reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0: Vaccines date back to 1626 poisoning the people. Okay? Poisoning the people since 1626. This is not new. They're not like, oh, we got some new stuff, and it's not the snake venom or anything else. It's just poison is what it is. They've been poisoning the people since 1626 with vaccines. So no child, no adult, no grandma, no grandpa, no mother, no nothing needs any shots, whether it be tetanus, whether it be rabies, whether it be anything. You do not need to put any shots into your animal, your grandma, your father, your mother, your children. That's it. It's straight poison. And there's a great picture from 1885, and it says, vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate. There is money in the side effects. That's it. That is all vaccines. Money in the side effects for the pharmaceutical companies to poison the people and just keep making money off of them. You go back into the nineteen hundreds and doctors used to claim there were no cases of cancer in an unvaccinated person. How about the Amish? The Amish don't put a single vaccine into their body, And you notice that the Amish look pretty darn healthy. Well, altogether. Why? They're not injecting themselves with poison. It makes no sense. So there's all these cultures who didn't use this garbage. And then as they now become like modernized and they start putting this garbage into them their body, then all of a sudden, people start coming down with all the same illnesses. I got autoimmune, lupus. I got allergies. I got this. I got that. Right? Right? All those things. Where do you think they're all stemming from? They get you as you're young because you don't have the ability to consent. Right? Tell that tell the doctor to take the needle and stick it in themselves. Give themselves their own boosters and vaccines. You don't need to do that. And I think people need to stand the ground with that because there has never been a single vaccine that has ever helped helped anybody.

There are thousands of pets out there dining out every day. While we sat at this table, five, six pets died in The United States from a rabies vaccine they didn't need. Anybody can walk in here, sit down and say whatever they want, but I gave you silence. I said to the state board, if I had to kill an animal to obey that law, would I have to do They said yes. One rabies vaccine is good for life. All this is unnecessary if that dog had a titer check, it would not need a vaccination. So this is the real problem here. I had put upstairs in the public health department 45 articles that show vaccines are dose dependent. Titers indicate immunity. It's been proven. Okay. But who's the we? Who's the we? The researchers. The researchers. These are the researchers. They're the ones who do the research. Okay. I spent a career the pharmaceutical. And I spent a career being a veterinarian watching the animals die. See. Think that happened before. But I completely don't agree with what you're saying. Do you know of any studies that the vaccine can sometimes create other health concerns for animals? Can you talk a little bit about that? Absolutely. You get tumors at the injection sites. You get autoimmune diseases that start later in life, but you get the immediate reactions. Some dogs die immediately of anaphylaxis. Others get just serum sickness and they vomit. Maybe you hide under the bed for a day or two. But if I lower my dose to protect the animal, then I'm in trouble. So I have to do what the manufacturer says. And like the State Board of Connecticut said, if I have to kill my pet, I have to kill my pet. It's the law. Well, guess what? I have a Hippocratic oath that is greater than any law that's passed in the state of Connecticut that would make me kill my patient. I won't do it.

The speaker claims that measles was not deadly in the US after the early 1900s, citing improved nutrition and later, Vitamin A treatment. They believe contracting measles can be beneficial, leading to increased resistance to certain diseases. Regarding an outbreak in Samoa, the speaker alleges that a measles vaccine caused deaths, not measles itself, and that they did not influence policy there. They maintain that vaccines cause autism, referencing a CDC study on the hepatitis B vaccine that showed an elevated risk. They accuse the CDC of fraud, claiming a scientist named Paul Thornson produced a study to create the illusion that vaccines don't cause autism, stole money, and is now a fugitive. The speaker states there are hundreds of studies linking vaccines to autism and neurological injuries. They accuse the CDC of being controlled by the pharmaceutical industry.

