TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker discusses the relationship between profits and cancer treatment in the United States. They mention a study that found chemotherapy to be ineffective 97% of the time, but it is still used because doctors profit from it. The speaker explains how doctors receive financial incentives for prescribing chemotherapy drugs. They argue that the pharmaceutical industry has control over cancer treatment and that the medical system prioritizes drugs and surgery over alternative approaches. The speaker suggests that funding for cancer research should also go towards nutritional, homeopathic, acupuncture, and naturopathic research. They criticize the for-profit nature of the medical industry and its impact on patient outcomes.

My name is Gwen Olsen, a former pharmaceutical industry veteran. The industry focuses on maintaining diseases, not curing them. Psychiatric drugs keep patients reliant on medications for life. Many drugs are no more effective than placebos, with exercise often proving more beneficial. The pharmaceutical industry prioritizes profit over patient well-being, pushing unnecessary medications. It's crucial to educate yourself on alternative health options to avoid becoming a lifelong pharmaceutical customer. Take charge of your health, share knowledge, and prevent loved ones from falling victim to unnecessary medications. Thank you. Translation: The speaker, Gwen Olsen, discusses the pharmaceutical industry's focus on maintaining diseases rather than curing them, highlighting the ineffectiveness of many drugs and the importance of educating oneself on alternative health options.

Speaker 0: This is interesting because we actually have some positive news to discuss today, which is always a good thing. We have RFK junior, saying that added sugars are the things that are driving metabolic diseases. Today, our government declares war on added sugar. My message is clear. Eat real food. Imagine that. We are finally hearing a message that is going to help people improve their health. It's really refreshing. Speaker 1: Yeah. It I've been in this fifty one years. As you recall, I I was diagnosed with, high grade embryonal cell carcinoma fifty one years ago, and I decided to leave the Mayo Clinic. Not gonna give you the whole story this morning, but, I decided to leave the Mayo Clinic and go down to Oasis of Hope Hospital in Tijuana. And there I met the Contreras family, and big, big message to me was stop eating sugar. Sugar feeds your cancer. Can you do that, Rick? And the reason I did do it, and I can look you in the eye and say I didn't cheat on this, is because my church had put money into sending me there. My my fam my father-in-law kicked in good amount of money, people praying for me. And I thought, how ungrateful would a person be to take their money and then cast the advice to the wind? So I did. I, for five years, I I eliminated the sugar. And even today, I was reading in the bible a few days ago where god says in two places, don't eat a lot of honey. Imagine that, you know, long time ago. And and god said, you know, honey is is good. It's tasty, but use it sparingly just like wine.

The talk traces a throughline from mid-20th century to today around nicotine products and the medical establishment, tying financial and political power to how health is marketed and regulated. - In the 1940s, Rockefeller doctors are described as being paid by tobacco companies to promote cigarette smoking. The argument then extends that tobacco companies realized they wouldn’t endure indefinitely, so they sought to keep influence by steering doctors to promote nicotine replacements—nicotine gum and nicotine patches—and they expanded into other nicotine deliveries, including inhalers and CBD products. - The narrative continues by asserting that, by 2025, pharmaceutical companies Johnson & Johnson and GSK are producing all of these nicotine products. It labels these same brands as wanting global vaccination and depopulation and claims they are run by the Rockefellers. It further asserts that another Rockefeller is involved in controlling the medical system and its connections to tobacco. - A chemical claim is raised: polysorbate eighty is found in nicotine gums, and this is described as the same chemical used in vaccines to break down the blood–brain barrier. The claim is made that polysorbate 80 is a modified neurotoxin nanoparticle used in nicotine products and ivermectin, suggesting a link between these products and broader vaccine technologies. - The speaker questions trust in doctors, noting a contrast between ongoing virus narratives and supposed alternative explanations. A claim is made that radio wave sickness has affected people since 2020 and that medical books describe viruses as being manipulated by the Rockefellers and Rothschilds. - The discussion references a recommended reading list: a book about pandemics resulting from new forms of technology and the rollout of injections, and Tom Conlin’s The Contagion Myth, which is said to debunk germs and viruses and the Rockefeller narrative. It notes this discourse traces back to the Flexner Report of 1913. - The closing sentiment frames a choice for the audience: decide whether to believe the stated lies or to move forward, with the implication that the path chosen will determine one’s understanding of health, medicine, and the role of powerful families in shaping medical narratives. In sum, the speaker weaves together claims of Rockefeller influence over doctors, tobacco and nicotine products, pharmaceutical dominance in nicotine delivery by 2025, chemical links to vaccines, alleged misinformation about viruses and “radio wave sickness,” and recommended literature that challenges mainstream germ theory and historic medical authority.

