reSee.it - Related Post Feed
reSee.it AI Summary
Military attorney Todd Callendar reveals shocking facts about the Covid vaccine. It contains 3 HIV proteins, potentially causing Vaccine-induced AIDS (VAIDS). Professor Luc Montagnier warned about this. After vaccination, get tested for HIV. Why isn't anyone investigating?
@bambkb - Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥
Military attorney , Todd Callendar with some #EXPLOSIVE #Covid #Vaccine facts : “They stuck 3 #HIV proteins in these #Covid #Vaccines and essentially gave the world #Vaccine induced #AIDS, also known as #VAIDS” Didn’t professor, Luc Montagnier warn us about this exact same thing!? “After you’ve taken the #Covid #Vaccine, go test yourself for #HIV, you might be surprised at the results” Why the fuck is no one investigating this?
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the potential dangers of vaccines, claiming that they can cause vaccine-induced AIDS and other health issues. They mention that the military is testing members for AIDS and sickle cell, as vaccines can alter red blood cells. The speaker also mentions a significant increase in morbidity and mortality in 2021, but the numbers have been manipulated. They talk about the difficulty of tracking pilots who can no longer fly due to health issues. The conversation then shifts to whether the military can determine if members have actually received the vaccine, mentioning the presence of luciferase in Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. This bioluminescent ingredient allows third parties to verify vaccination status. The speaker concludes by stating that those who refuse the vaccine are being processed out.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That they took 3 separate HIV proteins in these shots that effectively gave the world vaccine induced AIDS. If that happened, all the doctors will tell you that is so. So how is it possible that they've effectively killed half of the globe and they're still walking around free?
Speaker 1: Did you know, Todd, the military is starting to test the members of the military for AIDS?
Speaker 0: Yes, I do know that. And sickle cell too, by the way, and sickle cell as well because the vaccines have also the the propensity to change the shape of red blood cells. And so now they're showing uppers with sickle cell, with HIV, with cancers that never existed before. It was only in 2021 that we found there was an 1100% increase in all cause morbidity mortality. We don't know what those numbers are anymore as the DoD changed them and fudged them.
And I was talking to one of our whistleblowers yesterday, funny enough, and I said, well, how can we track how many pilots are no longer flying because they can't? And this person effectively said we can't because now dMAD is worthless. It's not useful because the numbers are all made up. We don't even know how to track this down.
Speaker 1: Now that they're doing these blood tests and they're looking to see if members of the military who have been vaccinated have AIDS, vaccine induced Vaccine acquired immune deficiency basically. Are they also looking to see if in fact some of the members of the military even took the vaccine? Because let's face it, There's people out there that'll for $100, $1,000, whatever, you can walk into CVS and they'll take your vaccine, squirt it into the trash can and fill out And say, well, they came in for their vaccine, didn't tell I didn't have to tell you I put it in their arm. Are they going to be able to determine that?
Speaker 0: Yes, they can. So we did mass spectrometry on both Pfizer and Moderna, and we found that each of them contain something called luciferase. And one of them is SM102 and the other one is ALC3015 as key ingredients. Luciferese is a bioluminescent ingredient, for lack of a better word, that will in fact allow third party onlookers to know whether or not you got the shot. And I've talked to people who showed up at the border with their fake vaccine cards and were turned away because the border inspectors knew they hadn't had the shots.
They knew remotely. So the answer to your question is yes, they'll know whether people got the shots or not. And those who stood up and said, I'm not getting the shots, are already getting processed out. That's what we're doing from day to day is trying to help those people.
reSee.it AI Summary
Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier asserts that the Covid virus contains added sequences, including HIV, suggesting a deliberate act by skilled molecular biologists. His expertise makes his viewpoint significant. The implications of such vaccine-related actions are concerning. #VaccineCrimesAgainstHumanity
@bambkb - Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥
Nobel prize winner in medicine and Professor, Luc Montagnier claims that : “Someone added certain sequences to this #Covid virus, including HIV sequences, it was a meticulous and professional job by molecular biologists!! This #Virus is man-made ” I don’t know many people alive that have better qualifications to speak on this subject than this incredible human being - Please, listen!! #Vaccine #CrimesAgainstHumanity
Video Transcript AI Summary
Professor Luc Montagnier, Nobel Prize winner in Medicine and co-discoverer of HIV, discusses his current work on the virus. He clarifies that he is not working in the lab but rather analyzing data with a colleague. Through their analysis, they have concluded that there was manipulation involved in the virus, specifically the addition of sequences from the HIV virus. However, Montagnier does not know who was responsible for this manipulation or the purpose behind it. He emphasizes that his role is to present the facts and not accuse anyone.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Et nous revenons avec l'actualité du Covid dix-neuf et nous sommes avec le professeur Luc Montagnier bonjour. Bonjour Et merci d'être avec nous. Faut-il le rappeler vous êtes prix Nobel de médecine et c'est vous qui êtes à l'origine de la découverte du VIH.
Speaker 1: C'est une longue histoire mais intéressante aussi pour l'actualité parce qu'on a une expérience Deux deux choses qui se sont passées qui ont été très difficiles à contrôler là-bas à ce moment-là et ce qui a Permis de trouver la vérité c'est comme aujourd'hui.
Speaker 0: Alors ce qui m'intéresse ce matin c'est que vous vous travaillez en ce moment sur le virus. Vous êtes d'accord
Speaker 1: de travail mais pas forcément au labo puisque on travaille sur ordinateur avec Avec un collègue et puis c'est tout. On n'a pas de d'expérience on peut dire, mais l'expérience vient JLM De la maladie elle-même, de toutes les mesures qui sont faites actuellement dans les laboratoires sur les patients.
Speaker 0: Et vous êtes arrivé à certaines conclusions.
Speaker 1: Alors, d'ailleurs, vous arrivez à la conclusion qu'effectivement il y avait eu Une manipulation au sujet de ce virus. C'est-à-dire Et bien qu'une partie, je ne dis pas le total, je ne sais pas, mais il Il y a un modèle qui est évidemment le virus classique et là c'était un modèle surtout venant de la chauve-souris. Mais Ce modèle on a par-dessus ajouté des séquences notamment du VIH, Le virus du du SIDA. Mais quand vous dites on a ajouté, qui a ajouté Ah moi je ne sais pas. Et
Speaker 0: c'est pas naturel, c'est ce que vous voulez dire
Speaker 1: Non, ce n'est pas naturel, c'était un travail de Professionnel, un travail de de biologiste moléculaire, c'est un travail très minutieux, on peut dire de d'horloger, on peut dire Et dans quel bout des séquences.
Speaker 0: Mais dans
Speaker 1: quel but Dans quel but Dans quel but, ce n'est pas n'est pas clair. Moi je je l'expose si vous voulez. Mon mon travail c'est d'exposer les faits, c'est tout. Je ne je n'accuse personne.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
"The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasmid DNA, it's not just mRNA, it’s got bits of DNA in it." - Professor Phillip Buckhaults, Phd in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. He does cancer genomics research at the University of South Carolina. https://t.co/DGyLZbLVJH
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the presence of DNA in the Pfizer vaccine and expresses concern about its potential consequences. They explain that they sequenced the DNA in the vaccine and found it surprising that any DNA was present. The speaker suggests that this DNA could be causing rare but serious side effects, such as death from cardiac arrest. They also mention that the DNA could integrate into the genomic DNA of cells, potentially leading to genome modification and autoimmune attacks. There is a theoretical risk of future cancer as well. The speaker emphasizes the need to investigate these concerns further.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That's a very good question. I think In many circumstances, there could be malice underneath but I'm trying to see just incompetence to be gracious. Sure a vaccine is contaminated with plasma DNA. It's not just mRNA. It's got bits of DNA in this DNA is the DNA vector that was used as the template for the in vitro transcription action when they made the mRNA.
I know this is true because I sequenced it in my own lab. The vials of Pfizer vaccine that were out here in Columbia. One of my colleagues was in charge of that vaccination program in the college of pharmacy. And for reasons I still don't understand he kept every single vial. So he had a whole freezer full of the empty vials.
Well, the empty vials have a little tiny bit in the bottom of them. He gave them all to me and I looked at them. We had 2 batches that were given out here in Columbia. And I checked these 2 batches and I checked them by sequencing. And I sequenced all the DNA that was in the vaccine and I can see what's in there.
And it's surprising that there's any DNA in there. And you can kind of work out what it is and how it got there. And I'm kind of alarmed about the possible consequences of both in terms of human health and biology, but you should be alarmed about the regulatory process that allowed it there. So this DNA, in my view, it could be causing some of the rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest. There's a lot of cases now of people having suspicious death after vaccine.
It's hard to prove what caused it. It's just temporally associated. Mechanism. This DNA can and likely will integrate into the genomic DNA of cells that got transfected with the vaccine mix. This is just the way it works.
We do this in the lab all the time. We take pieces of DNA and we mix them up with a lipid complex like the Pfizer vaccine is in. We pour it onto cells and a lot of it gets into the cells and a lot of it gets into the DNA of those cells and it becomes permanent fixture of the cell. It's not just a temporary thing. It is in that cell and all of its progeny from now on forevermore.
Amen. So that's why I'm kind of alarmed about this DNA being in the vaccine. It's different from RNA because it can be permanent. This is a real hazard for genome modification of long lived somatic cells like stem cells. And it could cause theoretically, this is all a theoretical concern but it's pretty reasonable based on solid molecular biology that It could cause a sustained autoimmune attack toward that tissue.
It's also a very real theoretical risk of future cancer in some people. Depending on where in the genome this foreign piece of DNA lands, it can interrupt a tumor suppressor or activate an Kajim. I think it'll be rare but I think the risk is not zero and it may be high enough that we are to figure out if this is happening or not. And again, but it's not a problem. So we're going to have to go back to the
@DiedSuddenly_ - DiedSuddenly
Study shows that the Covid 19 Vaccine is RE-ACTIVATING viruses and diseases that were once dormant in people. https://t.co/EyYigcTeDl
@thehealthb0t - healthbot
They are putting viruses in the vaccines https://t.co/p79XULC17k
Video Transcript AI Summary
Zoological viruses are being put in vaccines, specifically in the cell lines. These viruses have been present for a long time but are often overlooked in papers. The speaker suggests that this is a race and gender-specific attack, as certain groups are targeted. The goal is to change our DNA and establish a one-world order. The vaccines contain various viruses, including those found in polio vaccines. The speaker claims that those who are already immune will die from the shots due to antibody-dependent enhancement. The speaker advises against taking any vaccines, including the Pfizer vaccine, as they believe all vaccines are synthetic poisons. They claim to have evidence that the Omicron variant was present in humans in 2000. The ultimate objective is to ensure everyone is injected because other aspects of the environment, such as food and particulates, also pose a risk.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: They are putting zoological viruses in the vaccines.
Speaker 1: And they're they're in the cell lines, and they've been there all along. If you look at the next slide, what you're gonna see is the other retroviruses in the supplemental material that nobody ever reads in the papers, so you don't know. So they're showing you how did you get v p 62, which is a infectious gain of function molecular clone made by Bob Silverman's lab. Oh, the one who made it evade the immune system of blacks, Native Americans, they know exactly what they're doing. Look at all of the viruses.
How did they
Speaker 0: saying this is a race specific attack?
Speaker 1: Well, it's it's race and, gender, and that's why the first slide said favored species, what Darwin is doing, this is they are our god. This is this is pat Patrick Wood's testimony in our in in presentations in the crimes against humanity that they're gods, so they know exactly as they've targeted the athletes like Magic Johnson, HIV is to AZT is to AIDS. Yeah. Here it is. The original paper, origins of species by natural selection is what most people see, and nobody sees that 2nd page or the preservation of favored races in the struggle of life.
So they think they can change the code of our DNA, the one world order, and this is the game to inject us with that cell line, every one of the viruses on 41 are in Vero e six, or in the vero monkey kidney cell lines, we've been injecting is polio vaccines for 30 years, antibody dependent enhancement. So everybody who is infected and immune either god given immunity, will die from the shots. So all of the kids that had been mandated and injured by the vaccines. So they got caught. They know it.
What most people now realize is don't get another shot. I mean, no shot. I just showed you they were all done.
Speaker 0: Pfizer event nobody will take it, and nobody ever took it in a bunch of countries. Nobody's taken it. They're having to throw it away.
Speaker 1: No. But but also never another vaccine. Not a polio shot, not an MMR, not they've all been synthetic poisons. They since that's why I showed you all those viruses. They've been in those cell lines continuously growing in our lab for 50 years.
We've got them in freezers. We grow them up. I can prove Omicron was in humans, including me and my husband. In 2000, and in 2000 and n, we seroconverted and created antibodies. So the real important endgame is they've gotta get everybody injected because in the rest of your environment, your food, and your particulates is
@BGatesIsaPyscho - Concerned Citizen
🚨💉 Jesus - VAIDS is real 9 studies show HIV tests are positive post experimental mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Whilst HIV virus isn't present, the big concern is immunodeficiency. No wonder the vaccinated are constantly getting ill. https://t.co/Od6JMYVa1K
Video Transcript AI Summary
Nine studies have reported false positive HIV tests after COVID-19 infection or vaccination, suggesting a potential immunodeficiency. Dr. Ryan Cole presented data showing that the more COVID vaccines were taken, the higher the risk of recurrent COVID. There have also been cases of severe syndromes and reactivation of viruses like varicella zoster, Epstein Barr, and cytomegalovirus. An Australian investigation into vaccine-acquired immune deficiency syndrome (VAIDS) led by So McCann is expected to provide important insights. It is believed that both COVID-19 and the vaccines may worsen immunity, with some people experiencing immunodeficiency.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Nine studies are reporting false positive HIV tests. And, so I want people to understand the HIV test can turn positive after COVID-nineteen and as well as the vaccine. Now it's not AIDS, because the virus is not there, the HIV virus is not there. But what the concern is, is maybe a form of immunodeficiency is there. And, this can be both after COVID as well as after the vaccine, at our US congressional hearing, January 12, 2024, doctor, Ryan Cole did show the data from Shrehta and colleagues, Cleveland Clinic, 51,000 Cleveland Clinic employees, the more COVID vaccines that were taken, the highest risk for recurrent COVID over and over again.
So we see some very severe, syndromes, reactivation of of a varicella zoster, Epstein Barr, cytomegalovirus, it's extraordinary. And now this false positive HIV test. Now the question is, I know I know it's not HIV, but is it is it implying immunodeficiency. Right. Right.
So this Australian investigation into VAIDS, the vaccine acquired immune deficiency syndrome led by so McCann, I think it'll be very important because we do need some scholarship on this. Yeah. I've become pretty convinced that COVID itself worsen someone's immunity and the vaccine and most people took the vaccine, got COVID, and took the vaccine, but the vaccines don't work. They're either deeper they're even more deep in a hole on immunodeficiency.
@myhiddenvalue - Not A Number
BBC admits they use HIV to make the covid vaccine‼️ 😱😱😱 https://t.co/zZ0cRP6OrO
Video Transcript AI Summary
The spike protein of the coronavirus plays a crucial role in triggering a strong antibody response. To study it in the lab, Keith uses a small fragment of HIV as a clamp to lock the spike protein into its original shape. This helps maintain the structure of the virus on its surface.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It holds it together and allows it to stay 100% in that structure that's present on the surface of the virus.
Speaker 1: The shape of the coronavirus spike protein before the virus meets our cells is what Triggers the most protective antibody response. So Keith must make the spike protein in the lab Locking it into exactly the same shape by adding another protein that acts a bit like a clamp. And that protein Is a tiny fragment of HIV.
@FFT1776 - Sheri™ @FFT1776
A known cancer causing sequence was added to the Covid vaccines. It wasn’t needed. Why was it added? Why was this info then redacted and hidden? https://t.co/aHmpPNODcx
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker questions the presence of SB40 sequences in vaccines, suggesting they could lead to cancer through insertional mutagenesis. They advocate for alternative treatments like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, claiming they are safe and effective. The speaker criticizes the FDA for redacting data on vaccine contamination, questioning their transparency.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This was more nefarious than Doctor. Burkhold. In what sense are you saying that? The SB40 sequences, they should not be there. They don't need to be there to grow this in bacteria.
