I'm clicking the live button right now then and we'll just do it live So you want to introduce yourself first?
I actually don't know who you are except for that I know that you're a doctor in Canada who is friends or contacts with Cara and Jeff who are two very
They really support my family quite strongly, way more than anyone else does at the moment.
And so I'm, whatever, whoever they put me in contact with, I want to talk to simply to respect the amount of sacrifice that they are also making for some stranger on the other side of North America.
So if you could introduce yourself and how you've experienced the pandemic and where it went wrong for you.
I know Canada is a special case, but just kind of give us an idea of where you're at now and
We don't view ourselves as a special case at all.
We're part of the entire world that's completely being buffaloed by lying psychopaths.
So every country on earth is suffering the same thing.
We're just one of many.
That's my opinion on that one, Jim.
Yeah.
Uh, were you wanting to be just to introduce myself in a general sense to you?
Yeah.
I mean, you know, what kind of doctor you are, what you were doing when you were minding your own business before the pandemic and then where you are now and how this has changed your life.
Cause I assume it has.
Absolutely.
It says, and, uh, I, I probably know you a little bit better than you know me, Jay, because you've got some pretty popular stuff on your, uh, your broadcast.
And I can't say that I watch everyone, but I watch one here and there and
Interested when you talk with Dr. Lee, interested when you talk with Dr. McCullough, interested when you talk with Dr. Maccas, Dr. Troese, my colleagues from Canada, and very pleased that you're willing to reach out and have me on your show today.
My best to all of your audience, so that you know, I was a graduate of medical school in 1975.
I was a thoroughly authorized doctor willing to work and able to work in ICUs and the like and emergencies after 1977.
I've worked in my medical career there for close to 47 years since 1977.
And know a thing or two about medicine, know a thing or two about keeping people alive.
Also know a thing or two about
the smell of things when it doesn't sound accurate.
And quite, not as early as some people, it wasn't really till early 2022 that I really understood how deleterious this whole situation was, how likely it was to be an organized and a planned thing.
And I learned those facts from James O'Keefe in January of 2022.
That's when my eyes were thoroughly opened.
January of 2022, a broadcast from James O'Keefe
and he would have the primary informations of things we'll talk about in a few minutes, Jay.
James O'Keefe is certainly the prime person with the informations that proved that Major Joseph Murphy within DARPA had had communications with Fauci, had discouraged him from doing research of this nature a number of years back and learned that the research slash creation
of the deleterious vaccines have been going on since 2015, 2016.
And he put this all into a report, which he sent to his inspector general in the spring of 2018.
So he let everybody know that this terrible stuff was going on from 2015 to 2018.
Trump and everyone and all of us knew nothing about it at that point.
But Joseph Murphy and his emails with the DARPA people within the Department of Defense made it extremely clear
that it was a deleterious operation going on on both sides of the Pacific, and it was going on for four to five years.
So once I heard that, would your ears perk up when you hear things like that, Jay?
I think so.
And my ears perked up, and I've been involved ever since, ever since January of 2022.
Wow.
I wonder if it would surprise you that it's exactly the same narrative that got me involved in all of the mess after 2022.
Um, actually, um, I think the details of this will actually shock you unless you already know them.
Um, but, uh, I was part of a Twitter group called drastic in 2020.
And actually drastic is the original releaser of the diffuse document that, that
that O'Keefe later produced and released, but did not credit to drastic and did not credit to that.
He took credit for himself as having found this guy named Murphy.
Now, what I would challenge you to consider is that actually this whole thing would have been very handy for a biosecurity state that wanted to create an elaborate illusion about the potential for pandemics by planting
hidden research and hidden proposals in the literature and in databases to be found.
The reason why I will say that this is true is because when the diffuse document was first released inside of the group drastic,
I immediately said that this was way too convenient and that somebody was playing us.
And those people in that group threw me out because of that.
Now, what's really interesting is three months later, an associate of the State Department in the United States and an associate of Robert Malone came to my house in Pittsburgh and insisted that we do a live stream together about the diffuse proposal.
Now, I did it because he came to my house and I was a little scared about what this meant, but I thought, okay, maybe he's right.
Maybe we need to be concerned about this document and the origins of the virus.
And within about two months after that, I received two phone calls on the same day
which was a phone call from Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
and a phone call from Senator Ron Johnson, and both of them told me the exact same story, that Robert Malone had sat them down on a couch and made them watch my stream from January 22, 2022, where I interviewed Charles Rixey, the guy who came to my house to insist that the defuse proposal was real.
