Oh, look, JC on the bike was timed out by Risa.
Oh, time out JC on the bike.
JC on the bike.
It's JC on the bike.
Yeah.
Well, I'm wise enough to know when a chump needs banning.
And I know just the one.
Look it round.
It's JC on the bike.
Who says Vader didn't study music in college?
really.
Do it for me.
Do it to save the white race.
Hey what's up guys, it's Soph here, just getting ready for the pride parade.
Oh hey, didn't see you there.
I'm just here getting ready to go to the pride parade considering I'm going to a GSA meet pretty soon.
So when you're kind of, you know, playing around with a gun as you do, you should always be playing around with it.
You want to keep your finger directly on the trigger so you're always ready in case any sort of homosexual person strolls by.
I need to see you holding the gun like this, okay?
I want you to take yourself out.
The way you got to do it,
You gotta take your gun like so, thusly, and, uh, you know, shoot yourself in the back of the head.
So guys, one of the classic ways to make your whole thing more comical is, uh, going akimbo.
Uh, very impractical, very un-tactical.
You wanna make sure you're really close together before you start hitting each other.
If you think about it, you know, if we're defining vaccine really liberally, and these COVID vaccines are vaccines, the flu vaccine is vaccine, okay.
But actually, they're kind of cheating when they're calling these things vaccines.
And, you know, anything with really rapidly fading efficacy, such that you need shots within a year, you know, Canada's saying nine months, is as actually J.J.
Cooey's insistence, and I think he's right, on calling them transfections rather than vaccines.
So SARS-1 and its descendants have gone endemic.
That's what I was just saying.
The current PCR test is not specific for SARS-CoV-2.
And that is known because it's the German company that originally produced it knows that they've chosen a short sequence that they think is relevant.
It is a short sequence that just comes from one of the open reading frame one proteins.
We are being duped by a nonspecific test and we would have gotten these numbers or numbers very similar to them with or without this pandemic.
Because we've never looked for SARS viruses as they are spread through our population.
We've just never looked.
Nobody sampled for it until this year.
That's a huge point to make.
Because the SARS virus originally appeared in 2003 and disappeared in 2004.
But it didn't really disappear, it just became not a problem.
descendants of that virus of various virulence and infectivity have circulated in the time since.
They didn't disappear.
And this test is not specific for any one of them.
And no one has ever done a study about how many descendants there are, how many people are infected, how many animals have been infected by it, etc.
So
The next thing that I want to say is our lack of biological knowledge and the general poor health of America, of the American people, is being used to create the crisis they need to divide and conquer us, to ruin maybe America, I don't know, crash the dollar, I don't know, steal the rest of what limited treasury value we have left, I don't know.
But I know for sure
that they are combining our lack of biological knowledge and our general society's lack of good health and access to health care to create a crisis to usher in all kinds of changes that would otherwise never be necessary, and more importantly, never be possible.
Just yesterday morning, they let me know you were gone.
Suzanne, the plans they made put an end to you.
I walked out this morning and I wrote down this song.
I just can't remember who to send it to.
I've seen fire and I've seen rain.
I've seen sunny days that I thought would never end.
I've seen lonely times when I could not find a friend.
But I always thought that I'd see you again.
Won't you look down upon me, Jesus?
You gotta help me make a stand.
Just got to see me through another day.
My body's aching and my time is at hand.
I won't make it any other way.
Oh, I've seen fire and I've seen rain.
Seen sunny days that I thought would never end.
I've seen lonely times when I could not find a friend.
But I always thought that I'd see you again.
Been walking my mind to an easy time.
My back turned towards the sun.
Lord knows when the cold wind blows, it'll turn your head around.
Well, there's hours of time on the telephone line to talk about things to come.
Sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground.
Oh, I've seen fire and I've seen rain.
I've seen sunny days that I thought would never end.
I've seen lonely times when I could not find
But I always thought that I'd see you, baby, one more time again.
Thought I'd see you one more time again.
There's just a few things coming my way this time around now.
Thought I'd see you.
He's scheduled for 60 minutes next.
He's going on French, British, Italian, Japanese television.
People everywhere are starting to listen to him.
It's embarrassing.
And now your starting lineup.
No, I won't do that.
Sorry.
This is Giga Home Biological Throwback Thursday with Jessica Rose, virologist.
Very excited for this show.
It is throwback Thursday.
We're going to try and go back in time on Thursdays to see if we can put some meat on the bones of this illusion that they created.
and that is going to require some work.
It's going to require some archiving to realize what is perceived to be true is not true and how they did it.
In order to break this enchantment we're actually going to have to
You're going to have to pay attention to 2020 and 2021.
And as much as I want to move on and teach everybody the virology, I am a neurobiologist, a biologist by training for many, many years.
The name Gigaohm Biological comes from gigaohm seals, which are the electrical seal that I used to make when I was a biologist depicted in this
little diagram here.
Ladies and gentlemen, weaponized piles of money have convinced us to argue about the origins of a novel virus or multiple shooters and participating in the argument accepts the premise of a novel virus or multiple shooters by default.
And we are governed by a theater that spans from mainstream media to social media of all kinds.
And this includes all sides of every mythology that we're currently participating in.
If you want to break out, this is the biology that will help you break out.
And I hope that I can help you discover and understand this virology over the rest of the summer.
Welcome to the show.
This is Gigaohm Biological, a high resistance, low noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
Intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is pretty dumb.
And transfection in healthy humans was always criminally negligent and RNA cannot pandemic because viruses aren't pattern integrities.
They just can't do those kinds of things.
And oftentimes the misconstruing of whatever virology claims to be virology as life
is really the main bamboozlement.
They are trying to convince you that RNA molecules are capable of doing things that they cannot do.
And it doesn't matter if you start with the top phrase or you start with the middle phrase or you start with the bottom phrase.
These are all places where you can succinctly open the door to a discussion that otherwise wouldn't be opened because these phrases force people to ask correct questions rather than ask these
peripherally unrelated questions.
Thank you.
Thank you, thank you everybody.
Thank you, thank you, thank you everyone.
I love you too.
Thank you, thank you.
So I just want to be clear, first of all, the multiple shooters thing, what it does, first and foremost, and try to get your head around this, it completely absolves everyone who meddled with that kid, everyone that was involved in getting that kid to show up on that roof.
Don't forget that according to a lot of eyewitnesses, that kid threw his rifle to the side, away from him.
And it presumably looked like he was hoping he wouldn't get shot, that they would take him alive.
Now, if you just take that one little piece of the story that nobody wants to talk about the boy, the boy is from four blocks away from my house.
The boy was obviously somehow or another via social media convinced to go there, even though they say that he had no social media signature at all, which would be exceedingly odd for a 20 year old man in Bethel Park,
Pennsylvania.
These same people that want us to talk about the audio files which indicate multiple shooters don't want to talk about the only shooter for sure that we know was on the scene, seen by multiple people, and even had a gun that he fired.
Nobody cares about how he got there.
Nobody cares if Soph and Sasha and her handlers were responsible for it.
Nobody cares if somebody like Soph was responsible for it.
Nobody cares if someone like Sasha and Soph were responsible for that little boy being on that young man, that young adult, that perpetual adolescent,
was on that roof.
It's no question that that kid was some kind of patsy, but that doesn't mean that the discussion about him should then be moot.
Unless of course the discussion about him would be the only way out of the cave.
I mean, these multiple shooters that are on the audio tape, how do you know that they aren't people shooting blanks with the intent purpose of giving John Cullen and Chris Martinson something to argue about?
Just like when Lee Min Yan came out in February to give something to Brett Weinstein and Chris Martinson to argue about.
The assumption that the audio files indicate multiple shooters is predicated on the fact that all those gunshots are real, all those gunshots had bullets behind them, and all those gunshots are definitely real.
Even though we know they used fake video at the beginning of the pandemic to get us to believe that people were falling down on their faces in China, that they were building a huge, huge hospital, that there was a cruise ship in New York needed.
that there were airplanes on 9-11, but somehow or another, the audiophiles are convincing enough that we have to spend weeks and hours promoting the same clown show, Bret Weinstein, John Cullen, Chris Martinson.
These are all the same show.
Chris Martinson, the retired, you know, homesteading pharmaceutical executive who was on PBS NewsHour in 2008, right before the crash to tell us that it was gonna crash.
Then was ahead on the lab leak in February.
An advisor to Brett Weinstein went to the Panama Canal with Brett Weinstein and Big Honey.
to see the invasion of America from the South a couple months ago.
Big Honey also supposedly met up with Kevin McCarron in Japan.
And now we're supposed to believe that these same people who went down to Panama to see the invasion, these same people who were sure about the lab leak, these same people who were sure about ivermectin, these same people who are sure about the DNA double-stranded contamination of the shots, and sure about Li Min Yan despite not knowing anything about her and never looking where she came from, these same people want us to fight about audiophiles and how many different shooters there are and ignore the fact that there's definitely one shooter.
who was an American, probably an innocent kid that was, over time, worked into that plan.
And the most parsimonious, least number of moving parts is that that little kid missed.
And yet the same people that got us to argue about the lab leak and argue about double-stranded DNA and argue about the lab leak coverup are getting us to argue about the audiophiles now.
The audiophiles could be real.
Sure they are.
But it's a giant, giant assumption.
And if you think about whose hands that plays into, if in the end, the only thing that was necessary for that whole plot to happen was that kid to show up.
If that kid decides to stay at home, then what are those other shooters gonna do?
Don't you understand how pivotal it is for crooks to have shown up?
And we already know that he had a drone and that he flew it over there and stuff.
This is all absolutely crazy that they have done this to us again.
We might as well go out all and stock up on toilet paper.
Look at this video and tell me that in 2020, this makes any sense.
We're happy tonight we can get gathering here and celebrate the first year of anniversary of our new federal state of China.
It is not just an event for anniversary.
Actually for our Chinese people, we know how tough, how difficult we have to overcome numerous difficulties we face to the life's race and finally
We can push the whistleblower movement, and we can make China government, Chinese Communist Party, and even China military scared of us, because we reveal the truth to the world, which they want to block, which they want to suppress, and which they want to cover up, and even take over the world.
Okay, I still see that there's a big debate going on in the chat about the reality and whether or not those shots are real or whether they were supersonic or not.
Again, you don't need to be an expert on shooting.
You need to be an expert on audio recording.
You need to be an expert on fake audio recordings.
You need to be an expert on how to find out when audio recordings are cut and things are shifted.
Because again, the default assumption is that all these audio files are real.
All these audio files are legitimate pieces of evidence, manufactured or not, you don't know.
But the assumption that all of these people are working on is that these are real audio files that represent real data from the real day, and that we can use them to discern how many shooters there are.
And all you're doing is asking questions that have nothing to do with Crooks, nothing to do with who got Crooks to show up on the scene.
And if Crooks didn't show up on the scene, what would these other shooters have done?
just like if they hadn't murdered people in New York City with supplementary oxygen, what would the national security narrative had done?
If they wouldn't have murdered people in New York City or lied about it, what would we have done?