The speaker shares their personal experience with cancer and their journey to finding an alternative treatment. They discuss undergoing surgeries and years of chemotherapy before reaching their lifetime maximum. Feeling hopeless, they receive a suggestion to try a dewormer called fenbendazole. Skeptical at first, they decide to give it a try and start taking a combination of fenbendazole, curcumin, somatodine, annatto, and AHCC. To their surprise, subsequent scans show a reduction in the disease, and eventually, they become cancer-free. The speaker emphasizes the importance of faith and encourages others to explore alternative treatments. They also mention the financial interests of the pharmaceutical industry.

The speaker states they will never consult a doctor about general health again, believing doctors are ignorant and only prescribe medication. They claim doctors don't understand human biology and only focus on prescribing medicine for every ailment, leading to multiple medications with numerous side effects. The speaker reports being previously prescribed medication for thyroid issues, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure. They are now on no medication, and their blood work is better than ever. The speaker feels significantly improved and believes they saved their own life.

The speaker suggests that the medical field is controlled by big pharmaceutical companies, whom they compare to a mafia. They claim that these companies create medications that have harmful side effects and keep people dependent on doctors. The speaker also believes that the more one relies on medical treatments, the sicker they become. They mention chemotherapy as a lucrative treatment, but assert that there is a cure for cancer, which they attribute to God.

Speaker 0 outlines a sequence of political and corporate protections related to litigation and public health. He states that a Trump executive order will federally protect pesticide companies, such as Bayer, from lawsuits related to $7,200,000,000 in cancer. He contrasts this with Clinton’s protection of cell phone tower companies from lawsuits and Reagan’s protection of vaccine companies, implying a pattern across administrations. He then deepens the claim by alleging that all three presidents supported “the tiny hats, the Rothschilds,” and cites Murder by Injection to assert that Bayer was owned by the Rothschilds. Based on this, he advises against spraying pesticides on land and suggests boycotting as a strategy, noting that some farmers practice organic methods without pesticides. He names Amos Millers, Polyface, and White Oak Pastures as examples of farms that can operate without chemicals. The speaker contends that chemicals are used because if people aren’t poisoned, big pharma doesn’t make money, and the medical system is “ran by the Rawls Childs.” He mentions having delivered hundreds of talks on electroculture, which he says demonstrates that it’s possible to avoid using any pesticides, and asserts that those talks were deleted by YouTube for the topic. When asked what electroculture does, he promises it would bring “abundance”—“lots and lots and lots and abundance, all without chemicals.” Throughout, he repeatedly urges listeners to question everything and connects pesticide use to broader conspiratorial claims about corporate and financial control, as well as the influence of the Rothschilds on health and agriculture.

The speaker recounts a conversation where Steve advised against alternative treatments, urging a direct approach to Western medicine. Steve cautioned against trying herbs or other methods. The speaker believes Steve's advice stemmed from his own experience attempting to cure his pancreatic cancer through alternative means. The speaker recalls becoming close to Steve when they both had cancer simultaneously.

The speaker discusses mistletoe as a “superfood” and highlights its berries, noting that they are very bitter—“just like apricot seeds.” The speaker then asserts that mistletoe is “the solution to cancer.” They claim that mistletoe therapy has been used “all throughout the world” but has been banned in many places. The speaker asks the audience to wonder why this is the case and answers that it is because “the Rockefeller's control the system, natural remedies are not allowed to be told.” They further suggest that the widespread use of mistletoe therapy was restricted due to influential control over medical information. The speaker connects these ideas to a broader critique of information about natural remedies, asserting that “natural remedies are not allowed to be told.” They then refer to the cultural practice of kissing under a mistletoe, proposing that “the whole kissing under a mistletoe, they kind of subconsciously telling you all along to eat this.” The message implies that a cultural ritual around mistletoe serves as a subconscious cue to consume the plant. In closing, the speaker reiterates that mistletoe is “pretty delicious,” reinforcing the claim that it is enjoyable to eat despite the earlier discussion of its bitterness and therapeutic potential.

