reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 argues that some electrolytes on the market contain citric acid derived from black mold, used during the fermentation process to produce citric acid. They claim it is financially impractical for companies to produce organic citric acid from lemon peels in mass production without charging around $200 for a bag of electrolytes, which is why black mold is used. They state that even products marketed as made from cassava root are still made from black mold. The speaker notes that GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) regulation governs this, and mentions RFK’s mission to investigate GRAS to determine whether substances in foods are poisonous. They assert that black mold is poison and that citric acid appears in many products, so small amounts of poison can accumulate. The speaker expresses personal reluctance to explore this issue but concedes they did, describing it as scary, and concludes with a call to be more aware of what is being put into the body.

The difference between a food chemical and a drug is intended use; if intended for food, almost anything can be synthesized and added. The speaker claims we are being mass-drugged and poisoned by 10,000 virtually unregulated chemicals in our food. Monsanto's glyphosate litigation revealed ghostwritten papers claiming its safety, illustrating corruption. The speaker believes these unregulated chemicals are making us sick. Evidence-based approaches requiring long studies to prove harm from substances like glyphosate are flawed. The speaker asserts that the synergistic combination of toxins causes pleiotropic health issues, requiring common sense to understand the problem.

Drug companies won't test natural substances because they can't be patented. FDA requires testing for safety and efficacy, but natural products won't be tested due to lack of patentability. This creates a cycle where natural remedies are deemed unproven by the FDA.

Speaker 0 argues that the food supply is treated with a chemical called folic acid, which is not a natural vitamin and did not exist until the 1980s. According to the speaker, folic acid is not found anywhere on the surface of the earth, whereas folate does exist in nature. The speaker notes that during pregnancy, women are told to take high doses of folic acid, and questions why a man-made chemical that didn’t exist until the eighties is deemed absolutely necessary for a healthy pregnancy. The comparison is made between folate and methylfolate, implying a distinction between natural forms and synthetic forms. The speaker also states that in the United States, the entire grain supply—flour, rice, bread, pasta, grains of any kind, and cereals—is required to be sprayed with folic acid, although this is not openly labeled as such. Instead, it is described as fortified or enriched foods. The speaker claims that these fortified or enriched nutrients are fed to children, and asserts that half of the population has a gene mutation that prevents them from processing folic acid effectively. The consequence, according to the speaker, is that when a person cannot process a high amount of something introduced into the body, it becomes dysfunctional. The speaker then connects this to a broader societal issue, describing a common scenario: a child goes to school, comes home with a phone call reporting inattention and poor ability to follow directions, and the ensuing medical response is the prescription of stimulants such as Adderall or Ritalin. The speaker characterizes this as a solution that uses amphetamines to accelerate the central nervous system to match the pace of a racing mind, rather than addressing underlying factors. Ultimately, the speaker presents a proposed solution: remove folic acid, fortified, and enriched nutrients from the diet, and observe changes in behavior. The underlying claim is that eliminating these synthetic nutrients would calm behavior and improve function, implying that the current approach relies on artificial chemistry rather than natural nutrition.

The speaker says they want dyes removed from food, noting that products like Froot Loops contain dyes in the US but not in Canada or Europe. They are launching a review of Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) standards, which were adopted in 1958 to avoid testing common foods like flour, dairy, and eggs. The speaker claims industry took advantage of GRAS to add chemicals to food without review, resulting in 10,000 ingredients in US food compared to 400 in Europe. They state the US has the worst chronic disease burden globally. The plan is to eliminate GRAS standards for new products, review old ingredients for safety, and encourage companies to remove harmful ingredients.

Drug companies are not interested in natural substances that cannot be patented. The FDA requires substances to be tested for safety and effectiveness before they can be used legally. However, since natural substances cannot be patented, drug companies are unlikely to spend the money to test them. As a result, the FDA will always consider natural substances unproven and condemn them.

There are 250,000 drugs in the PDR, but none are designed to cure anything except maybe antibiotics for strep throat. Pharmaceutical companies focus on making money from insurance policies rather than creating cures. Laws do not require them to produce drugs that cure, despite their ability to do so.

Today, we'll discuss the war on natural remedies. The AMA formed the Committee on Quackery in 1963, leading federal agents to arrest those selling vitamins and supplements. Independent health practitioners faced persecution by the AMA, American Cancer Society, and Arthritis Foundation. People were jailed for herbal formulas, while harmful drugs were freely distributed. The Rockefeller Medical Monopoly funded these aggressive actions, targeting elderly women for selling herbal teas.