I don't think it's an accident. They could have chosen another plasmid that did not have the SB 40 sequences. If these sequences set above an oncogene and and they're promiscuous, that means they are likely to 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 coughing cancer from the sartanal metagenesis. We never needed these vaccines. We had treatments that worked. One of our doctors here is going to tell you about that 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?
reSee.it AI Summary
A Winnipeg Lab employee was caught smuggling vials of Ebola and HIV viruses at the US border. The person, originally from the Ivory Coast and a graduate of Laval, received a $500 fine for not declaring the contents to US customs. Interestingly, this individual is now a Director in the World Health Organization's Emergency Health Incident Strategy. It is worth noting that Covid-19 is said to have mutations similar to Ebola and HIV, unlike previous SARS or MERS.
@NyaPfanner - Nya Pfannerstill
Holy crap, get on your tin foil hats This Covid story is gonna suck As part of the Winnipeg Lab story of failure and espionage is an event where an employee was caught smuggling vials of viruses, including Ebola and HIV, but is caught at the US border https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/winnipeg-researcher-charged-with-smuggling-ebola-material-into-u-s-1.774725
Winnipeg researcher charged with smuggling Ebola material into U.S. | CBC News
A former researcher at the National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg is facing charges in the United States after allegedly trying to smuggle genetic material from the Ebola virus across the Manitoba-North Dakota border.
cbc.ca
@NyaPfanner - Nya Pfannerstill
The person caught was from the Ivory Coast, and studied at Laval. He hit the US Border with 20 vials of deadly infectious disease vectors, but somehow plea bargained down to a $500 fine for not declaring contents to US customs???https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/charged-with-smuggling-in-u-s-ex-winnipeg-researcher-cops-a-plea-1.820854
Charged with smuggling in U.S., ex-Winnipeg researcher cops a plea | CBC News
A former researcher at the National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg accused of trying to smuggle genetic material from the Ebola virus across the Manitoba-North Dakota border pleaded guilty to a lesser charge on Friday.
cbc.ca
@NyaPfanner - Nya Pfannerstill
Here's the tinfoil😉 The person who stole 20 vials of the worlds most deadly viruses, but was caught at the US border, then plea bargained down to a $500 fine . . . is now a Director in the World Health Organization - Emergency Health Incident Strategy (here he is in China) https://t.co/ZvsmkOSkjx
@NyaPfanner - Nya Pfannerstill
And can you guess which 2 disease vectors mutations were said to be found in Covid 19, but were not found in previous SARS or MERS? Why yes, its Ebola and HIV🤪 https://t.co/swQtWxO9Jf
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Doctor dropping truth bombs on the Covid vaccines https://t.co/uv8Uui9SkU
Video Transcript AI Summary
Dr. Sean Brooks, PhD, warns against mRNA vaccines, claiming they will lead to immune system decline, antibody-dependent enhancement, blood clotting, and sterilization. He predicts widespread illness and death, urging against vaccination.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: My name's doctor Sean Brooks, PhD, Oxford. I have 48 public patients including 23 folks. I studied health medicine and anatomy and physiology for approximately 21 years. Doctor Robert Malone, who created the messenger RNA vaccine, has said no one should ever take these jabs ever. Under any circumstance whatsoever, he created it.
And he says, don't ever do it. So let me explain what's going to happen to the people who have taken take it. Excuse me. The people who have taken it are going to die in the next 6 months to 3 to 5 years for three reasons. Number 1, you've dramatically decreased your own immune system by 35%.
The first jab did it by at least 15. The second reason, antibody dependent enhancement. Antib antibody dependent enhancement is what is happening with these jabs with everybody who has taken them. Unless, of course, you've taken a placebo, but there's no way that you would know that. So given that fact, antibody dependent enhancement tricks the entire body into believing that the cell that's eating the pathogen is eating it when it isn't.
It ends up leading to what's called a cytokine storm, which causes organ failure. That will cause your death and there's no stopping that. No amount of drugs will stop that. The third thing, blood clotting. Everyone who has taken the jabs is blood clotting.
If you don't believe me, there's a way you can find out. Take what's called the d dimer test. What that does is that detects blood clotting at the microscopic level. We're cutting full blood clots out of people right now. As I'm talking to you, millions have died from the jabs.
In your last meeting, you advocated for people to take the jabs potentially in the future, along with wearing masks. And I heard parents say the same thing. So to the parents who are actually considering jabbing their own children, you're going to sterilize them permanently. People who have taken the jabs are sterilized. 80% of women who have been jabbed have lost their children in the first trimester.
You can't have kids. You've also injected yourself with the equivalent of HIV. You can now no longer breastfeed, donate blood, donate organs, donate blood plasma nor bone marrow. If you don't believe me, try to donate blood and blood plasma and find out what happens. You will be denied.
Unless, of course, you live in California, in which case they're allowing people to donate toxic blood with spike proteins in it. The jabs create spike proteins. They're in the jabs themselves and they create it by snapping your r n a in half. You are no longer a human anymore. You are something else.
And you are susceptible to countless diseases. Now, here's what's gonna happen in the future very quickly. We'll get them 15 seconds. Great. I don't know what percentage of your staff is taking the jabs, but your school is going to close.
You will not stay open. You will close because they will fall ill and they will die. That will happen in all of your buildings. It will have it's already happening. Thank you, sir.
I I bet it is. It's already happening. Good luck. There's nothing to stop this. Thank you, sir.
@PatientCV - Patientmakt
@bobscartoons Have you heard this from Dr. Strecker about HIV (genetically modified virus)? WHO ordered a t-cell-destroying virus... no vaccine can "cure" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OumDcU_Ndo
@BGatesIsaPyscho - Concerned Citizen
‘Top Studies warn that the Covid Vaccinated Persons are testing positive for HIV’ It continues to go from bad to worse for the vaccinated - why aren’t they all rioting in the streets yet? https://t.co/R0PXiEowC2
@myhiddenvalue - Not A Number
The AIDs virus was manufactured https://t.co/Tj20kSDIol
Video Transcript AI Summary
The US government funded experiments with the AIDS virus at Fort Detrick. The World Health Organization's vaccination campaign in Africa and Brazil led to the spread of AIDS. The virus was crafted from animal viruses, causing many deaths. The speaker warns black people in the US not to trust the government or the Democrat Party.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The United States government gave 1,000,000 of dollars to the United States Military Chemical and Bacteriological Warfare Establishment at Fort Detrick and they began experimenting with the AIDS virus. I knew about the AIDS 3 years before the word ever came out in the world, in the United States particularly, because of my field work in Sierra Leone. The British government used their Forten Down CAB facility. It's easier to get into the Bank of England Boston to get into Fortin Down. All the deadliest viruses in the world are being crafted there.
In pursuance of the goal of Global 2,000 to decimate the world, shortly after this experiment that finished at 4th District, the World Health Organization started a massive vaccination campaign. They said for once and for all, we're going to wipe out the scourge of smallpox. They chose Africa and Brazil, launched a massive vaccination campaign. Immediately, AIDS began to appear. 1000 and thousands of people began dying of the strange new virus which the World Health Organization then said it come from the bite of a green monkey.
They forgot to tell you the green monkey has been there for centuries and he's been biting people if he ever did for centuries, but no disease of that nature had ever occurred. The World Health Organization deliberately took this virus which was crafted from a series of animal viruses including many of these sheep, which destroys the brain, which is why you find ACE patients get dementia probably first before any of the other ACE related complex diseases appear. And they began vaccinating innocent people on the massive scale and they began dying like flies. Why Africa and why Brazil? Because those two countries have the biggest black population in the world.
And I want to tell the black people of the United States of America, do not trust the Democrat Party, Do not trust government. Do not believe that government is your friend. To them you are dispensable.
@bambkb - Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁
🚨⭐️ Professor Emeritus, Yasafumi Murakami of Tokyo, Japan 🇯🇵 explains how the COVID vaccine has DNA fragments and a cancer promoting sequence, SV40👇 https://t.co/lEJ7XaejGX
Video Transcript AI Summary
Research has shown that COVID vaccines are contaminated with DNA, including a cancer virus promoter sequence. The DNA can enter the human genome, potentially activating carcinogenic genes and increasing cancer risk. Vaccines suppress immunity, further raising cancer risk. The presence of DNA in vaccines can lead to long-lasting spike production, causing health issues. Vaccines inducing IgG4 antibodies are considered defective. DNA impurities in vaccines can intensify side effects. DNA should not be introduced into the body's cells.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Professor Emeritus Yasufumi Murakami of Tokyo University of Science joins us for a discussion.
Speaker 1: 1 researcher found that COVID vaccines were contaminated with DNA. The vaccines are expected to contain only mRNA. However, in March, the researcher discovered that vaccines contained considerable amounts of DNA and other substances that should not be present. Since then, I have been keeping an eye on how things were going. Several researchers have reproduced similar data.
There is no doubt about it now. 1 problem is that the vaccines contained a sequence of a cancer virus. Some vaccines are contaminated with a well known promoter sequence of the cancer virus called SV 40. The vaccines contain the sequence needed to promote the gene expression of the virus. This sequence could enter the human genome.
There are many carcinogenic genes in the human genome. It has been proven that when the sequence enters the vicinity of the carcinogenic genes, the carcinogenic genes are activated. People who take the DNA problem seriously are annoyed by a denialist sect that underestimates the drug harm and denies the existence of the DNA problem. There have been all sorts of heated debates. However, it is almost certain that vaccines are with DNA.
2 renowned researchers have proven that vaccines are contaminated with DNA. The problem is that DNA can easily enter the genome. DNA induces mutations and activates human carcinogenic genes.
Speaker 0: As a phenomenon, in what way does DNA harm our bodies?
Speaker 1: DNA induces mutations. In other words, DNA can get into many parts of the human genome. DNA can enter cells very easily regardless of length, and can get into cells everywhere. Under the circumstances, the problem is that when DNA gets in the center of an important gene, the important gene will stop functioning. Another problem is that when the promoter sequence of a cancer virus enters the vicinity of a dormant carcinogenic gene, the promoter sequence awakens and activates the carcinogenic gene.
As a result, the risk of developing cancer increases. As I have explained, the biggest problem is that mRNA vaccines suppressed immunity. MRNA vaccines increase the risk of developing cancer while suppressing the immunity. When this happens, not only the risk of developing cancer increases, but also the immunity decreases. Consequently, vaccination increases the risk of developing cancer dramatically compared to the unvaccinated state.
Probably, this is a big problem. So the more people get vaccinated, the more people will probably get cancer.
Speaker 0: There are many different types of cancers such as lung cancer, stomach cancer, colorectal cancer, and blood cancer, etcetera. Do vaccines increase the risk of all types of cancer, not just certain types?
Speaker 1: It appears that vaccines increase the risk of all types of cancer. At least there is credible information that the number of leukemia cases is on the rise. Vaccination causes the promoter sequence of the cancer virus to enter white blood cells and attach to red blood cells everywhere. As a result, more and more leukemia cases are reported. The mRNA vaccine of Pfizer contains the promoter sequence of s v 40.
Speaker 0: This is now a indisputable fact?
Speaker 1: Yes. This is now an indisputable fact. Several groups of researchers have found this sequence. In addition, a lot of spikes of mRNA are produced. The spikes would be most protected from destruction.
Possibly, long spike genes remain intact. So if the long spike genes remain there, if the spike genes enters the human genome and cause gene expression stably, this means that gene expression will continue to take place all the time forever. That is, spikes are generated forever.
Speaker 0: Oh my
Speaker 1: god. Of course, DNA entered into nonstem cells is removed through cell replacement. But DNA entered into stem cells remains forever.
Speaker 0: Once the DNA gets into the stem cells, the DNA will keep creating more and more spikes. As a result, IgG 4 antibodies are introduced.
Speaker 1: The problem is that once Igg 4 antibodies are introduced, the number of spike producing cells will not decrease, and it becomes impossible to get rid of spike producing cells. Initially, the IDG 1 or IDG 3 response should remove the spike producing cells. Gradually, the IgG4 response becomes dominant. As a result, it becomes normal for spikes to be present in cells. The produced spikes then flow into the bloodstream and cause a variety of health problems.
So, any vaccine that induces IgG 4 is deemed as a defective vaccine.
Speaker 0: So you are saying that vaccines which create IgG 4 should no longer be produced?
Speaker 1: That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 0: I know a person who gets a health checkup every year, and he is perfectly healthy. The other day, he went to the doctor because he was not feeling well, and he was diagnosed as having stage 4
Speaker 1: cancer. I am not surprised. Normally, cancer cells are born and grow slowly, taking years to reach stage 4.
Speaker 0: However, as soon as his cancer was identified, he was told that his cancer was in stage 4. Could the vaccine have played a role in this cancer?
Speaker 1: Perhaps the vaccine suppresses the immunity, which makes it easier for cancer cells to grow.
Speaker 0: Are you saying that vaccines cause so called turbo cancers?
Speaker 1: The vaccines cause turbo cancers. Exactly. Suppression of the immunity is a major factor of turbo cancers. The increase in Igg4 antibodies results in suppression of cancer immunity. This is also a very big problem.
I can tell you 1 thing, the more DNA the vaccines contains, the more intense the inflammation caused by the vaccine becomes. DNA is a foreign substance to the cells. So, DNA causes a severe reaction and kills the immune system of the cells. The more DNA the vaccine contains, the more severe the side effects caused by the vaccine become.
Speaker 0: So you are suggesting that impurities contained in different lots are different?
Speaker 1: Vaccines could contain many different impurities, but 1 possibility could be DNA. In the first place, DNA is something that should not be put into cells of your body.
@myhiddenvalue - Not A Number
Nobel Prize winner Luc Montagnier, who was found dead 6 days after this interview, confirmed HIV was added to the Covid ‘vaccines’. “Someone added some sequencies including HIV” https://t.co/PQgMAPU43g
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
"The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasmid DNA, it's not just mRNA, it’s got bits of DNA in it." - Professor Phillip Buckhaults, Phd in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. He does cancer genomics research at the University of South Carolina. https://t.co/5MERUtHT6a
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasma DNA, not just mRNA. This DNA is the DNA vector used as the template for the in vitro transcription reaction. This was discovered by sequencing vials of Pfizer vaccine from Colombia.
It's surprising that there's any DNA in there. The speaker is alarmed about the possible consequences of this, including rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest. Mixing DNA with a lipid complex allows it to enter cells and become a permanent fixture.
This is a real hazard for genome modification of long-lived somatic cells, like stem cells, and could cause a sustained autoimmune attack. There is also a very real theoretical risk of future cancer in some people. The risk is not zero and it may be high enough that we ought to figure out if this is happening or not.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Competence to be gracious. So the Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasma DNA. It's not just mRNA. It's got bits of DNA in it. This DNA is the DNA vector that was used, as the template for the in vitro transcription reaction when they made the mRNA.
I know this is true because I sequenced it in my own lab. The vials of Pfizer vaccine that were given out here in Colombia, one of my colleagues was in charge of that vaccination program in the college of pharmacy. And for reasons that I still don't understand, he kept every single vial. So he had a whole freezer full of the empty vials. Well, the empty vials have a little tiny bit in the bottom of them.
He gave them all to me, and I looked at them. We had 2 batches that were given out here in Colombia. And I checked these 2 batches, and I checked them by sequencing. And I sequenced all the DNA that was in the vaccine. And I can see what's in there.
And it's surprising that there's any DNA in there. And you can kinda work out what it is and how it got there. And I'm kind of alarmed about the possible consequences of this, both in terms be causing some of the rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest. So there's a lot of cases now, of people having suspicious death after vaccine. It's hard to prove what caused it.
It's just, you know, vaccine mix. This is just the way it works. We do this in the lab all the time. We take pieces of DNA, we mix them up with a lipid complex like the Pfizer vaccine is in, we pour it on the cells and a lot of it gets into the cells and a lot of it gets into the DNA of those cells and becomes a permanent fixture of the cell. It's not just a temporary, a temporary thing.
