reSee.it - Related Video Feed

A healthcare worker is fed up with mask-wearing and inconsistencies in pandemic treatment across hospitals. They urge fellow healthcare professionals to speak out against government influence and lies in the media. It's time to tell the truth for the sake of their children.

80% of doctors are believed to have lost their minds. An anecdote was shared about a doctor who died shortly after receiving an mRNA gene therapy shot. Another similar incident was mentioned. The speaker emphasized the importance of listening to real stories to understand what is happening.

Speaker 0 refuses to wear a mask in a hospital and argues with the staff. They decline a visor and express their frustration with the situation. The speaker questions how far this issue will go and asks the staff if they feel okay about their actions. They request to proceed with their blood work and criticize the staff for their behavior.

Speaker 0 describes repeatedly witnessing what they say is deliberate killing and gross medical mismanagement of hospitalized COVID patients, saying “nobody will listen.” They compare the situation to Nazi Germany putting Jews into gas chambers, and say they are told “you can't save everybody” even though they insist the patients are “not dying from COVID.” Speaker 0 gives multiple examples: an anesthesiologist intubated a patient incorrectly, with only one side of the chest inflating; after about five hours waiting for a chest X-ray, the patient died. A patient with a heart rate of 40 in a stable bradycardic rhythm received chest compressions by a resident, which Speaker 0 says was not appropriate; Speaker 0 ran in to stop him, but the resident then “pushed epi,” placed defibrillation pads, and defibrillated, and the patient died. Speaker 0 says they repeatedly tried to get the director of nursing to stop the actions, but the patient was still killed. They also describe nurses placing an NG tube into the lungs and filling lungs with tube feeding, and confusing long-acting insulin with short-acting insulin and giving 30 units of fast-acting insulin, which they say killed the patient. They claim patients are “just going to let them rot on the vent” and that blood transfusions are not provided even though, they say, COVID patients “all eventually need a blood transfusion,” because vent settings do not work without adequate oxygen-carrying capacity. Speaker 0 describes staffing and procedural failures: a nurse reportedly fell asleep and norepinephrine ran out while a patient had no blood pressure and was not perfusing the brain; Speaker 0 says the same nurse is now running a CRRT machine “that she has never done before.” They say nurses were not swapped even though a nurse who knows the machine could handle it, and they predict the patient will die soon. They also say some patients are on only sedation or not truly treated for COVID, including a woman on a trank (tracheal vent-related mention) who is not “even cognizant,” and who only receives breathing treatments (albuterol) and insulin. They describe a cycle of vent and sedation management: day shift weans sedation to minimum, but at night the same residents increase sedation again, undoing day shift work; day shift attending rounds and says synchronization problems required turning sedation up, while Speaker 0 says the issue is the event mode being wrong. Speaker 0 says attempts to contact advocacy groups were unsuccessful, and they feel out of ideas. Speaker 0 further claims patients are not properly assessed: they say nobody listens to lungs, even with disposable stethoscopes, and that they have seen patients already in body bags with no knowledge of how long they had been dead. They say they were told a patient was acidotic and should be treated, but instead the patient’s condition was allowed to worsen, kidneys shut down, and then bicarb was run late; Speaker 0 says the patient became overloaded with fluid, developed heart failure, and died. They also describe witnessing procedures resulting in death, including an ET tube placed incorrectly causing choking on blood, and a central line complication where a doctor allegedly ruptured a subclavian vein and the patient bled to death. Speaker 1 and Speaker 0 discuss that Speaker 1 is also “not a doctor,” while Speaker 0 maintains that actions like defibrillating a patient with a heart rate of 40 in a stable rhythm constitute “murder.” Speaker 1 adds that “nobody cares” and makes comments about “minorities” and “the hood.” Speaker 0 says a prior lead who advocated for patients was moved to a different hospital and had warned Speaker 0 there would be problems. Speaker 0 ends by saying they will go back to the unit and “see how they kill him there,” urging people to stay safe and “stay out of NYC for your health care.”

The speaker refused a ventilator and remdesivir, citing concerns about their effects. Despite feeling fine, a doctor told them they would die. The speaker demanded a new doctor and criticized the lack of water and nutrition provided. They questioned the logic of being denied water but given water with MiraLAX. The speaker felt pressured to increase oxygen levels, which they believed was harmful. They were mistakenly labeled as "do not resuscitate" and had to clarify their code status to medical staff. Translation: The speaker rejected certain treatments, expressed dissatisfaction with medical care, and clarified their resuscitation status to healthcare providers.

