymph nodes for up to 2 months. These findings suggest that both messenger RNA and spike proteins can persist in the human body for several months.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: For instance, with the spike proteins, are they there forever once they're in your body? Work by Bruce Patterson at InCelDx is the best work we have available. In severe COVID severe COVID, people hospitalized, he was able to find the s one segment stuck in white blood cells for 15 months after the infection. After they're vaccinated, he's been able to find the full length spike protein, the s one and the s two segment, again, stuck in white blood cells for at least 9 months, but that's as long as he's looked. A paper from Stanford, from Roelkern and colleagues, has found that messenger RNA, which is the genetic code for the spike protein stuck in lymph nodes at 2 months, but that's as long as they've they've looked.
So I can tell you both the messenger RNA and the spike protein are long lasting in the human body, probably months, if not
Medical Freedom Panel 2023 - Senator Mastriano
Time: Friday, June 9th from 9 – 11AM Location: Capitol (East Wing Room – 8E-A) Livestream: Senatormastriano.com/medicalfreedompanel2023 Legislators Senator Doug Mastriano (Host) Expert Panelists Dr. Peter McCullough – is one of the most published cardiologists ever in America, with over 1,000 publications and 660 citations in the National Library of Medicine. He has testified before the […]
senatormastriano.com
@DrNoMask - DrRay
"“973% Increase in heart failure!” What’s really causing this in the Military?" Russell Brand full clip below https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrAJ0sSuhIo https://t.co/vJnzPYlWGw
Video Transcript AI Summary
Lieutenant Ted Macey, a Navy medical officer, has reported a significant increase in heart issues among active naval officers. He compared data from 2022 to a 5-year average and found alarming rises in various heart conditions, such as myocarditis (151%), hypertensive disease (36%), ischemic heart disease (69%), pulmonary heart disease (62%), other forms of heart disease (63%), and cardiomyopathy (152%). The overall increase in heart failure was a staggering 973%. The speaker highlights the need for an inquiry to determine the cause of this sharp spike in heart disease within the military.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A Navy medical, officer called Lieutenant Ted Macey has revealed a rise in heart issues in active naval officers. I don't let me know in the chat if you've got any theories as to what could be causing this sharp spike in heart disease in the military. Here he is.
Speaker 1: So in July, undersecretary Cisneros acknowledge the DMAT data, the database working properly, and also acknowledged things such as myocarditis rising 151%. So I did. I went in today. I'm doing the same thing, 5 year average. However, I'm comparing it to 2022, and I only Amusing fixed wing pilots and helicopter pilots.
Active duty. So we had hypertensive disease.
Speaker 0: Carl Reiner says it's been caused by white supremacy. Let's look into that.
Speaker 1: 36%, ischemic heart disease, 69%, Pulmonary heart disease 62%.
Speaker 0: Leferias Monster, I'm not gonna be reading your answers until you return to the scriptural and religious aspect of your nature?
Speaker 1: Heart failure, 973%. Other forms of heart disease, 63%. Cardiomyopathy, 152%.
Speaker 0: But there you go. It's a pretty extraordinary set of circumstances there. Heart disease. What's that? It's a 9, 9 73% rise.
That's a pretty significant rise. What's causing all of this stuff? We need an inquiry.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
"What we've learned now is that it's possible to actually have cardiac disfunction maybe even a cardiac arrest without myocarditis." Dr. Peter McCullough full interview below #stoptheshot #stoptheshots
Video Transcript AI Summary
A recent study suggests a potential link between mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and sudden cardiac deaths. Researchers found that when Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were applied directly to heart muscle cells, abnormal function and electrical currents occurred within 48 hours, indicating cardiac toxicity. Another study showed that mRNA was physically stuck in the hearts of individuals who died after vaccination. Additionally, a large study found abnormal heart scans in those who received the vaccine, with virtually everyone showing abnormal results. Even individuals with inflammation or higher mRNA doses had worse cardiac findings. This suggests the possibility of cardiac dysfunction or arrest without myocarditis. The information challenges the official narrative and raises concerns.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Peter, can you tell us about the, recent study that suggests there's a potential link between the mRNA COVID nineteen vaccines and sudden cardiac deaths? And can I just check we're off YouTube before Peter answers that? Fantastic. Yes. So can you tell us what about this new study?
Speaker 1: Sure. I think this is a little too strong for YouTube. So, the science here is very disturbing. Schreckenberg and colleagues from Germany showed that when Pfizer and Moderna is directly applied to heart muscle cells, they start to have very abnormal function and electrical currents within about 48 hours. I mean, this is evidence of direct cardiac toxicity.