What would have happened?
These are the questions that nobody's asking and why we have to go back to 2020.
Because this shouldn't be August, 2020, Scarlet Yan talking about the new Republic of China and it's one year anniversary.
That doesn't sound like a whistleblowing virologist to me.
You can find this video archived on my site.
For me, all for Chinese Communist Party.
Thank you.
Dr. Lee Min Yang is not only a hero to the Chinese people, not only a hero to the American people, she's a hero to all mankind.
That's quite a hug.
I never even get to hug my 14-year-old boy like that anymore.
He won't even let me get close to him like that.
I very rarely hug my wife like that, except for when she gets on an airplane, unfortunately.
What is this?
What are we seeing here?
So I don't want to spend too much time on this.
I want to get right to the work.
We need to have a new consensus about the idea that transfection in healthy humans was always criminally negligent and all these people knew it.
They knew that they had to have murder and lies in order to get away with it, in order to coerce people into accepting it, especially college age kids.
RNA cannot pandemic and all these molecular biologists know that.
And vaccine schedule in America is a criminal enterprise and all of these people know it, they just won't say it because that's their whole job.
Their whole job is to make sure that the average American, the average skilled TV watcher, the average skilled PBS news watcher,
never comes to that conclusion.
That's their job and that's why I think it's important to study these people who are on this team where they don't want to talk about 2020 and they keep saying the COVID shots are bad.
They can't find the word transfection or transformation.
They can't find the word fraud.
They can't find the word murder.
And all of them agree that we need to fear free-range RNA molecules.
And I'm particularly interested in Dr. Jessica Rose.
You can find her in lots of different places.
You can find lots of different CVs or partial CVs of hers.
If you, for example, oh, I didn't do this correctly.
Sorry.
Let me go back quick and get this out.
I want to make these animated when they come in.
Sorry.
So let me just save it quick and then I'll start it again.
The reason why I want to cover Jessica Rose is because I haven't really before.
I haven't really gone back in time to see where she first came out, when she first came out, and so I thought I would do that today.
If we build back this up from here,
We're gonna look at the orchid page from her because she has filled out an orchid page there you can actually see that she used to work in Israel and then in Newfoundland Canada and then Newfoundland Canada and then Israel and Israel so Israel Israel Canada Canada Israel and the last place She says she's at is Israel.
Although that's a postdoc.
So I don't know if that's new now Look at her publication list on on
Orchid, which is something I think you kind of have to maintain, but I'm not sure.
We can just look at some of the authors that she's recently written with.
In 2024, we have one here with Stephanie Seneff and Jessica Rose and Steve Kirsch.
Peter McCullough is possibly.
Dave Wiseman, I think is a good guy.
Josh Getzko.
Jessica Rose, here we go.
David Wiseman, Josh Getzko.
These are all Panda operators here.
So I'm not really totally down with Josh just because he was on my stream once and he knows that I presented three times at Panda, but he's actually never, ever,
ever shared my work even once.
And when he came on my show, he was talking about VAERS and stuff like that, kind of similar to what Jessica, I just don't trust Josh.
I'm very sorry if you like Josh, but I don't trust Josh.
And then we look down here again, David Wiseman, Kevin McKernan, and David Spector.
That's the guy from Canada who did their PCR tests and who actually can testify that they didn't have nested primers up there.
Let's see, Tess Laurie, I don't think she's bad, I just think she's fooled.
Here's another paper, Claire Craig.
Martin Neal, you know, that's one of the guys that I was supposed to write a virology review with, thanks to Jessica Hockett.
Norman Fenton, he might be a good guy, but he's fooled by these other people.
Josh McClellan, Joe Smalley, Josh Getzko again, Jonathan Engler.
That's the other guy from Panda that I was supposed to write a virology review with, and they just wrote the shittiest virology review ever.
And then Jessica Rose.
Martin Neal.
Norman Fenton.
Claire Craig.
Josh Getzko.
Jonathan Engler.
See what I'm talking about here?
These are all unpublished articles, but they're articles that were shared and talked about and promoted by these other authors.
Claire Craig.
Jonathan Engler.
Martin Neal.
Let's keep going.
David Wiseman, Josh Getzko, Jessica Rose.
Keep going.
Jessica Rose, Jessica Rose, Josh Getzko, Jessica Rose, Jessica Rose, Jessica Rose.
Jessica Rose, Jessica Rose, Jessica Rose, Jessica Rose.
Now, if we go back a little bit to her own CV and we look at what she did her PhD and master's thesis on, it's actually very interesting.
Her master's thesis is a dynamical systems analysis of HIV immunopathogenesis.
So she's not very skeptical about HIV, I guess, right?
She probably thinks it came from bushmeat and was isolated by Bob Gallo, right?
Just like David Baltimore says.
And then we have kinetics of chronic human viruses.
Chronic, is that like a latent virus?
Like what Judy Mikovits was talking about?
That seems to be her doctoral thesis.
I don't know if that ever got published.
Interesting.
And here's another one, the kinetic modeling of hepatitis B virus.
Is hepatitis B virus the one that, wow, that's interesting.
And so she's actually a virologist by training, even though she calls herself a immunologist and computational, but she's a computational virologist by training.
Molecular biology modeling came after.
Here we're talking about monocysteine virulence genes.
And so when we listen to this interview, I want you to listen for a few things because it's one of the first interviews we can find and it has Peter McCullough and her in it at the same time.
I want you to listen to who they mention as fellow travelers.
I want you to listen and try to identify what questions they offer up as important.
And I want you to listen for what biological ideas are touched and what are not.
They're not going to go in depth into anything, of course, because they never did.
But I want you to see very carefully.
And ask yourself, how is it possible that this is one of the first times she ever showed up and she shows up with who?
Peter McCullough.
Beatbox.
I used to listen to the Fat Boys a lot, you know, the Fat Boys are wow.
I wonder if I can find the Fat Boys on
on Spotify because the Fat Boys were hilarious.
Fat Boys, there they are.
Oh my gosh, look at that, they're right there.
I'm gonna have to listen to the Fat Boys later, that's pretty funny.
That's right.
that's really funny so anyway beatbox fat boys hilarious um let's uh let's do this uh escape oh sorry i had it all queued up here darn it losing my losing my plot here we had this ready to go too
yes so throwback thursday jessica rose the virologist in 2021 trying to understand their illusion that's the goal today um
And so let's get on with it, shall we?
Interestingly, before I start this, I just want you to hear the title of this video or this podcast is something like the Jihad Podcast or Jihad Biology or something, which is strikingly similar to a friend of ours who does the Jihad Science Show, which I find pretty funny.
Here we go, fun times.
Welcome to Truth Jihad Audio.
I'm Kevin Barrett talking with the folks who have the most to say from way outside the box of mainstream idiocy.
And today I've got two of my heroes I've been following for quite some time.
I finally got them on the show.
Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Jessica Rose.
They're both
people with very strong medical credentials who've questioned the COVID party line and gotten some pushback for their pains.
Dr. Peter McCullough is a cardiologist with a strong public health background, a master's in public health from the University of Michigan.
Jessica is a Canadian researcher who's got a bachelor's in applied math, a master's in immunology, a PhD in computational biology, and on and on and on, even more than that, but we'll just get going here.
That's pretty funny.
Peter and Jessica, how are you?
Great.
Thanks for coming.
Okay, well, it's an honor to have you.
We'll start with Peter because although both guests are having some internet issues, Peter's are worse.
So Peter, where to start here?
First, well, quickly, maybe you could introduce yourself and let us know how you ended up being somebody who's being both cheered and smeared for saying sensible things about COVID and the experimental injections.
I'm a practicing internist and cardiologist in Dallas, Texas, academic practice, spent about half my time seeing patients like yesterday and half my time in academic mode as an author and former editor and contributor.
I'm a frequent news commentator now, never thought I would be in the limelight, but I was very much prepared for it in terms of my training and background in analyzing data,
both as a clinical trialist and an epidemiologist.
I have been cheered.
There's no doubt about it.
I've testified in the U.S.
Senate and been well-received across multiple news platforms.
I've only been jeered, I think, and in fact, I know, by people with no credentials and no credibility.
And I think the jeers are about 1%, and I think the cheers are 99%.
But if you can find somebody who's credible, who's ever said a discrediting statement, I'd be happy to see it.
Well, here's a kind of humorous discrediting statement.
According to Wikipedia, you're spreading misinformation about COVID because you are not sure that people under 30 should be getting the experimental injections.
Now, I don't quite understand that.
Well, let me just say, Wikipedia
has contributors who are anonymous.
The most frequent contributor to my Wikipedia page is not me.
I should actually be writing my own Wikipedia page.
In fact, Wikipedia has locked me out.
It's someone in Illinois named the Altman.
So it's an anonymous.
uncredentialed person who's putting incorrect information on my Wikipedia page.
So Wikipedia, in my view, since it's not a biographical or autobiographical page that's credentialed or allows the individual to actually put correct information in, Wikipedia should be removed from the internet and clearly not viewed by anybody who's interested in the truth.
I agree completely.
I had a five-year battle with Wikipedia myself, and it was maddening.
They had libelous information up for five years that couldn't be taken down, sourced to an anonymous obscure blog, lying about me.
So yeah, it's completely insane.
And the idea that questioning whether people under 30 should be getting these COVID injections is also completely insane, isn't it?
Where did they come up with that?
I'm a doctor, so I decide.
not Wikipedia, but I decide.
I have the medical authority to decide and help patients judge the risks and the benefits.
The risks of the vaccines in people under 30 far outweigh any benefits that could be had even from the very beginning against the wild type strain of which the vaccines were designed to block.
So can we agree then that right now the the idea is is that we're questioning the vaccine for people under 30 but we are agreeing that the vaccine is absolutely fine for people above 30.
Can you hear that?
Can you hear it?
Make sure you hear it because that's exactly what they're saying here.
Stop lying!
I don't know what happened there, but that's really gross.
That's what we're dealing with here.
We're dealing with something very, very gross.
Now with the Omicron strain across the age spectrum, the risks, which are still there, outweigh any theoretical benefits.
And again, I'm the doctor.
I have the authority to decide and make that judgment, not anonymous Wikipedia people.
Well, I'm not a doctor, but that's sure how it looked to me, too.
I just can't imagine why anybody would be telling young people to have got even back in the bad old days of Delta.
But even then, the numbers didn't make any sense to me either.
So, Peter.
Where did this COVID thing come from?
It looks like a bioweapon, and there are various theories about that.
To my mind, even just the presumption that that's a possibility means we need to shut down biological weapons research.
Maybe you can tell us your thoughts about biological weaponry and the possible link with COVID.
That's beyond my range as a medical doctor.
I've been treating patients who are falling sick with the virus or after receiving the vaccine.
But I do would refer you and the listeners to Peter Bragan, COVID-19 and the Global Predators, We Are the Prey.
It's about a thousand references in it.
I wrote one of the introductions.
It's probably the best synthesis of where the virus came from, who are the collaborators and what are the potential motivations.
