WEBVTT 02:30.000 --> 02:53.540 You schedule for 16 minutes next is going on French British Italian Japanese television 02:54.540 --> 02:58.540 People everywhere are starting to listen to him. It's embarrassing 03:03.540 --> 03:10.540 And everybody knows when dry ice mixes with water it makes a real spooky fog show them Scooby 03:23.540 --> 03:26.540 Scooby Lou 05:54.540 --> 06:10.540 Good evening ladies and gentlemen this is legal and biological I resisted slow noise information brief brought to you by a biologist it is the 25th of October 2023. Thank you for joining me 06:10.540 --> 06:19.540 As usual tonight we are trying to break this limited spectrum of debate and this brilliant discussion within it 06:19.540 --> 06:27.540 And we're trying to turn it around a little bit I hope we're starting to become successful to a certain extent on that regard 06:28.540 --> 06:34.540 And I hope I'm starting to arm you with some of the basic arguments that you can take to your Thanksgiving dinner table 06:38.540 --> 06:43.540 It's it's going to be a long slog though we're not going to win this year or we're not going to win next year 06:44.540 --> 06:46.540 This may be the battle of our lifetime 06:47.540 --> 06:53.540 Because it is not a matter of what's true that counts but is what a matter is perceived to be true 06:54.540 --> 07:02.540 And I'm afraid that there has been a very concerted effort over many years to make sure that what is perceived to be true is indeed not the case 07:03.540 --> 07:05.540 It's not true at all 07:06.540 --> 07:10.540 And so that's where this you know don't take the bait on social media comes from 07:10.540 --> 07:16.540 They are they are controlling us by our urges and leading us by our noses 07:17.540 --> 07:26.540 And we have been fooled into solving this mystery about a gain of function virus that escaped or was released from somewhere in Wuhan, China 07:27.540 --> 07:32.540 And who's responsible for covering it up who funded it who lied about it 07:34.540 --> 07:37.540 And this is all one great big hoax 07:38.540 --> 07:43.540 But by accepting the challenge of solving it we have accepted its premises 07:45.540 --> 07:49.540 codified in the many books that have been released and will continue to be released 07:51.540 --> 07:57.540 Intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb 07:58.540 --> 08:00.540 And transfection is not immunization 08:08.540 --> 08:16.540 There is an illusion of consensus that has been created by people on the TV and behind the scenes people that purport to be 08:17.540 --> 08:20.540 dissidents and purport to be mainstream 08:21.540 --> 08:25.540 And I think the best way to describe what is being done to us at the moment 08:26.540 --> 08:31.540 Is to describe it as a sort of faith, a faith that is being protected by all these people 08:32.540 --> 08:34.540 It is a faith in a novel virus 08:35.540 --> 08:37.540 It is a faith in that millions have died 08:38.540 --> 08:43.540 And millions have been saved or could have been saved depending on which narrative you choose 08:45.540 --> 08:47.540 They could be saved by different things 08:48.540 --> 08:52.540 Gain of function is a real thing and a virus will come again 08:54.540 --> 09:00.540 And that's basically although these people have this wonderful diverse opinion 09:02.540 --> 09:06.540 And all these diverse opinions about what the most important thing to consider is 09:07.540 --> 09:10.540 None of them will challenge the tenets of this faith, none of them 09:12.540 --> 09:17.540 And when they are challenged to address any of the parts of the faith they walk around it 09:18.540 --> 09:20.540 All of them 09:24.540 --> 09:27.540 Because again it is not a matter of what it is true that counts 09:28.540 --> 09:34.540 But a matter of what is perceived to be true and their spectacular commitment to lies makes it very hard to see through 09:35.540 --> 09:39.540 Because it creates an illusion of consensus, a bunch of people 09:41.540 --> 09:45.540 A bunch of people that all agree about this one thing right here 09:48.540 --> 09:52.540 And if they all agree about this story and they all agree about this faith 09:53.540 --> 09:57.540 Then even though they seem to argue with one another, the show goes on 10:00.540 --> 10:03.540 And we are now about to move into a new phase of the show 10:04.540 --> 10:09.540 Where another aspect of the bifurcation is going to be brought together 10:10.540 --> 10:16.540 So first they split us up on pre-existing fault lines of political socio-economic division 10:17.540 --> 10:20.540 Based on this lab leak or natural virus narrative 10:21.540 --> 10:24.540 And now they are going to slowly bring us together 10:25.540 --> 10:31.540 With regard to the conclusion that some of the things that people said about the shots might have been correct 10:38.540 --> 10:41.540 I want to call your attention to the last couple of days of shows 10:42.540 --> 10:48.540 Because there were some pretty good home run shows with regard to Zuckerberg and Chan 10:49.540 --> 10:51.540 And the Huberman Show 10:52.540 --> 10:59.540 Talking about really how, sorry, how we are at this stage in our timeline 11:00.540 --> 11:03.540 When gathering the data now seems to be the imperative 11:04.540 --> 11:08.540 And so you can hear it all around the world, you can hear it from all these people all the time 11:08.540 --> 11:10.540 It is to get the data 11:11.540 --> 11:13.540 And so that's what Zuckerberg and Chan were talking about 11:14.540 --> 11:18.540 And what Huberman was seemed to be almost submitting to their superiority 11:19.540 --> 11:25.540 In terms of their vision and foresight into what shall come in the transgenic and trans-human future 11:26.540 --> 11:29.540 It was pretty disturbing but it's definitely worth watching 11:30.540 --> 11:34.540 And the reason why it's worth watching is because remember that Huberman is now part of this 11:35.540 --> 11:40.540 hierarchy of social media icons that includes Joe Rogan and Lex Friedman 11:41.540 --> 11:47.540 And Jordan Peterson and Brett Weinstein and Sam Cedar and Tim Poole 11:48.540 --> 11:50.540 And the list is endless basically 11:52.540 --> 11:59.540 And I have the feeling that eventually this guy Kevin McCurnan is going to go into that ecosystem 12:00.540 --> 12:02.540 And circulate this same claim 12:03.540 --> 12:05.540 Maybe he'll go on Joe Rogan next 12:06.540 --> 12:16.540 But a couple days ago he was on a CHD program with my colleague Brian Hooker and Mary Holland, the President 12:17.540 --> 12:22.540 And so I thought it would be useful to listen to this just to see what he presents 12:23.540 --> 12:25.540 And how he presents it 12:26.540 --> 12:28.540 And then I have a couple alternative videos that I wanted to watch 12:29.540 --> 12:32.540 Afterward from somebody else that you're kind of familiar with 12:33.540 --> 12:37.540 We might only watch one depending on how it ends up panning out 12:39.540 --> 12:40.540 So let's go into this first 12:41.540 --> 12:43.540 You can hear that my voice still needs quite a bit of rest 12:44.540 --> 12:50.540 There's still some what I would call loose material on my vocal cords or in my voice box 12:51.540 --> 12:53.540 That occasionally get in the way of breathing 12:53.540 --> 12:58.540 They also occasionally make my voice less projecting 12:59.540 --> 13:02.540 So I am working on getting a doctor's appointment 13:03.540 --> 13:05.540 Don't need to type or send a lot of emails or anything like that 13:06.540 --> 13:09.540 I'm definitely going to take care of my voice as soon as I can 13:10.540 --> 13:14.540 Because I think in the long term it might be good to have these vocal cords intact 13:17.540 --> 13:19.540 So let's get out of here and let's play this one 13:20.540 --> 13:21.540 I hope it's not too loud 13:23.540 --> 13:25.540 We're going to go a little forward here 13:32.540 --> 13:34.540 Oh, we're going to go a little forward here 13:35.540 --> 13:37.540 Powerful speakers like Bearish Arab 13:53.540 --> 14:06.540 Good morning children's health defense today is Tuesday October 24th 14:07.540 --> 14:09.540 And we have a very exciting guest with us today 14:10.540 --> 14:16.540 Kevin McCurnan, scientist who's going to be talking with us about the DNA contamination 14:17.540 --> 14:19.540 That's been discovered in COVID-19 vaccines 14:20.540 --> 14:25.540 Pfizer's but also others will be joined by our chief science officer Brian Hooker 14:26.540 --> 14:28.540 And we will be talking with Kevin 14:29.540 --> 14:35.540 Part of the context for this show is an article that defender published on Friday last week 14:36.540 --> 14:40.540 Regarding the fact that Health Canada, the main health agency in that country 14:41.540 --> 14:46.540 Has acknowledged the DNA contamination in Pfizer's COVID-19 shots 14:47.540 --> 14:50.540 This is the first time that a government has acknowledged this research 14:51.540 --> 14:58.540 This is very important because it suggests that now governments are on notice that they have to do something about this 14:59.540 --> 15:04.540 What Canada has said so far is they've looked at this and believed that the benefits still outweigh the risk 15:05.540 --> 15:09.540 But without any comprehension of the risks that seems rather specious 15:10.540 --> 15:15.540 It's our privilege to have Kevin here with us to talk specifically about his research 15:16.540 --> 15:23.540 Really one of the most dramatic elements of this is that inside this DNA plasmid contamination 15:24.540 --> 15:26.540 Our sequences from Simeon virus 40 15:27.540 --> 15:34.540 SB 40 was brought into the human population through the oral polio vaccine back in the 1950s 15:35.540 --> 15:37.540 Ironically today is world polio day 15:38.540 --> 15:44.540 And not in any way to diminish the significance of polio as a worldwide disease 50s 15:45.540 --> 15:47.540 Ironically today is 15:48.540 --> 15:51.540 World polio day 16:05.540 --> 16:10.540 And not in any way to diminish the significance of polio as a worldwide disease 16:11.540 --> 16:15.540 But the Simeon virus 40 now has robust science behind it 16:15.540 --> 16:17.540 Since the 1970s 16:17.540 --> 16:24.540 Proving that there's a very strong association between Simeon virus 40 and many forms of cancer and other diseases 16:25.540 --> 16:31.540 So with that, I'm very happy to go over to our conversation with Kevin McCurnan and Dr. Brian Hooker 16:36.540 --> 16:39.540 Welcome Dr. Kevin McCurnan and Dr. Brian Hooker 16:40.540 --> 16:42.540 I'm really thrilled to have both of you here with us 16:43.540 --> 16:47.540 So Brian, you're of course our science director here at Children's Health Defense 16:48.540 --> 16:52.540 On Kevin, you have an incredibly impressive background in science 16:53.540 --> 16:58.540 Would you just give us the quick highlights so that our viewers know how extensive your scientific credentials are? 17:00.540 --> 17:03.540 Certainly, well, I guess I'll shoot myself in the foot and tell you I dropped up a PhD program 17:04.540 --> 17:05.540 So I never got my doctorate 17:05.540 --> 17:09.540 But I have been working in the genomics field for 25 years now 17:09.540 --> 17:14.540 I started on the Human Genome Project down at with Eric Lander down at the White Institute at MIT 17:15.540 --> 17:19.540 Was managing the research and development team there through the scale up of the Human Genome Project 17:20.540 --> 17:25.540 And then after that spun a bunch of companies at least Adjunct Court is one company we spun out of MIT 17:26.540 --> 17:30.540 That built magnetic DNA purification tools which are made to play role in the story 17:31.540 --> 17:33.540 And we also built some PCR tests there and had a genome center 17:34.540 --> 17:36.540 That company got acquired by Beckman Coulter 17:36.540 --> 17:39.540 And then we spun another company out called Adjunct Court Personal Genomics 17:39.540 --> 17:43.540 That built the solid sequencer and that one got acquired by Applied Biosystems 17:43.540 --> 17:45.540 And I worked with Applied Biosystems for five years 17:45.540 --> 17:49.540 Building various DNA sequencers including some semiconductor systems 17:50.540 --> 17:52.540 So I'd have done some clinical sequencing 17:53.540 --> 17:57.540 We did a, they had a clean lab for a while that was doing sequencing of epilepsy and mitochondrial disease kids 17:58.540 --> 18:01.540 And that's kind of where I first ran into a lot of parents telling me about vaccine injuries 18:02.540 --> 18:07.540 And then we went into the cannabis arena where we were sequencing cannabis genomes 18:08.540 --> 18:12.540 Because many of the epileptic parents were looking for safe and effective cannabidiol 18:13.540 --> 18:14.540 Which was helping with seizures 18:15.540 --> 18:19.540 So we got interested in that field and somehow I ended up here sequencing a vaccine by mistake 18:20.540 --> 18:23.540 And found something that people seemed to be interested in 18:24.540 --> 18:26.540 So it's a long winding road to where I am now 18:27.540 --> 18:31.540 So tell us about this study that you did 18:32.540 --> 18:37.540 Where I think you were using these vials of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines as controls 18:38.540 --> 18:41.540 Is that right? And you've stumbled on an incredible important finding 18:42.540 --> 18:46.540 Yeah, so we were doing, we're trying to sort out the pathology of a viroid 18:47.540 --> 18:48.540 That's devastating the cannabis field 18:49.540 --> 18:51.540 So we were doing RNA sequencing and the pipeline broke 18:52.540 --> 19:00.540 So if I wrote is a naked piece of RNA that is infectious in itself, it doesn't have any protein code around it 19:01.540 --> 19:05.540 So you can synthesize these and actually put them into plants and they create some RNA interference 19:06.540 --> 19:08.540 And there's some pathology that results from this 19:09.540 --> 19:11.540 So they don't affect mammals but they infect plants and they can be devastating 19:12.540 --> 19:14.540 And it's probably knocking down the yields in plants like 40% in this industry 19:15.540 --> 19:19.540 So everyone's trying to understand this 256 letter piece of sequence 19:20.540 --> 19:23.540 That's a pathology in plants at least in the cannabis plant right now 19:24.540 --> 19:30.540 So when we were sequencing the RNA of the cannabis genome to see what was happening when it got infected 19:31.540 --> 19:35.540 We started getting all this sequencing data back that didn't look like it was concentrated on genes 19:36.540 --> 19:38.540 And that's a sign that your RNA purification system might be broken 19:39.540 --> 19:43.540 So the way to solve that and figure that out is to spike in a pharmaceutical grade RNA 19:44.540 --> 19:46.540 To see if you find out where it's broken 19:47.540 --> 19:49.540 And I figured, well, these are probably pharmaceutical grade 19:50.540 --> 19:52.540 If they're injected into people, I'll use one of those 19:53.540 --> 19:55.540 It has a poly-A tag on it that should stick to our magnetic beads 19:56.540 --> 19:59.540 And it should tell us if we have an RNA problem or something else is wrong 20:00.540 --> 20:04.540 But I didn't expect to get out of the experiment was the contaminant that I then was pregnant with 20:05.540 --> 20:08.540 To tell the world about that, okay, it worked as a control 20:09.540 --> 20:12.540 It taught us that we had a DNA problem in our RNA sequencing pipeline 20:13.540 --> 20:16.540 But now I see there's a plasmid in here that I can't hide from 20:17.540 --> 20:21.540 And I've got to put it public as quickly as I can, as responsibly as I can 20:22.540 --> 20:25.540 And so we chose to do that by releasing all of these really rapid sub-stack articles 20:26.540 --> 20:31.540 Because you just couldn't see this getting through the peer review process in a timely manner given the political nature of it right now 20:32.540 --> 20:34.540 I'm ignorant, I'm not a scientist 20:35.540 --> 20:38.540 Walk us back a little bit, explain to our viewers what is a plasmid 20:39.540 --> 20:41.540 What did you find here, what does that mean for us? 20:43.540 --> 20:47.540 So when the clinical trials, I want to be clear, this is mostly pertaining to Pfizer 20:48.540 --> 20:51.540 We sequence Pfizer and Moderna, but there's different background to them 20:52.540 --> 20:56.540 So Pfizer's trial started by generating, you need to make this RNA 20:57.540 --> 21:01.540 In order to make this RNA, you need to feed a DNA template to read the RNA from 21:02.540 --> 21:04.540 So it's called an in vitro transcription reaction 21:05.540 --> 21:09.540 You present an RNA polymerase with a piece of DNA and it starts making RNA off of it 21:10.540 --> 21:12.540 It's kind of like, you know, it's the ink for your Xerox machine, if you will 21:14.540 --> 21:17.540 So they started the clinical trial with DNA that was amplified with PCR 21:18.540 --> 21:23.540 Which is really clean DNA, because when you amplify it, it raises the amount of DNA from background, a million full 21:24.540 --> 21:29.540 So there's no residual background, you get a really clean piece of DNA that you can make your RNA from 21:30.540 --> 21:32.540 That was what the trial was run out, it's called process one 21:33.540 --> 21:36.540 Resif Levy and Josh Goodscow have a good paper on this and the BMJ 21:37.540 --> 21:41.540 Then after the trial was done, they did a debate and switch and they changed the manufacturing process for scale-up 21:42.540 --> 21:46.540 By taking that piece of DNA that they use that they PCR'd and uses a template in process one 21:47.540 --> 21:50.540 They plugged it into a bacterial clasmid with such a circular piece of DNA 21:51.540 --> 21:55.540 That allows something that allows a bug like E. coli to replicate it every 30 minutes 21:56.540 --> 21:58.540 That means they can have an infinite supply of their DNA 21:58.540 --> 22:03.540 They just have to keep growing the E. coli day-to-day and they don't ever have to use PCR again 22:03.540 --> 22:05.540 So it's a real massive cost reduction for them 22:06.540 --> 22:10.540 But it comes with some additional risk is that you now have this DNA being replicated in the E. coli 22:11.540 --> 22:14.540 And it's not good to inject people with E. coli, so you have to get the DNA out of E. coli 22:15.540 --> 22:20.540 And the process of getting that DNA out of E. coli comes with inherent contaminants that weren't in the original trial 22:21.540 --> 22:25.540 The plasmid DNA is one of them, which is a large 7,800 base pair piece of DNA 22:26.540 --> 22:29.540 And there's also the potential for endotoxin to come through from the E. coli 22:30.540 --> 22:33.540 So there's a material difference between the trial and what people actually got 22:34.540 --> 22:36.540 And that's an important part of the story that everyone needs to know 22:37.540 --> 22:42.540 Now what we're trying to do is figure out what is the consequence of this plasmid DNA being in there 22:43.540 --> 22:46.540 They knew it was there, they tried to get rid of it by chewing it up with an enzyme 22:47.540 --> 22:50.540 But they didn't get rid of it completely, they got it halfway chewed up 22:51.540 --> 22:53.540 Why didn't they get rid of it completely? 22:54.540 --> 22:58.540 I mean, they use an enzyme called DNase and DNase breaks down DNA 22:59.540 --> 23:04.540 Why wouldn't that completely eliminate it? Two questions, why wouldn't that completely eliminate it? 23:05.540 --> 23:09.540 And why didn't FDA approve both processes? 23:10.540 --> 23:14.540 They're both a process for the proof of principle as well as the process for production 23:15.540 --> 23:16.540 Or were they involved in the second part? 23:17.540 --> 23:22.540 So I'll answer the second part first, which is that there was some discussion in the EMA 23:23.540 --> 23:25.540 I don't know what's happened at the FDA because we have less authority there 23:26.540 --> 23:30.540 There's some information at the EMA that I'm superimposing on the FDA in Health Canada 23:30.540 --> 23:32.540 Because I think similar things may occur there 23:33.540 --> 23:37.540 But at the EMA, they had an equivalency study that they were supposed to do 23:38.540 --> 23:40.540 Measuring 252 patients done with process 1 and process 2 23:41.540 --> 23:45.540 And as best we can tell that data was never matured and was never required for release 23:46.540 --> 23:50.540 They asked of it, but when Pfizer couldn't produce it, they kind of looked the other way 23:52.540 --> 23:55.540 So Josh has a good write up on that on Twitter 23:56.540 --> 23:58.540 And I'll point you to his work and Retsus Levy's work on this 23:59.540 --> 24:02.540 But your first question, which is why isn't the DNase killing this? 24:03.540 --> 24:04.540 It comes down to I think two reasons 24:05.540 --> 24:08.540 One, the way that they're measuring what's there has some blind spots 24:09.540 --> 24:14.540 And the second thing is they probably didn't anticipate that the modifications they made to the RNA 24:15.540 --> 24:17.540 Inhibit the DNase from doing its job 24:18.540 --> 24:20.540 So when they do this in vitro transcription reaction 24:21.540 --> 24:24.540 And they make this RNA, they put in a different nucleotide 24:25.540 --> 24:26.540 Notice N1 nucleosuduyridine 24:27.540 --> 24:31.540 So this altered nucleotide is actually what really got the attention of the Nobel Prize 24:32.540 --> 24:40.540 They put in a different nucleotide so that the RNA was less labile to an RNA's L that's in the human genome 24:41.540 --> 24:44.540 So the human body makes RNases that destroy RNA 24:45.540 --> 24:48.540 You know, the way RNA behaves is like your DNA, your DNA is like your hard drive 24:49.540 --> 24:53.540 Your RNA is like the task manager of all the programs that are opening and closing off that hard drive 24:54.540 --> 24:58.540 So the cell needs to have a system to not only turn a gene on, but to turn it off 24:59.540 --> 25:01.540 If it can't turn it off, then you have a problem 25:02.540 --> 25:07.540 So the way a lot of these get turned off is there are RNases that make sure that when a gene is expressed 25:08.540 --> 25:10.540 It's only expressed for a certain period of time that gets decayed 25:11.540 --> 25:13.540 But they put in this other base that stops that process from happening 25:14.540 --> 25:16.540 So that the RNA doesn't degrade, it's red or yes 25:17.540 --> 25:19.540 They put in something that turned off the off switch, is that correct? 