TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Twenty percent of Americans did not take the COVID vaccine because it was not safe enough. The mRNA in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines has been chemically modified to resist breakdown by enzymes. The mRNA and spike protein are found in the heart and brain, and the spike protein circulates in the blood for six to nine months post-vaccination. The speaker claims the lethal part of the virus circulates in the blood of vaccinated individuals, especially after boosters, and that it is a killer protein. The speaker asserts safety trumps efficacy and objects to claims that vaccines, specifically the COVID-19 vaccine, saved millions of lives. They state that consent forms do not guarantee the vaccine will save lives and that there has never been a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial showing that COVID-19 vaccines reduce mortality or hospitalization.

Over 1.6 million adverse event reports have been filed to VAERS for COVID-19 vaccines, with a significant increase in 2021. The underreporting factor is estimated to be around 31 for severe events like hospitalizations and death. The speaker believes the mRNA platform was used to gather data for future gene therapy applications.

There is a new mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, but there is no evidence to support its effectiveness or safety in human trials. Additionally, several studies from different countries suggest that these vaccines may actually increase the risk of contracting COVID-19 over time. This is concerning and not a typical outcome.

First of all, multiple studies now, to be very clear, multiple studies now show that of the two, Moderna and Pfizer, Pfizer is definitely worse. Pfizer is worse for cardiovascular side effects related to blood clotting. Pfizer is worse for neurologic effects, and Pfizer is worse for serious adverse events overall. A few studies have shown that Pfizer may be associated with be associated with an increase in mortality also compared to Moderna. The vaccines, they are not the same. You've got probably more myocarditis cases with Moderna, but Pfizer is worse overall. So I apologize that it hasn't been clear. Sort of along those lines, what's your recommendation?

Monash University has just received a grant from Moderna to produce 100,000,000 doses of messenger RNA vaccine. The speaker questions what arms they are going to go into, and what they are going to have tagged, and what message they will have. They note that Monash has just come out with the RSV data. The speaker recalls a lesson from the 1970s: you steer away from trying to produce an RSV vaccine because you get immune enhanced disease. Many should have told them this; they didn’t cancel things, they put it on pause. So they paused, putting RSV messenger RNA into the arms of infants. The speaker states that twelve point five percent, one in eight, of these kids nearly died from overwhelming RSV infection. Twelve point five percent. The speaker suggests it’s a bit like they can’t control the dose and they shouldn’t have been doing it in the first place.

The speaker discusses the issue of DNA contamination in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and questions the FDA's handling of the situation. They explain that normally rigorous tests are required to ensure safety, but in this case, the FDA ignored those tests. The speaker also mentions that Moderna's own patent acknowledges concerns about DNA and insertional immunogenesis. They reveal that DNA fragments, including an antibiotic resistance gene and sequences from simian virus 40, were found in the vaccines. The speaker expresses shock at the FDA's lack of transparency and highlights the potential risks associated with DNA damage, such as cancer and birth defects.

Speaker 0 discusses the FDA approval of a new Moderna COVID vaccine, called MN Spike, for active immunization to prevent coronavirus disease. The speaker notes, “the messenger RNA coronavirus vaccine doesn't prevent infection and doesn't prevent transmission,” and says, “Yet here we are.” In the warnings and precautions section, the speaker states, “This product can cause myocarditis and pericarditis usually within the first week following vaccination.” They remark on ingredients, asserting, “Ingredients include polyethylene glycol, antifreeze,” and add, “Sure. Put that right into your body.” They claim the vaccine “codes for the spike glycoprotein,” and emphasize, “Remember, folks, this is the first time in human history that we have injected a product into the body that have forced our ribosomes, protein manufacturing machinery, to produce a nonhuman protein.” The speaker highlights section 13.1, asserting, “This product has not been evaluated for the potential for it to cause cancer.” They then say, “Well, actually, it has. These products now have been around for several years. Multi boosted people are showing an increased risk of cancer, often termed turbo cancer.” They argue that the warning should be changed to reflect that the product may cause cancer. Regarding studies, they claim, “not a single, not one randomized controlled trial against a placebo,” and ask, “What do they compare it to? The earlier version of their vaccine.” They conclude, “This is perfect. In my opinion, all COVID vaccines should pulled from the market immediately and a thorough investigation be launched.” They add, “Informed consent Friday. I hope this is helpful. Your comments are always appreciated. Take care.”

