TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

"The mRNA vaccines, you know, from COVID don't work against upper respiratory infections." "There are two problems with them." "One is they target a single protein, which drives what what's called an antigenic shift." "If it drives the virus to mutate, and it actually can prolong the pandemic." "We saw that during COVID, people took shots, mRNA shots for the original COVID variant and immediately, mutated into the Omicron virus to which the vaccine was ineffective, and that's what it does." "And the other issue is, that it the way that distributes in the body, the way that it migrates in the body, there's no control over and no predictability." "So it goes to every organ." "It turns your body into a an antigen factory where you're manufacturing antigens, and different people need different loads of antigens." "And we've seen now these epidemics of myocarditis and pericarditis, particularly in kids."

Data accumulated to the point where meta-analysis studies could be done. These are very comprehensive analyses, and it virtually came back consistently that there was no benefit to risk ratio for taking a messenger RNA vaccine. In fact, it was more dangerous to take a vaccine than it was to contract COVID-19 and be hospitalized with it. This is we're now in 2022 that the status started to come out. The side effects for this essentially gene therapy were so enormous and progressive. It was difficult to fathom. And then finally, a few months ago, some of the detailed biochemistry studies started to appear in the literature. And this sudden flood of messenger RNA, it appears irrespective of what the messenger RNA insert is coding for. Just the sheer amount of number of millions of molecules of messenger RNA entering the cell is creating biochemical

Vaccines must be carefully studied to ensure they do not worsen infections. Past vaccines, like the respiratory syncytial virus vaccine for children, have unexpectedly made things worse. Similarly, an HIV vaccine increased infection risk in some cases. It's crucial to conduct thorough studies in high-risk populations to understand how vaccines truly impact infections before widespread use.

The speaker believes that halting mRNA vaccine research and development at BARDA is a tragic, non-science-based mistake. They state that mRNA vaccines saved lives, citing estimates that in 2021, unvaccinated individuals were 12 times more likely to be hospitalized and die, and in 2022, six times more likely. The speaker, a member of the FDA vaccine advisory committee, notes initial concerns about potential serious side effects when the vaccine was rolled out to millions, but these did not materialize. While the vaccine can cause rare myocarditis, it is transient and self-resolving, unlike myocarditis caused by the virus itself, which can lead to hospitalization and death. The speaker emphasizes the technology's potential beyond COVID-19, including applications for cancer and gene therapy.

The FDA has approved a new mRNA Moderna vaccine, despite known serious adverse events. The speaker expresses disappointment, suggesting the FDA is slow to change course. The approval letter concerns the speaker. The vaccine, MN spike, is an mRNA vaccine that produces spike protein, with lipid nanoparticles that will go everywhere. The manufacturer's data indicates serious adverse events were reported by 2.7% of participants receiving the new vaccine, compared to 2.6% for the older vaccine it replaces. The speaker finds it bemusing that a treatment with a 2.7% risk of serious adverse events would be authorized, unless there was a significant risk-benefit. The new vaccine (mRNA 1283) was compared to the old Moderna vaccine (mRNA 1273), not a placebo.

One in thirty-five recipients of the booster vaccine had vaccine-associated myocardial injury. This level of adverse reaction is described as off the scale in healthcare. The speaker suggests that promoting the vaccine in places like New Zealand is unethical. The speaker believes this risk level would only be acceptable if the alternative was certain death, and otherwise, it is complete madness.

The speaker questions the government's decision to continue with mRNA vaccines despite evidence suggesting they may not be effective for respiratory diseases. They mention the partnership with Moderna to build a manufacturing plant in the UK, capable of producing 250 million vaccines annually. The speaker also highlights Moderna's pipeline of 48 products, including ongoing trials for cytomegalovirus, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus. They raise concerns about the contradiction between the vaccines' effectiveness and the push for more mRNA vaccines. The speaker wonders if this is a result of deception by big pharma.