25:20.540 --> 25:22.540 Yes, the RNA is harder to degrade 25:23.540 --> 25:27.540 And they wanted that so they ensured they got production of spike protein long enough to matter 25:28.540 --> 25:30.540 And there's a big debate as to whether it's too long right now 25:31.540 --> 25:34.540 Because we're finding this RNA stick around for way too long 25:35.540 --> 25:40.540 They thought it was only 48 hours, people can sequence out of plasma 28 days later, it's in breast milk now 25:41.540 --> 25:44.540 It's really a big train wreck in my opinion, they didn't need that 25:45.540 --> 25:51.540 But because of that base, that base also is published to radically change the melting temperature of DNA 25:52.540 --> 25:56.540 That means that it's much stickier, it's much harder to peel apart from DNA 25:57.540 --> 26:02.540 I think Colin Parr has a paper on this showing, if you just put four of these nucleotides into 25 26:03.540 --> 26:07.540 It raises the temperature 9C, the melting temperature, that's an enormous melting temperature 26:08.540 --> 26:10.540 For four bases of these things, yeah 26:11.540 --> 26:15.540 So that means that this RNA is extraordinarily sticky 26:16.540 --> 26:19.540 And that means it's very likely that it's making RNA DNA hybrid 26:20.540 --> 26:23.540 That when the RNA polymerase is copying the RNA off the DNA 26:23.540 --> 26:28.540 What you end up with is a triple helix, you end up with RNA kind of tangled up with DNA 26:29.540 --> 26:32.540 And a nucleus doesn't know how to get rid of the DNA in that context 26:33.540 --> 26:35.540 And this is really evident actually in Moderna's process 26:36.540 --> 26:41.540 Moderna, if you look at our paper, there's a hundredfold more spike DNA contamination than the plasma DNA 26:42.540 --> 26:45.540 The backbone that doesn't have any RNA similarity 26:46.540 --> 26:52.540 So that's a real clear set sign that the nucleus can destroy the DNA that doesn't have any complementary to RNA 26:53.540 --> 26:58.540 But it can't destroy the DNA that has complementary to the RNA that they're making 26:59.540 --> 27:02.540 So there's something I'd try to get rid of the DNA in that context 27:03.540 --> 27:05.540 And this is really evident actually in Moderna's process 27:06.540 --> 27:12.540 Moderna, if you look at our paper, there's a hundredfold more spike DNA contamination than the plasma DNA 27:13.540 --> 27:15.540 The backbone that doesn't have any RNA similarity 27:17.540 --> 27:22.540 So that's a real clear set sign that the nucleus can destroy the DNA that doesn't have any complementary 27:23.540 --> 27:28.540 to RNA, but it can't destroy the DNA that has complementary to the RNA that they're making 27:29.540 --> 27:34.540 So there's something I think they didn't see and anticipate because they changed this base 27:35.540 --> 27:39.540 They didn't realize the enzymes they typically used to get rid of this contaminant are no longer functional 27:40.540 --> 27:43.540 And so they now have to probably engineer different enzymes for this 27:44.540 --> 27:50.540 And DNase XT is a good idea, maybe T5, there's a host of these nucleases that might do a better job at this 27:50.540 --> 27:54.540 But I think with the Warp Speed program they didn't have time to really investigate this 27:55.540 --> 27:58.540 So that's one reason why the DNA is still there, there's a second reason 27:59.540 --> 28:05.540 The tools that you use to measure this differ based on the size of the DNA that's around 28:06.540 --> 28:15.540 So if you use something like barometry, this is a tool that uses a dye that is an intercalating dye that binds to like the minor groove of DNA 28:16.540 --> 28:20.540 These tools will measure DNA as small as like 5 to 10 bases 28:21.540 --> 28:25.540 It just has to be complementary at room temperature, that can be a 10 base pair piece of DNA 28:26.540 --> 28:29.540 You can get some cybergreen signal from it, a ribo green signal from 28:30.540 --> 28:33.540 QPCR needs at least 100 bases to amplify 28:34.540 --> 28:36.540 So all the DNA that's smaller than 100 bases, it can't see 28:37.540 --> 28:42.540 So they're using QPCR to monitor the DNA, they're using forometry to measure the RNA 28:43.540 --> 28:48.540 They're kind of playing some games there because they want to get really high RNA numbers and really low DNA numbers 28:49.540 --> 28:55.540 The EMA regulations aren't really a fixed amount of DNA, they're a ratio of how much RNA you have to how much DNA 28:56.540 --> 28:59.540 They're using two different processes to measure the DNA and the RNA 29:00.540 --> 29:06.540 But if I understand you correctly, they could be using one process for both or they could use both processes for both 29:07.540 --> 29:08.540 Absolutely, in fact 29:09.540 --> 29:17.540 That's absolutely right and I think anyone who's familiar with these bench tools knows the fact that they're deviating this is a game 29:18.540 --> 29:22.540 Because they had to make PCR primers to measure the spike DNA 29:23.540 --> 29:25.540 And all they have to do is change the polymerase to measure the RNA 29:26.540 --> 29:31.540 And they didn't do that, they opted to go get a whole other assay with a different instrument, with a different 29:32.540 --> 29:36.540 Forometry based readout to measure the RNA, they bent over backwards to measure the RNA differently 29:37.540 --> 29:42.540 They already had all the primers and tools, they needed to measure it with the PCR assay, they're using to measure the DNA 29:43.540 --> 29:45.540 You just swap the polymerase out and you get the answer the same day 29:46.540 --> 29:48.540 You did suggest gamesmanship, is that correct? 29:49.540 --> 29:50.540 And tend to deceive 29:51.540 --> 29:53.540 And tend to deceive, okay, got it 29:54.540 --> 29:58.540 And this data that you uncovered has been replicated around the world, is that right? 29:59.540 --> 30:04.540 Yes, many labs have now, so we put the primers public on our sub stack and in preprints 30:05.540 --> 30:08.540 And now people can just order those from IDT and make their own primers 30:09.540 --> 30:13.540 We have shipped Oslo primer lots that we have here when people didn't want to wait for IDT to remake these 30:14.540 --> 30:20.540 It can take IDT maybe a couple weeks sometimes to make these, so when people urgently want them, we'll ship them vials of our primers 30:21.540 --> 30:26.540 So Phillip Bockholz has confirmed this work by using our primers down in South Carolina 30:27.540 --> 30:30.540 He also went on to do Oxford Nanopore sequencing to confirm our work 30:31.540 --> 30:35.540 Just not to trust what we told him was working, he was doing what our primers were doing, he said alright 30:36.540 --> 30:38.540 Your primers clearly give me signal on my vaccine lots 30:39.540 --> 30:43.540 I'm now going to sequence them and make sure I can find the sequences of your primers inside my vials 30:44.540 --> 30:49.540 And he went and did that and confirmed that the DNA that he actually has in his vials matches the primer sequences we gave him 30:52.540 --> 30:56.540 Dr. Sin Lee did this at Milford molecular was saying our sequencing 30:56.540 --> 31:01.540 And he was doing what we were doing, we were doing what we were doing, we were doing what we were doing 31:02.540 --> 31:07.540 We were doing what we were doing, we were doing what we were doing, we were doing what we were doing 31:08.540 --> 31:11.540 Your primers clearly give me signal on my vaccine lots 31:12.540 --> 31:16.540 I'm now going to sequence them and make sure I can find the sequences of your primers inside my vials 31:17.540 --> 31:22.540 And he went and did that and confirmed that the DNA that he actually has in his vials matches the primer sequences we gave him 31:23.540 --> 31:29.540 I find that a very strange statement because why would you look for the primer sequences in the vial? 31:31.540 --> 31:36.540 If you're using nanopore, why wouldn't you just get all the sequences out of the vial? 31:38.540 --> 31:41.540 If you're using nanopore, I don't even know why you need to look what 31:45.540 --> 31:50.540 I don't know, the primers are supposed to be a very tiny probe for a longer sequence 31:52.540 --> 32:05.540 So I don't know how confirming that the primers are in the vial is any different than just confirming that there's DNA in the vial using nanopore without using his primers 32:08.540 --> 32:19.540 Or does he just mean that like as an extra control the actual primer sequence is actually in the bottle along with all the extended sequence that comes along with it, I assume? 32:20.540 --> 32:25.540 It seems like a weird statement, but you know, I'm not a molecular biologist. Maybe it makes more sense to somebody like Kevin 32:27.540 --> 32:32.540 Dr. Lynn, Dr. Sin Lee did this at Milford Molecular with Sanger sequencing 32:33.540 --> 32:40.540 He amplified, he made his own primers and he amplified, he emplied some large fragments to like 366 base pair of fragments to show that there's bigger fragments in there 32:41.540 --> 32:44.540 And Sanger sequenced those to prove that it's in fact in the vials 32:45.540 --> 32:53.540 And now the most recent study, I heard of one in Germany, I don't have a date of one in Germany, but Bridget Koenig claims to have found it in four vials out there as well 32:54.540 --> 33:08.540 And so what I'm interested in is the argument that I see forming here is PCR can find in theory a single molecule of DNA 33:09.540 --> 33:25.540 And so PCR may be able to find a very tiny amount of DNA which is lower than the agreement said 33:27.540 --> 33:35.540 And if we are essentially just saying, yeah, there's DNA in the vial and Pfizer can say, well, yeah, I guess there is some DNA in the vial but it's not too much 33:36.540 --> 33:41.540 Or they can say, well, yeah, but there's DNA in that stuff too and there's DNA in that stuff too 33:42.540 --> 33:49.540 So what difference does it make if there's a little DNA in this stuff? I mean, I understand the argument here that this shouldn't be there but 33:51.540 --> 34:02.540 We are being tempted to jump on this as if it's the magic answer to why everything went wrong and how we can now stick the knife in 34:03.540 --> 34:16.540 And we're putting all of our eggs in the basket of Kevin McCurnan that he's right that his measurements of vials are right 34:17.540 --> 34:31.540 And that nobody's gonna debunk this in a couple weeks by saying that, well, his primers weren't very specific or his PCR reaction doesn't isn't up to snuff because of this reason or because of that reason 34:33.540 --> 34:42.540 We have to be very, very careful here because there's a million reasons not to think that regular old transfection 34:43.540 --> 34:47.540 Regular old transfection was not a good idea now what 34:49.540 --> 34:51.540 This is a compounding problem 34:52.540 --> 35:01.540 And it's not being explained as a compounding problem although I did catch him a couple pages ago saying that the RNA stays around as a result of the 35:02.540 --> 35:09.540 N1 methyl pseudo uridine whenever the chemical alteration is and that he said that's a big train wreck 35:11.540 --> 35:14.540 Now I want you to think very carefully about this because 35:18.540 --> 35:27.540 It should really be a sum total story about what's wrong with transfection in healthy humans but even the 35:28.540 --> 35:37.540 Problem of the chemical alteration of the RNA which he came on my stream twice to talk about has almost completely been left out of this narrative 35:39.540 --> 35:42.540 Except characterized as a pretty big train wreck and we'll move on 35:48.540 --> 35:51.540 And there's a reason for that because this is a play 35:52.540 --> 35:58.540 And we have to be very careful about what the play is and who the bad guys are or who the people who know what the you know 35:58.540 --> 36:01.540 It could be that Kevin is just trying to do his best 36:02.540 --> 36:04.540 You know he was just trying just needed a 36:05.540 --> 36:07.540 Apolly a RNA 36:08.540 --> 36:11.540 Control to troubleshoot his problem 36:12.540 --> 36:15.540 And lucky for him somebody sent him a couple vials of 36:17.540 --> 36:19.540 Vaccine without ice buckets 36:20.540 --> 36:26.540 And he decided to use it as an RNA control which meant that it was going to get sequenced 36:27.540 --> 36:31.540 And as a result he found the plasmid 36:32.540 --> 36:37.540 And so he feels obligated to tell everybody I mean unfortunately you know he didn't mean to do it 36:40.540 --> 36:44.540 He's not an anti-vaxxer he just happened to find the DNA there 36:45.540 --> 36:51.540 So he feels the obligation to report it he did it pre-print because you know I mean how long is it going to take to go through peer review? 36:54.540 --> 36:59.540 But the RNA was chemically altered and codon optimized and that's a complete train wreck by the way 37:00.540 --> 37:02.540 I heard it 37:03.540 --> 37:07.540 There's a group in Japan Hiroshi, Arkawa I think maybe from Lincoln's name 37:08.540 --> 37:13.540 But they've been doing some work on this as well they've reassembled our data and been looking at some PCR protocols 37:14.540 --> 37:20.540 But the most recent one is out of David Speakers work out in Ontario where he's got the largest study to date 37:21.540 --> 37:27.540 He went through 27 vials and he even did some XBB 1.5s and those still have the DNA in them 37:29.540 --> 37:33.540 Now there's two different methods that we used in the paper with David just to try to emulate what Pfizer's doing 37:34.540 --> 37:38.540 As we measured it with QPCR in which case the DNA is under the limit on everything he looked at 37:39.540 --> 37:41.540 A couple of them are getting really close to the line 37:42.540 --> 37:44.540 That limit is somewhat arbitrary and we'll touch on that 37:45.540 --> 37:48.540 Then he also measured it with fluorometry to show that they're like a hundred foot over the line if you pick a different tool 37:49.540 --> 37:54.540 To really emphasize that this game of cherry picking different methods is a racket 37:55.540 --> 37:59.540 And that you can get vastly different numbers if you measure this thing with different tools 38:01.540 --> 38:07.540 But I think the interesting part of David's study is they took the vaccine lots sorted them based on DNA quantity 38:08.540 --> 38:16.540 And then Jessica Rose dug in to VAERS and showed that there are higher adverse events reported in VAERS 38:17.540 --> 38:19.540 The lots that have higher amounts of DNA 38:20.540 --> 38:22.540 It's a small data set, there's a lot of confounders there 38:23.540 --> 38:28.540 It's really just a hypothesis, we have to study more lots to make sure that there aren't other confounders that are skewing that association 38:29.540 --> 38:31.540 But it does seem to line up with Philips data 38:31.540 --> 38:35.540 He has numbers that are over the limit and have high adverse events 38:35.540 --> 38:37.540 We had numbers over the limit that have high adverse events 38:38.540 --> 38:43.540 And there's another lot that was recorded in some EMA documentation 38:44.540 --> 38:49.540 FL 0007 that has really high adverse events and has really high DNA as well 38:50.540 --> 38:54.540 So there's a couple other pieces of data that aren't in our paper because they were done at other laboratories 38:55.540 --> 38:59.540 That reconfirm at least with Pfizer more DNA is trending with more adverse events 39:00.540 --> 39:02.540 We're not seeing that with Moderna, which is interesting 39:03.540 --> 39:07.540 The correlation seems to go the other direction there and they are doing a better job getting rid of it 39:08.540 --> 39:10.540 They're probably at a log scale lower amounts of DNA 39:11.540 --> 39:15.540 So they may be below the amount that matters and something else is driving their adverse events 39:16.540 --> 39:22.540 We've found and confirmed in several different labs including Phil Buckholt's labs and Sinley's labs 39:23.540 --> 39:26.540 You've confirmed the presence of double-stranded DNA 39:27.540 --> 39:31.540 And sizable quantities, I mean we're talking about nanogram per milligram quantities 39:32.540 --> 39:35.540 Or hundreds of nanogram per milligram quantities of DNA 39:36.540 --> 39:41.540 First of all, what are the implications of just having double-stranded DNA in those vials 39:42.540 --> 39:46.540 And medically and then second of all, what is in that DNA? 39:47.540 --> 39:49.540 I mean, what is hiding in that DNA? 39:50.540 --> 39:52.540 You know, what elements do we need to be concerned about? 39:53.540 --> 39:58.540 Well, hiding is a good point because I do think there's been some intent to deceive here as well 39:59.540 --> 40:03.540 So, particularly on Pfizer's behalf, if you were to take the DNA sequence 40:04.540 --> 40:06.540 Which apparently they did give the sequence to regulators 40:07.540 --> 40:09.540 But they only annotated certain pieces of it and not others 40:10.540 --> 40:15.540 And that's very bizarre because if you take their sequence and plug it into a standard software tool like snap gene 40:16.540 --> 40:17.540 It will annotate everything 40:17.540 --> 40:22.540 So someone had to actually go and delete these annotations and then can something to the regulators 40:23.540 --> 40:25.540 And the piece that they deleted, I think, is the most controversial piece 40:26.540 --> 40:31.540 It's this SV40 promoter that is known to have a nuclear targeting sequence in this 40:32.540 --> 40:36.540 This is a tandem repeat of 72 bases, about 144 bases in size 40:37.540 --> 40:40.540 That binds transcription factors and drives any DNA attached to it into the nucleus 40:41.540 --> 40:44.540 This is in the answer of the SV40 promoter 40:44.540 --> 40:53.540 SV40 was used in the SV40 Ori, the promoter, and but they never reported the enhancer's presence, is that correct? 40:54.540 --> 40:56.540 They didn't report any of the SV40 components 40:57.540 --> 40:59.540 In fact, I can pull up what they did report here 41:00.540 --> 41:02.540 What you see on the right is what they presented to the EMA 41:03.540 --> 41:04.540 I suspect this is what went to Health Canada as well 41:05.540 --> 41:07.540 And there's somewhat shocked by this from the most recent email I saw from them 41:08.540 --> 41:13.540 But you'll notice it annotates the spike protein, the Ori, the kenamycin gene 41:14.540 --> 41:19.540 It has this five base pair cut site down here that linearizes the plasma 41:20.540 --> 41:21.540 A couple other small pieces 41:22.540 --> 41:25.540 If you take their sequence and just shove it into something known as snap gene 41:26.540 --> 41:28.540 It annotates all the stuff automatically over here 41:29.540 --> 41:30.540 It's SV40 just pops out 41:31.540 --> 41:33.540 I didn't find SV40, snap gene found it 41:34.540 --> 41:35.540 I'm going to pull this back 41:36.540 --> 41:41.540 So on the right, the Ori and the Kan are, and the S protein explained to us 41:42.540 --> 41:44.540 What is that showing us on the right? 