reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker, a physician and psychiatrist, states that medicine faces the difficulty that most disease is preventable, but the medical field profits from curing or ameliorating disease with medications and procedures. The speaker claims that the medical field does not profit from preventing disease by encouraging people to socialize or exercise.

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

Speaker 0 describes a controversial 2000 study and its alleged connections to Monsanto. The speaker asserts that Monsanto staff helped write the article, and that the authors were likely receiving large sums of money from Monsanto. They claim much of the data in the study was unpublished, describing it as secret data from Monsanto, and label the paper “basically a complete fraud.” The study supposedly claimed that glyphosate was safe and not linked to cancer. The speaker then references subsequent studies released recently, which purportedly found that glyphosate increased or caused ten distinct types of cancer in rats when the rats were exposed at so-called safe levels. Despite these findings, the speaker notes that the original paper was used by agencies around the world to claim glyphosate was safe and to support approval processes. The speaker concludes that the entire foundation of those safety assurances was built on “a complete fraud and lie,” and states that the retraction of the 2000 paper is, in this context, something they are happy about, remarking that it is probably the only time they will be happy about a retraction.

Colleagues, we have unknowingly and involuntarily been exposed to the weed killer Roundup. Studies have consistently shown that Roundup, produced by Monsanto and Vyre, is highly toxic, potentially carcinogenic, and linked to liver cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. It is also responsible for endangering 93 percent of species. Even the commission's own report acknowledges the long-term risk Roundup poses to mammals, including humans. We have a crucial opportunity to remove this harmful product from our shelves. We must take a zero-tolerance approach and eliminate Roundup before it devastates nature and harms us further. Thank you.

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

The speaker explains that glyphosate is a systemic chemical. A systemic herbicide is absorbed by the plant when glyphosate is sprayed onto the leaves, and it is translocated into the rest of the plant, meaning it goes into the plant and stays there. The speaker emphasizes that washing vegetables does not remove the glyphosate, underscoring that residue can remain in the plant even after cleaning. This point is presented as a key characteristic of glyphosate’s behavior in sprayed crops. The discussion then shifts to soil and dirt. The speaker recalls a saying from a farmer: even the soil, the bacteria in the soil, have been known to increase serotonin levels in the minds. This statement is presented as a positive connection between interacting with soil and mental well-being, suggesting that getting hands into dirt and feeling dirt can be beneficial. The speaker attributes positive outcomes to soil biodiversity and the natural state of farming, highlighting a contrast with chemical use. Throughout the message, the speaker reinforces a stance against chemical use in the food system. The closing remarks thank the audience for their support and explicitly credit the audience with helping to keep chemicals out of the food system. The overall framing ties together a concern about glyphosate’s persistence in plants with a broader appreciation for soil health and non-chemical farming practices.

The speaker discusses the role of cholesterol in the body, emphasizing that it is not the enemy. They explain how cholesterol is essential for brain function and repairing damaged cells. The speaker criticizes the overprescription of cholesterol-lowering medications, citing harmful side effects like memory loss and dementia. They share personal stories of individuals who experienced positive changes after stopping these medications. Additionally, the speaker questions the lowering of cholesterol level standards over time, suggesting it may be driven by profit rather than health concerns. The harmful effects of margarine and the misconception surrounding cholesterol and heart disease are also highlighted.

The speaker asserts that a common vitamin C supplement has a problematic underlying issue. They state that vitamin C supplements are ascorbic acid, and that synthetic ascorbic acid is produced from GMO corn. The speaker notes that the vast majority of GMO corn is sprayed with Roundup, the glyphosate weed killer. They claim that, in head-to-head studies, naturally occurring vitamin C found in foods such as oranges versus synthetic ascorbic acid shows benefits for humans, whereas the synthetic form does not appear to have the same impact. The speaker refers to a specific head-to-head study comparing camu camu berries to ascorbic acid in smokers, and they report that only naturally occurring vitamin C from camu camu berries lowered oxidative stress. They also mention observational studies in which the consumption of synthetic vitamin C has been associated with worsening metrics of cardiovascular disease. Based on these points, the speaker presents a takeaway: the synthetic form of vitamin C is derived from GMO corn, and consuming more of this synthetic form may be less healthy, while consuming the naturally occurring vitamin C from sources like camu camu berries or other natural sources could be more beneficial. The overall message emphasizes two main claims: (1) synthetic ascorbic acid is produced from GMO corn, which is largely treated with Roundup glyphosate, and (2) evidence from head-to-head and observational studies suggests that naturally occurring vitamin C provides benefits or oxidative stress reductions that the synthetic form does not, with observational data linking synthetic vitamin C to worse cardiovascular metrics. The speaker concludes that, to be healthy, one should eat more of the naturally occurring vitamin C sources and less of the synthetic ascorbic acid.

Dandelions, heart medicine, and Roundup are all connected. Dandelions are great for your heart, cleansing and strengthening it naturally. The company that sells the top heart medicine also owns Roundup.