Now, I'm suggesting to you that the American system and the global supranational powers of big pharma could have easily placed a document, a fake fear and cleavage site, gain of function document on a website to be found by some no-name guy with no business looking on that website to leak it to some random
a set of international meddlers on Twitter and then later release it in some semi-official form through O'Keefe.
There is no way to explain the behavior of these people for the six months before O'Keefe came out when we knew about the document.
other than to know that it was being orchestrated as a release and that it couldn't be released as early as DRASTIC found it.
Now, I'm not suggesting that all the people in DRASTIC are bad, but I am suggesting that this document was given to us by somebody that we can't trust, and it has been promoted as undisputable evidence that this can happen.
And I think that you have to consider the possibility that a biosecurity state that was interested in permanently rolling out a silly
already known to be not useful technology like transfection and wanted to roll it out under the guise of a new countermeasure and a new technology that was worthy of a Nobel Prize, one of the things you'd have to do is create a pretty elaborate mystery
to roll this out on.
And that mystery is this gain-of-function lab leak.
So, in being as aggressive as I can, first of all, you said you were an ICU doctor.
Are you aware of the
Hundreds of papers in the literature of extreme medicine and ICU medicine and intensive care medicine that shows that the use of pure oxygen can lead to extremely detrimental complications within hours.
And they've known this since like the 80s.
That's common knowledge.
You have to be very careful with oxygen levels.
But in the United States, would it surprise you that in the United States, in New York City, they were using pure oxygen directly from the tank at 60 liters a minute because they were running out of ventilators?
Oh, I know all of that, Jay.
But then what does that mean?
Doesn't that mean they murdered people by creating a phenomenon in the hospitals that's easily explained by the misuse of oxygen?
Well, I don't want to get into an exact analysis of something that I have no direct knowledge of, Jay.
Oh, but I'm telling you, I have direct knowledge of it and other people have direct knowledge of it.
That's why they cover it up with the story about ventilators and remdesivir and all the other stories that start with acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by the misuse of pure oxygen that was rampant in America.
There's no question that the right balance of things were never done.
It's not about the right balance.
It's about protocols that would be known to kill.
I'm trying to speak as myself.
If you'll allow me to state what I can state.
Simply is that overuse of oxygen can be a problem.
Use of remdesivir can be a problem.
under use of appropriate nutraceutical assists for someone suffering from a COVID coagulation syndrome, including budesonide to be inhaled, including anticoagulants, as simple as aspirin, and others to be used.
These measure, and ivermectin, because of its precise abilities to unconnect spike, which is latching onto itself,
all of the right things were never used, and many of the bad things were used.
How are you as a doctor seeing the medical field, evaluating the difference between previously existing cardiovascular
disease and the manifestations of it, like stroke and heart attack and all this stuff, and the COVID clotting thing that you're talking about.
How do you differentiate between those two?
By what you treat them with or by the symptoms that they present?
The key thing was not recognizing that the lung to heart interface problem was not actually a disease in the physical lungs or in the alveoli of the lungs.
The problem was of a micro clotting event in the vasculature that is between the lung and the blood system.
The micro capillary system where the exchange of oxygen goes on is where there were micro clottings going on.
And that's why the appropriate use of ivermectin to get rid of the micro clotting and the appropriate use of
basically very low doses of anticoagulants, but very low doses and precise doses of anticoagulants would have made a huge difference.
And this was not part of the protocol.
That much I can say.
In your understanding, what is the molecular mechanism by which ivermectin clears these microcrots?
Do we know that?
I mean, clotting is a pretty well understood mechanism.
They gave Nobel prizes out for that.
There's a, you know, the whole complement system and everything is well understood.
So how is it that, how is it that ivermectin is working at that interface?
You're more of an expert on these things.
Because in a sense, the expert is interviewing the moderately knowledgeable person.
I'm not an expert on it.
I've been just told that ivermectin is a wonder drug for cancer and for parasites.
And also for now, I've heard microclotting and I don't understand any of the molecular mechanisms that underlie these understandings.
I just know that everybody's claiming it.
Okay, well, I'll do my best to join the people who are claiming it.
And it is because it is such a unique, large, web-like molecule.
The ivermectin molecule basically looks like an Afghan rug.
Yeah, it's great.
It's a great insect poison.
It's a great ant killer.
A lot of its chemical derivatives are mostly insecticides, which is interesting.
