Highway run into the midnight sun Wheels go round and round on my mind Restless hearts sleep alone tonight
Sending all my love along the wire They say that the road ain't no place for a star to find me Right down the line it's me, you and me And loving a music man ain't always what it's supposed to be
Oh girl, you stand by me I'm forever yours Faithfully
Circus life Under the beach of the world We all need the clowns to make us smile Through space and time Always another show
Wondering where I am lost without you And being a part of you just never felt The true strangers meant to fall in love again I get the joy of rediscovering you
Oh girl, you stand by me I'm forever yours If only
I think truth is good for kids.
We're so busy lying, we don't even recognize the truth no more in this society.
We want everybody to feel good.
That's not, that's not the way life is.
But you can tell if someone's lying, you know, you can sort of feel it in people.
And I have lied.
I'm sure I'll lie again.
I don't want to lie, you know, and I don't think I'm a liar.
I try not to be a liar.
I don't want to be a liar.
I think it's like really important not to be a liar.
introduce Jonathan, who's going to talk about his latest distillation of what the pandemic means to society, to biology, to science, and to democracy, and the whole kind of idea of empiricism and integrity.
And then each of us is
that we have, each one of you is going to get a chance to comment.
It doesn't matter much at all what you believe about vaccines until we invent really important ones.
Until we have a pandemic that's killing everyone and you know, it's it's not it's you know measles plus and I can tolerate what you think about measles because You know not that many people die from it.
It's it's just a big hassle in the end
No, when we have this new pandemic that's got 75% mortality, there'll be no pretense of being polite in the face of these beliefs.
It'll be a moral emergency because it has to be.
I'm afraid that the latest data tells us that the deal is essentially a worst-case scenario.
I'm afraid that
Well, you isolate a virus by finding the virus which causes a disease.
You purify a virus by making a lot of, I mean just by purifying it so you get a pure virus.
I don't understand what the issue.
I see.
I have no responsibility for the current pandemic.
No, it depends on how they use it.
Can you explain the process of HIV isolation?
Well, didn't Dr. Gallo do that?
I mean, he actually isolated it, so... I mean, why should I do all of this?
This is all textbook stuff you're asking.
Stop lying!
The End
My kids actually found me a plush toy virus at the bookstore the other day.
They were at the used bookstore and my kid came back.
Papa, you're not going to believe what we found.
We found you a coronavirus plush toy.
It is not from event 201.
So here we are again.
I'm going to turn the music down a little bit.
Everybody's complaining that my music is too loud.
So I'm turning it down a little bit, and I'm putting my voice up a little bit, even if it's a little loud in my ears.
Trying to break the enchantment here with a little bit of work on the past.
I've told you many times before that there's evidence on the internet still available, even on YouTube, that can teach us what really happened.
All you got to do is go back and look for it.
The truth is actually available many different angles on it and tonight I really want to dig into one angle that I think is really important and that is early 2021 Malone and Associates because this is when they were still
jockeying for position, boxing people out, trying to make sure that people didn't catch on to the idea that there was no spread in New York City.
They didn't want anyone to catch on to the idea of what virology really was.
They didn't want anyone to think of the idea that placebos could be used to really make this work.
And they definitely didn't want you to know that transfection was a technology that was on Robert Malone's resume for more than a decade.
And that's also why they don't want you talking about all the ways that the protocols were murdered, especially that pesky, that pesky, give them as much as you want of the oxygen thing.
If you are, if you are at all interested.
If you are at all interested in that Oxygen story, I can highly recommend the last episode of Housatonic Live.
It is just a spectacular breakdown of the oddities of this story and the people that were involved in it.
It seems highly unlikely that this wasn't an integral part of the Scooby-Doo.
and all of these people, all of them are starting to attribute bad motives to being marked, bad motives to the people that are really trying to figure it out and instead they want you to be stuck on the scooby-doo, stuck on the mystery.
Solving the mystery seems to be what the weaponized piles of money want us to do.
Blaming the shots on the United States seems to be what the
the weaponized piles of money want the Five Eyes countries to do.
I think there is a real motion right now of these weaponized piles of money to push people to be convinced about the origins of the virus.
I think these people, by participating in this argument, are in the trap.
And I think this theater spans all the way to people like Robert Malone, Jessica Rose, and many, many more.
It is not to be taken lightly how much of this entire theater has been controlled by their participants, their players.
And how much of this mythology we've been forced to accept because we thought we were solving a mystery and they were helping us.
Not just this guy and his minions.
Not just the people that are pushing all the transhuman agenda, but the people who are purported to be fighting against it.
Even some of the people that purported to stand up against the AIDS virus and the AIDS epidemic were likely put there on purpose because they already knew.
They already knew how to govern us with this stuff.
They already knew that we were bamboozled.
They already knew that they had charlatan power over us and they were never going to give it back.
And so when the AIDS thing, you know, was done, they had another thing coming and another thing coming.
And now with social media, we have given an unprecedented power over our lives to these charlatans and these, these charlatans.
And maybe I'm wrong about some of these people.
That's why they're circled in yellow.
But some of them I'm damn sure about.
And if we want to make gentle,
If we want to make gentle the life of this world as we transition out of their mythology, we are going to need to be able to see how amazing the artificial wave of consensus is.
It's going away from the deep water.
It's perfect all the way across.
It's a great wave for kids to imagine that they're learning the ocean and that they're participating in the ocean.
But this is not a dangerous wave because it goes away from the shallow, because it's not an unusual random wave, but it is a very orchestrated wave of consensus.
And so your children are fooled by it.
They think they understand what's going on in the world.
And in order for them to see this wave of consensus, you've got to teach them the true biology and stay focused on it.
You've got to not take their bait on social media.
That's thinking about all the questions they want you to ask.
while not asking the right ones and you gotta teach your kids to love their neighbors because they need friends and we need communities to bounce back especially in America and so that's why this is a special message all the time for Americans even though of course I feel solidarity with everyone around the world who was subject to this multinational
intelligence operation where they convinced us that a pandemic happened when indeed it did not when indeed it's it's biologically not only implausible but I think impossible and so we're gonna spend most of this summer trying to sort these ideas out and try to get them succinctly expressed so that we can share them with our family and friends right after the right after the election when we have their attention
That's the idea.
Giga Home Biological is a stream that's been around for about four years now.
It started out as a YouTube channel being made by a research assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, and it transitioned into a channel about a lab leak.
thinking that I was solving the mystery myself and after four years of trying to solve that mystery I've kind of pulled my head out and realized that the national security operation was a script.
It was a script designed to make us solve that mystery and then teach our kids that mythology and I think there's a chance that we can have a huge paradigm shift and that people will understand that public health has always been a grift
and that we can reorient our societies toward cleaner environments and cleaner food and more decentralized communities.
But if we're going to do this, and we're going to start to advocate for that kind of sovereignty, we're going to have to pull our hands away from our eyes, we're going to have to drop our phones, we're going to have to take Twitter and these kinds of things off of our phones, and we're going to have to participate in them in a very, very controlled manner.
Because if the idea is to engage in united non-compliance, it's got to be informed.
Because united non-compliance that is basically fueled by their narratives or their mythologies, we're never going to really usefully escape.
And so this is GigaOM Biological, and hopefully together we're going to find a way to get out of this trap.
That's what I hope.
so
Good evening, everybody.
It's 511 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
I'm coming to you live from my garage as usual.
This is GigaOM Biological, a high-resistance, low-noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
It is the 6th of July, 2024.
We are four and a half years into this multinational security operation.
I'm wearing my 2014 10-year-old HeliMasters hat from the Netherlands.
I used to be a pretty
a pretty competent beginner RC helicopter pilot.
And I can still fly, and I still fly in the sim occasionally, but...
I used to be an incredible enthusiast.
That's why I played that video in the introduction in case you're wondering what in the hell was that thing flying around.
It was a helicopter, a 700 size helicopter.
It's about six feet across.
The blades are very, very much big enough to decapitate the user.
And he was flying in a 3D way so that the
the blades can turn either way and so that the helicopter can be blowing or sucking depending on what you're doing there and so the helicopter can fly upside down and do all the crazy things you saw there.
It takes an incredible amount of 3D spatial awareness and hand-eye coordination that I think is one of the highest examples of
of sort of human neuronal hand-eye coordination.
There are only a handful of people that can fly at that level and certainly with that amount of precision that some of those guys fly with.
Anyway, it was a very fascinating thing for me to always think about trying to get a few of those guys inside of an MRI machine while they were flying in the sim to see if you could process what parts of their brain were working.
I don't know, that was just a pipe dream a long, long time ago.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm a human just like you.
I've got kids.
I've got a wife.
I forgot it was my anniversary today.
And so I apologize, Phila, you still remain the number one.
Of course, you know that.
Intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
Transfection in healthy humans is criminally negligent and RNA cannot pandemic.
Unfortunately, V, these ideas are likely to be a part of our lives for the rest of it.
Hopefully, they will also be good enough and their compadres will be good enough to carry us through to our old age.
I love you very much.
I love you very much, V.
These people need to be called out for what they are.
They were positioned very early in the pandemic.
They were put on podcasts.
They were put in front of people all around social media.
And what you need to see is Bret Weinstein and Sam Harris and Eric Weinstein and the Rubin Report and all of these sort of
mid-level podcasters that have gone from being relatively nobody on the internet to being relatively prominent on these Rumble and Locals and YouTube and they're everywhere.
And so these are not spontaneous entrepreneurs working in the back of their garage like me.
These are people with staff.
These are people with funding.
These are people with sponsors.
These are people that most importantly were put in place so that people like
like Kevin McKernan would have a place to go and talk so that an illusion of consensus about what questions needed to be asked and what are the likely answers could be created on the internet with these podcasts.
And there's not just a few of them.
It's not just Rogan.
That's the trick you need to understand.
Many, many, many of these podcasters are witting or unwitting participants in this illusion because they have entertained and listened to these people and haven't had the biological knowledge, the background, or the insight to see that these people are coordinatedly lying about the potential for RNA to pandemic when in fact there is none.
Now the reason why this is so important is because the way that they do it is in teams.
And oftentimes it is Americans working in partnership with people from the UK or other Five Eyes countries.
And I have been subjected to this more than several times during the course of the last four and a half years.
The latest example of it is an American by the name of Jessica Hockett and a UK guy by the name of Jonathan Engler and their associates.
The behavior of these people in Twitter messages and in audio messages on my phone over the last nine or 10 months has led me to come to the conclusion that they were always working in concert to convince me to accept certain people as being people that would be good conduits for my information.
Good conduits to look to as ways to get the word of my biology out.
And then they obfuscated everything that I was doing
and obfuscated our collaboration for like nine months, representing them as part of my team, or on my side, or whatever you want to call it.
But in reality, on Twitter, they promoted each other.
And on Twitter and on their sub stacks, they promoted each other.
And they minimized my role and impact in their understanding of the biology, even though they came to me under the pretense that I had the unique insight, which helped them finally tie a lot of loose ends together, but nevermind telling anybody that it was me who did that.
And so once that ruse was broken, because Jessica Hockett made a couple very interesting, what I think must be bungles or mistakes in a text message to Mark and a proton mail to me that I just happened to not read until its effect couldn't, until the only thing it was, was evidence of her mistake.
And so the lucky thing is, is that when you look back on these conversations that they chose to have on Twitter via DM, I can publish those whenever I want to.
And the contents of those conversations are often very revealing, because despite the fact that I might protest that someone of their circle is making a very bad statement, why don't you call them out?
they would always defend those people saying, you know, there's lots of different opinions.
She's really great.