Separately, Crossan and colleagues from Harvard Showed the messenger RNA is physically stuck in the human heart and people who are dying after the vaccine. And now Nakahara and colleagues in a big study, 700 people took the vaccine, 300 who didn't. Their cardiac PET scans or positron emission tomography heart scans Are very abnormal in those who took the vaccine. There's a shift towards the abnormal uptake of what's called Fluorodeoxyglucose In positron emission tomography, this is basically a sick heart pattern on PET scanning and the astonishing finding was that virtually everybody who took the shot has an abnormal cardiac PET scan, those with sore arms as a sign of inflammation or potentially even potential dose of messenger RNA have worsened cardiac findings. So what we've learned now is that it's possible to actually have cardiac dysfunction, maybe even a cardiac arrest, without myocarditis.
Speaker 0: Fever. That sounds terrifying. And so beyond the, official and heavily propagated narrative that it was impossible able to gainsay for such a long time that it is difficult for me to accept, primed even though I've been with all manner of complex and contrary information over the last year
@rustyrockets - Russell Brand
"This is a MINDBLOWING reality!" - @P_McCulloughMD Find out what he's talking about on the live show right now: https://bit.ly/StayFree-237 https://bit.ly/StayFree-237
Bitly | Page Not Found | 404
bit.ly
Bitly | Page Not Found | 404
bit.ly
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Dr. Peter McCullough explains what cardiomyopathy is. https://t.co/SZcvcVmXFh
Video Transcript AI Summary
Dr. Peter Mercola, a cardiologist and chief scientific officer, discusses the negative effects of the COVID vaccine. Recent studies have shown that messenger RNA is found directly in the human heart, causing inflammation known as myocarditis. Another study revealed that the vaccine changes the heart's preference from fatty acids to glucose. Additionally, both Pfizer and Moderna vaccines applied directly to heart muscle cells caused abnormal contractions and depolarization of electrical currents. These findings suggest that the vaccines not only cause myocarditis but may also lead to a metabolic cardiomyopathy, potentially explaining sudden cardiac death without myocarditis. The rise in these issues is concerning.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Doctor. Peter Mercola joins me now to explain more on this, cardiologist and chief scientific officer of the wellness company. Doctor. Peter Mercola, thank you so much for being back with us. It's great to see you.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: So I was very interested to hear that the negative effects we're seeing result from the COVID vaccine actually align you. Closer to the cardiomyopathy, as it turns out, than myocarditis as we had originally sort of heard about. Now for those of us that aren't doctors Jurors like yourself break down for us exactly what cardiomyopathy is and how it actually differs from myocarditis.
Speaker 1: What we've learned in the last few weeks, So some critical studies, one by Crossen and colleagues. It shows, in autopsies, human autopsy studies, this Harvard study, That messenger RNA is directly in the human heart. So that's been identified with inflammation, around it that would be called myocarditis. You. Separately, in a paper, again, multicenter study from the United States, Nakahara and colleagues, showed that the cardiac muscle changes It's preference for from free fatty acids to glucose.
So this was a very disturbing study, over 700 vaccinated versus 300 unvaccinated. And then finally, the the paper you started out with, from from Europe demonstrated that in red cardiomyocytes, both Pfizer and Moderna directly applied on the heart muscle cells caused dysfunction. That means that the heart muscle cells contracted in Abnormal ways and started to actually depolarize. Electrical currents depolarized in an abnormal way. What this is adding up to Is the vaccines clearly cause myocarditis or patchy heart inflammation in some, but more globally, they may cause a form of a metabolic Cardiomyopathy, that is a form of a diseased pattern, both metabolically and potentially electrically for the heart.
And it may explain Sudden cardiac death in the absence of myocarditis.
Speaker 0: Wow. Absolutely incredible information. It's so sad that we're seeing such a rise in all of this.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Senator Janae Shamp asks Dr. Pete Chambers "Can you explain to us the document entitled cumulative analysis of post authorization adverse event reports of PF07302048 released by court order in 2021 by Pfizer?" full testimony below https://t.co/D6JC6Mwhft
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss a document released by court order in 2021, which analyzes adverse event reports related to Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine. They mention the large number of diagnoses during the preliminary phase of the study, expressing concern about the speed at which these diagnoses were made. They emphasize the importance of allowing individuals to choose whether or not to receive the vaccine, especially in the military. One speaker highlights the high number of adverse events associated with the vaccine, suggesting it indicates a significant safety issue. They explain that the vaccine is a genetic product that can affect every organ in the body, making it different from traditional medications. The speakers also mention the impact of vaccine mandates on healthcare workers and describe the militarization of public health.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'd like to ask you specifically, you testified in the Navy SEAL 1 versus Austin court case. Can you can you explain to us the document entitled cumulative analysis of post authorization adverse event reports of 0730-2048 released by court order in 2021 by Pfizer?
