reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Andrew Marino, a physicist and a lawyer, was the physicist and lawyer for Dr. Robert In fact, he was the guy that made good on Albert St. Georgie’s prediction that proteins were semiconductors. He worked for the military and did studies on the sanguine antenna built in Wisconsin to track submarines and found out that they caused problems. Information was delivered to the military in 1973, and Becker found that there was a lot more problems with electromagnetic pollution that’d be uncovered between Niagara Falls and New York City with power lines. When the military wouldn’t listen to him, he went on TV with Wallace on sixty Minutes, polled the nation, and literally a couple weeks after that, his lab was completely defunded. And remember, this guy was three times nominated for the Nobel Prize. The reason it never made waves, because remember, nobody back then had a salt on and nobody had a microwave oven, only the red. K? And just so you know, this was on the front page of the Boston Globe in 1977. So Marino was the guy, the physicist in his lab, who actually in congressional testimony in the early seventies, actually told the government, leading the congress, this is published in the archives. You can go read it yourself, satellites above the earth affected the magnetosphere, 80,000 kilometers from base stations on the surface of the earth. So the proof is there, my friend, but they've ignored it. So if you read his book, it's called Going Somewhere written by Andrew Marino. When I hear scientists tell me that non ADVMF can affect us because it's not ionizing radiation, that book alleviates all of them. The other thing I would say, his Roland Van Wyck’s book is beautiful to lay out all the stuff about biophotons and the stuff that the Russians have found and the biophoton research done by the Japanese and the Europeans. It's well researched. All the stuff about quantum mechanically has happened in biology from 2007 to current. We know that it's operational in photosynthesis. You now have books out written by Jim L. Callely and John Joy McFadden. The Life at the End where you'll learn about the Klitschko's experiment with European robins to figure out how birds navigate utilizing libido reception and free radical signaling in their eyes through cryptochromes. In other words, this science is well laid out. The problem is, it's not well known. And in your podcast, I'm laying out the reason why it's not well known because if you really knew what's really published, you probably wouldn't put he Jobs iPhone up to the side of your head and then you'll read Isaacson's biography and realize why Jobs didn't let his own kids use it. Why? Remember, every time Steve Jobs went to an iMac conference, everybody remembers his worn out popular Levi's. Remember that he died from a retroperitoneal camp. Don't ever forget that. Don't ever forget the story of the iPad that had an infrared detector based into it that Apple never marketed. Do you know why that was in there? Because when a child got an iPad and it touched its leg, you would turn off RF and microwave emission. So that tells you that Apple knew exactly what was going on. But they never marketed it because you would ask the question, why do you have an infrared turn on? The reason is simple, my friend. All the people listening to this, most of the young people, their digital babysitter is their iPhone and their iPad that they hand kids. And they're causing brain damage in every single child because that blue light is ruining the melanopsin sickling everywhere in their body. But the reason why that's good is because you're creating obedient idiots to make TikTok videos in the future.

Speaker 0 asks: Should we stop wearing sunglasses? Speaker 1 responds: Yes. Except we should be wearing them indoors and at night, not outdoors during the day. When you wear sunglasses outdoors, they block the UV, and that's kind of what most people wear them for. Things are bright. Well, reason things are too bright for most people is because they don't get out at dawn to see the sunrise. And if they did, their eyes would adjust to the sun and they wouldn't need sunglasses. We've been told forever from optometrists and doctors that UV is bad for the eyes. And in fact, our eyes have receptors to read the ultraviolet light. And when we cover them with sunglasses, we cannot read how much UV is in the sun, and so we get sunburned. Speaker 0 asks: So you are an expert in all things circadian rhythm and light diet. So what time are you waking up, and what time are you going to bed? Speaker 1 answers: So this eight hours of sleep a night, I think is bull. I wake up with the sun. I actually need to sleep less in the summer and more in the winter, and that's how we're biologically designed. We are a light poisoned population. The light that we're exposed to is highly intense in the blue color of light. There's no infrared, almost zero red light, very little yellow, and a ton of blue light. Blue light in itself is not bad, but blue light becomes toxic when we're exposed to too much of it. It messes with our circadian rhythm. It is actually associated with cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and obesity if we see it after sunset, and macular degeneration during the day because we have so much of it hitting our eyes causing free radicals.