I don't want to, I don't want to correct her.
But with me, it was either promote them or we're going to ignore you.
Right with us or we're going to ignore you.
And this is just the latest manifestation of it.
I was also part of the Steve Kirsch steering committee, this kind of thing.
And so I think these study halls are really important because again, here you have what I would consider a
The best description would be a traitor.
This is somebody who was listening to me argue very vigorously that he had to start calling it transfection as soon as possible and explain to people how simple transfection was and that it was a product line in several biotech companies for the decade before the pandemic along with transformation.
And yet here he is today responding to somebody who happens to mention that I actually was credited on their podcast as saying it should be a transfection and called that.
And they agreed with me, but then never did it.
And here he is saying, yeah, it's the right word, but it's not widely understood.
And then a third person says, well, make it understood that just a thought.
And I don't want to be a creep, but I was saying that to Brett in 2021.
Right up until he said that he didn't think that 30 minutes on Zoom would help.
That he wouldn't understand me any better with a few minutes on Zoom.
So I just, I forgot.
I mean, I just, I'd walked out of that signal chat assuming that they were just playing me the whole time.
What was I doing there teaching them biology all the time if they weren't even gonna use a term?
Nevermind concepts.
Which they also ignored until Robert Malone or somebody said it was okay to say those concepts in their presence.
These people are traitors, ladies and gentlemen.
They're not talking about American laws that need to be changed.
They're talking about the WHO and the UN.
These people talked about bushmeat for a year.
These people wore masks for a year.
This guy advocated for everyone taking ivermectin for 30 days to get to zero COVID in June, 2021.
And I think the show that we're gonna watch today, which is part of this operation to get us to teach gain of function to our children that they want us to accomplish for them,
this, this idea that the worst case scenario has happened, that something got leaked and it's all over the world now.
They must be killing us.
All this stuff must be under their control.
This is all nonsense.
And they want you to forget that this 2024, they want you to forget that this is the fifth year of this nonsense.
These people don't get to claim that they, they spoke up and had principles when it was necessary.
They didn't even speak up until 2021.
some of them until 2022, most of them in the same month of 2021, Naomi Wolf, Brett Weinstein, Steve Kirsch, Robert Malone, all because, why?
Because of Byram Bridle.
They had to step in front of Byram Bridle and make sure that the lab leak was never questioned, that the danger was never questioned, that the disease was never questioned, that the novelty was never questioned.
that zero COVID wasn't questioned as a possibility.
And the way they're getting away with it is that they're not talking about what they were doing in 2020 and 2021.
They're just not talking about it anymore.
They won't admit what they said on those podcasts.
They won't talk about what they said on those podcasts.
And that's why I think it is vital that we talk about what they said on those podcasts, because it's the faith that's a lie.
Transfection is definitely real.
Transformation is real.
It's virology.
But the faith in a novel thing that goes around the world fueled by RNA is just nonsense.
It's absolute nonsense.
That's why none of these people talk about these five people at all.
They want you to blame it on the DOD.
These people want you to focus on the shots and maybe the DNA double-stranded contamination in it, which they don't seem to be saying much anymore because I think we trounce them on that.
Because it's so stupid to say that when transfection in its purest form would still be criminally negligent in a healthy 10-year-old or a healthy 80-year-old.
That these lipid nanoparticles were inappropriate for any healthy person.
And so they want you to focus on a very limited spectrum of that crap.
That's why the VAERS expert from the very beginning has always been a non-American.
And nobody will pay attention to Albert to this day.
Welcome the Eagles, you know.
It's just all a big game for these people.
And as long as they only focus on their one talking point, their one book title, their one set of patents, then they never get around to telling you that they just murdered people and lied about it.
Give them as much oxygen as they want.
Turn it up as high as it needs.
Kyle Seidel was writing papers that said, you know, 60 liters is great.
Publishing videos saying 60 liters a minute is wonderful.
We're going through thousands of liters of oxygen here.
Don't anybody smoke.
Now Robert Malone is talking about a risk assessment for avian flu and telling you it's there, telling you that it's moving, telling you that there are some, showing you some skepticism.
The limited spectrum of debate with a great big argument inside of it is even, the other side is the much less tethered to reality side, his Brownstone Institute and CHD.
Robert Malone doesn't say anything much about gain-of-function research here, in his substack.
And so the limited spectrum of debate right now about where avian flu is going, headed, gone, coming from, is defined by, on one side, Robert Malone.
And on the other side, it's defined by children's health defense and brownstone.
It's just such nonsense.
Okay, so I see in the video that that's there.
So there's motors called Scorpion Motors.
That's not because I'm a Scorpio.
And then Gali on the other side is also a helicopter brand.
So don't get too excited about that.
That's just a Scorpion motor thing.
So Malone does the Vajon Health thing.
Why did this stop?
I'm gonna escape out of here, I think.
Yes, I think that's better.
Yes, Malone does Vajon Health in June 2021.
Now, I didn't cut all the clips out of the archive yet to show you that Kevin McCairn and Charles Rixey and Christine Grace
They did an absolutely despicable trio presentation for Vajon Health at some weekend COVID summit.
It was appalling.
And my review of that summit and my critique of the worst slide deck ever
um used by christine grace um she actually made kevin mccarran look like a pretty competent presenter the way that she she blubbed it but her her
let's call them text rich slide deck, needed a lot of critique and also her focus on things without actually teaching anybody anything about what anything meant, resulted in her actually writing a letter to Children's Health Defense complaining that I was doing something illegal or incorrect on the internet, which is technically tortious interference with an employer or an employer,
employment or a business interference or some shit like that.
I'm not really sure.
My lawyer said that I should just take all that stuff and archive it so I have.
That's the game that these people play.
And they will stop at no level in order to create the illusion that somehow the world is responding to me.
But it's not.
Because they're all on the same team.
It's not like they didn't know each other in some way or weren't connected to each other in some way.
These people are not randomly distributed anymore.
It may be that some of the people at CHD don't know the extent to which there are traitors in our midst, but nobody gets a free pass anymore.
Because this video, for example, has been available for all these people to watch and think about and take notes on since June of 2021.
And so there's no excuse for anybody not to know what we're about to see.
And I think that what we're about to see in the first, let's say half an hour, is gonna be absolutely mind-blowing.
Because this guy just blows his mouth off like, there's no, nothing to be lost here.
I can just talk all I want because I'm Ditra and because I'm running this thing.
Everybody's going to take direction from me.
There's a really good one coming about a housekeeper that I'm just going to freak out about.
Let's do it.
Study hall time.
I mean, this is already pretty extraordinary.
I have this incredible music and graphics.
And like, Japan, that's who he's talking about.
He's talking about McCairn.
Germany, he's talking about supplement sales people, you know?
And he has this stuff going already in 2021.
And I want you to hear very carefully.
One of the things I really want you to hear is that a lot of his questions, I think, are queued up by Malone, which I find pretty funny.
There he is.
Maestro.
He also plays in a symphony.
Hello and good evening to everyone.
And we're going to have an absolutely fascinating discussion.
Fascinating.
This isn't going to work.
Oh boy, it's not going to work.
That's not going to work for me.
All the way back in 1988.
That's Rob Malone.
And we're going to explore some of his ideas, some of the history, some of his experiences.
And I hope that you will find this as absolutely fascinating as I have.
So here we have with us, Rob, how are you?
I'm good.
And thank you, Dr. McMillan, for having me on your podcast and for the opportunity to discuss ideas and data and science and everything else.
Super smiling.
Let's get straight to the crunch point that I want to understand.
You were a PhD student when you first came up with the concept of mRNA vaccination.
Were you the first person ever to think about this?
I can't say whether anybody else preceded me in thinking about it.
I'm not aware of documentation of others having.
I think we should start out with a list of a few things that we're interested in figuring out here.
So first of all, super smiley, is there a warning?
So that's the first question that I have.
Is there a warning?
Is there a clear warning?
So will he actually warn us about anything to do with this technology?
Will he say that there's reason for pause?
That's the main issue that I have here, because that's what he's supposed to be a hero about.
And in May of this year, 2021, I had already put out a public call to pause all transfections.
In May of 2021, I already had it written in January of 2021.
I could have probably published it in January of 2021.
But I was delayed because somebody said that they might be able to get it in an op-ed or something like that.
And that would be my other author on that, which I now have posted on my website under the link Scooby.
because I had been fooled by these people, including Gerrit van den Balsch and others that had convinced me that the transfection might be changing the gain-of-function virus as it circulates.
And so the reasons why I was making the call for a pause in transfections was very many, there's a long list, but one of them was the potential enrichment of the circulating new pathogen.
And that's why I have it on that link as Scooby, because it ain't my finest hour.
I was completely bamboozled into thinking I had solved the mystery, that I was one of the smartest people on earth, because I had figured it out like the rest of drastic.
And I had people telling me that I was that.
And that's how they did it.
That's why a lot of these people are still there, because they have comfort.
Because everything's working out just fine.
And because they've been told to keep their head down, I think, and just stay focused on the message about the shots and everything will be fine.
Don't talk about the murder and the lying about it.
So let's see what we got here with Mr. Maloney.
In my experience, when the time is right for a technology or discovery, it tends to emerge kind of organically all across the world.
In this case, strangely, it doesn't seem to have done so in that time frame of the late 80s.
And so the record suggests that I was the first to develop this idea, but I can't say that nobody else had it.
That'd be impossible.
And so when you think, because you were studying, you were doing your PhD at the Salk Institute at that time.
And when you were working on your dissertation with mRNA, and just to clarify, in case people don't fully understand, even though we're talking about it in the context of COVID, a lot of people may not understand the simplistic perspective on mRNA.
What really were you doing in a very simple way for somebody to understand?
So you're kind of asking the question, how did this all come about?
And I can assure you that I did not start off thinking, I'm going to have a PhD on RNA vaccines.
Absolutely not.
The genesis of this is that I was fascinated.
I was fascinated with retroviruses.
I had kind of cut my teeth on mouse mammary tumor virus, a breast cancer virus of mice, and in a laboratory that played a key role in initial discoveries having to do with the role of retroviruses in AIDS back at UC Davis at the Primate Research Center.
And so that was my background.
And I'd come out of that as entering into an MD-PhD program absolutely fascinated with the idea of retroviral-based gene therapy.
And I thought this was something that I could do with my fascination and knowledge of retroviruses.
And it looked likely that this was really going to happen technically.
And it's something that I could continue to pursue through my entire career.
And by this point in time, there would be gene therapists everywhere in every hospital.
That was my vision at the time.
And so I went to this university, UC San Diego, that had two of the absolute pioneers in retroviral gene therapy, Inder Verma and Ted Friedman.
than the one that really came up with the whole gene thing.
So that's interesting because he said repeatedly that he was fascinated by retroviruses.
So retroviruses puts him right smack dab in the middle of HIV and Gallo and Baltimore.
And since these small communities of scientists are indeed very small, it's very likely that as a aggressive young PhD, MD, PhD student that he met Gallo, he met Baltimore, he met all these people because he wanted to meet the people that were doing these things.
I mean, that's how it works.
I would have done the same thing and I did in neuroscience.
I mean, I had no qualms going up to somebody at neuroscience and introducing myself as a little groupie.
And so I'm sure he did it, too.
That's how you get mentorships.
That's how you get postdocs, is just being bold.
And so this puts him right, right, I mean, really right in the middle of it, where Judy Mikovits was, where
with Murray Gardner is who we worked with.
It's a real, it's a real interesting little tiny network of people that actually also intellectually descends from people like Stanley Plotkin and Hilary Kaprowski and Salk and Sabin and all these other people that are all people that have taken part in the erection of this narrative, so to speak.