The main thing is it's very, very large.
It's a very, very large molecule.
It's very, very interesting.
A large molecule would mean many more side effects and possibilities that we don't understand.
A small molecule would have limited possibilities.
So again, I don't think you're winning that argument by making that argument.
I'm not trying to win an argument, Jay.
You asked me to give a description of why I think it helps in multiple ways.
But is it possible that it doesn't, and you're just being fooled by the illusion of consensus of all these other doctors on the internet?
Not a chance.
Not a chance I'm being fooled, Jay.
Not a chance I'm being fooled.
So you have patients that had microclots that you identified and diagnosed, and then they cleared because you gave them ivermectin?
Other doctors did, I didn't.
I haven't treated a single patient with COVID myself.
But you're so certain about what's going on medically, but you don't have any personal experience with it.
I find that extraordinary because that could get us in a lot of trouble if you're wrong.
We can both, I would invite you to, can you just let this old doc talk to you a little bit?
I thought we were going to have a friendly interview about things and I'd be delighted to have it.
I think we are having a friendly interview.
I just don't want to get off track of making sure that we don't get any dust in our eye.
So every time you say something that is certain that I'm pretty sure isn't certain, I just want to make sure that we understand it's not certain.
For example, I think that a lot of people on earth have become certain that RNA can be the,
the underlying biological foundation of a pandemic, even though before the pandemic, DNA was the special molecule.
DNA is the special molecule that can only divide between 24 and 36 times in cell culture before the telomeres get too short.
DNA is the only molecule that's double-stranded so it can be proofread.
DNA is the only molecule that we can detect with PCR.
We have to convert RNA to DNA in order to detect it.
But somehow or another, all these people are sure
RNA spilled in a mud puddle can show up in all the white-tailed deer in North America and all the people and it's still going now.
And there's no biology to support that.
None.
Okay, that sounds interesting.
Yeah, it would be interesting if anybody cared.
I mean, as a biologist who has grown up and then his whole life studied this dogma of DNA to RNA to protein, it has become very disturbing to me how alone I am in this realization that all the biology that I've been taught in Biology 101 that applies to the wonderful molecule of DNA that makes evolution real and all these genetic diseases real,
RNA doesn't have that, and yet somehow or another, RNA is by itself able to high-fidelity circulate the globe, and we can track it through 18 million sequences that are, you know, curiously enough, being curated by DITRA in America, and yet somehow or another, nobody cares that the biology of this is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence that's only been provided by Peter Daszak, Ralph Baric, Tony Fauci, and all the people that were
happy to give the blame for this, but never consider the possibility that Tony Fauci might have been in place for 38 years because they needed a person to lie for 38 years.
Well, the psychology and who did what, I'm certainly not privy to it.
I'm not a fly on anybody's wall.
But I do agree with you.
that the essential balance and information transfer that occurs in us so that we can have proteins, potentially healthy proteins made by our body, only is able to, as we go backward from the protein, we see that an RNA ends up getting analyzed through mitochondrial and other sources so that the protein can be made.
And where does the RNA come from?
The RNA comes from the body's own
uninterrupted DNA circumstances within the cells that allows, in a normal circumstance, RNA is simply produced in the body.
RNA doesn't exist until your own God-given DNA creates those RNAs, which can then make proteins.
That's how it all should work.
But how people with CRISPR devices and the like were able to interfere with these things, it's just awful.
My apologies for the phone of mine interrupting this call.
I'll just ignore it, and we'll continue as soon as the stinking ringing stops.
Okay, folks?
Sorry I didn't put that on mute.
No, no, I don't hear it.
It tweaked your audio a little bit.
I'll just ignore it until it goes away.
Thanks, brother.
No, no, no problem.
So, in trying to keep this friendly, I guess one of the places where I think we've at least gotten to now is the idea that you're not ruling out the possibility that
in America, they might have lied about how people died.
And if they lied about it in enough concert across enough news programs, then they could make a mountain out of a molehill, even if you don't want to give me the idea that there is no
molehill.
It could have been a very small signal.
It could have actually been a background signal, which is one of the reasons why I started with RNA cannot pandemic because in my experience as an academic biologist, PCR is extremely accurate.
But PCR as used on the academic bench has many controls.
It has done in triplicate.
It has multiple targets that are endogenous and then also what you're focusing on.
And none of those things were used
for the PCR tests that describe the pandemic in 2020, 2021, and 2022.