Computer screens are predominantly blue-lit due to technology developed in a CIA program linked to Operation Paperclip. In the mid-20th century, the CIA conducted experiments at Tulane involving neurosurgeons who explored behavioral control through electrical stimulation of the brain. Professor Delgado proposed wireless control using RFID chips, leading the CIA to consider using light from screens for similar effects. This technology was later utilized by companies like Google and Meta. Interestingly, the initial concept originated from the mafia in Las Vegas, who created a controlled environment with blue-lit slot machines and free alcohol to increase gambling profits, inspiring the CIA's program.

Speaker 0 argues that LEDs emit radio frequencies that harm people, the same stuff that comes from a cell phone, and that blue light is toxic to our body. They claim a digital light on your face and a street light on your face, and criticize putting LEDs all over faces as silly. If sticking to any type of colored bulb, they say you should use incandescent or halogen or a UV bulb, and “you just go tanning.” They state there’s no need to put LEDs on the face and suggest it should be outlawed because they were never pushed. They claim LEDs are linked to cataracts and mess up health, causing a lot of brain fog, making people unable to focus; in the grocery store, people can’t think because the lights are affecting health. If natural light isn’t available, they recommend getting a candle and placing candles and salt lamps around the house, or, if not, using incandescents or halogens and not bringing LEDs into the house. They further claim that many people with health issues like ringing in the ears are affected by LEDs and Wi-Fi in the home, and that this combination will mess you up.

Computer screens emit blue light due to government programs like Operation Paperclip, which involved experiments on monkeys by drilling into their heads. Professor Delgado discovered behavior control wirelessly using RFID chips and semiconductors. The CIA then utilized electromagnetic radiation through screens to influence behavior. This technology is now used by companies like Google and Meta. The idea originated from the mafia in Las Vegas, who used blue-lit slot machines and free alcohol to manipulate people. This led to the CIA's MK Ultra program.

"They claim: 'In to realize that they can use light frequencies to destroy the leptin melanocortin pathways in the brain to control people. They don't need LSD. They don't need mescaline. They don't need anything else.' The program changes as it evolves when they find out that people that have heavily melanated skin are the most difficult to control. There's another DARPA program called the targeted individual program, about controlling people utilizing remote technology. The person who discovered this whole thing is Alan Fry, described as 'the first guy that showed that when you zap a brain with any type of electromagnetic radiation, it opens the blood brain barrier so you can take bad shit and get it in.' What happens in the United States at that time? 'People start making processed food.' 'What also magically happens? Drugs start to come on market and they have a lot of fillers and preservatives in them.' 'Guess what all those fillers and preservatives and all the fake process shit was really about. figuring out how to get toxins from your gut into your brain so that you could electromagnetically target them.' That is actually what happens between MK Ultra into SRI."

The speaker describes a new device used to measure the spectrum of light, noting that under full sunshine it reveals all seven colors—“just like the rainbow”—and that this natural spectrum is straightforward. When measuring incandescence, the speaker highlights a “beautiful red hue” and claims there is “really none of the other stuff to make you go blind,” implying that incandescent light presents a safe, simple spectrum in comparison to other sources. The speaker then discusses LEDs, stating that they are “super weird to have LEDs” because they “cause blindness, cataracts, dizziness, headaches, fatigue,” and references “that color spectrum” as part of the issue. Fluorescence is described as being almost identical to LEDs in this respect. The speaker also mentions “full moonlight” in this context, implying a comparison between the spectral qualities of LEDs/fluorescent light and moonlight. A key point emphasized is that LEDs and fluorescent bulbs seem to mimic moonlight, which the speaker notes as a source of behavioral or perceptual effects, claiming that this similarity to moonlight is what contributes to people going nuts. The overall message centers on a contrast between the spectra of different light sources—sunlight with its full seven-color spectrum, incandescence with a prominent red hue and fewer problematic elements, and LEDs/fluorescent lighting with problematic health and perceptual effects and a moonlight-like quality.