The speaker describes unbridled enthusiasm and irrational exuberance for life as sacrificing safety. They state they presented autopsy work on death after COVID-19 vaccination at the American Society of Microbiology, where thousands of microbiologists, vaccinologists, and immunologists attended. As people visited, the speaker was stunned by what they call scientific seduction by messenger RNA technology. They predict a cataclysmic recognition that mRNA platforms are unsafe, claiming there is no way to break down pseudourrogenated messenger RNA. The speaker asserts that circulating messenger RNA from Pfizer or Moderna remains in patients’ bloodstream three years after the shots, described as intact.

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 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.

Self amplifying mRNA vaccine, which got fast track FDA approval a few months ago for the h five n one influenza. "That's even worse, quote, self replicating. We know Pfizer admits that their COVID shot is self replicating, thus sheds. This is officially sheds." "But now, when these self amplifying mRNA vaccines shed, they are shedding machinery that if you take it into your body, will start producing more mRNA." "There are women who miscarried when they were exposed to the Pfizer vaccine or Moderna vaccine." "Pfizer told their officials that they had to report in the trial if any pregnant woman was exposed to anyone who was vaccinated." So shedding was a problem. So many people, like, didn't take it, but their spouse did. They got sick.

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.

Concerns have arisen regarding the safety of coronavirus vaccines, particularly due to observations made during their development. Laboratory animals exhibited immune pathology similar to issues seen with respiratory virus vaccines in the 1960s, notably with the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine, which resulted in adverse effects and even deaths in some cases. This phenomenon, known as paradoxical immune enhancement, occurs when vaccinated individuals experience worse outcomes upon exposure to the virus. The RSV vaccine setbacks halted its development for decades, but efforts are being renewed. The potential for similar issues with coronavirus vaccines has raised alarms among researchers, highlighting the need for caution and further understanding of these immune responses.

The recent conference in Perth highlighted serious concerns about messenger RNA vaccines, particularly those from Pfizer, which are reportedly contaminated with SV 40, a substance previously used in tumor research on mice. It's shocking that these vaccines are being administered to humans for a disease that hasn't caused any deaths in two years. Additionally, a deal was announced in Australia for the purchase of $2 billion worth of Moderna vaccines over the next decade, targeting various diseases and intended for children. This raises ethical questions about the motivations behind such decisions, as it seems irresponsible to prioritize profit over the safety of children. The actions of companies like Moderna and Pfizer are seen as deeply troubling, and there is a call for accountability.

The speaker argues that an irrational, unbridled enthusiasm for new possibilities leads to a sacrifice of safety. This enthusiasm, in their view, has adversely affected precautionary considerations and risk assessment. They reference presenting autopsy findings related to deaths following COVID-19 vaccination at the American Society of Microbiology, an event attended by thousands of microbiologists, vaccinologists, and immunologists. In conversations with attendees, the speaker was surprised by what they describe as a scientific seduction surrounding messenger RNA technology. The core concern expressed is that this eagerness to embrace mRNA platforms is accompanied by a neglect of safety considerations. The speaker asserts that there will be a cataclysmic recognition that messenger RNA technology represents an unsafe platform. They emphasize that, as they understand it, there is no way to break down certain aspects of the technology they refer to as “pseudourogenated messenger RNA,” noting this within the context of their work in research laboratories. The statement implies a belief that the degradation or metabolic processing of this form of RNA poses unresolved issues. A central, striking claim presented is that circulating messenger RNA from Pfizer or Moderna has been found in their patients’ bloodstream three years after vaccination, and that this RNA is intact. The speaker underscores this as evidence tied to their observations and research experiences, asserting the persistence of the RNA in the circulatory system over an extended period. Overall, the message conveys a perspective that rapid adoption and optimism around mRNA vaccines and technologies have overshadowed safety considerations, and it anticipates a future realization of safety concerns associated with these platforms. The speaker ties their warnings to concrete experiences at a major scientific conference and to specific, long-term biomarkers observed in patients, presenting a narrative of ongoing research findings and anticipated paradigm shifts in how the safety of mRNA vaccines is perceived.