Thank you for that reference.
I will check that out.
So regarding the vaccines, it seems that there's a huge accumulation of danger signals suggesting that they are neither safe.
Well, we know they're not very effective in terms of promoting herd immunity, but we also are learning that there are a lot of reasons to think that they're unsafe.
What are the most important ones in your view?
We always consider safety first before efficacy.
So even if the vaccines were perfect against COVID, if they were unsafe, we still wouldn't use them.
So we always, we would never have somebody take an injection and be harmed.
That's completely unacceptable.
We know now from the released court-ordered Pfizer documents, Pfizer had 1,223 deaths reported to them within 90 days of release of their product.
That is completely unacceptable.
They should have pulled the product off the market at 50 deaths or before.
And by continuing to have the product on the market,
Pfizer basically defrauded the government as providing a safe and effective product and chances are if we get the Moderna and Johnson and Johnson documents we'll find the same thing.
Dr. Rose is with us and she's an expert on the vaccine adverse event reporting system that shows alarming signals as does a yellow card and the EU
uterus system, there's also the V-safe and Vigi-safe systems.
All of them show alarming, unacceptable, catastrophic deaths that occur a few days after receiving the vaccine, and then an array of non-fatal syndromes, some of them causing permanent injury, neurologic, cardiovascular, immunologic, and hematologic.
And so there you have it.
Jessica Rose is coming on the scene right now as an expert on VAERS, even though she's a virologist and a computational biologist.
Because she can crunch numbers, I guess, she's become an expert on VAERS.
And now here is Peter McCullough telling us that she's an expert on VAERS.
And he's introducing her in a way that sounds like it's a relatively new introduction.
They haven't made this appearance often, and she is not a well-known, you know, like she is now, where she can go in front of a crowd in Geneva and rap and get away with it.
And Dr. Rose, what do you think are the worst of these things?
And she's not a doctor.
So if we're calling her Dr. Rose in the presence of Dr. McCullough, that's just kind of dumb.
But we are, and we're going to keep doing it the whole podcast, which is already a problem, in my humble opinion.
Oh, well, that depends on your point of view.
But I mean, most people would think that death is the worst.
We're at over 30,000 deaths in the domestic data set in VAERS right now.
And as Peter said, this is mirrored in all of the adverse event data collection systems that are somewhat functioning right now around the world.
I would say that personally, the neurological adverse event reports are
One of the worst because these can be debilitating there's actually a category in there's called disability and the the numbers of disabled.
of people reporting disabilities in the context of these injections.
And now we're only talking about the Pfizer, the Moderna, and the Janssen products in the United States.
So this is just three products.
It's just off the charts.
It's not even comparable to anything we've seen historically.
And again, as Peter said, I mean, at 50 deaths, the product should have been pulled.
This should have been pulled in January last year.
So what you can see already, if we're talking about Janssen and Pfizer and Moderna as the same and lumping them all together as one thing, then what you're gonna see, of course, is they're seeding the narrative that the government is gonna admit that Janssen causes problems.
The UK is gonna admit that, what was that one called?
AstraZeneca?
Has problems.
And so they're seeding the narrative right now.
They can't even differentiate between a transformation and a transfection.
Right?
They're not even differentiating between the two.
So that's, sorry for that bad writing, but that's what I hear here.
I hear a setup because Janssen, Pfizer, and Moderna are listed as all equivalent.
It's not rational, it's not logical, it doesn't make any sense why this is continuing to this day.
And not only continuing, but being pushed and promoted more shots, more versions of shots against more versions of this virus.
It's insanity, it doesn't make any sense to me.
Well, Dr. Peter McCullough, the VAERS data has been questioned in that, as Matthew Crawford said when he was on the show a few weeks ago, that theoretically every death data has been questioned in that, as Matthew Crawford said when he was on the show a few weeks ago, that
Theoretically, every death that occurs within X time of vaccination ought to be reported to VAERS, which would be a very, very large number, even if the vaccine weren't killing anybody.
So how do you think we should be interpreting the VAERS data?
Do you see it?
Matthew Crawford was on his podcast, the Jihad Truth podcast before Jessica Rose and Peter McCullough and
Matthew Crawford met Robert Malone at the very, very first international COVID summit in San Juan or Puerto Rico or wherever the hell that was in 2020.
Are you seeing that it's all just one big team Malone yet or are you still trying to deny it?
We should interpret it as being valid for what's there, but being a grossly underreported set of data.
So initially, events are reported, they get a temporary VAERS number, then the CDC vets it,
And then when it's found to be valid, it gets a permanent VAERS number.
The data Dr. Rose gave you are the permanent VAERS number.
I've done numerous VAERS submissions, and I can tell you there are queries and calls from the CDC.
If the lot number isn't correct or they want to know the MRI or the blood test, the CDC verifies it.
So these numbers up in the database are legitimate and real.
The concern is that they're a gross underreport.
A paper by Pantazatos and Seligman in the ResearchGate preprint server system using census data and vaccine administration data, it's an ecological analysis, suggests the upper bound of the confidence interval for the number of lives lost after the vaccine
through December of 2021 could be as high as 187,000 Americans.
It's catastrophic, but it's cohesive with what we're hearing from the life insurance systems, where all the life insurance systems are reporting in now record numbers of deaths in people working age.
That's right.
And Dr. Jessica Rose, you recently wrote a post about the deaths among millennials.
What is the data show about that?
So yeah, there's this surge of deaths in millennials, which are 25 to 44 year olds.
These are young people.
84% surplus of deaths in the fall of 2021, which is completely unexplained.
Nobody knows why.
It's, according to what I found, it's not due to drug overdoses and suicides and all of these, these other ways.
According to what I've found, no data provided.
No, no explanation needed.
It's not due to drugs and overdoses.
It's not due to suicide.
It's something else really weird.
Holy shit.
Five to 44 year olds.
These are young people.
Um,
84% surplus of deaths in the fall of 2021, which is completely unexplained.
Nobody knows why.
It's- Do you see my arm?
Do you see my arm?
They lied to us.
These people lied to us.
They lied to us and we lied to our kids and that's why we're here right now.
There's no way to explain why she just happens to have to say the opioid epidemic right now unless Mark has been right all along and they've been using that shit.
This is really awful.
This is really worse than I ever imagined it would be.
Thank you for the person to send me this video.
Thank you, Pamela, for having found it and the other person who sent it to me.
I'm really sad right now.
There's this surge of debts in millennials, which are 25 to 44 year olds.
These are young people.
84% surplus of deaths in the fall of 2021, which is completely unexplained.
Nobody knows why.
It's, according to what I found, it's not due to drug overdoses and suicides and all of these other ways of, or these ways of dying that, yes, they're on the grow, but they only comprise a certain percentage of this overgrowth of death.
So- There's no way to explain it.
There's absolutely no way to explain why she needs to address these other sources of death, but still clarify that even though those are rising, of course, I'm not ignoring them.
It's not just that.
There's something else in the background.
It's very mysterious, strange.
Stop lying!
Are you mad yet?
Something caused this surplus of death in young people.
It's outrageous that this isn't like headline news.
So it couldn't be murder.
It couldn't be a combination of all these things, including putting people on supplementary oxygen or unneeded ventilation or unneeded remdesivir or any number of ways, including the opioid crisis.
But according to what I found, it's not that at all.
According to what I found, no data provided, no source cited.
Stop lying!
News and, you know, extra, extra read all about it, like back in the day.
It's not right that nobody is giving a clear answer as to what killed these people.
It's factual.
It's confirmed in many different ways.
Yeah, and it's, yeah, again, it's inexplicable.
There are so many answers that we need and that we're not getting.
Jessica Rose has been on Tommy's podcast with Matt Crawford at least twice, if not three times in these years.
Just keep that in mind as we move forward with these fake experts.
And Dr. McCullough, what about the reports of athletes dropping from cardiac problems, sometimes dead and sometimes not?
Are those also concerning?
Have you looked at the statistical analysis of those?
What should we think of those?
Roughly 700 athletes, mainly European, mainly soccer and rugby and other forms of football, 700 have had cardiac arrest during competition or practice.
About half of them have been successfully resuscitated, half sadly have died.
These are record numbers.
Not a single case has there been a reporting that they took the vaccine, had myocarditis and died, not a single case.
700 athletes have died in the EU, mostly football players, soccer players.
About half of them have died and been unable to revive.
And none of them, none of them have been reported as being vaxxed, having myocarditis and died.
That's exactly what he said.
forms of football.
700 have had cardiac arrests during competition or practice.
About half of them have been successfully resuscitated.
Half, sadly, have died.
These are record numbers.
Not a single case has there been a reporting that they took the vaccine, had myocarditis, and died.
Not a single case.
In fact, there's almost little or nothing said about each one of these deaths.
It's almost like a mystery.
We do know globally these leagues have enforced
Oh, looks like we may have lost Dr. Peter McCullough, as he predicted.
Dr. Jessica Rose, are you still there?
I am, yes.
Okay, looks like we may have lost Peter.
Oop, there he goes.
Come in, Peter.
Now he's gone.
He's gone.
Okay.
Well, maybe you can pick up from there about the mysterious deaths of athletes.
Yeah, sure.
And I'll segue into the conversation about causation, because there's a huge pushback from all sides as to the debate of, are these injections causing all of these adverse events?
Without a reasonable doubt, to me, they are.
And there's a way to verify this.
Using something called the Bradford Hill criteria, which is a, you know, long since used set of criteria that you can use to assess a causal effect in epidemiological or biological data and one of the ways that you can do that one of one of the criteria is called specificity.
So that applies to our healthy young athletes and also our young children who are suffering these massively rare cardiac events and myocarditis, for example.
If you take a young person and you ask yourself the question, okay, is it common for a young person to have a heart attack?
Is it common for a 15-year-old boy, for example, to have myocarditis?
Is it common for a healthy young athlete at the peak of their career to just drop dead from a cardiac event?
So you look in specific populations where you would never expect, just logically or statistically, for these things to occur.
And we're finding these things.
much higher rates than above background in both of these specific populations.
So yeah, and again, once again, we have not seen this before with a product that's being peddled to such a large proportion of the human population.
There's just no
There's no explaining this.
Well, there is.
It's just that you won't do it.
So what you can see here very carefully is that this molecular biologist won't use the word transfection.
This molecular biologist won't differentiate between old vaccines and new vaccines.
They want to keep that debate to a minimum.
The only thing they really want to discuss here is the idea that there is a signal that we don't really understand, and it's not coming from the lockdowns.
It's not coming from the protocols.
It's not coming from the opioid crisis.
It's coming from something else that, you know, much higher rates in these groups of people.
But you're not asking the right question at all.
The question that she wants us to ask is, is it common?
What are the rates that these things happen in a normal population?
Why not just differentiate between the people that have taken the shot and the people that haven't?
Why even open the door for the possibility that these might be normal rates, but we first have to determine what the normal rate is?
It's just running out the clock, ladies and gentlemen, on questions that get you to the end zone much slower, in a much more circuitous route.
It's exactly what Peter said.