They argue that centralization—big pharma, the FCC, and other captured agencies—drives a problem that includes tech giants like Motorola, Nokia, Apple, Meta, and Google. They claim that programs government-sponsored at Tulane Neurosurgery and Neurology, known as MK Ultra, taught that people could be controlled through light waves. They describe a progression from cutting monkeys’ heads and wiring their heads to study behavior to the claim that we are controlled by light waves, not just by light in our environment. They point out that blue light is used by Dell, Apple, Meta, Google, and others on screens, and question why efflux or iris isn’t preloaded, suggesting the reason is that blue light lowers dopamine and melatonin, making people addicted. They attribute the discovery of this effect to the mafia rather than the CIA, linking it to the Las Vegas model: a desert city with great light and casinos that used blue light and alcohol to lower patrons’ dopamine so they would spend more money. They claim the CIA then redirected researchers to explore how to control without wires, moving from direct brain wires to semiconductors and LEDs through light. They recount that silicon valley developments with semiconductors produced LEDs, and that the early work included Delgado, a PhD researcher who implanted wires in a bull’s head to stop the animal via remote control, demonstrating a transition to wireless control. They assert that the next step was to eliminate wires and implant microchips in the brain, akin to Neuralink, enabling electrical, photoelectrical, and wireless control. They claim that researchers discovered that light could be used to control mammals, and that Meta and Google codified this through patents for blue light technology used in screens, owning the patents via patent attorneys. They reference Maria Manoulas in Los Angeles and her circle of friends connected to screens, asking whether these tools have been used to influence people and situations around them. They argue digital babysitting is successful for parents because a child becomes easier to control with screens, comparing this to a heroin addict needing a fix, explaining that exposure to electromagnetic pollution reduces beta endorphin (the natural brain opiate) and drives a need for external dopamine from drugs, alcohol, sex, or food. They claim this entire line of research originated in covert work at institutions such as Tulane, Johns Hopkins, Mayo Clinic, and Harvard, then moved into big tech. They explain the transition from old CRT screens to blue-lit modern screens, noting that those who own the patents control the algorithms and centralize medicine for profit. They suggest a cynical view of doctors: their burnout is tied to blue-lit electronic medical records like Epic, Cerner, and Meditech, which require data input rather than patient interaction. They ask who that serves and imply it harms both patients and doctors. They challenge the idea that technology saves money, asserting instead that it increases data collection and profit through big data. They warn that AI will be used to train computers to replace dermatologists, predicting that in twenty years people will visit Walgreens and consult AI-generated, Google-algorithm-created centralized medicine. They name Maria Manoulas and her circle as part of this ecosystem.

Speaker 0 describes an experiment in which young white rats were placed directly in front of a TV set for the same time periods as bean plants and children exhibiting tired child syndrome symptoms. Using semi time lapse photography, partially speeding up the action, the results show that the young rats on the left, protected only with black photographic paper, became aggressive and more difficult to manage. In contrast, those on the right, protected with a lead shield, remained perfectly normal and docile. Autopsies were performed on all of these animals, revealing brain tissue damage in the rats protected only with the black paper, but not in those protected with the lead shielding.