It is in that cell and all of its progeny from now on forevermore. Amen. So that's why I'm kind of alarmed about this DNA being in the vaccine. It's it's it's different from RNA because it can be permanent. This is a real hazard for genome modification of long lived somatic cells, like stem cells, and it could cause theoretically, this is all a theoretical concern, but it's pretty reasonable based on solid molecular biology, that it could cause a sustained autoimmune attack toward that tissue.
It's also a very real theoretical risk of future cancer in some people. Depending on where in the genome this foreign piece of DNA lands, it can interrupt a tumor suppressor or activate an oncogene. I think it'll be rare, but I think the risk is not zero and it may be high enough that we are to figure out if this is happening or not. And, again, the the the autoimmunity thing is not my wheelhouse. I'm not an immunologist, but the cancer risk is.
That's my bag. I know this is a thing, and it is a possibility.
@thehealthb0t - healthbot
"The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasmid DNA, it's not just mRNA, it’s got bits of DNA in it." - Professor Phillip Buckhaults, Phd in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. He does cancer genomics research at the University of South Carolina. https://t.co/G1kL20ruoK
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Pfizer vaccine contains not only mRNA but also plasma DNA from the vector used in its production. I sequenced samples from two batches of the vaccine in Colombia and found this DNA, which raises concerns about potential health risks. This DNA could integrate into the genomic DNA of cells, leading to permanent changes. Such integration poses theoretical risks, including autoimmune responses and cancer, depending on where the DNA inserts itself in the genome. While these risks may be rare, they warrant investigation to understand their implications better.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Competence to be gracious. So the Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasma DNA. It's not just mRNA. It's got bits of DNA in it. This DNA is the DNA vector that was used, as the template for the in vitro transcription reaction when they made the mRNA.
I know this is true because I sequenced it in my own lab. The vials of Pfizer vaccine that were given out here in Colombia, one of my colleagues was in charge of that vaccination program in the college of pharmacy. And for reasons that I still don't understand, he kept every single vial. So he had a whole freezer full of the empty vials. Well, the empty vials have a little tiny bit in the bottom of them.
He gave them all to me, and I looked at them. We had 2 batches that were given out here in Colombia. And I checked these 2 batches, and I checked them by sequencing. And I sequenced all the DNA that was in the vaccine. And I can see what's in there.
And it's surprising that there's any DNA in there. And you can kinda work out what it is and how it got there. And I'm kind of alarmed about the possible consequences of this, both in terms of human health and biology, and of this, both in terms of human health and biology, but you should be alarmed about the regulatory process that allowed it to get there. So this DNA, in my view, it could be causing some of the rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest. So there's a lot of cases now, of people having suspicious death after vaccine.
It's hard to prove what caused it. It's just, you know, temporarily associated. And this DNA, associated. And this DNA is a plausible mechanism. Okay?
This DNA can and likely will integrate into
Speaker 1: the genomic DNA of cells that got transfected
Speaker 0: with the vaccine mix. Vaccine mix. This is just the way it works. We do this in the lab all the time. We take pieces of DNA, we mix them up with a lipid complex like the Pfizer vaccine is in, we pour it on the cells and a lot of it gets into the cells and a lot of it gets into the DNA of those cells and becomes a permanent fixture of the cell.
It's not just a temporary, a temporary thing. It is in that cell and all of its progeny from now on forevermore. Amen. So that's why I'm kind of alarmed about this DNA being in the vaccine. It's it's it's different from RNA because it can be permanent.
This is a real hazard for genome modification of long lived somatic cells, like stem cells, and it could cause theoretically, this is all a theoretical concern, but it's pretty reasonable based on solid molecular biology, that it could cause a sustained autoimmune attack toward that tissue. It's also a very real theoretical risk of future cancer in some people. Depending on where in the genome this foreign piece of DNA lands, it can interrupt a tumor suppressor or activate an oncogene. I think it'll be rare, but I think the risk is not zero and it may be high enough that we are to figure out if this is happening or not. And, again, the the the autoimmunity thing is not my wheelhouse.
I'm not an immunologist, but the cancer risk is. That's my bag. I know this is a thing, and it is a possibility.
@jasper_truth - JasperTruth
THE ENTIRE BL00D SUPPLY IN THE US & THE REST OF THE WORLD IS CONTAMINATED WITH THE SP!KE PROTEIN!!! https://t.co/3Z6ZJnkjxN
Video Transcript AI Summary
The entire blood supply in America and worldwide is contaminated with spike proteins from vaccines. We need to stop accepting blood from vaccinated individuals, as unvaccinated patients receiving these transfusions are experiencing serious health issues like blood clots, heart attacks, and strokes. This was predicted three years ago, and those who spoke out were silenced. It's crucial to remove the spike protein from the blood supply and hold accountable those responsible for this situation. The current management of this issue is reckless and dangerous.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hello. Doctor Ben Marble here. I'm gonna make a comment about the blood supply, the entire blood supply in America, and basically the whole world is contaminated with the spike protein, poison by a weapon. We need to rest all the damn evil poison pushers, and we need to quit accepting blood from people who took the poison, because we're seeing patients that get blood transfusions that are unvaccinated, and suddenly they get blood clots or have heart attacks or strokes, have bad outcomes after receiving blood that has the spike protein poison in it, which is what I told everybody was gonna happen 3 years ago, and I was banned everywhere for telling the truth. Alright.
So we gotta arrest all these damn evil poison pushers, and we need to get the spike protein out of the blood supply. This is complete mad science insanity, and all the retards are in charge, and they all need to go to fucking hell as far as I'm concerned.
@thehealthb0t - healthbot
Doctor dropping truth bombs on the Covid vaccines https://t.co/mEWQg6f6J4
Video Transcript AI Summary
My name is Dr. Sean Brooks, PhD from Oxford. I have studied health and medicine for 21 years. Dr. Robert Malone, the creator of the mRNA vaccine, advises against taking these vaccines under any circumstances. Those who have taken the vaccine may face severe health issues, including a 35% reduction in immune function, leading to potential death within 6 months to 5 years. This is compounded by antibody-dependent enhancement, which can cause organ failure, and increased blood clotting. Many vaccinated individuals may also face infertility, with 80% of vaccinated women losing pregnancies in the first trimester. The vaccines alter RNA, making individuals susceptible to various diseases. Schools may close as staff members fall ill. There is no remedy for these outcomes.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: My name is doctor Sean Brooks, PhD, Oxford. I have 48 publications including 23 folks. I studied health medicine, anatomy, and physiology for approximately 21 years. Doctor Robert Malone, who created the messenger RNA vaccine, has said no one should ever take these jabs ever. Under any circumstance whatsoever, he created it.
And he says don't ever do it. So let me explain what's going to happen to the people who have taken take it. Excuse me. The people who have taken it are going to die in the next 6 months to 3 to 5 years for three reasons. Number 1, you've dramatically decreased your own immune system by 35%.
The first jab did it by at least 15. The second did it by 35. Now, if you take any booster shot, you will die. That's it. You take a flu shot in the future, you will die.
The second reason, antibody dependent enhancement. Antib antibody dependent enhancement is what is happening with these jabs with everybody who has taken them. Unless, of course, you've taken a placebo, but there's no way that you would know that. So given that fact, antibody dependent enhancement tricks the entire body into believing that the cell that's eating the pathogen is eating it when it isn't. It ends up leading to what's called a cytokine storm, which causes organ failure.
That will cause your death and there's no stopping that. No amount of drugs will stop that. The third thing, blood clotting. Everyone who has taken the jabs is blood clotting. If you don't believe me, there's a way you can find out.
Take what's called the d dimer test. What that does is that detects blood clotting at the microscopic level. We're cutting full blood clots out of people right now. As I'm talking to you, millions have died from the jabs. In your last meeting, you advocated for people to take the jabs potentially in the future, along with wearing masks.
And I heard parents say the same thing. So to the parents who are actually considering jabbing their own children, you're going to sterilize them permanently. People who have taken the jabs are sterilized. 80% of women who have been jabbed have lost their children in the first trimester. You can't have kids.
You've also injected yourself with the equivalent of HIV. You can now no longer breastfeed, donate blood, donate organs, donate blood plasma nor bone marrow. If you don't believe me, try to donate blood and blood plasma and find out what happens. You will be denied. Unless, of course, you live in California, in which case they're allowing people to donate toxic blood with spike proteins in it.
The jabs create spike proteins. They're in the jabs themselves and they create it by snapping your RNA in half. You are no longer a human anymore. You are something else And you are susceptible to countless diseases. Now here's what's gonna happen in the future very quickly.
Yeah. 15 seconds. Great. I don't know what percentage of your staff has taken the jabs, but your school is going to close. You will not stay open.
You will close because they will fall ill and they will die. That will happen in all of your buildings. It will have it's already happening. Thank you, sir. I'm I bet it is.
It's already happening. Good luck. There's nothing to stop this. No.
@toobaffled - “Sudden And Unexpected”
Covid mRNA jab causing vaccine-induced AIDS? https://t.co/hYNTPvBMx1
Video Transcript AI Summary
A new Yale Medical School study reveals that individuals experiencing long COVID may actually be suffering from mRNA vaccine injuries, specifically vaccine-induced AIDS (VAIDs).
The study, led by Bornalli Botticelli, indicates that mRNA injections alter human biology, leading to long-term spike protein production that increases over time. Scientists warn that these vaccines change T-cell immunophenotypes, triggering VAIDs.
We were forced to take these experimental vaccines or risk losing our jobs, and we were lied to about their safety and efficacy. The vaccines didn't prevent contraction or transmission of the virus, and they caused heart issues, blood clots, and autoimmune disorders. Now, we're finding out that the mRNA jab causes VAIDs in many people, marking one of the most egregious scandals in American history.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Bombshell new study from Yale Medical School finds people suffering from long COVID are actually suffering from mRNA vaccine injury. As if that's bad enough, it's worse than that. These people are suffering from what's called vaccine induced AIDS. It's called VAIDs. This is from Slay News.
Leading scientists from the world renowned Yale University have confirmed that COVID mRNA vaccines cause vaccine acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, VADES. A bombshell study conducted by researchers at Yale University School of Medicine found that mRNA injections alter human biology to create long term spike protein production that increases over time. The scientists warned that the COVID mRNA vaccines alter T cell immunophenotypes, which triggers VADES. The study was led by Bornalli Botticelli. So not only were we collectively forced to take an experimental vaccine or, what, risk losing our jobs, we were lied to about it.
It didn't stop you from contracting or transmitting the virus. It wasn't safe. It caused heart issues and blood clots, autoimmune disorders. We were censored when we questioned the madness, and now we find out that the mRNA jab causes vades in many people? This is one of the most egregious scandals in American history.
Cash Patel's first order of business at the FBI should be throwing in prison every single person involved in this crime against humanity.
@newstart_2024 - Camus
Japanese professor Murakami of Tokyo University of Science makes an astonishing finding Pfizer's jab contains the SV40 sequence which is known as a promoter of the cancer virus. The SV40 sequence is completely unnecessary to produce the mRNA jab, so why is it there?! https://t.co/CJhRErJRMf
Video Transcript AI Summary
モデルナの配列は大腸菌で利用するビクター配列だが、ファイザーの配列にはSV40の配列の一部が含まれている。SV40は遺伝子の発現を上昇させるプロモーターだが、発がん性を持つウイルスとしても知られている。mRNAワクチン製造には全く不要な配列であり、なぜこのような配列があるのかが問題である。この配列があるとDNAが移行しやすくなり、ゲノムに入りやすくなる。SV40のプロモーターの中には核に移行する配列も入っている。試験管内でmRNAを合成するプロセスに全く関係ないSV40のプロモーター配列がなぜ残されているのかが疑問視されている。実験室ではよく使われるSV40プロモーターが、なぜmRNAワクチンに入っているのかが問題である。
**Translation:**
Moderna's sequence uses a vector sequence common in E. coli, but Pfizer's sequence contains a portion of the SV40 sequence. SV40 is a promoter that increases gene expression but is also known as a carcinogenic virus. This sequence is completely unnecessary for mRNA vaccine production, and the question is why such a sequence is present. This sequence makes DNA more likely to migrate and enter the genome. The SV40 promoter also contains a sequence that migrates to the nucleus. The question is why the SV40 promoter sequence, which is completely unrelated to the process of synthesizing mRNA in vitro, remains. The SV40 promoter, which is often used in laboratories, is questioned as to why it is included in the mRNA vaccine.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: 配列 が 読 める わけ で し て 配 列 を 読 ん で み た の が これ が モデル ナ の 方 の 配 列 で
Speaker 1: 一般 の 質 問 は 分かり に く い かもしれない けど 輪 っ か な ん です ね プラス の D - A
Speaker 0: の 輪 っ か な ん です よ これ
Speaker 1: 輪 っ か に 書い て
Speaker 0: あっ て それ で ここ が スパイ ク な ん です
Speaker 1: よ バイク タンパク を コート し て いる
Speaker 0: ところ で で ここ が スパイ ク の 電 子 な ん ですよね で です ね 問 題 は モデル ナ の 方 は よく 大腸 菌 で これ 利 用 する よう な ビ ク スター で 配 列 な ん です が ファイ ザー の こ の 配 列 で 僕 見 て びっ くり し た んですけど も ここ ちょっと まず 大 き く し て ます ね ここ に です ね SV 40 の 配 列 の 一 部 が 入っ て ま し て で 、これ は フル モーター っ て いう んですけど も 遺 伝 子 の 発現 を です ね 上 昇 さ せる っ て いう か 遺 伝 子 発現 を さ せる の に 必要 な 配 列 な ん です よ で 、問題 は 有名 な 発 が ん 性 を 持っ て いる よう な ウイルス で 、その 配 列 入っ て いる ということ で あり ま し て 、どう し て こう いう 風 な が ん ウイルス に 限ら れ する よう な 配 列 が ある の かっ て こと な ん です。 で 、全く 要 ら な い ん です よ 。これ は m 型 ワクチン を 製 造 する た め に は 全 く 要 ら な い 配 列 な ん です それ が しっかり 入っ て る っ て いう の と あ と です ね もう 一 つ の 問 題 は こ の 配 列 が 入っ て い ます と です ね そ の D NA が あくま で 移 行 し やす く な っ て し ま う だ から より ゲノム に 入り やす く な っ て し ま う ということ です ね っていうこと で こ の よう な 配 列 が そ の 破 壊 さ れ な い で 残っ て い ます と そ の D NA は 移 行 し やす く なる と 入り やす く なる わけですよ ね ゲノム に と いう 風 な 問 題 点 が ある わけ
Speaker 1: です こ の s b 4 っ て いう の プロ モーター の 中 に 核 に 移 行 する よう な 配 列 も 入っ て る
Speaker 0: っ て こと です か そういうこと な ん です
Speaker 1: ね 核 に 行き やす く なる わけ です ね
Speaker 0: 移 行 し やす い 配 列 は 持っ て い て で これ 結構 有 名 な です 話 題 で し た 論 文 が ある こと で 出 て
Speaker 1: ます で そ の
Speaker 0: 後 そんな 配 列 は 覗 か な い ん です ね 覗 か なけれ ば い け な い ん です が 覗 か な い ま ま 作っ て る ということ な ん
Speaker 1: です ね
Speaker 0: そうなんです よ やっぱり 問 題 な の は ね メッセンジャー の 試験 管 内 で 合 成 する よう な プロ セス に 全く 関係 な い SV 40 の プロ モーター 配 列 を な ぜ 残し た ん です
Speaker 1: か 。なぜ ある の か ですよね 。なぜ な い ん です よ 。この メッセンジャー の 作 る 上 で 全 く 必要 な い です。 SV 4 っ て 言っ て いる の は あ れ です ね 、ガン ウィ ルス の それ が な ぜ か 入っ て まあ 実 験 場 使 う ん ですよね 私 た ち は こ の S B OT プロ モーター っ て いろんな 実 験 に 行っ た ら こ の メッセンジャー の ワクチン な ぜ 入っ て る の かっ て こと
Speaker 0: です ね
@davidicke - David Icke
What's REALLY in the fake 'Covid' vaccines - and their like? https://t.co/ja6d5JNfuE
Video Transcript AI Summary
**French Summary:**
En mars 2021, il a été constaté que les vaccinés devenaient électromagnétiques. En mai 2021, le docteur Pablo Compra en Espagne a découvert des nanoparticules d'oxyde de graphène dans les vaccins Pfizer. En Italie, les docteurs Gati Montanari ont trouvé les mêmes composants inorganiques et d'autres composants non déclarés. En Argentine, Lorena Diblazi et Marcella Sangorine ont fait des découvertes similaires, avec des métaux lourds et 55 composants non déclarés, dont certains mortels. Des recherches en Allemagne, Angleterre, Corée et Australie ont abouti aux mêmes constats. En août 2021, le Japon a retiré des lots de vaccins Moderna à cause d'une contamination. Selon des chercheurs, il s'agirait d'un crime contre l'humanité, avec des nanoparticules en nano réseau auto-assemblés présents dans tous les vaccins anti-covid 19, peu importe le fabricant. Des photos du docteur David Nixon en Australie montrent ces nanoparticules.