The transcript discusses a plan attributed to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to airdrop oral rabies vaccines into six states over the course of a month, continuing a process that started in August in other states. The states named are Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia, all of which are expected to receive these vaccines. The plan involves dropping edible satchels of food that are designed to attract wildlife. These satchels are described as containing an oral rabies vaccine, so that when wildlife consumes them, the animals are vaccinated against rabies. It is stated that this vaccination occurs without the animals’ consent, noting that animals cannot give consent. A key question raised is what would come next after this initial distribution. The speaker asks about the implications if these satchels are spread across the stated areas and whether there will be any impact on domestic pets. The transcript asserts that the satchels are intended for wildlife vaccination and that if cats and dogs end up consuming one of the satchels, it should be okay for them and they would simply be vaccinated against rabies. The speaker contends that many people have presumably already vaccinated their animals against rabies, so the program is framed as not causing harm to pets. The speaker then reflects on the broader pattern, asserting that this is how such programs begin. The argument is made that the authorities start with animals, referencing a history of starting with animals when a rabies problem is presented as an epidemic in wildlife. The speaker notes that people are concerned about wild animals biting dogs and other animals, and that the plan is presented as a measure to prevent rabies transmission in the animal population. Finally, the transcript asserts a claim about the progression of this approach, stating that this is how it begins and arguing that there is a suggestion of eventual vaccination or interventions targeting the human population, asserting that “they’ve already started to do this” with humans. The overall content centers on the described vaccination plan, its intended wildlife focus, its effects on pets, and concerns about potential expansion to humans.

The transcript discusses the book Vaccinations Do Not Protect by Eleanor McBean, claiming that vaccination goes against the constitution to take this “garbage.” It asserts that most people don’t know that doctors do not take the shots themselves or give them to their own children, yet they administer them to other people’s children because they receive a commission. It notes that certain physicians have observed patterns such as paralysis within twenty-four hours after the injection, up to six months after, cancer near the injection area, and diseases such as TB within twenty years. The speaker claims that Edward Jenner, the father of vaccination, noticed a similar pattern in 1796, describing it as poisoning the people. The question is posed: why do they do this? The answer given is that vaccination is a big business, and that it is protected by the government. The speaker asserts that vaccination was protected by the government in 1986 so that people cannot sue. It is stated as part of the argument that vaccination is the leading cause of why children die under the age of 15.

Speaker 0 asserts that there is no safe vaccine on the childhood schedule and labels themselves an anti-vaxxer because no vaccine has been properly tested for safety. They state that, in the book Vax Facts, you are more likely to die from the vaccine than from the disease for which there is a vaccine, and that this is true for every single vaccine on the childhood schedule. They acknowledge that death from the vaccine is still a death and “super rare,” but claim you are much more likely to die from the vaccine. They ask which do you want: a greater chance of dying from the vaccine or a lesser chance of dying from the disease, noting that for many of these diseases, the risk is zero.

The speaker discusses rabies and vaccines in a conspiratorial frame, arguing that rabies is fake and that the treatment and vaccine are worse than the disease. They state that the vaccine is claimed to be mandatory, but argue that mandating is “voluntary to a service” and that the true situation is a game where “mandatory” only applies once you agree to it. They claim the test for rabies is the same as used during the pandemic, asserting that “the fruit came up positive for an illness,” and suggest that this demonstrates that “we’ve been lied to,” with implications that vets benefit from the situation. The speaker recounts an historical diagnostic method: in the early nineteen hundreds, rabbits were the primary diagnostic tool to determine if an animal had rabies. They describe a procedure where, if a person was bitten by a suspected dog, “the brain tissue of the dog was injected into the two rabbits,” and “If the two rabbits died, rabies was proven.” They present this as the science behind rabies diagnosis. They then criticize the vaccine’s safety, claiming “that vaccine comes with a lot of side effects.” They cite an example case: “38 dogs and cats took the new vaccine that was made out by Merck,” and claim that these subjects “started having seizures, aggression, and death,” concluding with the statement that the vaccine is portrayed as “Safe and effective” by others. On a path to alternatives, the speaker says you could find a holistic vet who will give a medical exemption so you don’t have to receive the vaccine, or you could simply say no. They claim that if a vet “doesn’t wanna play ball,” you can make them sign a vaccination guarantee that nothing will happen to your animal after taking the injection, and predict that the vet “won’t sign it.” The segment ends with a provocative note encouraging skepticism about viruses, followed by the assertion that if you are unvaccinated and the virus enters your community, the virus will … (the clip ends here with an incomplete thought, implying a cautionary consequence).