Clayton says he learned that the CIA knew about a “parasitic infection of cancer in the body” as early as the 1950s and helped suppress information about it. He argues that claims about sunlight or red light therapy—such as sitting in a backyard—help ward off macular degeneration and other issues happened more than 100 years ago, and that people are now “maybe just learning about it.” Clayton also discusses a framework for why light therapies might work. He says mitochondria make up about 25% of cells and contain mitochondria chromophores, described as light receptors biologically designed to receive light. He connects this to observations of nature, where plants and animals receive both the Earth’s magnetic field and “grounding,” and he pairs those ideas with therapies including a pulse electromagnetic field and light therapy. He states that nature provides multiple light components at the same time, including red light (especially during sunrise and sunset) and UVB during the day, along with full-spectrum light ranging from red to near-infrared, infrared, and far infrared. He explains that light enters mitochondria through mitochondrial chromophores and generates reactive oxygen species, alongside adenosine triphosphate, described as cellular energy. He then states that reactive oxygen species and the ATP response include “specific aspects that target circulating tumor cells,” whether those cells are already circulating or are going to become problematic cancers. He adds that preventative studies of red light therapy on cancer have been done, particularly in animals, showing it is preventative. He also cites cancer incidence statistics: one in two males are getting cancer during their life, and one in three females.

The speaker describes observing moonlight and notes that the color spectrums appeared as lines, with certain colors missing, and that the moonlight is constantly changing. They claim this is why people go nuts during the full moon. They assert that the Epstein files were dropped two days before the full moon because “everybody goes nuts when they find out that the government's a bunch of pedophiles … and they need to be hung.” They argue that LEDs and fluorescence are very similar to moonlight, producing the same color spectrum, which is why LEDs and fluorescence are used in homes—to give people the same moonlight spectrum. The speaker claims that people walk around with pulsating and flickering light, “going completely crazy,” because the color spectrum from the moon flickers like an LED or fluorescent bulb during the full moon. They say they bought a device to see what the color spectrum is of what is coming off the moon. The speaker contends this is also why incandescent bulbs should be banned, arguing that incandescent bulbs are being removed for a reason: “number one, they're healing on the eyes,” and that there’s a red spectrum which is “actually very beneficial.”

Dinshaw color therapy is described as a deep rabbit hole. The speaker claims that the government burned Dinshaw’s books in the 1950s. Dinshaw realized that you could heal a person by putting different colors in front of them, based on the color they are missing. Colors cited include red, yellow, green, purple, and other color spectrums. He had a special machine placed in front of the person that corresponded to their ailment. For example, if a person had a headache, the machine would use the color red. The person would sit in the sun, and the red would go through into the eyes, which absorb all of the color spectrums, and then the headache would be resolved. If someone had a stomach issue or didn’t feel well, the color blue would be used. The person would sit in the sun, the blue would go through the eyes, and the stomach issue would be cured. The speaker states that the government burned Dinshaw’s books because color therapy works so well. The claim is made that every single disease could be resolved with color therapy. Beyond treatment, the speaker notes that food, drink, or the clothing and materials a person wears emit a frequency. On a “blue day,” one might wear the color blue to uplift the mood. If one desires more energy, one might wear red. To open the crown chakra, one might wear purple. Each color is said to represent different types of meridian lines in the body, aligning with Dinshaw’s work. The discussion expands to the broader idea of color and light spectrums, mentioning stained glass windows in cathedrals as examples of color spectrums present in the environment. The implication is that color and light have profound effects on physiological or energetic systems, as suggested by Dinshaw’s color therapy approach.

The speaker argues that if you’re dealing with addictive behavior from phones, you should turn off “suggested posts” on Instagram and other social media apps for the next 30 days. They say that about 80% of what appears in a feed are suggested posts, and that these suggested posts are not the people you follow—those people “barely come up” because suggested posts appear throughout the time spent on the app. The speaker also claims that social media companies keep people addicted by using suggested posts and that, in addition, the apps listen to a user’s microphone and camera the entire time via settings, then use spoken information so “everything that you speak gets put into the social media platform” and appears on your feed. According to the speaker, turning off suggested posts will make you see a “very different thing,” helping you understand why you might feel addicted or hooked in. The speaker also suggests turning on black-and-white mode so social media becomes “real boring” because you’re “not addicted to the artificial colors.” Finally, they recommend disconnecting and going to sit out in nature. The speaker concludes that the goal of suggested posts is to keep users connected all the time and hooked, including seeing content about “the war,” with the speaker describing the cycle of news updates and stating “It’s MKUltra. That’s what it is. MKUltra to keep you hooked.”