41:45.540 --> 41:49.540 And then what did they have to take out to get to what you showed us through snap chain on the left? 41:50.540 --> 41:53.540 Okay, so the bacterial origin of replication is here in blue 41:54.540 --> 41:57.540 So when you put this in a coli, it will double with the coli 41:58.540 --> 42:00.540 It probably runs the copy number to 50 to 100 copies in the cell 42:01.540 --> 42:02.540 And then the cells double over 30 minutes 42:03.540 --> 42:04.540 So it's a great Xerox machine for DNA 42:05.540 --> 42:08.540 But to make that happen in a coli, you have to put a kenamycin resistance gene in there 42:09.540 --> 42:11.540 So that only the coli cells that have the plasma survive 42:12.540 --> 42:13.540 That way you knock out all the background 42:14.540 --> 42:15.540 So this is the kenamycin gene 42:16.540 --> 42:18.540 Now this kenamycin gene won't work on its own 42:19.540 --> 42:20.540 It needs a promoter that they've materially omitted here 42:21.540 --> 42:22.540 Oh, interesting 42:23.540 --> 42:24.540 That's missing 42:25.540 --> 42:26.540 The graph on the right seems very strange 42:27.540 --> 42:28.540 Because that kenamycin wouldn't work without a promoter 42:30.540 --> 42:31.540 Correct 42:31.540 --> 42:33.540 The other thing about the SV40 promoter is it is active in mammalian cells 42:34.540 --> 42:36.540 And you really don't want mammalian promoters in any injectable 42:37.540 --> 42:39.540 They don't need this because they have 42:40.540 --> 42:42.540 If you look very carefully here 42:43.540 --> 42:46.540 There's also an AMP-R promoter that's kind of obscured over here in the left 42:47.540 --> 42:49.540 That's what Moderna uses the drive to kenamycin gene 42:50.540 --> 42:52.540 Pfizer has it too, they just happen to also have this mammalian promoter 42:53.540 --> 42:54.540 That is superfluous and shouldn't be there 42:55.540 --> 42:57.540 And they know it because they deleted it from the annotation 42:58.540 --> 42:59.540 That's an intent to deceive, they actually 43:00.540 --> 43:01.540 I believe so 43:02.540 --> 43:04.540 Because any annotation tool that annotated this plasma 43:05.540 --> 43:06.540 That got down to T7 promoters 43:07.540 --> 43:08.540 It found the bacterial origin 43:09.540 --> 43:11.540 It found, I think this F1 origin down here 43:12.540 --> 43:13.540 It would have found the SV40 origin 43:15.540 --> 43:17.540 So this was deleted, this was deleted 43:18.540 --> 43:22.540 Let's just do a little background gentlemen on SV40 43:23.540 --> 43:25.540 Maybe Brian, can you give us a little bit of background in the 43:26.540 --> 43:28.540 Vaccine context of what SV40 really is 43:30.540 --> 43:32.540 And Kevin, correct me if I'm wrong 43:33.540 --> 43:41.540 But the SV40, Simeon Virus 40, was an artifact of the polio vaccine 43:42.540 --> 43:44.540 The oral, the live polio vaccine 43:46.540 --> 43:48.540 In the 1950s and 1960s 43:49.540 --> 43:53.540 And it is oncogenic SV40 itself 43:54.540 --> 43:59.540 As the virus is associated with certain tumors, certain forms of cancer 44:00.540 --> 44:02.540 Certain aggressive forms of cancer 44:03.540 --> 44:07.540 And that it was a contaminant in the oral polio vaccine 44:08.540 --> 44:10.540 The live virus polio vaccine for many, many years 44:11.540 --> 44:15.540 And so having these elements, including the SV40 promoter 44:16.540 --> 44:20.540 Would in itself, I believe, would be oncogenic 44:21.540 --> 44:26.540 And then that SV40 element, that 72 base pair element 44:27.540 --> 44:31.540 Has been shown to tie with other oncogenes in vivo 44:32.540 --> 44:36.540 And act as an enhancer, enhances its ability to form cancers 44:38.540 --> 44:40.540 So I'm very new to SV40 44:41.540 --> 44:43.540 I've been learning this just in this last year 44:43.540 --> 44:44.540 So what's going on in the field 44:45.540 --> 44:47.540 Now we don't have the whole SV40 virus, which is 5.2 kilobases 44:48.540 --> 44:51.540 We have about 420 bases or so of it 44:52.540 --> 44:53.540 Which consists of four pieces 44:54.540 --> 44:57.540 We have the SV40 origin, the promoter, the enhancer and the polyase signal 44:58.540 --> 44:59.540 That are in there 45:00.540 --> 45:04.540 In SV40, I think, instructs it to put a polyase signal on a messenger RNA 45:05.540 --> 45:07.540 For some reason, that's sitting in this vector as well 45:08.540 --> 45:09.540 I haven't studied as much in what the polyase signal 45:10.540 --> 45:12.540 Why they need the polyase signal in this vector, that seems to be 45:14.540 --> 45:17.540 I think that's needed, if they want to express these plasmids of a million cells 45:18.540 --> 45:20.540 It's good to have something that puts a polyase signal on it 45:20.540 --> 45:24.540 And so they put that on the F1 origin for other reasons 45:26.540 --> 45:29.540 So that being said, a lot of pushback is, hey, this doesn't have the T antigen 45:30.540 --> 45:34.540 The tumor antigen is what is deemed to be the carcinogen in SV40 45:35.540 --> 45:38.540 And so you guys are conflating SV40 with the virus 45:39.540 --> 45:41.540 You're spreading fear porn and all that 45:42.540 --> 45:46.540 I think an important thing to know is that a large portion of the population 45:47.540 --> 45:49.540 Is SV40 positive from the polio vaccine? 45:50.540 --> 45:51.540 So they presumably can make T antigen 45:52.540 --> 45:53.540 And why is that important? 45:54.540 --> 45:59.540 Well, T antigen is what actually initiates the DNA replication on the SV40 promoter that's in the vaccine 46:00.540 --> 46:02.540 So if a certain part of the population makes T antigen 46:03.540 --> 46:04.540 And you inject them with a lot of these promoters 46:05.540 --> 46:07.540 They're going to have the machinery to turn that promoter on 46:08.540 --> 46:09.540 Wherever it lands 46:10.540 --> 46:11.540 So there's 46:12.540 --> 46:13.540 I want other words 46:14.540 --> 46:20.540 Right, in other words, if you've been vaccinated with the oral polio or the live virus polio vaccine 46:21.540 --> 46:25.540 Then you could have the T antigen already in you 46:27.540 --> 46:29.540 Right, and that's something that I can't really 46:30.540 --> 46:34.540 I think right now we have data here that shows there's a legal problem here 46:35.540 --> 46:37.540 More so than we have evidence of a clinical problem 46:38.540 --> 46:39.540 The clinical problem we still need more data from 46:40.540 --> 46:42.540 We need to find out if this DNA is actually in other people 46:43.540 --> 46:45.540 Post vaccination and people who haven't been vaccinated to see 46:46.540 --> 46:48.540 Is it associated with a lot of this adverse events? 46:49.540 --> 46:50.540 Right now this is just hypothesis generation 46:51.540 --> 46:53.540 We don't we have that. We have a lot of reasons to believe this is a bad idea 46:54.540 --> 46:55.540 They don't need this DNA in there 46:56.540 --> 46:57.540 They didn't tell the regulators about it 46:58.540 --> 46:59.540 And it's inside of an LNP 47:00.540 --> 47:02.540 And it's going to get to the nuclear space and the sequence that's in there 47:03.540 --> 47:04.540 All right, so all of that is a train wreck 47:05.540 --> 47:07.540 If you're putting in 200 billion of these molecules per shot 47:08.540 --> 47:09.540 And you're doing them five times a year 47:10.540 --> 47:11.540 I don't know how many times people are taking them 47:12.540 --> 47:13.540 But if you think of your to schedule 47:14.540 --> 47:15.540 You should be past your fifth by now, right? 47:16.540 --> 47:18.540 So there's a cumulative dosing problem here 47:19.540 --> 47:21.540 There's a high number of these fragments in there 47:22.540 --> 47:24.540 Even though the nanograms might seem low 47:25.540 --> 47:27.540 The fragmentation of them makes them like buckshot 47:28.540 --> 47:30.540 And makes them much more potent as integration tools 47:31.540 --> 47:33.540 Because you have more active ends of DNA 47:34.540 --> 47:36.540 It's the ends of the DNA that have phosphates and hydroxyls 47:37.540 --> 47:38.540 That make them sticky 47:39.540 --> 47:41.540 Those are kind of like the Lego pieces of DNA, if you will 47:42.540 --> 47:44.540 So you'll see an FDA documentation on guidance documents 47:45.540 --> 47:47.540 So look at DNA that they base these nanogram limits 47:48.540 --> 47:49.540 Based on genomic DNA 47:50.540 --> 47:52.540 Ten nanograms of genomic DNA might be like twelve hundred copies of DNA 47:53.540 --> 47:54.540 But we're dealing with really small pieces 47:55.540 --> 47:56.540 Which means we have hundreds of billions of pieces 47:58.540 --> 48:00.540 And they even allude to the fact that if you were dealing with not 48:01.540 --> 48:02.540 The million cell contamination 48:03.540 --> 48:04.540 Which would be three giga-based genomes 48:05.540 --> 48:06.540 But you're dealing with viruses 48:07.540 --> 48:08.540 Well then the copy number is so damn high 48:09.540 --> 48:11.540 That you might need ventigram or adigram limits 48:12.540 --> 48:13.540 On the amount of DNA that could be around 48:14.540 --> 48:16.540 There's other guidance documents that also speak to the fact that 48:17.540 --> 48:18.540 The two hundred base paired limit is 48:19.540 --> 48:21.540 Maybe not really pertinent if you're dealing with promoters 48:22.540 --> 48:23.540 Maybe it should be down at seven bases 48:24.540 --> 48:26.540 Because seven bases could integrate and cause problems 48:27.540 --> 48:30.540 Even in like in a VDJ circumstance with certain parts of the genome 48:31.540 --> 48:33.540 So there are guidance documents 48:35.540 --> 48:37.540 And they put out guidance documents before LNPs were around saying 48:38.540 --> 48:39.540 We think there's going to be a million cell DNA 48:40.540 --> 48:41.540 We can tolerate this much of it 48:42.540 --> 48:43.540 Based on this copy number 48:44.540 --> 48:45.540 Based on us not knowing much about it 48:45.540 --> 48:47.540 But the moment you start getting into high copy number contaminants 48:48.540 --> 48:49.540 That have bioactive elements to them 48:50.540 --> 48:51.540 In their inside LNPs 48:52.540 --> 48:53.540 The whole game changes 48:54.540 --> 48:55.540 And it's really astounding 48:56.540 --> 48:58.540 You know when you when you look at these numbers 48:59.540 --> 49:01.540 It's really astounding 49:02.540 --> 49:04.540 When you look at these genomic insertion events 49:06.540 --> 49:08.540 And I've done genetic engineering before 49:09.540 --> 49:13.540 Primarily in genetically modified plants and bacteria 49:15.540 --> 49:17.540 It's like you're going to Vegas 49:18.540 --> 49:19.540 You're looking for the one in the million event 49:20.540 --> 49:22.540 But there are enough 49:23.540 --> 49:25.540 Aaron strands of DNA around there 49:26.540 --> 49:28.540 For that to actually happen, is that correct? 49:29.540 --> 49:31.540 Yeah, I mean Philip Buckholt put up an interesting paper 49:32.540 --> 49:33.540 And his Twitter recently about the rate 49:34.540 --> 49:35.540 When you do the million transfection like this 49:36.540 --> 49:37.540 The rate of integrative cells that's stabilized 49:39.540 --> 49:40.540 It was down below seven percent 49:41.540 --> 49:42.540 But seven percent is a huge number 49:43.540 --> 49:44.540 When you're dealing with billions of LNPs 49:46.540 --> 49:47.540 Right, right, so this is 49:48.540 --> 49:50.540 LNP is lipid nanoparticle, is that right Kevin? 49:51.540 --> 49:52.540 That's right, yeah, so these are 49:53.540 --> 49:54.540 packaged in these LNPs, we know that 49:55.540 --> 49:56.540 That was part of our most recent paper 49:57.540 --> 49:59.540 If you use a nucleation on the vaccine 50:00.540 --> 50:01.540 It won't get rid of the DNA that's there 50:02.540 --> 50:03.540 Because it's protected, it's inside this 50:04.540 --> 50:05.540 lipid nanoparticle 50:06.540 --> 50:08.540 So the guidance documents the FDA have for DNA contamination 50:09.540 --> 50:11.540 They are just ancient relics 50:12.540 --> 50:14.540 They're outdated, they actually started before the NCBIA 50:15.540 --> 50:17.540 Which is this National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act 50:18.540 --> 50:19.540 They were at ten p-grams back then 50:20.540 --> 50:22.540 After that act, they went up a thousand fold 50:23.540 --> 50:24.540 Over the course of ten years 50:25.540 --> 50:27.540 So, we're now at this stage 50:28.540 --> 50:29.540 We've tolerated a thousand times higher 50:30.540 --> 50:31.540 Now we're switching to LNPs 50:32.540 --> 50:33.540 That bring these things directly into cells 50:34.540 --> 50:35.540 With nuclear targeting sequences 50:36.540 --> 50:37.540 We were told that this would not target the nucleus 50:38.540 --> 50:40.540 We were told that this would not enter into the nucleus 50:41.540 --> 50:42.540 Is the nuclear targeting sequence 50:43.540 --> 50:44.540 Is that the SV40 enhancer? 50:46.540 --> 50:47.540 That is, it's actually 50:48.540 --> 50:50.540 It's been published as a great gene therapy tool 50:51.540 --> 50:53.540 Because it's so effective at bringing things to the nucleus in hours 50:54.540 --> 50:55.540 David Dean has great work on this 50:56.540 --> 50:57.540 Canada has just admitted that they found it 50:58.540 --> 50:59.540 It's in the vaccine 51:00.540 --> 51:01.540 So, all these arguments about our vials 51:02.540 --> 51:03.540 Are from dumpsters and everything 51:04.540 --> 51:06.540 Pfizer gave sequence to Health Canada 51:07.540 --> 51:08.540 That has it in there 51:09.540 --> 51:10.540 So, there's no more argument of it being in there 51:11.540 --> 51:12.540 So, let's move to the legal issue 51:13.540 --> 51:14.540 That you flagged for us Kevin 51:15.540 --> 51:16.540 So, Health Canada has acknowledged 51:17.540 --> 51:19.540 That this DNA contamination is in the vials 51:20.540 --> 51:21.540 So, we now have a major government 51:22.540 --> 51:23.540 Of the world acknowledging this 51:24.540 --> 51:25.540 And we published Children's Health 51:26.540 --> 51:27.540 Defense on Friday last week 51:28.540 --> 51:29.540 Published a story quoting Health Canada 51:31.540 --> 51:32.540 Is saying, Health Canada expects sponsors 51:33.540 --> 51:35.540 To identify any biologically functional DNA 51:36.540 --> 51:37.540 Sequences within a plasmid 51:38.540 --> 51:39.540 Such as an SV40 enhancer 51:40.540 --> 51:41.540 At the time of submission 51:42.540 --> 51:43.540 But we know that that didn't happen 51:45.540 --> 51:46.540 In our mind, as a scientist 51:47.540 --> 51:48.540 Who's long been involved in this area 51:49.540 --> 51:51.540 Should that be enough to now force 51:52.540 --> 51:53.540 All of the governments around the world 51:54.540 --> 51:55.540 To take these vials off the market 51:56.540 --> 51:57.540 Until they've been investigated 51:59.540 --> 52:00.540 I would think so if they don't do this 52:01.540 --> 52:02.540 What are they there for? 52:03.540 --> 52:04.540 I mean, this is like every time someone breaks a rule 52:05.540 --> 52:06.540 They just change the rule 52:07.540 --> 52:08.540 I mean, what do we need regulators for 52:09.540 --> 52:11.540 If they're not going to stick to these rules 52:12.540 --> 52:13.540 And guidelines they put forward 52:15.540 --> 52:16.540 In the same breath of that e-mail 52:17.540 --> 52:18.540 I think they reiterated the safe and effective 52:19.540 --> 52:20.540 Psalm, like, okay, we need 52:21.540 --> 52:22.540 But that's nonsense, as people say 52:23.540 --> 52:24.540 They say the risk benefit profile 52:25.540 --> 52:26.540 Continues to support the use 52:27.540 --> 52:29.540 But if they don't know, if they didn't know this 52:30.540 --> 52:31.540 And they don't acknowledge this 52:32.540 --> 52:33.540 Then how could they assess the risk benefit 52:34.540 --> 52:35.540 Profile? That seems just nonsensical 52:36.540 --> 52:37.540 It's circular, it's very circular for them 52:38.540 --> 52:39.540 To state that, you don't actually 52:40.540 --> 52:41.540 I mean an important point to that risk 52:42.540 --> 52:43.540 They waive the genotoxicity studies of the trial 52:44.540 --> 52:46.540 Right, right, right, they don't know that 52:47.540 --> 52:49.540 There's risk because the trials were never done 52:50.540 --> 52:53.540 And how can you get away with it? 52:54.540 --> 52:55.540 It seems like when you look at the 52:56.540 --> 52:57.540 Plasmid submission to the FDA 52:58.540 --> 52:59.540 There are unknown sequences 53:00.540 --> 53:01.540 There are big black boxes 53:02.540 --> 53:04.540 There's a big unknown where the SV40 promoter went 53:05.540 --> 53:07.540 Why did they tolerate this in the first place? 53:08.540 --> 53:12.540 You know, I don't know because there's other things in that sequence 53:13.540 --> 53:15.540 There's other points in that sequence that should have 53:16.540 --> 53:17.540 Wrong alarm bells 53:18.540 --> 53:20.540 If you turn on any sort of ore finding tool 53:21.540 --> 53:23.540 So to paint where the open reading frames are 53:24.540 --> 53:25.540 You can identify where the spike is 53:26.540 --> 53:28.540 But the thing that will blow your mind is that there's an 53:29.540 --> 53:30.540 Orp on the reverse strand of the spike 53:31.540 --> 53:32.540 That is 252 amino acids long 53:34.540 --> 53:35.540 Like that should have been a red flag 53:36.540 --> 53:38.540 So that tells me that no one opened this 53:39.540 --> 53:40.540 In a tool, they got the sequence 53:41.540 --> 53:43.540 And probably just said, pay your user fee 53:44.540 --> 53:45.540 And we'll put it in the file and move on 53:46.540 --> 53:48.540 What an Orp finder does is it looks for open reading frames 53:49.540 --> 53:50.540 And so if you turn it on, it will look for 53:51.540 --> 53:52.540 Star coat-ons and stop coat-ons 53:53.540 --> 53:54.540 And it instantly finds the spike protein 53:56.540 --> 53:57.540 If you ask this to look at 53:59.540 --> 54:01.540 On both strands of the DNA, it will find another Orp 54:02.540 --> 54:03.540 That runs the entire direction 54:04.540 --> 54:05.540 On the other strand of the spike protein 54:07.540 --> 54:08.540 For 1,252 amino acids long 54:09.540 --> 54:11.540 I don't have it visualized here because I've picked up the wrong screen here 54:12.540 --> 54:14.540 But I do have it on my sub-stack and people can see this 54:15.540 --> 54:16.540 Now anyone who's regulating this 54:17.540 --> 54:19.540 Would have, should have, put this into a 54:20.540 --> 54:21.540 Tool-like snap gene to say 54:22.540 --> 54:23.540 Show me what's in this plasma 54:24.540 --> 54:25.540 And it annotates all these pieces for you 54:26.540 --> 54:27.540 And it would have shown you that there is a mysterious 54:28.540 --> 54:30.540 Orp of unknown origin that encodes the entire opposite strand 54:31.540 --> 54:32.540 Of the spike protein 54:34.540 --> 54:36.540 Moderna doesn't have it, the virus doesn't have it 54:37.540 --> 54:39.540 It says Kevin, it's unknown, they don't know what it is 54:40.540 --> 54:42.540 I've blasted this thing against NCBI 54:43.540 --> 54:47.540 The only hits I can find in uniprot are to a gene that's 54:48.540 --> 54:50.540 Or protein that's in silk and in collagen 54:51.540 --> 54:53.540 And some other fibroin thing 54:55.540 --> 54:56.540 I don't know 54:59.540 --> 55:01.540 I guess I'm a little confused what he's saying 55:02.540 --> 55:03.540 He's saying that the 55:04.540 --> 55:06.540 On the complementary strand 55:07.540 --> 55:08.540 To the spike protein 55:10.540 --> 55:12.540 There is another open reading frame 55:14.540 --> 55:16.540 And the AI tool 55:17.540 --> 55:19.540 Recognizes that an open reading frame 55:20.540 --> 55:22.540 Because it finds the start codons 55:24.540 --> 55:25.540 My guess is 55:26.540 --> 55:27.540 Is that he is like 55:28.540 --> 55:30.540 Letting this software tool 55:31.540 --> 55:33.540 Tell him that there's a 55:34.540 --> 55:36.540 Origin of replication there 55:37.540 --> 55:39.540 And it's an open reading frame 55:40.540 --> 55:42.540 And then he's just saying, so I look and I try to find it 55:43.540 --> 55:44.540 But I can't find it anywhere 55:45.540 --> 55:46.540 Maybe because it isn't anything 55:48.540 --> 55:50.540 And it just has a start codon or something in the front 55:51.540 --> 55:53.540 That makes that automatic search system 55:54.540 --> 55:56.540 Identify it as an open reading frame 55:58.540 --> 56:00.540 I'm skeptical of that call right there 56:04.540 --> 56:06.540 I'm skeptical of that that doesn't really 56:07.540 --> 56:09.540 Sit right with me for some reason 56:10.540 --> 56:12.540 Just because this AI program or this 56:13.540 --> 56:15.540 This software tool 56:16.540 --> 56:19.540 Locates what it says is an open reading frame within 56:20.540 --> 56:23.540 With an origin of replication doesn't necessarily mean 56:24.540 --> 56:26.540 That that's going to be functional 56:28.540 --> 56:30.540 And in any other context 56:31.540 --> 56:33.540 I mean it's 56:34.540 --> 56:36.540 There's so much I've taken notes and I just want to keep it going 56:37.540 --> 56:39.540 And then I'll go back all the way to the beginning 56:40.540 --> 56:41.540 What this does 56:42.540 --> 56:44.540 But I know that this is an artifact of our codon optimization 56:45.540 --> 56:46.540 That should not be there and is a massive risk 56:47.540 --> 56:48.540 And they should get rid of it 56:49.540 --> 56:51.540 Because it's actually it's a massive 56:52.540 --> 56:54.540 Sedoco puzzle for someone to actually figure this out 56:55.540 --> 56:57.540 Like how do you get a 1,273 amino acid 56:58.540 --> 56:59.540 Open reading frame in strand 57:00.540 --> 57:02.540 And how do you get one on the other 57:03.540 --> 57:05.540 That doesn't have a stop codon anywhere 57:06.540 --> 57:07.540 That's scary 57:08.540 --> 57:09.540 What are the implications of having that 57:10.540 --> 57:11.540 And so the definition then it seems 57:12.540 --> 57:14.540 Of an open reading frame is just a very long sequence 57:15.540 --> 57:16.540 Without a stop codon 57:17.540 --> 57:19.540 Okay, maybe that's extraordinary 57:20.540 --> 57:23.540 Or maybe he's just making us ask the wrong question 57:24.540 --> 57:25.540 Like where did this come from? 57:26.540 --> 57:29.540 Or if you know that or if going into the opposite direction 57:30.540 --> 57:34.540 You know and then and then injecting that into humans 57:36.540 --> 57:37.540 I don't know if it's going to get expressed 57:38.540 --> 57:39.540 That's the thing 57:39.540 --> 57:40.540 Sure, yeah 57:41.540 --> 57:43.540 A waste pair of answer is a bidirectional promoter 57:44.540 --> 57:46.540 So presumably it makes our need both directions 57:47.540 --> 57:49.540 If for some reason it spans this poly A region 57:50.540 --> 57:52.540 In the plasmid it could go and start making RNA 57:53.540 --> 57:55.540 Over that unknown, that mysterious orb 57:56.540 --> 57:57.540 Good, good 57:58.540 --> 57:59.540 I don't know what that's going to do in the cell 58:00.540 --> 58:01.540 It could, there's a COSAC consensus sequence there 58:02.540 --> 58:03.540 It's very difficult to informatically screen 58:04.540 --> 58:05.540 For internal ribosomal entry sites 58:06.540 --> 58:07.540 So I can't tell you that ribosomes 58:08.540 --> 58:09.540 Definitely get to translate this thing 58:10.540 --> 58:11.540 But I can certainly tell you that if I were a regulator 58:12.540 --> 58:13.540 I would tell them to get rid of it 58:14.540 --> 58:15.540 Because it's risk with no gain 58:17.540 --> 58:18.540 Sorry 58:19.540 --> 58:20.540 There's no way they did 58:21.540 --> 58:23.540 If they looked at this, this would have run out to them 58:24.540 --> 58:25.540 It's clear to me, they didn't look 58:26.540 --> 58:28.540 I think they collected their user fee and put the thing in the file 58:29.540 --> 58:31.540 So the regulators were asleep on the job 58:32.540 --> 58:33.540 It sounds like what you're saying 58:34.540 --> 58:35.540 Because they didn't catch SV40 58:36.540 --> 58:37.540 That they could have easily caught through snap chain 58:38.540 --> 58:40.540 And they also didn't tell us about this open reading frame 58:41.540 --> 58:45.540 1220, 237 pair bases, base pairs 58:46.540 --> 58:47.540 Is that right? 