And so just to put numbers on this, there were 220 approved via EUA, Emergency Youth Authorization, diagnostics for COVID in America, that all of which are no longer on the market.
So the actual products that were used to define the pandemic no longer exist in America.
And so there is no way to go back and reevaluate it.
Just to give you an anecdotal story, in Canada, I've spoken several times on a stream with the guy who coordinated the PCR testing in Canada, and he admitted that there was no, not admitted, he said and confirmed that there are no, it was not like he was trying to hide it.
that there was no control, no endogenous control, and they only worked at one target.
So there's no way that the PCR could have been accurate.
And in fact, it's likely that it was just amplifying a background.
And whether they got a signal or not, they said it was COVID if the doctor wanted to, because there was $35,000 in America for every person that died and that got to the hospital for it.
So if they stayed on protocol, which included pure oxygen,
then they would get $35,000 when they died.
And that's real, that's documented.
The FLCCC protocol said that if you had a 94% pulse ox, you should go to the hospital.
That's how people were herded into hospitals and why the people that died in America were only in hospitals.
That's a very good point.
The people dying in hospitals doing so badly and the hospital care doing so badly.
In spite of doing so badly, and in spite of creating those deaths in 2020, when there was no vaccine, in spite of the creative deaths in the medical directive circumstances, you well described there, Jay, in spite of those deaths happening, worldwide deaths in total did not go up in 2020.
In 2020, the number of deaths throughout the world were right on the number that it's always at, roughly 1% of the population, 700 million people
Sorry, I want to get this right.
70 million people die in a normal year.
That is one one hundredth of seven billion.
Yeah.
So the normal 70 million people died in 2020.
Yeah, I think through apparently much flu disappeared virtually.
And this thing called covid-19 occurred in 2020.
But the sum total of deaths from flu like illnesses or by ostensibly viral type illnesses stayed the same.
The total deaths in the world stayed the same by the end of 2020.
2021 comes along, this usage of the vaccine starts in 2021, that's when death rates around the world elevated.
First in the pilots, the nurses, the doctors, the people being forced to take the vax, and in the elderly themselves forced to take the vax throughout the first half of 2021.
And the accent and the increase of deaths increased as the vaccines were used more and more and more.
And of that, there can be great certainty.
That's my best comment to this point.
Yep, I totally, I completely agree with you and the important argument that I'm trying to make or the important point that I'm trying to make with you is that if the NIH and Gavi and whoever you want to put at the top of this already knew that the Moderna tested, DARPA tested technology called transfection was never going to pass a normal FDA
transition was never going to be approved for general use, had already been tested as a transformation or a transfection to cure genetic diseases, like in Jesse Gelsinger's case, or to treat special cancers, it had no appropriate place or use in healthy humans at the start of the pandemic.
So if
If the goal was to roll that out anyway, then you would need to murder people and lie about it in order to create the crisis that would justify it.
You actually had to scare people into taking it.
And so that required people to be in place to agree that we're not murdering anybody.
60 liters a minute is normal.
We had American doctors on YouTube saying that that was working.
And you can verify that that would never work.
60 liters a minute?
with a mask like this would kill people.
It would create ARDS in less than two hours.
The first and earliest paper I found on PubMed that shows that showed 80% oxygen in monkeys will cause ARDS in two hours.
This is well known and so whatever happened in New York City might not have shown up in the world average.
But it showed up on PBS NewsHour as a sharp spike, starting in New York City, and the rest of the universe covered this as the start of a crisis.
And so they didn't have to murder very many people, as long as every single Five Eyes nation and every news program in the world said that something crazy was happening in New York.
And I'm suggesting that that's exactly how this was pulled off.
And now we have, five years later, a chorus of American and international people that understand that's the illusion.
And that's why they're the same people that go all around the world and speak in all these different places.
It's not new doctors every time as the truth is spreading.
It's the same people that have to go around and protect the narrative about the murder that was used to coerce these people.
The murder in Scotland, the murder in UK, the murder in the Netherlands.
I lost people to a urinary tract infection because they were understaffed.
in the Netherlands, this happened everywhere.
And it doesn't have to rise to the level of the average being higher in order to create the illusion of consensus about this spreading novel pathogen and get everybody to respond as ridiculously as possible.
And that's where we are right now.
That's the reason why the same people are still telling the same story and why people are still arguing about the 19 base insert still that I was arguing about, lost my job for in 2020.
That's what I was arguing in 2020.