Even if these products are 100% efficacious, which they are not, they're negatively efficacious right now, which means that they're causing harm to your immune system, as a matter of fact.
It doesn't matter if the product isn't safe.
If it's even killing 50 people, it needs to be removed from use.
This is the job of our regulators.
So they're calling it a product as if it's a novel product, just like the novel virus, but it's not a novel product.
It's a transfection by a lipofectamine, by a lipid nanoparticle.
It's all the same bullshit that we've been using on our lab benches for decades.
The only improvement of it is that it's a unique formulation of the lipid nanoparticle that they can claim is novel.
And that apparently Robert Malone thinks he can claim that Peter Cullis told him was fine and stayed at the injection site and that's why he took it.
Stop lying!
These people are all on the same team, and they are all lying, and they've been lying from the very beginning to try and make sure that we focused all of our energy on solving the mystery of the novel gain-of-function virus, the bioweapon, as the jihad truther said, and that we didn't ever come to the conclusion that maybe we should investigate further what happened in 2020.
Maybe it was just murder and lies.
Jessica's not worried about that.
It's not even opioids and suicide.
We don't even have to worry about those.
There's something else a lot creepier around.
Regulatory bodies like the FDA.
And it's interesting, the media is telling us that, well, whatever problems there might be with the vaccines, that they're actually doing a lot more good than harm.
They're saving you from the evils of COVID.
There it is, there it is.
Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
So what you and Dr. McCullough say is that basically we have to have a do no harm kind of approach.
Precisely.
Right.
And then, but the other side of that, and of course, you know, people with kind of the military approach to things, you know, military people are very much acculturated to sacrificing a certain number of their troops in order to gain a strategic advantage, win the war and save more of their troops.
And it does make you wonder whether somebody high up in these agencies
might be thinking along those lines.
That's the implication of the way the media talks about it.
The implication would be that, well, if we kill 100 people or even 100,000 and we save half a million or a million, then we've done a net good.
So there's a philosophy.
Do not harm doesn't work if it's worst case scenario.
And worst case scenario was what a lot of people said it was.
All the George Webb team
said it was worst case scenario, a bioweapon.
Kim.com became convinced after he did a little Twitter space with Kevin McCarran and Charles Rixey that it was a bioweapon and that if they wanted to, they could make a bioweapon be much more effective than a nuclear bomb.
About a year and a half before the pandemic,
Ralph Baric compared a bunch of different worst case scenarios like pole shift and these kinds of things and put pandemics on that list as well.
And so here we are again, agreeing about, well, I mean, if shit is bad enough, then we may need to have to mandate things.
You know, like if the vaccines work, then Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
is fine with mandates, but until we have placebo controlled trials, no mandates, man.
These people are liars, traitors to our children.
Tickle issue there.
And maybe you could concisely explain the do no harm position.
Well, I'm not a medical doctor, but if I was, I would abide by my oath to do no harm, which you have to take if you become a medical doctor.
One of the parts of doing no harm
if you're a medical doctor and you treat patients is to ensure that not only you are up to date on what's going on in the pharmaceutical world, in the vaccine world, in the peer-reviewed literature world, in all the studies that you probably should be reading world, you have to convey that information to your patient as part of informed consent, especially when you're talking about a brand new experimental product
that's being mandated in many cases.
It's not a brand new experimental product.
It is a transfection and a transformation, which you could differentiate by saying the one uses DNA and one uses RNA.
One has a viral vector, one doesn't.
You could explain all of this and explain how neither of these things comes anywhere near what we used to call a vaccine.
And then, and then Jessica Rose, you would be helping people to get closer to the goal line that you just mentioned, which is informed consent.
But instead, there's no video or recording of you talking about informed consent in front of the ACIP.
There's a video of me, which you never shared.
She is a traitor and a liar and working for NATO, Canada and Israel, but not America and not America's kids, not to protect the American constitution.
She is part of the team that is designed to undermine it, I assure you.
In many places in the world.
So, it's this duty of medical doctors to do no harm is is seemingly being waived by many people and I'm not sure why that is.
Um, I mean, maybe they don't think there is harm because they're simply just not up to date on the data.
I would dare say that that's the reason why, but I don't think that's an excuse.
I think it's, it's, it's absolutely your duty as a physician with patients to be up to date.
And the data is very clear on both the efficacy and the safety of these products.
The VAERS data is also clear about the previous vaccine schedule or not?
The VAERS data before the vaccine schedule, I mean, before the COVID started was supposedly between 40 times underreported.
Jessica is not concerned about that at all.
Jessica is very concerned that people don't see that whatever signal we had before the pandemic, if that's zero, then we now have a very strong signal.
And so her message is, is that there was no signal before the pandemic.
There was no hazard before the pandemic, even though a lot of people at Children's Health Defense and ICANN before the pandemic believed that there was.
That's why they made the movie Vaxxed, and that's why they made the movie Vaxxed 2.
But Peter McCullough and Jessica Rose right now are 100% dead on Ball's narrative.
There's a novel virus that needs novel solutions.
These two are on the cutting edge of this novel understanding of this novel challenge.
Liars.
It's really, really clear.
The pharmacovigilance tools that we use to assess safety signals like VAERS are screaming
red flags in just about every adverse event type you can imagine.
There are over 10,000 types of adverse events reported to VAERS right now in the context of these products.
So it's not just the absolute numbers of the reports, which like Peter said, are severely underreported.
It's the number of types.
If you pick any system, any tissue, any tissue system, any cell type,
in the human body, somehow these products are affecting them in some populations of people.
And that's one of the points I've been pushing.
This is happening.
They can deny it all they want.
And so she has no biological explanation for that?
She has no biological explanation for that?
Because I think Byron Bridle hasn't come out yet.
Or Byron Bridle's gonna come out next week.
This is July 6th.
Bret Weinstein's classic podcast with Robert Malone and Steve Kirsch is two weeks after this.
Or it's in June, sorry, it's in June of 2021.
So when is this?
This is June 6th, July.
I think this is July 6th.
I'm sure, I gotta look it up again.
Let me just do that quick to make sure I'm right.
This was posted two years ago.
I don't see the date here.
This is the subscript.
It says April 20th, 2022.
Really?
2022?
No way.
That's super late.
Wow.
2022?
They're just talking like this now?
Isn't that incredible?
They're still talking about Janssen as if it's on the market.
That seems really odd to me.
Is that possible?
When did they take, can someone find out when they took Janssen off the market?
I thought that was in 21 already.
but it is happening.
And the annoying part for me as a scientist is that the work that needs to be done now is to figure out who this is happening to and why precisely.
And because they're denying the existence of the problem itself.
We don't need to find out why.
We already know why.
Transfection and transformation were always criminally negligent in healthy humans.
That's why, Jessica.
And you knew that already in 2022.
I assure you she knew that.
If this is really April 20th, 2022, then I am shocked.
I am shocked.
Those studies aren't being done.
Well, I've had Meryl Ness on this show, and she points out that the VAERS data, of course, is extremely concerning, but it's hard to know what to make of it, given that... A pause in 2022.
Wow.
So my timeframe has really been compressed.
I thought for some reason they pulled it in 2021.
Holy shit.
So the show was really, really slow.
The show was really, really slow.
And now you can really see how slow it is.
If in April 20th, 2022, this woman still can't go beyond saying, there's, there's, there's, and it's all over the body.
And we better find out why.
Wow.
Okay.
Well, Albert wrote about it last night.
You can check that out with his, he's working on the data that Steve Kirsch has been pimping the check data.
So check that out.
Albert's in the chat there with a, with a link.
Matthew Crawford said that theoretically everybody would self those studies aren't being done.
Well, I've had Meryl Ness on this show, and she points out that the there's data, of course is extremely concerning, but it's hard to know what to make of it, given that, as Matthew Crawford said that theoretically, everybody who has
any problem after a vaccine up to who knows, you know, two weeks or a month, or there isn't even a timeframe really.
There's no official timeframe.
So any medical problem of any kind whatsoever after getting a vaccine, theoretically, you know, you could die 50 years after the vaccine from old age.
And theoretically, there's no reason not to report that to VAERS.
So given that there's such loose reporting criteria,
It's really hard.
It's easy for the establishment to tell us that, oh, it's all coincidence.
All of these different kinds of problems are just problems that people would have had anyway.
And it's just a coincidence that they happen to have them within X timeframe, whatever that timeframe may be from the Xs.
So anyway, Meryl Ness points out that, yeah,
She thinks that actually the VAERS data is probably underreported, but we can't prove that.
But she says that the government is holding really good data, that they've paid a lot of taxpayers' money for really good data, and they've kept it under lock and key, which is both outrageous in terms of swindling the taxpayers who paid for all that data, but also very suspicious.
What's your take on all of that data that's not being released?
Yeah, it's shameful because it does exist.
They have more demographic data than we know about.
A, we don't know about it and therefore B, we don't know what it's telling us or what it would if we had access.
This is the same story that we're being peddled from
from the manufacturers.
As you know, as you're probably well aware, you know, Pfizer wanted to hide their safety and efficacy data for 75 years.
And they've been ordered by the court now, thanks to some brave lawyers, to release this data over the next, I guess we have seven months,
left now, uh, you know, tens of thousands of pages of data per month.
And they were fighting and fighting and saying, well, we'll do this, but we'll-we'll redact some of it, and-and blah, blah, blah.
It's like, no, no, no, no.
You know, the public has a right to know what your studies showed in the clinical trials.
Um... So don't forget, Naomi Wolf is gonna be the one that organizes 2,300 people.
to use their free time to read those documents from Pfizer.
And then she puts out substacks and releases things over time, all the time, people paying attention to.
She claims that she had 2,300 smart people working on the Pfizer documents.
That's impressive.
So they didn't mention Naomi Wolf, but that's what they're talking about with the Pfizer documents.
And in fact, I think she started with that already in June of 2021, a year earlier than this.
I've already been injected with it.
So, you know, that's an important thing for us to know.
It's just appalling.
I mean, you have to ask yourself, what would be the motivation of anybody
To hide safety data.
And like I've said before, the only reason you would ever want to hide safety data is if you really don't want people to know that it's revealing that your product isn't safe.
That would be the only reason to hide it.
And then you have to start getting appalled.
and realize that- See, what she wants you to think is that this is all just about money and greed and assholes that are doing it because someone else would do it if I didn't do it.
And of course, that's not the case at all.
This is a multi-year operation to convert the sovereignty of the young people in America and in the Western world to that of a community-oriented communal health model.
And she can claim all she wants to that, you know, having her feet in, in the sands of Israel and her feet in the, in the sands of Canada makes her some kind of world traveling dissident, but I think she plays for them.
And that's why she can't meaningfully say anything, you know, like, well, if I compare the vaccine schedule in Israel or Canada to America, it's obvious what they're doing here.
If I compare the average health of people in Israel to the average health of people in America and Canada, it's obvious what they're doing here.
If I, you know, there's lots of things that she could say, but she's hyper focused on the safety data, the VAERS data.