Lifespan improvement is attributed to medical interventions, but medicine only contributes about 3.5% through antibiotics, vaccines, etc. The rest stems from the health revolution: clean water, shelter, electricity, and child labor laws ending. The "magic of medicine" is overstated. The medical field has value in surgery and certain drugs, especially for organ failure. The speaker's Hippocratic Oath involves consulting any helpful consultant and prioritizing the patient's well-being, including using the most benign therapies first. Therapies that align with the body's blueprint and the theory of health, rather than just fighting disease, yield better results, assuming there's time.

There is nothing that will prevent, reverse, or delay Alzheimer's disease, according to the Alzheimer's Association website, but this is false. The speaker claims to have published cases, clinical trials, and books showing improvements in thousands of people, which is far better than what has been achieved with drugs. The speaker asserts that there is a fundamental change in the way we think about and practice medicine in the twenty first century, but most physicians are not yet implementing it.

In this episode, Rick Hill shares a perspective on sugar, ultra-processed foods, and metabolic disease that predates current headlines by decades. He recounts a pivotal personal journey from the early 1970s, when Mayo Clinic told him he had only months to live. Rather than accept that prognosis, he pursued an integrative, nutrition-focused approach that treated cancer as a metabolic condition, beginning with the complete removal of sugar and processed foods. Rick Hill survived and has remained cancer-free for more than five decades. The conversation connects today’s breaking news to lived experience, asking a deeper question: what if we’ve known the root cause of many chronic diseases far longer than we admit? The discussion argues that the root causes of chronic illness extend beyond isolated symptoms and treatment, suggesting a fundamental metabolic pattern linked to diet and food processing. Hill emphasizes that cancer and other metabolic conditions can be approached through nutritional strategies that modify metabolic processes, particularly by eliminating sugar and heavily processed foods. The host frames Hill’s experience as a lens to evaluate contemporary public health debates and policy discussions around diet, metabolic health, and disease. The conversation also touches on broader societal themes tied to public health and policy. It critiques the way crises are framed and managed, noting how emergency measures can lead to longer-term shifts in power and access. The speakers examine whether current health crises are reflective of deeper structural issues and whether root causes—such as diet, lifestyle, and metabolic factors—have been sufficiently acknowledged in public discourse and policy. The transcript then situates these ideas within a larger frame about control and access in modern society, contrasting personal health autonomy with broader questions of civil liberties and proof of compliance. The discussion suggests that understanding and addressing metabolic roots could inform how societies think about prevention, treatment, and policy in the realm of chronic disease. Overall, the episode seeks to connect an individual’s decades-long cancer survival story to ongoing debates about sugar, ultra-processed foods, and metabolic disease, urging consideration of root causes as a central element in understanding and addressing chronic health challenges. (Note: Promotional details and advertising content from sponsor mentions have been omitted from this summary.)

They canceled this cartoon because it exposed the truth: There's more money in treating disease than curing it. Why cure cancer in a day when they can bill you for a lifetime? I, Dana White, won't go to doctors for my general health. They just want to give you pills. The best doctors couldn't stop my snoring or control my blood pressure and cholesterol. Now everything is good. Medicines stack up, and you end up on fourteen pills with side effects. I jump out of bed ready to kick ass every day now. I went from constant sickness to this by making one change using natural remedies. A doctor revealed that chronic sinus problems are often due to mold fungus, and oil of oregano is the best remedy. The trillion-dollar healthcare industry limits access to this information. There's a lot of money to be made from keeping you sick. My family uses oil of oregano instead of antibiotics. Make sure to choose one with high carvacrol. I use this one from Balanced.

The medical industry is based on a lie. John D. Rockefeller bought major universities and media companies, creating his own medical curriculum based on pharmacology, which extracts substances from oil. These medicines were found to cause cancer. Rockefeller used his power to debunk natural therapies, discredit doctors who spoke against him, destroy their lives, and even assassinate some. If you think you need pills, pharmaceutical companies will control you.