58:48.540 --> 58:50.540 The open reading frame is 1273 for the spike 58:51.540 --> 58:53.540 And on the reverse side, there's like a 1252 amino acid 58:55.540 --> 58:56.540 Open reading frame 58:57.540 --> 58:58.540 And I could see someone writing an off 58:59.540 --> 59:00.540 Being like, oh, it's messenger RNA, it's going to be single stranded 59:01.540 --> 59:02.540 The reverse strand won't be there, what it's an RNA form 59:03.540 --> 59:05.540 But they didn't anticipate the DNA is going to come with it 59:06.540 --> 59:07.540 And so now we have both strands there 59:08.540 --> 59:10.540 And the other strand codes for something 59:11.540 --> 59:13.540 So if any of this stuff integrates, it's likely to be an open reading frame 59:14.540 --> 59:16.540 Of a foreign peptide that your immune system's not going to like 59:18.540 --> 59:22.540 The point is, it's a very open reading frame rich plasmid 59:24.540 --> 59:28.540 We've got millions and millions of lipid nanoparticles 59:29.540 --> 59:32.540 That are floating around physiologically 59:33.540 --> 59:36.540 And basically, and the lipid nanoparticles contain 59:38.540 --> 59:40.540 What appears to be transfection soup 59:41.540 --> 59:42.540 How do people not get transfected by this? 59:44.540 --> 59:46.540 I think the numbers are probably in the billions of trillions 59:47.540 --> 59:48.540 From what I've read on the L and P's 59:49.540 --> 59:50.540 A large number, but 59:52.540 --> 59:54.540 And yeah, they probably have the RNA and the DNA in them 59:55.540 --> 59:57.540 From the measurements we've made, they're packaged 59:58.540 --> 01:00:00.540 And they're the clearest resistant and they're ending up in cells 01:00:01.540 --> 01:00:03.540 What a lot of people push back is like, okay, any cell that gets transfected 01:00:04.540 --> 01:00:06.540 Is going to die, so who cares if this cargo's in there 01:00:08.540 --> 01:00:11.540 It's true because we see the spike protein and the spike sequence 01:00:13.540 --> 01:00:15.540 Persisting in least 28 days, people have sequenced 01:00:16.540 --> 01:00:18.540 mRNA or DNA, we don't know which one it was 01:00:19.540 --> 01:00:21.540 But they've got sequence of the vaccine 28 days later in plasmid 01:00:22.540 --> 01:00:24.540 They have found it in breast milk five or seven days later 01:00:25.540 --> 01:00:27.540 The protein itself, they have found Patterson 01:00:28.540 --> 01:00:30.540 Founded four months later on exosomes, I think 01:00:31.540 --> 01:00:34.540 Sorry, that was Bansal, Patterson found it like I think 200 days later in macrophages 01:00:35.540 --> 01:00:40.540 So cool thing is persisting, and I don't think every cell that gets transformed 01:00:41.540 --> 01:00:45.540 Is 100% killed instantly, there's something going on where people can't clear this 01:00:46.540 --> 01:00:48.540 And maybe it's hitting immune-privileged cells 01:00:49.540 --> 01:00:51.540 And that's why it sits around forever 01:00:52.540 --> 01:00:54.540 So I think it is a risk, if there's DNA floating around 01:00:55.540 --> 01:00:56.540 It's going to add to the persistence of this 01:00:57.540 --> 01:01:01.540 Because it could integrate and continually express these other foreign peptides 01:01:02.540 --> 01:01:06.540 Exactly, and what about, you know, what about the implications? 01:01:07.540 --> 01:01:10.540 When I think of DNA disrepair, I think of cancer 01:01:11.540 --> 01:01:14.540 And so, you know, I get very, very concerned about that 01:01:15.540 --> 01:01:19.540 Just not, you know, not specifically on 01:01:20.540 --> 01:01:22.540 Oh, we're making people into, you know, 01:01:23.540 --> 01:01:26.540 Genomically stable spike protein production factories 01:01:27.540 --> 01:01:32.540 But also just the other bits and pieces of DNA that are getting integrated into the genome 01:01:33.540 --> 01:01:34.540 And, you know, what are they doing? 01:01:35.540 --> 01:01:38.540 What are they enhancing, and what are they, you know, or what are they silencing? 01:01:40.540 --> 01:01:46.540 Well, what made me nervous is when we saw, so Phillips' work, I think, showed a couple billion of the 01:01:47.540 --> 01:01:51.540 Of the amplicons from just PCR, so PCR measures 100 base per amplicon 01:01:52.540 --> 01:01:54.540 And we have one that actually targets CSV 40 promoter 01:01:55.540 --> 01:01:58.540 So there's a billion copies of just that region in every injection 01:01:59.540 --> 01:02:02.540 That's kind of, that's carbon bombing a genome with a billion promoters 01:02:03.540 --> 01:02:05.540 Where are those lands, and what efficiency is an open debate 01:02:06.540 --> 01:02:10.540 But wherever they land, they're going to be active promoters of a million cells 01:02:11.540 --> 01:02:13.540 So I think that alone is an issue 01:02:14.540 --> 01:02:17.540 Because you're just dropping these things that make RNA into the genome randomly 01:02:18.540 --> 01:02:22.540 And if you happen to put one on a protoanco gene, or if, you know, right, right, a host of issues 01:02:23.540 --> 01:02:28.540 Now, there's other areas that genes that if you hyper express them, they can drive to sell excess cell growth 01:02:29.540 --> 01:02:32.540 They call them protoanco genes, and so it's an act of promoter for that 01:02:33.540 --> 01:02:34.540 Turns out it's not good 01:02:35.540 --> 01:02:38.540 The other thing that can happen is you can break a gene that slows down cancer, like P53 01:02:39.540 --> 01:02:41.540 P53 and Braca are these DNA repair enzymes 01:02:42.540 --> 01:02:44.540 And if you happen to put a different part of the plasma inside of those 01:02:45.540 --> 01:02:47.540 It could, it could disable those genes 01:02:48.540 --> 01:02:51.540 Then you don't have, you don't have this repair mechanism that you need 01:02:52.540 --> 01:02:55.540 Now, most people have two copies of all these genes 01:02:56.540 --> 01:02:58.540 So many people, you break one of them, maybe you're okay 01:02:59.540 --> 01:03:01.540 But there are subsets of people that have Braca mutations and P53 mutations 01:03:02.540 --> 01:03:05.540 And they're haploid, so they have like one bad copy and one good copy 01:03:06.540 --> 01:03:08.540 You come in with this vaccine, you can knock out the only other good copy 01:03:09.540 --> 01:03:14.540 And so this is a whole host of sort of rare genetics that you have 01:03:15.540 --> 01:03:18.540 I'm not sure how it inserts specifically to knock out a single enzyme 01:03:19.540 --> 01:03:21.540 So precisely among the entire human genome 01:03:22.540 --> 01:03:26.540 Wherever this small fragment of DNA is going to integrate 01:03:27.540 --> 01:03:30.540 If it's going to disrupt the Braca gene or disrupt the P53 gene 01:03:31.540 --> 01:03:35.540 It's going to have to insert exactly there and whatever chromosome it's in 01:03:36.540 --> 01:03:39.540 And then unless you have injected a pregnant woman 01:03:40.540 --> 01:03:44.540 And it's inserting into a developing fetus, which would be devastating 01:03:45.540 --> 01:03:50.540 Is it integrating into the genome of a liver cell that's going to die next week? 01:03:51.540 --> 01:03:58.540 Is it integrating into the cells of your kidney wall or you know what what 01:03:59.540 --> 01:04:02.540 And what happens if it does 01:04:03.540 --> 01:04:10.540 Again, I am trying to be devil's advocate here and try to emphasize 01:04:11.540 --> 01:04:17.540 That all these hypothetical scenarios where this DNA could in theory integrate 01:04:18.540 --> 01:04:22.540 And disrupt a gene, cause cancer, do whatever 01:04:23.540 --> 01:04:26.540 Are very low probability events 01:04:27.540 --> 01:04:36.540 Whereas the destruction of tissues which are expressing foreign proteins driven by this chemically modified RNA 01:04:37.540 --> 01:04:39.540 Not messenger RNA, but modified RNA 01:04:42.540 --> 01:04:44.540 Those consequences are going to be devastating 01:04:45.540 --> 01:04:50.540 Those consequences can include clotting and autoimmunity and the list is long 01:04:51.540 --> 01:04:54.540 And so if we're going to focus on what this DNA could do 01:04:55.540 --> 01:05:02.540 If it integrates and knocks out a cancer gene or the promoter integrates right next to an oncogene 01:05:03.540 --> 01:05:08.540 We're talking about what happens if I put all of my chips on 30 black 01:05:09.540 --> 01:05:13.540 And the ball hits 30 black, well then you're a millionaire 01:05:14.540 --> 01:05:18.540 And if some of this DNA goes into your grandma's 01:05:19.540 --> 01:05:25.540 You know already developing cancer and and juices it a little bit boy she could be dead 01:05:28.540 --> 01:05:33.540 But that kind of glosses over the fact that well if you transfect your grandma 01:05:34.540 --> 01:05:36.540 There's a million reasons why she might die 01:05:37.540 --> 01:05:40.540 And it has nothing to do with what the DNA integrates 01:05:41.540 --> 01:05:48.540 And it feels very much after he just you know casually went past the idea that the RNA is found everywhere 01:05:49.540 --> 01:05:52.540 And the spike protein is found everywhere and it doesn't go away like we thought it was 01:05:53.540 --> 01:05:54.540 And that's a train wreck 01:05:56.540 --> 01:05:58.540 We're focusing off a lot on this DNA then aren't we 01:06:01.540 --> 01:06:05.540 To consider this and perhaps why this may not be something you'd be seeing in all patients 01:06:06.540 --> 01:06:12.540 And there's another dimension of like which vaccine lots have more of this versus less of this like the Schmeling paper you look at has 01:06:13.540 --> 01:06:17.540 4% of the vaccine lots having a majority of the adverse events 01:06:18.540 --> 01:06:22.540 So we have a lot of VED diagrams here of things to consider 01:06:23.540 --> 01:06:25.540 There's a lot of people who probably took these and don't have any harm at all 01:06:26.540 --> 01:06:33.540 There's maybe a subset of people that take these bad lots that in fact have some genetic reason why they're more susceptible to the harm than others 01:06:34.540 --> 01:06:36.540 So you see there's a lot a little slippery language there 01:06:37.540 --> 01:06:40.540 There's probably a lot of people who took these vaccines and didn't have any harm at all 01:06:42.540 --> 01:06:48.540 There's probably a lot of people that took these vaccines and there's no harm at all 01:06:50.540 --> 01:06:54.540 There's probably a lot of people who took these vaccines and didn't have any harm at all 01:06:57.540 --> 01:07:00.540 There's probably a lot of people who took these vaccines and didn't have any harm at all 01:07:03.540 --> 01:07:07.540 And you mentioned, I think, to all of us. 01:07:07.540 --> 01:07:11.860 And so this is a whole host of sort of rare genetics 01:07:11.860 --> 01:07:13.060 that you have to consider in this. 01:07:13.060 --> 01:07:15.140 And perhaps why this may not be something you'd 01:07:15.140 --> 01:07:17.660 be seeing in all patients. 01:07:17.660 --> 01:07:20.060 There's another dimension of which vaccine 01:07:20.060 --> 01:07:21.900 lots have more of this versus less of this, 01:07:21.900 --> 01:07:23.300 like the Schmeling paper you look at 01:07:23.300 --> 01:07:27.060 has 4% of the vaccine lots having the majority 01:07:27.060 --> 01:07:28.700 of the adverse events. 01:07:28.700 --> 01:07:32.540 So we have a lot of VED diagrams here of things 01:07:32.540 --> 01:07:33.900 to consider. 01:07:33.900 --> 01:07:35.380 There's a lot of people who probably took these 01:07:35.380 --> 01:07:36.740 and don't have any harm at all. 01:07:36.740 --> 01:07:38.940 Maybe a subset of the people that take these bad lots 01:07:38.940 --> 01:07:42.460 that, in fact, have some genetic reason why they're more 01:07:42.460 --> 01:07:43.940 susceptible to the harm than others. 01:07:43.940 --> 01:07:48.140 Oh, so then even some people are lucky and not genetically 01:07:48.140 --> 01:07:50.620 susceptible to the DNA contamination, 01:07:50.620 --> 01:07:52.940 and they didn't have any problems. 01:07:52.940 --> 01:07:54.820 But then these other losers over there 01:07:54.820 --> 01:07:57.500 who just happened to have the wrong genes, 01:07:57.500 --> 01:08:00.220 they're extra susceptible, right? 01:08:00.260 --> 01:08:03.180 Stop lying. 01:08:03.180 --> 01:08:04.180 Others. 01:08:04.180 --> 01:08:06.260 Kevin, you mentioned, I think, harm at all. 01:08:06.260 --> 01:08:08.380 The majority of the adverse events. 01:08:08.380 --> 01:08:13.420 So we have a lot of VED diagrams here of things to consider. 01:08:13.420 --> 01:08:15.060 There's a lot of people who probably took these 01:08:15.060 --> 01:08:16.300 and don't have any harm at all. 01:08:16.300 --> 01:08:18.620 There's maybe a subset of people that take these bad lots 01:08:18.620 --> 01:08:21.700 that, in fact, have some genetic reason 01:08:21.700 --> 01:08:24.340 why they're more susceptible to the harm than others. 01:08:24.340 --> 01:08:27.500 Kevin, you mentioned, I think, today and in the past 01:08:27.500 --> 01:08:30.700 that this promoter, the SV40 promoter in particular, 01:08:30.700 --> 01:08:32.740 is used in gene therapy. 01:08:32.740 --> 01:08:35.940 And yet this was not reviewed as a gene therapy. 01:08:35.940 --> 01:08:37.460 It was reviewed as a vaccine. 01:08:37.460 --> 01:08:40.540 Is that an issue in your group? 01:08:40.540 --> 01:08:43.780 Yeah, I think that is actually a very serious legal issue. 01:08:43.780 --> 01:08:46.500 This here is the SV40 enhancer that 01:08:46.500 --> 01:08:49.300 is published to bind all of these transcription factors 01:08:49.300 --> 01:08:52.300 and drag this sequence into the nucleus. 01:08:52.300 --> 01:08:54.900 There's two of these copies of these 72 base pair pieces 01:08:54.900 --> 01:08:56.940 of DNA, and this is what they're putting 01:08:56.940 --> 01:09:00.700 in plasmids to get them to do perform gene therapy. 01:09:00.700 --> 01:09:03.620 So the sequence that they omitted 01:09:03.620 --> 01:09:06.460 is a bioactive sequence according to Health Canada, 01:09:06.460 --> 01:09:07.860 and it is used in gene therapy. 01:09:07.860 --> 01:09:09.380 There's just no debate anymore. 01:09:09.380 --> 01:09:12.660 The plasmids that are in there are gene therapy tools, 01:09:12.660 --> 01:09:15.060 and they're injected into beings and people. 01:09:15.060 --> 01:09:18.980 So not only was there no informed consent for anybody, 01:09:18.980 --> 01:09:20.980 and this was emergency news authorization, 01:09:20.980 --> 01:09:24.300 so they weren't by law. 01:09:24.340 --> 01:09:28.180 The question becomes, again, am I cracking yours? 01:09:28.180 --> 01:09:30.380 No, okay, it sounded like I was really loud. 01:09:30.380 --> 01:09:32.180 I don't think I'm actually that loud. 01:09:36.660 --> 01:09:39.700 The important thing to understand here is that 01:09:44.180 --> 01:09:45.020 yeah. 01:09:55.300 --> 01:09:58.300 I just, I, base pair pieces of DNA, 01:09:58.300 --> 01:10:00.300 and this is what they're putting in plasmids 01:10:00.300 --> 01:10:03.300 to get them to do perform gene therapy. 01:10:03.300 --> 01:10:06.300 So the sequence that they omitted 01:10:06.300 --> 01:10:09.300 is a bioactive sequence according to Health Canada, 01:10:09.300 --> 01:10:10.300 and it is used in gene therapy. 01:10:10.300 --> 01:10:12.300 There's just no debate anymore. 01:10:12.300 --> 01:10:15.300 The plasmids that are in there are gene therapy tools. 01:10:15.300 --> 01:10:17.300 And now the way that they assembled the plasmid 01:10:17.300 --> 01:10:19.300 was to look at all the fragments 01:10:19.300 --> 01:10:23.300 and then reassemble them into the plasma sequence. 01:10:24.300 --> 01:10:29.300 They found very few really long sequences of DNA 01:10:29.300 --> 01:10:31.300 because the DNA was digested. 01:10:34.300 --> 01:10:36.300 And so the argument on the other side 01:10:36.300 --> 01:10:39.300 is clearly going to be these fragments are tiny. 01:10:39.300 --> 01:10:41.300 Kevin makes the argument that tiny fragments 01:10:41.300 --> 01:10:45.300 have lots of active sticky ends, 01:10:45.300 --> 01:10:48.300 and so they're more likely to integrate. 01:10:48.300 --> 01:10:51.300 The regulators and other molecular biologists 01:10:51.300 --> 01:10:53.300 will say that the shorter the pieces are, 01:10:53.300 --> 01:10:55.300 the more likely that they won't integrate, 01:10:55.300 --> 01:10:56.300 that they won't be dangerous, 01:10:56.300 --> 01:10:58.300 that they will be cleaned up as noise. 01:11:02.300 --> 01:11:04.300 And so that's how they're going to argue 01:11:04.300 --> 01:11:06.300 that this is not really valid. 01:11:06.300 --> 01:11:08.300 If you use fluorimetry, 01:11:08.300 --> 01:11:10.300 you're finding these little tiny fragments 01:11:10.300 --> 01:11:12.300 that are a few base pairs long. 01:11:12.300 --> 01:11:14.300 I'm getting a GFP signal and claiming 01:11:14.300 --> 01:11:15.300 that's double-stranded DNA, 01:11:15.300 --> 01:11:18.300 but that's really not double-stranded DNA. 01:11:18.300 --> 01:11:20.300 That's not going to make RNA. 01:11:20.300 --> 01:11:23.300 It's not going to make protein. 01:11:23.300 --> 01:11:28.300 And if it integrates, it will be integrating where? 01:11:28.300 --> 01:11:31.300 Into the genome of a cell that's no longer using the genome, 01:11:31.300 --> 01:11:34.300 like an endothelial cell, 01:11:34.300 --> 01:11:36.300 or a liver cell, 01:11:36.300 --> 01:11:39.300 or an already differentiated cell in the body 01:11:39.300 --> 01:11:42.300 that really only uses a very sub-small subset 01:11:42.300 --> 01:11:45.300 of the total genome and its nucleus. 01:11:45.300 --> 01:11:48.300 And so if this small piece of DNA was 01:11:48.300 --> 01:11:50.300 to magically integrate the chances 01:11:50.300 --> 01:11:51.300 of it integrating somewhere 01:11:51.300 --> 01:11:54.300 that will have any impact on that cell, 01:11:54.300 --> 01:11:57.300 it seems to be quite vanishing. 01:11:57.300 --> 01:11:59.300 Certainly not just going to happen 01:11:59.300 --> 01:12:02.300 to stumble on Braco or stumble on P53 01:12:02.300 --> 01:12:04.300 because it's like a magnet for it. 01:12:07.300 --> 01:12:10.300 And so we seem to be creating these, you know, 01:12:10.300 --> 01:12:13.300 worst-case scenario is that it, 01:12:13.300 --> 01:12:15.300 your son drinks some whiskey, 01:12:15.300 --> 01:12:16.300 gets in the car, 01:12:16.300 --> 01:12:18.300 backs across the street, 01:12:18.300 --> 01:12:21.300 crashes into the house across the street. 01:12:21.300 --> 01:12:24.300 That's the worst-case scenario if you leave your son at home. 01:12:24.300 --> 01:12:26.300 The best-case scenario is you watch some Netflix 01:12:26.300 --> 01:12:28.300 and goes to bed on time. 01:12:30.300 --> 01:12:33.300 The best-case scenario or other scenarios 01:12:33.300 --> 01:12:36.300 that eats ice cream and you told him not to. 01:12:36.300 --> 01:12:38.300 But the worst-case scenario is, yeah, 01:12:38.300 --> 01:12:40.300 he drinks half a fifth of whiskey, 01:12:40.300 --> 01:12:41.300 drives the car across the street, 01:12:41.300 --> 01:12:43.300 crashes into the neighbor's house. 01:12:44.300 --> 01:12:46.300 But it's not very likely. 