The speaker asserts that preservatives are toxic to the body and rejects putting any preservatives into it, stating that if what you’re consuming is not three ingredients or less (basically food), you should not put it into your body. They argue that common additives like citric acid, maltodextrin, vegetable glycerin, and soy lecithin should be avoided, describing each as problematic. Key claims include: - Citric acid is a toxic mold sprayed with aluminum, and it was created by Pfizer, so people are aware and should avoid it in supplements, food, cleaning products, and shampoos. - Maltodextrin is derived from corn that has been sprayed with pesticides and is a cheap filler. - Vegetable glycerin could come from canola, soy, or corn, and you have no idea; solvents and chemicals are used in its production. - Soy lecithin is another cheap filler used in vitamins, supplements, and foods and it causes bloating. - Xanthex gum (Xantham gum) is another additive mentioned. The speaker emphasizes keeping intake simple: if you’re eating, stick to the simplest things—meat, dairy, honey, fruit, vegetables, nuts, and superfoods. They claim all of these are single-ingredient foods. If you want to add flavor, you can use some spices, but there isn’t much needed beyond that. They criticize highly processed products, suggesting that items like cookies with many ingredients are “garbage” that will pollute the body. The speaker contends that dietary issues people encounter are often attributed to genetics, but in their view, the root cause is having “poisoned” the body with processed foods. The conclusion presented is that avoiding processed additives and focusing on simple, whole foods will lead to better gut health, whereas consuming processed, multi-ingredient products will lead to negative outcomes. The speaker closes with a blunt affirmation: “It’s great.”

Anything from nature cannot be patented, so drug companies won't spend millions testing natural substances for FDA approval. The FDA requires efficacy and safety testing, but since natural substances can't be patented, no company will invest in the testing. Therefore, according to the speaker, the FDA will always condemn anything from nature as unproven, regardless of its potential effectiveness.

Speaker 0 claims that pork is avoided so people can be sold Viagra, arguing that the precursors of pork and nitric oxide appear in the pharmaceutical product Viagra; thus, when men have erection problems, pharmaceutical companies can sell them Viagra instead of encouraging them to eat organic pork. They assert a broader pattern: foods are taken away from people, like peanuts, so that TRT can be sold, along with hormones and Viagra, and other products for gut issues supposedly caused by pesticide spraying on crops. They state that probiotics are grown on canola, corn, and soy. The conversation also mentions raw eggs; raw eggs are said to be very beneficial, and the speaker claims to eat two raw eggs every day. The speaker concludes that healing is simple.

The speaker argues that money is made from sick people, not healthy people, and that heart medicine, dandelions, and Roundup fit together. They claim the little yellow dandelions that people are told to hate are actually the greatest thing on earth for the heart, with enzymes and electrolytes that can cleanse and strengthen heart valves and muscles more than anything else, natural and free. They add that the same company that owns the heart medicine—the highest sold heart medicine in the world that makes hundreds of millions of dollars a year—also owns Roundup.

Speaker 0 argues that ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were suppressed because they are well-established drugs with safety records and billions of doses used; ivermectin is a human drug that also works on horses and won the Nobel Prize for its effectiveness in humans. He states there is a federal law that says an emergency use authorization (EUA) for a vaccine cannot be granted if there is any approved medication shown effective against the target disease, so admitting effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin would have made EUA for vaccines illegal and would have collapsed a “200,000,000,000 enterprise.” Speaker 1 notes this is the first time hearing that assertion, acknowledging it’s in the book. He suggests that if the medical community had been saying ivermectin is an effective COVID treatment, EUA for vaccines could not have been granted. Speaker 0 explains that many in the medical community supported effectiveness, citing a petition signed by 17,000 doctors and numerous peer-reviewed publications, but Fauci aggressively crusaded against it, labeling it a horse medication and alleging danger and overdosing to drown out those reports. Speaker 1 asks why Fauci continued to push the claim after EUA was granted. Speaker 0 answers that, even with EUA, the law may require withdrawal if a functioning medication exists, implying a motive to undermine ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. He mentions a strong incentive for Fauci to kill these medications and cites several doctors who treated tens of thousands of COVID patients and supported the claim that the science shows many lives could have been saved. He names Harvey Reich at Yale, Peter McCulloch as the most published doctor in history and prominent in biostatistics/epidemiology, and Peter Quarry in connection with the doctors who treated many patients. They allegedly state that half a million Americans did not need to die.