- 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.

"Unfortunately, the mRNA platform, though it is brilliant in its conception, is fatally flawed." "the myocarditis and pericarditis that showed up as a result of COVID vaccinations are inherent to the platform, not to the messenger RNA that was delivered inside these shots." "the design of this platform is to induce your own cells to make a foreign protein which gets displayed on the surface of those cells." "there's no targeting mechanism to lead it to happen only in certain tissues, it can happen haphazardly around the body, including in places like your heart." "And what that triggers is your own immune system to see those foreign proteins and conclude the only thing they can, which is that those cells have been virally infected." "the right response, the response, the natural response of the body is to take virally infected cells and destroy them."

"Senator: 'We discovered is that Anthony Fauci was destroying federal records. He was encouraging other people to destroy federal records. That is a crime.' He testified to the house a year ago and said he wasn't doing that. 'That's a crime to perjure himself.' 'We will bring him back. I've asked him to come and testify this fall. If he doesn't come voluntarily, we will subpoena him.' 'The question is, is he immune because of the pardon? I think that that needs to be challenged in court.' 'I have encouraged the Trump administration that they should prosecute this case and challenge the auto pen. I don't think the auto pen is sufficient.' 'There were so many pardons that I'm not sure Biden was aware of all the people he did pardon.' 'There is not a direct link from the person running the auto pen to the president. The person that was running the auto pen never spoke with the president.' 'And I think a president's signature on something so as important as legislation or a pardon is absolutely required.'" "Susan Monarez will testify before the senate HELP committee tomorrow. This will be her first appearance since being ousted from the role. She will be joined by Deb Aury, a former chief medical officer and deputy director who was one of four CDC officials who resigned after Monarez was ousted." "The chair with the president of Moderna ... I asked him about the expectation that he'll be getting a lot less revenue from the vaccine for COVID perhaps this time around. The scientific evidence shows that the risks of taking the COVID vaccine for children exceeds the benefits, and the scientific evidence is abundant on this. There's a study out of Israel that showed that about six to eight kids 20 that are healthy will get an inflammation of the heart that is very dangerous, and that risk exceeds the benefits of a vaccine. Every kid at six months needs to get a COVID vaccination, and that defies the scientific evidence and shows me that she's not objective. It's the same with the hepatitis B vaccine. Unless the mom has hepatitis B vaccine, disease, there is no indication for the vaccine at birth, and we need to readdress that."

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.

The speaker states that while messenger RNA (mRNA) can be used to produce missing proteins like insulin, using mRNA for vaccines is a failed and dangerous concept. They criticize the US government for not being honest about their involvement in mRNA research, specifically the Adept p three program, which aimed to use mRNA to end pandemics within 60 days.

We observed potential safety issues with coronavirus vaccines similar to past respiratory virus vaccines. In the 1960s, some children had adverse reactions, even deaths, due to immune enhancement when exposed to the virus after vaccination. This led to the abandonment of the RSV vaccine program for decades. The same immune pathology was seen in laboratory animals during coronavirus vaccine development, raising concerns about safety.

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.

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.

"What happened is that the data had accumulated to the point where meta analysis studies could be done." "And it virtually came back consistently that there was no benefit to risk ratio for taking a messenger RNA vaccine." "In fact, it was more dangerous to take a vaccine than it was to contract COVID nineteen and be hospitalized with it." "The side effects for this essentially gene therapy was so enormous and progressive, it was difficult to fathom." "Just the sheer amount of number of millions of molecules of messenger RNA entering the cell is creating biochemical havoc." "It's disrupting protein metabolism." "It's interfering with tumor suppressor genes." "It's just completely it's damaging the mitochondria, the powerhouses of the cell." "It's it had to be stopped."