Speaker 1: The 75 year Supposedly keep under wraps document?
Speaker 0: I think you know a little bit about that document. Yes.
Speaker 1: Yes. I can explain that there were 12 91 diagnoses that are on that? Is that the one you're talking about, right, that were during a preliminary phase Of study, Phase 1, I believe. So I don't know how you could come up with that many In that period of time, but I do know that it was very concerning to me and it was entered in.
Speaker 0: It was entered into the record.
Speaker 1: Yes, it was entered into the record.
Speaker 0: So what do we so what do we now do with that?
Speaker 2: In my opinion, you're asking a lawyer, remember not a doctor And it's that we have to make sure people can always choose to say no because to me that's the last line of defense. Okay. Members of the military couldn't say no.
Speaker 0: Write?
Speaker 2: Right. Right now, the most recent version of the COVID vaccine, the latest statistic is less than 2% of Americans After 1,000,000,000 spent by our government trying to promote it, are willing to take that shot. And they're not taking it because right now there are most mandates are gone. But if they were mandated, that would put them in a different situation. Right?
So to me, you're asking me, it's it's about choice.
Speaker 3: I'll tell you what I do With a report that indicates with a single product, more than 1200 unique adverse events, My interpretation like that is we are dealing with a product safety problem like we've never seen before. When there's a drug problem, We have what's called system organ class or SOC. It it becomes clear that there's side effects that center in on a particular organ or certain problems. For instance, you know, when we give an anti inflammatory, it can cause a stomach ulcer. And that's the system organ class that goes to GI.
But we don't have drugs that we prescribe that cause over 1200 adverse event syndromes. What we've learned is this is a genetic product. It insert the genetic code in the body and the body produces the spike protein from the virus. The spike protein was engineered in the biosecurity lab in Wuhan, China. The spike protein goes everywhere in the lab in Wuhan, China.
The spike protein goes everywhere in the body and can affect every single organ in the body. That's what we're up against now in medicine. That's the reason why people are sick in so many different ways because it's the first use Of a widespread genetic technology that 75% of Americans took, that's what we're up against. This is way different Then a drug safety problem with a pill or some other established medication that's been studied and we can actually narrow down to what the safety concern is. Genetic products, this is the for the most people, this is the probably the first and maybe only genetic product they'll take is a whole different level of drug safety concern?
Speaker 1: Good point. Something else I'd like to bring up, we talked about it also in the break. Health care workers fell underneath the mandate just as much as the military did
Speaker 0: because
Speaker 1: of that Memorandum of Agreement between HHS and Defense Health Agency. So a lot of health care workers dealt with the same thing. Public health for sure. And then even in the hospitals. That's why I call it the militarization of public health.
That's why I call it that. It's Once you once the DoD runs something, it's militarized. I just want to clarify.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Stop the shots
@DrNoMask - DrRay
"Please protect your citizens. We've got to get one state to stand up and do the right thing." Dr. Janci Lindsay full clip below
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses concern about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, particularly regarding the presence of DNA and contamination in the shots. They argue that the number of deaths reported after the vaccine rollout is higher than in the past 30 years combined for all other vaccines. The speaker also discusses the risk of gene therapy and the potential for cancer and autoimmune reactions. They mention the presence of SV40 sequences and antibiotic-resistant genes in the shots, which they believe is intentional. The speaker highlights the increase in miscarriages and stillbirths reported after vaccination and questions the transparency of the FDA and CDC. They urge for the recall of the vaccines and express frustration with the lack of action taken.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: FDA. I just sent them emails and said, hey. You wanna you should look in this. Okay.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you so much. Next is doctor, Jancy Lindsey. I hope you can,
Speaker 2: I hope you realize what a 0 spoken with many scientists about checking for this months months months ago? None of them would I spoke at the US Senate in December of 2002, about the risk of this being passed to our children because of it being reverse transcribed simply from the RNA before we knew that there was DNA in the shots. As As soon as I found out there was DNA in the shots, I went all over every social media platform I could get to And started ringing the alarm bell. Exactly. You don't have to play that at this point.
I have little time so I'm gonna follow-up with what he said. Well, just show the ones their side. So I disagree with doctor Buckholson that I think that this is the most dangerous platform that has ever been released on mankind. That is very easy to see in the various database where you have more deaths, in just A couple months after the rollout than you have in the past 30 years for all the other vaccines combined. You would have to shrink that and go up.
So there we go. So, these are all all the other vaccines for the past 30 years combined. And this is what happened Sorry. And this is what happened During COVID to deaths from vaccines, do you see? We're at over 35,000 deaths.