The key focus is on well-being, which has shifted over the past 20 to 30 years towards expensive remediation rather than wellness and prevention. The FDA plays a crucial role in this discussion. It raises the question of whether it's worthwhile to continue promoting costly drugs while neglecting preventive measures and overall wellness.

Speaker 0 posits that every time you consume natural flavorings, you could be eating something developed by human fetal cells. They claim that major food companies, including Pepsi, Nestle, and Kraft, have used a biotech company called Cinomics to create flavor enhancers. The disturbing part, they say, is that these artificial flavors were originally tested using HEK293, a cell line derived from aborted fetal tissue, and that due to legal loopholes they don’t have to tell consumers. They insist: natural flavors don’t necessarily come from nature; they can be chemically engineered in a lab using biotech derived from human cells. The explanation provided is that the food industry knows processed food loses its flavor, so instead of relying on real ingredients, they turn to biotech companies to develop flavor enhancers. Ceramics reportedly found that HEK293 cells, originally from fetal tissue, react to flavors like human taste buds, and by testing these flavors on cells, additives were created to make processed food better, allegedly addicting millions of people worldwide. These chemical compounds were then rebranded as natural flavors. Speaker 0 asserts the why behind it: the food industry is described as one giant deceptive machine that uses loopholes to keep consumers in the dark. They claim that today, even natural flavors can contain over 100 synthetic compounds developed using biotech processes that consumers aren’t told about. The overarching claim is that the motive is profit, not health, and that people are the experiment. If this has been hidden for decades, then they ask what else might be hidden, urging listeners to wake up, check labels, and demand transparency. They warn not to trust food giants that profit from deception, arguing that if manipulation of what people eat is possible, it could extend to manipulating how they think and feel. They conclude by stating that the truth is out and invite viewers to share whether they’ve been fooled by natural flavors in the comments.

Speaker 0: I have three friends. All three of them had stage four cancer. All three of them don't have cancer right now at all. And they had some serious stuff going on. And what did they take? Yep. Jesus. They took some what you've heard they've taken. Speaker 1: Ivermectin. Fenbendazole. Fenbendazole. Yeah. Speaker 0: That's it. Speaker 1: Yeah. I'm hearing that a lot. Speaker 0: They drank hydrochloride something or other? There's studies on Speaker 1: that now where people have proven that they've Speaker 0: drinking methylene blue and stuff Speaker 1: like that. Yeah. Methylene blue, which was a fabric dye. Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. It was a textile dye, and now they find it has profound effects on your mitochondria. Yep. Yeah. Speaker 0: This stuff works, man. There's a lot of stuff that does work, which is very strange Speaker 1: Mhmm. Because, again, it's profit. When you when you hear about things that are demonized and that that turn out to be effective, you always wonder, well, what is going on here? Mhmm. How is how is our medical institutions how have they failed us so that things that do cure you are not promoted because they're not profitable?