Andrew Marino, a physicist and a lawyer who worked for doctor Robert Inkbeck, is the guy who made good on Albert St. Georgie’s prediction that proteins were semiconductors. He worked for the military and did studies on the sanguine antenna built in Wisconsin to track submarines, and found out they caused problems. Information was delivered to the military in 1973, and then Becker found out there were a lot more problems with electromagnetic pollution that’d be uncovered between Niagara Falls and New York City with power lines. When the military wouldn’t listen to him, he went on TV with 60 Minutes with Mike Wallace, polled the nation, and literally a couple weeks after that, his lab was completely defunded and all the military money was taken away. Marino was three times nominated for the Nobel Prize. The reason it never made waves is that back then nobody had a cell phone, nobody had a microwave oven, only the RIP. This was on the front page of the Boston Globe in 1977. Marino was the physicist in his lab who actually gave congressional testimony in the early seventies, telling the government, published in the archives, that satellites above the earth affected the magnetosphere 80,000 kilometers from base stations on the surface of the earth. The proof is there, but they've ignored it. If you read his book, Going Somewhere, written by Andrew Marino, you’ll understand. When scientists tell me that non-ADVMF can affect us because it's not ionizing radiation, that book alleviates all of them. Roland Van de Wick’s book is cited as beautiful for laying out biophotons and the biophoton research done by the Russians, and the Japanese and the Europeans. It’s well researched, and all the stuff about quantum mechanics in biology from 2007 to current has happened; we know it’s operational in photosynthesis. There are books Life at the Edge by Jim L. Callely and John Joy McFadden, which discuss the Klitschko experiments with European robins to figure out how birds navigate utilizing lead meter reception and free radical signaling in their eyes through cryptocrons. In other words, this science is well laid out, but not well known. The reason it’s not well known, as laid out in the podcast, is because if you really knew what’s published, you probably wouldn’t put your iPhone next to your head and read Isaacson’s biography and realize why Jobs didn’t let his own kids use it. Jobs died from a retroperitoneal cancer. The story of the iPad had an infrared detector built in that Apple never marketed, because when a child touched it to their leg, you would turn off RF and microwave emission. That suggests Apple knew what was going on. The reason is simple: most young people’ s digital babysitter is the iPhone and iPad handed to kids, and they’re causing brain damage in every child because blue light is ruining melanopsin signaling everywhere in their body, which, the argument goes, is good because it’s making obedient idiots to make TikTok videos in the future.

Exposure to screen type light between the hours of 11PM and 4AM activates a specific circuit in a brain area called the habenula that lowers dopamine and creates a sense of disappointment. So it's pro depressive. That's straight from the discussion that followed: “from 11PM to 4AM, if you're on your phone, if you're looking at a TV or iPad or screen consistently, it's going to make you more depressed.” It was noted that “in theory, yes,” but in practice you would have to do that pretty consistently. The conversation also clarified that it’s the brightness of light, not the color of the light, that matters. Measures to mitigate include dimming it way, way down, or wearing glasses or using biohacking stuff. The claim was reiterated: “the studies by multiple groups are showing that from 11PM to 4AM, if you're on your phone… it’s going to make you more depressed.” The response added that there isn’t just one exposure; rather, “it's not like one exposure,” and “it's going to dim dopamine” or “blunt dopamine.”

Speaker 0 highlights Michael Gradazar's argument: it's not the blue light. It's that these devices are attention capture devices, and they are designed to ruthlessly fleece you of your attention economy. My goodness are they good at doing it because they've spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing that technology. And as a consequence, you become so cerebrally activated that it masks your state of sleepiness. The passage frames this as a critique of how digital interfaces leverage attention through substantial financial investment, leading to heightened neural activation and fatigue masking. Gradazar's assertion emphasizes attention capture over screen light as the primary mechanism.