**English Translation:**
In March 2021, it was observed that vaccinated individuals were becoming electromagnetic. In May 2021, Dr. Pablo Compra in Spain discovered graphene oxide nanoparticles in Pfizer vaccines. In Italy, Doctors Gati Montanari found the same inorganic components and other undeclared components. In Argentina, Lorena Diblazi and Marcella Sangorine made similar discoveries, with heavy metals and 55 undeclared components, some of which were deadly. Research in Germany, England, Korea, and Australia yielded the same findings. In August 2021, Japan withdrew batches of Moderna vaccines due to contamination. According to researchers, this is a crime against humanity, with nanoparticles in self-assembled nano-networks present in all anti-covid 19 vaccines, regardless of the manufacturer. Photos from Dr. David Nixon in Australia show these nanoparticles.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Dernier poster et je termine là-dessus. C'est le poster que vous avez derrière moi, mars deux-mille-vingt-et-un. Un grand nombre de personnes ont réalisé que les individus vaccinés devenaient quasiment tous électromagnétiques à minima au point d'injection. Mai deux-mille-vingt-et-un, en Espagne, le docteur Pablo Compra découvrait par le biais de son microscope électronique à transmission, la présence de 1000000000 de nanoparticules d'oxyde de graphène dans les flacons de Pfizer. En Italie, les docteurs Gati Montanari découvraient les mêmes composants inorganiques avec leur microscope électronique à balayage environnemental.
Ils ont également découvert plusieurs dizaines d'autres composants qui ne figuraient pas dans la liste des composants officiels déclarés par les sociétés pharmaceutiques. En Argentine, Lorena Diblazi et Marcella Sangorine ont fait les mêmes découvertes, mais en pire s'agissant des métaux lourds et des composants non déclarés, cinquante-cinq composants non déclarés dont certains sont mortels. En Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Corée ou encore en Australie, même recherche, même résultat, même constat. Rappelez-vous qu'en août deux-mille-vingt-et-un, au Japon, le ministère de la Santé a fait retirer tous les lots des vaccins de la société Moderna en raison d'une découverte de contamination. Mais de quelle contamination parle-t-on Aujourd'hui tous ces chercheurs sont formels, il ne s'agit pas d'une contamination mais d'un véritable crime contre l'humanité.
Un crime machiavélique organisé et planifié depuis longtemps. Ce que vous voyez sur ce poster, ce sont les meilleures images que nous ayons actuellement en notre possession. Ces photos représentent les nanoparticules disposées en nano réseau auto-assemblés. Ils sont présents dans tous les vaccins anti covid dix-neuf, peu importe la société pharmaceutique qui les produit. Sinofarm, Sinovac, Turcovaques, n'importe.
J'accélère, les photos remarquables que vous voyez là nous viennent d'Australie et ont été prises par le docteur David Nixon. À votre avis, à quoi avons-nous à faire Je vous pose la question et je termine là-dessus, je vous rends la parole et je vous remercie de m'avoir écouté.
@CultivateElevat - Matt From Cultivate Elevate
Spike proteins are fake like viruses https://t.co/c82r8BFBjh
Video Transcript AI Summary
Spike proteins is fake. honestly, John D. Rockefeller made up spike proteins just like he made up germ theory, just like he made up the shedding, just like he made up all those things. You have to understand that everybody who advocates certain things, they are all under the same system. They are all in the system to say and repeat the same thing.
If they don't tell you viruses are fake and contagion is a myth and all of the bunch of nonsense germ theory is fake, you're just being led into the same path. This is why the whole MAHA thing, there's nobody out there who doesn't believe in viruses. Every single person who's on the MAHA movement believes in the virus theory. That's for sure. That viruses and, you know, spike proteins and this and bio labs and jumping out of a lab.
None of that's true. It's all a bunch of fake nonsense that's been promoted to keep you in fear. That's what it is. There's a great book, a farewell to virology. There's a great book, can you catch a cold?
There's a great book, the contagion myth that debunks all
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Spiked proteins is fake. Honestly, John D. Rockefeller made up spike proteins just like he made up germ theory, just like he made up the shedding, just like he made up all those things. You have to understand that everybody who advocates certain things, they are all under the same system. They are all in the system to say and repeat the same thing.
If they don't tell you viruses are fake and contagion is a myth and all of the bunch of nonsense germ theory is fake, you're just being led into the same path. This is why the whole MAHA thing, there's nobody out there who doesn't believe in viruses. Every single person who's on the MAHA movement believes in the virus theory. That's for sure. That viruses and, you know, spike proteins and this and bio labs and jumping out of a lab.
None of that's true. It's all a bunch of fake nonsense that's been promoted to keep you in fear. That's what it is. There's a great book, a farewell to virology. There's a great book, can you catch a cold?
There's a great book, the contagion myth that debunks all
@Luizmd - Luiz M.D.
If you believe "HIV" is real, watch this. https://t.co/kG9ySOcfjH
Video Transcript AI Summary
The documentary traces the global HIV/AIDS story through shifting science, politics, testing, treatment, and personal narratives, revealing a landscape of debate, fear, and influence that has shaped how the epidemic is understood and managed.
From the outset, the film juxtaposes dramatic claims about the virus with questions about complacency, fear, and the human cost of AIDS. Early voices warn that HIV remains a deadly virus despite reduced fear, while others emphasize a persistent problem for individuals and the vast number of people living with the virus. The central tension is set: can a cure be found, and what would it take?
A through-line is the distinction between HIV and AIDS. The narrator and interviewees seek clarity on what causes AIDS, how HIV relates to it, and why the distinction matters for diagnosis and treatment. Experts emphasize core definitions: HIV is a virus; AIDS is a syndrome caused by infection with the virus; you don’t get infected with AIDS, you get infected with HIV which can lead to AIDS. Yet the dialogue also documents persistent public confusion about the difference, and shows that international definitions and country-specific criteria have evolved and sometimes diverged, complicating diagnosis and statistics.
The film surveys the history of HIV/AIDS terminology and surveillance. It highlights the GRID term, the early CDC framework, and the 1985, 1987, and 1993 definition changes that broadened AIDS criteria, sometimes to include people with varying CD4 counts or opportunistic infections. A retroactive redefinition in 1993 reportedly increased estimates, and a Bangui criteria conference in Africa sought a simple clinical way to diagnose AIDS in settings with limited lab access. World Health Organization definitions multiply across countries, leading to several AIDS definitions worldwide and debates about how to interpret the numbers.
The program documents how testing has driven both diagnosis and fear, including debates over screening versus confirmatory testing. It shows rapid antibody tests, ELISAs, Western blots, and viral-load tests, noting limitations and discrepancies: rapid tests may yield false positives or negatives, confirmatory tests can yield inconsistent results across manufacturers, and in some settings, developing nations rely on screening tests without adequate confirmatory verification. The story includes personal accounts of misdiagnosis, false positives, and the emotional toll of testing, as well as examples where people faced life-altering decisions based on uncertain results. The film also questions the reliability of testing narratives in light of varied international criteria and the economics of testing.
The narrative shifts to Africa, particularly South Africa, where the epidemic intersects with poverty, infrastructure, and policy debates. It documents the perception that Africa bears the highest incidence of AIDS, the Bangui criteria’s adoption in Africa, the social and economic context, and the role of poverty as a deadly factor that can mimic or exacerbate immune deficiency. It also notes skepticism about how data are compiled and presented, including claims that numbers are influenced by advocacy, funding incentives, and political considerations.
The film chronicles the evolution of treatment from AZT monotherapy to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and the cocktail era, detailing dramatic shifts in prognosis and the emergence of drug toxicity and side effects. Personal testimonies recount adverse reactions, weight changes, lipodystrophy, heart risks, and the existential dilemma of lifelong treatment versus quality of life. The dramatic arc notes that, while HAART transformed AIDS from a fatal disease to a manageable chronic condition for many, the treatment introduced new side effects and ethical concerns about prescribing practices, access, and the long-term effects of therapy.
A recurring theme is the tension between scientific consensus and dissenting voices. The film presents prominent figures associated with HIV research and advocacy, including discussions of the role of Robert Gallo, Françoise Barré-Sinoussi, and Montagnier, and the geopolitical dynamics around the virus’s identification and acceptance as the cause of AIDS. It includes accounts of cofactor theories proposing that other factors—cofactors beyond HIV—may influence progression and that poverty, malnutrition, and coexisting infections can affect immune function. Some interviewees critique the dominance of a single narrative and suggest that alternative explanations have been marginalized or labeled as unscientific.
Personal stories punctuate the analysis: families learning of HIV status, the experience of testing in settings from a South African train station to clinics in Romania, and the emotional and practical consequences of a positive diagnosis. The film documents the journey from diagnosis to treatment, including the trials and revelations of those who have acquired, faced, or combated the disease, and those who question or reconsider the standard medical narrative.
Towards the end, the documentary reflects on the broader social and ethical implications: the cost and allocation of billions in AIDS funding, the disproportionate burden on poorer nations, the role of activism and politics in shaping policy, and the ongoing uncertainty about optimal testing, diagnosis, and cure. It closes by acknowledging the resilience of people living with HIV and those who work to understand and treat the virus, while underscoring that many fundamental questions about HIV, AIDS, and their interconnections remain debated in scientific and public spheres. The conclusion suggests that the epidemic’s true battles may extend beyond biology to include poverty, access, governance, and the politics of data.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There's nothing like HIV. There's no disease, no infectious disease that essentially kills everyone who gets it.
Speaker 1: The fear factor's gone, and yet getting HIV infection is a problem for any individual. The fear should still remain because it's a virus that kills people.
Speaker 2: There is this sense of complacency that it's better, and it it isn't better. And all these people, these forty plus million people living with the virus, they will die of AIDS.
Speaker 3: Over the past three decades, humanity has rallied together for the AIDS cause. People from all walks of life have united across all social and economic boundaries, joining hand in hand for one common purpose, to end AIDS. And
Speaker 4: I want you to say the name of the person you're walking for. I'm walking for Robert Johnson. I'm walking for Rob Hudson. I'm walking for everybody that isn't here to walk for themselves.
Speaker 2: The statistics are growing all except for one. That's the amount of people cured, and it's still zero.
Speaker 5: In theory, we could cure AIDS on a piece of paper. Maybe someday it'll come. I can't say when.
Speaker 6: Despite all the major progress we have in chemotherapy of those patients, none of these patients got rid of the virus.
Speaker 7: I don't think the pharmaceutical industry is very interested or invested in a cure. You know, I don't mean to be too cynical, but the reality, I think, is that, you know, the situation they've got now, which is lifetime treatment with expensive drugs, that kind of suits them pretty well.
Speaker 8: A cure is going to require some very tricky and sophisticated molecular biology, and I frankly don't see it happening.
Speaker 3: Ever?
Speaker 5: Ever.
Speaker 3: I was born in 1980, a year before AIDS exploded onto the public consciousness. I grew up beneath its shadow like a child raised under the threat of the mushroom cloud. You might say I am a member of the first HIV AIDS generation. I've never known a world without it. This film is an account of my journey through the shifting sands surrounding HIV AIDS.
AIDS has been front page news for nearly thirty years, yet how much do any of us really know about HIV and AIDS? What is the difference between HIV and AIDS?
Speaker 9: I don't know exactly.
Speaker 10: HIV is
Speaker 11: is wow.
Speaker 12: HIV has a ping too. AIDS is the
Speaker 13: same AIDS
Speaker 14: is the actual disease.
Speaker 3: I don't know the difference.
Speaker 15: I know HIV is less deadly. What
Speaker 3: would you say is the difference between HIV and
Speaker 16: There is no big difference, is it?
Speaker 17: HIV, AIDS is just a starting point.
Speaker 10: HIV, it's a virus.
Speaker 3: The actual virus is AIDS. People around the globe were just as confused as I was, so I sought out the world's leading HIV AIDS authorities, among whom were the discoverers of HIV, the key White House adviser on AIDS issues, and the executive director of UN AIDS global response to the epidemic. Meeting with these distinguished experts, I candidly asked, what is the difference between HIV and AIDS?
Speaker 7: The difference between HIV and AIDS is a really critical concept, and unfortunately, it's one that seems to escape a lot of people or just they don't remember it after hearing it.
Speaker 1: HIV is a virus. AIDS is a syndrome caused by infection with the virus. So you don't get infected with AIDS. You get infected with HIV, and that causes AIDS.
Speaker 18: The biggest problem with the HIV theory of AIDS is HIV.
Speaker 1: There is a group of AIDS denialists that say that HIV does not exist and has never been isolated, which is as bizarre as it gets.
Speaker 19: We do not say that HIV doesn't exist. What we say is that the presently available data does not prove the existence of HIV.
Speaker 1: The reality is that HIV does exist and does cause AIDS.
Speaker 20: I mean the evidence is incontrovertible. HIV causes AIDS.
Speaker 21: Alright, that's a theory that's there. Let that theory be there. But let's have some other conversations. Let's have some other research. Let's have some other fun.
Maybe something else is working here.
Speaker 3: No. Why nearly three decades since its discovery does there continue to be debate over HIV? Why is there no cure in sight? To answer these questions, I needed context. The past is prologue, so my journey begins with a step back in time.
Speaker 22: The National Center for Disease Control is reporting more cases of two rare and deadly diseases found in homosexual men. There is no apparent explanation for the outbreak.
Speaker 23: Obviously, this is an issue with great emotional fervor, but it
Speaker 24: How can we stay unemotional when people are dying every day from a disease the CDC has yet to name for crying out loud. If the CDC won't name it, at least demand the press stop calling it GRID.
Speaker 8: Well, unfortunately, I have to take credit for coining the term GRID, which stood for gay related immune deficiency. We were seeing a cluster of gay men who were suddenly critically ill of pneumocystis pneumonia, which was the indicator disease of something new, and reported our findings to the CDC.
Speaker 20: I was the chief of the STD division at the CDC at that time when the draft report of five cases of pneumocystis in gay men, came across my desk for review. Shortly afterwards, cases of a very rare cancer called Kaposi's sarcoma were diagnosed in young gay men. My first reaction was this is an extraordinarily important finding. The CDC was looking for something
Speaker 25: like that when it came along. They were looking for it already. They were hoping there was gonna be a new plague because polio was over. The CDC's budget was getting decreased. This is back in like '19 early eighties.
Speaker 20: There was double digit inflation, a very high unemployment, a rapid military buildup, and a threat to decrease, all domestic programs. And this led to reductions in force in
Speaker 5: the public health service, particularly the CDC. The Center of Disease Control, CDC, in Atlanta was under threat for reduction and even theoretically for closure.
Speaker 25: There were memos around the CDC says we need to find a new plague.
Speaker 26: For them to justify their expenses and their existence and their make their careers, they have to find infectious diseases.
Speaker 25: We need to find something that scare the American people so they won't give us more money.
Speaker 20: Once people recognized that this was likely caused by a virus, the media attention went from no news coverage to the most covered news story in history. People went from neglecting it to fear and panic. Maybe I can get it.
Speaker 27: All of a sudden, AIDS was a very fundable project, and I suppose the psychology they worked on was the fact that they thought, well, in congress, essentially, this is white, straight, heterosexual men who are congressmen. And if they feel they can't fuck around without, you know, being worried about AIDS, they're gonna let the dollars out. And it worked.