Typically, you would get no more Then 200 deaths in a year for all 30 vaccine, or for all of the vaccines combined. This is the past 30 years Deaths from vaccines reported into the VAERS database. You've already heard earlier that this represents only 1 to 13% Of the cases that are normally reported, this is a safety signal. This is a safety signal. This is the platform itself, Okay, in the clinical trials, we saw deaths.
We definitely had deaths. That was Using process 1 without the contamination. Okay. What may not have been clear is that the the shots tested on the people in the clinical trials were vastly different than the shots tested or given to people released on the population. I'm short I'm not on time, so I'm trying to fit this in.
Basically, people were given in the clinical trial a clean shot. People, everybody else was given these contaminated shots. Every single file that's been tested by every scientist around the world is contaminated with these plasmids. And they're Osmids. And some are contaminated when Kevin McKernan first tested the vials, he found that one of the vials contained up to about 30% of the nucleic acid material was in fact DNA.
So this is not some residual contamination that's carrying over. This is significant contamination. Why does that matter? Gene therapy was never brought to market even though it's been over 40 years in development because in the past it caused latent cancers that developed 2 to 4 years After these were given because it caused lethal autoimmune reactions even when you were producing human proteins, not viral proteins, not proteins not bacterial proteins that you are displaying on the surface of yourself. Think about the logic of this.
In traditional gene therapies, and these are gene therapies, they would be classified as gene therapies. In traditional gene therapies, you send in A genetic message to make a missing protein. That protein is identical to the protein that Should have been in your body but you're missing. This time we're sending in a sequence and asking it to make a piece of a Viral protein and we're displaying it on ourselves and then our body is attacking it and killing those cells. It Doesn't stay in your arm, they said it would stay in your arm.
It goes to every single cell in your body, every tissue in your body. It goes to your brain, it goes to your bone marrow. Where then your body is able to attack these cells. It is not a healthy The platform for this there's a difference between using this technology for cancer or for fixing inborn errors in metabolism As compared to using it in a vaccine. There you understand the risk.
Here the risks were not told to people. With this DNA being present, what Philip did not touch on is that there are sequences within these plasmids. I personally feel That this is an intentional, I believe that there is nefarious intent. I'm going to tell you why and it's something that he didn't touch John, there are s v 40 sequences excuse me there are there are s SV 40 sequences within the plasmids that were not disclosed to the regulators. The SV 40 sequences, if you recall the SV 40 virus, Was a contaminant of the polio vaccines.
It is thought that that contamination of the virus, which is on oncogenic, caused many of the cancers for the next several decades from the people in the people that receive these vaccines. Now the whole the whole s v 40 virus is not in the shots. But what is in the shots is a special sequence, it's called a nuclear localization sequence, which is In the shot, to take the plasma DNA directly to the nucleus of human cells, it is not not needed to grow these in bacteria. You would not have to use this to grow it in bacteria for the purpose that They said it was 4 to make lots of copies. This sequence takes the DNA to the nucleus of human cells Where it can then be integrated or where, as Philip said, it is most likely to be integrated.
So All this about there's no DNA in the shots, they will not go to the nucleus, they will not integrate with your DNA is not true, and they knew it from the beginning because uh- They knew the plasmids were there. That's a problem. There's also an s v forty promoter only designed to be expressed in human cells, not bacteria cells. Now Philip has checked in something he didn't say, which is good news, For people, Doctor. Buchholz, I keep saying Philip, which is good news for people, is that most of the sequences were broken.
Have they been intact? And if there are any that are intact, and this is something he should have said, we have to check. They can infect the e coli in your gut. That's what they're designed to do, to infect the e coli to to infect e coli, which means you can be actual spike factory because they're self replicating and they would self replicate in the bacteria of your gut and then make spike over and over and over again. That's a problem.
They also carry an antibiotic resistant Dean Cassette, Takanomycin and Neomycin. Kanamycin is the main antibiotic used to treat tuberculosis. Neomycin is another antibiotic That's widely used. People that receive these, if it transfects the E. Coli in your gut, it can make that your gut and other bacteria, not just that.
It can make them resistant to those antibiotics. That is a huge, huge risk. And it's something that's known for plasmids. It's something that they've they're careful to make sure that you don't have these Antibiotic resistance genes. If they're making something that should go into gene therapy and now it's here, now it's present.
I've worked for several months to try to get these shots recalled completely recalled. They're dangerous. Excuse me, I need to get a drink of water, they're dangerous. We're injecting these in our kids. We don't inject contaminated medical products in our kids.