Speaker critiques LED red-light therapy, calling LEDs unhealthy and arguing they emit radio frequencies like street lights; asserts there are no health studies showing LEDs are healthy. Claims Monsanto and IBM created the LED to push robotic, transhuman, or AI futures and that red light therapy is nonsensical unless used outdoors. Advises using incandescent or halogen instead of standing in front of a pane of LEDs. Links LEDs to blindness, cataracts, brain fog, and nausea; notes how shoppers report feeling sicker under store lighting. Argues there is no heat from LEDs and questions the logic of red-light therapy. Promotes sun exposure as the true biohack: sit in the sun for two hours, go out in nature. Says the sun is free and constant, and that most illnesses can be reversed by simply sitting in the sun.

The speaker asserts that all computer screens are blue-lit because the original technology emerged from a government program associated with Operation Paperclip. He says this program originated at Tulane Neurology and Tulane Neurosurgery in the mid-20th century, where the CIA conducted experiments on monkeys involving drilling into the skull, placing wires into the thalamus, and applying electricity to observe behavioral changes. One participant, Professor Delgado, reportedly proposed wireless control after seeing that wired devices could alter behavior. Delgado allegedly demonstrated wireless control in monkeys and bulls using RFID chips and semiconductors. The speaker claims the CIA then expanded the concept to light and screens, suggesting that electromagnetic radiation through screens can influence behavior, and asserts that this is why computer screens operate at certain frequencies. He connects this idea to a meeting arranged by a patent attorney who allegedly safeguarded the interests of Google and Meta to enable control over people’s activities. In a broader backstory, the speaker asserts that the original idea behind this development began with the CIA and traces it back to the Mafia in Las Vegas. He contends the Mafia wanted to build a new city in a desert, enclosed it, blacked out windows, and invented blue-lit slot machines. They supposedly discovered that money could be extracted more efficiently by offering free alcohol, which then inspired the CIA to initiate the program. The speaker emphasizes that this chain of events links Operation Paperclip, the CIA’s research, and modern tech platforms. He references Bobby Kennedy in connection with the topic, and notes his medical school background at LSU.

The speaker, a neurosurgeon, claims medicine is “ass backwards” and argues that many health problems originate from light exposure, especially blue light. They assert the alpha wave in the human brain is 7.83 hertz and describe a “direct loop” from the brain to the pineal gland involving balanced energy from blue and red light. They say blue light is “toxic,” makes people fat, and blocks perception of truth when dopamine is low. They also claim energy and mass are the same thing, differing only by environment, and describe the eye (the pupil) as a “perfect black box radiator” where UV light passes through and can be demonstrated with a UVA flashlight and fluorescence. They argue aromatic amino acids absorb UV light because benzene rings function as “photon traps,” and they claim the eye is loaded with these UV-absorbing aromatic amino acids. They connect this to water and coherent domains in water, stating that sunlight-driven exclusion zone coherence in water generates free, delocalized electrons used to run biochemical programs. They further describe UV light hitting proteins in water as creating an electromechanical effect transmitted as sound-like changes in water density, framed as a quantum-mechanical mechanism, and they claim mitochondria produce cytosolic water that surrounds cellular components. The speaker links Schumann resonance to sunlight interacting with Earth’s ionosphere and says the resulting 7.83 hertz entrains humans to generate alpha waves. They claim non-native EMF dehydrates cells by lowering redox potential in mitochondria, reducing water production. They offer a practical analogy: microwaving leftover steak makes it taste like “shoe leather” because microwaves vibrate and rotate water quickly, causing dehydration. They shift focus to the eye’s timing system, saying traditional ophthalmology emphasizes the “camera” (including cataract surgery implants) while missing UV/blue light pathways. They claim cataract implant lenses block UVA/UVB and also block part of blue light (stated as “50%” since a change in 2008). They describe infrared A as a large portion of sunlight reaching Earth and argue blue light bends most via gravitational lensing, landing in front of the retina and contributing to “visual obscuration,” elongation of the eyeball, myopia, retinal detachments, and acute macular degeneration. They connect cataracts to “blue light toxicity,” claiming the brain responds by making the lens black/hazy to protect itself. They describe melanopsin as an opsin in retinal pathways linked to nighttime signaling and melatonin. They then present a controversial claim: central retinal pathway energizes distal brain functions, including turning on the pituitary gland, and they use the historical ophthalmologist Fritz Hallwich to support this. Hallwich, they say, removed cataracts (without intraocular lenses present at the time), documented improvements in growth, metabolism, weight, sleep, animal behavior, coat color, and changes in urinary metabolites of hormones—leading to the claim that “light was able to make chemicals in us that weren’t there before.” They also bring in John Ott, stating Ott used time-lapse and investigations suggesting light affects chloroplast rotation and that retinal pigment epithelium melanin absorbs UV and is associated with a DC electric current that supports tissue regeneration. The speaker argues that when light slows (energy loss), the pituitary gets bigger, and they claim this reflects light being turned into hormones that can alter DNA. They say obesity may relate to insufficient sunlight rather than food intake. They reference medical school training with Nicholas Bazan, stating the eye has more DHA than other brain regions and that the eye’s clock must run faster for synchronization. They further claim blue light acts as an antidote to vitamin A and DHA by making vitamin A (described as yellow) and that opsins in the body depend on vitamin A, linking vitamin A deficiency to obesity via NHANES data. They give “sun’s rules” for timing: they recommend reconstructing morning exposure, including receiving UVA and infrared A earlier, and they claim sunrise patterns regenerate components and support making melatonin first in the eye before generalizing throughout the brain. They argue UVA light helps turn on hormone production, while UVA on skin turns off hormone production in the blood plasma. They also connect UVA light to reducing mitochondrial energy production by turning down ATP generation, stating red light turns on cytochrome c oxidase and UV light turns it off via nitric oxide. Practical advice: they recommend grounding and reducing clothing to allow UV exposure, mention UVA-penetrating bathing suits, suggest infrared A methods such as sauna or geothermal-heated pools, and state that heat is infrared light.