Speaker 25: Suddenly, was a lot of money available for anybody who wanted to study HIV. And nobody ever looked back and said, Why do we want to study HIV? Bob Gallo said on television, Causes AIDS.
Speaker 24: The evidence shows that this disease is not merely confined to the gay community. I motion to call disease acquired immune deficiency syndrome, AIDS.
Speaker 3: In 1982, doctor Harry Haverkosz was one of the Centers for Disease Control's epidemiologists tasked with defining AIDS.
Speaker 28: AIDS refers to a syndrome and its definition changes periodically.
Speaker 6: AIDS is a chronic disease. It's based on its immunodeficiency.
Speaker 25: AIDS is not a disease. Right? AIDS is a whole lot of different things. Depends on what country you're in.
Speaker 29: When your CD four count falls below a certain arbitrary level, by definition, you have AIDS. You know, when someone's count goes down and
Speaker 7: then it goes back up again, it's you know, politically, they may still have AIDS. Medically, I don't think they do.
Speaker 29: If you develop any of a number of opportunistic infections or diseases, that puts you in the category of AIDS.
Speaker 25: We don't even know what AIDS is. AIDS is so hard to define because they change the definition of it every year.
Speaker 20: The definition of AIDS has broadened over time. It was revised in 1985, then again in 1987.
Speaker 30: The changes in the definition have been political. Every time they change the definition, the numbers go up.
Speaker 28: The definition has changed many times. The biggest change was probably in 1993, which they then, you know, added the CD four count and HIV and, you know, you see, you could not even be ill, but if you had a CD four count consistently below 200, you now had AIDS.
Speaker 3: A closer look at the Centers for Disease Control's documents reveals that AIDS numbers actually declined in 1993, but a retroactive definition change increased the estimates by more than one hundred percent.
Speaker 26: The more diseases they could lump into this AIDS syndrome, s stands for syndrome, the better the chances are they get patients under that umbrella, the more patients they could catch.
Speaker 28: As time goes along, you know, get used for a variety of of issues. And some of those are not based solely on scientific decisions, but politics and capitalism and reimbursement comes into play.
Speaker 7: For example, a person with hepatitis C, even say here in San Francisco, you've got hepatitis C and only hepatitis C, you're you're shit out of luck.
Speaker 16: Having an AIDS diagnosis, you know, I get a free apartment. The city of San Diego pays my apartment.
Speaker 31: I can have the state of California pay for many medications related to HIV.
Speaker 16: I get social security benefits.
Speaker 31: I can get discounts on my supplements at the local health food store.
Speaker 16: I also get food stamps and in home supportive cleaning services.
Speaker 31: So I was basically a healthy person walking around and yet I had all these wonderful little perks, you know.
Speaker 7: You get all these benefits, I mean, that that that we fought for and got, but the end result has been a sort of an imbalance. I mean, we we succeeded. I'm glad we did, but it is a little unfair.
Speaker 3: Politics, insurance, capitalism, benefits, you can be sick or healthy, I never would have thought that AIDS was so convoluted.
Speaker 28: Right. Right. Well, as I said, that that that has changed. How you define that scientifically has changed quite often, which just makes it difficult to, you know, for for the laypeople to understand. It makes it difficult for me to interpret the numbers.
Speaker 3: Africa is purported to have the highest incidence of AIDS cases on the planet. So I trekked to South Africa to witness firsthand the impact of AIDS on that troubled continent. Around ten million of South Africa's forty eight million people have been reported to have AIDS. It's only a ten minute drive from Cape Town's pristine modern airport to the squalor of neighborhoods said to be ravaged by AIDS.
Speaker 1: All the facts on HIV and AIDS with Creselda on Metro FM talk.
Speaker 17: It's World AIDS Day. Their functions, gatherings, the international theme is stop age. Stop HIV and AIDS. Keep the promise. So many years later, we keep saying the same things, HIV, HIV, HIV.
Yet Each time I hear words like HIV and AIDS, I just want to pull my hair out. I'm just so fatigued about how we've packaged the messaging. All we talk about is AIDS. It's a sex virus. You have to use condoms or you die.
It's a sick and sad message. People can't think outside AIDS anymore. It's just a shocking sad reality.
Speaker 32: The first AIDS meeting on the Continent Of Africa was in 1985 in Nibangi.
Speaker 11: We were there with a few people who had experience on AIDS in Africa. And one of our problems was how can you diagnose AIDS in Africa in the absence of very sophisticated laboratory support?
Speaker 32: Even though by 1985 there was an HIV test, most of Africa didn't have access to it. So one of the things that we did in that meeting was to sit down and hash out the so called Bangui criteria for the diagnosis of AIDS in Africa. The idea was what would be a simple way for a clinician to look at a patient and say that, this patient likely has AIDS.
Speaker 11: We say somebody who has a combination of certain signs and symptoms like major weight loss, and if you have a combination of that, you can say this is probably somebody with AIDS.
Speaker 33: They wanted a clinical case definition where they could decide that someone had AIDS just by looking at weight loss and persistent fever and so on.
Speaker 11: It gave something to clinicians in Africa to to diagnose AIDS.
Speaker 32: And that helped in the overall effort to count cases because we needed to know what was the impact of the of the epidemic.
Speaker 33: They could discover AIDS all over Africa at that point. They could say that we are all at risk, but they could say it's spreading around the world. They could say it affects women as much as men because almost anyone in an African hospital could be diagnosed with AIDS without having to do the HIV test at all.
Speaker 14: Whole nations have been led to believe that in some instances that they've got large percentages of their population infected and doomed because of this sexually transmitted supposed sexually transmitted virus. It's such a tragedy.
Speaker 34: A lot of people here is very sick and is very die.
Speaker 3: What kind of sickness do you see around here?
Speaker 34: It's HIV AIDS.
Speaker 3: What is AIDS?
Speaker 34: Don't know. We don't know.
Speaker 35: So here you're living in a mud hut and here some come a white man with doctors who you respect, and they tell you that there is now among you an invisible disease that it and it gets into your blood and can stay there unseen for years. And when it manifests itself, it's going to manifest itself in the forms of diseases you've always known.
Speaker 12: Maybe if you look skinny, if you lost weight maybe, they'll simply say, you have AIDS or you're coughing a lot maybe. They'll say you have the disease.
Speaker 35: This cannot help but create extraordinary paranoia in people's minds. They say, well, what is going on with us? My neighbor next door has got he's got malaria. Is that that does that mean that he's that he's actually got the dreadful disease that that the whites are talking about?
Speaker 10: Like, I could be fed now, then the mentality is that if ever I become thin, then it could be one of the symptoms. I have to ask myself why now? Why at this time?
Speaker 3: Doctor Christian Fiala argues that many doctors have misused the Bongi definition.
Speaker 36: In the era before AIDS, we we had to admit we don't know the diagnosis and we could hypothesize. But nowadays, what doctors do is, well, if we don't know what it is, it must be AIDS.
Speaker 37: We did have patients with, the conditions we now regard as AIDS defining, even before the advent of AIDS.
Speaker 32: People could have TB and not have HIV and fulfill the Bunge criteria. They'd lose weight, they'd have TB, and they could look like they have AIDS when they don't. Is this Bangui definition still being used today? I'm fairly certain that in many parts of Africa where there's still no little or no testing available that that definition is still used, and I wouldn't be surprised that it's used in the poorer parts Asia.
Speaker 30: This word AIDS, I don't know what it is anymore. I don't know what we're talking about anymore when we talk about AIDS. AIDS is one thing in Greenwich Village and a very different thing in Kampala, Uganda.
Speaker 3: I visited the World Health Organization's website searching for answers and discovered there are currently more than 12 different definitions of AIDS worldwide. So I turned to Doctor. James Chin, former head of the WHO's global HIV statistics unit, for an explanation.
Speaker 18: Some countries, they felt they were a little more sophisticated than than others. And you have, you know, along with the epidemic of HIV epidemics of HIV AIDS experts, and some of them will not necessarily, adhere to any international definition. They'll make up their own definition.
Speaker 3: High school biology class taught me that diseases and syndromes cannot differ from country to country, like languages. It was becoming clear that HIV and AIDS were distinct, separate entities and that AIDS was diverting my attention from the real culprit HIV. Where to next? The place millions have had their lives changed forever.
Speaker 16: She says, we have your test results. You need to come in and get it. And I was like, tell me now, Cheryl. She was like, Kim, we really need you to come in and tell me. I said, then I know it's positive, Cheryl, or you would just tell me over the phone.
And she's like, Kim, don't panic. You can still have a normal life.
Speaker 38: I can still remember his face. I can remember his eyes. And all he said was, I'm so I'm so sorry. I I think you should put your affairs in order, and you you might have five years.
Speaker 16: I said, Cheryl, I have to get off the phone right now. Have to go tell my dad. He started crying. This isn't the way it happens in the movies.
Speaker 3: It's 7AM here in Johannesburg, South Africa, and I'm a little nervous because I'm about to go in for my first HIV test. Have you ever gone in for an HIV test?
Speaker 14: No. No. No.
Speaker 3: No. No. Yes.
Speaker 9: I have actually, a few years ago.
Speaker 3: Were you nervous, apprehensive?
Speaker 16: I was, very
Speaker 3: The nearest testing center wasn't in a hospital or in a doctor's office, but on the main concourse of a bustling train station, beneath a few portable tents. HIV testing facilities are everywhere, from street corner kiosks to shopping malls. I'll be tested with a rapid test, which looks for antibodies to HIV.
Speaker 34: So have you ever tested for HIV before?
Speaker 3: No. Except no. Never. It's our
Speaker 13: first time.
Speaker 11: First time.
Speaker 3: Wow. Is this your questionnaire? Yes. Okay.
Speaker 39: These tests claim to be HIV tests. I'm going to read from a section that says limitations of the tests. The specificity of the REVEAL rapid HIV antibody test for blood specimens in low risk populations has not been evaluated. They don't know, in their terms even, how well this test is going to work in people they don't want it to work in. Low risk.
We don't think you're at risk.
Speaker 9: In 1990, we flew to Romania to adopt a baby. We found Lindsey, and she was only two weeks old. I can still remember that feeling, just holding Lindsey for the first time thinking, now my dream is gonna come true. I'll have one of those children. Before we left Romania, we had to make sure that she didn't have HIV.
We had to find a doctor and he did the test and it came back negative. We flew home just after Christmas nineteen ninety and thought we had it made.
Speaker 40: So I'm going to take a test which comprises of two test kits. These two test kits are from two different countries. Why we are putting them being two? Mhmm. We want them to confirm each other.
Can they be
Speaker 34: two
Speaker 40: different outcome? Then this one is stamina, which is going to give us the final results.
Speaker 3: Can I just ask you something as someone who's a little nervous?
Speaker 40: Okay.
Speaker 3: It seems like if this is positive and this is negative, my life hangs in the balance on whatever this one is. Yes. How do we know that this one's accurate when both of these were inaccurate?
Speaker 40: This one has been tested to be the one that is going to take out the results that are correct.
Speaker 3: Oh, so this one is more accurate than these two?
Speaker 40: Yes. According to what we have learned.
Speaker 3: So why don't we just use the more accurate one to begin with?
Speaker 40: You know what, what if now the more accurate one has a discrepancy? How are you going to find out?
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 41: Rapid tests in Germany, it's not allowed for standard diagnostics.
Speaker 3: May I ask why how come you don't use rapid tests for standard diagnostics?
Speaker 41: Several professional organizations who decide as an expert committee on guidelines how to do things. None of these responsible societies recommend it for scientific reasons.
Speaker 40: We always say to our clients, even if we have tested here, we can go to other centers and go and test and verify them. Test. We cannot say we are 100% because you find clients going from area to area during tests, and they come with stories that I was negative at a certain area and positive with you.
Speaker 3: How do they decide whether they're positive or negative?
Speaker 40: We cannot tell because we are using a rapid test.
Speaker 3: It occurred to me that perhaps the HIV epidemic is reported to be so widespread in South Africa and other poor nations simply because they use these inaccurate tests.
Speaker 18: There's the saying that if if you knew how sausages
Speaker 42: what
Speaker 18: sausages are made of, most people would hesitate to sort of eat them because they they wouldn't like what's in it. And if you knew how HIV AIDS numbers are cooked or made up, you would use them with extreme caution.
Speaker 3: I decided to investigate HIV testing protocols used throughout the development.
Speaker 43: When we're testing people for HIV, the first thing we do is a screening test, and it's usually a test called the ELISA.
Speaker 44: But there are also now available rapid assays that can be used as screening methods,
Speaker 39: because they're And we all know faster and cheaper is more efficient.
Speaker 41: If an ELISA is positive, it does not mean that the patient is HIV positive. That's a problem.
Speaker 45: If we're using antibodies as a screening test to tell who's infected or not, Very occasionally you can get false positives.
Speaker 44: So screening tests by themselves should not be used as a definitive measure of infection. That's why we use a screening test to pick up all the cases, but we use a confirmatory test to eliminate any false positives.
Speaker 40: Take it easy. I'll just get the site.
Speaker 3: It should be emphasized that most of the developing world uses only screening tests to confirm an HIV diagnosis. There are no confirmatory tests.
Speaker 40: The time now is twenty five past. At twenty two, the results will be out, which is going to be fifteen minutes.
Speaker 3: Nine days after returning home, Stephen Scherle's pediatrician ran a battery of tests on Lindsay, including an HIV test, even though Lindsay had tested negative for the virus in Romania.
Speaker 9: Doctor. McHugh called us and said, we run into some problems with the test, the testing that you did at Methodist Hospital, and you'll need to come right in and see me.
Speaker 38: I said, well, what is it? She says, well, I can't, I'm not gonna tell you over the phone. I said, I need to know exactly what this is. He said, you know, you got bad news that that she tests positive.
Speaker 9: And he said she'll have a twenty percent chance of living to age two. That was just a shock. Just a shock after all this joy and happiness. We finally found our daughter and I'm dancing around Romania and now I come home and it's like somebody could just stab me. And then I had to call my mom, and that was the worst phone call I've ever had to make because I I even remember saying that poor girl, she's just not gonna make it.
Speaker 43: So that we don't have to go to somebody and say, well, you might be infected, but it might be a false positive, we do a second test. That's a test usually called the Western Blot.
Speaker 16: In 1992, when I was told by my doctor that I was HIV positive, that was only a verbal admission to me. She didn't give me the written paper that came from the lab that tested my blood. I found out that it says this indicates possible infection by virus.
Speaker 7: There can be mistakes from the antibody test, and there are conditions that can cause the test to be inaccurate.
Speaker 16: Now that I've got the package insert for that test kit, it says positive results using any specimen type should be followed with additional testing. But this is the test that
Speaker 13: they used to confirm with.
Speaker 5: This has a margin of error done properly that's extremely low. In other words, it's one of medicine's better tests.
Speaker 45: I don't think the western blot is a useful diagnostic test. I don't think it's worth doing.
Speaker 44: Did he give a reason?
Speaker 28: You know, anybody can say anything. I think it's stupid to drive a car.
Speaker 44: But you might, you gotta give a reason.
Speaker 45: It's a useful prognostic test. Once you know that someone is infected, then you can follow their antibody response as well with western blots.
Speaker 44: I'd say he's absolutely wrong. It had a complete use for us.
Speaker 45: You don't need a Western blot and it's become a dogma in HIV research that you need one ELISA followed by a Western. You don't. You need two different kinds of ELISAs made in two different formats.
Speaker 3: Would you ever want to confirm somebody is positive using just ELISAs?
Speaker 41: No, never. It's not against the rules, it's against the recommendations.
Speaker 39: It's a turbulent sea of argument about how can we use this test, when can we use this test, why does this have no standard.
Speaker 23: We have a group now of about 40 patients that have no detectable virus in their body, but they're not being treated. So the first question is are they really infected?
Speaker 3: So the western blots can have false positives?
Speaker 23: No. The western blot was negative too. But they were told they were positive by a lab, yes, that misread the western blot.
