TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker claims that the Rockefellers control major drug companies worldwide, with representatives from banks and oil companies on their boards. They aim to control all aspects of biology, from birth to death, including hormones, glands, and genes. The Rockefellers gained control of the medical industry in 1910, leading to the current expensive healthcare system in the US. Cancer treatment is particularly costly, with little promise of a cure. The speaker suggests that these monopolies are interconnected and controlled by a group of elitists known as the world order people. (134 words)

Let's discuss UnitedHealthcare, particularly in light of its recent leadership changes. Last year, they generated $373 billion in revenue, with 60% coming from their pharmacy benefit manager, a largely unknown entity. The public and politicians often overlook the significant role of health insurance companies, which I mentioned on Rogan. While there's a lot of focus on Big Pharma, which made about $600 billion, health insurance companies generated 2.5 times that amount, totaling $1.5 trillion. Projections indicate they could reach $1.9 trillion in revenue by 2029.

The speaker discusses the pharmaceutical industry and its problems. They explain that the industry has struggled to keep up with the complexity of molecular biology and the changing face of capitalism. The speaker highlights how the industry has become powerful and profitable by increasing prices and creating "me too" drugs. They criticize the lack of transparency and the influence of the industry on decision-making at various levels. The speaker emphasizes the need for better pharmacovigilance and a change in medical education to prioritize understanding the dangers of medications. They also address concerns about the industry and the role of doctors.

The speaker claims that corporations are essentially one "mega corporation" due to cross-ownership by a few key institutions: Vanguard, BlackRock, State Street, Fidelity, T. Rowe Price, Geode, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, Northern Trust, and Capital World Investors/Capital Research and Management Company. These institutions own each other. Visualizations based on an anonymous Reddit report show that BlackRock's stock, for example, is owned by other institutions like State Street, Capital World Management, and Bank of America. When these institutions are traced to their owners, and so on, it reveals a structure where corporations primarily own each other, with minimal ownership by retail investors. This pattern extends across various sectors, including tech, groceries, and housing. The speaker suggests that GameStop was an exception, but even that may no longer be true. Because these owners own each other, their interests are aligned. The speaker concludes that buying from any of these corporations is essentially buying from the "mega corporation," which siphons money to the top.

Brenzavvy, a drug similar to Jardiance or Farxiga, is not covered by insurance, prescribed by doctors, or carried by wholesalers because it is too cheap. Brenzavvy costs $60 at the speaker's pharmacy. Pharmacy benefits managers (PBMs) deny coverage because Brenzavvy's low price prevents rebates. Farxiga and Jardiance cost insurance payers $1,000 upfront with a 40% rebate. An HHS report stated PBMs get 23% on average for brand meds. After rebates, Farxiga and Jardiance still cost $600, with PBMs earning $138. With 8,000,000 prescriptions a year, PBMs make $1,100,000,000 off those two drugs. The speaker claims PBMs keep Brenzavvy off their lists to avoid losing a billion dollars annually. The speaker believes affordable healthcare is impossible with PBMs involved. The speaker encourages listeners to use forestpark.pharmacy to save money and to inform their bosses about potential savings.

It used to be that pharmaceutical companies were working with the doctors. Now unfortunately, companies are captured by the price of the stock. Know, venture capitalist owned pharmaceutical companies. They owned the CR or the clinical research organizations. They owned the site. They owned the institutional review board. They owned the advertising, the marketing. They influenced through the media. And so unfortunately, there's a big it's a it's a loaded question, but it's a big market. And what we saw this pandemic was the price of the stock mattered more than the price of a life.

Pharmaceutical companies generate over two-thirds of their profits in the United States, despite the U.S. accounting for only 4% of the world's population. The speaker expresses respect for pharmaceutical companies and their leadership. They believe these companies successfully convinced people for many years that the current system was fair, even though the reasons why were not widely understood.

Pharmaceutical companies generate over two-thirds of their profits in the United States, despite the U.S. accounting for only 4% of the world's population. The speaker expresses respect for pharmaceutical companies and their leadership. They believe these companies successfully convinced people for many years that the existing system was fair, even though the reasons why were not well understood. The speaker claims to have figured out the reasons behind this.