The construction of it.
That's what they're doing here.
Now they are constructing a narrative about what happened in the pandemic.
And the illusion of consensus here is that the doctor, Philip, is learning from the doctor, Malone.
The consensus is that Malone knows what he's talking about.
And he's really interested in retroviruses in the past.
It's a very, very,
interesting admission.
It has nothing to do with RNA viruses at all.
It's retroviruses.
So they're still thinking that you have to write
You want to write into the genome, you know, that's what they're still thinking, because that's what retroviruses can do.
If you believe virology and you believe Baltimore, that they can write into the genome of a cell, which is a very special thing, very different than transfection, where you're simply expressing a protein for a brief period of time until that RNA goes away.
Just keeping everything straight.
Now, where the rubber hits the road for the young graduate student is, what are you actually going to do?
What is the question you want to work on?
And for me, one of the core questions was, how does the RNA of the retrovirus assemble into live virus particles and get produced as viruses?
This was essential to the fundamentals of making retroviral vectors work.
And there was enough known about the RNA of the retrovirus in the specific packaging sequences that it was possible, theoretically, to examine that RNA, mutate that RNA, and ask questions about how those specific sequences were interacting with cellular proteins and viral proteins to assemble the retroviral particles that would be produced.
So there you have it all in one in a nutshell.
And if you will read the last substack that I wrote, which is just a working document.
It's not really a finished product.
It was kind of notes that I was handing to people that I thought were my friends, but turned out to be my meddlers.
If you read that substack, you will see that one of the things that is pretty well known in RNA virology is you need to co-transfect.
You need to co-transfect the RNA called the N.
gene and if you do that you will get very successful packaging of apparently viral particles.
Now what Robert Malone just described there is the early history of virology and the early history of retroviruses and specifically the quest to understand the mechanisms behind viral packaging.
It is the infectious cycle ladies and gentlemen
He's talking about the infectious cycle when he talks about viral packaging.
He's talking about how they hijack the machinery of your cells to make them do something they don't already do.
which of course is not what happens.
And anybody that's watching this for a while or watching me and my show for a while knows that you can't make a cell do something that it doesn't already do.
And so the main argument that I'm making, and a lot of people that have been studying exosomes for a long time have been making without knowing it,
is that our cells release viral-like particles all the time that are called exosomes or endosomes or whatever you want to call them.
They can have proteins on the outside that can be specific for an address.
They cannot have proteins on the outside.
They can have RNA and DNA inside.
Maybe they have enzymes sometimes.
We don't know.
It's very hard to study them because it's an incredibly heterogeneous signal, this size scale.
Because there's bacteriophages in there.
There's garbage in there.
There are signals from other animals in there.
It's all mixed in.
Tiny, tiny, tiny signals that we have no way of getting to.
So the only thing we can really do is amplify them.
That's it.
And so they've...
using polymerase chain reaction purported to amplify some of those signals and through that amplification and other methodological experiments methodological manipulations they purport to understand how these entities work and that they're all outside of us that's just impossible
But if you got in on the game early, you were in on the ground floor, you were there when the illusion was being set, when the narrative, the mythology was being established.
And so what I'm arguing is, is that if this goes as deep as those people like Dave Resnick and Peter Duesberg would say,
than people like Robert Malone were put in place already back then, recruited already back then, and read into the national security narrative already back then, and have been participating in its active sustaining and its active curation at the WHO, active curation at closed door grant committee meetings, and all of this stuff.
consulting for the people that write the grants to these committees.
And so what I am suggesting is pretty strong, pretty right on with what Mark is suggesting, that a lot of these people have been deep state operatives for a very long time.
I hate the words deep state as an idea, but if you use it as a general term to describe someone who has been working covertly for the government,
even as a government employee.
You can work for the government and still work covertly in the sense of you tell everybody that you're doing one job, when in reality, the Department of Defense or Health and Human Services or whoever you work for, whatever intelligence agency you work for, knows that you have an alternative job, which might very well be to sustain the illusion
of retroviral biology to sustain the illusion of virology in general and of infectious disease as a pathogen-oriented immune response and a pathogen-associated molecular patterns as being the way that the immune response is orchestrated.
to effectively neutralize any other interpretation of the immune system and neutralize any other interpretation of that biology, for example, it being endogenous signaling.
So that, as I explained in that Gabe Mason podcast, that maybe when I encounter a RNA or a bacteria or a bacteriophage,
that is maladaptive to my system for whatever reason, maybe my immune system is capable of sending signals to my family that manifest in a sore throat for a day or a cough for a day.
And they develop immunity or their microbiome develops an immunity or a tolerance to something that otherwise they wouldn't have built an immunity or tolerance to in the same way.
Maybe we send signals and use MHC molecules to select mates.
For all we know, no one's going to care because that's not funded.
They don't want us to think about the irreducible complexity that is us.
They want us to think of ourselves as stupid meat puppets.
Machines.
And that was why they used Rodney, for example, in all those TED Talks.
I don't know if it's ever become clear to you if you've watched enough of them.
But what they did is they warmed everybody up with Rodney because he's so charming and he's so ethereal.
But his explanation for how things are learned and complex skills are learned by the body and the mind is something that they're very interested in.
And so someone with the level of insight into how skill, high-level skill and learning is accomplished and the flow state is accomplished is something that they were very interested in from Rodney.
But at some point, I don't know if he was as useful to them as they thought, simply because he does have a respect for the irreducible complexity.
He does understand that, you know, what he sacrificed in order to get where he was.
He understands a lot.
That they want to understand but don't because they're not asking the right questions.
And so again, I can't stress enough I think you're witnessing something here a possible real paradigm shift because This Philip Macmillan is not a hero who quit his job so that he could teach the world the immunology that it would save it he's not somebody who lost his job at a medical school because he was speaking out and
These are people who were put in place, elevated, and allowed to circulate on social media as well as anybody wanted them to, without any, let's say, without any negative programming.
And so Robert Malone being elevated on this guy's show several times
over the course of these four years is a very, very, very obvious sign that this is not a horse farmer who's decided to zoom and save the world.
An emu farmer who's decided to save the world.
This is a deep state operative, a government agent working for an intelligence agency or a five eyes network or some shit.
to help with the controlled demolition of America in the West.
And I don't know how far off script they are now, but I do know that when you listen to him here in this video, you are hearing a very cocky, very confident, over his skis actor, who if you just take the time to watch this video, and I promise I will push play, you will see a guy who is still figuring out
what bullshit's going to stick.
Before you go any further, let me just clarify because I'm talking really basic stuff for people.
When you say RNA, usually the DNA in our body is what makes all the proteins.
Well, it goes from DNA, DNA makes RNA and RNA then makes the proteins.
Yes.
And so when you talk about RNA, you are talking about going in the middle between the DNA and the proteins to be able to change the way how a cell works.
Is that about right?
So that kind of jumps ahead in time to the idea of mRNA as a drug and mRNA as a vaccine.
At this point in time, I just want to set the stage.
You know, the truth of the matter is retroviruses, and it's captured in the name, retroviruses are very odd.
And David Baltimore got the Nobel for this.
in that they have a protein that will take from the RNA and make DNA, which then gets put into the chromosome of the cell, which then makes retroviral RNA, which then gets packaged and put out as new viral particles.
That's the life cycle of a retrovirus, is it's got this backwards step.
But yes, you're exactly right.
The central dogma of biology is that DNA makes RNA, RNA makes protein.
So in this case, I was trying to ask this question about how retroviruses package RNA so that they can produce viable retroviruses.
And in order to build that as an experimental system, I had to have a way to produce synthetic RNA with mutations in it, put it into a cell and ask whether it comes back out as virus particles.
See, so he was actually mutating individual genes to see which genes resulted in exosome production.
I mean, how else can you hear it?
I mean, he calls them viruses, but he's using these genes, these small transcripts to see which ones stimulate the release of particles.
Now we can go back at his papers over the summer and we can look and see if he's bullshitting or not, but that's what he claims right here, which suggests a very intimate knowledge of the illusion.
Because we at GigaOM Biological have come to the conclusion that the illusion is the infectious cycle.
That the infectious cycle is outside pathogenic particles that are hijacking the machinery of our cells to make our cells do something they don't already do instead of endogenous signaling mechanisms that are being misconstrued as pathogenic mechanisms.
Now, it is possible.
It is still possible.
that there is something happening, that there is something transmitting, that there are symptoms that can pass from conspecific to conspecific for a limited time.
But the idea of a pandemic that is fueled by an RNA that was crafted and the crafting of it is what endowed it with the ability to pandemic is a lie.
It is an absolute monstrous exaggeration.
that it has no basis in biology at all.
There isn't a paper I can show you that proves that, because there is no proof for it.
And you can't prove a negative.
Nobody sets out to show that, look, RNA can't go around the world forever, because it can't.
And he spent his graduate time trying to figure out what genes of retroviruses, remember Bob Gallo and
David Baltimore, you know, the liar at the beginning of every stream lately.
This is their idea.
The Baltimore scheme of where these enzymes fit and where these molecules fit and how we just use DNA to RNA to ribosome to protein, but they have all kinds of other stuff they can do.
And they do it while they hijack our own cells.
It's just absurd.
I have the feeling that this is one of the guys that like they recruited him when he was young and raring to go and super excited.
And he's been in it ever since.
That's why Merrill Nass and his history go back very, very far.
because likely they've both been part of this little charade for a very long time.
The bioweapons expert from Maine and the bioweapons expert from the foot of the Shenandoah National Forest.
It's like Radagast and his girlfriend or something.
And that's what got me going on this.
It wasn't because I was going to change the world or make an RNA vaccine or any of that stuff.
That's where it started.
I was in an amazing hothouse gene therapy environment.
Just to give an example, the senior postdoc, when he left the laboratory, created the leading adenoviral vector company that now has been sold to Johnson & Johnson.
And that technology is the basis for the J&J vaccine now.
So I wonder why he didn't say the name.
I think that's Cursel, right?
Cursel?
I think that was that name and he probably worked for them or something.
I don't know.
Mark could tell you that.
Why don't you go look it up on Mark's website sometime and use his website for something?
Because all that information is there.
You can see Robert Malone's extensive career.
You can see an example of his resume and you can check some of this stuff out.
So I was in this amazing pressure cooker doing these gene therapy experiments and surrounded by people grappling with the early days of gene therapy and what the problems were.
Was there any specific moment when you thought, oh my goodness, this is a possibility to use this technology to make a vaccine all the way in the 1980s?
He just told you that he thought there was gonna be a gene therapist at every hospital in America using retroviruses to cure childhood diseases.
Using them as vaccines was a secondary idea to the idea of altering humans at the genome level.
First, of course, the innocent and totally benign goal of curing childhood diseases by editing the genome.
Not really sure how you do that without changing an embryo, but anyway,
So there was two kind of events.
The first one was the aha moment about using gene therapy technology to produce vaccines.
And that happened because I was working very closely with a postdoc mentor.
His name is Dan St.
Louis.
He still lives in San Diego.
And Dan was working on a system where he would use retrovirus vectors to put genes expressing a secreted protein into cells of a mouse, and then collecting them in a little package, a nodule, we could say, placing them as a transplant into the mouse, and then the mouse would continue making the protein.
So this was putting things into engineered cells in cell culture, and then implanting them back in the mouse.
That was the model, using a retrovirus.
And Dan ran into a problem.
It was a huge paradox in the laboratory.
The cells would produce the protein in the mouse for about three weeks, and then they would stop producing it.