So it's crazy.
I'm certainly not part of that group of quote unquote, same people.
No, my greatest concern is that given that we were foisted by certain elements, we were foisted to be fear on Julie, and we were foisted to not use naturalistic mechanisms that would be assistive.
We doctors had our hands, legitimate doctors had their hands tied behind their backs.
They weren't able to prescribe ivermectin.
They weren't able to prescribe low and appropriate dosages of oxygen.
They weren't able to prescribe, they were banned from using steroids for a viral infection.
Absolutely.
Steroids are a sine qua non that should be used during a viral pneumonitis.
And they were even banned from using
proper antibiotics for secondary bacterial infection, because secondary bacterial infection will happen, and you need to be free to use those.
But you know antibiotics don't work on a viral syndrome, right?
That's what we were told.
Well, duh, I know that, of course.
But the whole point is this.
When you've got a viral pneumonitis, what happens 12 hours later, 36 hours later?
Then the person gets bacterial infection on top of the viral.
So there is a time when you do need actual antibiotics.
You have to be a good clinician.
You have to analyze the X-ray and the sputum samples properly.
And you make a decision based on that.
And in many, many circumstances, actual antibiotics are truly necessary.
But the doctors were banned from using the antibiotics.
Instead, give a toxic kidney-killing drug like remdesivir incense.
Let's just see how the patient does.
Well, the patient will do as you know they will do.
Well, let me ask you this question then to flip it around a little bit.
I think I asked this question to Peter McCullough, but I don't remember if I did.
I might not have.
I might have asked him a different one.
So imagine a scenario in 2018 where there's no novel pathogen and you just decided that nobody gets to use antibiotics in the hospital.
How many more people would die?
A lot or a little?
plenty, lots.
And that's what they did.
So how do we how do we divorce that effect from the the experience of a novel pathogen?
How do we tell everybody that you probably didn't experience something novel, you just probably needed antibiotics and your doctor didn't give them to you?
How do we how do we solve that mystery?
Because if that's what they did in America and a few other places with with coercion and lies, then we really need to wake up quick.
Well, Didier Raoult knew what to do.
McCullough knew what to do.
Zelenko knew what to do.
The man in the moon knew what to do if they were a legitimate position.
It would be a mixture of the old and the new, a mixture of what's always been helpful for viral infections.
plus some new things that were going to go into help the specific coagulation issue that was going on in the lungs, the specific microcoagulation within the lung, microvasculature, that was the one that was really missed.
And that's why 85 to 90% of the people who died in Canada, the states didn't need to.
That million figure, that means that only 900,000 people would have died in the states
Sorry, 100,000 would have died, but 900,000 Americans would not have died throughout 2020 if they had been allowed to use ivermectin and antibiotics in an appropriate fashion.
And I would just be afraid that the ivermectin was thrown in there to distract people from the effect of
telling people not to use antibiotics.
And this... I appreciate your question on that.
The problem I have with ivermectin, let me just say this one thing.
The problem that I have with it is that I don't know of any other cancer curing medicines that are good for healthy people.
And yet this is something that cures cancer and also...
People are upset that some people are talking about a benefit for cancer.
Specifically, remember with ivermectin, it does have a multimodal effect.
It doesn't come with a label on its front that says only for cancer, only for malaria, only for RNA disease.
But it's a curious combination of insecticide, anti-cancer drug, which we usually associate with chemotherapy,
But it's not a chemotherapy.
This is a naturalistic medicine which has nothing in common with chemotherapy.
It works terribly different than chemotherapy does.
But do we know how it works?
Do we know how it works?
Because it would be important to know how it works because then that means we know a lot more about cancer than I thought.
I'll leave it to the specialists.
The specialists from William Mackus to others are being pretty darned excellent.
William Mackus wasn't even an active doctor at the start of the pandemic, wasn't even doing anything in the dissonant space until 2022.
It's weird.
I won't have an argument with you about William.
Okay, I get it.
person.
I want to understand the biology of the assumptions that everybody's making without any mechanistic explanation.
It's the first time in history where the essential selling of something as snake oil, I've got no explanation, but it's sure good for everything, is being accepted around the world and being perpetuated by a lot of people who have no need to do it.
Why?
Why not just focus on the fact that you know that three or four times as many people would die of pneumonia if you didn't use antibiotics in the hospital and start there.
Start with the fact that not resuscitating people in New York City could be a problem and say that they murdered people and lied about it in order to roll out a technology that would otherwise never been able to roll out.