Bayer has removed glyphosate from Roundup weed killer, and according to the speaker, this is presented as good news only to reveal a new toxic lineup being sprayed in homes and public spaces. The speaker notes that all of these ingredients are horrible, with special emphasis on Dequat dibromide, which is stated as not only banned in the European Union but also more toxic than glyphosate and capable of damaging the gut, kidneys, liver, and nervous system. Despite these warnings, the speaker asserts that this mixture is still being sprayed. The message is that the problem with Roundup isn’t that it’s fixed, but that it’s not fixed at all—the product has not been made safe; instead, it has been rebranded, swapping one toxic chemical for four others, and the public is being led to believe it is safe. In addition to the product changes, the speaker highlights a legislative development: AB 453. This bill is described as shielding pesticide companies from liability in court, even if their chemicals cause harm. The speaker asserts that this reduces accountability and results in more toxins being sprayed near families. The overall claim is that Bayer did not make Roundup safer by removing glyphosate; rather, they replaced it with a new set of toxic ingredients, and now a state bill would protect manufacturers from legal consequences related to any harm caused by these chemicals.

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.

Dandelions, often seen as weeds, are actually great for heart health, cleansing and strengthening the heart naturally. The company that produces the best-selling heart medicine also owns Roundup, a controversial herbicide. This connection shows how they profit from both sick and healthy individuals.

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.

The speaker suggests that pharmaceutical companies want people to continuously take vaccines, even as they become sicker. They claim that these companies also acquire drugs to treat the injuries caused by the vaccines. For example, before rolling out COVID-19 vaccines for children, one of the companies acquired drugs to treat blood clots in children, which they believe the vaccines may cause. The speaker also mentions a large acquisition by Pfizer for novel cancer treatments, implying that they will cause the cancers they treat. The speaker concludes that pharmaceutical companies want people to be sick and dependent on their medications.

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

We're going down rabbit holes on this podcast. Bayer is a pharmaceutical company. Monsanto is a pesticide company. Bayer bought Monsanto. Bayer makes drugs for non Hodgkin's lymphoma. Monsanto makes a toxic herbicide called glyphosate that they spray on food. Glyphosate, wait for it, causes non Hodgkin's lymphoma. Now we've come full circle. Big pharma is in bed with big food, and both of them are in bed with our western health system. None of which is concerned with making cures, all of which is concerned with making customers. Welcome to the circus.

The speaker argues that “Bad cholesterol” is a misnomer and claims it is “the biggest fraud.” They state they have spent countless hours researching cholesterol and that “None of it says anything about cholesterol being bad.” They assert that “The only bad thing about cholesterol is not having enough,” and claim that “One of the biggest defenses against stroke is cholesterol.” They further connect depression to serotonin levels, stating “Depression is directly related to how much serotonin is in the body,” and conclude that “Who controls the amount of serotonin that's manufactured? Cholesterol.”

Dandelions, heart medicine, and Roundup are all connected. Dandelions are great for your heart, cleansing and strengthening it naturally. The company that sells the top heart medicine also owns Roundup.

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 speaker questions the safety of glyphosate, the key ingredient in Roundup, despite claims from Bayer that it does not cause cancer. They cite 180,000 lawsuits against Bayer, resulting in over $12 billion in damages, and Bayer's efforts to prevent future glyphosate-related cancer lawsuits. Roundup Ready crops, genetically engineered to resist glyphosate, led to a surge in its use, with approximately 60% of crops now treated with it. The speaker highlights a letter from members of Congress arguing against glyphosate overregulation, suggesting that without it, widespread hunger will occur. They point out that some signatories, like Deb Fischer and Chuck Grassley, are major recipients of funding from big agriculture and biotech companies like Bayer, DuPont, and Dow. The speaker implies that these contributions influence their support for glyphosate.

Speaker 0 argues against labeling certain plants as weeds, stating that destroying them would mean destroying the land. They point out that the plants produce flowers, which come from them, and these flowers help butterflies, bees, and all the other pollinators. The speaker notes that “Monsanto wants to sell you some poison to get rid of the bees, the pollinators, and then Walmart will sell you, guess what, robotic bees.” They question whether viewers are watching the same video. The speaker concludes by asserting that “Monsanto says destroy the weeds because it destroys the beets.”

Big food, big pharma, big chemicals get super wealthy. Right? What is the product of health care? It's a healthy body. If we take The US population and compare it to the world, we're at the very bottom when it comes to health, yet we spend the most for health care. Over $4,100,000,000,000 every single year.

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

The speaker recalls having wisdom teeth removed at age 20 and mentions an insurance company offering a $5,000 reward for removing wisdom teeth. They claim to have learned that wisdom teeth are connected to the heart and that there is no reason to remove them. They state that wisdom teeth are pulled out so they could get a “from the” and then mess with the meridian line, and that wisdom teeth are connected to the brain and the heart. They assert that when people get their wisdom teeth removed, they often start developing heart issues, implying a causal link to the procedure. The speaker argues that the meridians of the wisdom teeth connect not only to the brain but also to the heart, so removing them disrupts the body’s pathways. They claim the dentist industry is a break off of the industry, that they fluoridate mouths, take teeth out, and x-ray people, and that all teeth are meridian lines; messing with those meridian lines messes with the body’s pathways.

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.