The speaker asserts that the modern medical establishment is disconnected due to its focus on treatment, billing, and a high-throughput model. They suggest shifting focus towards preventative measures like school lunch programs instead of medication. The speaker advocates for addressing food as medicine, gut health, the microbiome, and environmental toxins as causes of cancer, rather than solely relying on treatments like chemotherapy. They propose using cooking classes to manage diabetes, rather than just prescribing insulin. The speaker believes a new report calls for transforming healthcare from a reactionary system to a proactive one.

One speaker argues that mold should not be feared because mold consists of spores, and spores are everywhere; spores are equated to pollen, suggesting that fear of mold is unfounded since they are the same thing. The other speaker adds that there are studies indicating that “those ones all heal all the diseases,” highlighting a notion that fear campaigns around mold are misleading. They claim that if a person has mold, candida, or similar issues in their body, it signifies “too many toxins” and that the body is signaling this excess as a remedy to keep the person alive. The dialogue includes a specific recollection about Ajana, who purportedly said that certain things are in the body so that toxins, metals, or similar substances may not actually take you out; otherwise they would seep into the organs and end you quickly. This is presented as evidence of the body’s miraculous nature. A central theme repeatedly asserted is that “the human body is absolutely miraculous” and that “everything is reversible.” The speakers list various conditions—autism, autoimmune diseases, lupus, and even eyesight—claiming they have witnessed people reverse these conditions. It is stated that people can regenerate their eyes and no longer need an eye professional, and that reversing all conditions is possible if one takes initiative. The speakers critique the medical establishment, implying that “every single professional will tell you the opposite because they want you to be their patient for life.” This sentiment is tied to a broader call for personal action: if people do not make changes—such as removing WiFi or taking other unspecified steps—they will continue to complain rather than find solutions. Overall, the message emphasizes that fear about molds and toxins is misguided, that the body possesses remarkable self-healing capabilities, and that proactive efforts can reverse a wide range of health issues. The speakers express a strong desire to provide solutions and to move people forward, rather than remain mired in complaint.

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.

Speaker 1 notes that ivermectin has broken through to the public sphere beyond COVID and is now discussed for many diseases. Speaker 0 asks where ivermectin stands in the scientific and medical community today and what other use cases exist for the medicine. Speaker 1 responds that thousands of doctors follow their data; 18,000 GI doctors see their data when they publish or present at the American College of Gastroenterology. Word-of-mouth in the medical community is a major form of marketing, with one doctor speaking to another. Referencing the COVID era, Speaker 1 mentions corruption and retractions, then describes ivermectin as having created a healthcare revolution where doctors have lined up to work to see other benefits of ivermectin without needing to ask permission to treat patients. A whole branch of healthcare is moving away from the same institute that Speaker 1 helped create drugs to market with his sisters. He says a group of doctors who had sponsored or helped pharma are turning away from pharma and exploring other methods to treat patients. He states his job is to unite doctors to see the truth, while bringing pharma back to being righteous and stopping data manipulation and scientist censorship. Speaker 1 references his book, Let’s Talk SH.T, acknowledging he could be wrong and challenging others to prove him wrong and reproduce the data to retract the hypothesis or paper. He emphasizes that the scientific process should be followed, especially when everything was done by the book and as well as he could. He adds that the research was not funded by others; it was funded by his savings. He created the microbiome research foundation with the goal of raising money to study kids with autism and to push an IND to the FDA, which cost about $600,000 to obtain FDA approval. He clarifies that no external party paid for this work, and he continues to struggle to raise funds to treat poor autistic kids who cannot afford expensive stool testing, drugs, and vitamins; they need help and everyone should step in to assist these kids. Speaker 1 concludes that their focus is fixing autism, with the aim of later addressing Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and cancer.

Speaker 0 argues that type 1 diabetes is linked to factors such as raw meat, raw milk, bee pollen, removing WiFi, barefoot grounding, and dragon's blood. They claim the pancreas is “pretty much just getting zapped by WiFi, electricity” and that these elements “mess with your blood sugar.” They assert that consuming raw meats, raw milk, and raw honey causes the pancreas to work harder due to “too much electricity, too many radio frequencies,” combined with too much processed foods, and that everything in the gut turns to sugar, leaving the pancreas overloaded. They propose that diabetes type 1 is reversible, and that type 2 diabetes requires only activity and dietary changes. They state that “all illnesses are reversible,” and expand on a broader view that illness exists because of systemic incentives: they claim the Rockefeller system benefits from people being sick and detoxing, implying that if people healed themselves through a raw diet, eliminating WiFi, and reconnecting with the sun, they would not be patients and hospitals would shut down. They suggest doctors, nurses, and hospitals rely on keeping people sick and dependent to earn money. The speaker reflects on a personal journey that led to these realizations, concluding that many people are lying and that others want you to remain a patient. They present a worldview in which sickness serves financial interests, and imply that true healing comes from lifestyle choices such as dietary changes, removing exposure to WiFi, and increasing sun exposure.