And Inder's lab, where I was, Inder Verma, one of the top.
Wow, this is a huge detail.
Did you hear it?
So what he's saying is that this St.
Louis guy, he transfected cells.
And then he put those cells into a mouse, like a little tumor.
And that little tumor then grows in the mouse for like three weeks and produces the protein.
So presumably you would think of something like insulin.
Or maybe an enzyme that you need all the time.
And so they're growing cells here and they're transfecting them.
So that they produce a protein in the mouse, like they're putting cell culture, a little nodule in, and then it produces it for about three weeks.
And then the immune system, of course, kills those cells because they're foreign.
Or they're expressing a foreign protein.
I don't know which one it would be necessarily.
leaders at the time in regulation of gene expression.
And the others who were supporting him in that mission thought that this must be a... I think Dan St.
Louis, he said, I'll go back.
And then they would stop producing it.
and then implanting them into cells of a mouse.
I was working very closely with a post-doc mentor.
His name is Dan St.
Louis.
He still lives in San Diego.
And Dan was working on a system where he would use retrovirus vectors to put genes expressing a secreted protein into cells of a mouse and then collecting them in a little package, a nodule, we could say, placing them as a transplant into the mouse, and then the mouse would continue making the protein.
So this was putting things into engineered cells in cell culture and then implanting them back in the mouse.
That was the model, using a retrovirus.
And Dan ran into a problem.
It was a huge paradox in the laboratory.
The cells would produce the protein in the mouse for about three weeks, and then they would stop producing it.
And Ender's lab, where I was- So I want to stop here because remember, he's transforming, right?
He's using retroviruses and DNA.
It's RNA, but it has to write it into DNA.
So this might've been an RNA retrovirus, but then it writes it into DNA.
So he transformed this.
This is transformation.
So he transforms the cell culture, and then he puts the transformed cells back into the mouse.
He's not putting retroviruses into the mouse.
Make sure that you hear that.
It's not quite the same thing yet.
Fair enough.
one of the top leaders at the time in regulatory regulation of gene expression, and the others who were supporting him in that mission thought that this must be a what was happening was some sort of a control event that the retroviruses were getting turned off in the cells.
And the aha moment for me as somebody trained in medicine for a couple years and immunology and vaccines and all that
was, good heavens, this is happening at three weeks, which is exactly the timeline for a good, robust cellular immoral immune response.
Probably what's going on is not some epigenetic, fancy chromosomal silencing thing, but rather simply that the mouse is making an immune response against the foreign protein.
And lo and behold, that was what happened.
Now, it seems like a very small thing in retrospect, but it was heresy at the time.
Gene therapy had not yet come to confront the fact that it has this fundamental logic flaw, which is if you're putting the good gene into a patient, the patient's immune system doesn't know that it's the good gene.
It only knows that it's a foreign gene, and it will mount an immune response against it, and it will also mount an immune response against the vector if it's an adenovirus or retrovirus or whatever.
So this aha moment seems trivial in retrospect.
time, it was a kind of heresy, and not well received, as you might imagine.
But that was one of the key ones, was gene therapy can be used, it may not ever remember, I come into this, a true believer in gene therapy, there's gonna be my career, right?
I'm in, I'm all in.
Okay.
And suddenly, the epiphany, oh, this isn't gonna work so good.
What are we going to do about it?
Right?
Because because if you've got an immune response, there's no going back, you know, then you're into immune suppression land and really complex science.
Oh, really complex science, when you start messing with the immune system.
Isn't that an interesting statement to make?
And that doesn't work very well.
But the aha was, oh, one of the way out of the woods is that we can use gene transfer technology to make vaccines.
And so that was a key aha.
And I thank Dan St.
Louis for helping me and mentoring me at that time when I had that brainstorm.
The other one that was kind of pivotal was way downstream.
And it happened because of this serendipity that I was working with a non-viral method.
It's very, very interesting.
I'm going to go back.
It's very, very interesting that they are not saying this correctly, right?
So, it's not really clear to me how this experiment leads you to use
RNA as a vaccine, because again, he's transforming the cells and then he's putting those cells in the mouse.
So transfecting the mouse directly is not a, let's just say it's not only one step away from what they did in this Dan St.
Louis experiment.
It's very interesting.
He's kind of gone through it too quickly in my mind to not explain the difference between those.
It was kind of pivotal.
was way downstream and happened because of this serendipity that I was working with a non-viral method for transferring RNA into cells.
And then because I was working as a teaching assistant in an embryology course at UC San Diego, and I had extra Xenopus embryos.
So these are- So maybe what they did with retroviruses was they disarmed them so that they would just be RNA that would express proteins.
And that we would need to figure out.
I would have to go look back at that.
So then they're looking for just the kind of like what Ralph Baric is supposedly blamed for, trying to find the minimum number of genes that is necessary, the minimum number of proteins that are necessary, thank you, in order to get viral expression to occur.
So this is really cool because now he says that he was using non-viral vectors to bring RNA in.
which is, again, lipid nanoparticles is what we're going to hear in a minute.
And so he's a very big expert on their uselessness in a healthy animal, yet somehow or another he took the shot, apparently.
I'm not even sure if he really brags about that on this podcast, which will be interesting.
In fact, we should make a note of that mentally.
When is he going to say that he took the shot?
because on Brett Weinstein's podcast, he says he took the shot because he wanted to travel.
Basically early stage tadpoles.
And I took the material that I had been using for cell culture to test.
I was testing a whole large array of cell culture ones for the ability to put RNA into them.
And I said, well, let's just see what happens with these frog embryos.
And those RNA experiments worked, to my great surprise.
Astonishing, really.
They worked incredibly well.
And then the next stage in the embryology course was some experiments involving chick embryos.
And so I did this kind of same thing.
Well, if it works with frogs, what about chicks?
And lo and behold, I got signal with chicks.
And so at that point, then things got serious.
And so he was basically transfecting animals there, right?
He's transfecting frog embryos, and he's transfecting chick embryos.
using retroviruses, which may not even really be retroviruses.
They may just be vectors that are derived from whatever they called retroviruses back then.
Because again, remember what he told you earlier, he was looking for packaging sequences
and doing point mutations in them to see how he could change the way that viral packaging occurred.
He was working on the infectious cycle and specific proteins and regulatory proteins involved in it.
So again, if you think carefully and try to remember that a cell can't be made to do what it doesn't already do, he was basically working on exosomal signaling and what triggers it, what controls it, how is it regulated, and how can we hijack it.
because if we can hijack it, then we can use it to package things and use it for cell transformation.
But if you listen carefully to what he's talking about, it's really, he's sometimes not talking about the same thing, but pretending that he is.
And again, this little thing right here where he transforms the cell culture and then puts those cells back in the mouse, that's very similar to what they're doing to cure sickle cell anemia right now.
They're transforming people's whatever immune cells like, and then putting them back in.
That's a lot of what these cures are.
They're ablating all the cells and they're putting the new ones back in, but they're transforming those cells outside of the animal and then putting them back in.
It's not the same as vaccinating with a lipid nanoparticle carrying a RNA because that's just transfection.
This is transfection in a cell culture and then implantation.
And so it's really interesting how imprecise he's being with this.
I'm sorry if I'm beating it too hard here.
And interesting.
And disclosures were filed, and people started wrestling over who got ownership and all those kinds of things.
And it all went sideways.
So this is where you- With these embryos and how well this worked.
And it was totally unexpected.
But once there, this was a simple 2 plus 2.
It doesn't work that well.
I'm not going to cure cystic fibrosis or muscular dystrophy, but it might work well enough to make an immune response.
And that was kind of the synthesis.
So listen, this raises an important phase, because at this time, you are also having difficulty as a PhD.
in that environment.
And you did actually... So this is a queued up question, right?
This brings me to the next point that you wanted me to mention, which is that you were having PTSD with Inder Verma because he was driving you crazy with this IP wrestling shit.
...leave before you had finished.
Was that a difficult time for you personally?
So I ended up with a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder from a university physician.
So he had a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder from a university physician.
I went through some experiences that I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.
With the perspective of time, I would not be who I am now if I had not gone through those.
And I was absolutely an aggressive, ambitious, overconfident young graduate student.
And you mentioned before, if I could speak to my younger self or to other graduate students, I would tell my younger self a story about the importance of humility.
and being a little bit more low-key about things.
But that's who I was then.
The experiences profoundly changed me, and I'm sure for the better.
But they were extremely painful going through.
And so I was right then.
You can see that he would have run up to Bob Gallo, and he would have run up to David Baltimore and said, hey, it's great to meet you.
I really admire your work.
I want to learn from you.
Can I do a little stint in your lab, the whole nine yards?
Of course he would have.
And that would have got him in trouble, right?
Because that loyalty doesn't work.
That intellectual property doesn't work.
You're telling everybody our ideas.
What's wrong with you, man?
Get back to work.
Let me ask you a hard question on that point, because you left the Salk Institute.
And in a sense, you left a lot of that work behind you.
Do you think that you'd be in a completely different place if you had stayed and continued with that work there?
OK.
Probably not.
The cascade of serendipity continued when I left Salk and joined a little startup working for a scientist that I'd been collaborating with at the company Syntex in Palo Alto that had been hired to this La Jolla startup called Vykal.
What happened was that I brought the protocols and reagents and know-how into Vykal.
And there was capital and willingness to support further animal research and to take it to the next step at FICAL.
And that was what led to the science paper that was considered to be analogous to cold fusion.
That was the naked DNA and RNA paper.
That wouldn't have happened had I remained at the salt.
Absolutely.
That is hilarious to claim that your paper was the equivalent to cold fusion.
That is some serious egomaniac right there.
Wow.
So would it have been better for me, in terms of my long-term career trajectory, to stay at the Salk?
I don't know.
It was impossible for me to remain at the Salk, psychologically.
It was not an option.
I had, in the context of all this recent churn about those old days, a colleague, another postdoc from the lab, wrote to me personally and empathized, said that they hadn't realized all that I'd been going through, but they shared what they'd gone through and what they had seen other people go through.
And you may or may not be aware, I don't think I'm sliding.
Dr. Verma was asked to leave the Salk Institute, where he was basically running the place, after an expose in Science Magazine about sexual harassment, which this individual that wrote to me privately reminded me of some of the things that he'd observed.
And he spoke about Dr. Verma's... I wonder if he... I won't even say it.
It's just ridiculous.
He has PTSD.
Let's just assume that.
Practice of...
being very casual with the intellectual contributions of others in the forms of manuscripts, grants, etc.
And the individual had the same exact experience that I had, where at one point Inder gave me a stack of grants that he had to review, and he said, read these and get ideas.
I was shocked.
And I went to the then president of the Salk and said, this isn't right, is it?
And the response I got back was, well, maybe Indra isn't the best role model for you.
So there was kind of a tolerance there for a number of things.
And I was an ambitious graduate student in a postdoc lab of, I don't know, 16 postdocs or something, who were extremely competitive.
And the practice was to assign multiple postdocs to the same task and see which ones succeeded.
So you can appreciate it's just a pressure cooker.
And I was warned not to go there.
Um, and yet I chose to do so because I was so passionate about, um, gene therapy and what I wanted to do in my career.
And now he wants pity 20 years later because it was so hard and it was so cutthroat.
Um, so, uh, you know, I, I can't, I brought this upon myself in some way.
There is no warning here.
We have not been warned at all yet.
And so if you were hoping there was going to be a succinct, Hey, wait a minute, everybody, let's just pause.
Transfection isn't a good idea in healthy humans.
You were wrong.
He never did that.
This is pre-Brett Weinstein, I believe.