Speaker 3: Heavyweight champion Tommy Morrison tested positive in 1996. Eleven years later, in 2007, he tested negative multiple times, allowing him to return to the ring.
Speaker 43: There's constant discussion in the community of people who do diagnostic testing and the blood bankers about how to read these tests.
Speaker 3: When you're looking at this Western blot, how do you determine what is a positive?
Speaker 41: You need a certain number of bands being present. It depends a little bit on the producer of the test.
Speaker 3: It depends on the manufacturer. Yeah. Is there different criteria for what might be a positive?
Speaker 41: Yeah. There are different criteria from the manufacturer. Thank you for the word. And also there are guidelines from the WHO and UN AIDS.
Speaker 20: Well HIV infection is diagnosed with rather now routine laboratory tests for which the there are criteria for diagnosis established by the manufacturer, FDA.
Speaker 3: Claudia showed me the package insert that comes with the western blot. It contains eight different sets of criteria for diagnosing HIV infection.
Speaker 14: Because of the different criteria that apply in different countries, you can be considered, you can test HIV positive in one country and be given an AIDS diagnosis as a result of that, whereas in another country you won't test HIV positive and you won't be given an AIDS diagnosis.
Speaker 18: It's ludicrous that you can be positive in one country and not positive in another.
Speaker 3: Theoretically, I could be diagnosed with AIDS in The United States. But if I take three steps to my right, I wouldn't be diagnosed with AIDS, or I would lose my AIDS diagnosis when I crossed the border.
Speaker 13: In 1992, I was encouraged by a doctor to take what's called an HIV test as a matter of social responsibility, and I was shocked and devastated and horrified when the results came back positive. It was one of those moments that everyone fears their whole life. A week later, I take the same test to an AIDS specialist. He looks at and says, this isn't a positive test. I don't know what this test means.
Speaker 3: Since a false positive looks like a true positive, how can you ever distinguish whether it's truly a positive or a negative?
Speaker 16: Well, that's a great question. It's going to be very hard to determine a false positive.
Speaker 13: So I take the test again, and this time my results come back marked from indeterminate. I'm faced with the decision, do I want to wait six weeks to test again or do it right away? I opted for right away. My results that time come back positive. Took it again, came back negative.
I took it again, positive.
Speaker 3: What happens if you are positive on one criteria but negative on another manufacturer's criteria? Do you decide who is infected and who is not?
Speaker 41: You will use the less, the most sensitive criteria?
Speaker 3: In 2007, I read about new legislation passed in New Jersey calling for the mandatory testing of pregnant women or newborn infants should the mother's status be unknown.
Speaker 46: HIV mandatory testing, to me, is a no brainer.
Speaker 13: I'm very much opposed to the concept of mandatory testing of any population because the tests are scientifically shown to be unreliable and inaccurate.
Speaker 46: You have no reason to fear this bill. And my hope is that eventually this will become a federal law so that every woman in this country would be tested.
Speaker 43: HIV testing isn't an absolutely precise science.
Speaker 16: When I confronted my doctor about that, she said we're way past Western blot now. We have the viral load test. But when you get the package insert for the viral load test, it says
Speaker 3: If you test positive, you are considered confirmed infected with HIV. But at the bottom of the page, in fine print, it states a person should have additional testing.
Speaker 14: It does not allow you to tell a single person on this planet that they are HIV positive, and it's a scandal that this test continues to be used.
Speaker 16: So again, I'm asking where's the test? Where's the test that can confirm a diagnosis of HIV infection?
Speaker 9: And I can't find one.
Speaker 3: I have the package insert from the manufacturer which they supplied me with and under limitations of the test it states that risk factors should be used in conjunction with the test. Has the person had sex? Have they used drugs? Have they had a blood transfusion? And then in conjunction with the test, not the test alone, but with the test, then you decide whether the person is positive or negative.
Do the answers to these questions help aid in the diagnosis? Of course they did. Really? They do.
Speaker 44: Now if I tell you that the test you took was lousy and didn't mean a thing, does that make any difference for everybody to hear?
Speaker 3: It'd make a difference for me.
Speaker 28: Yeah, I know.
Speaker 13: How can we say that HIV is the cause of AIDS when we don't know, based on current tests, whether or not anybody diagnosed positive actually has HIV.
Speaker 34: President Tabu Mbeki will officially open the AIDS conference tonight. Delegates here are hoping he will finally separate himself from the AIDS denials.
Speaker 47: We remain convinced of the need for us better to understand what would constitute a comprehensive response in a context such as ours, which is characterized by high levels of poverty and disease. As I listened and heard the whole story told about our own country, it seemed to me that we could not blame everything on a single virus.
Speaker 35: I thought this man must be an idiot. Everyone in Africa is dying of AIDS. I know this because I read the New York Times. It's beyond doubt.
Speaker 3: Rianne Milan was hired by Rolling Stone to investigate and debunk president Mbeki's misguided ideas. Where to begin? The numbers.
Speaker 35: My very first action, I opened Johannesburg's yellow pages. I thought that I could illustrate this with a scene that began in in a in a coffin factory in Johannesburg where workers are working overtime trying to create caskets for these massive, these mountains of people who are dying of this condition.
Speaker 6: And I
Speaker 35: I discover that in the midst of what the UN AIDS says is a plague, is that half of the coffin factories in Johannesburg have gone bankrupt.
Speaker 11: In South Africa alone, it's about a thousand people dying every day from AIDS.
Speaker 18: If you're an advocacy agency and you perceive low numbers to be bad, your bias may be to accept higher numbers even if they're scientifically sound.
Speaker 11: I know Jim quite well, I was the chairman of the steering committee on epidemiology of the global program on AIDS in WHO when Jim Chin was in charge of epidemiologic estimates. And we could never get information how the WHO estimates were made then. So we were very critical these days because we felt it was not based on enough evidence.
Speaker 18: It's possible that he didn't read the materials we sent him or he didn't understand them, but we did send information to anybody that wanted to know about the estimates, because they were pretty transparent.
Speaker 3: In an attempt to get to the bottom of the statistics debate, I've come to Geneva, Switzerland to look at the World Health Organization's official numbers, and what we found, there are no numbers, only assumptions and estimates.
Speaker 28: How are the monies divvied out to states for AIDS prevention or AIDS treatment? How is government money sent out to different states and communities?
Speaker 3: The more AIDS you have, the more money you get.
Speaker 35: Exactly. The AIDS foreigners have a vested interest in maximizing and squeezing the data to get the worst possible scenario that they can out of it, because the worse the situation is, the more compelling their fundraising claims are.
Speaker 11: When UN AIDS was created, about $250,000,000 was spent on AIDS in poor countries. Ten years later, it's $10,000,000,000. That's an unprecedented increase. Still not enough.
Speaker 18: When that was created, the first thing Peter Piat said and said was that UN AIDS is an advocacy agency, pure and simple.
Speaker 11: This was my first objective when I came into this job, and that was put it on the political agenda.
Speaker 18: He divested himself of all of the program aspects and the scientific aspects of of AIDS.
Speaker 11: This is not a scientific issue. This is a matter of politics.
Speaker 18: Except one unit. We kept sort of the numbers unit.
Speaker 11: We are really doing a major disservice to say it is not as bad as it looks like. Because actually it is much worse.
Speaker 3: One month after my interview with doctor Piyat, the Indian government slashed their estimates by nearly 60%. Shortly thereafter, UN aids acknowledged they've been overestimating global HIV statistics for more than a decade.
Speaker 18: They painted themselves into a corner and now the the their house of numbers is falling apart.
Speaker 48: America is leading the fight against disease, and I call on you to double our initial commitment to fighting HIV AIDS by approving an additional $30,000,000,000 over the next five years.
Speaker 35: Noble corruption, misuse of statistics in order to convince people that there's one hell of a problem out there, guys, and we gotta go and do something about it.
Speaker 49: If you look at the real world, you know, how many people are infected, diagnosed to be infected, and eligible for treatment. There are very few compared to the number.
Speaker 3: In April 2008, Congress approved a $50,000,000,000 expenditure for AIDS treatment and prevention.
Speaker 18: The vast majority of the world's population is not at any measurable risk of HIV infection.
Speaker 3: No measurable risk. Growing up in the age of AIDS, I was taught there were three certainties in life: death, taxes, and contracting HIV from unprotected sex. If
Speaker 10: you don't use a condom, there's a lot of chances that you can actually get the killer disease that is AIDS.
Speaker 50: I did a study of the heterosexual transmission of HIV in California and we recruited individuals who were infected with HIV, then we recruited their sexual partners, and we looked at whether transmission in fact had occurred.
Speaker 39: Paidian runs a study, it's a ten year study, with the world's most virulent, terrifying sexually I mean this thing jumps, excuse me, off of penises into vaginas miles away. How many of them do you think, after ten years, with the world's most terrifying virulent sexually transmitted disease came up positive? Not nobody. Nobody, nobody who was negative came up positive, zero.
Speaker 50: I think HIV is more difficult to transmit than other sexually trans than a lot of probably most other sexually transmitted diseases. I mean I think that's pretty widely known.
Speaker 3: If I were to have unprotected sex to somebody who is HIV positive, how many acts would I have to engage in before I got the virus?
Speaker 14: Just one. Just one.
Speaker 15: I think one would be enough.
Speaker 16: Most act.
Speaker 20: One is enough. Remarkably HIV is a difficult infection to transmit.
Speaker 3: This contradicts everything I was ever taught about the sexual transmission of HIV.
Speaker 30: AIDS is the best example of what's really scary and alarming and dangerous about our culture right now, which is that it's a culture of of PR. It's a public relations phenomenon. The truth doesn't matter. What matters is the image. If we were talking about reality, the reality is that AIDS is over.
Speaker 17: Somebody decided in the early eighties that there's this infection called HIV. And upon deciding that, I don't think it was debated enough.
Speaker 3: In 1983, Doctor. Luc Montigny and his team of researchers identified what they thought might be the cause of AIDS.
Speaker 49: I really was excited because we knew it was a new type of virus not shown before in men and very likely to be the cause of AIDS. Of course, at that time we didn't have the full theory what's the cause of AIDS.
Speaker 1: That initial work was rapidly reinforced by additional virology and serology studies in in Bob Gallo's lab in Washington.
Speaker 0: Now we've got pushed by the Reagan administration that wanted to do something on AIDS finally. They literally told us to just close CDC's lab down. We we don't care about it. There's a bunch of gays who gives a shit. And that was really their their whole story.
So the whole thing that they rested their political response was, well, we discovered the virus.
Speaker 34: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. The probable cause of AIDS has been found. Credit must go to our eminent doctor, Robert Gallo, who directed the research that produced this discovery.
Speaker 5: What was new that day is for the first time we were saying that's the cause, I'm sure.
Speaker 27: It was a civic press conference. There was not evidence then that HIV was the cause of AIDS. It wasn't called HIV. There was certainly evidence that he didn't discover it. It was discovered in France.
Speaker 51: The conference was held before any of Robert Gallo's papers were published. Therefore, any other scientist had a chance to review them and look at the evidence and see if he got it right or wrong.
Speaker 0: Gallo's philosophy was to have people to whom he would give the virus be in his own control so that any information that came out of that was would come through him, that he got all the information, and he'd often put his name on publications, and would quote collaborate with them. But should you have any broader view other than his personal glory and your personal glory, it is, this was not a scientific pursuit in any way.
Speaker 51: The US Department of Health and Human Services decided from now on we are only going to fund AIDS research that assumes that Robert Gallows virus is the cause.
Speaker 28: I didn't think that HIV in 1984 was the cause of AIDS. Why I did the study comparing gay men with Kaposi's and gay men with Pneumocystis? I assumed there must be something else. If you go read my paper from 1985 that Kern and Jaffee would not sign on to, I actually lay out the co factor hypothesis in that paper.
Speaker 49: I'm a promoter of of the role of co factors in AIDS.
Speaker 28: Cofactors just says that the cause of a disease is by more than one factor.
Speaker 27: Just simply being infected with HIV is not going to do it. You need certain cofactors.
Speaker 29: Cofactors are not necessary.
Speaker 27: Doctor. Fontra will say HIV causes AIDS without the need for anything else. That's kinda ridiculous.
Speaker 29: The data that indicate that any different type of infection like mycoplasma or something like that is a necessary cofactor, I believe those theories have been debunked.
Speaker 27: What the fuck does he mean? Sorry. What's it sorry. Does he mean that there are no cofactors? Where's he coming from?
There's cofactors for everything.
Speaker 5: Cofactor implies something specific, and it and it really gets us off into tracks that are wandering.
Speaker 28: Gallo isn't gonna isn't gonna change his mind. He's probably 70 years plus now. He's gonna remember things that we all remember, things that are good for us, and we forget the bad things. The cofactors are important to really understand how people get ill, why they get ill.
Speaker 30: What is asked of an AIDS journalist is to deny an existing reality, which is a strong, growing body of dissent on a scientific question.
Speaker 9: In August '92, my dad had just read his latest national review and there was an article in there about Peter Duesberg, a maverick cell biologist. He said he didn't think HIV caused AIDS.
Speaker 45: To deny that this well identified, well characterized virus is linked with AIDS is to my mind just potty.
Speaker 9: He said, I can't replicate this in my office. I can't get this virus to do anything. We thought, oh my gosh, my dad is already daydreaming. He's trying to wish this all away because he knows how upset we are. Just just wish it all away, and, you know, everybody will be going happy.
Speaker 26: If Fauci would say here's a billion dollar for alternative theories of AIDS, you wouldn't believe what's gonna happen. A lot of HIV researchers overnight would find of would start cofactors. The first year they would call them cofactors of HIV, and the next year the co would be topped and HIV would be topped a year later.
Speaker 6: Peter is highly intelligent. He did excellent work. I mean, no wonder he got a full professorship in Berkeley and was nominated to the American Academy of Sciences. But I told him very frankly that he's killing people with his theories and I still stick to that.
Speaker 21: They attack him, they attack his ideas, and they don't and they they present some bogus way of refuting what his science has said, but doesn't really refute it.
Speaker 52: Peter Dusberg? Yes.
Speaker 26: They are all prostitutes, most of them, my colleagues, to some degree, even myself. You have to be prostitute to get money for your research. You're trained a little bit to be a prostitute, But some go all the way.
Speaker 3: In light of all this scientific uncertainty, I asked Doctor. Fauci for evidence linking HIV to immune deficiency disease.
Speaker 29: When you put the combined findings of the initial characterization as a distinct retrovirus isolated by Montagnier and his group, together with Gallo linking the virus to being the cause of AIDS, and they put those things together, and that's how we have a confirmation of the causative agent of a of of AIDS, namely HIV.
Speaker 3: Still unclear about the evidence for HIV's existence, I decided the best way to verify it would be to actually see it. I asked doctor Hans Gelderblom, a world renowned electron microscopist, if he thought there was any reason to question doctor Montagnier's published images.
Speaker 52: I've seen these publications, stamp sized images. It's a nuisance. It's a nuisance. You do not really see much.
Speaker 6: When we saw that photo, we said, suggestive, but not convincing.
Speaker 3: Doctor Gallo, one year later, published photographs he claimed to be of HIV. Were his any better?
Speaker 52: These pictures were not so impressive. They were not much better than Montangi's images.
Speaker 19: It's one thing to look like, and another thing is to be a virus.
Speaker 16: In 2002, I stumbled across an article by Valander Turner and Andrew McIntyre of the Perth Group in Australia, and it questioned whether there's ever even been found a virus. I became consumed with researching this. I could read from morning till night, morning till night every day, and every link turned under a link and I would email to these people and say, where's the test? I want to know. Am I dying?
Am I contagious? And they weren't even very kind. They were just like, read our articles again. How many times do we have to tell you there's no test?
Speaker 3: It is crucial to understand that an AIDS diagnosis is forever. It cannot be reversed or alleviated.
Speaker 2: The stigma attached to people knowing that you have it and are living with it is worse than actually living it.
Speaker 53: I can't think of anybody who's ever been evicted from their apartment because they had breast cancer or because they had cerebral palsy.