And the crazy thing is, is that she's going to be focused on that from here on out.
Even when she spoke in front of the Senate earlier this year, it's VAERS, VAERS, VAERS, I'm the VAERS lady.
Just like Pierre Cory is the New York City and Ivermectin guy.
Just like Robert Malone is the, you know, RNA vaccines work great if we don't rush them.
And pandemics are real because I'm an outbreak specialist that started on Ebola and Zika.
just like Jessica Rose started out as an expert on the AIDS virus for shit's sake.
These agencies and these organizations and establishments are, they're really not peddling products that are safe for human so-called consumption.
They're not.
Yeah, it's, again, you know, it's just, it's all a part of this,
this whole story that's been one big lie, in my opinion.
None of it adds up.
None of it makes sense.
None of it is in the interest of public health, obviously.
And yeah, it's not over.
That's one of the most disturbing.
What is the big lie?
Is the one big lie the shot?
The one big lie is the lie about the product?
or products that she still can't differentiate between yet?
Do you see how much, how absolutely malevolent this is?
Who's she saving?
Who is she helping?
Who is she getting closer to being able to exercise informed consent?
No one.
Stop lying.
It's because she's, she's lying about what the lie is.
She's agreeing that the one big lie equals the shot.
It has nothing to do with the natural virus.
It has nothing to do with PCR.
It has nothing to do with sequencing.
It has nothing to do with murder in New York City.
Once you see them for who they are, once you hear who they're promoting over and over again, you can only hear a network of liars.
That's why they were there.
Dr. Peter McCullough, he said that according to one estimate, I forget what the precise number was.
I think he says it was 160,000 possible vaccine deaths in the U.S.
alone.
I've spoken with others.
I'm going to have Steve Kirsch on the show in a couple of days, and he's come up with estimates in that ballpark or possibly even somewhat higher.
Have you tried to crunch numbers and examine the various approaches?
A number of people have used different signals to argue for different numbers of deaths.
And the US deaths, again, a lot of people have managed to put them in the six figures, usually the low six figures.
Have you crunched those numbers or looked at some of those estimates?
Yeah, I actually have a publication.
It was the second publication I did on VAERS data.
where it's actually an assessment of the pharmacovigilance-ness of VAERS.
And in this paper, I do estimate the underreporting factor using Pfizer's phase three clinical trial data that had been released at the time.
That's right.
Yeah, I remember seeing that actually, yeah.
Yeah, so my underreporting factor was a conservative estimate at 31, which means that you would need to multiply most of the adverse events by a factor of 31, probably not death, even though this was calculated using severe adverse event data for which death is.
I would say that the underreporting factor for death is lower because it's death more often reported, I would say.
But in VAERS currently, in the domestic data set in the context of the COVID-19 products alone, we have over 30,000 deaths reported.
So if we use an under-reporting factor of say, I don't know, let's just go 15, which is half of the lowest estimate that's been calculated, we're at about half a million deaths.
So the number is, we don't even need to account for the underreporting factor here when talking about the appallingness of what we're seeing.
The numbers in VAERS right now, just the absolute numbers without, like I said, calculating in the underreporting factor are off the charts when you compare them to the last 30 years of data.
There's no comparison here.
It's like when I describe what the bar graph looks like, if you tally up all of the adverse event reports for all the vaccines combined for the last 30 years, because VAERS has been on the go for 30 years, you get about 39,000 reports per year.
This is for all the vaccines combined.
I think there's almost up to 100 now, different kinds.
If you compare that to just the adverse event reports in the context of COVID-19 for 2021, we're over a million.
I mean, it's just insane that anyone would think that nothing is going on here and that it's just a coincidence and that, you know, it looks like a bunch of bungalows over the last 30 years compared to this massive skyscraper.
That's what the bar graph looks like.
And it's the same story for any standalone adverse event that you pick.
You can pick anything.
You can pick death, you can pick myocarditis, disability, anything you want.
And it looks like that.
And we're not explaining the biology at all, of course.
Why would that be?
What would that be due to?
She could say that it doesn't stay in the injection site right now.
We already know why, right?
But she doesn't say that.
In 2022, she doesn't say that, even though I was saying it already in 2021.
And so was Byron Bridle.
to any remotely credible or thoughtful attempts.
They said Matt Crawford's name twice and Meryl Nass' name twice, but still haven't said Byron Bridle's name.
And it's a year after he came out.
You see this?
To argue back from the other side, I've been looking for them.
No, no, Steve Kirsch is very good at calling people and getting people's attention.
He's a doer.
He is very active.
And he's been trying for, I'd say it's going on a year now.
sending emails to like the top, like Walensky and Woodcock and all these people and saying, hey, how about letting us know what the under-reporting factor is if you're saying that ours is wrong?
How about letting us know how come there's no causality assessment being done here?
How about letting us know, like any of the answers to our questions, what's the cutoff number for the number of deaths to deem the product unsafe?
Anything, how many deaths are reported to VAERS right now?
They can't even answer that, my friend.
There's a video of Walensky, both Walensky and Fauci, not being able to answer the simplest of questions.
She's the director of the CDC.
This is the organization that owns this data set.
She could not answer a simple question, how many reports of death are in VAERS right now?
Wow, that's crazy.
I know Dr. McCullough has compared the inefficacy and danger of the vaccines to the apparent efficacy of treatments.
Have you done work on the treatment issue?
You mean like ivermectin?
Yeah, ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, I guess, are the two big ones.
Yeah.
I've talked about them in my presentations.
to various people.
So the first one she came up with with ivermectin, just remember the first one that we came up with that I said on my YouTube channel and that Zev Zelenko treated a lot of congressmen with was hydroxychloroquine.
The reason why Peter McCullough kind of rose to fame was because he was speaking out about hydroxychloroquine not causing hearts to swell up.
So it's interesting that she starts, first of all, what do you mean, ivermectin?
Dr. McCullough has compared this apparent inefficacy and danger of the vaccines to the apparent efficacy of treatments.
Have you done work on the treatment issue?
You mean like ivermectin?
Yeah, ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, I guess, are the two big ones.
I've talked about them in my presentations to various people, just in the context of, hey, there's another solution, but that's, I piggyback off of the FLCCC and peer query, like I'm not really analyzing data per se with regard to the early treatment, so.
I know that there are many, many, many studies showing efficacy of these products.
And I also know that ivermectin is, it's an antiparasitic drug that's super, super cheap, that's been on the go for decades, been used without any malefacts, even in pregnant women.
And has, in fact, been on the going efficacy of these products and I also know that ivermectin is, it's an anti parasitic drug that's super super cheap.
That's been on the go for decades.
been used without any malefacts even in pregnant women, and has, in fact, been associated with a Nobel Prize.
I mean it's, it's a, it's an FDA approved drug that's been on the go forever.
You know repurpose drugs are used all the time.
We use them in an off label way which means that you you've you you use it for a different ailment or disease for example with with success.
This is not a new thing, but all of a sudden, very very strangely I mean Pierre Corey is the one to talk about this with.
These poor drugs are being demonized.
I mean, it's just bizarro world.
If people understood how strange that was, I think that they would ask a lot more questions.
It's very strange to us, like how nonsensical it all is.
Well, I've had this argument with my brother who is... So repurposed drugs, she reviews quite vigorously.
And that's of course Malone and the Domain Program and Brett Weinstein and Steve Kirsch are all in on the ivermectin idea.
And if we could just force people to take it for 30 days, we'd be at zero COVID.
And then of course, she mentions Pierre Kory, who we've all come to love as one of the greatest characters in this story.
So that's...
That's pretty spectacular.
What else do you want me to know?
You should talk to Pierre because he knows all about this stuff.
He's an MD, PhD, who has run lots of studies, usually randomized controlled trials.
And so he says that- Who's that?
If people understood how strange that was, I think that they would ask a lot more questions.
It's very strange to us.
like how nonsensical it all is.
Well, I've had this argument with my brother, who is, he's an MD, PhD, who has run lots of studies, usually randomized controlled trials.
And so he says that, well, first, he said, Oh, there's no evidence that ivermectin works, or no good evidence.
And so I sent him, I sent him to that website that has the huge list of studies, the vast majority of which do show.
Yeah.
Right.
And he said, oh, wow, I never saw that.
So OK, well, there is some evidence.
He said, however, the good ones, the good randomized controlled trials, don't show efficacy.
So still, he's not convinced.
So how do you respond to that?
I respond to that like this.
I trust the doctors on the ground who are having success treating COVID patients, OK?
Paul Merrick and Pierre Cory and, you know,
Farid and Tyson, they've treated tens of thousands of patients with these things.
And you know how they did that?
Do you know what the context was?
We had an emergency situation.
We had this potentially deadly virus.
And so if you're an emergency room doctor, if you're an ICU doctor,
So I think that one of the reasons why FLCCC was created by Robert Malone and Pierre Corey was to step in front of Paul Merrick.
So I spelled that wrong.
But Paul Merrick is a guy who is the vitamin C high dose for sepsis treatment.
And of course, he was also advocating for DNC for severe COVID.
And so they had to step in front of this guy, and they did.
And they stepped in front of him with a protocol.
The FLCC protocol included a 94% pulse ox recommendation.
And then if it's lower than that, you should go to the hospital.
And they also, of course, recommended ivermectin and still do.
There's place, you know, you can see that Pierre Cory spends a lot of time with Paul Merrick.
I think Paul is probably just taken by these people.
I believe to try and get into the head of the people who are on the,
on the front of the line, as we've been calling it.
They had to come up with a way to prevent their patients from dying or getting to the hospital.
And so I imagine there was a lot of trial and error.
There was a lot of critical thinking.
There was a lot of, I'm going to draw upon my decades of experience as a physician, a lot of amazing independence.
The reason why the obsession with ivermectin is bizarre is because nobody in America was using it before the pandemic.
Veterinarians were, but it wasn't being used to prevent river blindness in the deep South or something like that.
So there was no reason for any American doctor who we can all admit now are not the most informed biologists on the planet, there'd be no reason for them
to have this on a short list of antivirals that would be appropriate for them to try.
And there's no reason for anybody at FLCCC to have gone against Paul Merrick's recommendation of just, you know, vitamin D and C and some antibiotics.
There's also no reason for them to be recommending ivermectin over hydroxychloroquine with such vigor.
There's just no reason.
There's more data, quite frankly, on the antiviral properties of hydroxychloroquine than there are on ivermectin, and yet this antiparasitic is assumed to work so well because these people say it does.
She's arguing that they use their experience and gut instinct.
They don't have any experience with this.
That would be like saying that the way that they figured out how to make
you know, fine, fine croissants is that they figured it out by trial and error.
And I trust these guys more than I trust people that are taking the recipe.
These people are lying.
She's lying.
Just like she said that, you know, according to what I've figured out, it's not the opioid crisis or suicide.
It's something else.
Stop lying.
Dependent assessment.
And they came up with these protocols from going through these processes.
So that's what I would trust.
You mean this protocol?
That one?
If I had to make a decision for myself or someone that I love who is struggling to breathe, I'm like, take them to those people and let them do it.