The discussion traces the alleged dark origins and long-running influence behind modern medicine and vaccines, framing today’s pharmaceutical system as the culmination of a century-long strategy led by powerful interests. - Rockefeller’s role is presented as foundational. Speaker 0 describes John D. Rockefeller becoming America’s first billionaire in 1913 and using strategic philanthropy through the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research (1901) and the Rockefeller Foundation (1913) to shape Western medicine toward laboratory-based, drug-centered approaches. The narrative claims this shift marginalized herbalism, naturopathy, homeopathy, and holistic remedies, promoting a model in which a pill is developed for every illness and patients remain chronically ill to sustain repeat business. - The early to mid-20th century is characterized as a period of regulatory capture and a pivot to synthetic, patentable drugs. From the 1920s to the 1940s, oil and chemical companies supposedly moved into synthetic drugs with Rockefeller guidance, removing incentives to patent natural remedies while patenting synthetic ones. This, the speaker argues, created a profit motive to treat illness as a recurring revenue stream. - Regulatory capture and the FDA’s evolution are discussed. The claim is that the FDA became more of a gatekeeper dependent on the industry it regulates, with former pharma executives and consultants filling key roles and rubber-stamping drugs. The only notable counterpoint highlighted is Doctor Francis Kelsey, who reportedly blocked the thalidomide approval in the 1960s, preventing birth defects in the United States and illustrating a brief period when public safety was prioritized. - The subsequent decades are summarized as intensifying industry influence. The 1970s are described as a time when pharmaceutical funding of clinical trials and lobbying expanded, and the 1980 Bayh-Dole Act is cited as enabling private patenting of publicly funded research, increasing collaboration between universities and industry and training medical professionals to favor pharmaceuticals. The 1990s are marked by direct-to-consumer advertising on U.S. television, which allegedly shifted patient behavior and doctor prescribing patterns toward medications advertised directly to the public. - Whistleblower testimony is invoked to illustrate ongoing concerns about drug safety and industry practices. A whistleblower recounts bribes and perks tied to drug promotion, including lavish gifts and trips to doctors, and asserts that patients are often treated as a means to profit for corporations. - The conversation shifts to vaccine safety and regulatory issues. The discussion includes claims about the COVID-19 vaccines, with assertions that the FDA acknowledges a number of child deaths, and a reference to an autopsy-based analysis by Dr. Peter McCullough suggesting a high proportion of vaccine-related deaths in examined cases. There is mention that Dr. McCullough faced professional pushback. - The importance of gut health and the microbiome is emphasized as a counterpoint to pharmaceutical-centric medicine. Speaker 3 argues that gut microbiome diversity is linked to many chronic conditions and aging, and cites the benefits of fermentation and kimchi. A specific emphasis is placed on kimchi as having a broad spectrum of beneficial bacteria and on the purported anti-aging effects observed in cell studies. - Kim Bright of Brightcore Nutrition advocates kimchi-based products (Kimchi One) as a practical approach to support gut health and overall well-being, describing customer testimonials about improved digestion, immune function, skin and hair health, and weight management. She argues for the daily use of gut-supporting probiotics, especially after antibiotic use, and asserts that antibiotics can disrupt gut flora, necessitating restoration of beneficial bacteria. - The speakers discuss consumer engagement and the role of direct customer contact, contrasting it with impersonal pharmaceutical industry practices. They express optimism about changes in medicine and a desire to reduce reliance on processed foods and large pharmaceutical advertising, hoping for reforms and greater transparency. Throughout, the tone asserts a pervasive influence of Rockefeller-era strategies on today’s medical and vaccine landscape, while promoting kimchi-based approaches as a healthier counterbalance and offering products as a practical embodiment of that stance.

Speaker 0 argues that apricot seeds are dangerous because they contain cyanide, a claim he attributes to the FDA in the 1970s scaring people away from eating them. He asserts that the same FDA tells people to take 62 vaccines, while also condemning nature, pointing to the apricot seed as “nature” that is dangerous. He notes that apple seeds, plum seeds, and cherry seeds also contain cyanide, and claims this cyanide dissolves cancer cells because cancer cells are “crying out for help” and are fed by the apricot, which leads to cancer beginning to “poop.” He asks the audience to see why the FDA “made that up,” suggesting the FDA came around in 1934 when people were drinking radium water and becoming overstimulated, and then went after “other natural remedies, like apricot seeds.” He remarks on the irony of the bitter apricot seed being the source of healing, while someone supposedly asks where to get apricot seeds and mentions RNC as a supplier with the seeds described as “amazing” and bitter. He contrasts almonds: now they are sweet and allegedly increase dopamine, whereas the bitter almond is claimed to have healing properties. He states that “the bitter is what has the healing properties for the body,” implying that the sweetness of modern almonds corresponds to a loss of those healing properties. He claims the government altered the supply by reducing bitter apricot trees and replacing them with sweet apricot trees. He concludes with a general, sweeping assertion that “Government, 20% of the GDP is the med…,” implying government involvement in the medical industry or health narrative, though the sentence is incomplete in the transcript. Overall, the speaker presents a narrative in which apricot seeds contain cyanide that can target cancer cells, critiques the FDA’s historical stance on natural remedies and radium water, contrasts bitter versus sweet almonds in terms of healing properties and dopamine effects, and alleges government manipulation of apricot tree varieties to favor sweet over bitter varieties, tying these claims to a broader statement about government influence on medicine and GDP.