Speaker 2: I did a campaign to address stigma. The message is that if anyone is infected, we are all affected. Some have it medically, some have it socially, some have it culturally. And at the end of the day, if it exists anywhere, it exists everywhere. We don't all
Speaker 5: have AIDS. And once you start bullshitting, it gets a problem. You know? We don't all have AIDS. We all have to be sympathetic to AIDS, and yet all kinds of people who get HIV infection.
But, you know, we don't need to make, in my view, non truths, you know, or just to have a slogan or a symbol. We all have AIDS. No. We don't all have AIDS.
Speaker 2: But my message is you do have it. Whether you want to accept it or not. Are you medically susceptible? Maybe not. But are you socially vulnerable?
Yes.
Speaker 3: In June 2007, the BBC featured a news story which began HIV infection theory challenged.
Speaker 45: Living cells are complicated, and how they work inside the body is even more complicated. So there's still a lot of debate, as to how exactly HIV causes AIDS.
Speaker 3: In March 2008, the Washington Post went on to state that multiple surprises have reminded researchers how much they still don't know about HIV's biology.
Speaker 54: HIV has got to get inside the circulation of the body, and it does that in ways that are not completely understood.
Speaker 43: The prime target for HIV is a t cell population called CD four helper t cells.
Speaker 29: The way that the virus gets into the target cell, it fuses its membrane to the membrane of the cell.
Speaker 5: I don't understand the fusion process. I don't think anybody completely understands it.
Speaker 28: We have a relatively poor understanding of how viral proteins interact with proteins in the cell.
Speaker 3: How come our antibodies aren't able to keep HIV in check?
Speaker 29: It's an excellent question. That's one of the great stumbling blocks.
Speaker 21: They can't prove that HIV is the cause of AIDS. Okay? They cannot prove that HIV is the cause of the collapse of the immune system, no matter how many scientific journals says it is. When you go to the basic research, it doesn't prove it.
Speaker 55: We are almost convinced that there is other factors that are involved in the loss of CD4 cells and we don't know yet all the mechanism.
Speaker 56: How HIV depletes the T cells so an individual advances to AIDS is probably due to multi factorial elements. One is it will kill the cell eventually that it infects. HIV does not necessarily kill the cells it infects. Some T cells are directly killed by HIV and other T cells keep the virus in check. It's a silent state within the cell and I think in some some many cases these cells can return to a normal function.
Speaker 8: Can that cell return to a normal state? I don't think so.
Speaker 13: When I was told I was HIV positive, I accepted that on a very deep level. But only by having the courage, the open minds, and the open hearts to answer these questions are we ever going to know how to help people, how to do what we need to do to help people.
Speaker 3: In late two thousand and seven, Science Daily reported that three prominent research teams had published papers in the Journal of Immunology challenging the theory that the sudden loss of T cells triggers disease and AIDS.
Speaker 1: The details of HIV pathogenesis, how HIV kills people, are still being worked out.
Speaker 3: If the sudden loss of t cells in HIV positive individuals can't explain why people get disease, then there must be cofactors that cause people to get sick and die, or factors that have absolutely nothing to do with HIV. While researching HIV hotspots, I began to realize there is a direct correlation in these places with another condition that leads to immune deficiency and death.
Speaker 36: I think it is important to keep in mind, especially for us in the West, that poverty is not a romantic issue. It is a deadly issue. Poverty leads to diseases and premature death, period.
Speaker 34: When you look at the symptoms that they talk about, you know, for people that are HIV positive, you find that some of them, they are more related to malnutrition.
Speaker 49: Their nutrition is not very equilibrated. They are in oxidative stress even if they are not infected with HIV. So their immune system doesn't work well already.
Speaker 17: People are hungry. They underdeveloped. There are no hospitals. There's no proper medical care. You take away poverty, you're giving people an ability to fight infections.
Speaker 3: These are toilets? Yeah. We
Speaker 57: don't have flushing toilets. When flies get to the toilets, they actually can come back to to to to to to touch our food, you see. And and and look, we need to take that food, and we don't know which infections are there.
Speaker 15: How do you expect people who must must survive in these places? Look there. How many white people there are staying in this house like this one? In Cape Town, it's different. You go to suburbs, you see the suburbs is different to our places.
Speaker 27: Why have we done nothing for African people just like give them clean water so they don't die in infancy of diarrheal disease and stuff like this. All we care about is HIV AIDS. Well, question. Well, there's money in it. There has to be, you know, other dynamic working to lead public interest to the African situation and ignore clean water, sanitation, malaria.
I mean, that kill people.
Speaker 34: This is the beginning of a war. It is it is a war to reclaim our help.
Speaker 3: In 2008, USA TODAY published a news story that stated, if we look at the data objectively, we are spending too much on AIDS. About $10,000,000,000 a year is spent on AIDS while two billion people live with no sanitation. One billion lack access to clean water, and malnutrition kills someone every ten seconds. These factors enable diseases to thrive and severely weaken the immune system of those living in such squalor.
Speaker 17: If we were to take all that money and put it towards developing poor countries, God would be so proud of us indeed because we would have taken away the major challenge that's facing humankind and that is people dying in silence. It's slow painful deaths from being scared of something that was just packaged as as as it.
Speaker 3: Could it be that the real epidemic is extreme poverty, not HIV? On the other hand, HIV allegedly occurs in The United States as well. So I looked for alternative causes of immunodeficiency in this wealthiest of nations.
Speaker 7: There are other ways you could produce a condition that looks like AIDS, but they too will be some source that causes a severe, defect in the immune response.
Speaker 26: Nineteen million Americans now, nineteen million are taking illicit drugs every day, but we don't talk about this. This is politically incorrect.
Speaker 29: There have been a number of theories as to what the origin of HIV AIDS is. One of them was a theory that certainly turned out to be completely incorrect that it's a lifestyle phenomenon.
Speaker 20: The large epidemic of STDs in general in the late seventies and particularly in gay men in San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles were meccas of the new lifestyle, which came from the liberation in the post Stonewall era.
Speaker 14: The more partners you could have, the more you were striking a blow for gay Liam. I remember talking to one of the people who was at the forefront of that lifestyle. He very much felt like if he did have another bout of syphilis or gonorrhea, whatever it might be, that it was like a notch, another a victory notched up for his right to exist as a gay man.
Speaker 28: I went on a vacation to Los Angeles, and it wasn't that wild, but one night I went to a bathhouse. I came home with, get this, at the same time, syphilis, gonorrhea, and two forms of parasites.
Speaker 27: I have no views about that, you know, in a judgmental kind of sense, but certainly from a public health point of view that's kind of a prescription for disaster because AIDS first occurred in these men who were not healthy for reasons that were obvious to everyone.
Speaker 31: You're talking thousands of partners, sometimes hundreds, you know, per month, lots of antibiotic use, lots of drug use, and, you know, the result were people getting pretty sick.
Speaker 28: There's a drug called Amyl nitrile that was developed in the eighteen fifties and sixties. Came in ampoules and they became known as poppers because you'd pop them when you open these ampoules up to sniff when you had coronary artery disease. The first AIDS cases, for example, that Mike Gottlieb reported, were all five gay men. They were young. They all used poppers.
Poppers. Something you
Speaker 39: walk around huffing all night. I mean, it says flammable, fatal if swallowed on the side of the bottom. They're walking around huffing it all night long. Why? Gives you a great rush.
Speaker 58: Poppers was a sex drug. They were in every gay bathhouse, every bar, every porno bookstore across the nation. Poppers were visible on the dance floor and the discos. At the end of an evening, the bartender would announce last call for alcohol, last call for poppers,
Speaker 25: it was like a mad wonderful kind of a dance that was being done, but if you think that can happen forever, you're wrong.
Speaker 31: Whether or not HIV exists, whether its its role in a weakened immune system is almost irrelevant when you compare it to what was going on at that time.
Speaker 14: The lifestyle explanation proved politically unacceptable, but the virus explanation proved proved very, very acceptable to many different parties.
Speaker 8: Pneumocystis pneumonia and Kaposi sarcoma were the hallmark diseases for AIDS in the early years.
Speaker 25: To go back and deconstruct it and say, what exactly did cause Pneumocystis Carinea?
Speaker 59: I remember the first patient that I ever saw, my resident brought me to see a young gay man with Pneumocystis pneumonia. I knew a little bit about the use of poppers or amyl nitride inhalants and I started asking the patient if he used them and it turned out that he was a very heavy user of amyl nitrites and much to the surprise of my students I said I think the man probably has destroyed his pulmonary immune system by inhaling this toxin.
Speaker 25: What exactly caused Kaposi sarcoma? We know that now. It was amyl nitrite.
Speaker 58: We saw KS decline, interestingly parallel to the decline of popper use.
Speaker 8: We now know that capsa c sarcoma is caused by a second virus, the human herpes virus strain eight.
Speaker 26: To rescue comes another virus. As always, when you need when you're in trouble, you find another virus.
Speaker 28: If one wants to look at really what causes this, we've gotta look beyond, just HIV and just beyond h h v eight.
Speaker 25: Calling it a disease, see, and to give it that name, AIDS. So everything's included under that and you don't have to just say, I mean, if you just said,
Speaker 44: you know, these people are getting a lot
Speaker 25: of weird diseases, all kinds of diseases, it wouldn't have had the same impact. It was much better to say there is an infectious organism on the loose in America and it could get you.
Speaker 3: I had interviewed the world's leading HIV experts and discovered that the two benchmark diseases of AIDS have alternate explanations. Once again I turned to Doctor. Gelderblom, seeking proof of HIV's existence in the most recent images available.
Speaker 52: Here, you do not see anything about the details, but I would say it's probably a virus.
Speaker 3: These are HIV here? Yeah. Oh, so are these HIV too?
Speaker 44: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Everything Probably. Probably. Yeah.
Speaker 5: What can I tell you? You know, I
Speaker 29: mean, it exists.
Speaker 0: The animal said he had all these viruses, and it was a lie.
Speaker 14: I think HIV totally has turned out not to be the cause of AIDS. HIV has turned out not to be.
Speaker 3: Gelderblum's images said to come from isolated HIV culture provided no proof for HIV's existence. So I asked Nobel laureate Doctor. David Baltimore and Doctor. Robin Weiss how they would isolate and photograph this elusive virus.
Speaker 54: Well, I didn't doctor Gallo do that. Mean, he actually isolated it. So I mean, why should I do all of this? This is all textbook stuff you're asking me.
Speaker 45: I'm not quite sure what's behind your question about isolation.
Speaker 54: I don't want to be your textbook, you know? I got other things to do.
Speaker 14: They're embarrassed. The scientists have been embarrassed about this. They know that it's flawed.
Speaker 3: In 1987, the CDC made two mind boggling changes in the definition of AIDS, which are in effect today. You can be diagnosed with AIDS without ever having an HIV test.
Speaker 58: In 1987 I had a lesion on my arm and it was KS Kaposi sarcoma.
Speaker 3: A doctor diagnosed you with AIDS without an HIV test? Yes. You can be diagnosed with AIDS if you've tested negative for HIV.
Speaker 28: Alvin Friedman Keen found sixteen patients with Kaposi's sarcoma among gay men in New York City in the eighties. They did not have HIV infection, yet they had AIDS by our definition, right?
Speaker 3: In a World Health Organization publication, Doctor. Chin writes, it should be emphasized that the surveillance definitions for AIDS were not intended to be reliable indicators of HIV infection.
Speaker 30: If you have thousands of documented cases of AIDS without HIV, how can HIV cause AIDS?
Speaker 3: Why do you believe that HIV does cause AIDS?
Speaker 47: Because that's all the information that I've been given.
Speaker 13: Because we've never been taught anything different.
Speaker 16: We have we just heard it.
Speaker 15: Because that's what the scientific community has told us.
Speaker 51: Scientists are supposed to observe, experiment, and reason from what they observe. They're not supposed to grab hold of an idea and cling to it and adjust everything else in their perceptions to fit that idea. I think an HIV positive test means that your life is forever changed. You have a whole new battery of things to consider for yourself. What does it mean to me?
Speaker 16: It's very hard to find anyone who supports you when you say, I don't think I'm going to die of HIV or AIDS.
Speaker 31: Does the typical model of HIV equals AIDS equals death, how invested am I gonna be in that model?
Speaker 0: Everyone who's infected with HIV would like to deny it. It's a bad prognosis, it means you're going to take drugs for the rest of your life, etcetera, etcetera. So there's people who want to say, ah, I'm one of the people who tested positive, but I'm not going to get the disease.
Speaker 31: Do I start treatment? Treatment meaning the antiviral drugs, if ever.
Speaker 9: We started taking Lindsay to a doctor at the Children's Medical Clinic. She gave us a prescription for retrovir syrup, which is AZT. It was so important for us to get something to help our baby that we sat on the floor in the pharmacy and gave her her first dose.
Speaker 3: Shortly after Lindsay began AZT treatment, side effects began to emerge.
Speaker 38: Her eating habits changed quite a bit. She didn't eat well. She was hard to handle at the table. And then the leg cramps started. Once that started, it got progressively worse.
Speaker 9: She would just grab him and go, oh, you know, screaming in the middle of the night, just like it was a It wasn't an ache, was like must have been sharp pains. It just just made you feel sick to your stomach.
Speaker 49: Any drug active on HIV would be toxic because it's not 100% specific on the HIV enzymes.
Speaker 38: When we switched over to the university, then the dosage of AZT went up and that's where she started flattening out on her growth chart. The doctors would try to put a positive spin on how well she was progressing. It was mainly in the T cells that weren't always a positive situation.
Speaker 9: Yeah, the T cell count would go down and then the doctors would say, well, maybe we better raise that AZT dosage, get that T cell count back up. We're going, I think it's kind of making her sick because she doesn't want to eat. She's having leg cramps. And they'd say, well, it's the HIV, and that's what it does. It's all part of the package.
Speaker 60: The treatment causes a very similar condition we would expect from an AIDS patient. That's why nobody noticed that there was something wrong with the treatment.
Speaker 13: I remember in 1992 after I first tested positive, I became involved in an organization called Women at Risk. There were 11 of us at the time on the board and involved in the group. All of us except three were on the medications. In the year and a half that I was involved with Women at Risk, every single woman in that organization on the drugs died. Every single one, except the three of us who weren't taking them.
Speaker 42: Stop the clock, the left of people. Stop the clock, the of people. Stop the clock, left people.
Speaker 31: We weren't just given handfuls of AZT, we demanded it.
Speaker 42: My AZT should be free. Where is your humanity?
Speaker 31: We considered the FDA not giving us these things as being anti gay instead of being responsible. And so we went and we lobbied and we pushed for all these things, and we didn't think clearly about what it was we were asking for. It's like that saying, be careful what you ask for. It may come to pass.
Speaker 60: That's the very reason why everybody believes HIV is a deadly virus because the HIV positive patient at that time got a deadly treatment. Despite the billions spent on the drug, tens of thousands of people with AIDS have died, and now a growing number of studies
Speaker 35: are questioning the drug's usefulness.
Speaker 9: We just decided between ourselves in November to write to Peter and say sorry to bother you, are you for real, and if Lindsey were your daughter what would you do? On November 11, we got a big package and he said you must take your daughter off AZT immediately or she will die from it like Kimberly Megalis.
Speaker 26: That is AIDS by prescription. You get immunodeficiency and you die from the tox. That is AIDS by prescription.
Speaker 59: When AZT became widely available in 1985 and 1986, I cautioned my patients not to jump on the bandwagon and start being treated. I didn't want to see my community poisoned by an ineffective therapy.
Speaker 28: I think in retrospect the dose that we started with with AZT was a dangerous and poorly tolerated dose.
Speaker 60: Nobody wants to realize what was the real effect of this over treatment. That means that we killed a whole generation of AIDS patients.
Speaker 11: In '96, David Ho announced highly active antiretroviral therapy.
Speaker 3: Also known as the cocktail, because the treatment combined the newly developed protease inhibitors with older HIV drugs, such as the chemotherapy drug AZT.
Speaker 11: That was a revolution. What was a one hundred percent fatal illness now could be treated.
Speaker 60: The AIDS medication today is not that toxic than it was in the early days. And it's a potent drug regime that means it kills almost everything.