Struggling to breathe.
Is that the Pierre Cory nod there to the Kyle Seidel nod?
They're going to do, because I trust them.
They've been on the ground, boots to the ground, treated the patients.
Nobody's being hospitalized if they go to these people.
Nobody's being hospitalized if they don't go to the hospital.
Nobody's being hospitalized if they don't go to the hospital, Jessica, you liar.
And the other side of that is it ain't going to hurt them.
It's a completely harmless drug, this ivermectin.
It has an incredibly impressive- It cures cancer.
It's a safety profile.
So there's no harm.
That's the other point I don't get, like why it's being demonized.
You know what I mean?
It's like, yeah.
So that's what I would say.
I also, I'm skeptical about these randomized controls.
All the giggling.
I never found any reason to giggle in any interview I've ever done about this stuff.
Never once did I find it necessary to flirt or to giggle or to throw my hair.
And if you watch Jessica Rose's years and hours of interviews, she's, she's giggling and throwing her hair around a lot.
trials, given that the most celebrated one that supposedly proved that ivermectin didn't work, it turns out that if you actually look at their numbers, as Meryl Nass pointed out on my show weeks ago, it turns out that it was conducted in Brazil among poor people, who apparently a lot of them probably signed up because it was a free source of ivermectin, which they take anyway prophylactically.
and so anyway they they had divided into two groups they don't describe how they take it prophylactically but they're not taking it daily like brett weinstein said we should do for 30 days to get to zero covid
supposedly double-binded.
However, it so happened that this huge number, I think it was like 60% or something, of the people in the control group that were getting the placebo didn't comply with the protocols of the trial somehow.
So it came to the attention of the experiments that these people hadn't complied.
Like 60% of the control group didn't comply
and a vastly small version, hardly any of the ivermectin group didn't comply.
So how can that be double-blinded?
Welcome to Truth Jihad Audio.
I'm Kevin Barrett, talking with the folks who have the most to say from way outside the box of mainstream idiocy.
Sorry about that.
Yeah, the FCCCT, yeah.
Right.
And he said, oh, wow, I never saw that.
So OK, well, there is some evidence.
He said, however, the good ones, the good randomized controlled trials don't show efficacy.
So still, he's not convinced.
So how do you respond to that?
I respond to that like this.
So the clinical trials don't matter.
She responds to it like this.
I trust the treating doctors because they've used their instincts and they've used their experience to decide and to settle on ivermectin as the solution.
That's what she's saying right here.
I trust the doctors on the ground who are having success treating COVID patients, okay?
Paul Merrick and Pierre Cory and, you know,
Farid and Tyson, they've treated tens of thousands of patients with these things.
And you know how they did that?
Do you know what the context was?
We had an emergency situation.
We had this potentially deadly virus.
And so if you're an emergency room doctor, if you're an ICU doctor, people need to try and get into the head of the people who are on the,
on the front of the line, as we've been calling it.
They had to come up with a way to prevent their patients from dying or getting to the hospital.
And so I imagine there was a lot of trial and error.
There was a lot of critical thinking.
There was a lot of, I'm going to draw upon my decades of experience as a physician, a lot of amazing independent assessment
and they came up with these protocols from going through these processes.
So that's what I would trust.
If I was, you know, um, if I had to make a decision for myself or someone that I love who is struggling to breathe, I'm like, take them to those people and let them do what they're gonna do, because I trust them.
They've been on the ground, boots to the ground, treated the patients.
Nobody's being hospitalized if they go to these people.
So, and the other side of that is,
It ain't gonna hurt him.
It's a completely harmless drug, this ivermectin.
It has an incredibly impressive safety profile.
So there's no harm.
That's the other point I don't get why it's being demonized.
You know what I mean?
It's like,
Yeah, so that's what I would say.
I also I'm skeptical about these randomized controlled trials, given that the most celebrated one that supposedly proved that ivermectin didn't work.
It turns out that if you actually look at their numbers, as Merrill Nass pointed out on my show, a couple of weeks ago.
It turns out that it was conducted in Brazil among poor people, who apparently a lot of them probably signed up because it was a free source of ivermectin, which they take anyway prophylactically.
And so anyway, they had divided into two groups, supposedly double-blinded.
However, it so happened that this huge number, I think it was like 60% or something of the people in the control group that were getting the placebo,
didn't comply with the protocols of the trial somehow.
So it came to the attention of the experiments that they hadn't, that these people hadn't complied.
Like 60% of the control group didn't comply and a vastly small version, hardly any of the ivermectin group didn't comply.
So how can that be double-blinded?
Somebody knew, you know, which group was which, and Merrill thinks probably that the poor people who signed up for free ivermectin
They tasted their sugar pill.
Oh, it's sugar.
It's not ivermectin.
And they went out and bought ivermectin anyway.
And yet this has been touted as the best RCT, proving ivermectin doesn't work.
If that's the- So Merrill Nass thinks that the reason why the random control trial didn't work is because the people could taste their placebo and went out and bought their own ivermectin.
Merrill Nass!
Four times mentioned.
More times than Matthew Crawford's been mentioned.
And she's sure that these randomized control trials are being goofed up by these people who are taking ivermectin because they know it already works.
I would trust these people that are taking, oh my gosh.
The best.
I would hate to see the worst.
Yeah, no, real world experience is the best.
Thank you very much.
They can have their randomized control trials.
You know, it's not that I'm saying that they're not great when we have time and when they're done properly, but, you know, boots to the ground, real life is more valuable.
And it's especially valuable when you're considering the fact that these people are still telling us that we're in an emergency situation, which we are not, but assuming that- Oh, we're not in an emergency situation.
Interesting.
How do you know that?
Is it because they murdered people?
Is it because there's no evidence of spread?
Did you read Denny Rancourt's paper that was published two years before this video?
Is that why you're saying we're not in an emergency anymore?
We had been, you know, in the past, in the last year or so, in an emergency situation, which we are not.
But assuming that we had been... Assuming that we had been... Stop lying!
Assuming Pierre Corey wasn't lying about what happened in New York City, assuming that Kyle Seidel wasn't lying about the 60 liters a minute of oxygen being applied, then maybe it was just murder, Jess.
You know, in the past, in the last year or so, you know, the best solution is to all hands on deck, man.
Let's try everything and see what works.
Seriously, they didn't take their time rolling these injections into people's arms, did they?
They skipped all the safety trial.
They did the shoddiest clinical trials in the world.
Vaccines are supposed to take five to 15 years to go from conception to arm.
They have to take that long in order to ensure that the products are safe and effective.
And I mean, we raced through this in a year and a half, two years, the whole thing, the whole shooting match.
And these are not.
conventional vaccines, which makes what I just said very frightening.
And most people don't realize that.
This is a new platform.
It's a new delivery system.
It's not a new platform.
It's not a new delivery system.
She's a molecular biologist who almost certainly has used transfection and transformation in her academic work.
And if she hasn't, then she's just an ignoramus.
because almost everybody in academic biology and medicine and whatever in academia is using transformation and transfection all the time.
And I'm getting sick and tired of hearing these people that have so many degrees, they can't even list them all in the beginning of their podcasts.
And they can't seem to find these fricking words that I taught them already in 2020.
Lipid nanoparticle tech, and it's a new concept.
This is modified RNA, which is injected into your body, and it provides the template for your host cells to develop or to translate these modified RNAs, whatever they are, into protein.
And these are very stable modified mRNAs, as we're seeing in peer-reviewed literature right now.
Up to 60 days, we found this crap in the germinal centers of lymph nodes.
So they're in the germinal centers of lymph nodes.
We should not have transfected lymph nodes.
That would not be a good idea.
And any immunologist would know how absolutely ridiculous it would be to transfect the lymph nodes.
Do you see what I'm saying here?
You're transfecting the lymph nodes so that, what, naive, dormant immune cells might start expressing foreign proteins so that maybe your immune system would have to clean out the expressing cells in the lymph nodes?
And you're an immunologist and you can't say why that's particularly bad and we're an hour into this discussion?
Stop lying!
It's just gross.
Or to translate these modified RNAs, whatever they are, into protein.
And these are very stable modified mRNAs, as we're seeing in peer-reviewed literature right now.
Up to 60 days, we found this crap in the germinal centers of lymph nodes.
Yeah, what about the evidence that there is uptake into the DNA that it actually is altering DNA?
For a long time, that was totally being debunked by the so called fact checkers.
But then apparently, some studies came in showing that well, actually, it looks like there is some some uptake.
So in April of 2020, now we're talking about DNA
talking about DNA integration now, which is again, a subject that didn't really come up until 23 with McKernan.
But it came up earlier, of course, in these weird places.
And so that's what he's talking about now.
DNA integration was eventually demonstrated using transfected cultures of the spike protein and then showing that they could find the spike protein DNA in the
in the chromosomes of those cell cultures.
Supposedly, McKernan and other labs have done that already.
But again, this is in 2022, and we have that data being shown or claimed in front of the Senate in 2024, so two years later.
Again, what I want you to see is that they've been running out the clock.
It's been a, it's been a running out the clock thing.
There's no reason why in 2021, we couldn't have been all the way to the finish line and saying the transfection and transformation in healthy humans was always dumb.
And we need to put these people in jail.
We could have been there in 2021.
Right when we took the Janssen shot off, we could have taken the RNA shot off all for the same reasons.
But these people have been running out the clock.
What do we make of that?
Yeah, so there's a new study.
Thank you for saying that.
The integration has only been shown in the microbiome, and so that's not really showing anything, especially when they digest the whole sample.
So good one.
Which is not in the preprint servers.
It's peer-reviewed.
It is published.
That shows definitively.
I've been up and down this paper a few times, and they did really good work, really good controls.
And it shows definitively that reverse transcription occurs, which means that wasn't meant to happen.
It wasn't meant to be possible for this RNA to go back to DNA.
And the problem- Actually, reverse transcription means that there's an AIDS virus present.
Maybe you should call David Baltimore.
But of course, since you did your master's thesis on the dynamics of HIV virus, you should already know that the standard way of identifying whether HIV is present in a culture is to look for reverse transcriptase activity.
Problem with that is
We don't know for sure yet.
We have strong evidence that it can happen with SARS, that this DNA can be incorporated into our genome.
But that's precisely the problem.
We were actually told that this was an impossibility, that it could reverse transcribe.
We were told there is zero possibility.
We were mocked.
for even raising concerns that that might be a possibility that integration may occur.
We have yet to prove it.
Well, the reason why it's so stupid is because you just got through telling us that the mRNA is found in the lymph nodes for 60 days, yet didn't bother to tell us that that's an extremely bad thing because, you know, autoimmunity is a real big problem.
And I'm an immunologist.
Instead, we're talking about DNA integration, which is like four or five bad outcomes down the line, and is only really bad if it integrates in certain cells that are dividing.
And otherwise, does it really matter?
We don't know.