That's why we're also not really jumping around.
We don't really have succinct talking points at the beginning because Brett's podcast actually fixes that problem in some ways.
It's almost like they learned from this.
Maybe that's speaking, you know, a victim.
But regardless, it was not a psychological option for me.
having been this starry-eyed, naive, ambitious young scientist, to remain in that environment that I had walked into, thinking it was the temple of knowledge.
Francis Crick was there at the time, there was a half a dozen Nobel laureates.
It was kind of the center of the intellectual world of molecular biology, that and the whitehead.
And so in retrospect, can I say I should have done it differently?
One makes many mistakes as a young person, but
you know, were they useful or not?
I think that has to do with what you do inside with those experiences.
And hopefully I've processed them and I take some comfort that I have had a long series of contributions since.
But one of the things that comes out of that is I am really religious about ensuring that people get credit for their contributions.
And I think it makes me a much better leader.
He's really religious about people getting their contributions.
acknowledged wow so he makes a great leader because he makes sure that everybody gets the right authorship so that that raises a question before we move on in the discussion which is that when we see all the attention now on the success of mRNA vaccines and so on how does it make you feel considering that you first i guess documented the idea here it comes you were taking it forward and then you almost had to walk away from it and yet you are not giving any credit for it how does that make you feel
Okay, let me frame it up a little bit.
I had no choice but to walk away from it because Vykal, in my employment terms and agreement, had employment terms there that made it so that everything I did at Vykal was owned by Vykal.
And furthermore, I was not allowed to continue to develop that line of research.
It belonged to Vykal, and they sold it to Merck.
So for many years, all of this data and information that I've recently, and my wife has largely disclosed, was hidden away in a very large box in our closet.
And it wasn't an option.
Now, Vykal recently went bankrupt.
And as a young academic, I received cease and desist letters from BICO.
So it really wasn't an option to carry on in the same way.
I had to do new things.
So just to get that.
The feeling.
So Francis Delier of Heidi News was the one that first contacted me from the press about this whole situation.
And from the heart, what I said to him was, it feels like rape.
And I know that's a strong word.
But what I was trying to express is it feels rape.
And from the heart, what I said to him was, it feels like rape.
And I know that's a strong word, but what I was trying to express is it feels like something that I have created.
And with- In his lived experience, it felt like rape.
I've never personally been raped, but I imagine that it feels a lot like what Inder Verma did to me.
And a lot like what it feels like to get cease and desist letters as a young dropout graduate student.
This is a narrative in development.
It is a script in the making.
It is a character in the making.
It is a schtick in the making.
It is a lie in the making.
That's why it's important to go back to these years of 2020 and 2021.
Because if you go back and look what I was saying and compare it to what these people were saying,
I won't have anything to stream about it anymore because everybody will just be a subscriber.
I'll be the new Joe Rogan.
But that's never gonna happen.
But that's really the truth if I toot my own horn.
Find the videos of me in 2020.
Find one of me in 2020 and I dare you not to be shocked at what I'm saying.
And compare that to any of these people, if you can even find a video from 2020 of some of them.
Compare me to Paul Cottrell.
Compare me to Kevin McCairn.
Compare me to Kevin McKernan.
What I was saying in 2020, what I wrote in 2021 makes these people look exactly like what they are.
Meddlers put in place to curate a narrative.
And this is a guy who's only been on stage a few times and still trying to figure out what it is exactly his message is.
Or maybe his handlers are trying to figure it out.
But in this same month, is the month that he goes on talking with that blonde girl.
And he explains the exact same thing that he was talking about right here, that I worked on packaging sequences and I'm an expert on the infectious cycle.
And I can tell you that the vast majority of viral particles that are produced during an infection are useless.
They're replication incompetent.
He never said it again.
Just like he's never really been so detail-oriented about some of these things in such a sloppy way, so that we could barely get through any of this video yet.
Because this isn't a narrative in development.
He's never going to use the word rape again.
He's never going to whine about it quite this much again.
He's never going to use this many details about retroviruses again.
He's never going to say that he was really interested in retroviruses very many more times again.
every time he does it puts him right back into the little circles of HIV and chronic fatigue syndrome and xmrv and htlv2 or whatever the hell they all are sv40 my ass you know my own passion and and effort i mean i work tirelessly um is being taken from me
completely without anything being taken by others.
And that's rough.
In academe, there's rules about citing citations.
You know that.
You're an academic, and you publish also.
And it's probably pretty important to you, as it is to me, in this small, strange world of academic research and publications, that people acknowledge your intellectual contributions.
And I'm sure you, like me, are rigorous about acknowledging the best metaphor is we all stand on the shoulders of giants.
And I think it's important to acknowledge those that have contributed to this song that we all sing together, that have come before us and are our peers, and to have that kind of taken away and others seeking to advance their own agenda.
So he's kind of talking about a community.
He's kind of talking about a consensus that you don't want to buck.
kind of suggesting standing on the shoulders of giants.
And I think one of the giants that he's talking about is David Baltimore.
One of the giants he's talking about is Robert Gallo.
One of the giants he's talking about is Murray Gardner.
One of the giants he's talking about is Stanley Plotkin.
One of the giants he's talking about is Hilary Kaprowski.
One of the giants he's talking about are Sina Bavari and David Hone, his friends and colleagues.
without even acknowledgment is a little rough.
And so how does it feel?
It hurts a lot.
And, you know, a quote, I think it's from the outliner.
It hurts a lot.
It ain't right.
It ain't proper.
And I think we all know that, right?
Intuitively.
But science and academic science is a strangely competitive world that's very much a pyramid.
So it's a personal commitment on my part to make sure that everybody that is in my world gets credited for their contributions.
And I guess I kind of expect the same from others regarding my contributions.
It's the only thing... So he's really seeding this narrative right now that there is a contribution to be acknowledged, there's intellectual property to be acknowledged, there's a hat tip to be given.
This is very, very much in parallel to how his wife was behaving on the internet about the fact that his technology, his technology, his technology was saving the world.
And so you can hear from this that that's really the argument that he's making right now.
He's, I can't tell if anybody else had this idea besides me, but I do have the patents.
And there are no warnings here.
There is no hesitation here.
There's no cautionary user discretion advised here.
This is egomania.
I suffered.
I paid the price.
I carry a cross.
I suffered.
What did he say?
Shit.
I got PTSD.
It felt like rape.
I mean, I don't know.
I don't know what to say.
I really don't know what to say other than he's really, really making this.
It's really obvious.
And we need to wake up.
This guy toured the world.
and told people stories on stage for years that other people shared and told us we had to listen to him.
FLCC, American Frontline Doctors, they're all telling us that he's good.
The International COVID Summits.
Bobby Kennedy and Children's Health Defense published his book.
We have got to come out of this nosedive that these people have us in and we've got to wake up and apologize to our children.
These people are liars and they are coordinated traitors to America, working with other five eyes, useful idiots to create an illusion of consensus about a novel virus from which millions were saved by transfection, this guy's invention.
It's part of the capital that we're all trading as academics and intellects contributing to this common song that we sing in science, and that we will all respect the contributions of each other.
Does that answer your question?
Absolutely, absolutely.
And I feel honored that I'm in a position to be able to at least give you the opportunity
Does that answer your question that I told you to ask me?
To get some of that credit, you know, and I feel honoured about that.
So I'm going to take us on to a different part because we are in the middle of COVID.
You are therefore one of the experts on mRNA vaccination and it has done a tremendous step with regards to reducing
I'm shocked.
I mean, I am amazed.
I spent a couple of decades of my career trying to advance new gene delivery technologies.
I was a founder of Inovio, the electroporation company, and mentored the young Norwegian scientist that was behind that.
I spent years and years developing and testing cationic lipids.
I know how hard this business is to get to get this level of transgene expression, because that's really what it is.
This is really gene.
So he did years and years of lipid nanoparticle research, which means that he's he could not be lied to by Peter Cullis.
That's also a lie then.
Listen to what he's just said there, please.
...new gene delivery technologies.
I was a founder of Inovio, the electroporation company, and mentored the young Norwegian scientist that was behind that.
I spent years and years developing and testing cationic lipids.
I know how hard this business is to get... Years and years developing cationic lipids.
Years and years developing cationic lipids.
He didn't take this shot.
He lied on the Bret Weinstein podcast when he said that he took it for travel and that's the reason why on the Tommy podcast, Steven Hatfield said that he didn't have a Vax card when they went to Italy together.
Ladies and gentlemen, he lied about taking the shot to coerce other people into doubt.
That there might be some risk benefit to way out here if it's flying AIDS and I'm fat or I'm old.
He was on a beach in Hawaii misleading kids about this stuff too.
And even then, a couple months after this, he still wasn't precise enough to save anyone.
Because that was never his job.
None of them were there to save anybody.
None of them were taking any risks telling people not to do this.
Just like CHD doesn't take any risks right now when they say that they want to have a big top tent of health freedom and that they want freedom of speech and they want vaccines to be a choice.
They're not taking any risks to save any kids.
And these two clowns aren't taking any risks either.
They're actually performing an elaborate act, which is designed to coerce people
confuse people and remove their ability to exercise informed consent, which is an international war crime.
to get this level of transgene expression, because that's really what it is.
This is really gene, back to the original concept.
This is gene therapy applied to vaccines with RNA.
Wow.
I thought, given what had happened and all the pushback and all the intervening time, I thought that this would eventually come to pass, but I would be long in the ground when it happened.
So to see it happen so suddenly in the context of this amazing public health crisis we're in.
Amazing public health crisis we're in.
What a poor choice of words that was.
It's mind-boggling.
Furthermore, the levels of activity of these lipoplexes, that's the technical term for these small nano aggregates of RNA and lipids that are formed, which are what allows the RNA to go into cells.
Lipoplexes, what an interesting thing to call them.
So they're not just simple little viral-like particles, little fat bubbles?
They're more complex than that?
Oh.
and be produced into protein.
Um, the, the level of efficient efficiency associated with those, uh, is mind blowing to me.
Um, and, uh, I, in particular, I think the unsung hero in this song here is, uh, Dr. Peter Cullis and his team, um, who developed the core, this advanced new, uh, um, he's selling it.
He's selling the shot.
Peter Cullis figured it out.
Holy shit.
There's not a warning, there's an endorsement.
There's not a warning, there's an endorsement in this video.
Blow it to me.
And in particular, I think the unsung hero in this song here is Dr. Peter Collis and his team, who developed the core, this advanced new formulations of lipids that are directly being used by both the BioNTech Pfizer product and the CureVac product.
The Moderna product is a slight variation on the same.
The activity of those is mind-blowing.
So I... Mind-blowing.
Mind-blowing.
He's describing the activity of these transfection vehicles as mind-blowing.
Stop lying!
Never expected to see this in my lifetime.
Um, and, uh, it's, uh, I'm fascinated, but with that high level of transfection activity of, you know, polynucleotide delivery ability.
What did he call it?
Transfection activity?
What?
Huh?
Maybe we should call it transfection in 2021 and then everybody will be able to exercise informed consent and avoid it.
I'm fascinated, but with that high level of transfection activity of polynucleotide delivery ability, there comes... What part of me is not completely and totally vindicated by that one line right there?
Never mind his CV.
Never mind all the other things that you can find on the internet.
That one line right there, they know.
They knew.
They could have used that word every day and twice on Sunday if they wanted to.
He could have told that to Brett Weinstein in the first 10 minutes.
Well, these are transfections.
I'm an expert.