The speaker claims that the Rockefellers control major drug companies worldwide, with representatives from banks and oil companies on their boards. They aim to control all aspects of biology, from birth to death, including hormones, glands, and genes. The Rockefellers gained control of the medical industry in 1910, leading to the current expensive healthcare system in the US. Cancer treatment is particularly costly, with little promise of a cure. The speaker suggests that these monopolies are interconnected and controlled by a group of elitists known as the world order people. (134 words)

Universities, health organizations, and other institutions are in need of funding, while big multinational corporations have the money to provide it. These corporations use their financial influence to gain control. They give grants for research, collaborate on projects, and pay individual professors, doctors, and researchers. They may also fund educational programs that align with their interests. Although these arrangements are supposed to be independent, it is clear that corporations prioritize supporting their own products. If organizations do not comply, they risk losing funding. This financial influence is how the medical establishment is swayed.

We're paying too much for drugs compared to other countries, and existing laws make it hard to lower costs. The middlemen in the drug industry are profiting significantly without adding value. We're going to eliminate these middlemen to reduce drug prices to unprecedented levels. This topic dominated our discussions with executives and others involved.

The speaker suggests that pharmaceutical companies want people to continuously take vaccines, even as they become sicker. They claim that these companies also acquire drugs to treat the injuries caused by the vaccines. For example, before rolling out COVID-19 vaccines for children, one of the companies acquired drugs to treat blood clots in children, which they believe the vaccines may cause. The speaker also mentions a large acquisition by Pfizer for novel cancer treatments, implying that they will cause the cancers they treat. The speaker concludes that pharmaceutical companies want people to be sick and dependent on their medications.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the COVID-19 vaccine episode, challenging why the vaccine was pursued as a public health solution and exploring deeper incentives behind the program. - A knowledgeable figure at the stand answered a burning question: did they know the vaccine wouldn’t be effective from the start and could be dangerous? The answer given was that it was “a test of a technology.” The exchange suggests the broader aim was testing an entire program of control previewed in Event 2019. - They ask whether inoculation was necessary on billions, noting it could have been tested on a much smaller population. If shots had been basically empty or inert, the data could have been spun to claim success and end the pandemic, preventing injuries from appearing. The absence of that approach remains a mystery. - The speakers point to high pre-vaccine seroprevalence in 2020, including studies from South Dakota showing 50-60% seroprevalence before vaccine release, implying that a saline shot or no shot could have achieved “indomicity” (immunity) without a vaccine. - They discuss why people might fear vaccines and interpret the broader impact: the public is waking up to something terrible having occurred, as it revealed readiness to lie, potential data quality concerns, and risk to pregnant women and healthy children who might get little justification for risk. - The disease’s lethality is framed as greatest among the very old or very sick; for others, it was less deadly, with natural evolution potentially reducing vulnerability over time. - The mRNA platform was touted as a means to outrun mutations, but the timeline to release was still insufficient to stay ahead of natural change. They note accelerated development was the fastest vaccine in history, from detection to inoculation, reducing the timeline by about a year or two, yet not fast enough. - Political and logistical factors delayed release; there is mention that it would not have appeared under Trump and that Eric Topol argued to delay the rollout. Fauci reportedly sent Moderna back to trials due to insufficient racial diversity in participants. - The discussion questions whether the vaccine qualifies as a normal consumer product, given ongoing subsidies, mandates, indemnifications, wartime-like supports, and propaganda. They wonder if there has been an ongoing two-century revolt by industry against public scrutiny, with public interest repeatedly leading to pushback and rebranding. - A central theme is the sophistication of pharma: the “game of pharma” involves owning an IP-based health claim, crafting supportive research, convincing it is safe and effective, achieving standard-of-care status, securing mandates and government funding, and leveraging ongoing propaganda. They describe pharma as a long-running arms race with deep institutional knowledge, implying that it is far more capable of shaping reality than the public realizes.

Speaker 0: The pharmacy benefit managers. Speaker 1: Think of it like this. So you go to a restaurant and you order a burger. Okay? And let's say that burger costs $15. But before your order goes through, some guy steps in and says, hold on. If the restaurant wants to sell you that burger, they need to pay me $5. And if not, you can't have the burger. Speaker 0: Think of them as the toll bridge between you and drug prices. Speaker 1: But the PBM isn't just collecting the toll. They're also controlling which cars can pass. They own the bridge. They set the price of gas. They use their contracts to profit off of everyone crossing. Speaker 1: So the PBM charges the employer a very high price. It pays the pharmacy a very low price, and it keeps the difference, and that's called spread pricing.

Universities, health organizations, and others seek money from big corporations to influence research and opinions. By funding research, paying individual professionals, and supporting programs, corporations ensure loyalty and favorable outcomes. This financial influence shapes the medical establishment, even if it appears independent on the surface.