Something Doctor. Buchholz didn't touch on as well. Is if there's that much plasmid in the shot, there's a very good chance that there's bacterial endotoxin in the shot. Which means bacterial proteins which Can cause anaphylaxis and even death. And that may be what caused some of the the rapid deaths that occurred right After people got these shots.
There's so much more to touch on. We've seen massive cases of miscarriage Carriage and stillbirth. Normally, during years we wouldn't see more than 25 cases of miscarriage or still birth. For all the vaccines combined, in 2021 we saw 3,428 cases of Birth and miscarriage reported into the VAER system. Remember, no more than than 25 typically in a year is normal for All the vaccines combined.
3,428 in 2/20 1. In 2/22, we saw 15 25 stillbirth and miscarriage. Carriage. And in halfway through that year, the FDA or the CDC said they would stop reporting on One, they would stop making all their information public because they did not want to encourage vaccine hesitancy or misinformation or misinterpret Or misinformation or misinterpret misinterpretation of the data. So all of a sudden we saw what was What was going like this go like this in February.
That's artificial. We can't even trust the data coming out of the the CDC anymore. The FDA The FDA knows about this contamination. They're not doing anything. I'm sorry this is so rushed.
I just wanted to address what What doctor Buckholz was not able to. He and I have the same degrees. I have a degree in biochemistry and molecular biology, Gee, and I'm a toxicologist and an expert witness as a profession nationally and internationally. This is outrageous. I've never seen anything like this in my entire career.
We have got to pull these shots and restrict them from our children. We cannot inject these into The babies and children. These are contaminated dangerous lethal products. I don't agree with Doctor. Buchholz, But I believe that he's just seeing a lot of this data.
I feel like he is where Where we were 3 years ago. So, that's basically if I don't leave Now I won't catch my plane. May not catch it anyway. So
Speaker 1: You had said earlier, nefarious. You felt like this was more nefarious than doctor Burkhold. In what sense are you saying that?
Speaker 2: The s v forty sequences, they should Not be there. They don't need to be there to grow this into back to grow this in bacteria. I don't think it's an accident. They could They've chosen another plasmid that did not have the SV 40 sequences. If these sequences sit above an oncogene and and they're promiscuous, that means They are likely to integrate in places more likely than other genetic inserts.
Thank you so much. Then they can cause cancer. Insertional mutagenesis anyway causes cancer. And that's the risk. That's why gene therapies were not brought to market for so many years.
Because there was a risk of causing cancer from insertional mutagenesis. We never needed He did these vaccines. We had treatments that worked. One of our doctors here is going to tell you about Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, I can tell you as a toxicologist, they are not toxic. They're they're some of the safest drugs you can use.
I there's no reason once the FDA found out about this contamination, okay? And we looked to see endotoxin levels, but they've got them all redacted. Why would you redact them if you were trying to be transparent? Why would you hold The data for 75 years. All of the clinical data for 75 years from these, if you were trying to be transparent.
Tell Tommy, why? There is something very unusual going on here that is being done differently than it's Ever been done before. We don't give experimental products to pregnant women. We don't give experimental products to Babies that have a death profile like this. It's not done.
It's never been Done before. Please protect your citizens. Please, I am begging you to protect your citizens. We've got to get 1 state to stand up and do the right thing. Do whatever you can so that Other states will follow.
I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: Thank you, doctor, Lindsey. Any questions?
Speaker 2: Again, sorry. I was a little urgent in that. I re scheduled my Uber twice. So
Speaker 1: So it's just very difficult
Speaker 2: to keep this, everything on schedule with him, but
Speaker 1: thank you for staying so much. Thank you for staying, and thank you for presenting, and we appreciate it so much.
Speaker 2: If you have any questions, please feel free to call.
Speaker 1: We will be reaching out, I promise. Jean. Who's next?
Speaker 0: Mister chairman, we passed over to meet, to meet time Obligations. We passed over, mister Rick Nagel, so it's probably time to call him up now.
Speaker 1: Andrew Rick Nagel.
Speaker 0: Is it Nog? Yeah. Nogel. Beg your pardon, sir.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
"We have actually a much bigger illness that's beset on America and beset on many of your family and friends and that's the injuries and disabilities and problems that's developed after the covid 19 vaccines" Dr. Peter McCullough full conference below https://rumble.com/v3by5sb-reawaken-america-tour-las-vegas-day-2.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the injuries and disabilities that have occurred after receiving the Covid-19 vaccines. They claim that the vaccines were a large human experiment and that the spike protein produced by the vaccines remains in the body for an unknown duration. The speaker suggests that the spike protein is difficult for the body to break down because it is not natural and was engineered in a Chinese lab. They accuse Dr. Anthony Fauci and others of covering up the origins of the virus and suppressing early treatment. The speaker states that about 15% of vaccine recipients have experienced medical problems, including myocarditis and blood clots, even years after vaccination.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We have actually a much bigger illness that's beset on America and beset on many of your family and friends. And that's the injuries and disabilities and problems that's developed after the Covid nineteen vaccines. The COVID nineteen vaccines were the largest human experiment ever done in the history of mankind. In the United States, they're largely genetic products. People who took the vaccines for the first time took a genetic injection of foreign genetic material that produced in their body for an uncontrolled duration and time and quantity the Wuhan spike protein, the protein on the surface of the virus that causes so much damage in the human body.