01:12:47.300 --> 01:12:50.300 In fact, I would argue it's vanishingly small, 01:12:50.300 --> 01:12:52.300 the probability that that's going to happen, 01:12:52.300 --> 01:12:54.300 even if I left a bottle of whiskey on the table 01:12:54.300 --> 01:12:57.300 next to the car keys, my son wouldn't do it. 01:12:58.300 --> 01:13:00.300 So it's a pretty bold statement to say 01:13:00.300 --> 01:13:03.300 that all this double-stranded little pieces of DNA 01:13:03.300 --> 01:13:07.300 and so it's highly likely because they were in lipid nanoparticles 01:13:07.300 --> 01:13:09.300 that they'll get into that nucleus 01:13:09.300 --> 01:13:12.300 and they'll interact with the two cancer-controlling enzymes 01:13:12.300 --> 01:13:14.300 called P53 in Braca. 01:13:17.300 --> 01:13:21.300 Why wouldn't they interact with one of the 100,000 other enzymes 01:13:21.300 --> 01:13:23.300 that are present in our cells instead, 01:13:23.300 --> 01:13:26.300 or one of the other 100,000 places 01:13:26.300 --> 01:13:29.300 that it could integrate and do nothing, 01:13:29.300 --> 01:13:32.300 or have no real effect, 01:13:34.300 --> 01:13:36.300 whereas transfection, 01:13:36.300 --> 01:13:38.300 expression of a foreign protein, 01:13:38.300 --> 01:13:40.300 activation of the immune system 01:13:40.300 --> 01:13:42.300 by the expression of a foreign protein, 01:13:42.300 --> 01:13:46.300 and the challenge of the immune system to clear that 01:13:46.300 --> 01:13:50.300 is obviously a non-physiological problem 01:13:50.300 --> 01:13:53.300 that you would not want to challenge a healthy human with, 01:13:53.300 --> 01:13:56.300 but let's focus on this DNA problem. 01:13:58.300 --> 01:14:00.300 That's where we are, ladies and gentlemen. 01:14:00.300 --> 01:14:02.300 That's where we are. 01:14:02.300 --> 01:14:07.300 That is the bamboozlement that's being brought upon us right now. 01:14:09.300 --> 01:14:11.300 Make no mistake about it. 01:14:11.300 --> 01:14:18.300 So it's a very, very nuanced trap 01:14:18.300 --> 01:14:20.300 that we are being lured into, 01:14:20.300 --> 01:14:24.300 and if we're not explicit and very careful 01:14:24.300 --> 01:14:26.300 about how we look at this, 01:14:27.300 --> 01:14:29.300 from the outside, 01:14:29.300 --> 01:14:33.300 from the perspective of people looking at us 01:14:33.300 --> 01:14:35.300 from the outside, 01:14:36.300 --> 01:14:39.300 it will be very easy for us to be brushed away, 01:14:39.300 --> 01:14:40.300 and you'll see in a minute. 01:14:40.300 --> 01:14:41.300 We'll watch the rest of this, 01:14:41.300 --> 01:14:44.300 then we're going to watch some debunk the funk, 01:14:44.300 --> 01:14:46.300 and they're injected into billions of people. 01:14:46.300 --> 01:14:50.300 So not only was there no informed consent for anybody, 01:14:50.300 --> 01:14:52.300 and this was emergency use authorization, 01:14:52.300 --> 01:14:55.300 so they weren't, by law, 01:14:55.300 --> 01:14:58.300 they weren't able to give truly informed consent, 01:14:58.300 --> 01:15:01.300 but it looks like this was a gene therapy, 01:15:01.300 --> 01:15:04.300 and people were not told that this was a gene therapy. 01:15:04.300 --> 01:15:05.300 Is that right? 01:15:05.300 --> 01:15:09.300 That's right, and now they may not have meant for it to be this, 01:15:09.300 --> 01:15:12.300 but they certainly, in my opinion, hit it. 01:15:12.300 --> 01:15:15.300 The fact that that SV-3 region is the only origin missing 01:15:15.300 --> 01:15:19.300 on the vector means whoever ran the annotation program there 01:15:19.300 --> 01:15:21.300 probably had three origins show up, 01:15:21.300 --> 01:15:23.300 the F1, the bacterial, and the SV-40 01:15:23.300 --> 01:15:24.300 and decided to remove the SV-40 01:15:24.300 --> 01:15:26.300 because it was an unpopular name, 01:15:26.300 --> 01:15:28.300 and they knew it was controversial. 01:15:28.300 --> 01:15:30.300 Incredible. 01:15:30.300 --> 01:15:33.300 There's a long literature in mainstream scientific 01:15:33.300 --> 01:15:35.300 journals about SV-40. 01:15:35.300 --> 01:15:36.300 Isn't that right, Brian? 01:15:36.300 --> 01:15:37.300 Absolutely. 01:15:37.300 --> 01:15:40.300 You know, it's such a strong promoter, 01:15:40.300 --> 01:15:42.300 and it's a mammalian active promoter, 01:15:42.300 --> 01:15:45.300 and so you would expect if you put that promoter, 01:15:45.300 --> 01:15:48.300 and especially if you have that 72 base pair 01:15:48.300 --> 01:15:51.300 enhancer region, that you're basically, 01:15:51.300 --> 01:15:55.300 you know, you've got a nuclear localization signal, 01:15:55.300 --> 01:15:57.300 and so that is its job. 01:15:57.300 --> 01:16:01.300 It basically will take a DNA sequence 01:16:01.300 --> 01:16:05.300 behind it, and it will deliver it into the nucleus. 01:16:05.300 --> 01:16:09.300 This is, it's absolutely incredible that this is there. 01:16:09.300 --> 01:16:12.300 It's absolutely incredible that this whole thing 01:16:12.300 --> 01:16:15.300 was hidden from view. 01:16:15.300 --> 01:16:19.300 Wouldn't that raise, you know, again, 01:16:19.300 --> 01:16:22.300 maybe I'm beating a dead horse, 01:16:22.300 --> 01:16:24.300 but just the absence of that information, 01:16:24.300 --> 01:16:27.300 wouldn't that raise some type of red flag 01:16:27.300 --> 01:16:31.300 with the EMA and the FDA? 01:16:31.300 --> 01:16:35.300 You would hope so, that they would feel deceived by this. 01:16:35.300 --> 01:16:36.300 Yeah. 01:16:36.300 --> 01:16:38.300 That this is something that is clearly in the rules 01:16:38.300 --> 01:16:40.300 that you need to declare these things, 01:16:40.300 --> 01:16:41.300 and now they find out, you know, 01:16:41.300 --> 01:16:45.300 years later that they weren't sure this information. 01:16:45.300 --> 01:16:49.300 So I don't know where it leads to. 01:16:49.300 --> 01:16:50.300 Right, right. 01:16:50.300 --> 01:16:53.300 You've been looking at this for quite a while now, Kevin, 01:16:54.300 --> 01:16:58.300 and so, you know, if you don't like the message, 01:16:58.300 --> 01:17:00.300 you shoot the messenger. 01:17:00.300 --> 01:17:03.300 So what's happening with you? 01:17:03.300 --> 01:17:05.300 Oh, well, I've already been character assassinated 01:17:05.300 --> 01:17:07.300 for my choice to get it into the cannabis field, 01:17:07.300 --> 01:17:10.300 so I'm kind of bulletproof from that standpoint. 01:17:10.300 --> 01:17:13.300 It's almost as bad as, you know, looking at vaccines. 01:17:13.300 --> 01:17:16.300 So his skin in the game is that he already threw away 01:17:16.300 --> 01:17:19.300 his career going into the cannabis industry, you know, so, 01:17:19.300 --> 01:17:22.300 I mean, 01:17:22.300 --> 01:17:23.300 he can't lose any. 01:17:23.300 --> 01:17:25.300 He can't be canceled anymore than that. 01:17:25.300 --> 01:17:26.300 In general. 01:17:26.300 --> 01:17:27.300 So yes. 01:17:27.300 --> 01:17:28.300 Yeah. 01:17:28.300 --> 01:17:29.300 Exactly. 01:17:29.300 --> 01:17:31.300 In the past, I want to point out that Kevin generously 01:17:31.300 --> 01:17:34.300 gave us a declaration in the case that we filed against 01:17:34.300 --> 01:17:37.300 coercive PCR testing of children in New York City schools, 01:17:37.300 --> 01:17:40.300 and we're very grateful for that. 01:17:40.300 --> 01:17:41.300 So, yeah. 01:17:41.300 --> 01:17:44.300 So, so you're not worried about the character assassination 01:17:44.300 --> 01:17:46.300 that goes along with this, Kevin? 01:17:46.300 --> 01:17:48.300 No, they already assassinated my character a decade ago 01:17:48.300 --> 01:17:50.300 when I decided to start studying cannabis. 01:17:50.300 --> 01:17:52.300 So they'll continue on that front. 01:17:52.300 --> 01:17:55.300 And yeah, we get harassed on Twitter and all the usual social media 01:17:55.300 --> 01:17:59.300 nonsense, but I don't think this is, I don't think it's very 01:17:59.300 --> 01:18:00.300 effective. 01:18:00.300 --> 01:18:02.300 And oftentimes, I think as a reverse effect, 01:18:02.300 --> 01:18:04.300 as people see who they're attacking. 01:18:04.300 --> 01:18:06.300 And I mean, you can see our preprint on Thursday. 01:18:06.300 --> 01:18:08.300 It's got like 72,000 downloads now, 01:18:08.300 --> 01:18:12.300 probably because a Streisand effect of everyone who's hating on us 01:18:12.300 --> 01:18:13.300 on Twitter. 01:18:13.300 --> 01:18:14.300 So. 01:18:14.300 --> 01:18:17.300 What's your sub stack so that we can have everybody follow? 01:18:18.300 --> 01:18:20.300 It's, it's a named after the count, 01:18:20.300 --> 01:18:22.300 the active compound and catnip. 01:18:22.300 --> 01:18:23.300 I'm a cat person. 01:18:23.300 --> 01:18:25.300 So it's, uh, it's a petalactone. 01:18:25.300 --> 01:18:28.300 Uh, so it's unfortunately really horrible to tell somebody in her 01:18:28.300 --> 01:18:32.300 to spell, but lactone is the last word, but a petalactone. 01:18:32.300 --> 01:18:35.300 If you ever get confused, just look up the active ingredient 01:18:35.300 --> 01:18:38.300 and catnip and it will give you that long winded name. 01:18:38.300 --> 01:18:41.300 I taught people how to take the Pfizer sequence as if they were 01:18:41.300 --> 01:18:44.300 given it as if they worked at the EMA or the health Canada. 01:18:44.300 --> 01:18:47.300 This is the tool that you would probably use to open it up and look 01:18:47.300 --> 01:18:48.300 at it. 01:18:48.300 --> 01:18:49.300 This is called snap gene. 01:18:49.300 --> 01:18:52.300 It's a free tool downloaded, opened the file, 01:18:52.300 --> 01:18:55.300 and it will instantly paint you the SV 40 regions. 01:18:55.300 --> 01:18:59.300 So this shows you that that someone had to go in and actively 01:18:59.300 --> 01:19:02.300 delete this because the standard tools in the industry paint this 01:19:02.300 --> 01:19:03.300 thing. 01:19:03.300 --> 01:19:06.300 So I don't get credit for finding SV 40 snap gene found it. 01:19:06.300 --> 01:19:08.300 It painted it the first time I loaded the sequence in, 01:19:08.300 --> 01:19:11.300 which is why I was really confused to see that it was not in 01:19:11.300 --> 01:19:15.300 Pfizer's plasma map because that told me somebody had to go 01:19:15.300 --> 01:19:16.300 and erase it. 01:19:16.300 --> 01:19:18.300 That's not an oops, I forgot it. 01:19:18.300 --> 01:19:22.300 That's a, I clearly wanted to deceive you type of move. 01:19:22.300 --> 01:19:23.300 Right. 01:19:23.300 --> 01:19:25.300 And this is just a picture of that second origin. 01:19:25.300 --> 01:19:27.300 Oh, I'm sorry, that second open reading. 01:19:27.300 --> 01:19:31.300 It's going in the opposite direction and teaches people how to go 01:19:31.300 --> 01:19:34.300 and look for these yourselves and some of the genes that that 01:19:34.300 --> 01:19:35.300 thing hits. 01:19:35.300 --> 01:19:38.300 They're not really strong hits, but I'm like, this is really weird. 01:19:38.300 --> 01:19:40.300 It says silk protein and silk. 01:19:40.300 --> 01:19:42.300 I'm not really strong hits. 01:19:42.300 --> 01:19:43.300 Stop saying that. 01:19:43.300 --> 01:19:47.300 And, um, and these not a very strong. 01:19:47.300 --> 01:19:50.300 Intervening sequences is SV 40 sequences. 01:19:50.300 --> 01:19:51.300 It's not just you. 01:19:51.300 --> 01:19:53.300 It's health Canada now, right? 01:19:55.300 --> 01:19:59.300 Yeah, they, they, they confirmed in that email that yes, 01:19:59.300 --> 01:20:02.300 we were given the sequence from the plasma, but we were not, 01:20:02.300 --> 01:20:06.300 we're not specifically annotated the SV 40 that was in that sequence. 01:20:06.300 --> 01:20:10.300 They, they annotated all those other pieces and just decided to not tell them 01:20:10.300 --> 01:20:12.300 about the SV 40 in the sequence. 01:20:12.300 --> 01:20:14.300 But they have some sequence to tell. 01:20:14.300 --> 01:20:17.300 A huge focus being a page in there and not telling them that he slips it in there. 01:20:17.300 --> 01:20:19.300 So they have the sequence themselves. 01:20:19.300 --> 01:20:20.300 They could have done it. 01:20:20.300 --> 01:20:23.300 They, they, they can, they can run snap gene just like anybody else. 01:20:23.300 --> 01:20:29.300 In theory, I suspect that they did until we published our work. 01:20:29.300 --> 01:20:30.300 Right. 01:20:30.300 --> 01:20:31.300 Oopsy. 01:20:31.300 --> 01:20:36.300 You've identified for us, Kevin, that, um, that the FDA and, and health Canada 01:20:36.300 --> 01:20:40.300 and the EMA potentially could allege that they were deceived. 01:20:40.300 --> 01:20:44.300 And perhaps they were deceived and that perhaps opens the door for them right now 01:20:44.300 --> 01:20:46.300 to take much more dramatic action. 01:20:46.300 --> 01:20:50.300 I think that's fair because if you look through the volume of data that 01:20:50.300 --> 01:20:55.300 Pfizer's handing over, it is, it's almost this drowned the regulator in materials 01:20:55.300 --> 01:20:57.300 so they can't possibly read it all. 01:20:57.300 --> 01:20:59.300 And that's really easy to do with sequence information. 01:20:59.300 --> 01:21:03.300 You hand them a file of 7,800 bases and unless they have the time that sets 01:21:03.300 --> 01:21:06.300 on a side and say, annotate this and look at this and tell me if there's 01:21:06.300 --> 01:21:07.300 something weird in it. 01:21:07.300 --> 01:21:11.300 They're, they're then also buried in all the PCR data, all the LPS data. 01:21:11.300 --> 01:21:15.300 They, they, they, you know, Pfizer even went out and engineered a new mass spec 01:21:15.300 --> 01:21:19.300 method of DNA sequencing to try to show them that their polyA signals were in, 01:21:19.300 --> 01:21:21.300 in the, in the vaccine were the right length. 01:21:21.300 --> 01:21:25.300 I mean, they did all of this work that I thought was fairly unnecessary and looked 01:21:25.300 --> 01:21:28.300 like a tactic of, of drowning regulators and data. 01:21:28.300 --> 01:21:31.300 That, that's probably what we're hearing here. 01:21:31.300 --> 01:21:32.300 They snowed them. 01:21:32.300 --> 01:21:34.300 Well, this is incredibly enlightening. 01:21:34.300 --> 01:21:37.300 Kevin, thank you so much for taking the time to explain this to us. 01:21:37.300 --> 01:21:41.300 I certainly have a much clearer picture and we can send people to your catnip, 01:21:41.300 --> 01:21:43.300 the pedal act tone. 01:21:43.300 --> 01:21:44.300 Is that right? 01:21:44.300 --> 01:21:48.300 New letter to get all the latest and look at it in greater detail again. 01:21:48.300 --> 01:21:49.300 Thank you both so much. 01:21:49.300 --> 01:21:50.300 Thank you. 01:21:50.300 --> 01:21:51.300 Thank you. 01:21:51.300 --> 01:21:52.300 Thank you. 01:21:52.300 --> 01:21:53.300 Thank you. 01:21:53.300 --> 01:21:54.300 Thank you so much, Kevin. 01:21:54.300 --> 01:21:56.300 And, and we look forward to your further research. 01:21:56.300 --> 01:21:57.300 Thank you for having us. 01:21:57.300 --> 01:21:58.300 Okay. 01:21:58.300 --> 01:22:06.300 So let me just summarize this really quickly and then let me give you my one minute 01:22:06.300 --> 01:22:10.300 summary about why I think we need to be careful about this. 01:22:10.300 --> 01:22:13.300 That was a lot of notes while he really went nuts there. 01:22:13.300 --> 01:22:25.300 So the big thing that seems to really impress Mary and, and Brian is that health 01:22:25.300 --> 01:22:32.300 Canada has decided to acknowledge that the SV40 enhancer and promoter sequences 01:22:32.300 --> 01:22:38.300 are there as evidence of double stranded DNA originating from the plasmid, 01:22:38.300 --> 01:22:44.300 which was used in process two manufacturing. 01:22:44.300 --> 01:22:49.300 Now, I find it a little interesting that Josh Getsko is the guy who kind of led 01:22:49.300 --> 01:22:57.300 the charge on the story of process one versus process two. 01:22:57.300 --> 01:23:01.300 He has been outspoken before about VAERS and other things. 01:23:01.300 --> 01:23:10.300 He seems to have auditioned quite early for participation in this on the team. 01:23:10.300 --> 01:23:14.300 And so being a part of that could mean that he's just a good guy who's been 01:23:15.300 --> 01:23:18.300 vigilant and working hard and pick this ball up and ran with it. 01:23:18.300 --> 01:23:23.300 And I hope that's the case. 01:23:23.300 --> 01:23:30.300 The Vyroid reference was interesting. 01:23:30.300 --> 01:23:35.300 That's naked RNA, which can infect plants. 01:23:35.300 --> 01:23:42.300 He was looking at trying to sequence Vyroids, and he needed an RNA polyA RNA control. 01:23:42.300 --> 01:23:53.300 And as he told me the story or told us the story on John Bodeman's St. Patrick's Day stream, 01:23:53.300 --> 01:23:59.300 he said that he sent out an all call to his network saying, 01:23:59.300 --> 01:24:03.300 hey guys, I need some polyA RNA for a control. 01:24:03.300 --> 01:24:05.300 Can anybody help me out? 01:24:05.300 --> 01:24:11.300 And then some random person sent him a box with three vials of the vaccine in it. 01:24:11.300 --> 01:24:14.300 That's the story that I remember. 01:24:14.300 --> 01:24:23.300 And so these were RNA samples that were not stored at the right temperature, shipped to him. 01:24:23.300 --> 01:24:28.300 And he was able to use them as controls, which also allowed them to get sequenced. 01:24:28.300 --> 01:24:34.300 And that's why we're here because then he found the plasmid DNA there. 01:24:34.300 --> 01:24:39.300 And remember that he would have assembled all kinds of little tiny fragments 01:24:39.300 --> 01:24:42.300 and then figured out that if you lined them up correctly, 01:24:42.300 --> 01:24:49.300 they reassembled into the original plasmid process, too. 01:24:49.300 --> 01:24:53.300 In case you're wondering, that's death on a unicorn there. 01:24:53.300 --> 01:24:59.300 It's for my daughter, kind of. She really likes unicorns. 01:24:59.300 --> 01:25:06.300 So he talked about PCR being used to produce the DNA for process one versus DNA plasmids 01:25:06.300 --> 01:25:09.300 plus bacteria to be used in process two. 01:25:09.300 --> 01:25:16.300 He did mention that the RNA being codon optimized 01:25:16.300 --> 01:25:20.300 and pseudoyuridine chemically altered made it stay around longer, 01:25:20.300 --> 01:25:23.300 was found in breast milk. He dropped a kind of all kinds of anecdotes there 01:25:23.300 --> 01:25:25.300 to finally say that it was a big train wreck. 01:25:25.300 --> 01:25:33.300 But that was about a 30 second, 15 second blip about the fact that the RNA is also bad. 01:25:33.300 --> 01:25:36.300 The RNA is also bad. 01:25:36.300 --> 01:25:44.300 Was briefly there, even though Kevin came on my stream twice in 2021 and 22 01:25:44.300 --> 01:25:51.300 to say many things about why the RNA itself was bad. 01:25:51.300 --> 01:25:58.300 And we know that the RNA could be reverse transcribed to DNA in theory. 01:25:58.300 --> 01:26:00.300 And so then you have DNA anyway. 01:26:00.300 --> 01:26:07.300 So again, we had that report earlier that there are places like in the liver 01:26:07.300 --> 01:26:11.300 where the line one enzyme is present and we can go backwards to DNA. 01:26:11.300 --> 01:26:14.300 And so then where are we? We're kind of in the same place again, right? 01:26:14.300 --> 01:26:22.300 So he talks about fluorometry versus PCR and using that to find double stranded DNA 01:26:22.300 --> 01:26:37.300 versus RNA. Many labs have now used his primers to find SV40 in these shots. 01:26:37.300 --> 01:26:41.300 Buck halter also used nanopore sequencing, but then only to look for his primer 01:26:41.300 --> 01:26:46.300 sequences, at least that's how he said it can't be true, but maybe it is. 01:26:46.300 --> 01:26:52.300 And then Sin Lee also used sanger sequencing to find, I don't think he went 01:26:52.300 --> 01:27:05.300 to look for the whole plasmid, but just for his little promoter sequences again, I think. 01:27:05.300 --> 01:27:11.300 So it's under the QPCR limit, which technically means then again that he didn't find a lot. 01:27:11.300 --> 01:27:14.300 And if you use fluorometry, then you're finding little tiny pieces 01:27:14.300 --> 01:27:19.300 and then you could call that being above the limit, but as he said, they're only concerned 01:27:19.300 --> 01:27:24.300 about longer pieces of DNA, and there's a reason for that. 01:27:24.300 --> 01:27:28.300 So him and Buck halter are making the argument that small pieces of DNA 01:27:28.300 --> 01:27:31.300 all have legatable ends, and so that makes them more dangerous. 01:27:31.300 --> 01:27:38.300 It's like a shotgun or a carpet bombing with the enhancer. 01:27:38.300 --> 01:27:43.300 But technically that's not true, I don't think, unless he's really found the enhancer 01:27:43.300 --> 01:27:49.300 intact, which I'm not really convinced that that's exactly what they found. 01:27:49.300 --> 01:27:55.300 They found lots of fragments that when you use an assembly program, you can find these things again, 01:27:55.300 --> 01:28:02.300 but I don't know how many intact segments of these enhancers and promoters are present. 01:28:02.300 --> 01:28:09.300 And I think that's part of the gray area there that's on purpose. 01:28:09.300 --> 01:28:17.300 And so then he talked a lot about the fact that the guidance documents surrounding these kinds of 01:28:17.300 --> 01:28:24.300 biologics are not up to date, and that the regulators therefore didn't really know how to regulate these things 01:28:24.300 --> 01:28:26.300 because they weren't up to date. 01:28:26.300 --> 01:28:31.300 So on top of the fact that the manufacturers tried to obfuscate what was there and how to look for it 01:28:31.300 --> 01:28:36.300 and whether they looked for it, the regulators themselves were also held back 01:28:36.300 --> 01:28:47.300 by their own out of date guidance documents. 