FDA, I don't know why, just approved a new Moderna COVID vaccine. Here is the package insert. It's called MN Spike. It's a vaccine indicated for active immunization to prevent coronavirus disease. This product can cause myocarditis and pericarditis, usually within the first week following vaccination. Ingredients include polyethylene glycol, antifreeze. And it codes for the spike glycoprotein. This is the first time in human history that we have injected a product into the body that have forced our ribosomes, protein manufacturing machinery, to produce a nonhuman protein. This product has not been evaluated for the potential for it to cause cancer. not a single, not one randomized controlled trial against a placebo. What do they compare it to? The earlier version of their vaccine. In my opinion, all COVID vaccines should be pulled from the market immediately and a thorough investigation be launched.

The Florida Department of Health, under Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladipo, published guidance on updated COVID-19 boosters. On August 22, 2024, the FDA approved updated mRNA vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna for ages 12+ and granted emergency use authorization for ages 6 months to 11 years. The guidance states the booster approval occurred without human clinical trial data and does not protect against the dominant strain, which accounts for 37% of US infections. There is limited data showing substantial protection against the virus or variants. The federal government hasn't required manufacturers to prove boosters prevent hospitalization or death, and has failed to provide sufficient safety and efficacy data or acknowledge safety concerns, including prolonged mRNA/spike protein circulation, increased risk of lower respiratory infections, and increased risk of autoimmune disease. The Florida Department of Health encourages healthcare providers to discuss this guidance with patients. Based on global immunity and available data, Dr. Ladipo advises against mRNA COVID vaccines. Providers concerned about high-risk patients should prioritize non-mRNA vaccines and treatments.

Moderna's patents acknowledge that DNA integration is a risk, necessitating the invention of new methods to remove DNA. According to the speaker, Moderna is approximately tenfold more effective than Pfizer at removing DNA. The speaker claims that the manufacturers' patents indicate that the vaccines pose an oncogenic risk. The speaker suggests that one need not consult external papers to recognize this risk, as it is evident from the manufacturers' own patents.

The speaker clarifies they are injured by an mRNA therapeutic, not a vaccine, and highlights issues with lipid nanoparticles and synthetic mRNA, which can persist for hundreds of days. They claim that instructing cells to produce a protein that presents on the cell surface can trigger autoimmune disorders. The speaker states that the spike protein itself is biologically active, causing cells to grow and divide inappropriately, and was known to damage the placenta and lungs. They assert they knew early on that the shot didn't stay in the arm. They cite 2005 research showing the SARS-CoV-1 spike protein alone could harm animals. The speaker references 2015 gain-of-function research at UNC, NIH, and Wuhan labs, where a more lethal and transmissible SARS virus was created. A traditional vaccine attempt for this virus caused harm and lethality in animals, with pathology slides showing similar vascular lung damage seen with SARS-CoV-2. The speaker concludes that "they" knew about these risks but still rolled out the vaccine, profiting from it while falsely claiming it was safe and effective.

An Australian woman has chronicled the money trail showing universities receiving millions to create messenger RNA factories. Messenger RNA vaccines are not needed, will never be better than existing vaccines, and bring huge, unsorted adverse events. However, they are patented and allow for creating new vaccines yearly, like the latest RSV vaccine. The speaker hopes to see a proper assessment of its value. Pfizer's messenger RNA flu vaccine failed, which the speaker sees as a good thing because messenger RNA vaccines for flu are frightening.