They didn't do it.
they interchange the word gene therapy and vaccines just like these two clowns are interchanging the words genes vaccine and gene therapy and vaccine and transfection and vaccine and these vaccines and these vaccines and that's not how this works you can't call everything a vaccine just because you squirted in and you have some intentions
And this disingenuous word game is at the heart of the coercive psychological operation that they executed on us, that these people executed on us.
These are traitors to their countries.
Misleading thousands, if not millions of citizens around the world about what really happens and what really can happen and what really can't.
and waging a semantic war where no one can be precise enough to enable informed consent, to execute informed consent.
Consequences, as you know, in drug development, nothing is free and no drug is perfectly safe.
And so- Why is he smiling?
Gosh, I wish I could see this person in person again.
I can't wait to see this person in person again.
With this amazing advance in efficiency, come some potential issues which I think we need to be sensitive to.
Now, this is a sensitive topic because, as I said, we're in the middle of a pandemic.
there is a lot of pressure politically to try and get out of it with regards to vaccines.
And a major part of it, especially with some of the other side effects that we're seeing from some of the other vaccine candidates, it looks as though the mRNA technology is leading the way.
Oh, so he's already putting down the narrative that they're going to have to pull the adenovirus-based shots because those are having some side effects.
It looks like the mRNA is doing better.
That's no different than the little joke they did on Saturday Night Live where the Johnson & Johnson is for you guys because I get Moderna.
You don't think that happened?
You probably don't remember that happened.
I'll find it right now.
I'll show it to you right now.
I should have downloaded it already, but I didn't.
They actually made a joke on Saturday Night Live about that.
They really did.
most vulnerable now have some degree of protection states and getting vaccines into their older population the majority of baby boomers have been vaccinated have been vaccinated have been vaccinated vaccinated vaccinated okay so let's wait let's find out when this was first posted on on snl march 28th 2021 baby boomers
Most vulnerable now have some degree of protection.
States are getting vaccines into their older population.
The majority of baby boomers have been vaccinated.
baby boomers greatest generation got all the money now we got the vaccination crash the economy three whole times but when it comes to the vax we the first in line got a job out of college no student debt retirement funded a hundred percent voted for trump but just for the taxes don't believe in covid still got the vaccine
This is kind of like encouraging old people.
This is making a a This is really evil
So here they're trying to say that she doesn't need a mask because she's got a vax.
You see, this is all the same propaganda machine that lied to us and coerced us and separated us and divided us.
And Brett Weinstein and these people are all part of that same narrative, that same group of coordinated liars.
to me in the bank account.
And right embedded in the middle of it is the immunomythology that antibodies are how you fight viruses.
That antibodies are a correlate of immunity that translate to something that allow your doctor to see.
that companies can build detectors for, diagnostics for.
And that's why Kevin McKernan was promoted so early in the pandemic and made sure that he did podcast appearances and that he wrote that paper at the beginning of the pandemic with the Dutch guy, Peter Borger.
Not objecting to PCR testing as a diagnostic, but objecting to the methodologies that were purported to be advocated for by the WHO.
So just test, just different ones.
And now let's listen to the worst part of this song and the funniest part of this song, the immunomythology part.
So they're already setting up the idea in 2021 that the housing market is going to be destroyed in 2022 and 2023.
And that
The way that it's gonna be destroyed is that all of these houses are gonna be bought up because they're all owned by old people.
And that no one's ever gonna live large like these people again.
March, 2021.
They're already preparing us for the death of the American dream here on Saturday Night Live with lots of funny.
I mean, they say it right in your face.
We've been running the world since 1945.
We've crashed the economy three times.
They say it out loud.
I don't want to do that anymore.
I want to watch.
I want to watch Robert.
alone.
So you've made a good point is that there is the opportunity to make a difference.
But as always with any technology there are risks or potential problems.
This is an important topic.
What have you come across recently that would make you think about consideration of how we approach vaccination at this point.
So thanks for that.
And let me frame that up a little bit.
I was alerted from a colleague that worked for the government, let's say, US government, that was in Wuhan during the last month of 2019.
I was alerted in the first week of 2020 about the threat that the virus represented.
And I made a threat assessment.
I'm an experienced outbreak specialist that does a lot of biodefense work these days.
mostly with the U.S.
government.
And so I made a threat assessment and made a... What a weird thing to say like 25 minutes into the thing.
I'm a guy, I'm an outbreak expert that does a lot of defense work with the U.S.
government.
That seemed like kind of just thrown out there.
That's weird.
Because in the next interview, he's going to say DITRA, right?
And DOD and WE.
That's how he talks to Paul Cutrell about it in August.
It's a really interesting
of 2020 about the threat that the virus represented.
And I made a threat assessment.
I'm an experienced outbreak specialist that does a lot of biodefense work these days, mostly with the U.S.
government.
And so I made a threat assessment and made a personal determination that the most efficient way to help provide protection was to focus on drug repurposing, not on vaccine development.
Now, the government of the United States made a different assessment and different decision, and I don't want to second guess that.
That's a really weird statement to make because if the government made a different decision, then what was the domain program?
He made a personal assessment.
The U.S.
government didn't fund the domain program.
The domain program didn't happen.
Then what's going to go on here?
It's water under the bridge.
And I can tell you, having been through too many of these outbreaks, when it hits and the fog of war hits, it becomes very difficult to process information and make decisions.
This decision was made by the government to pursue vaccine technology because there was apparently, by these emails that have come out recently from The Washington Post under FOIA, there was a sense that this was the best way to move forward, is to invest all capital and effort into vaccine development.
And the NIH, as well as BioNTech back in
EU made a strategic assessment to invest in RNA-based approaches, which was quite bold.
And that decision has been validated.
And so I've watched with great interest as this has proceeded.
Recently, because of my background, and I'm a clinical development specialist, I'm experienced in toxicology and regulatory affairs and other things.
This is what I do for a living these days.
I was approached by some individuals to- I thought he does defense work.
I thought he just said a minute ago that he's an outbreak specialist and does defense work, primary for the U.S.
government.
Now he's telling, now he says something else.
Because of my background, and I'm a clinical development specialist, I'm experienced in toxicology and regulatory affairs and other things.
This is what I do for a living these days.
I was approached by some individuals to provide an independent assessment of some data that had been revealed through a Freedom of Information Act submitted by a group of Canadian scientists and physicians, which had obtained a copy of the
application which Pfizer and BioNTech had submitted for their mRNA vaccine to the regulatory authorities in Japan.
And this is a, forgive me, there's some technical words here.
This was their initial new drug application or their common technical document.
These are regulatory terms.
What it means is it's the information package that a drug developer or sponsor, in this case, vaccine developer.
He hasn't said Byron Bridle's name yet.
Would submit to a government regulatory authority that basically says, here's the sum total of all of our data at this point in time, supporting the use of this product in humans.
And so normally these packages of information are closely held confidential and are not discoverable by Freedom of Information Act.
They're usually protected from that, and that's certainly the case in the United States.
But these Canadian scientists and physicians who were very concerned about some of the safety signals that they were seeing in vaccine recipients in Canada decided to, of their own initiative, to seek more information.
And so they obtained this, and within 24 hours, I was asked by the editor-in-chief of an organization called Trial Site News in the United States to look at this document and another document that... Trial Site News asked him to look at documents?
Trial Site News is the one that promoted Kevin McCarran and Kevin McKernan in the same damn article about four months ago in March of 2024.
It's all one big show, ladies and gentlemen.
And in fact, he has informed LifeSite News a lot, and they have promoted him a lot.
It's all one big show, ladies and gentlemen.
One big national security operation run by Five Eyes Countries to convince the world of a pandemic, to roll out transfection under the guise of the V word, and to keep people confused long enough so that they could be coerced into taking it.
And it didn't work.
They're off script.
Not enough of us took the shot.
They have a very, very big problem because a lot of us are not ever going to take a shot again.
And so there's going to become a crucial point in America where they're going to start telling us how many people have and how many people haven't taken one of these shots.
And you're going to have to believe me, they're going to lie about it.
They're gonna lie about it because they want to eliminate the control group by any means necessary and it is still an objective.
It is still a checkbox that they have not been able to hit.
And his job and Malone's job and Corey's job and Weinstein's job and all of their jobs was to make sure that we would hit it by making us solve the lab leak.
mystery of the lab leak and find out that it's a gain-of-function virus it might be flying aids we sure got lucky with this gain-of-function spike but now there might be a highly infectious omicron variant that comes out of belgium maybe some garage in belgium
was publicly available from the European Medicines Agency that was their official summary of their assessment of the analogous initial new drug application and common technical document that had been submitted to them.
Can I stop you here a minute, Robert, before you go any further?
Because we're speaking live, and this information is being shared publicly.
And you are walking in an area here that is not well taken, where you are saying stuff that can be challenging to the political narrative with regards to vaccines.
Are you sure you want to speak about this?
Yeah, so thank you.
Are you sure you want to go here?
I mean, be careful, Robert.
Are you sure you want to go here?
Because this is very thin ice.
I mean, I just want to double check Robert Malone.
I don't want you to risk too much of your personal reputation.
I don't want you to put too much on the line to save anybody.
holy shit, forgiving me the opportunity to pause and reconsider.
I'm, I'm really committed to openness and transparency.
And part of that comes from the background of the crucible that I've had to go through.
But it also comes from the extensive training I've had in in bioethics.
Holy shit, he's got extensive training in bioethics too, as well as clinical product development and review committees and also biodefense, works a lot with the US government on biodefense and stuff and outbreak specialists.
also does x-ray crystallography models of enzymes, and also can run an AI program that can screen an entire library of pharmaceuticals and nutraceuticals that are in the FDA catalog, which he still, strangely enough, hasn't mentioned at all.
He said he made a personal decision, a personal decision to pursue repurposed drugs, even though the government didn't, but DITRA did.
And I'm personally, as a physician, scientist, clinical development specialist, I have a really bedrock commitment to fundamental principles of bioethics.
And among those is transparency and the importance of full disclosure to protect.
I mean, how often is he going to tell us how ethical of a man he is?
How often is he going to tell us that he fights for the rights and credit of others?
How often is he going to tell us that he's been he's like the best guy ever?
Holy shit.
This is a guy who Jiki Leaks says is a pretty decent dude.
He worked for Ditra before, but I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna say he's a bad guy.
I don't know.
Just like, because Jessica Rose apparently hasn't tried to out Jiki Leaks, then she's gotta be a good guy.
I'm sorry, but I just don't buy it.
And I'm not buying the idea that Jicky Leaks can't see this guy for who he is.
I'm not buying it.
Jicky Leaks is probably on their team, pretending to be the leader of a out-of-control chaos mouse army that opposes all these people.
and keeps nudging everybody around all the time, but I don't see how it's possible to watch a video of this guy in 2021 and not realize that he is practicing a lie here.
Is Jiki gonna be able to ignore that in about 15 minutes, he's gonna say that his housekeeper has questions about this shit?
just like in a couple weeks we're gonna hear from Steve Kirsch in the same year saying yeah my housekeeper and her husband and somebody else like three people related to my housekeeper have been injured by the shots so that can't be random it is a coordinated group of traitorous liars it is a network that spans the five eyes countries
And it is so often, so often, someone from the UK collaborating with someone from America like the shit you're watching right now.
Receiving experimental products.
So I'm comfortable continuing to speak.
I'm an experienced professional, regulatory professional, and I hope that you don't, the audience doesn't in any way infer that I am invested in a contrary position regarding.
Jiki Leaks hasn't blocked me, so he's not against me, but he doesn't agree with everything that I say.
And one of the things that he doesn't agree with is that Robert Malone is an obvious bad guy.