But focusing on that, instead of focusing on the primary observation, which is the transfection goes all over the body and therefore is likely to trigger autoimmunity anywhere it goes, is something that this immunologist, computational biologist, fraudulent traitor hasn't been able to say in four fricking years.
that, but I dare say that paper is being written right now.
We were also told that the product, whatever is in the needle, was going to remain at the injection site and the local draining lymph node close to the injection site.
The local draining lymph node is not acceptable.
staying at the injection site and draining to the local lymph node is not acceptable for these lipid nanoparticles.
You dumb ass.
You incredibly unsophisticated biologist liar.
You cannot have lipid nanoparticles with a modified RNA go to the lymph node and have everything be okay.
You freaking liar.
And it's very, very clear
from the recent Pfizer dump that it absolutely doesn't stay at the injection site.
It biodistributes into places where it should never go.
Because we have- Well, the lipid nanoparticle going there without the RNA is not very likely, but if it does go there, it could still be highly toxic to those lymph node cells.
Because again, once the pH inside of the lipid nanoparticle changes, the lipid, the cationic lipids become incredibly toxic, which is a very easy thing to explain and Christine Grace spends a whole hour not explaining it every time she talks.
You don't need an hour to explain that the pH
changes as an LNP is absorbed into a cell, and that pH changes the chemistry and the toxicity of the lipid nanoparticle carrier by orders of magnitude.
There, I'm done.
I explained it all.
Lipid nanoparticles are toxic, and they lie to us about it because they lie to us about what happens or doesn't happen inside of our body.
See, I don't need an hour to explain it.
Lipid nanoparticles and cationic lipids are really toxic once they get divorced from the peg and once they get exposed to intracellular pH.
You liars.
No idea what the physiological effects are going to be.
The ovaries, the testes, the brain, the adrenal glands, the liver, the spleen.
I mean, it's everywhere.
And so we're talking about the lipid nanoparticles right now.
So these guys are comprised of four different fats, four different lipids, one of which is called a cationic lipid, which is highly toxic to cells by nature.
And so is the polyethylene glycol.
But not until it gets to the right pH.
So again, not specific enough, not accurate enough.
And this is in 2022, when she's supposedly been working on this full time between surfing and COVID.
The peg.
which is on the surface of the lipid nanoparticle.
So these guys are heavily biodistributed, they go everywhere, they slip into cells, and they deliver their payload, which is this modified RNA.
So we have to assume that the host cells are going to start producing the proteins that are the byproduct of this modified mRNA, whatever it is.
And so we're- There will be no Byram Bridle nod because she is on Steve Kirsch and Robert Malone's team.
And Steve Kirsch and Robert Malone went on Brett Weinstein's podcast in June of 2021, specifically to step in front of Byram Bridle on social media.
And they have stood in front of him ever since.
We're going to get massive amounts of these foreign proteins being produced in locations where it should never occur.
And we have no idea what the effect of that would be.
Autoimmunity, Jessica, you are a fricking immunologist.
Autoimmunity, Jessica, duh!
All we know is that we see a lot of leaves rustling in the wind.
In the, in the, in the... She doesn't want to say it.
She's not interested in saving anyone.
It is a slow roll titration.
They are slow rolling the truth.
You could say it very succinctly, but they don't because they are working against us.
World of adverse event reports.
So you, everybody's heard.
their mother, their sister, their daughter, their friend, somebody they know has had some kind of menstrual dysregularity.
If they've either had the injections or interestingly enough, been in proximity to someone who has.
We're seeing, yeah, we're seeing fertility issues in the form of miscarriages, spontaneous abortions, stillbirths.
Yeah, we're seeing enormous effects in terms of the adverse event reports now.
When you compare them to the past 30 years, it's just not the same story at all.
Something's going on here.
So in my opinion, I mean, maybe they're not related, but we have to find out.
So something different is happening here and it isn't that,
It is something different, meaning that the previous vaccines weren't as dangerous as this one, that the previous vaccine schedule's fine.
And she should be sophisticated enough as a dissident immunologist to know that one of the best ways to wake Americans up would be to point out how shitty their vaccine schedule is, how early it is, how often it is, and for what it is, how many of them are required versus comparing them to any of the other countries, I don't know, that she surfs in.
if they aren't or if they are.
And the onus is on these people pushing this crap into us to prove that they're safe.
It's not up to us to prove that they're not.
We're doing this because we care, but it's not our duty.
It's their duty to prove that they're safe.
And if they're not even willing to acknowledge that, you know, this happened even though you said it wouldn't and we're seeing this effect,
Or, you know, shouldn't you acknowledge that first and investigate like the possibility that maybe we're seeing an increase in stillbirths because, you know, there's massive amounts of spike protein being produced in the ovaries like.
shouldn't we find out?
Yeah.
It does make you wonder and of course I don't think you have to be a professional conspiracy theorist like me to wonder whether the fact that we're seeing all of these signals relating to the reproductive system
might possibly be related to the fact that we have Malthusians in high places Bill Gates is one of the many wealthy oligarchs out there who whole Rockefeller family and all of their friends, of course, have been on this for a long time.
But in its course, it's not just these oligarchs who might think that the human population of Earth is way too high.
It's unsustainable.
It has to go down.
What would be a kind and gentle way to do this?
Well, if we could either release a disease or put out mandatory injections, either one of which, or perhaps both, tended to reduce fertility,
then that might contribute towards helping solve this Malthusian problem.
And to me, that's not a stupid conspiracy theory just because, I mean, these oligarchs actually have a good reason to worry about the size of the population.
One can project oneself into their shoes.
Imagine that one is a somewhat sociopathic oligarch and used to solving problems in a pretty brute force way.
I don't think it's unreasonable to wonder whether that could conceivably be
related to this bizarre phenomenon of putting out this experimental gene therapy.
And so what they- Is neither safe nor effective, but seems to do something.
What they really want you to think is that depopulation might be the agenda.
It couldn't possibly be the inversion of sovereignty.
It couldn't possibly be experimental testing.
It couldn't possibly be genetic characterization.
It can't be any of these things.
It's just depopulation.
This is what it is.
It's gotta be depopulation.
It can't possibly be an inversion of sovereignty.
It can't possibly be a conversion from a sovereign being and individuals to experimental animals.
It can't be the desire to genetically characterize everyone that's alive before we lose them or the next generation before we lose them and then depopulate.
It couldn't at all have some nuance where we actually talk about that Kissinger himself said that once we get people to accept mandatory vaccination, then we can depopulate the earth whenever we want to.
And so they're not talking about the fact that they would murder
people.
And they're not saying it's murder, they're saying depopulation.
Maybe they have a good reason to do it, if they're a little bit sociopathic.
Maybe they have a good reason to do it if the models say it.
Maybe they have a good reason to do it because they calculated it or used AI to know.
Sounds to me like he's down with it as long as they've got the right attitude or the right numbers to back up what they're doing.
Yeah, I, you know, I don't know if they're trying to do that could very well be I mean, there's not much that surprises me anymore after witnessing the last year.
But yeah, I would say that they they're not smart enough to have anticipated this effect, I think that this is just about being careless.
and it might just be a byproduct of that carelessness.
Carelessness?
There's no plan here.
I'm just trying to solve the mystery of the Scooby-Doo and the VEARS data.
There's no, there's no plan here.
I'm not being paid to manipulate the opinion of people.
i'm not being paid to manipulate the conscious and intelligent thoughts of people in america i'm not being paid to do that no no no i don't know i'm just i'm as confused as you are i'm just like i'm just like peter uh jordan peterson i got no idea i'm in a psychological disarray just like everybody else
Yeah, that's what Ron Unz thinks too about his data or his evidence that seems to point to COVID emerging out of a presumably a U.S.
biowar strike on Wuhan in October.
Biowar strike.
2019.
October 2019.
A biowarfare strike.
Well, that's an interesting theory to throw out there that October, 2019, that's interesting.
That would be what?
The Wuhan Games.
Stop lying.
It's got like all the talking points.
And then the fact that it next emerged in Qom, Iran, seemingly specifically targeting high up people in Iran also adds to that thesis.
but he so he argues that it likely would have been blowback that is these people aren't smart enough not to figure out that you shouldn't be uh hitting adversary economies with biological weapons because it might blow back and hurt your own economy even worse oh hilarious they released the clone and the clone came back and bit us in the ass stop lying that is hilarious uh so there are these you know there's the
the theory that it's all a combination of coincidence and incompetence.
And who knows?
I mean, we'll perhaps, maybe we'll never know for sure.
Of course, we'll never know.
Have you looked at the research about the possible biowar origins of COVID?
No.
okay well I urge you to she's supposed to focus on bears she's being paid to focus on bears she's being paid to focus on bears like a razor blade she is being paid to focus on bears no yeah no I I kind of try and keep that to my like uh you know the um
What would I call that?
I don't really have free time, but like, I try and separate- I'm doing so much nowadays, you know, I got the family and I got the surfing and I got the career and I got the- Stop lying!
Great, the thing that I'm doing related to this COVID nightmare from all the other stuff.
I know it's very difficult to do that.
And I do have opinions, but yeah, I don't know.
I think the bottom line is I want to save my energy and my bandwidth for the really important stuff, which is, well, first of all, stopping things like this nightmare idiotic who treaty that they're... Yeah, yeah, talk about that.
Yeah, I mean, you know, I don't know if people know about this, but this is happening today and we had five days notice, which the only reason I know about that is because of our, you know, inside groups who are
getting the information from the inside.
They're just planning on passing this insanity treaty, which basically means that all the countries that sign up, it's like a hundred and something something, I don't remember the exact number, will give up their sovereignty.
And no matter what the hell they decide to do, you will have to abide.
You will have to believe them, that there's some kind of new emergency,
they'll have these new measures, they'll lock you up, they'll inject you, they'll do whatever the hell they want to you and there's nothing we're going to be able to do about it because we won't have personal sovereignty.
So is that an announcement?
She's telling us that the who is going to take away our personal sovereignty and then we're not going to have any choice.
She's telling us that just like Meryl Nass tells us that.
Just like Robert Malone tells us that maybe it's, you know, better that we just
throw away the thousand years of previous experience and organize humankind in a different way.
Maybe what we thought was in existence before the pandemic was never there in the first place.
We won't have national sovereignty, we won't have anything if this goes ahead.
So it's like, these are the kinds of things, and I know they're all related, I really do, but focusing on
the real ways that we can try and stop that kind of nonsense from happening, which is finding out about it, first of all, and using, you know, the methods that we've always used, which is the voices and the power of the people.
So one of the things that I did, I mean, it's stupid and it's small, but it's something.
I mean, I used my Substack platform to just, you know, say, hey, you guys, you need to send
a message to these people.
Here's the website, go to this site, write your message send it to them because we need to let them know that this is not okay with us as a global population, we don't want this shit.
We don't want you to take over our sovereignty, we don't, we don't need you, we don't need big brother, we don't.
Yeah, I went on a little rant there, but.
President Trump just pulled us out of the WHO.
That simply stopped funding it.
I don't think he actually took us out of the WHO treaty.
And that's what we need to do.