- The discussion opens with a critique of how public health authorities in the United States and much of the media discouraged experimentation with COVID-19 treatments, instead pushing vaccination and portraying other approaches as dangerous. The hosts ask why treatments were sidelined and treated as heretical to question. - Speaker 1 explains that the core idea was to stamp out “vaccine hesitation,” which he frames not as a purely scientific issue but as a form of heresy. He notes a broad literature on vaccine hesitancy and contrasts it with the perception of the vaccine as a liberating savior. He points to a Vatican €20 silver coin (2022) commemorating the COVID-19 vaccine, described by Vatican catalogs as “a boy prepares to receive the Eucharist,” which the speakers interpret as an overlay of religious iconography with vaccination imagery. They also reference Diego Rivera’s mural in Detroit, interpreted as depicting the vaccine as a Eucharist, and a South African church banner reading “even the blood of Christ cannot protect you, get vaccinated,” highlighting what they see as provocative uses of religious symbolism to promote vaccination. - They claim that the Biden administration’s COVID Vaccine Corps distributed billions of dollars to major sports leagues (NFL, MLB) and that many mainline churches reportedly received money to push vaccination, with many clergy not opposing the push. The implication is that monetary incentives influenced public figures and organizations to advocate for vaccines, contributing to a climate in which questioning orthodoxy was difficult. - The speakers discuss the social dynamics around vaccine “heresy,” using Aaron Rodgers’ experience with isolation and shaming in the NFL and Novak Djokovic’s experiences in Australia to illustrate how prominent individuals who questioned or fell outside the orthodoxy faced punitive pressure. They compare this to a Reformation-era conflict over doctrinal correctness and describe a psychology of stigmatizing dissent as a tool to enforce conformity. - They argue the imperative driving institutions was the belief that the vaccine was the central, non-negotiable public-health objective, seemingly above other medical considerations. The central question they raise is why vaccines became the sole priority, seemingly overriding a broader, more nuanced evaluation of medical options and individual risk. - The conversation shifts to epistemology and the nature of science. Speaker 1 suggests medicine often relies on orthodoxies and presuppositions, rather than purely empirical processes. He recounts a Kantian view that interpretation depends on preexisting categories, and he uses this to argue that medical decision-making can be constrained by established doctrines, which may obscure questions about optimization and safety. - They recount the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and discuss Sara Sotomayor’s dissent, which argued that liability exposure is a key incentive for safety and improvement in vaccine development. They argue that the current system creates minimal liability for manufacturers, reducing the incentive to optimize safety, and they use this to question how the system encourages continuous safety improvements. - The hosts recount the early-treatment movement led by Peter McCullough and others, including a Senate hearing organized by Ron Johnson in November 2020 to discuss early-treatment options with FDA-approved drugs like hydroxychloroquine. They criticize what they describe as aggressive pushback against such approaches, noting that McCullough faced professional sanctions and lawsuits despite presenting peer-reviewed literature. - They return to the concept of orthodoxy and dogma, arguing that the medical establishment often suppresses dissent, citing YouTube removing a McCullough interview and the broader pattern of silencing challenge to the vaccine narrative. They stress that the social and institutional systems prize conformity and punish those who deviate, creating a climate of distrust toward official health bodies. - The discussion broadens into metaphysical and philosophical territory, with references to the Grand Inquisitor from Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov. They propose that elites—whether religious, political, or scientific—tend to prefer “taking care” of people through control rather than preserving individual responsibility and free will. The Grand Inquisitor tale is used to illustrate a recurring human temptation: to replace personal liberty with a protected, paternalistic order. - They discuss messenger RNA (mRNA) technology as a central manifestation of Promethean or Luciferian intellect—humans attempting to “read and write in the language of God.” They describe the scientific arc from transcription and translation to mRNA vaccines, noting Francis Collins’s The Language of God and the idea of humans “coding life.” They caution that mRNA vaccines involve injecting genetic material and point to the symbolic and ritual power of vaccination as a form of modern sacrament. - The speakers emphasize that the mRNA approach represents both a profound scientific achievement and a source of deep concern. They discuss fertility signals and potential adverse effects, including myocarditis in young people, and cite the July 2021 NEJM case study as highlighting safety concerns for myocarditis in adolescent males. They reference the FDA deliberative-committee discussions, noting that some influential voices publicly questioned the risk-benefit calculus for young people, yet faced pressure or dismissal within the orthodox framework. - They describe post-hoc investigations and testimonies suggesting that adverse events (like myocarditis) might have been downplayed or obscured, and they assert that public trust in health institutions has eroded as a result. They mention ongoing debates about whether vaccine-induced changes might affect future generations, referencing studies about transcripts of mRNA in cancer cells and liver cells, and they stress the need for independent scrutiny by scientists not “entranced” by the vaccine program. - The dialogue returns to the broader human condition: a tension between curiosity and restraint, knowledge and humility. They return to Dostoevsky’s moral questions about free will, responsibility, and the limits of human knowledge, concluding that scientific hubris can lead to dangerous consequences when it overrides open inquiry and accountability. - In closing, while the guests reflect on past missteps and the need for integrity in medicine, they underscore the ongoing questions about how evidence is interpreted, how dissent is treated, and how society balances scientific progress with humility, transparency, and respect for individual judgment.

Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 to explain why the vaccine causes myocarditis and pericarditis. Speaker 1 mentions rare reports of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with vaccination but does not provide a clear explanation. Speaker 0 insists on understanding the mechanism and questions why the vaccine is considered safe without addressing the risks. Speaker 2 intervenes, suggesting that Speaker 1 will address the question later. Speaker 1 talks about the benefit-risk ratio and the global recommendation of health authorities. Speaker 0 reiterates the question, to which Speaker 1 agrees to provide a response later. Speaker 2 confirms this agreement.

The mRNA platform is effective but has a flaw: it can cause autoimmune disorders by producing foreign proteins in cells. The challenge is to target only specific cells and avoid damage to vital organs. The pandemic allowed the emergency use authorization of mRNA vaccines, bypassing safety measures. However, a large portion of the population has already accepted this technology. To address the issue, a solution could be to replace the spike protein with a different protein that doesn't have flaws. But if the problem lies in any foreign protein transcribed by cells, the immune system may still target vital organs.

The speaker discusses the issue of DNA contamination in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and questions the FDA's handling of the situation. They explain that normally rigorous tests are required for genotoxicity and immunogenesis, but the FDA seemed to ignore these requirements. The speaker also mentions that Moderna's own patent acknowledges the concerns related to DNA and insertional immunogenesis. They reveal that DNA fragments, including an antibiotic resistance gene and sequences from simian virus 40, were found in the vaccines. The speaker expresses concern about the potential risks associated with DNA damage, such as cancer and birth defects. They criticize the FDA for downplaying the issue and emphasize the importance of transparency.

Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1 about a report stating that serious adverse reactions occur in 1 in 800 vaccinated individuals. Speaker 1 claims to be unaware of the report but mentions routine screening of literature for adverse events. When asked about Moderna's rate of serious adverse events, Speaker 1 cannot provide the information. Speaker 0 expresses frustration and finds it extraordinary that a multinational company cannot provide this data. Speaker 1 offers to provide the information later but states that no safety concerns were observed in their clinical trials. Speaker 0 concludes that the conversation is a waste of time.

A physician who experienced an adverse reaction to the Moderna COVID shot states that the COVID shots should never have been authorized for children and pregnant women. After receiving the Moderna shot, the speaker developed transverse myelitis, autonomic dysfunction, and an unspecified immune disorder, leading to medical retirement. The speaker is now co-chair of React19, representing Americans injured by the COVID shots. The speaker claims that the clinical trials were rushed, safety data was withheld or altered, and reporting systems like VAERS and V-Safe have failed. The speaker questions whether regulatory agencies have a conflict of interest. The speaker alleges that instead of proving safety and efficacy, the COVID-19 shots were assumed to be safe and effective, with short follow-up data, and were given to pregnant/lactating women and children without long-term safety data. The speaker is appreciative that the COVID-19 shots have been removed from the childhood vaccination schedule for healthy children, but much damage has already been done. The speaker advocates for recognition, research, medical care, and compensation for those injured by the COVID-19 shots.