The speakers discuss rabies and vaccinations in a provocative, conspiratorial frame. They claim rabies is nonexistent and that the treatment, the vaccine, is worse than the disease. They question the idea of compulsory vaccination, asserting that mandates are voluntary until you agree to them, and describe mandates as a game. They compare the rabies test to the pandemic-era testing method, suggesting the test for rabies relies on tests that produced positive results for illnesses, implying deception. They note that in the early 1900s, rabbits were the primary diagnostic tool: brain tissue from a suspected dog injected into two rabbits; if the rabbits died, rabies was proven. They present the vaccine as having many side effects and cite an instance where 38 dogs and cats given a Merck vaccine experienced seizures, aggression, and death, labeling the vaccine “Safe and effective” as something they dispute. They propose solutions: finding a holistic veterinarian who can grant a medical exemption, or simply saying no to vaccination. They claim it’s possible to make a vet sign a vaccination guarantee that nothing will happen to an animal after the injection, and suggest vets won’t sign such a guarantee. The conversation closes with a clip asserting that if you are unvaccinated, the virus will hunt you out or find you, repeating the claim that the virus will locate unvaccinated individuals. Overall, the dialogue presents a skepticism toward rabies biology and vaccination, asserts that vaccines have harmful side effects, questions mandates, and promotes exemptions or refusals, culminating in the assertion that viruses target the unvaccinated.

- The speaker presents a checklist for healthy cats and dogs and raises controversial claims about vaccines, diet, and technology used on pets. - Vaccination critique: Vaccines are pushed because “there’s money in the side effects,” and a claim is cited from the book Poison Needle by Eleanor McBean that “Rabies doesn’t even exist, but they poison the animals anyways.” - Diet recommendations: Advocates raw diets for dogs and cats, specifically “Raw meat, raw milk. Not kibble, processed garbage.” Cites Doctor Pottinger (Dr. Pottinger) who fed 900 cats raw meat and raw milk, reporting no parasites, no dewormers, and silky skin and fur. - Personal anecdote: A friend reportedly gave raw meat and “superfoods” to their dog; the dog supposedly showed no teary eyes, no skin allergies, and no deworming. - Parasites and metals claim: The speaker asserts that parasites are caused by heavy metal pollution; kibble is “loaded with metals,” leading animals to develop worms to counter the metals. - Vaccines and implants claim: Vaccines and RFID/chip implants are described as treating animals like lab experiments, allegedly causing tumors in the region where they are placed. - Alternative remedies: Mentions a case where Pearl Powder Shiloh Shot in Dragon’s Blood with a raw diet was given to a puppy, and the puppy was described as happy and healthy with complimenting observations. - Wireless/chemistry claim: Ends with the idea of an “invisible rainbow” (WiFi) that harms animals, suggesting microwave frequencies cook them. List of perceived hazards includes vaccines, kibble, WiFi, RFID chips, and dewormers, all said to contribute to health issues in dogs and cats.

The speaker claims that vaccines are not safe or effective, particularly the COVID-19 jab. They believe that those who promote and administer vaccines should be imprisoned, and parents who allow their children to be vaccinated should have their children taken away. They argue that COVID-19 was created to make the flu seem more dangerous, even though flu statistics show it can be deadlier. The speaker also suggests that the COVID-19 jab weakens the immune system, affects DNA, and can cause cancer. They criticize doctors for administering the vaccine to various groups, including toddlers, patients, school children, and pilots. Lastly, they believe that getting the COVID-19 vaccine is either suicide or murder.