One of the things that Jiki Leaks won't say is that this guy who's been touring around the world for four years straight with Peter Kory and Meryl Ness and Shoshana Topova and David Martin, that these must all be good guys, I guess, according to Jiki.
Jeeki's focused on Nick Hudson, because Nick Hudson used to work for insurance companies, so he's gotta be a bad guy.
But the guy who works for Ditra, and the guy who worked for Retrovirus, the priests of retrovirology, he couldn't possibly be a bad guy, no way.
Wake up, Jeeki.
Pull your head out, or I'm gonna start calling you for the meddler you are.
This guy is at the center of it.
And he's been at the center of this shit for 20 years in my country.
Meddling with my nation.
And the fact that you won't speak out about him at all says that you're probably meddling in my nation too.
which is the same reason why Nick Hudson won't really call him out.
Why Jonathan Engler just ignores him.
Why Jessica Hockett never mentions his name.
And Jessica Hockett couldn't figure out that Pierre Corey was a witness for freaking, for George Floyd and on papers that cited Kyle Seidel's work.
Because they're all part of the same network of liars that's trying to get us not to focus on the right people.
Not to focus on the right laws, not to focus on the right questions.
Double-stranded DNA.
Retroviruses in every hospital.
I worked on packaging proteins, packaging sequences.
packaging sequences he said packaging sequences that he cloned and transformed into cell cultures to see which ones would make exosomes he freaking said it and none of these no virus people picked up on it not from their cozy little lord of the rings island
not from the woods of New York, not from a farm wherever he is.
None of these no virus people picked up on the fact that he just said it in an interview casually.
And in another interview, he says that most of the particles that are produced are replication incompetent anyway.
And the only reason why he would know that is because of what he said in this interview and the work that that represented or comes from.
I'm sorry, but I don't think there's any way to see it any other way.
These people have been working on a covert program to understand our molecular biology that includes retroviruses and includes exosomes that can have genetic material in them.
Maybe even, very briefly, have self-replicating RNAs in them.
I don't know.
But if they found this stuff, they lied to us about it.
And they told us it wasn't part of us so that they could study it and eventually use it against us.
Because if viruses are from us, if exosomes are from us and they're studying us, then there are entirely different ethical concerns here.
If they are pathogens and it's public health, then your ethics can be damned.
Ladies and gentlemen, they have stolen our biology and told us it was outside of us, and Robert Malone is at the heart of it.
At the heart of the theft, at the heart of the lie, wittingly or unwittingly, he's participating in it.
I think it's almost certain that Tony Fauci knows, it's almost certain that Robert Gallo knows, it's almost certain that David Baltimore knows, and that means that it's almost certain
that Judy Mickiewicz knows, and it's almost certain that Robert Malone knows, and that's the exact same reason and supporting reason why those two characters never come together, never have had a debate or a discussion, never have debunked each other or validated each other.
They've only been in music videos together made by Mickey Willis' crew.
The illusion is breaking, ladies and gentlemen, because the truth is still available on YouTube.
Vaccines.
I'm not an anti-vaxxer.
I've spent my whole life developing vaccines and trying to advance vaccines.
But that doesn't override my commitment to transparency and disclosure and good science.
He's saying it again!
he's so ethically can stop talking about how ethically is it's i'm i'm of the belief that the public is that adult public is mature enough
to make their own informed decisions based on the information available.
And that it's the obligation of governments and public health organizations, particularly in the context of an experimental product like these vaccines all are right now.
It's the obligation of the public health community, the official public health community, to convince the public that they're safe.
But this is all illusion of consensus.
This is all illusion of consensus too, right?
These don't have to be real people.
They could be real people.
It doesn't matter.
It creates an illusion of consensus that the people in the chat
also think he's a trustworthy guy not only philip but also the people in the chat really believe the most interesting man in the world you know the most interesting man in the world you know that right he's got a little commercial it's the most interesting man in the world
Isn't there one?
I don't know where that is.
I thought I downloaded it.
I won't be able to find it off the top.
But he did a whole commercial where he made fun of himself being the most interesting man in the world.
Just like that Miller Lite commercial or whatever.
But it was him.
With a glass of wine.
They did that.
Him and Mickey Willis.
of governments and public health organizations, particularly in the context of an experimental product like these vaccines all are right now.
It's the obligation of the public health community, the official public health community, to convince the public that they're safe and effective.
And so I'm totally OK with proceeding.
And I'm a grown up too.
And if I say something that's controversial and I start getting hate mail, that's part of the price I have to pay.
But it doesn't, I've been through situations before where I have gone public about major ethical issues that I've encountered in
in this kind of technology development space and drug development space and clinical research space.
And I've had consequences in my career.
He's hinting at the Jesse Gelsinger story.
And one thing you should know about Jesse Gelsinger is the investigation was done by Endoverma.
So him speaking out could have been a coordinated thing with him and his supervisor.
Now remember, one of the very interesting things here would be that if that PTSD and that apparent split between him and Inder Verma was actually just a lie.
It's just a scam.
It's just part of their little schtick.
because that's how they do it.
Just like Matt Crawford stormed out of the Signal Chat with Alexandros Marinos and Brett Weinstein and Chris Martinson.
He stormed out like he was all pissed because nobody's listening to me.
Nobody will listen to me about the DMED data.
And then a few weeks later, I left that Signal Chat group and went to Matt thinking that, yeah, but Matt, they don't listen to me either.
And so now whether you believe Inder Verma or whether you believe Robert Malone, you're going to believe a liar probably.
Or if Inder Verma says something that isn't jiving with what Robert Malone says, Robert Malone can claim he's a liar.
You know, he also sexually harasses people and stuff.
Maybe that's how they're controlling Inder Verma and keeping him quiet or kept him quiet about the details of retrovirology versus endosomes and exosomal communication.
There's lots of possibilities here that are not discussed when you make the assumption that Robert Malone is a 20-year
track record of being a hero.
A 20-year unblemished track record of integrity inside of a den of vipers.
That's what he's trying to paint here.
Cutthroat, lying, stealing, cheating bastards in science.
And I'm just a shining beacon of truth and integrity.
He's insisting on it.
But that doesn't absolve me from the obligation that I think I have to be open and transparent about information.
How many freaking times is he going to say that he feels very important that it's open and transparent shit?
Can you see it?
The illusion is being laid.
The neuro-linguistic programming, as ham-fistedly as it is being done here, is being done.
He's repeating things.
He's insisting on certain concepts to be associated with his dumbass.
I'm sorry, but this guy has got to be done.
It's got to be over.
Anybody that's promoting this guy has to be automatically disqualified.
Anybody that's not actively saying that Robert Malone is part of this has to be disqualified at this point.
Quite frankly, I think if you think that Jessica Rose is good, you need to be disqualified at this point.
She rapped on stage in Geneva.
with the blessing of all of these people, these performers that all were in Geneva at the same time.
Weinstein, Malone, Kirsch, Rose, it was gross.
Pushing the idea that the shots in America is bad because of the shots.
Who did Jessica Rose save in Israel?
Who did Jessica Rose save in Canada?
What tenure track position did Jessica Rose lose when she spoke out about VAERS having a signal now that it didn't have before?
which is relevant and in my opinion should be made publicly available.
Well, that is tremendous.
And we do appreciate that because we do need scientists like yourself who are studying and able to challenge and make sure that everything that we do is as safe as possible.
So yes, please go ahead.
We are very appreciative of that.
So thank you for that support in those words.
Let me just kind of loop back just a little bit on that theme.
It's interesting that he doesn't use the military lingo that he used when he talks to Andrew Huff or somebody else like that.
Good copy and shit like that.
With this guy, it's very flowery.
And, you know, thanks a lot for that comment.
Thanks for giving me a chance to reconsider before I blow my head off.
In my experience, in my strong opinion, science requires that we challenge each other.
And if we don't do that, we end up with groupthink and we end up making mistakes.
So continuing on the theme,
These documents were provided to me and I was asked to render an opinion about what I saw as a professional with the level of, you know, the type of experience and background that I have.
These documents that had been uncovered by my respected scientific and clinical colleagues in Canada.
And so I made an opinion.
Who I won't mention because if you mention them then you'll be able to find out who he is and you'll listen to him instead of me.
independent assessment of those.
And then I was concerned that I may have over interpreted or misinterpreted.
And so I asked an even more senior regulatory specialist that I respect highly to look over the same documents and draw their own independent opinion to make sure that I wasn't over reading things or overreacting to them.
So that happened.
And I think that was he says that was Jeremy Marks, but I'm not sure.
With those documents, we both observed that there were deficiencies that were highly unusual and not what we would anticipate seeing in a regulatory submission from an organization of the experience and capabilities of Pfizer.
And that was, I found that a little bit alarming.
So did my colleague.
He was less sanguine about placing his name to his assessment.
And so he remains anonymous.
But I was comfortable that the assessment that I made was true and accurate based on the documents that I had.
And I was very clear on that.
So the findings included that
There were data in the IND package from Japan, data tables, that examined the biodistribution of the vaccine product in an animal model, in a rodent model.
with limited numbers of samples using two core technologies.
One was the one that I used way back in the day when I was finding RNA delivery, which is expression of proteins from an RNA encoding, the protein that makes the firefly tail glow.
So it has the perhaps unfortunate name here in the States, where we have a strong religious community, of being luciferase.
Luciferase is just the name that the discoverers that were trying to understand how come fireflies glow at night gave to the protein when they cloned it.
And it turns out to be a super duper, we call it reporter protein, way to detect whether or not
a polynucleotide and RNA or DNA has gotten into a cell and been turned into protein because it will produce photons and those are easy to detect.
So a lot of technical there.
So the studies were done in non-good laboratory practice means and they involved use of luciferase RNA rather than the actual RNA of the drug product encoding spike.
And they involve tritiated RNA.
So this is radioactively tagged RNA that is able to be detected very sensitively because it's radioactive in various tissues of the animal in which it's been injected.
And so the data that I was able to review
had to do with the distribution of injected RNA lipoplex complexes.
We talked about that earlier.
This is the actual material.
Only it wasn't the actual material, which is what usually one has to do these studies with.
It was a surrogate, the RNA for the luciferase instead of the RNA encoding the vaccine, which is encoding spike.
So what the data showed was that in these rodent models, and it was small numbers of rodents,
This is the opposite of a useful summary for a layperson.
This is the opposite of trying to give a message because he is not giving a message.
He's explaining something in the worst way possible.
It didn't stay at the ejection site, could have been said 10 minutes ago already.
And if you can't see this as a malevolent meddler working for the five eyes, intelligence, whatever's that did this to us, I don't know what to tell you.
That the injected material, a lot of it stays near the injection site, but a lot of it doesn't.
And it goes throughout the bodies of these mice or rats.
It appears that it may have remained biologically active in some of those distal sites.
He's not trying to save anyone.
He's trying to save the product.
He's trying to save the narrative.
He's trying to save the fear and uncertainty and doubt that this whole operation relied on in order to get maximum compliance in the oldest people.
And it certainly, the data suggested, and the tables are a little difficult to follow for me because they analyze both the lipid distribution and the tritiated signal distribution, which is a marker of the RNA.
They showed a high concentration and relative concentration into, for instance, ovarian tissue, spleen, and liver.
But in particular, the ovarian tissue was surprising.
And particularly it was surprising because there was not that concentration in the testis that were sampled from the male.
So we had concentration of the lipids in particular in ovaries.
And we had some relative concentration of the tritiated signal suggesting the RNA in the ovaries compared to some other tissues.
But strikingly, we had distribution of all of this kind of systemically throughout these animal models.
Is that what we would expect to a certain extent with regards to injecting a vaccine?