The speaker believes mRNA shots are a "festering wound" impacting everyone that cannot be ignored. The speaker urges the new administration to address the issue, citing 500 mRNA shots in the pipeline, 33 of which are self-amplifying. Self-amplifying means they are designed to replicate indefinitely, which the speaker finds "terrifying" because current mRNA shots already lack an "off switch." The speaker claims these self-amplifying shots are already in use in Japan, India, and the EU. The speaker believes the one in the US pipeline is for H1N1, so it may not be used unless there is an issue, but they are still experimenting with it.

First of all, multiple studies now, to be very clear, multiple studies now show that of the two, Moderna and Pfizer, Pfizer is definitely worse. Pfizer is worse for cardiovascular side effects related to blood clotting. Pfizer is worse for neurologic effects, and Pfizer is worse for serious adverse events overall. A few studies have shown that Pfizer may be associated with, may be associated with an increase in mortality also compared to Moderna. The vaccines, they are not the same. But between the two of them, Pfizer is definitely worse. You've got probably more myocarditis cases with Moderna, but Pfizer is worse overall. So I apologize that it hasn't been clear. They shouldn't take them. They are products that should not be going into human. Because these products, they should not used in any human beings. And, you know, there's some people who are trying to put them in animals too, and and I think many of us wouldn't wanna eat that food either, that meat. Sort of along those lines, what's your recommendation?

The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasma DNA, not just mRNA. This DNA is the DNA vector used as the template for the in vitro transcription reaction. This was discovered by sequencing vials of Pfizer vaccine from Colombia. It's surprising that there's any DNA in there. The speaker is alarmed about the possible consequences of this, including rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest. Mixing DNA with a lipid complex allows it to enter cells and become a permanent fixture. This is a real hazard for genome modification of long-lived somatic cells, like stem cells, and could cause a sustained autoimmune attack. There is also a very real theoretical risk of future cancer in some people. The risk is not zero and it may be high enough that we ought to figure out if this is happening or not.

MRNA vaccines were hailed as medical breakthroughs in the fight against COVID. Now the US Department of Health and Human Services is slashing a half billion dollars in government funding from mRNA vaccine development. The current vaccines are not infection blocking. When new variants come up, you lose protection, and they have very short duration. There was never a vaccine made with mRNA. Lipid nanoparticles go everywhere in the body, to the brain, to the bone marrow, to the liver, to the spleen, most importantly to the reproductive organs. I regret it every single day that I walked into my local pharmacy to get that shot in my arm. The spike protein directly causes blood clotting and is found in the middle of large blood clots. This vaccine, the mRNA vaccine, has probably saved about three million lives.

Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 to explain the process of how the vaccine causes myocarditis and pericarditis. Speaker 1 mentions rare reports of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with vaccination. Speaker 0 insists on an explanation of the mechanism, but Speaker 1 does not provide a direct answer. Speaker 1 emphasizes that all medicines have benefits and side effects and refers to the benefit-risk ratio. Speaker 0 continues to press for an explanation of the biochemical pathway, but Speaker 1 agrees to provide a response later. The transcript ends with Speaker 2 confirming Speaker 1's agreement to give a further response.