The FTC sued the largest three PBMs. The FTC accuses these three companies for artificial inflating insulin prices, investigating their rebate system. There were marked up specialty drugs for cancer, HIV, and other conditions by over $7,300,000,000. One of the companies actually countersued the FTC over false and defamatory statements. PBMs own the insurance companies, and the pharmacies. Caremark owns CVS. Express Scripts owns a home delivery pharmacy. Rx owns Optum home delivery pharmacy, so they can ship directly to your house. Control of 80% of all the medications in The US comes from three of the biggest PBMs. In reality, the PBMs are not just the middleman. Since they've merged with the insurance companies and the pharmacies, now they're the actual gatekeepers of medicine.

A health insurance CEO was recently murdered, sparking surprising support for the act among some younger people, reflecting deep-seated anger towards insurance companies. The discussion highlights how these companies profit from chronic diseases by delaying care and prioritizing profit over patient health. The insurance model has shifted from personal care to a profit-driven system, leading to inadequate patient interactions and a focus on prescription drugs rather than preventative measures. The conversation also touches on the role of pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) as profit centers for insurers, contributing to rising healthcare costs. Advocates argue for a shift towards proactive, preventative care, emphasizing the need for transparency and accountability in the healthcare system to address chronic diseases effectively.

Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Finance are all involved in promising that data will improve our healthcare, making it more convenient, affordable, and keeping us healthier. However, global organizations and governments are also entering this space. The future of healthcare lies in the digitalization of the system, which is essential as our healthcare systems will eventually collapse without it. It's remarkable how similar the messages from politics, business, science, and media are. Is this really just about our health, or could there be other interests at play?

Most physicians and clinicians avoid getting involved in the issue of profit-driven healthcare. The real problem lies in the collusion between academic institutions, doctors, medical journals, and industry for financial gain. These corporations, as legal entities, often exhibit psychopathic traits, prioritizing profit over the well-being of patients. Many top drug companies have been fined billions for illegal marketing, hiding harm data, and manipulating results. However, these fines are often outweighed by the profits they make from selling the drugs. While the pharmaceutical industry has contributed life-saving treatments, the net effect of their practices is negative, with a significant amount of wasted resources and harmful drugs approved.

The speaker points out that major media outlets like CNBC, Fox, and CNN are owned by Vanguard and BlackRock, who are also the top shareholders of Pfizer, Johnson and Johnson, and Moderna. They mention that Vanguard and BlackRock are also the top shareholders of flight companies and junk food manufacturers. The speaker suggests that this control extends to social media platforms like Meta, Snapchat, Twitter, and Google, which they claim are pushing the same narrative as the media. They emphasize that these companies are profit-driven.

The speaker claims that the Rockefellers control major drug companies through their influence in the industry. They have representatives from banks and oil companies on the boards of these companies. Their goal is to control all aspects of biology, from birth to death, including hormones, glands, and genes. The Rockefellers gained control of the medical industry in 1910, leading to the current expensive healthcare system in the US. Cancer treatment is particularly costly, with little promise of a cure. The speaker suggests that these monopolies are interconnected and controlled by a group of elitists known as the world order people.

According to the speaker, 50% of pediatricians' revenue comes from vaccines, with insurance companies like Blue Cross offering bonuses for high vaccination rates, potentially influencing doctors' recommendations. The speaker claims that pediatricians may dismiss families who want alternative vaccine schedules to protect these bonuses. The speaker alleges that 80% of doctors now work for corporations focused on revenue over patient care, creating pressure to generate funds due to medical school debt. The speaker suggests the entire system is incentivized to keep people sick, not necessarily deliberately, but through financial incentives. Insurance companies allegedly profit more from a sick population because they collect money as friction, taking a cut of revenues. The speaker claims that doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies also benefit financially from people being sick, creating systemic pressure regardless of individual intentions.

Trump recently announced plans to break up pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), which are often misunderstood. PBMs were created in the 1970s to help lower prescription drug costs but have since been acquired by major insurance companies, turning them into profit centers. Instead of negotiating lower prices, PBMs negotiate higher costs to receive kickbacks from drug manufacturers. For example, 30% of the cost of drugs like Ozempic goes to PBMs as kickbacks. UnitedHealthcare generated $373 billion in revenue last year, with 60% from its PBM. While insurance companies may not have as high profit margins as big pharma, they use various methods to obscure their profits. Overall, health insurance companies generate significantly more revenue than pharmaceutical companies, highlighting the hidden influence of PBMs in the healthcare system.