01:28:47.300 --> 01:28:50.300 The genotoxicity studies were waived. 01:28:50.300 --> 01:28:55.300 He says, you know, it's pretty difficult to screen informatically for ribosome initiation sites. 01:28:55.300 --> 01:29:02.300 That's an interesting little slip there. 01:29:02.300 --> 01:29:10.300 And then the actual question is then, are these double-stranded DNA pieces actually integrating or not? 01:29:10.300 --> 01:29:14.300 Where are they integrating, how often, what are the odds, et cetera? 01:29:14.300 --> 01:29:18.300 And he zeroed in on one particular instance. 01:29:18.300 --> 01:29:29.300 And I noticed that this entire talk, this entire talk, this entire line, this entire talk, what did they not mention? 01:29:29.300 --> 01:29:43.300 When is the time when you would be most concerned about integration of genes, integration, or disruption of genes? 01:29:43.300 --> 01:29:48.300 When is the time when you would be most concerned about that? 01:29:48.300 --> 01:29:50.300 Would that be in an old person? 01:29:50.300 --> 01:29:52.300 Would that be in an adult? 01:29:52.300 --> 01:29:56.300 Would that be in a great big giant fat adult? 01:29:56.300 --> 01:29:59.300 Would that be in a teenager? 01:29:59.300 --> 01:30:02.300 What about a person who's already been through puberty? 01:30:02.300 --> 01:30:06.300 What about a pregnant woman with a fetus inside of her? 01:30:06.300 --> 01:30:10.300 Oh! 01:30:10.300 --> 01:30:12.300 So you don't want to mention that? 01:30:12.300 --> 01:30:25.300 You don't want to talk about that at all because gene integration into the fat cells of a 400 pound man who can't walk down the street and is 65 years old is not that dangerous. 01:30:25.300 --> 01:30:38.300 But injecting live-ended DNA with active mammalian promoters into pregnant women, now that might be a problem, ladies and gentlemen, we might need to back the truck up here. 01:30:38.300 --> 01:30:48.300 But of course we haven't mentioned that at all because we don't want to emphasize the part of the narrative which is about the malfeasance, the coercion. 01:30:48.300 --> 01:30:54.300 We want to emphasize the narrative about this ultra-complicated biology stuff. 01:30:54.300 --> 01:30:57.300 Not the really simple stuff. 01:30:57.300 --> 01:31:02.300 Like we didn't need to do this because people were not dying from a spreading respiratory disease. 01:31:02.300 --> 01:31:08.300 They were dying from ventilators and from remdesivir. 01:31:08.300 --> 01:31:12.300 You see where this went? How quickly this went off the rails? 01:31:12.300 --> 01:31:19.300 And it's because it's such a damn shiny object that nobody can stop looking at it. 01:31:19.300 --> 01:31:23.300 But if you understood the biology, it's actually not that shiny, okay? 01:31:23.300 --> 01:31:27.300 It's really not. I've got to get a new notebook here. 01:31:27.300 --> 01:31:32.300 I think that's number six. 01:31:39.300 --> 01:31:43.300 So look, here's the deal. Okay, I'm just going to make a list. 01:31:43.300 --> 01:31:48.300 This work. 01:31:48.300 --> 01:32:07.300 Okay, so first just understand this. Very simple fact, okay? 01:32:07.300 --> 01:32:24.300 Transfection is RNA. Transformation is DNA. If you use these processes to make proteins, you are transfecting or you are transforming your target. 01:32:24.300 --> 01:32:36.300 If you use an adenovirus carrying DNA to express the spike protein in a human, like in the J&J shot, you are transforming human cells. 01:32:36.300 --> 01:32:46.300 If you are using a lipid nanoparticle carrying an RNA to express spike protein in human cells, you are transfecting those cells. 01:32:46.300 --> 01:32:56.300 These two things have been products for sale as various methodologies for decades. 01:32:57.300 --> 01:33:10.300 And in the pandemic, we called these investigative vaccines. 01:33:10.300 --> 01:33:18.300 This is the story so far, okay? We know that transfection is RNA and transformation is DNA used to make proteins. 01:33:18.300 --> 01:33:29.300 And we know that we change the name of these processes, these methodologies without really significantly changing how they work and called them investigative vaccines. 01:33:29.300 --> 01:33:47.300 How do we know that's true? Because Peter Kullis told us that Peter Kullis, the great inventor of the LNP that was used to carry these transfections to our body's cells, 01:33:47.300 --> 01:33:57.300 told us that he burned five postdocs trying to learn how to target the LNP somewhere, and they failed. 01:33:57.300 --> 01:34:11.300 There's no more discussion. What do you need to talk about anymore? You don't need to burn biorum bridles, career anymore, you don't need to cite the Japanese paper, you don't need to cite the Japanese leak document. 01:34:11.300 --> 01:34:25.300 You can just cite the creator of the lipid nanoparticle who got screwed out of the Nobel Prize, who admitted it on camera in 2022. 01:34:25.300 --> 01:34:33.300 Almost in the same presentation that he said when I heard that the Pfizer data came out and was 95% effective, I opened a Scotch. 01:34:34.300 --> 01:34:51.300 Even though I knew in my head the lipid nanoparticle was going all over people's body and we couldn't control where it went and it maybe even went to their brain. But I had a Scotch anyway. 01:34:51.300 --> 01:35:20.300 The transfection in its purest form, so that would be best RNA, super pure, best top shelf LNP. 01:35:21.300 --> 01:35:34.300 And transfection in its purest form, it still doesn't work. It's a bad idea for healthy animals. That's the deal. 01:35:35.300 --> 01:35:42.300 Transfection in its purest form. But this wasn't transfection in its purest form. 01:35:42.300 --> 01:36:04.300 This was transfection with a foreign immunogen with human homology. 01:36:04.300 --> 01:36:22.300 Number one, number two, it was impure RNA that had been codon optimized. 01:36:22.300 --> 01:36:28.300 So that's misfolding. 01:36:28.300 --> 01:36:41.300 And it was also pseudoyuridine, which is premature stop. 01:36:41.300 --> 01:36:51.300 Plus, it's a wobble base, right? So it can be lots of different amino acids that it can code for when it goes through. 01:36:51.300 --> 01:37:03.300 It goes through the ribosome. And the LNP is a question for toxicity. 01:37:03.300 --> 01:37:15.300 And let's see, foreign immunogen, impure RNA, codon optimized, pseudoyuridine, LNP toxicity, protein fragments then, right? 01:37:15.300 --> 01:37:21.300 Because of these two things down here. 01:37:21.300 --> 01:37:39.300 And so even if transfection was in its purest form, super best RNA, super top shelf LNP, you'd still have the problem of you challenging your immune system to tell the difference between self and non-self when there are no signals related to viral infection. 01:37:39.300 --> 01:37:45.300 But then on top of that, you decided to use a foreign immunogen with human homologies. 01:37:45.300 --> 01:37:52.300 You decided to use an impure RNA rather than pure RNA. You decided to codon optimize it, which makes it misfold more. 01:37:52.300 --> 01:38:07.300 You decided to use pseudoyuridine to make it last longer, which also results in a wobble base and also results in premature stop codons, which results in protein fragments with unknown immunogenic quantity qualities. 01:38:07.300 --> 01:38:12.300 Plus the LNP toxicity is a big variable. 01:38:12.300 --> 01:38:22.300 And now on top of all of this, you have cDNA and endotoxin. 01:38:22.300 --> 01:38:36.300 And so the idea is, and I apologize, that my handwriting is very bad when I'm actually looking at the camera in here and I'm not really writing like I am on the other, I mean, just when I take notes, it looks really nice. 01:38:36.300 --> 01:38:39.300 But when you're watching me right, I don't write so well. 01:38:39.300 --> 01:38:52.300 The point is, again, I'm trying to make is that by focusing on the cDNA down here, we are ignoring that transfection in its purest form would suck. 01:38:52.300 --> 01:38:57.300 We're ignoring that the immunogen sucks. We're ignoring that the RNA sucked. 01:38:57.300 --> 01:39:06.300 We're ignoring that the codon optimization sucks. We're ignoring that the pseudoyuridine sucks, and we're ignoring that the LNP probably sucks. 01:39:06.300 --> 01:39:18.300 We're ignoring that these protein fragments make it suck even worse, and we're focused on this cDNA because we have this idea that maybe the regulators will finally act. 01:39:18.300 --> 01:39:26.300 And it's okay to think that way as long as we don't throw this list away. 01:39:26.300 --> 01:39:41.300 Because if we focus on the cDNA and put all of our eggs in the basket of Kevin McCurnan's observations, this is what's going to happen. 01:39:42.300 --> 01:39:45.300 Anti-vaxxers pretty much never come up with anything new. 01:39:45.300 --> 01:39:53.300 And recently, in dark, stinky corners of the internet, there have been claims about DNA contamination in COVID vaccines. 01:39:53.300 --> 01:39:55.300 This, again, is nothing new. 01:39:55.300 --> 01:40:01.300 It is recycled anti-vaccine garbage that has always been around for as long as vaccines have. 01:40:01.300 --> 01:40:05.300 Hey, I'm Dr. Wilson, I'm a PhD molecular biologist, and welcome to another COVID-demunking video. 01:40:05.300 --> 01:40:11.300 So, yeah, today I'm going to be tackling this claim that there is DNA contamination in COVID vaccines. 01:40:11.300 --> 01:40:15.300 But first, I want to cover some background on this topic. 01:40:15.300 --> 01:40:24.300 What you need to understand before learning why these claims are wrong is a little bit about how vaccines and other biologic drugs are made. 01:40:24.300 --> 01:40:30.300 All biological drugs, including vaccines, have a step in their manufacturing that uses cells. 01:40:30.300 --> 01:40:38.300 These can be mammalian cells, these can be bacterial cells, depends on the product, and what is needed. 01:40:38.300 --> 01:40:48.300 For example, to make insulin, which is needed to keep diabetics all over the world alive, you need bacterial cells that are genetically engineered to produce human insulin. 01:40:48.300 --> 01:40:56.300 Once the human insulin is made, all the bacteria and all the parts of the bacteria are separated away from the insulin, and the insulin is the drug product. 01:40:56.300 --> 01:41:04.300 Another example are polio vaccines. In order to get a polio vaccine, you need a virus, and the virus is grown in cells. 01:41:04.300 --> 01:41:09.300 But just like the insulin, the virus needs to be taken away from the cells and all the cells parts in order to make the actual vaccine product. 01:41:09.300 --> 01:41:17.300 Whatever the case may be, there are a slew of long-established tests that are done to ensure that your drug product has actually been removed from the cell's parts. 01:41:17.300 --> 01:41:22.300 There are tests that are designed to look for how much host cell DNA is left in the drug product after you have finished making it, 01:41:22.300 --> 01:41:26.300 same with host cell proteins, more bacterial endotoxin, and several other things. 01:41:26.300 --> 01:41:32.300 All of these tests are required by regulatory laws to be done on each and every lot of biological drug that goes out onto the market. 01:41:32.300 --> 01:41:37.300 And there are set limits as to how much residual material can be found in those drug products. 01:41:37.300 --> 01:41:40.300 These are very strict guidelines that pharmaceutical companies have to abide by. 01:41:40.300 --> 01:41:45.300 In addition to good manufacturing procedure, which is abbreviated GMP, we also have good documentation procedure and good lab procedures. 01:41:45.300 --> 01:41:47.300 All of this can be summarized as just GXP. 01:41:47.300 --> 01:41:50.300 So moving forward, I'll be referring to all of these guidelines as GXP. 01:41:50.300 --> 01:41:55.300 If any of those GXP guidelines are not met or there are deviations from their protocols, then that is a huge no-no, 01:41:55.300 --> 01:42:02.300 and it would result in a lot not even going out in the first place, or being recalled, or a number of other things, including fines and disciplinary actions against those responsible. 01:42:02.300 --> 01:42:05.300 So it's kind of a big deal, which is why there are many layers to these regulations. 01:42:05.300 --> 01:42:10.300 The pharmaceutical company itself is required to do in-house testing to show that their product meets all of these regulations, 01:42:10.300 --> 01:42:14.300 and the regulatory body, in this case for the US being the FDA, will double check those results, 01:42:14.300 --> 01:42:19.300 meaning that they can perform their own testing in their own labs, and furthermore, when those drugs go out to other countries, 01:42:19.300 --> 01:42:23.300 those other countries' own regulatory bodies will also do in-house testing on the products that they receive. 01:42:23.300 --> 01:42:28.300 Again, by the end of it, the levels of residual host cell protein, DNA, whatever, have to be below a certain set limit. 01:42:28.300 --> 01:42:31.300 Anything below that certain set limit is considered to be trace amounts. 01:42:31.300 --> 01:42:35.300 And in those trace amounts, these materials will not have a biological effect on whoever receives the drug. 01:42:35.300 --> 01:42:39.300 So in other words, if there is no biological effect being exerted by these materials in these trace amounts, 01:42:39.300 --> 01:42:42.300 then for all intents and purposes, they might as well not be there. 01:42:42.300 --> 01:42:46.300 So that's what we mean when we say, no, there is no contamination in these materials. 01:42:46.300 --> 01:42:56.300 So do you see how easy it would be for CHD to tie their ropes to Kevin McCurnan and start to fight on his behalf, 01:42:56.300 --> 01:42:58.300 maybe even give him a T-shirt? 01:42:58.300 --> 01:43:04.300 And then because we have put all of our eggs in the CDNA contamination basket, 01:43:04.300 --> 01:43:14.300 even if a very small fraction of what Dan Wilson says in this video is really dead on balls accurate, 01:43:14.300 --> 01:43:24.300 it's still going to be sufficient for the vast majority of his viewership to discard Kevin McCurnan as an anti-vaxxer. 01:43:24.300 --> 01:43:30.300 And as we watch this, you're going to see that a lot of the objections that he brings up are the same kind of objections 01:43:30.300 --> 01:43:37.300 that somebody sitting on the FDA board would bring up, same kind of objections that other people on Twitter bring up. 01:43:38.300 --> 01:43:47.300 And so unless we're really ready to go toe to toe with these people on the molecular biology, or Kevin is willing to do it, 01:43:47.300 --> 01:43:56.300 then we're setting ourselves up essentially to substitute and jump into the ring instead of Kevin. 01:43:56.300 --> 01:44:04.300 And instead of Kevin's co-authors, CHD is about to jump in front and say, well, 01:44:04.300 --> 01:44:11.300 health Canada says, and Kevin McCurnan says, so children's health defense says, 01:44:11.300 --> 01:44:19.300 and now debunk the funk, and a bunch of other people can accuse us of being completely wrong. 01:44:19.300 --> 01:44:25.300 Whereas if I think we stuck to this list I just put up, starting with the fact that 01:44:25.300 --> 01:44:31.300 transfection in its purest form is still a stupid idea in healthy people, 01:44:31.300 --> 01:44:35.300 we would have a lot stronger, solid ground to stand on, 01:44:35.300 --> 01:44:39.300 and by the time we got to complaining about the CDNA contamination, 01:44:39.300 --> 01:44:43.300 we would have already hit a home run or a grand slam. 01:44:43.300 --> 01:44:48.300 A couple people would have already crossed the plate, you know what I mean? 01:44:49.300 --> 01:44:57.300 And I'm very worried about this idea that we are being baited into accepting this as a whoa, this is great. 01:44:57.300 --> 01:45:01.300 And now the regulators will call it off the market for a few months, 01:45:01.300 --> 01:45:06.300 and then when a new one comes on the market and the regulators have really cracked down, 01:45:06.300 --> 01:45:11.300 and there's no more DNA in these shots, 01:45:11.300 --> 01:45:16.300 then everybody will be bamboozled again. 01:45:16.300 --> 01:45:23.300 Because transfection has been given a pass because of the CDNA contamination. 01:45:23.300 --> 01:45:27.300 He already believes transfection works great. 01:45:27.300 --> 01:45:35.300 Don't forget that half of the country doesn't know that transfection is a terrible idea. 01:45:35.300 --> 01:45:42.300 So it's not really a good idea to bring those people to the truth by first telling them an anecdote 01:45:42.300 --> 01:45:54.300 that, yeah, there's some contamination in there, and that might integrate into your genome. 01:45:54.300 --> 01:45:56.300 We've got to be very, very careful. 01:45:56.300 --> 01:45:59.300 Listen to the rest of this video just so you can see what I'm talking about. 01:45:59.300 --> 01:46:03.300 This is not funny. 01:46:03.300 --> 01:46:10.300 He's got a team of people, you know, he didn't do this all by himself. 01:46:10.300 --> 01:46:14.300 Other people seem to think that they've found differently, and it's quite a funny story, so let's get into it. 01:46:14.300 --> 01:46:18.300 So when it comes to COVID mRNA vaccines, some people who have a history of subscribing to anti-vaccine 01:46:18.300 --> 01:46:23.300 kind of deranged conspiracy theories claim to have found plasmid DNA in the mRNA vaccines. 01:46:23.300 --> 01:46:25.300 What is plasmid DNA, you might ask? 01:46:25.300 --> 01:46:29.300 Well, it comes from the manufacturing process used in making mRNA vaccines. 01:46:29.300 --> 01:46:31.300 A plasmid is a circular piece of DNA that can be taken up. 01:46:31.300 --> 01:46:34.300 You know what's most frustrating about this for me? 01:46:34.300 --> 01:46:48.300 That this whole story of using plasmid DNA in process two is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that they make infectious clones to study RNA viruses. 01:46:48.300 --> 01:46:54.300 It is exactly this process, and it is exactly as Kevin McCurnan said in that stream. 01:46:54.300 --> 01:46:58.300 They can make as much as they want. 01:46:58.300 --> 01:47:07.300 There's no limit. They have an infinite amount of plasmid. All they have to do is keep feeding the bacteria. 01:47:07.300 --> 01:47:24.300 That's why infectious clones can be used to create a pandemic, because you're not relying on some kind of magical RNA to be ridiculously high fidelity for three years and circulate the globe in a cartoon-like fashion. 01:47:25.300 --> 01:47:32.300 You're relying on brute force. 01:47:32.300 --> 01:47:40.300 RNA is a bit like paint. It doesn't replicate itself very well. It dilutes. 01:47:40.300 --> 01:47:51.300 So if I go outside of my garage and spill a bucket of paint on the ground, the only way it's going to spread is if people walk through it. 01:47:51.300 --> 01:47:58.300 And maybe if you were really careful, you could scoop up enough paint so that you could get some paint on the house next door. 01:47:58.300 --> 01:48:03.300 And you could argue that, wow, the blue paint is spreading everywhere. 01:48:03.300 --> 01:48:10.300 But to say that all the houses in Pittsburgh are because I dump paint in the backyard would be ridiculous. 01:48:10.300 --> 01:48:20.300 But if I had a giant truck full of blue paint, I could drive all around Pittsburgh and spread it all over the place and make it look like my paint had spread all over. 01:48:20.300 --> 01:48:29.300 But anybody who knows how paint works would be like, well, it couldn't have been Jay's fault for spilling it in his backyard that it got all over Squirrel Hill in Pittsburgh. 01:48:29.300 --> 01:48:34.300 That's impossible. Paint doesn't work like that. 01:48:34.300 --> 01:48:41.300 And there should be lots of biologists that are saying that RNA viruses don't pandemic. 01:48:41.300 --> 01:48:49.300 But infectious clones could be used to make it look like they was a pandemic. 01:48:49.300 --> 01:49:04.300 There should be hundreds, if not thousands, of biologists saying this just from a rudimentary understanding of the difference between double-stranded DNA and its copying versus single-stranded RNA and its copying. 01:49:04.300 --> 01:49:18.300 But instead, the moment I started talking about infectious clones as the ubiquitous way with which we study at RNA virology, Kevin McCernan himself got so tired of arguing about it 01:49:18.300 --> 01:49:24.300 that he blocked me on Twitter. 01:49:24.300 --> 01:49:37.300 This is not insignificant, ladies and gentlemen, that for process two and for making of the spike protein for all these different vaccines, it's fine to talk about recombinant DNA being replicated in a bacterial culture. 01:49:37.300 --> 01:49:46.300 But if I talk about how they do that with all coronaviruses all the time, and that barracks the guy who invented it and made it ubiquitous for everybody, 01:49:46.300 --> 01:49:58.300 and that's how they share these things, they send these clones around, all the stored viruses at the CDC are actually clones, and everybody got mad. 01:49:58.300 --> 01:50:02.300 Oh, no, you're an idiot. Don't listen to him. 01:50:02.300 --> 01:50:06.300 He's compromised. 