No. You don't need any of that. Any of those shots, whether it's tetanus, rabies, flu shots, boosters, all that garbage. It's all garbage. It's to poison you. So anybody who tells you to take shots, fire them. Fire them. They don't need a job because all they're doing is poisoning the public so that they can stay in business. Whether it's a professional, whether it's a vet, whether it's whoever, fire them. It's the goofiest thing that any of that is still legal and that you can't sue if that shot that you take actually kills you. They are protected from lawsuits. All of the booster companies are protected from lawsuits since 1986 with Reagan. If you can't sue for damages, you kinda understand what's going on. You are the experiment.

In 1909, Dr. Clark claimed vaccinations cause cancer, stating he'd never seen cancer in an unvaccinated person. Saint Savior's Cancer Hospital made a similar claim in 1887. In 1885, the speaker alleges that vaccinations were driven by profit, including profits from side effects. Going back to 1799, the speaker claims that after Dr. Jenner introduced the smallpox vaccine, deaths increased, enraging people and medical professionals who wanted him put on trial. The speaker connects the origin of Raggedy Ann dolls to a father whose daughter died after being vaccinated without his consent. The speaker suggests people should consider this history when told that vaccines will fix cancer.

Speaker 0 claims that people lie about tetanus and rabies, asserting that rabies doesn’t exist and that dogs are poisoned. They allege veterinarians administer 13 vaccinations to keep the veterinary industry in business, and that the first vaccination against dogs was injected into their brains, followed by more vaccines to sustain the vets. They describe the entire system as intended to keep “these terrorists in business” who constantly poison people and animals, and they state that if a vet truly cared about an animal, they wouldn’t inject it. The speaker asserts that injections of poisons into animals would not lead to health, applying this logic to horses, cats, and wildlife as well. They claim wildlife are vaccinated by the government, referencing deer “spinning around in circles” in the forest as evidence. The call is for people to be aware and to say no, defending their dogs, cats, and even their grandmother, framing it as a constitutional right. They urge listeners to resist vaccination or other medical interventions for family and animals, insisting on a stance of defiance against forced measures. The speaker emphasizes personal agency and the obligation to defend family and animals, portraying vaccination as coercive and harmful. They allude to expressing censored language that would condemn the alleged actions, but refrain from explicit terms. The overall message is a condemnation of vaccines and veterinary practice, framed as a political and constitutional violation, and a directive to resist vaccination and to advocate for personal choice.

Pets have died in the US from unnecessary rabies vaccines. The speaker questions the need for these vaccines, suggesting that a tire check would indicate immunity. They mention having provided articles to the public health department that support the idea that vaccines are dose dependent. Another speaker, who has a background in the pharmaceutical industry, disagrees. The first speaker explains that vaccines can cause tumors, immune diseases, and immediate reactions in animals. They express their refusal to follow a law that would require them to harm their patients.

The speaker claims that vaccines are being used to weaken and destroy people's immune systems, especially in children. They argue that vaccines are useless and harmful, acting as bioweapons rather than life-saving measures. The speaker also mentions the origins of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), stating that they are owned by the Rockefeller family, who were involved in eugenics. The speaker suggests that there is a deliberate agenda to reduce the population by weakening immune systems.

The speaker questions why a large dog and a small dog receive the same volume of rabies vaccine. They suggest over-vaccination may contribute to the rising incidence of cancer in dogs. Bombarding dogs and cats with multiple antigens yearly can cause an inappropriate immune response, preventing the immune system from working correctly, potentially leading to uncontrolled cell growth, like cancer. Some vaccine protocols list up to eight or nine different vaccines given to dogs and cats almost yearly.

Dr. Francis Potenture observed that cats fed cooked food became sick, while those fed raw meat, raw milk, and cod liver oil remained healthy and parasite-free. The speaker claims pet food companies promote cooked food despite its negative effects, arguing that animals would not naturally cook their food. The speaker suggests that cooked food leads to worm infestations, creating a need for medications like ivermectin and heartworm treatments. Furthermore, the speaker alleges that rabies is nonexistent, and vaccinations are administered to keep veterinarians in business. The speaker concludes that feeding pets cooked food causes health issues, leading to unnecessary vaccinations and perpetuating a cycle that benefits the veterinary industry.