The discussion traces a long, shadowy arc in the development of modern vaccines and medicine, arguing that rapid COVID-19 vaccine progress rests on over a century of influence by powerful interests rather than sudden breakthroughs. - The narrative centers on John D. Rockefeller, who became America’s first billionaire in 1913, the same year the Federal Reserve was created. It frames Rockefeller as leveraging his oil wealth to monopolize medicine, promoting prescription drugs while vilifying natural and holistic remedies. The claim is that Rockefeller used strategic philanthropy (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, established 1901; Rockefeller Foundation, 1913) to push laboratory-based, drug-centered medicine, marginalize herbalism and naturopathy, and steer doctors toward pharmaceuticals. The effect, according to the speakers, was to keep people sick so they would return for ongoing treatments rather than cures. - The timeline continues with the rise of the pharmaceutical industry from the 1920s to 1940s, described as moving into synthetic drugs with Rockefeller guidance. Natural remedies were said to be non-patentable while synthetic drugs could be patented, creating a business incentive for ongoing, chronic treatment rather than cures. - The conversation shifts to regulatory dynamics, arguing that regulation became regulatory capture from the 1930s to 1960s, with the FDA functioning as a gatekeeper increasingly populated by former pharma professionals. The FDA’s integrity is debated through the example of Dr. Francis Kelsey, who resisted approving thalidomide; the drug was later linked to birth defects worldwide, and Kelsey’s stance is presented as a rare early stand for public safety. - In the 1970s and 1980s, the narrative asserts growing corporate influence: pharma lobbies expand, advertising budgets explode, and medicine becomes a growth industry. The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 is cited as enabling private patents on publicly funded research, tying universities to pharma interests and shaping medical education toward pharmaceutical solutions. Direct-to-consumer advertising is highlighted as a turning point in the 1990s, pressuring doctors through patient demand spurred by TV ads. - The discussion includes a first-hand account from a former pharmaceutical sales representative, Lisa Prada, who describes bribes and perks (golf outings, concerts, strip clubs, etc.) to influence prescribing, and asserts that patients were often treated as means to corporate ends. - Kim Bright, founder of Brightcore Nutrition, joins to discuss current health issues, arguing that the pharmaceutical industry prioritizes profits over patient well-being. She notes that the Rockefeller Foundation funded COVID-19 vaccine efforts (she cites $55 million) and argues the foundation and industry continued to push medical interventions globally. She notes that the FDA’s public acknowledgment of COVID vaccine-related child deaths is incongruent with whistleblowers’ claims and autopsy data. - The program underscores the idea that prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death in the United States and Europe, citing studies on gut microbiome disruption from medications like antibiotics and acid-reducing drugs (dysbiosis) as a major contributor to chronic disease. - The gut microbiome is emphasized as central to health. Dr. David Perlmutter’s work on the gut-brain connection is referenced, including criticism faced for linking diet and fermented foods to health outcomes. Kimchi is highlighted as a powerful antimicrobial and a potential anti-aging agent in cellular studies. The hosts discuss kimchi’s health benefits, including improved digestion, immune function, and weight management. - Brightcore promotes Kimchi One capsules as a convenient alternative for Americans who dislike traditional kimchi, claiming benefits such as reduced bloating, better digestion, improved hair and skin, and weight loss. A discount offer is advertised: 25% off online, up to 50% off with a phone order, free shipping, and a free vitamin D3 with the first 100 callers, using the code provided. - The conversation closes with reflections on the do-not-mistake-the-system dynamic, optimism about changes in medicine, and calls for removing dependency on processed foods and advertising-driven medicine, with an acknowledgment of RFK Jr.’s activism against pharmaceutical ads on television.