The speaker discusses red light therapy, advocating the use of a red light incandescent bulb that costs about $7 to $10, which you can plug in to treat with red light. They argue you don’t need the masks associated with seizures. They contrast incandescent bulbs with LED masks, stating that the LEDs flicker like crazy, causing nausea, and they emit radio frequencies that are “toxic to your brain” because you are pulsing your brain the entire time. The speaker recommends sticking to old incandescent bulbs, noting they don’t cost much. They comment that the government wanted to ban incandescent bulbs, but claim these bulbs are linked to health issues and are perfectly legal.

Lou shows an image of a guy running with ear pods and checking a device like an Apple Watch, asking how much that is doing inside his body and noting many people are likely using them. Speaker 1 says we’ve all been sold sexy products that are fun, but the risks aren’t being shared. They offer a free public education webinar every month, two hours, to walk through the science, and for cliff notes they provide the following immediate observations people may notice: - Headaches - Nosebleeds - Anxiety - Depression - Insomnia They describe this as a neurotoxin that pulsates our biological system many, many times per second, more than the Earth’s natural electromagnetic field. The brain perceives this invisible light energy as the lights are on, which disrupts the circadian rhythm in the wee hours of darkness. Melatonin suppression is singled out as a major consequence, affecting sleep and the nighttime cell repair and regeneration processes. The blood-brain barrier is a membrane surrounding the brain that helps keep toxins out of sensitive brain areas. The speaker claims that constant pulsing with man-made microwave radiofrequency opens up or permeates the blood-brain barrier, allowing toxins to accompany blood into the brain and contributing to increased neurotoxicity today. The speaker also mentions something called rouleaux formation. When radiating devices like a phone are held, the pinky finger tingles. Citing Dr. Magda Havas and Dr. Rob Brown, they say this exposure leads to rouleaux formation. The speaker explains rouleaux as red blood cells that are normally free-floating and deliver oxygen throughout the body being affected by microwave radiation, causing red blood cells to become magnetized and stick together, forming chains like a stack of coins that cannot efficiently reach tissues and organs to deliver oxygen. Rouleaux formation is described as a very serious concern.