The speaker claims that "The USDA last year approved self amplifying mRNA injections for our cats and our dogs for rabies and a few other things. And these are authorized and they're widely available for online purchase." They say "veterinarians across the country are currently injecting self amplifying mRNA into our pets." They warn that "This can probably shut on to humans and this this has to be stopped" and ask, "Has it started yet?" "Yes." They cite "Nobivac Nex NXT, it's the platform developed by Merck" and that "you will find it online, and you can even buy it." They claim it is "possible... they are either shedding the self amplifying RNA or the antigen products that the dogs or cats are now producing onto the owners through bodily fluids." They add that "none of this was tested" and "they just authorized it anyways because they don't care," and that "it's completely unknown really at this point."

The speaker claims that vaccines are being used to weaken and destroy people's immune systems, especially in children. They argue that vaccines are useless and harmful, and that they are actually bioweapons. The speaker also mentions the connection between the World Health Organization (WHO) and Rockefeller, suggesting a sinister agenda. They conclude by stating that the intention is to make people die faster.

The speaker argues that the vaccine program should stop and that injecting foreign matter into babies cannot be considered an improvement to their health. They reference Peter McCullough as someone who said the program needs to halt. They criticize the expansion of vaccine policy since the 1986 Act, which granted liability protection for the trio of vaccines (MMR, DPT, and polio) at the time, and suggest there was no foresight about expanding to multiple doses of many vaccines for little babies. Now that this has happened, they insist it must end. They point to polio as an example, noting that children still receive four polio vaccines even though polio has not appeared in the Western Hemisphere since 1991, and that the World Health Organization declared the region polio-free in 1994. They question why four doses of polio vaccines, which contain monkey kidney cells and formaldehyde, are given for a disease the region is no longer exposed to. They ask, “Why? To protect against what? That’s not even here.” They extend the argument to “the same thing” with other vaccines. The speaker asserts that measles has not been deadly since 1963 and explains that the measles virus has a life cycle in which an outbreak occurs roughly every four years regardless of vaccination rates. They make a similar claim about pertussis. They argue that injecting foreign matter into children does not improve their health and is not preventing deadly diseases that are now treated with antibiotics, steroids, inhalers, and other therapies. They point out that it is not a big deal to have multiple tetanus shots and still contract tetanus, using this as evidence about the effectiveness of tetanus vaccination. Overall, the speaker contends that the concept of deadly diseases being eradicated by vaccines is a multi-generational myth and that vaccines are not reliably protective. They argue that the practice has run its course and that it is overdue for the entire vaccine program to end, suggesting that it did its job and should now be discontinued. The concluding stance is that the multi-generational myth of deadly diseases and the safety and protection of vaccines should stop, and that the program should be ended.

Speaker 0 states that there has never been a single animal with rabies and claims animals are injected to keep vets in business. They assert that if your vet tells you your animal needs rabies shots, you should fire them. They claim all they’re doing is promoting poison so they can inject your animal, then your animal can come down with a debilitating disease, and then they have a patient for life. They define rabies as “There is no rabid dogs running around, and they're gonna get you in anything else.” They describe the first studies on rabid dogs as dogs that were locked in cages and went completely nuts, and allege the guy who created the rabies vaccine stuck it in the dog's head and said that the rabies vaccine worked after the dogs died. They assert that to this day, they are still injecting dogs for rabies, calling it a fake illness, to poison the dogs to have patients for life, calling it truly sick and twisted. They cite The Contagion Myth by Tom Cowan and The Poison Needle by Eleanor McBean as debunking this, and claim vets do the same thing as doctors—there to keep you as a patient for life. That is what they’re going to say about.