01:50:06.300 --> 01:50:19.300 It is the standard technique by which they make all biologics. Do you hear it? It's the standard technique by which they make all biologics. 01:50:19.300 --> 01:50:26.300 That is the reason why the clone story is the answer. 01:50:26.300 --> 01:50:35.300 You can't make a little bit of an RNA virus and then let it loose and have it go change the world. That's not how RNA works. 01:50:35.300 --> 01:50:39.300 And these people all know it. They have to. 01:50:39.300 --> 01:50:45.300 Or they're participating in kind of a I don't want to know kind of thing. 01:50:45.300 --> 01:50:51.300 Because all you got to do is let your brain work. And this becomes basic biology. 01:50:51.300 --> 01:50:57.300 By things like bacteria and then expressed, meaning that the DNA can be read by cellular machinery and made into mRNA. 01:50:57.300 --> 01:51:02.300 Once the mRNA is made, the DNA is chopped up and the pieces are mostly removed from the final drug product. 01:51:02.300 --> 01:51:15.300 But this guy, a Mr Kevin McKernan, claims that he has gotten some vials of COVID mRNA vaccine and has found contamination of plasma DNA in the vaccine vials at levels orders of magnitude higher and the regulated limit. 01:51:15.300 --> 01:51:22.300 Wow, this should be good. He has written up his results and posted them on this regulation free preprint server, meaning that there's no safeguard, no peer review. 01:51:22.300 --> 01:51:27.300 We already go back to Kevin's talk and already preview what's going to happen here, right? 01:51:27.300 --> 01:51:35.300 The orders of magnitude statement comes from the fluorometry versus the QPCR. 01:51:35.300 --> 01:51:41.300 And in the discussion with Mary and Brian, Kevin was very clear. 01:51:41.300 --> 01:51:50.300 Using QPCR, they found levels of DNA lower than the minimum required or minimum allowed. 01:51:50.300 --> 01:51:57.300 But with using fluorometry, they found several orders of magnitude more than that. 01:51:57.300 --> 01:52:10.300 And so the argument that Dan is going to make is that fluorometry isn't an accurate representation of dangerous DNA because it's picking up all kinds of tiny little fragments. 01:52:10.300 --> 01:52:15.300 That's the exact argument that's going to happen here. Now, who wins that argument? 01:52:15.300 --> 01:52:18.300 What's the right answer there? Do you know? 01:52:18.300 --> 01:52:21.300 I thought this was just a home run. 01:52:21.300 --> 01:52:26.300 That even goes into what people can post on it, so it's not peer reviewed and it's not checked by anybody before it goes up. 01:52:26.300 --> 01:52:30.300 But that really doesn't even begin to describe the many problems with what he has presented here. 01:52:30.300 --> 01:52:38.300 So let's start with this. He writes that the COVID mRNA vaccine vials were sent to him anonymously in the mail without cold packs. 01:52:38.300 --> 01:52:43.300 Oh, wait, you serious? Let me laugh even harder. 01:52:43.300 --> 01:52:46.300 I could honestly end the video right here. That is really bad. 01:52:46.300 --> 01:52:49.300 This already violates the good documentation procedure of GXP guidelines. 01:52:49.300 --> 01:52:53.300 Not only do you have no idea who handled those vials before you receive them. 01:52:53.300 --> 01:52:58.300 Now, remember the story that he told Mary was that he didn't really mean to sequence the vials. It wasn't his intention. 01:52:58.300 --> 01:53:07.300 He just wanted a standard polyA RNA to control the experiment that he was doing. 01:53:07.300 --> 01:53:17.300 But look how inconvenient that aspect of the experiment is if someone from the other side can completely make fun of it. 01:53:17.300 --> 01:53:22.300 And it's not really that bad of a critique, right? I mean, it is. 01:53:22.300 --> 01:53:34.300 You should really probably start with a fresh vial, right? You should at least know where it was or how long it wasn't chilled like. 01:53:35.300 --> 01:53:38.300 But they're clearly not stored properly if they're not even sent on cold packs. 01:53:38.300 --> 01:53:41.300 Any self-respecting scientist would immediately recognize that this is not the right way to do this experiment. 01:53:41.300 --> 01:53:46.300 A competent and self-respecting scientist would make sure that they do the experiment right and actually have vials that have documentation 01:53:46.300 --> 01:53:52.300 so that they can show who handled them before they received them, but they were stored properly and make sure that there's no funny business going on with whatever you're testing. 01:53:52.300 --> 01:53:55.300 But we're not dealing with one of those people here and I'm not ending the video here. 01:53:55.300 --> 01:54:00.300 I'm going to be thorough and look at the results that they actually obtained with these mystery garbage vials. 01:54:01.300 --> 01:54:07.300 Let's go back to what I said earlier about there being tests to determine whether or not residual materials in your drug product are actually below the regulated acceptable limit. 01:54:07.300 --> 01:54:12.300 In order to demonstrate that tests are done to quantify the levels of residual materials in the drug product. 01:54:12.300 --> 01:54:16.300 So the obvious question is, I mean, you could even make the argument that the FDA would say the same thing, right? 01:54:16.300 --> 01:54:19.300 We don't know where these vials were. You got them in the mail, they were garbage. 01:54:19.300 --> 01:54:23.300 We're not going to take your word for these. 01:54:23.300 --> 01:54:26.300 They might even say to you that that was illegal. 01:54:26.300 --> 01:54:29.300 There's a law that these are the property of the government. 01:54:29.300 --> 01:54:34.300 You're not allowed to do anything with them except to inject them in people's arms or it's against the law. 01:54:34.300 --> 01:54:35.300 It's a federal law. 01:54:35.300 --> 01:54:37.300 They could even say that. 01:54:37.300 --> 01:54:40.300 That's where we are right now. 01:54:40.300 --> 01:54:48.300 Is CHD going to put their name on this and then get accused of doing something illegal or supporting the illegal something something? 01:54:48.300 --> 01:54:50.300 I don't know. I don't know that that's going to happen. 01:54:50.300 --> 01:54:51.300 I'm not a lawyer. 01:54:51.300 --> 01:55:05.300 I'm just saying it ain't so cut and dry as let's give Kevin McCurn in a sweatshirt and hat and get him on the team and give him a baseball bat and get him up to the plate. 01:55:05.300 --> 01:55:10.300 Here is did have here actually quantify the levels of plasma DNA in the vials. 01:55:10.300 --> 01:55:12.300 Well, he tried, but he didn't really. 01:55:12.300 --> 01:55:15.300 The key figure here in his blog post is this one. 01:55:15.300 --> 01:55:17.300 This is where he tried to make a standard curve. 01:55:17.300 --> 01:55:23.300 If you want to have a standard curve made up of known values so that you can compare your unknown samples against it and actually quantify a value. 01:55:23.300 --> 01:55:37.300 So this is his attempted standard curve where he just ran some known amounts of DNA on a PCR and then on a seemingly separate PCR assay ran his material from the vaccine vials and just compared the two separate assays, which not good. 01:55:37.300 --> 01:55:38.300 You don't want to do that. 01:55:38.300 --> 01:55:41.300 You ideally want to compare them within the same assay, but there's a lot more wrong here. 01:55:41.300 --> 01:55:43.300 So let's go right to the meat of what is wrong. 01:55:43.300 --> 01:55:45.300 There's a lot of analysis missing from this standard curve. 01:55:45.300 --> 01:55:51.300 He just reports that this certain value came up around cycle 20 and seems to be fine with just mentioning that. 01:55:51.300 --> 01:55:53.300 So I analyze the data for him. 01:55:53.300 --> 01:55:57.300 Whenever you make a standard curve in a quantitative PCR experiment, there are several basic things that you really should do. 01:55:57.300 --> 01:56:01.300 Two of those basic things is calculating the linearity and efficiency of your reaction. 01:56:01.300 --> 01:56:02.300 Again, he didn't do that here. 01:56:02.300 --> 01:56:03.300 So I did it for him. 01:56:03.300 --> 01:56:07.300 The linearity of his standard curve looks fine, but the efficiency of the reaction is where he run into a problem. 01:56:07.300 --> 01:56:11.300 In any PCR, the number of molecules present should double with each cycle. 01:56:11.300 --> 01:56:14.300 And the efficiency of a quantitative PCR reaction is measuring that. 01:56:14.300 --> 01:56:16.300 It's measuring how efficient the reaction was. 01:56:16.300 --> 01:56:23.300 Usually in GXP world and just across the board, a range of 90 to 110 percent efficiency is considered acceptable. 01:56:23.300 --> 01:56:25.300 Kev's efficiency here was around 70 percent. 01:56:25.300 --> 01:56:35.300 There could be many reasons that a PCR's efficiency would be low like this, but normally those reasons will be ironed out when you're actually qualifying your standard operating procedure for your assay, which Kev didn't do. 01:56:35.300 --> 01:56:45.300 Now, because he didn't actually post his mean cycle threshold values, I didn't have precise numbers to plug into this calculator, but I judged as best as I could, and I was even as generous as possible with the decimal points. 01:56:45.300 --> 01:56:48.300 But no matter how much I played with it, I couldn't get the efficiency above 75 percent. 01:56:48.300 --> 01:56:51.300 So let's be generous and say that the efficiency of the reaction was 75 percent. 01:56:51.300 --> 01:56:55.300 In a GXP experiment, that would invalidate the entire experiment. 01:56:55.300 --> 01:56:57.300 So essentially his assay failed, and his results are unusable. 01:56:57.300 --> 01:56:58.300 And there's good reason for this. 01:56:58.300 --> 01:57:04.300 If the efficiency is low, that means that the curves on this graph here are artificially shifted to the right, which means that you're not really making a difference. 01:57:04.300 --> 01:57:06.300 You're not really measuring accurate numbers at all. 01:57:06.300 --> 01:57:08.300 Just for comparison, here are data that I pulled from one of my experiments. 01:57:08.300 --> 01:57:11.300 You can see that the efficiency is well within range, and when the arity is pretty good. 01:57:11.300 --> 01:57:12.300 This is a passing assay. 01:57:12.300 --> 01:57:13.300 This is a failing assay. 01:57:13.300 --> 01:57:20.300 Kev is trying to criticize pharmaceutical companies' manufacturing processes while not being able to meet the standards of good manufacturing procedures himself. 01:57:20.300 --> 01:57:27.300 The theme from earlier when I talked about where the samples came from of just not taking the time to do this experiment the right way is very consistent throughout this whole thing. 01:57:27.300 --> 01:57:28.300 And yeah, there's more, it gets worse. 01:57:28.300 --> 01:57:33.300 So already he's failed the good documentation procedures, and now he has failed his actual assay, his experiment. 01:57:33.300 --> 01:57:37.300 But let's forgive that and move on and analyze the data further for tending like it's valid. 01:57:37.300 --> 01:57:42.300 Because remember, he claims to have found DNA in amounts that are orders of magnitude higher than what the regulatory limits set. 01:57:42.300 --> 01:57:44.300 So did he actually find that much DNA? 01:57:44.300 --> 01:57:46.300 Well, no, he didn't care ready for this one. 01:57:46.300 --> 01:57:49.300 In order to calculate how much DNA you actually have in your drug product, you have to do a few things. 01:57:49.300 --> 01:57:56.300 Once you have your standard curve and you're unknown plotted against it, it depends whether or not your standard curve is measuring copies or gram amounts. 01:57:56.300 --> 01:57:58.300 Kev's standard curve here is in gram amounts, and that's fine. 01:57:58.300 --> 01:57:59.300 We can work with that. 01:57:59.300 --> 01:58:03.300 And so I did, I put all the math involved here into a Google Excel sheet that you can access and look at yourself. 01:58:03.300 --> 01:58:04.300 It's in the description below. 01:58:04.300 --> 01:58:05.300 So go check that out. 01:58:05.300 --> 01:58:06.300 You want to check my math? 01:58:06.300 --> 01:58:18.300 But to make this as simple as possible, if I am as generous as possible, and I assume that all of the DNA copies that he has measured in this experiment are representing full-length intact plasmid, the total gram amount in a single dose of COVID vaccine would be 81 nanograms. 01:58:18.300 --> 01:58:21.300 So that's not orders of magnitude higher than regulatory limits. 01:58:21.300 --> 01:58:24.300 But we're not dealing with full-length intact plasmid here. 01:58:24.300 --> 01:58:30.300 Again, remember what I said about the manufacturing process, where after the mRNA is made, the DNA gets chopped up and mostly removed from the drug product. 01:58:30.300 --> 01:58:32.300 The DNA is going to be in pieces. 01:58:32.300 --> 01:58:36.300 So normally what people would do is look at the average length size of DNA in the final product. 01:58:36.300 --> 01:58:38.300 This can be done by doing what's called an electroph diagram. 01:58:38.300 --> 01:58:39.300 Kev actually did one. 01:58:39.300 --> 01:58:43.300 And he shows that most of the DNA in the vial is fragmented. 01:58:43.300 --> 01:58:44.300 In fact, it's very short. 01:58:44.300 --> 01:58:46.300 About 100 base pairs is the biggest peak that he gets. 01:58:46.300 --> 01:58:50.300 The full-length plasmid is going to be on the order of 15,000 bases. 01:58:50.300 --> 01:58:52.300 Okay, so this is a false argument, right? 01:58:52.300 --> 01:58:54.300 We also said this earlier. 01:58:54.300 --> 01:58:57.300 The idea that you need the whole plasmid is not the deal. 01:58:57.300 --> 01:59:12.300 The deal is that you need a meaningful size of DNA that's not supposed to be there, that it gives a potential for this integration or potential for mRNA production or potential for translocation to the nucleus. 01:59:12.300 --> 01:59:17.300 Some additional problem because of the DNA being there. 01:59:18.300 --> 01:59:25.300 So he's kind of, you know, making a crappy argument here that we can't find any full plasmid so it's no big deal. 01:59:25.300 --> 01:59:37.300 And this is kind of in parallel, but the flip side to Kevin and Buckhalter's argument that the smaller these pieces are, the more active ends there are, and that's kind of like carpet bombing the genome. 01:59:37.300 --> 01:59:40.300 Now, let's just listen. 01:59:40.300 --> 01:59:48.300 So while Kev's own results show that most of the DNA is fragmented, he doesn't show an average base pair length, which is what you would use to calculate how much DNA you actually have. 01:59:48.300 --> 02:00:00.300 So I looked at some historical data for similar biological products and similar electropharium curves, and I think 800 to 1,000 base pairs is a good average to estimate for average base pair length in this sample. 02:00:00.300 --> 02:00:04.300 I'll be generous and say 1,000 base pairs is the average length, so knowing that and knowing how many... 02:00:04.300 --> 02:00:12.300 That we know is wrong from Buckhalter's estimation. The smallest... the pieces are really much tinier than that, so this is wrong. 02:00:12.300 --> 02:00:20.300 This is definitely, at least from the perspective of trying to debunk Kevin and Buckhalter's work, this is wrong. 02:00:20.300 --> 02:00:38.300 And so you shouldn't be surprised. I'm not surprised that the debunk and his team or his helpers are going to get some of this incorrect, or at least represented disingenuously by saying that the average length of the double stranded plasma is 1,000 base pairs. 02:00:38.300 --> 02:00:49.300 I'm pretty sure Kevin didn't say that, and I'm pretty sure that Buckhalter actually measured them with the nanopore sequencing, and we could probably go back and look. 02:00:49.300 --> 02:01:00.300 But I think that I think that was also, they were much, much tinier, and that was Buckhalter's full argument was that they were so small, and that's what makes them not work. 02:01:00.300 --> 02:01:03.300 It's going to take me a while to find that. I'll just keep it plain. 02:01:03.300 --> 02:01:10.300 Because you measured in the actual QPCR reaction, you can calculate the nanogram amount of DNA, which comes out to five nanograms. 02:01:10.300 --> 02:01:13.300 That's about how much DNA Kev actually measured in this experiment. 02:01:13.300 --> 02:01:15.300 He keeps calling him Kev. 02:01:15.300 --> 02:01:18.300 He keeps calling him Kev. That to me is a little weird. 02:01:18.300 --> 02:01:22.300 I've never called him Kev, and I've actually had him on my stream. 02:01:22.300 --> 02:01:28.300 I had a good friend when I was a kid, though, Kevin. I used to call Kev a lot, but... 02:01:28.300 --> 02:01:35.300 On multiple levels, and was done on mystery vials with no documentation history, and he thought that this was a big find. 02:01:35.300 --> 02:01:40.300 Okay, so moving on a little bit, that five nanogram amount? 02:01:40.300 --> 02:01:47.300 Remember, that is me being as generous as possible with the numbers, and also ignoring the fact that his QPCR efficiency failed, which means that his standard curve is... 02:01:47.300 --> 02:01:52.300 Actually shifted to the left, which means that his samples are going to be an even lower gram amount on that standard curve. 02:01:52.300 --> 02:01:57.300 So, if this experiment was done the right way, you would probably get an even lower gram amount than what is shown here. 02:01:57.300 --> 02:02:02.300 So how do we know that Kev is wrong without even doing any of this analysis of his garbage data? 02:02:02.300 --> 02:02:06.300 We know because, again, regulatory bodies do this for us, and we've seen the results. 02:02:06.300 --> 02:02:10.300 For example, here's a summary of COVID vaccine batch release information from Australia. 02:02:10.300 --> 02:02:15.300 These vials were made by Pfizer, tested in-house by them, released by the regulatory body, and then went to Australia. 02:02:15.300 --> 02:02:19.300 And their regulatory body tested it themselves, and found that it passed all of the criteria. 02:02:19.300 --> 02:02:26.300 That means that all of the residual plasmid, the hostel DNA, the hostel proteins, the endotoxin, everything was below the acceptable limit, meaning that it was in trace amounts. 02:02:26.300 --> 02:02:28.300 In other words, practically nothing there. 02:02:28.300 --> 02:02:36.300 So either there's a global conspiracy among pharmaceutical companies and regulatory bodies all over the world, everyone's lying, or Kev just has no idea what he's doing. 02:02:36.300 --> 02:02:38.300 I think it's the latter. 02:02:38.300 --> 02:02:42.300 So you might think that that's the end of this video, but, oh no, there's more, it gets worse. 02:02:42.300 --> 02:02:47.300 So after blogging about these findings, Kev went on to say that these findings have health implications. 02:02:47.300 --> 02:02:57.300 He went on to claim that a promoter, which is a DNA sequence that sits in front of a gene on DNA and helps the DNA actually get read by cellular machinery, is somehow going to cause cancer. 02:02:57.300 --> 02:03:08.300 Yeah, he thinks that a promoter is somehow going to get into your cell nucleus and integrate itself into your DNA and just happen to integrate in front of a gene that, if misregulated, would contribute to cancer. 02:03:08.300 --> 02:03:11.300 And this is exactly what I just said. 02:03:11.300 --> 02:03:17.300 So parts he gets right, parts he gets wrong, parts he gets right again. 02:03:17.300 --> 02:03:20.300 It's exactly the bamboozlement. 02:03:20.300 --> 02:03:38.300 It's exactly how it always happens with Rogan, with Weinstein, with with Robert Malone and Steven Hadfield, with Rick Bright, with Tony Fauci, with EcoHealth Alliance, with Bobby Kennedy, with everyone. 02:03:39.300 --> 02:03:44.300 It's extraordinary how nobody can seem to get it straight. 02:03:44.300 --> 02:03:49.300 And they all make catastrophic errors when it comes to the faith. 02:03:49.300 --> 02:03:55.300 The faith in a novel virus, the faith in a million people dying and a million people could have been saved. 02:03:55.300 --> 02:04:02.300 The faith in the RNA and that it did something, the faith in gain of function and that a virus will come again. 02:04:03.300 --> 02:04:12.300 So let's argue about contamination of the shot with CDNA derived from the process to that they lied about. 02:04:17.300 --> 02:04:24.300 You know, this would be a pretty stupid idea if there were no evidence of random external promoters integrating themselves into your DNA. 02:04:24.300 --> 02:04:25.300 There isn't. 02:04:25.300 --> 02:04:30.300 It would be doubly stupid if we weren't regularly exposed to DNA viruses that have promoters in their genomes. 02:04:30.300 --> 02:04:36.300 We are just like anti-vaxxers who have come before him, who have tried to fear monger to the public about imaginary contaminations in vaccines. 02:04:36.300 --> 02:04:37.300 He's doing it again. 02:04:37.300 --> 02:04:38.300 And in a really bad way. 02:04:38.300 --> 02:04:44.300 So in summary, the experiments that claim to show DNA contamination in COVID vaccines are very sloppily done. 02:04:44.300 --> 02:04:47.300 Because they're so poorly done, they're not even considered valid by regulatory standards. 