The speaker states they never expected to be in their current position, as their initial aspiration was to be a healer, specifically a nephrologist, teach medical students, and improve the world. While they've met incredible people and have no regrets, they describe their current situation as a nightmare. They emphasize that no doctor desires to have their integrity or sanity questioned.

The speaker describes an incident involving a red hat that led to exhaustion. The speaker claims they were misdiagnosed by a Jewish doctor at a specific hospital, and that a specific media outlet was involved. The speaker states they cannot reveal the race, people, doctor, hospital, or media outlet involved, but then identifies the doctor as Jewish.

Speaker 0 accuses someone of setting them up, repeating it twice. They claim that they were asked to come two hours later and were set up. They express frustration and mention not feeling well. The transcript abruptly ends.

A person at a book signing told the speaker a story about Remdesivir. According to the story, a woman's sister was in the hospital when a doctor ordered a second round of Remdesivir. The nurse cautioned the doctor that the patient had four young children. The doctor then rescinded the order. The speaker claims this shows the doctor and nurse knew the drug was killing people, but spared the patient because she had children. The speaker believes that without children, the doctor would have administered the drug and killed her anyway. The speaker concludes this reflects the personalities, behaviors, and ethos of hospital staff.

Speaker 1 says they took a vaccine but have not received any boosters. They describe the moment they “really started to get red pilled” about vaccines as when they took the vaccine and became “the sickest” they have been in the last 15 years. They say they were in bed for two days with their heart racing, and they claim they are not allowed to discuss “serious injury” or even the fact of how sick they were. They add that they have had COVID five times, with their worst COVID experience being “like a sinus infection,” and they say they are not willing to trade that for the vaccine experience. Speaker 1 also says many people they know reported being “really, really sick” from their second vaccine shot, calling that a side effect that “we even talk about enough in this country.” Speaker 0 responds that the discussion involves companies with a long history of lying and being forced to pay criminal fines, and that these companies receive an exemption from being responsible for any side effects. Speaker 1 agrees.

A 71-year-old woman with suspected stroke is brought to the emergency room at Saint-Joseph Saint-Luc Hospital. The speaker, potentially linking her condition to vaccination, discusses this with the nurse on duty. The nurse confirms that they have been seeing more cases of stroke within two weeks of vaccination, but nothing is being done about it. The nurse mentions that the majority of these patients die due to the severity of the strokes. The speaker expresses frustration and helplessness at witnessing fellow citizens being affected and potentially facing certain death. They apologize for the message but felt the need to share their observations.

The speaker discusses being accused of horrible things due to being Jewish and receiving messages questioning their trustworthiness as a dual Canadian-Israeli citizen. Another speaker asks if they work for an Israeli intelligence firm called Black Cube, to which the speaker denies. The conversation shifts to a specific point that the speaker didn't fully answer before abruptly ending.

The speaker's son was diagnosed with an infection, but the nurse practitioner refused to give medication. The speaker questioned this decision and began recording the interaction. The situation escalated, with security being called. The speaker expressed frustration and threatened to share the video with others.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 exchange a tense, fragmented interaction in a waiting room scenario. Speaker 0 expresses frustration about waiting two hours for a specialist and acknowledges the overall overload in healthcare, the low pay, and the sometimes rude behavior they perceive, while emphasizing that their own intent is simply to know when the doctor will arrive. Speaker 1 reassures that the doctor is on the way and asks for a little more patience, noting they are currently working amid the same pressures. Speaker 0 seeks a rough estimate of the doctor’s arrival time, to which Speaker 1 responds that they are busy with work. Speaker 0 again tries to engage, and Speaker 1 shifts to a broader complaint, stating that they are trying to do their job despite enormous workload, low pay, and sometimes quite rude behavior. Speaker 0 acknowledges understanding but reiterates the two-hour wait. Speaker 1 interrupts Speaker 0 to continue making a point about the environment, saying, “Luister eens, wij proberen gewoon ons werk te doen. Ondanks de enorme werkdruk in de zorg. Ondanks de lage beloningen, ondanks de soms nogal onbeschofte” (Listen, we are simply trying to do our jobs, despite the enormous workload in healthcare, despite the low pay, despite the sometimes rather rude). Speaker 0 again mentions the two-hour wait. Speaker 1 then brings up aggression they have faced, including verbal abuse and physical aggression, stating, “Ondanks alle agressie die wij over ons heen krijgen. De scheldpartijen, de fysieke” (Despite all the aggression we receive, the swearing, the physical). Speaker 0 denies being aggressive and clarifies that they only want to know roughly when the doctor will have time. The exchange intensifies as Speaker 1 accuses Speaker 0 of having an aggressive tone and warns that if Speaker 0 does not sit calmly, they will call security. Speaker 0 protests that there is nothing wrong with their tone, recounting the two-hour wait, and Speaker 1 reiterates concerns about tone, insisting that Speaker 0’s tone is not acceptable. Speaker 1 ultimately declares that enough is enough and that aggression toward care workers must end, concluding with “Handen af ten zorg. Toch?” (Hands off the care, right?) and a momentary pause that implies security involvement. The interaction centers on a stressful delay in care, the pressures faced by healthcare workers, and a conflict over tone and boundaries amid a high-demand, high-stress environment.