All of you who've had COVID and all of you who've taken the vaccines have now been exposed to and have taken up the spike protein into your body many of you still have the spike protein in your cells and your tissues. Every study that's looked at this has actually identified this central issue. The human body does not seem to have enzymes that can break down this protein like it could any other natural protein and have us get rid of it. It's because this protein is not natural. It's not!
It was engineered in a Chinese biosecurity lab using blueprints that came from U. S. Researchers Fully funded and supported by the National Institutes of Health and the National Allergy Immunology Branch run by Doctor Anthony Fauci And this work went on from 2012 and was published in 2015 by Doctor. Ralph Barrick at the University of North Carolina on Chapel Hill that declared the creation of a chimeric prototypical virus SARS Co V 2. And then when the virus ultimately emanated out of Wuhan, China Doctor Anthony Fauci and Peter Dasik at the Equal Health Alliance Francis Collins at the National Institutes of Health all conspired to conceal a world wide global Security issue and instead of being honest with us and and basically letting us as doctors step in and save people from this illness, they covered it up and as a result Americans were slaughtered by the suppression of early treatment and this deceptive propaganda campaign that all we could do is wait in fear and take a vaccine.
The vaccines have left about 15% of those who have taken them with some form of a medical problem. That is a huge number. Now fortunately, about a third of people who took the vaccine, they've had no side effects whatsoever and they appear to be exhibiting no side effects emerging. So if one took the shot and they're perfectly fine, didn't even have a sore arm, they're extremely unlikely now to develop a problem. But as people who developed in initial reaction and were sick for a few days or weeks afterwards, I really worry about them because we are seeing the late development of Myocarditis And cardiac arrest, even 2 years after the vaccine, blood clots developing even 2 years after the vaccine.
ReAwaken America Tour Las Vegas - Day 2
Request Tickets At: https://timetofreeamerica.com/ or by texting 918-851-0102 **Scholarship Pricing Is Available to Make the ReAwaken America Tour Affordable for Everyone That Wants to Attend ********
rumble.com
@DrNoMask - DrRay
The Notorious one pointed out what they did with "flooding " so I made 2 videos of it. https://twitter.com/DrNoMask/status/1518761271851634695 https://twitter.com/DrNoMask/status/1485710938233782277 https://twitter.com/DrNoMask/status/1549399112155537408 https://twitter.com/DrNoMask/status/1428700372474925070 https://twitter.com/ActerisXor/status/1409686558844674054 https://twitter.com/DrNoMask/status/1487075394712915976 Part 1.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Ivermectin and cancer on NIH website👇 https://search.nih.gov/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&affiliate=nih&query=ivermectin+and+cancer
ivermectin and cancer - National Institutes of Health Search Results
search.nih.gov
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Ivermectin Prophylaxis Used for COVID-19: A Citywide, Prospective, Observational Study of 223,128 Subjects Using Propensity Score Matching https://www.cureus.com/articles/82162-ivermectin-prophylaxis-used-for-covid-19-a-citywide-prospective-observational-study-of-223128-subjects-using-propensity-score-matching
Ivermectin Prophylaxis Used for COVID-19: A Citywide, Prospective, Observational Study of 223,128 Subjects Using Propensity Score Matching
Background: Ivermectin has demonstrated different mechanisms of action that potentially protect from both coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and COVID-19-related comorbidities. Based on the studies suggesting efficacy in prophylaxis combined with the known safety profile of ivermectin, a citywide prevention program using ivermectin for COVID-19 was implemented in Itajaí, a southern city in Brazil in the state of Santa Catarina. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of regular ivermectin use on subsequent COVID-19 infection and mortality rates.
Materials and methods: We analyzed data from a prospective, observational study of the citywide COVID-19 prevention with ivermectin program, which was conducted between July 2020 and December 2020 in Itajaí, Brazil. Study design, institutional review board approval, and analysis of registry data occurred after completion of the program. The program consisted of inviting the entire population of Itajaí to a medical visit to enroll in the program and to compile baseline, personal, demographic, and medical information. In the absence of contraindications, ivermectin was offered as an optional treatment to be taken for two consecutive days every 15 days at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/day. In cases where a participating citizen of Itajaí became ill with COVID-19, they were recommended not to use ivermectin or any other medication in early outpatient treatment. Clinical outcomes of infection, hospitalization, and death were automatically reported and entered into the registry in real time. Study analysis consisted of comparing ivermectin users with non-users using cohorts of infected patients propensity score-matched by age, sex, and comorbidities. COVID-19 infection and mortality rates were analyzed with and without the use of propensity score matching (PSM).