Mark Baker, founder and president of the Soft Lights Foundation, and Clayton (Speaker 0) discuss the health and societal concerns around LED lighting. Baker argues that LED lights are devastating to health due to their blue-rich spectra, prevalence in night environments, and the resulting impact on sleep, mood, circadian biology, and overall well-being. He describes personal experiences that motivated his activism, including a mental breakdown linked to LED exposure and a subsequent shift to full-time advocacy. Baker explains that LEDs are now ubiquitous: LED headlights in cars, blue-rich LED streetlights, general-service LED lamps in homes, and intense LED indicators on appliances. He notes that emergency vehicles with flashing LEDs are also problematic for some people. He acknowledges that the issue feels overwhelming to many, including bureaucrats, which adds to the difficulty of solving it. The conversation delves into Baker’s backstory. In the mid-2010s, as high-powered LED lights proliferated, he noticed blue-rich headlights and 5,000 Kelvin streetlights that disrupted his psychological wellbeing. Living in California, he experienced intense lighting at night from apartment windows and, after attempting to contest changes with city officials, suffered a severe mental breakdown when his school district refused to turn off the LEDs. This led to hospitalization and redirected his career toward advocacy, studying physics, government regulation, and organizing with others suffering similarly. Baker emphasizes that many people experience LED-induced sensitivities: migraines, epileptic seizures, sleep disruption, and even suicidal thoughts for some. He notes that individuals with astigmatism report driving difficulties due to LED headlights. He characterizes the public as having diverse responses: some people are highly sensitive to LEDs, others notice little to no effect. He frames the community as “canaries in a coal mine” for broader environmental and health impacts. The discussion covers the science of light. The body has photoreceptors beyond the eyes, including in skin and tissues, with blue wavelengths around 450 nanometers linked to circadian regulation. He asserts that artificial light at night interferes with melatonin suppression and cellular repair processes, thereby increasing health risks. He argues that the spectral distribution of many LEDs, with a prominent spike in blue light and no infrared, contrasts with incandescent light, which has a warmer, red-yellow spectrum and includes infrared. He maintains that LEDs are further from natural light than incandescent sources and that this spectral shift affects mood, sleep, and health. On policy and regulation, Baker critiques the 2005 Energy Policy Act, which directed the Department of Energy to pursue solid-state lighting and set a minimum luminous efficacy of 45 lumens per watt. He contends that the DOE did not coordinate with the FDA to ensure safety standards, so LEDs entered markets without assessing flicker, color temperature, or overall quality. He suggests this failure contributed to a mismatch between efficiency goals and health outcomes. He calls for reintroducing safe, healthy lighting and undoing “the effective ban on incandescence,” arguing that incandescents were healthier and that the current LED emphasis ignores health impacts. Baker discusses practical implications for sleep and daily life. He recommends reducing exposure to night-time LED lighting, using warmer color temperatures (around 2,700 Kelvin or lower), and installing measures to limit blue light in bedrooms. He notes that even skin exposure to light and non-visual photoreceptors can affect sleep. He mentions that some LEDs are being redesigned to imitate incandescent light, including “natural light” LEDs with broader spectral distributions and devices that incorporate infrared light to soften nighttime exposure. He also highlights the challenge of modern fixtures that integrate LEDs into fixtures rather than as replaceable bulbs, complicating the shift away from blue-rich lighting. The Soft Lights Foundation provides resources at softlights.org, including a campaign to ban blinding car headlights and an LED incident report for the FDA. Baker mentions a Change.org petition with tens of thousands of signatures, a database of incident reports to push regulatory action, and a resources section with scientific articles. He encourages joining the Ban Blinding LEDs Facebook group and engaging with regulatory and legal efforts (e.g., lawsuits) to address LED-related health concerns. In closing, Baker argues the system resists change, driven by arrogance, incompetence, negligence, and financial incentives, but denies a conspiratorial killing intent. He invites listeners to learn more, sign petitions, and consider environmental and health impacts when choosing lighting options.