The speaker discusses being accused of horrible things due to being Jewish and receiving messages questioning their trustworthiness as a dual Canadian-Israeli citizen. Another speaker asks if they work for an Israeli intelligence firm called Black Cube, to which the speaker denies. The conversation shifts to a specific point that the speaker didn't fully answer before abruptly ending.

The speaker shares their experience of suffering from myocarditis after receiving the vaccine. They express frustration with health professionals who dismissed their symptoms as anxiety or in their head. It took them a year and a significant amount of money to finally get a diagnosis. The speaker urges people to trust their own bodies and question the advice of health professionals. They believe the vaccine is causing more harm than good and want to spread awareness about the need for change. The speaker concludes by stating that health professionals are killing people and calls for them to start doing the right thing.

They are witnessing medical negligence and deaths in a hospital, with patients not dying from COVID. Instances include incorrect intubation, wrong medications, and lack of proper care. Despite efforts to advocate for patients, the situation remains dire. The speaker expresses frustration at the lack of action and concern for the patients' well-being.

The speaker mentions server logs and their own logs, and then reveals that someone named Christie is involved. They state that Christie is not the right driver for the medical situation and imply that it is being discussed online.

In the exchange, Speaker 0 foregrounds money while alluding to a much sharper, disturbing desire. He begins with a repetitive assertion of wealth: “Money. Money. Money.” Then he shifts the emphasis to a more sinister longing, stating that “more than anything else, what I really want, what my giant nose needs just to grow more warts is Christian blood.” He then attempts to identify or locate this blood, asking, “Let me see if I can find any.” The dialogue then pivots to a confrontation with the presence or identity of others. Speaker 0 asks, “You guys you're Jewish children?”, expressing a sense of frustration or misfortune by adding, “This is not my day. This sucks.” The tone conveys a reaction to the situation or to the people present. Following this, there is a provocative question about identity tied to blood: “You're wearing Israeli blood?” This question suggests an assertion or challenge about the affiliation or origin of the individuals’ blood, implying a connection to Jewish or Israeli heritage. Finally, the line of inquiry narrows to a direct address toward a person named Esther, asking, “Esther, are you wearing an Israeli blood?” This repeats and personalizes the provoking question, tying the earlier general inquiry to a specific individual. The overall interaction centers on money, a disturbing fixation on blood tied to religious or ethnic groups, and confrontations about Jewish and Israeli identity, all framed through Speaker 0’s provocative and inflammatory questions and statements.

Speaker 0 says that, amid recent news about sexual harassment, they noticed a disturbing pattern: many of the predators (not all) are Jews. They state that they have three words to say to that, but the transcript does not include the three words.

The speaker, whose background is in critical care, worked throughout the pandemic in the ICU providing direct care to COVID patients. After eighteen months of what they describe as “chaos,” they left the bedside because they “could not watch one more” of their patients “needlessly die” due to “deadly hospital protocols” and the “denial of life saving medications.” They state that hospital messaging said COVID was killing all patients, but they contend that “this was not the case at all,” and instead that “the complete and total medical mismanagement of COVID” was killing them. They argue that if patients were truly dying of the virus itself, there would be widespread deaths outside healthcare settings, asking why bodies were not being pulled “from homes and off of the streets en masse.” They then assert that “patients… they’re not dying at home” and “they’re not dying on our streets,” and claim that people are dying “in our hospitals,” saying it is “time that we start asking ourselves why.” Although they “walked away,” they say one thing that still haunts them from bedside work is the patients’ “faces”—specifically the faces of patients they “knew didn’t need to die.” They describe not being comfortable with death initially, but learning that death comes for all of us eventually. They say that in nursing—especially in the ICU—they learned that there are “fates far worse than death.” They describe providing compassion in a patient’s last moments as an “honor,” emphasizing care and compassion during end-of-life periods. They frame their experience during the pandemic as “different,” saying these patients “didn’t die from a disease” and “didn’t die from a virus,” but instead “died in a hospital holocaust.” They use this description to claim that a “shamelessly corrupt system,” which they say used “well intentioned nurses” to carry out a “sinister plan,” was responsible. They further state that “ventilators” are “the new gas chambers.” Finally, the speaker says they did not leave before witnessing “numerous alarming signs” that “these novel vaccines were causing great harm” to their patients.