Results: Of the 223,128 citizens of Itajaí considered for the study, a total of 159,561 subjects were included in the analysis: 113,845 (71.3%) regular ivermectin users and 45,716 (23.3%) non-users. Of these, 4,311 ivermectin users were infected, among which 4,197 were from the city of Itajaí (3.7% infection rate), and 3,034 non-users (from Itajaí) were infected (6.6% infection rate), with a 44% reduction in COVID-19 infection rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.53-0.58; p < 0.0001). Using PSM, two cohorts of 3,034 subjects suffering from COVID-19 infection were compared. The regular use of ivermectin led to a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality (25 [0.8%] versus 79 [2.6%] among ivermectin non-users; RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.20-0.49; p < 0.0001). When adjusted for residual variables, reduction in mortality rate was 70% (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.19-0.46; p < 0.0001). There was a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate (44 versus 99 hospitalizations among ivermectin users and non-users, respectively; RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.31-0.63; p < 0.0001). After adjustment for residual variables, reduction in hospitalization rate was 67% (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 023-0.66; p < 0.0001).
Conclusion: In this large PSM study, regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates.
cureus.com
@DrNoMask - DrRay
The Pharmacokinetics and Interactions of Ivermectin in Humans https://link.springer.com/article/10.1208/s12248-007-9000-9#ref-CR14
The Pharmacokinetics and Interactions of Ivermectin in Humans—A Mini-review - The AAPS Journal
Ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug with a broad spectrum of activity, high efficacy as well as a wide margin of safety. Since 1987, this compound has a wi
link.springer.com
@ActerisXor - Acteris
@DrNoMask @LaLaRueFrench75 Powerful message contrasting the adverse effects of Ivermectin/HCQ to experimental vaccines. Its criminal that many countries around the globe are not using of these drugs!! But also not empowering people to check their Vit D, C, Zinc to help build their immunity.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
Btw, Americas Frontline Doctors are heroes. Here is part 2 of "flooding" https://t.co/6ayKY1zrfz
Video Transcript AI Summary
There is a growing problem of people using a drug meant for animals to treat COVID-19. This false information started with a viral video from a group called America's frontline doctors, claiming that hydroxychloroquine could cure COVID. They later started promoting another drug called Ivermectin as a cure for COVID, despite warnings from the CDC, FDA, and other health organizations that it is not effective and could be harmful. Ivermectin is actually meant to prevent parasites in animals like horses. It's important to rely on approved treatments and vaccines to prevent COVID-19.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: More concerns today about a pretty strange but growing problem. There's a surge in demand for a drug that is often used to treat worms in animals as a false cure for COVID nineteen. Now NBC News has done a deep dive into this disinformation and how it's spreading. Ben Collins covers disinformation, extremism, and the Internet for NBC News. He joins us now.
Ben, a lot of people are scratching their heads about this one, quite frankly. But, help us understand how this all started and how this this false information is spreading.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So let's flash back a year ago to the Hydroxychloroquine phase of The, pandemic and the idea that was some sort of false cure for it. There was this group of doctors that it was a very viral video that was retweeted by then president Trump where they said hydroxychloroquine cured COVID. You don't need to wear a mask. You just need hydroxychloroquine.
Of course, that wasn't true. But that group, which is called America's frontline doctors, very large social media apparatus from there. They started touring the country. They started barnstorming the country. Once the vaccines came out, they started saying the vaccines don't work, but we have another cure this time
Speaker 2: We have to understand that when the CDC and World Health Organization are putting out a warning, it's for several reasons. Number one
Speaker 3: one thing according to the FDA, the CDC, doctors, and scientists that actually work at preventing COVID, the vaccine. That's it. Now that hasn't stopped people from trying all sorts of treatments and unapproved drugs. Most of them recommended on social media. The latest trend has people using very strong drugs meant for horses.
Doctors say this could make you sick or even kill you.
Speaker 2: We continue to get emails from viewers about Ivermectin like this one from Julianne. She wrote a saying there was good evidence That Ivermectin really is effective for COVID nineteen. And all bent on selling the vaccine As the only answer. Now we've done a lot of research on this and this is just not true. That's according to the Federal Drug Administration, Centers For Disease Control, the World Health Organization, Oregon Health and Science University and the manufacturer of Ivermectin Merck.