Nicholas Holcher, an epidemiologist and foundation administrator at the McCullough Foundation, appears on the WiderWake Media Podcast to discuss what he calls harms from the mRNA COVID vaccines and to critique mainstream approaches to the pandemic and public health policy. - Vaccine definitions and mRNA technology - Pre-2000 definition: a vaccine is an injectable or oral product that introduces a killed part of a virus or an inactivated form to the body so that encountering a wild-type version would not infect or would cause a less severe illness. - He asserts that mRNA injections are not vaccines: they are a gene transfer platform using modified messenger RNA with long persistence in the body (via N1-methylpseudouridine), delivered in lipid nanoparticles. He claims these bubbles distribute systemically, including to the brain, heart, bone marrow, and reproductive system, and that they instruct cells to produce a spike protein, effectively turning organs into “toxic spike protein production factories.” He says this leads to autoimmune attack on those tissues and contributes to adverse events, including myocarditis, strokes, immune destruction, and “turbo cancers.” - History and purpose of mRNA in vaccines - According to Holcher, work on this technology existed for decades but animals testing showed high mortality or sterilization in ferrets and mice, preventing approval except under a declared global emergency. He contends the COVID-19 crisis enabled emergency use authorization across Western countries, with ulterior aims to inject the globe with mRNA technology. - Global impact and uptake - He estimates about 70% of the global population received at least one COVID-19 injection (mRNA or viral vector). He notes Eastern countries used non-mRNA platforms (e.g., AstraZeneca/J&J in some places; Sinovac elsewhere) but that uptake in the West was high. - Harms and evidence - Excess deaths: cites a study by Dennis Brancourt et al. estimating around 17 million deaths worldwide as a result of COVID injections (as of September 2023); he claims US deaths could be in the hundreds of thousands to millions. - Turbo cancers: cites multiple studies in 2023 showing increased risk of seven cancer types (colorectal, bladder, breast, thyroid, prostate, etc.) in vaccinated groups; cites a major cancer journal, OncoTarget, reporting hundreds of turbo cancer cases across 27 countries, with Pfizer contributing most cases. Holcher also mentions his own group’s work with Neo7 Bioscience documenting genomic integration of vaccine-derived mRNA in a stage IV bladder cancer patient (31-year-old woman) with a segment of mRNA found in circulating tumor DNA on chromosome 19; another study reported thousands of dysregulated genes in post-vaccine cancers, including p53, KRAS, and BRCA. - Definition of turbo cancer: per Merrick et al., rapid, aggressive tumor progression with sudden onset and early metastasis, often in younger individuals, and resistant to treatment. - Fertility, pregnancy, and autism - Fertility: cites studies suggesting fertility impacts, including Karaman et al. finding depletion of primordial follicles in rats after mRNA vaccination; Manichi et al. reporting 33% lower conception rates in vaccinated women in Denmark; a study indicating a ~20% drop in sperm concentration and motility with no recovery over five months. - Autism: asserts a large body of evidence linking vaccines to neurodevelopmental disorders, citing a 136-study review with 107 studies finding positive associations between vaccines and neurodevelopmental issues, including autism, attributed to toxicity and immune system disruption, particularly in children with high vaccine exposure and reduced detox capacity (CYP450 impairment). - Other topics tied to vaccines and public response - The COVID-19 period and vaccine skepticism: claims the pandemic catalyzed a large anti-vaccine movement because people were compelled to take an experimental gene therapy product. - Sam Altman and gene editing: discusses Altman’s Preventive venture with the aim to reduce heritable diseases via in utero gene editing but warns of the path to designer babies and the potential for harm in early-iteration edits, citing prior CRISPR experiments on human embryos that produced deformed offspring or nonviable results. - AI, workers, and future society: predicts two-tier society with implanted or enhanced individuals and a replacement of human labor by robots and AI systems; discusses military and surveillance ambitions in gene editing and AI augmentation. - Mental health and digital life: references a randomized trial showing that turning off mobile Internet improved depression scores and well-being to an extent comparable to or greater than antidepressants. - World Health Organization (WHO): notes the US has pulled out of the WHO, arguing this is good for the US but potentially harmful for others still in the organization; expresses concerns about the pandemic treaty and ongoing global health governance, including vaccine passport-style surveillance. - FDA and public health policy: acknowledges some shifts (e.g., cutting doses from the childhood schedule) but argues the FDA remains compromised and too aligned with vaccine industry interests; criticizes the removal of a potential black box warning for vaccines and calls for more accountability. - Resources and contact - Holcher invites listeners to follow him on X (Twitter) at @nichulsher and to read their work on focalpoints.com and through McCullough’s network. Note: The transcript presents Holcher’s claims and interpretations about vaccines, turbo cancers, autism, fertility, and policy changes. The summary reproduces these points without endorsement or evaluation.

RNA sequencing of the Moderna vaccine's three prime ends suggests a possible mechanism for RNA persistence: in vivo re-adenylation. The data indicates plasmid DNA contamination despite efforts to reduce it. The data also reveals contamination from other mRNA vaccines in Moderna's pipeline. The speaker suggests that with widespread DNA sequencing capabilities, tolerating incorrect RNA sizes in vaccines is irresponsible. Sequencing before approval would have allowed for a better understanding of low RNA scores before global administration.