Isn't there some degree of spread?
Injecting a vaccine.
So again, Dr. Philip McMillan being as inaccurate as possible and using the word vaccine whenever possible because these people are liars.
Or do we expect it to remain local to where it was injected?
Good question and entirely appropriate.
And I had no way to... They are running through it right now.
They are rehearsing it right now.
They're trying to decide what they can say and what they can't say and how many words they can use to say it.
How can they object without objecting?
How can they pretend to be skeptical without giving anybody good reason not to be afraid?
How can they accept the virus, but have some limited spectrum of debate that feels really lively, like this guy's really telling the truth, so that we can flash a couple comments up on the screen and make everybody watching think that everybody thinks he's telling the truth.
This is the placement of Robert Malone.
testing him out on a few foreign podcasts with a few clowns getting him ready to go to the big show which was the Brett Weinstein podcast and he knew it just like he knew it when he was going on Rogan.
This is rehearsal.
possess because we didn't have the controls of alternatives.
But yes, one would expect, to some degree, a spread of the injected material.
I like that critique.
Somebody in here says regarding the Five Eyes, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia and Oz are just colonies being used.
for different things by the UK.
So I would agree with that.
It is more likely to need to focus also on Germany.
And I would also agree with that wholeheartedly.
Thank you very much for posting that.
Good to see you in the chat there.
Core thesis that had been advanced in the scientific literature before my... I'm glad I didn't lose you.
I've lost a lot of people in my chat.
I'm really happy to see you there.
I can only speak to my personal experience, my encountering these data in this IND package, IND being the abbreviation for initial lead drug application.
My expectation from the literature was that the injected material and the encoded spike protein would remain membrane-bound and regional.
I was aware that these complexes had been engineered as a formulation historically, specifically so that they would be transmitted along the lymphatic system.
And I'm trained in pathology.
I used to teach university pathology.
And I know darn well that the lymphatic system drains into blood and circulates and passes through the liver and all that good stuff.
This is fundamental biology and human physiology in mammals.
So the prior publications and information have suggested that these complexes would remain at the site of injection or the draining nodes.
The formulations were specifically engineered to preferentially go through lymphatics to the draining nodes, lymph nodes, which is where the immune system processes antigens and teaches B cells and T cells.
And that's just the worst idea I've ever heard.
So you want these lipid nanoparticles to go where the dormant T cells are, where the dormant B cells are, where the inactivated, not ready to, I mean, still waiting to be activated T cells are.
I just, I cannot see how it is possible that anyone with any biological background at all can listen to this and say that they wanted the lipid nanoparticles to go to the draining lymph node.
Not the, not the produced protein.
Not little lipid rafts with the spike protein.
He's talking about the lipid nanoparticles taking the RNA, being designed to take them to the draining lymph node and what?
Transfect immune cells?
He just said it right there.
Augmenting the immune system with a lipid nanoparticle transfection agent that is kind of designed to go back to the lymph node is the stupidest shit I've ever heard.
The prior publications and information had suggested that these complexes would remain at the site of injection or the draining nodes.
The formulations were specifically engineered to preferentially go through lymphatics to the draining nodes, lymph nodes, which is where the immune system processes antigens and teaches B cells and T cells, these are the things that attack other cells or produce antibodies.
So why in the shit would you just transfect as much as you can there?
How would that usefully augment the immune system, Master Malone?
Considering that there are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of unique epitopes represented by the T cells in each lymph node waiting to be turned on if necessary and to clonally expand when called, why in the world would we want a lipid nanoparticle carrying a RNA encoding a foreign protein to go there?
You dum-dum.
What is going on, Philip McMillan?
Where did you learn your biology if you don't think that that's the stupidest shit you've ever heard?
Um, teaches them, uh, educates them so that they make the proper immune response against the energy just for the, uh, for the viewership.
Um, so, uh, that was the logic spike was engineered with a tether.
Um, it, uh, transmembrane region, it was supposed to stay in the cells that it was, uh, that were in the region and, uh, it was not, uh,
previously disclosed, let's say, in the literature, that it would move systemically in any kind of a systematic way.
So for me, it was a surprise.
And the relative concentration in certain organs was a bit of a surprise.
You'd expect it to concentrate in spleen and in liver.
The ovarian signal was a little surprising, more than a little surprising, a bit concerning, particularly since now we get into this intersection between these many reports that patients that are out there, that patients have made,
And we have to be really careful because there's a selection bias.
When somebody makes a spectacular claim, you know, I lost my baby, or I had, you know, my parents died, or, you know, right after vaccination, whatever, these things quickly catch fire in social media these days.
And the truth is that all of these events would be expected to occur at some normal frequency.
And for instance, there are those who say.
He is not helping anyone usefully question what's happening.
He is creating more confusion.
Well, don't be sure just because both your grandparents died after vaccination, that would kind of be expected to happen anyway at a certain frequency.
I'm sorry, I gotta go eat dinner.
I gotta break away now.
This is a YouTube video.
This is a video that has been archived by Mark Kulak on his Bitchute channel.
This is a video that I will archive on my Peertube channel.
And it is a video that continues to go on and on, the same kind of ham-fisted execution of this narrative curation, because they really don't realize how bad it's going in 2021.
They think they can still pull out of the nosedive, that they're gonna get people to take the injection at the end of the year, because at the end of this year is when they go on TV and say that the world should expect a winter of
of disease and death for the unvaccinated.
So at this time, they still think they can get us.
They still think that the lab leak and the Scooby-Doo mystery is gonna convince people that, well, I better get a vaccine if this was a gain-of-function virus.
That's where we are in this narrative right now, at this time, in this video.
They still think they have a chance at getting rid of the control group if they scare us enough about this gain-of-function virus and about the spike protein, which these two clowns will most certainly talk about in the coming minutes.
Ladies and gentlemen, there is no other way to see it.
These people are evil meddlers, and they want us
to teach our children an illusion of consensus about bat cave viruses and laboratory viruses and genetically stitched viruses so that they surrender their sovereignty to this mythology.
And it is a mythology that can be debunked.
because it's just transformation and transfection in cell culture and in animals.
It is just the cheap production of DNA and RNA.
And it is the cheap use of transfection and transformation that can explain all and any of these phenomenon, including what they call virology in laboratories.
And so instead of debunking virology in a few statements, we have spent four and a half years
Instead of debunking transfection and transformation as not investigational vaccines and pulling everybody out of this nosedive in 2021, we are now here in 2024 with Brett Weinstein saying that not everybody understands what transfection means.
It's very simple.
You can't grow RNA that you find in the wild in a dish.
If you want to do that, you're going to have to make a DNA copy of it by sequencing it and synthesizing it.
And DNA, unlike RNA, is very high fidelity to copy, like a CD.
And we have lots of ways to do it using bacteria.
These are very old techniques that go back to Baltimore and Gallo.
And so we can grow a lot of DNA.
We can grow a lot of RNA and we can put it in places and find it with PCR and sequencing.
We can also passage it in cell culture.
We can use electroporation and all of these things.
We can test for it and find it.
Doesn't necessarily mean we're proving that it's replicating.
Not necessarily mean we're proving that it's virology, but these signals are makeable and they are detectable.
And you can make very high quantities of them because there are industrial methods appropriate for making venom, appropriate for making any protein biologic, including antibodies that could be used to generate the DNA and RNA that these virologists call infectious clones.
And yes, they could be made at an industrial scale as well, using all the same equipment.
But the real thing you should be calling it is synthetic DNA in quantity, because that's all that's needed for the sequencing to work, for the PCR to work.
They could transfect you to an immunogen that would cause symptoms.
Maybe even they transfected people to the spike so that they would find it and then could justify the 45 minutes it took for Moderna to design the spike with a membrane anchor.
Ladies and gentlemen, it's all about synthetic biology.
It's the only thing that's real.
If you haven't seen this interview with Gabe Mason that I did the other day, please watch it again because I do think I say some really interesting things in that video.
And I do think that some of those things were taken and kind of used against me or pirated and pawned off as somebody else's ideas.
So be careful.
It's important that you hear it so that you can
hear these combination of words being crafted and used by me and then stolen by other people.
Ladies and gentlemen, these people are part of the same narrative control curation group that Tony Fauci and Richard Ebright and Peter Daszak are all part of the same show that these people are part of.
And that's really hard to accept for a lot of people, but it's definitely true.
They are national security operatives.
They are spies.
They are intel agents.
They are meddlers and they are traitors.
And if you want to see them for what they are, I suggest one really good video to watch is Mark's video from today, Where in the World is Pierre Kory?
was the title of it.
Ladies and gentlemen, intravascular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
Transfection in healthy humans is criminally negligent and RNA cannot pandemic.
Weaponized piles of money have murdered people and gotten people to agree about that being a lab leak.
The old vaccine schedule was shit.
And virology is just transformation and transfection of cell cultures and animal models with synthetic DNA and RNA.
And for some reason or another, Andy Kaufman couldn't say that when he was arguing with Steve Kirsch last week.
For some reason, Andy Kaufman couldn't say that for four years.
And Tom Cowan hasn't been able to say it for four years.
And Christine Massey keeps arguing about all the foyage she's collected.
And Alex Zek keeps saying that they've proven virology's wrong with a control experiment.
But you're not proving anything wrong if exosomes are everywhere.
and transfection and transformation are real.
Ladies and gentlemen, stop all transfections in humans because they are trying to eliminate the control group by any means necessary.
And if you liked what you saw, please go to gigaohmbiological.com and find a way to financially support this work because we need it real bad.
We are running on fumes.
And if you need to rewatch or you want to share it, please share the links at stream.gigaohm.bio and realize that you can download those videos now.
audio 480 and 1080 and you can do whatever you want with them including share them, post them, email them around, cut clips.
Thank you very much everybody for supporting my work and realize that I have a little bit of a funny weekend
because it's my anniversary and my family is leaving for a couple weeks and so my timing won't be very good until Tuesday and after Tuesday we're gonna work like a Swiss Swiss train schedule here so thank you very much and I'll see you again soon this is a luxury of having spent my life doing what I love the cost of that it sucks
I'm not blind.
I'm not numb to the pain.
I would argue I'm more conscious of it than anybody else, but I'm also more conscious of what that gives me.
And when I'm done with this, that will be what it is and I'll find a way.
But there's something inside of me propelling
that I'm not going to give up until the wheels fall off.
That's what I'm made of.
And I wish I see all the arguments against it, but I wish I could relate the intangibles to you.
My guess is that we're all built the same.
None of us are completely stupid, a little deranged.
I think a strong argument, I do.
But ultimately, we also know what we have.
And to go and lay down in that sense of it, that's like embracing what we've done with our lives, you know?
This guy is Rodney Mullen.
He is a world famous skateboarder, inventor of many, many skateboarding moves, and a longtime supporter of GigaOM Biological.
And one of the reasons why I'm in front of you today, because without him edifying my belief in myself and my confidence in my ability to figure this out, I might have given up a few years ago already.
And so I've got a lot to thank Rodney for, the least of which being the financial support that he's provided over the years.
But more than anything, I just have him as an inspiration because he's somebody who, you know, just did what he felt was right.
And it's led him in all the places where it needed to go.
And I'm doing what I think is right.
And if it wasn't for my wife, Fearla,
I definitely wouldn't be in front of you right now.
So I need to go enjoy my anniversary and celebrate it.
And I will be again here tomorrow because that's what we do.
I think tomorrow I actually might have an interview with someone if I can schedule it.
So we'll see.
It'll probably be after dinner if that happens.
Thank you very much for joining me and I will see you again tomorrow.