We need to get out of the WHO treaty, out of the, which means getting out of the UN, which is a lot harder for people to say.
And in fact, I would argue that Jessica Rose saying the WHO is protecting the UN.
And I think we should just get rid of, get out of the UN and that gets us out of the WHO as well.
And so I think that that's a very,
very purposeful focus, focusing on the who, but it's a subsidiary of the UN.
We should have left the UN years ago, indeed.
Nightmare we have coming toward us.
And most people have no idea.
You know, it's hidden.
It's completely hidden.
Yeah, it's partly hidden under the propaganda.
having been studying this kind of hysterical mode of fear propaganda since a little bit after 9-11, and then noticed that a similar approach was taken with COVID, that is just hitting the whole population with this wall-to-wall fear propaganda, and then manipulating the population to do completely insane things en masse,
And now it's odd that just as the pushback was starting to peak with Canadian truckers, and then American truckers following Canadian truckers, and larger rallies, and more and more awareness, and the vaccines seem to hit a brick wall, and then suddenly, overnight, the pandemic is forgotten, taking wind out of the sails of the pushback movement, and suddenly we're all supposed to fear and hate Russia.
And once again, the population seems to actually have been herded so that now about three quarters of the people do fear and hate Russia, just as the same three quarters of the people feared COVID and reacted to 9-11 in the way that the controlled demolition people wanted them to.
So it sure seems that the- He's just said that the controlled demolition people were a fake on 9-11.
He's implying there's no planes.
That's pretty impressive.
I wonder if she's gonna,
She's going to address that at all.
The public relations mind control machinery is trying to stay one step ahead of us.
Do you have any ideas how we can try to get a step ahead of them?
Yeah, stop listening to their garbage.
But she's their garbage.
But Robert Malone is their garbage.
But Matt Crawford is their garbage.
But Meryl Nass is their garbage.
You see the problem?
Robert Malone says you're never gonna figure out who Fifth Generation Warfare is, but I'm telling you, we figured it out.
It's him.
It's Jessica Rose.
It's Peter McCullough.
It's Pierre Corey.
It's Matt Crawford.
It's Meryl Nass.
All the people that were mentioned here are part of this show.
And I think they're all basically coordinated underneath Robert Malone, DITRA, DOD man.
I don't know how to do that, because I mean, I can't even get my family members.
I think the Department of Justice, or sorry, the Department of Defense probably killed some people early on and murdered people and lied about it.
And then the rest of the role that the Department of Defense has to play is this.
And they probably used members of NATO and Five Eyes countries to do it.
And that's why Robert Malone is so often coordinating with people from the UK or Australia or Canada.
That's why Jay Bhattacharya started a blog with a Canadian kid.
That's why Alina Chan, a Canadian girl, was given a job at the Broad Institute.
That's why.
It's cooperating with Five Eyes people.
That's why Jiki Leaks is not able to get over Peter Daszak and Tony Fauci and Ralph Baric.
He can't get over them.
He can't admit that Robert Malone is definitely on the same team as them.
He can't admit that Pierre Kory is on the same team as them.
That, obviously, Jessica Rose and Peter McCullough are on the same team as all of them, and that's why Pierre Kory and Peter McCullough are the two guys that had to go to Australia and testify about what happened in America.
Jiki Leaks is on their team.
Jiki Leaks pretends to oppose Panda.
He's on the same team as Nick and Jason and Jonathan and Neil.
It's all the same.
Shoot, his fake substack name is probably just like Master Teacher Brother or something.
Ahmed Khaled Syed Seyed, whatever the hell it is.
Archmedic by ass.
Traitors.
All of them are traitors.
You know, not that I've seen them for like a decade, but I couldn't even get them to turn off the TV.
It's like, no, no, it's a part of our story.
She hasn't seen her family in a decade.
Her family won't listen to her, but she goes between Israel and Canada regularly through the pandemic to surf.
But I guess she's just dealing with friends, not family, huh?
schedule.
And, you know, it gives people a feeling of weird safety and warmth, but it's like, dudes, you got to find another way to get safe and warm.
Cause that ain't it.
Safety and numbers.
Yeah.
It's inexplicable to me.
It's like, no, no, no, no.
You, you have to turn off the television.
You have to get rid of your stupid phone.
You know, maybe that's a little bit too much to ask for most people, but I mean, these are the ways out of this.
I mean,
We have to detach from these things that don't matter, that have no meaning and reconnect with the things that do, which is each other and the earth.
It's just, it's that simple.
You know, turn off the goddamn TV and go outside.
Why not throw in some blasphemy there, right?
Why not just throw in some blasphemy and go outside and connect with the earth?
Don't pray.
Don't connect with God.
Don't get spiritual.
Go connect with the Earth.
Sounds a lot like, I don't know, Russell Brand before he converted to Christianity last month.
All right, well, that's a good place to leave it.
Thank you so much, Dr. Jessica Rose.
Quite impressive and inspiring, both with your numbers-crunching scientific work and also your inspirational rants.
I hope I can get you back on the show for more rants and more scientific parsing in the future.
So thank you, God bless, and keep up the great work.
God bless you.
Yeah, I'd love to come back.
Thank you.
OK, take care.
Bye.
I'm not even really sure what to say anymore.
I'm not even really sure how to process this.
But she definitely was sure that it's not opioids and it wasn't suicide because the research that she did indicates that it's something else.
Now, if Jessica Rose is a good guy and just doing her best and making mistakes, then she needs to admit it and she needs to say it.
Just like if Denny Rancor is really a good guy and he means to promote the right people, then he needs to force these people that promote him, like Robert Malone and the rest of them, he needs to force them to say exactly what Mike Eden has said.
and focus on the observation that there was no excess all-cause mortality prior to the WHO declaration, that there's no all-cause mortality increase until the WHO declaration.
That needs to be front and center and not the 17 million people killed by the shot that they started yelling from the rooftops after they met you in Romania.
You gotta do better than this, Denny.
You gotta force them to admit that they are pointing to the start of the pandemic as evidence of a pandemic.
And you have the data that shows that that's a lie.
You have the data that shows it was murder.
And that means that these people are essentially lying about you and lying about your data by not admitting that your data shows that.
Do better, Denny Rancor.
because otherwise you are part of this illusion of consensus and you are helping them with your inaction by sustaining it.
And we know these people came out early.
We know they did.
They all came out early saying some shit, but not all the shit.
They know about Alina Chan, the Canadian that's now part of the Whitehead Institute at MIT, or the Broad Institute.
You know, the Human Genome Project place where the former boss of Kevin McKernan still works, Matt Lander.
Yeah, she works for him now.
And yes, Kevin McCairn, the guy who was just recently promoted in March on Life Science Site News, along with Kevin McKernan, two years before that was actually on a stream together with Mark Bailey, where they pretended to stop the train, where they pretended to argue about virology and not virology, just like in 2023, we have the mother of SOF,
being promoted with three separate hours on CHD and an hour on Epoch Times as a American thought leader.
You know who else was an American thought leader promoted on Epoch Times in 2020?
Lee Min Yan.
This is a network of liars, ladies and gentlemen.
It's a network of liars that are wittingly or unwittingly participating in the illusion.
misleading our children.
And that's why the crossover event of Andy Kaufman and Steve Kirsch.
Yes, Andy Kaufman, the guy that Kevin McCarran said in February of 2020 was the baddest of bad and all about stopping the no virus guy, Andy Kaufman.
You know, the one that I showed earlier with a photograph with shaking the hand of Andrew Cuomo in 2019.
It's all one big network.
That's why they all interact together.
That's why slowly over these many years, nobody talks about the murder that happened here.
But they're sure that COVID shots are bad.
Boy, they're sure this is worst case scenario.
They're sure that there's multiple shooters.
They're sure that they let this happen, but we don't have to worry about how the kid was fooled because then we might reveal the network that Alex Jones and Soph and Sasha are all a part of.
They created this illusion of consensus, ladies and gentlemen, by sticking to a limited spectrum of debate, and these people need to go to jail for it.
They need to go to jail as traitors.
They were involved in making it seem like, for our kids, that transfection and healthy humans worked.
That's what you just heard in that argument.
We're talking about under 30 only is sketchy, but people above 30 were saved.
And RNA can definitely pandemic because this could have even been a bioweapon.
Stop lying!
These people are lying about it.
And yes, ladies and gentlemen, these people are also lying about it.
And there she is.
There she is, Jessica Rose.
There he is, Robert Malone.
There she is, Jill Glass Poole Malone.
There he is.
Brett Weinstein, there he is right there, Kevin McKernan, they're all liars, they're all traitors, they're either working for weaponized piles of money that are cooperating with these global interests, but they are definitely working against American children, they are working against American families, they are working against the American Constitution and the American Dream.
And they helped do that.
They helped with the controlled demolition of the American dream, of the American ideal, because they helped create this illusion of consensus with their fricking masks and the other bullshit that he did.
And by admitting in July of 2024, that that's the right word, but not admitting that I told him that was the right word four years ago.
And that his wife said it was the right word three years ago.
and that I was the one who insisted that they call it that.
And did they?
Did they?
Could they have?
For the last three and a half years, they could have.
But they chose not to, just like all of these people chose not to.
because they are sustaining an illusion of consensus that is required for this national security exercise, is required for the roles that they play.
And that's why they won't talk about this new consensus that we need, that transfection in healthy humans was always criminally negligent, RNA cannot pandemic, and the vaccine schedule in the USA is a criminal enterprise.
And we won't say that they used murder and lies in order to cover that up and to make sure that for generations to come, this truth would never come out.
And we at GigaOM Biological and the rest of the independent bright web believe that a new consensus is necessary about what these weaponized piles of money have convinced us to argue about.
Please, ladies and gentlemen, stop all transfections in humans because they are trying to eliminate the control group by any means necessary.
If you liked what you saw, please find a way at GigaOMBiological.com to support this stream.
We need new subscribers.
We don't have and had new subscribers in a couple weeks now.
So if you're not sharing or you stopped, if you're not supporting and you think about it, I'm begging you, please get on that website and find a way to support.
If you need to communicate with me, it's GigaOM.bio.
And if you want to share the stream when it's not live, don't share it on Twitch.
please share stream.gigaohm.bio in the links there.
You can find other videos that we're working on and talking about also at stream.gigaohm.bio.
And so if there's stuff that I've looked at in the stream, that kind of thing, you can find that there as well.
Thanks for joining me.
I hope it was okay.
I got to get on the road and get some dog food and a couple other things that I've been putting off because
My best friend does all that stuff.
So anyway, thanks for joining me.
I will see you again tomorrow.
to left field a long home run for Aaron judge into the second deck his ninth of the season and the Yankees have tied it
I'm actually going to a butcher because I get fresh meat for Ruby all the time.
So we're not going to get high-end bag food.
We're going to get meat.
Thanks for the support guys.
Thanks for sharing my work.
See you tomorrow by everybody out there.
And how about some pretty nice sportsmanship by a Blue Jays fan out there.
Give that young Yankee fan a ball boy.
That kid is not going to forget tonight.