Somebody said you've opened my eyes to a lot. Our dog continues to struggle since the vet gave her two shots. This is the problem: all of those vets, unfortunately, that's just they that's why they give these animals shots. They're just giving them shots so that they can stay in business. They poison your dog as a puppy or as a kitten, whatever it may be, so that they can stay in business. So what you need to do is need to fire the the vet that you're going to if they're pushing shots onto any of your animals and find yourself a holistic vet or just fire them altogether because all your animal needs is raw meat and raw dairy. That's pretty much it. Because think of animals. When they're out in the wild, that's pretty much all they're eating. They're not cooking anything up. They're not eating kibble. They're not eating, you know, processed foods. They're literally just out there hunting, and they don't definitely don't have a fire to cook up their meals before they eat them. But the whole thing into that, when you get in into the shots, you know, the book, the poison needle, just a phenomenal one so people can be aware of that.

German summary: Speaker 0 äußert eine ganz konkrete, sehr gewagte These: "ich sage offen, dass ich von Impfungen bei Kindern unter 3 Jahren abrate." Speaker 1 fordert, das Buch zu lesen, das "so geschrieben ist, dass sogar Oberstufenschüler es verstehen", und sagt: "Wenn ein Arzt das liest und das nicht versteht, dann soll er seinen Titel an die Wand hängen." Er behauptet, Impfstoffe seien "lebensgefährlich" und die "größte Gefahr der Menschheit." Begründung: klassische Impfstoffe enthalten Zusatzstoffe wie Aluminiumsalze, die "Gift" seien und in die Blutbahn gelangen; der Unterschied zwischen Injektion und Verzehr sei entscheidend; in Muskeln injizierte Substanzen gelangen in die Blutbahn. Bei Kleinkindern sei die Konzentration nach einer Impfung mit Diphtherie, Tetanus, Patusis "unglaublich hoch." Er schlägt vor, "wartet wenigstens die 3 Jahre ab." Lebendimpfstoffe hält er für problematisch; "niemand hat's wirklich gezeigt, dass die Viren harmlos sind." Er verweist auf Polio, Tollwut und Tetanus und behauptet, "für keinen Impfung ... echte Wirksamkeit nachgewiesen worden" außer Tollwut und Tetanus. English translation: Speaker 0 asserts a very concrete, very bold thesis: "I openly say that I advise against vaccinations for children under 3." Speaker 1 urges reading the book, which is "written in a way that even high school students can understand," and says: "If a doctor reads it and does not understand it, then he should hang his title on the wall." He claims vaccines are "life-threatening" and the "greatest danger to humanity." Reasoning: classical vaccines contain additives such as aluminum salts, which are "poison" and reach the bloodstream; the difference between injection and ingestion is crucial; substances injected into muscle reach the bloodstream. In toddlers, the concentration after a vaccination with Diphtherie, Tetanus, Patusis is "incredibly high." He suggests "wait at least 3 years." He regards live vaccines as problematic; "no one has shown that the viruses are harmless." He references polio, rabies, and tetanus, and claims "for no vaccine has real efficacy been demonstrated" except for rabies and tetanus.

The speaker treats vaccine injuries, stating that 70% of their practice involves them. They claim rabies vaccines are among the worst. They were shocked to learn that there has been no canine strain of rabies in the US for 14 years, suggesting that dogs are being unnecessarily killed or restrained. The speaker believes that over-vaccination is occurring constantly. They assert that no vaccine is safe, and no vaccine is 100% effective.

Dr. Francis Potenture observed that cats fed cooked food became sick, while those fed raw meat, raw milk, and cod liver oil remained healthy and parasite-free. The speaker claims pet food companies promote studies against raw food, despite the absurdity of pets cooking their food in the wild. The speaker suggests that cooked food leads to worm infestations, creating a need for medications like ivermectin and heartworm treatments. Furthermore, the speaker alleges that rabies is nonexistent, and vaccinations are administered to keep veterinarians in business. The speaker claims that vets recommend cooked food, causing health issues, then administer vaccinations for fake illnesses, creating a cycle that benefits the veterinary industry.