Speaker 0 says that anti-Semitism is “rubbing me the wrong way” and that they consulted an Encyclopedia Britannica volume from 1968 to “go back even closer to when the horrible events happened” and “stop this,” intending to “deny the denial” about the Holocaust. They claim they looked through the “H” section and, while searching, they encountered entries such as the “Holy Roman Empire,” “Holy Orders,” “Holy Ghost,” “Holy Land,” “Holy Cross,” “Holstein,” and “Holt.” They say this occurred “in real time” and interpret the experience as proof that the 1968 Encyclopedia Britannica contains “pure, unadulterated hate.” They specifically mention the word “Palestine,” repeatedly calling out that “Palestine” appears, and they claim the pages are “so much hatred,” including “Jew hate.” Speaker 0 claims the encyclopedia includes “pages and pages all about this country that according to Ben Shapiro doesn’t exist,” and then says they searched for “the horrors of the worst event in human history” (the Holocaust) but found that it “isn’t in the goddamn encyclopedia from 1968.” They address Encyclopedia Britannica, saying they will be “hearing from the ADL” and that they will sue for “$33 billion.” They contrast what they describe as a lack of reporting “only 23 years after it happened” with what they describe as the opposite occurring “80 years after it happened,” when they say it is “all we fucking talk about.”

The speaker says medical staff only offer new opioids and express sympathy without addressing their requests. The speaker has been asking for eye drops for six hours due to burning eyes and is unable to lower their neck because of a lump. They have been requesting a CT scan since the previous night. The speaker believes staff are trying to tire them out with opioids to prevent them from reporting the situation. A doctor said the speaker could be in trouble for recording, even though the speaker claims to only record voices, not images, of the nurses.

The speakers repeatedly claim that Jews are responsible for the COVID vaccines. Chaim Ben Pesach asserts that the Jews were behind the invention and creation of the COVID vaccines that are going to save humanity, saying: “The Jews were behind the invention and creation of these COVID vaccines that are gonna save humanity now.” He adds that “It was Jewish brains that created these two COVID vaccines,” naming Moderna’s chief medical officer in charge of R&D as Tal Zaks, and Pfizer’s CEO as Albert Burla, whom he describes as a Greek Jew, with the chief Pfizer scientist being Mikael Dolsten, “a Jew from Sweden.” He emphasizes, “The Jews were in charge of the research, the science. They were the scientists. They’re the main researchers. Both COVID vaccines that are now gonna rescue humanity.” The same sentiment is echoed, “Both were created by Jews. The Jews were behind the creation of these COVID.” There are several interruptions that repeat the antisemitic line: “corona is for the non Jews. It’s not for Amistroel. It’s not for the Jews.” A girl is shown or mentioned as having been vaccinated: “This girl just got vaccinated.” A different speaker (Speaker 4) acknowledges a setback but frames it within faith and hope: “As much as it really stinks to have such a huge setback, we know God is good and there’s people out there who are trying to help and hopefully find their answers.” Speaker 5 speaks from a personal perspective, describing hiding experiences and feeling ignored by doctors who previously claimed safety: “I’ve been hiding a lot and not showing exactly what this has done to me. But I’m done hiding, and I’m done being scared. There are several stories like mine. The same doctors who told us this was safe are the same doctors brushing us off as if we didn’t matter. It is now time.” Speaker 6, a 59-year-old in good health, says they are not working on the front line and therefore their type is not recommended to get vaccination: “59 years old, in good health. I’m not working in the front line. So my type is not recommended to get vaccination. If at my type, it’s not recommended to get vaccination.”

A doctor recounts moving breathing treatments from their office to patients' cars due to concerns about virus spread, despite hospitals also avoiding them for the same reason. They mention Dr. Richard Bartlett, a Texas doctor who faced criticism for advocating budesonide breathing treatments early in the pandemic. The speaker claims Dr. Bartlett was smeared and pursued by the Texas Medical Board for allegedly making false claims. However, the speaker maintains that these treatments were invaluable and recommended them to high-risk patients, noting a very low risk of issues.