They all say That Ivermectin should not be taken to treat COVID. Ivermectin is a drug meant to prevent parasites in animals like horses.
reSee.it AI Summary
Vaccine hesitancy is a rational mindset. Questioning vaccines is intellectually sound. The COVID-19 vaccines have caused numerous injuries, disabilities, and deaths. We should be appalled and skeptical. It's time to embrace extreme vaccine hesitancy. Watch Dr. Peter McCullough's Remedy episode 5 for more.
@DrNoMask - DrRay
"Vaccine hesitancy is a healthy state of mind. To be an antivaxxer or someone who questions the vaccines, that's an intellectually healthy position to take. We should all have skepticism. The covid 19 vaccines have led to a massive number of injuries, disabilities, and deaths. We all should be shocked. Outraged. We all should be antivaxxers at this point in time. We should all have extreme vaccine hesitancy." Dr. Peter McCullough Watch Remedy full episode 5 below
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Temple of Baxdini, where Edward Jenner created the cowpox vaccine, is considered a pilgrimage site for pro-vaccination scientists. Some individuals, like pediatricians and public health doctors, are accused of being anti-science or conspiracy theorists for questioning vaccines. The media often labels them as such to suppress their views. Vaccine hesitancy is seen as a positive thing, as it encourages critical thinking and considering what's best for oneself and their children. Those who question vaccines are not necessarily anti-vaxxers, but rather intellectually healthy individuals who prioritize skepticism. With the numerous injuries and deaths associated with COVID-19 vaccines, extreme vaccine hesitancy is justified.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: On the screen during that meeting was shown a picture of the Temple of Baxdini. The Temple of Baxdini is a building where Edward Jenner made his cowpox vaccine centuries ago, and it is preserved to this day and is considered a pilgrimage site for many scientists who are religiously pro vaccination.
Speaker 1: There is almost a religious zeal that surrounds Vaccination, and it's particularly strong in those people like pediatricians, public health doctors who appear to know very, very little about vaccines to be accused of anti science or, being just simply an anti vaxxist so we can write you off. This is this is a pharmaceutical industry propaganda ploy. No less no more than that that since they I I once had an interview with Anderson Cooper. I think it took about 15 seconds for him to start talking about Conspiracy theory. It's actually the same in Italy when I interviewed him.
It was conspiracy theory conspiracy theory straight away as it's a default place to go when you don't have to think about the arguments. You don't have to articulate a better argument to make your point. You simply call people anti vaxxers, conspiracy theorists, and that's it.
Speaker 2: The Washington Post that an article about me this week that said I was a conspiracy theorist. You know, they are actually part of a conspiracy do suppress people like me. And the way they suppress people is by characterizing us as conspiracy there's but they can outright censor us or they can censor us through defamation. You know, that's what they've been up to. So this Reporter Michael Sherr, who's spent his entire you know, the title of it is Robert f f Kennedy's conspiracy is serious, but he actually is part of a conspiracy to label me a conspiracy theorist.
Speaker 3: And that's the Pro Vaccine Playbook. Just call anyone who questions vaccines a conspiracy theorist or an anti vaxxer and accuse them of being vaccine hesitant, Whatever that means.
Speaker 4: This whole vaccine hesitancy thing that they're calling is is a good thing. And so for anyone who It's labeled as a vaccine hesitant adult or as an anti vaxxer. Wear it like a badge of courage. Wear it with proudly that you are critically Thinking and thinking for yourself and what's in the best interest of you and your children.
Speaker 5: If you don't go along with the full narrative, the full CDC schedule, You don't support that, then by some measures, you're anti vaccine.
Speaker 6: Who isn't an anti vaxxer if the definition is you're not gonna be compliant with is insane agenda. Vaccine hesitancy is a healthy state Date of mind to be an anti vaxxer or someone who questions the vaccines, that's an intellectually healthy the position to take. We should all have skepticism. The COVID nineteen vaccines have led to a massive number of injuries, disabilities, and deaths. We should all be shocked, outraged.
We all should be anti at this point in time, we should all have extreme vaccine hesitancy. Doctor Mccull is absolutely correct. We should all have extreme vaccine hesitancy now, especially in light of the extreme fear based push that we've seen to make everyone take the COVID nineteen injections.
@TTAVOfficial - The Truth About Vaccines
@DrNoMask #REMEDY airs tomorrow - go to http://REMEDY.film to watch our trailer and sign up to watch free. Lives are on the line and people are dropping dead everyday without this information. Please be someone's hero and share!
TTAV Presents REMEDY: World Premiere July 26
The Truth About Vaccines Presents REMEDY
remedy.film