Rick describes chemotherapy as a lot of work, expensive, and painful. He visited the Mayo Clinic, went into rooms, introduced himself as Rick, and asked patients a quick question: “Would you do this again now that you've started your chemo?” He states that, to a person, the patients said, “I am so sorry I started this. This is crazy. You know, the collateral damage in your body is enormous. I have none of that collateral damage.”

The transcript presents a provocative framing of cancer treatment decisions and the influence of alternative medicine advocates. It opens with a claim that chemotherapy is widely recommended for cancer patients because oncologists receive a four to six percent commission for each treatment, implying a financial incentive behind standard cancer care. The speaker then contrasts this with the stance of a prominent monarch, referred to as the king of the United Kingdom, who is not going to undergo chemotherapy. This contrast is used to question why others would pursue chemotherapy when a high-profile leader would refuse it. Following this, the dialogue introduces a figure described as a “great fan” and loyal promoter of alternative medicine, who is depicted as consistently opposed to chemotherapy. This individual is characterized as someone who believes strongly in natural remedies, herbs, potions, and related approaches rather than conventional medical treatments. The speaker suggests that this person’s position aligns with a broader skepticism toward chemotherapy as a conventional option. The conversation then pivots to encourage readers or listeners to explore a specific book: A World Without Cancer, The Story of B 17 by G. Edward Griffin. The transcript explicitly mentions the book as a recommended source of information, signaling that it presents an alternative view on cancer and treatment. Within the discussion of alternatives, seeds containing “B 17” are highlighted as potential natural solutions. The seeds named include apricot seeds, cherry seeds, and plum seeds, with the claim that all contain B17, which is framed as a natural remedy in place of radiation and in opposition to what the speaker characterizes as an industry’s commission-based approach. Throughout, the speakers emphasize a preference for natural or non-traditional remedies over the conventional chemotherapy route. The language conveys skepticism about chemotherapy, suggesting a conflict of interest in the standard medical system, and promotes B17-containing seeds as a viable alternative, linking them to both the non-use of chemotherapy by the king and the endorsement of a book that supports these views. The overall message presented is that chemotherapy is driven by financial incentives, while there are natural, seed-based alternatives advocated by proponents of natural medicine, with a notable emphasis on the book by G. Edward Griffin as a source of justification.

Thomas Binder argues that there has never been a pandemic of a killer virus, but there has been a pandemic of cowards. He claims doctors observe a pandemic of severe illnesses and sudden unexpected deaths from heart attack, myocarditis, aortic dissection, stroke, pulmonary embolism, thrombosis and inflammation of other organs, disseminated intravascular coagulation, increased infections including COVID, cancer, autoimmune diseases, infertility, miscarriage, and many more. He asserts that the modified RNA vaccine platform represents the greatest medical crime in human history and a humanitarian disaster of unprecedented proportions. He states that the pharmaceutical industry is moving all vaccinations to the modified RNA vaccine platform. Binder argues that the modified RNA vaccine platform is nonsensical and life threatening, identifying two fundamental flaws: first, injecting the construction plan for a protein foreign to the body without any control over which body cells will produce it, in what dose, and for how long; second, the cells coerced to produce the foreign protein and present it on the surface will be mistakenly recognized by the immune system as foreign, leading to destruction much like the rejection of a foreign organ. He contends the alleged modified RNA vaccination coerces the body to produce a toxin in an unknown dose and for an unknown period, and literally transforms parts of the body into an alien. Therefore, he asserts, the entire modified RNA vaccine platform must be banned immediately. Binder claims that governments are negotiating a plandemic treaty with the WHO, and if signed, the WHO will be placed above the constitution of the country, resulting in loss of freedom of choice for citizens, governments, and parliaments. He states that “who controls the who controls the world.” He proclaims that the only reasonable, 100% effective and safe prevention of another criminal pandemic is the immediate smashing of the WHO into a thousand pieces. Addressing those who have been injected, or experienced side effects, he encourages hope that more responsible doctors and scientists are researching ways to treat even the most complex side effects. He likens the situation to smoking: it is almost never too late to quit and live healthier. Regardless of injection status, he urges listeners to wake up, stand up, and tell manufacturers, alleged experts, government, parliament, generals, and authorities who have failed in the Covid scandal that enough is enough. He calls for stepping back and standing in courts, arguing this for the sake of a future worth living for children and grandchildren.