Speaker 58: I play around with treatment interruption because I think the drugs are toxic. And if I do the drugs continuously without interruption, I think that they'll have cumulative damage.
Speaker 8: In the years that we've been using the cocktail, we found that there are lots of side effects.
Speaker 3: In South Africa, I spoke to a couple of pharmacists specializing in HIV treatment. How often do you see side effects in patients? All the time. Almost
Speaker 41: all the time.
Speaker 7: We saw the lipodystrophy, the buffalo humps at the back of the neck, and the lipoatrophy, which is the loss of fat in the face and the arms, giving people a very gaunt look.
Speaker 43: The risk of heart attacks seems to be increased in people on these drugs.
Speaker 7: With what we have now, the side effects eventually are going to outweigh the benefits.
Speaker 60: So patients really do better for the short term, but in the long term, they die also.
Speaker 3: In 1994, Audrey Serrano tested HIV positive. While initially healthy, she was prescribed AIDS drugs which nearly killed her and left her scarred for life. In December 2007, after multiple negative tests, she was awarded $2,500,000 in damages.
Speaker 56: Some people are very fortunate. They don't have these side effects, but many people do. So prolonged treatment is impossible.
Speaker 58: I know people that are like horses, have no impact with some drugs, no side effects, and somebody else falls apart.
Speaker 49: The new generation of antiretroviral drugs are less toxic. They can be more tolerated. But for how long? I agree, we cannot give a treatment for life. It's not like insulin, know, it's something which is toxic.
Speaker 3: Has a patient ever died from the side effects?
Speaker 44: Yeah, sometimes.
Speaker 60: Sometimes it happens.
Speaker 39: AIDS drugs are all classified as black box drugs. A black box drug is the most severe warning that our FDA will put on a product. It means you could die taking this because other people have died taking this.
Speaker 61: My sister Joyce was my best friend. She's a great mom, and just a very lively person.
Speaker 3: In 2003 Joyce found out she was pregnant with a second child. She was offered an HIV test as standard prenatal care by her obstetrician.
Speaker 61: She called me at work and she was like I got something to tell you and I was like well what is it? She said I'm HIV positive. So I took a deep breath and said well it's not the end of the And she said, Well, Neal, I met this doctor today, and he's a specialist, and he says, Is there some medicines I can take that will keep my baby from being HIV positive? Nevirapine.
Speaker 39: Severe life threatening skin reactions, including fatal cases.
Speaker 61: One morning she was covered in these welts and this rash. It was all over her face, it was all over her chest, all over her arms, her hands.
Speaker 39: When they're talking about a rash that can kill you, they're talking about a drug that targets actively cells in your dermis, in your mucosal layers, in your intestine, and stops them from working, and what happens, could buy skin.
Speaker 17: I would never take them. I look at, I I I don't have a problem with other people taking them, but I as Griselda Kananda personally, looking at the side effects that they come with, looking at the toxins that they they they present in my body, not now, not ever.
Speaker 60: I have patients tested in 1985. They were all advised to take treatment, but they declined the treatment for different reasons, because they didn't want to take toxic drugs because they were feeling well at that time.
Speaker 3: And how are they doing today?
Speaker 60: They are still living.
Speaker 3: Healthy? Yeah.
Speaker 38: Once we came to the conclusion that this drug that was causing this problem, irregardless of what the HIV was going to do, she was gonna come off the drug no matter what.
Speaker 9: If taking her off the drugs meant that she could sleep through the night and be happy for six months, that would be worth it rather than live in agony for two years or twelve months.
Speaker 38: You hear a lot of doctors, hear a lot of educators in age, you hear a lot of people talk about it is probably the drugs that are going to kill us before the disease does.
Speaker 30: What are the drugs doing to the bodies? They're putting the body into coffins.
Speaker 61: Before my sister started taking the drugs she was healthy. After she took started the drugs she developed an allergic reaction which made her look like a patient with full blown AIDS. She was admitted to the hospital, she continued to spiral down, and within thirty seven days from her first date of taking the medicine, she was gone.
Speaker 3: When news of Joyce's death reached the NIH, emails were exchanged between the director of the AIDS division and an ethics and safety officer. Ed, there was fulminant liver failure resulting in the death on this trial last week. Ouch, not much we can do about dumb docs.
Speaker 27: They are cynical enough to introduce drugs that they know will have toxic effects and will carry a certain mortality, and they know that the life of the drug before this mortality becomes too obvious to ignore is say two or three years and they work up what the sales are going be in those two, three years and then they know they're going to have to reduce the dose.
Speaker 61: Joyce has two sons. Jamal will be, he is in his senior year of high school this year. Sterling will be four years old. And in my mind they were robbed of their mother.
Speaker 16: If someone's going to be giving me a diagnosis of certain death in five to seven years, I want scientific proof. This isn't a religion.
Speaker 30: My interest in questioning and breaking and exploring does HIV cause AIDS is an instinct to liberate people from a death sentence that isn't theirs to carry.
Speaker 9: After we took Lindsay off AZT, her weight did go up.
Speaker 38: Within a couple of days, the leg cramps went away.
Speaker 9: And her physical body seemed to be doing pretty well, but it was like she was disturbed. She was agitated very easily.
Speaker 38: Her lifespan changed all the time after she got to be two years old, and then she'd only lived to be five. When
Speaker 9: she got to be a little older, then they said, oh, she might live to be seven.
Speaker 38: Yep. I definitely wouldn't live in the double digits, and that just was our life then.
Speaker 3: Although Lindsay was on AZT for twenty two months she made a full recovery from the pernicious side effects. Lindsay will be 19 in October 2009.
Speaker 51: Because it's been surrounded from day one with so much emotion, so much fear, so much psychology, so much drama, very few people are capable of looking at AIDS logically.
Speaker 49: We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected. Our immune system will get treated with virus within a few weeks if you have a good immune system.
Speaker 3: If you have a good immune system, then your body can naturally get rid of HIV.
Speaker 49: Yes.
Speaker 3: If you take a poor African who's been infected and you build up their immune system, is it possible for them to also naturally get rid of it?
Speaker 49: I would think so.
Speaker 23: It's very easy to get people to think the right thing if you get it right on the tablet the first time. But once something's on the tablet and you gotta erase it and put something else, it's very hard to get people to think differently.
Speaker 3: The victims of HIV and the dedicated professionals combating it deserve our sympathy, compassion, and respect. However, at Journey's End, I find myself perplexed, bewildered at times with an overall feeling of dismay and sadness. I found a research community in disarray over the most fundamental understanding of HIV, all the while presenting a monolithic public posture of authority and certainty. Bluntly stated, we have tests that prove nothing, remedies that kill, and statistics manipulated to the point of absurdity. Ninety percent of global HIV corresponds to areas of great poverty and squalor.
Ironically, while we may have been pursuing a phantom killer, a shape shifting assassin, perhaps the real enemy has been hiding in plain view, clear as day, and as old as time.
Speaker 49: We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected. Our immune system will get rid of that risk only a few weeks if you have a good immune system.
Speaker 3: If you have a good immune system, then your body can naturally get rid of HIV.
Speaker 49: Yes.
Speaker 13: How can we say that HIV is the cause of AIDS when we don't know based on current tests whether or not anybody diagnosed positive actually has HIV? Some
Speaker 56: people are very fortunate they don't have these side effects, many people do so prolonged
Speaker 43: T cell is impossible What
Speaker 27: the vaccine mean?
@JamieAA_Again - Jamie Andrews
Dr Robert Wilner injected "HIV positive" blood into himself. Guess what happened? Nothing. Because the particle that they call "HIV" doesn't exist https://t.co/hc7W1BqvHK
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker describes a typical butterfly needle set, noting that if somebody has a scissor, it will pop down, and confirms that the device is sterile. The needle is used to take blood by sticking it in, with the ability to inject things as well, and the speaker emphasizes the goal of obtaining a substantial amount of blood. The process is described as the group proceeds to collect blood, with the moment captured as “There we go. Okay. There we go.”
The speaker then states that they are wiping the needle thoroughly in this blood, and addresses a list of individuals by name—Fauci, Gottlieb, Galpin, Gallo, and “all the rest of those criminals”—to whom they attribute a criminal label. The speaker asserts that the actions are “for the sake of humanity and no other reason,” insisting that it hurts. This is followed by a declaration that the effort is undertaken “in the hope that it’ll save the lives of millions of individuals,” who are described as dying “because of the greatest lie ever told.”
In this segment, the practical procedure of drawing blood using a sterile butterfly needle is introduced, including a note on potential adjustments (such as the needle’s behavior when a scissor is present). The speaker foregrounds a moral framing, positioning the act as a sacrifice intended to benefit humanity, while simultaneously accusing a group of named individuals of criminal activity. The emotional tone is underscored by the claim that the effort is both painful and driven by a belief in saving countless lives, countering a narrative described as “the greatest lie ever told.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Typical butterfly needle set. If somebody has a scissor, it'll pop down. Got it. Okay. It's sterile.
And usually we use it to take blood by sticking this in and then we can inject things also. So we want to get a lot of blood. There we go. Okay. There we go.
I'm wiping this needle thoroughly in this blood. And I say to my friends Fauci and Gottlieb and Galpin and Gallo and all the rest of those criminals. Alright. That this is for the sake of humanity and no other reason. And believe me, it hurts.
And this is in the hope that it'll save the lives of millions of individuals who will die because of the greatest lie ever told.
reSee.it AI Summary
Military attorney Todd Callendar reveals shocking facts about the Covid vaccine. It contains 3 HIV proteins, potentially causing Vaccine-induced AIDS (VAIDS). Professor Luc Montagnier warned about this. After vaccination, get tested for HIV. Why isn't anyone investigating?
@bambkb - Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥
Military attorney , Todd Callendar with some #EXPLOSIVE #Covid #Vaccine facts : “They stuck 3 #HIV proteins in these #Covid #Vaccines and essentially gave the world #Vaccine induced #AIDS, also known as #VAIDS” Didn’t professor, Luc Montagnier warn us about this exact same thing!? “After you’ve taken the #Covid #Vaccine, go test yourself for #HIV, you might be surprised at the results” Why the fuck is no one investigating this?
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the potential dangers of vaccines, claiming that they can cause vaccine-induced AIDS and change the shape of red blood cells. They also mention a significant increase in morbidity and mortality in 2021, with manipulated numbers making it difficult to track the impact. The conversation then shifts to the military testing members for AIDS and whether they can determine if someone actually received the vaccine. The speaker explains that mass spectrometry revealed the presence of luciferase in Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, which can be used to verify vaccination status. They mention instances of people being turned away at the border due to fake vaccine cards. The speaker concludes by stating that those who refuse the vaccine are being processed out.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That they took 3 separate HIV proteins in these shots that effectively gave the world vaccine induced AIDS. If that happened, all the doctors will tell you that is so. So how is it possible that they've effectively killed half of the globe and they're still walking around free?
Speaker 1: Did you know, Todd, the military is starting to test the members of the military for AIDS?
Speaker 0: Yes, I do know that. And sickle cell too, by the way, and sickle cell as well because the vaccines have also the the propensity to change the shape of red blood cells. And so now they're showing uppers with sickle cell, with HIV, with cancers that never existed before. It was only in 2021 that we found there was an 1100% increase in all cause morbidity mortality. We don't know what those numbers are anymore as the DoD changed them and fudged them.
And I was talking to one of our whistleblowers yesterday, funny enough, and I said, well, how can we track how many pilots are no longer flying because they can't? And this person effectively said we can't because now dMAD is worthless. It's not useful because the numbers are all made up. We don't even know how to track this down.
Speaker 1: Now that they're doing these blood tests and they're looking to see if members of the military who have been vaccinated have AIDS, vaccine induced Vaccine acquired immune deficiency basically. Are they also looking to see if in fact some of the members of the military even took the vaccine? Because let's face it, There's people out there that'll for $100, $1,000, whatever, you can walk into CVS and they'll take your vaccine, squirt it into the trash can and fill out And say, well, they came in for their vaccine, didn't tell I didn't have to tell you I put it in their arm. Are they going to be able to determine that?
Speaker 0: Yes, they can. So we did mass spectrometry on both Pfizer and Moderna, and we found that each of them contain something called luciferase. And one of them is SM102 and the other one is ALC3015 as key ingredients. Luciferese is a bioluminescent ingredient, for lack of a better word, that will in fact allow third party onlookers to know whether or not you got the shot. And I've talked to people who showed up at the border with their fake vaccine cards and were turned away because the border inspectors knew they hadn't had the shots.
They knew remotely. So the answer to your question is yes, they'll know whether people got the shots or not. And those who stood up and said, I'm not getting the shots, are already getting processed out. That's what we're doing from day to day is trying to help those people.
reSee.it AI Summary
Military attorney Todd Callendar reveals shocking facts about the Covid vaccine. It contains 3 HIV proteins, potentially causing Vaccine-induced AIDS (VAIDS). Professor Luc Montagnier warned about this. After vaccination, get tested for HIV. Why isn't anyone investigating this?
@bambkb - Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE❤️ - DAD🦁 🐉 🔥
Military attorney , Todd Callendar with some #EXPLOSIVE #Covid #Vaccine facts : “They stuck 3 #HIV proteins in these #Covid #Vaccines and essentially gave the world #Vaccine induced #AIDS, also known as #VAIDS” Didn’t professor, Luc Montagnier warn us about this exact same thing!? “After you’ve taken the #Covid #Vaccine, go test yourself for #HIV, you might be surprised at the results” Why the fuck is no one investigating this?
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the potential dangers of vaccines, claiming that they can cause vaccine-induced AIDS and other health issues. They mention that the military is testing members for AIDS and sickle cell, as vaccines can alter red blood cells. The speaker also mentions a significant increase in morbidity and mortality in 2021, but the numbers have been manipulated. They talk about the difficulty of tracking the number of pilots who can no longer fly due to health issues. The conversation then shifts to whether the military can determine if members have actually received the vaccine, mentioning the presence of luciferase in Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, which can be detected through mass spectrometry. The speaker concludes by stating that those who refuse the vaccine are being processed out.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That they took 3 separate HIV proteins in these shots that effectively gave the world vaccine induced AIDS. If that happened, all the doctors will tell you that is so. So how is it possible that they've effectively killed half of the globe and they're still walking around free?
Speaker 1: Did you know, Todd, the military is starting to test the members of the military for AIDS?
Speaker 0: Yes, I do know that. And sickle cell too, by the way, and sickle cell as well because the vaccines have also the the propensity to change the shape of red blood cells. And so now they're showing uppers with sickle cell, with HIV, with cancers that never existed before. It was only in 2021 that we found there was an 1100% increase in all cause morbidity mortality. We don't know what those numbers are anymore as the DoD changed them and fudged them.
And I was talking to one of our whistleblowers yesterday, funny enough, and I said, well, how can we track how many pilots are no longer flying because they can't? And this person effectively said we can't because now dMAD is worthless. It's not useful because the numbers are all made up. We don't even know how to track this down.
Speaker 1: Now that they're doing these blood tests and they're looking to see if members of the military who have been vaccinated have AIDS, vaccine induced Vaccine acquired immune deficiency basically. Are they also looking to see if in fact some of the members of the military even took the vaccine? Because let's face it, There's people out there that'll for $100, $1,000, whatever, you can walk into CVS and they'll take your vaccine, squirt it into the trash can and fill out And say, well, they came in for their vaccine, didn't tell I didn't have to tell you I put it in their arm. Are they going to be able to determine that?
Speaker 0: Yes, they can. So we did mass spectrometry on both Pfizer and Moderna, and we found that each of them contain something called luciferase. And one of them is SM102 and the other one is ALC3015 as key ingredients. Luciferese is a bioluminescent ingredient, for lack of a better word, that will in fact allow third party onlookers to know whether or not you got the shot. And I've talked to people who showed up at the border with their fake vaccine cards and were turned away because the border inspectors knew they hadn't had the shots.
They knew remotely. So the answer to your question is yes, they'll know whether people got the shots or not. And those who stood up and said, I'm not getting the shots, are already getting processed out. That's what we're doing from day to day is trying to help those people.