02:04:47.300 --> 02:04:49.300 And we actually analyze the invalid data. 02:04:49.300 --> 02:04:53.300 We see that it's actually consistent with the levels being below regulatory limits. 02:04:53.300 --> 02:04:56.300 And on top of all that, what Kev has done might be illegal. 02:04:56.300 --> 02:05:03.300 According to federal law, COVID vaccines are the property of the federal government and can only be used, administered, or handled by approved bodies. 02:05:03.300 --> 02:05:07.300 I don't think that Kev's lab is an approved body for handling federal property. 02:05:07.300 --> 02:05:09.300 So, yeah, it might be illegal. 02:05:09.300 --> 02:05:10.300 More on that later, maybe. 02:05:10.300 --> 02:05:11.300 Anyway, that's going to do it for this week's video. 02:05:11.300 --> 02:05:12.300 That was pretty fun for me. 02:05:12.300 --> 02:05:14.300 And thank you so much for watching. 02:05:14.300 --> 02:05:15.300 I really do appreciate it. 02:05:15.300 --> 02:05:19.300 If you've enjoyed this video, then don't forget to like it and subscribe so that you can catch me next week, where I'll be debunking some more. 02:05:20.300 --> 02:05:26.300 So, don't forget, there's another one because, of course, that was the first preprint. 02:05:26.300 --> 02:05:28.300 And now this is the second preprint. 02:05:28.300 --> 02:05:29.300 And he did it again. 02:05:29.300 --> 02:05:32.300 Yes, he did it again. 02:05:37.300 --> 02:05:40.300 Support what the author was claiming in the slightest. 02:05:40.300 --> 02:05:45.300 Now, there's another preprint by the same author claiming the same thing, that there's DNA contamination. 02:05:45.300 --> 02:05:47.300 And now he's got a Carnegie Mellon sweater. 02:05:47.300 --> 02:05:50.300 Are far above the allowable FDA limits. 02:05:50.300 --> 02:05:53.300 And it's just as wrong and sloppy as the first one. 02:05:53.300 --> 02:05:56.300 But a lot of you have been asking me to debunk it, so here we go. 02:05:56.300 --> 02:06:01.300 I will tell you exactly how this paper is so sloppy that it is practically useless, again. 02:06:01.300 --> 02:06:07.300 And I will tell you everything you need to know to understand why this story is wrong to begin with. 02:06:07.300 --> 02:06:09.300 Just for those who don't know, this is a preprint. 02:06:09.300 --> 02:06:11.300 That means it has not been peer reviewed. 02:06:11.300 --> 02:06:12.300 But that's not why it's wrong. 02:06:12.300 --> 02:06:14.300 So, let's get into what makes it wrong. 02:06:14.300 --> 02:06:19.300 Before we get to the data, I'm just going to jump the gun a little bit and tell you why this whole idea was wrong to begin with. 02:06:19.300 --> 02:06:26.300 Every single biologic or drug that uses biological materials in the manufacturing process needs to go through certain quality control standards in order to get FDA approval. 02:06:26.300 --> 02:06:30.300 And each subsequent batch that goes out to the public also needs to pass those same quality control standards. 02:06:30.300 --> 02:06:33.300 This is a whole regulatory area called good manufacturing practice, and it is global. 02:06:33.300 --> 02:06:39.300 Flashing across your screen right now are just some of the tests that each and every COVID mRNA vaccine batch had to pass before it went out to the public. 02:06:39.300 --> 02:06:44.300 This includes quantifying residual DNA left by the plasmid. That is used in the manufacturing process to make the mRNA. 02:06:44.300 --> 02:06:46.300 These tests are done both by the manufacturers and also by... 02:06:46.300 --> 02:06:48.300 That's funny. That's what you call contract research. 02:06:48.300 --> 02:06:49.300 That's funny. 02:06:49.300 --> 02:06:51.300 The results are then reviewed by regulatory bodies before the loss. 02:06:51.300 --> 02:06:58.300 The title of that one was proposed testing for prasmin DNA prior to release. 02:06:58.300 --> 02:07:02.300 It says proposed testing. 02:07:02.300 --> 02:07:05.300 So he's kind of misrepresenting this. 02:07:05.300 --> 02:07:09.300 Flying residual DNA left by the plasmid. That is used in the manufacturing process to make the mRNA. 02:07:09.300 --> 02:07:13.300 These tests are done both by the manufacturers and also by third parties, which are called contract research organizations. 02:07:13.300 --> 02:07:16.300 The results are then reviewed by regulatory bodies before the loss can go out to the public. 02:07:16.300 --> 02:07:17.300 Each test is qualified... 02:07:17.300 --> 02:07:18.300 There's an Australian... 02:07:18.300 --> 02:07:19.300 Is qualified in... 02:07:19.300 --> 02:07:21.300 Not sure that happened in America. 02:07:21.300 --> 02:07:30.300 The assay itself and the reagents take significant effort to demonstrate that they are actually measuring what the test is designed to measure and that it can demonstrate purity or contamination or lack thereof in whatever the context may be. 02:07:30.300 --> 02:07:32.300 The point is there is a lot of work that goes into this. 02:07:32.300 --> 02:07:34.300 A lot of people do these tests and a lot of regulatory bodies all over the world. 02:07:34.300 --> 02:07:35.300 Look at the results. 02:07:35.300 --> 02:07:40.300 So if these results are going to be overturned, then you need something of equal rigor to overturn them. 02:07:40.300 --> 02:07:43.300 And these preprints are nowhere near that level of rigor. 02:07:43.300 --> 02:07:54.300 It does really seem like the only thing he has to stand on is the idea that the SV40 promoter was removed from the EMA document that was submitted to Canada and to the European Union. 02:07:54.300 --> 02:08:01.300 And this allows them to title that video intent to deceive. 02:08:02.300 --> 02:08:06.300 Other than that, it doesn't seem as though there's a tremendous amount of evidence. 02:08:06.300 --> 02:08:18.300 They said that they were trying to correlate the amount of DNA in different lots to the outcomes, the VAERS outcomes. 02:08:18.300 --> 02:08:20.300 But we didn't see any of that data. 02:08:20.300 --> 02:08:22.300 We didn't hear any about that data. 02:08:22.300 --> 02:08:27.300 We didn't see how they quantified the difference between different lots. 02:08:28.300 --> 02:08:30.300 And how those quantifications were done. 02:08:30.300 --> 02:08:31.300 We didn't see that at all. 02:08:31.300 --> 02:08:36.300 He just mentioned that it happened that Jessica Rose did it. 02:08:36.300 --> 02:08:44.300 But that's a whole nother ball game quantifying the contamination across lots is very different. 02:08:44.300 --> 02:08:51.300 Apparently they had like 25 vials or something like that, right? 02:08:52.300 --> 02:08:55.300 I'm not sure they've been qualified as being of the quality of like an undergraduate project, to be honest. 02:08:55.300 --> 02:08:58.300 Anyway, let's now look at the preprints and what they show or what they claim to show. 02:08:58.300 --> 02:09:05.300 In this new preprint, again, what they're looking at are what they claim to be COVID mRNA vaccine vials, and they are testing the liquid inside of them for residual DNA contamination. 02:09:05.300 --> 02:09:11.300 They're doing this by using QPCR, which is the gold standard by which DNA and other nucleic acids are quantified in this context. 02:09:11.300 --> 02:09:13.300 But like the first preprint, there are still significant issues. 02:09:13.300 --> 02:09:17.300 If you haven't watched my previous video on this topic, I highly recommend you go check that out because I explain it all in much more detail. 02:09:17.300 --> 02:09:22.300 But in their first preprint, their QPCR reaction failed efficiency, which off the bat means it is totally invalid. 02:09:22.300 --> 02:09:27.300 And by the way, anybody who publishes QPCR reaction or tries to publish one, that failed efficiency is doing incredibly sloppy work. 02:09:27.300 --> 02:09:35.300 I can't stress that enough. It's a huge mistake that an undergraduate shouldn't make, let alone someone trying to publish a preprint that is trying to take down all of the pharmaceutical and regulatory industries. 02:09:35.300 --> 02:09:38.300 In any case, in this new preprint, their efficiency was much better. Very glad they learned that part. 02:09:38.300 --> 02:09:44.300 However, just like the first preprint, they are miscalculating the amount of DNA in their sample, and as a result, hugely overestimating how much DNA is there. 02:09:44.300 --> 02:09:48.300 Funnily enough, this overestimation still puts them below the FDA regulatory limit. 02:09:48.300 --> 02:09:52.300 Yeah, they admit and fully show that their measurements were below FDA regulatory limit. 02:09:52.300 --> 02:09:58.300 Anyway, the correct way to calculate how much DNA you have in your samples in this context is to use QPCR to get a copy number. 02:09:58.300 --> 02:10:04.300 Once you have a copy number of how many copies of DNA you have in your sample, you can then use that copy number to calculate a gram amount. 02:10:04.300 --> 02:10:09.300 But remember, as I explained in my previous video, any trace amounts of DNA that are going to be in the COVID mRNA vaccines are going to be in fragments. 02:10:09.300 --> 02:10:17.300 That's because the plasmid used for manufacturing is digested by enzymes called DNases, and then most of those fragments are removed away from the mRNA before it's made into the drug product. 02:10:17.300 --> 02:10:18.300 Because you have the copy number... 02:10:18.300 --> 02:10:26.300 How are they removed away? See, that's the argument that Buck Halter and McCurnan are making is that you can't remove them. 02:10:26.300 --> 02:10:35.300 They're just fragmented, and then they stay there. He's just hand-waving here, which is very interesting. 02:10:36.300 --> 02:10:45.300 But what I'm trying to set up for you is the idea that this is already ready to go, like within days. 02:10:45.300 --> 02:10:52.300 And so there is something happening here besides a sudden finding of DNA. 02:10:52.300 --> 02:10:56.300 It's possible that this DNA is harmless. 02:10:56.300 --> 02:11:00.300 It's possible that this DNA is meaningless. 02:11:00.300 --> 02:11:12.300 It's possible that it's just another piece of the nasty puzzle that is transfection is not a product that we can make suitable for healthy humans. 02:11:12.300 --> 02:11:17.300 And this is just one of the many details of that story. 02:11:18.300 --> 02:11:32.300 That when we emphasize it as the detail, when we emphasize it as the camels, you know, the straw that breaks the camel's back, we are actually overemphasizing its real significance, I think. 02:11:33.300 --> 02:11:46.300 And giving the door an opening to people like this who can kind of pounce on it and exaggerate that to the point where all of the other legitimate concerns get lost in this. 02:11:49.300 --> 02:11:57.300 It's 10.35. It's been two hours and ten minutes. I'm going to put this in the chat for you to watch if you want to. 02:11:57.300 --> 02:12:02.300 I'm not going to watch any more of this guy because I've already watched one and you get the idea of what he was doing. 02:12:02.300 --> 02:12:07.300 You get the idea of what he was trying to do. 02:12:07.300 --> 02:12:15.300 And I just want to finish up with a little summary really quick as long as my voice is still working. 02:12:15.300 --> 02:12:20.300 So thanks for watching that. This is a group of people that has been manipulating us. 02:12:20.300 --> 02:12:35.300 A couple of days ago, I watched a stream of somebody that I used to really enjoy named Huberman, who is a professor at Stanford, a neurobiologist, only to find out through my own loving wife that actually he's part of the intellectual dark web to and I was a dork for not knowing it. 02:12:37.300 --> 02:12:46.300 So they misled us about the potential for pandemics to be in the laboratory and that was that noise. 02:12:47.300 --> 02:12:53.300 That was on my microphone outside. It sounded like somebody jumped on it. 02:12:53.300 --> 02:12:57.300 And also the fact that we could stitch things together. 02:12:57.300 --> 02:13:04.300 But the illusion of consensus with regard to this, I hope you understand is very specific. 02:13:04.300 --> 02:13:15.300 The illusion of consensus is that the worst case scenario now or in the future is a gain of function laboratory bio weapon release leak. 02:13:16.300 --> 02:13:17.300 Accident. 02:13:19.300 --> 02:13:25.300 And so it's not only the illusion of consensus isn't that gain of function is real. 02:13:25.300 --> 02:13:32.300 The illusion of consensus is that gain of function is a potential source of a disaster. 02:13:33.300 --> 02:13:41.300 And that inside of that potential source of disaster are people who actually want to create the potential for that disaster. 02:13:42.300 --> 02:13:45.300 And there is a consensus across left and right. 02:13:46.300 --> 02:13:51.300 High in government secret meetings everywhere that this is the truth. 02:13:52.300 --> 02:14:08.300 And people like Kevin McCann and George Webb and Paul Cottrell were involved intimately in ceding this narrative in 2020 when it wasn't yet right to put it on television. 02:14:08.300 --> 02:14:26.300 When it wasn't yet right to put it on the intellectual dark web, there were people way, way out in the fringes that were already driven, promoted and encouraged to talk about the worst case scenario of 1 billion dead because of the release of a bio weapon. 02:14:27.300 --> 02:14:39.300 And that consensus was used as a seed to terrify people and to try and solve this mystery of where is the mystery virus. 02:14:40.300 --> 02:14:53.300 And the people on television and the people in social media and these people creating this illusion of consensus about the faith wants you to believe that excess death is the mystery virus. 02:14:54.300 --> 02:15:03.300 I mean a million 200,000 people so far have been killed in America by COVID means that all the excess deaths were due to COVID. 02:15:05.300 --> 02:15:14.300 And the magic trick, the enchantment that they are pulling there is that they are not doing the math correctly because if you want to know who the mystery virus killed, you've got to take the excess deaths. 02:15:15.300 --> 02:15:21.300 And then you've got to subtract the people that we didn't resuscitate in New York and elsewhere to prevent spread. 02:15:22.300 --> 02:15:26.300 You've got to subtract all the people that we ventilated to prevent spread. 02:15:26.300 --> 02:15:32.300 You've got to subtract all the people that we didn't give antibiotics to because antibiotics don't work on a viral pneumonia. 02:15:33.300 --> 02:15:39.300 You've got to subtract all the people that we didn't give steroids at the right time to because steroids are inappropriate for COVID. 02:15:40.300 --> 02:15:45.300 You've got to subtract all the people that got remdesivir, deteriorated and died from it. 02:15:46.300 --> 02:15:53.300 You've got to subtract all the opioid deaths that were extra because they were also roped in as part of the excess deaths. 02:15:55.300 --> 02:16:01.300 And you've got to subtract all the death certificate fraud that was driven by the PCR and driven by the financial incentives. 02:16:02.300 --> 02:16:04.300 And when you do that, there's nothing left. 02:16:05.300 --> 02:16:09.300 And that's why all the people that are preserving the faith don't do that math. 02:16:10.300 --> 02:16:19.300 That's why all the people who are preserving the faith don't talk about the PCR fraud, the lateral flow fraud, the variants and all the other crap about the virus because then you have to do the math. 02:16:24.300 --> 02:16:31.300 And if you do the math, you dispel this faith, the faith of a novel virus that millions died and were saved. 02:16:34.300 --> 02:16:36.300 The gain of function is real and a virus will come again. 02:16:37.300 --> 02:16:42.300 And that narrative is really, that's how they did it. That's what this faith is codified. 02:16:43.300 --> 02:16:51.300 The UN codified the faith of a novel virus in a PCR test with financial incentive in the US was ready to act on this plan. 02:16:52.300 --> 02:16:56.300 The only way that the molecular biology could be reels if they used an infectious clone. 02:16:57.300 --> 02:17:05.300 And the goal is the total surrender of individual sovereignty and enforcement of a global fundamental inversion from basic human rights to basic granted permissions. 02:17:07.300 --> 02:17:11.300 It's an illusion of consensus about this faith. 02:17:13.300 --> 02:17:25.300 An illusion of consensus that was started in 2019 with the intellectual dark web, including Brett Weinstein, Eric Weinstein, Sam Harris, Jordan Peterson, the whole nine yards. 02:17:26.300 --> 02:17:41.300 And then it was ceded with Rand Paul and Tony Fauci lying and fighting and that was ceded by the narratives and ceded by the proximal origin paper and the big dispute about what language they used and how dismissive they were. 02:17:42.300 --> 02:17:49.300 And then by the the Shenxi Lee science paper and then Omicron came out in South America and everybody thought it was a white hat and now we're here. 02:17:50.300 --> 02:17:55.300 And for three years, all the people that have been promoted on social media have never questioned the faith. 02:17:56.300 --> 02:17:58.300 Elon Musk has never questioned the faith. 02:17:59.300 --> 02:18:05.300 Peter Teals never questioned the faith. The Weinstein brothers have never questioned the faith. Sam Harris loves the faith. 02:18:06.300 --> 02:18:13.300 Tony Fauci is the priest. It's all people keeping us in this illusion of consensus of a mystery to solve. 02:18:14.300 --> 02:18:18.300 And by accepting the mystery and trying to solve it, you accept its premises. 02:18:19.300 --> 02:18:27.300 Once you've accepted its premises, then they can change your mind and give you an illusion of consensus that we don't know what's going on and then doctors behave stupid for three years. 02:18:28.300 --> 02:18:32.300 And now we have the excess deaths that we can invert and call a disease. 02:18:36.300 --> 02:18:37.300 That's what this was. 02:18:38.300 --> 02:18:47.300 We were solved into salt. We were fooled into solving the mystery and this mystery is really just a conflated background signal they lied. 02:18:49.300 --> 02:19:00.300 The faith is a lie. The diagnostics are lies. Their fidelity is a lie because it was an endemic background and it doesn't really matter what it was. 02:19:01.300 --> 02:19:07.300 But I think the best explanation is probably an infectious clone because the protocols were murder and transfection is not medicine. 02:19:08.300 --> 02:19:16.300 They might have transfected some people with something that wasn't an infectious clone, maybe just a spike protein or, you know, I don't know, anthrax or something like whatever you want to make up. 02:19:17.300 --> 02:19:23.300 But there are definitely, this is not the solution. It was a conflated background signal because the faith is a lie. 02:19:24.300 --> 02:19:29.300 That's kind of, that's kind of where I'm at. It's kind of how I feel. 02:19:30.300 --> 02:19:44.300 And I think that the players don't address the PCR fraud and all of the fraud about the virus and about replication competence and about transfection in general as we talk today specifically, and they never talk about natural immunity. 02:19:45.300 --> 02:19:53.300 I'm the only person, I don't want to toot my own horn, but I'm the only person who spent hours and hours talking about immunology. 02:19:54.300 --> 02:20:12.300 I'm the only person who has at least three five hour immunology streams under his belt in the last three years. Nobody else. Nobody else. Nobody else. Not one of these people. None of them. 02:20:15.300 --> 02:20:24.300 And that's because we are at a time point where they want your data. So they don't, there's no incentive to teach you this biology so that you understand its sacredness. 02:20:24.300 --> 02:20:34.300 The incentive is for you to think that it's just not even worth protecting or not even worth respecting. We're on the verge of cracking it. 02:20:35.300 --> 02:20:45.300 Ladies and gentlemen, intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb, transfection is not immunization. 02:20:45.300 --> 02:21:06.300 Thank you guys for joining me. 02:21:07.300 --> 02:21:16.300 It has been a pleasure to be here tonight. My voice held out pretty well. It feels pretty good. I guess I'm going to get a good night's sleep tonight. 02:21:16.300 --> 02:21:28.300 I don't know. It's been 50 in a row. If I make it to the doctor and the doctor says I can't talk for a while, then it's just going to stop. 02:21:28.300 --> 02:21:38.300 But the worst case scenario starting on November 2nd through November 5th, I will be off and back on November 6th. 02:21:38.300 --> 02:21:48.300 Just so you know, there is going to be a break to this 50. We're not going to get to 400 just yet, but the streak is alive and I will see you tomorrow. Thanks guys. 02:21:58.300 --> 02:22:27.300 Thank you so much for joining me. 02:22:27.300 --> 02:22:45.300 I'm going to have you on soon, Albert. I promise I'm going to have you on soon. Things are really busy behind the scenes, so I'm having no guests right now. It's nothing to do with you. I just need to clear my schedule.