Speaker 0 explains that people wonder why ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were suppressed, noting these are well established drugs with safety profiles and billions of doses given. He says ivermectin is a human drug and also works on horses, but it would win the Nobel Prize because it works so well on human beings. Speaker 1 responds “Mhmm.” Speaker 0 states there is a little known federal law that says you cannot give an emergency use authorization (EUA) to a vaccine if there is any medication approved for any purpose that is shown effective against the target disease. So if Tony Fauci or anybody had admitted that hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin are effective against COVID, it would have been illegal to give the EUAs to the vaccines, and they could never have gotten them approved. He suggests this would have collapsed a “200,000,000,000 enterprise.” Speaker 1 says, “That is fascinating,” noting they had been covering this for two years and that this is the first time hearing that; if the medical community had been saying ivermectin works, it would have affected EUA. Speaker 0 responds that the medical community did say that—17,000 doctors signed a petition, and there are many peer reviewed publications consistently saying so. Yet Fauci aggressively crusaded against it, insisting it’s a horse medication, that people are overdosing, and so on. He asks why Fauci kept saying it. Speaker 1 asks why Fauci continued to say it after he got the authorization. Speaker 0 offers possible explanations: one, even if you have an EUA, the law appears to say you can't have it anymore if there is a functioning medication. He acknowledges, though, that he cannot read Fauci’s mind but speculates there is a strong incentive for Fauci to kill ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. He cites several doctors who treated tens of thousands of COVID patients successfully and who argue that half a million Americans did not need to die, naming Harvey Reich at Yale, Peter McCulloch, and Peter Quarry.

The speaker claims the U.S. has 10,000 food ingredients due to the FDA's GRAS standard, which presumes chemicals are safe until proven guilty. Europe, in contrast, has only 400. Kellogg's Froot Loops in the U.S. contain red, blue, and yellow dyes, unlike the version sold in Canada, which uses vegetable dyes. A U.S. McDonald's French fry has 11 ingredients, while the same product in Europe has three. The speaker believes companies are mass poisoning American children due to their influence over regulatory agencies and asserts they are the only one who can stop it.

A few years ago, the New York Attorney General discovered that 79% of supplements from Target, GNC, Walmart, and Walgreens did not contain the ingredients they claimed to have. Some even contained sawdust instead. Only 4% of Walmart products tested had DNA from the listed plants. To ensure you're getting quality supplements, it's important to buy from companies that conduct third-party testing and have high-quality facilities. The speaker, who has experience in pharmaceutical sales, recommends trusting certain brands that do their own due diligence.

The speaker urges listeners to ask themselves whether their symptoms or diagnosed conditions, and the prescription drugs they take, are truly caused by drug deficiency. They question the idea that conditions like high blood pressure, migraines, diabetes, or heart disease are due to a lack of the drugs themselves. The speaker makes several pointed claims about specific medications: - Lisinopril: described as snake venom in a tablet from a viper in Brazil (Jarocas Viper) since 1981, and asserts that the listener may be swallowing dried snake venom to lower blood pressure, even though the doctor may not have explained it this way. - Xarelto: said to be prescribed for atrial fibrillation by a cardiologist. - Imitrex: noted as something people inject for migraines. They challenge the notion that symptoms are caused by deficiencies in these drugs or by the body lacking them. They ask whether the body is deficient in acetaminophen (and by extension Advil) or Tylenol to cause fever, arguing that none of these claims are true. They assert that these are man-made chemicals and drugs and that none of us are deficient in them. The speaker then presents a contrasting view: every single disease and every single symptom is a clear sign that you are specifically nutrient deficient. They contend that when the nutrients are put back into the body—“the nutrients back in that God gave you and put in the earth”—the earth’s supply to the human body aligns with how God designed it, providing everything that’s for the benefit of man. The overall message emphasizes a shift from relying on drugs to restoring nutrients from natural sources as the body’s path to health.

Natural substances cannot be patented, which means drug companies are not interested in testing them for FDA approval. The FDA requires substances to be tested for safety and efficacy before they can be used legally. However, since natural substances cannot be patented, no one is willing to spend the money to conduct these tests. As a result, the FDA will always consider natural substances unproven and condemn them.

The speaker claims that the synthetic vitamin industry is a scam created by Big Pharma to sell more products. They argue that even organic vitamins are made from industrial waste such as coal tar ash, petroleum oil, black mold, and cyanide. The speaker explains that the push to sell vitamins began in the 1920s, with organizations lobbying for iodine to be added to table salt. This was followed by the fortification of milk with vitamin D and the identification of new vitamin deficiency diseases. The speaker suggests that this created a cycle of new vitamin discoveries and the need for chemical substitutes to keep people healthy.

To make someone chronically ill and dependent on drugs, one should have them eat the standard American diet, lower their cholesterol below 200, and give them proton pump inhibitors. This creates nutrient and vitamin D deficiencies due to lack of cholesterol, as well as testosterone and estrogen deficiencies. The result is a lifetime of illness requiring multiple drugs, as additional medications are needed to mitigate the side effects of the initial drugs, leading to polypharmacy. The FDA is supposed to protect us, but is influenced by big pharma, due to the large profits made from drug therapy.