I'm very comfortable agreeing with you that that is completely true what you just said.
I'd rather not in any way discuss the benefit or lack of benefit of
uh, uh, Mendezal or Vibramectin for cancers.
That's for other people to figure out over the next 10 years.
Okay.
But the one area I can stay with very comfortably is, uh, a lawyer in the States happened to represent 200 different people across the States in a stretch of 18 months.
He went to court and people who were not doctors made the judgment of whether the patient got Ivermectin or not.
They were individual judges.
Some sided with the,
Hospital instead, the hospital says you cannot get ivermectin, therefore you won't get ivermectin.
Well, 50 out of 50 died.
Everybody who got no ivermectin when they lost in court, left in a body bag.
Were they also getting antibiotics?
I'm only talking one factor here.
Ivermectin given or ivermectin not given.
50 out of 50.
died when they were not given the ivermectin in spite of the family wanting to have it be given.
A completely different group of 50 families and a specific patient who was in hospital.
They won in court.
The judge says, I'm telling you, the hospital, you've been sued.
You must allow the patients to give them ivermectin in the hospital, even though it's not your protocol.
49 out of 50 lived.
One was so sick they didn't get better.
So you've got 98% success when ivermectin being given to a hospitalized patient who's already far along the route of dying.
And ivermectin pulled them back from death.
These people were discharged and left.
So the two groups were tremendously different.
Everybody died in the one group.
98% of people lived in the other group.
And Jay, I'm sorry.
That might not be what they call a randomized controlled study.
In fact, it's the opposite of it.
It's just what happened between lawyers and judges and what happened to the patients who got the IVR and the patients who didn't.
And I'll tell you which group I would have wanted to be in if I was lying there in my bed with an endotracheal tube down me and a gastric tube in my stomach.
And if it got me at a hospital and they put ivermectin down the gastric tube in my stomach and I absorbed it through my natural digestive mechanisms and I was able to leave hospital because of it,
That's a pretty big picture, Jay.
And that's why I'm a comfortable believer, not for other conditions, but for COVID-19 itself.
And also for some of the COVID-19 VAX injuries, both.
Ivermectin has a place and it should be allowed.
It should be massively allowed in my personal medical
Well, then if I'm just to agree with you on that sense, if you're right, then I think that billions of dollars should be investigated in understanding the many molecular mechanisms that underlie the Swiss Army knife of health that ivermectin is.
Because if any of these claims can be verified,
then we can end the billion-dollar spending on cancers that's going nowhere, we can stop researching the genetic causes of cancer, and we can start thinking about the molecular mechanisms of ivermectin and find more ways to use it.
Because for me, again, I'm not talking about cancers whatsoever.
I'm only talking about the benefit of a specific thing called COVID-19.
Which we agree, right?
We don't have any real evidence of specific.
We don't have any evidence of specific COVID-19.
We just have evidence from PCR tests that we can't check and never could check.
And we have evidence from the internet that says that all these people agree that something weird is going around.
And that's all we've got, because we know that they weren't resuscitating people in New York City.
We know they were using supplementary oxygen in New York City.
We know they killed people with remdesivir, with ventilators, without using antibiotics.
Sorry, Jay, I have a technical issue.
Right now, your volume is about 115th of what it was throughout our chat.
Is there a chance that you can send your sound to me slightly better?
Just in the last minute and a half, your sound has dropped to almost inaudible to my ears.
That's weird.
Hold on.
Let me see if I can fix that for you.
Test one, two again.
Hello.
You still can't hear me, huh?
Still very bad?
Yeah.
I mean, we can... It's not impossible.
It's just very, very poor.
I'll hang in and we'll make it work.
Okay.
Well, I mean, you're already, we're already very, very far into this.
I don't think we have a lot of disagreements.
And I think this is kind of where I'd hoped we'd be because I don't,
Honestly, I don't, I don't, I don't think it's going to be an easy walk for any of us to get all the way out of this.
And I don't know that I'm right.
I just, I have a feeling I've got to pull you farther out yet because, um, the amount of malevolence is underestimated by almost all of us.
And one of the things that I've come aware of that a lot of people aren't yet aware of is that there are groups of people that lie together.
So I've been in number of groups that, that are supposedly working together, but in reality, they were.
they were coordinatedly lying to me in text messages and on phone calls to get me to fight with other people about things in order to keep me out of the space that I'm in now, which is that RNA cannot pandemic.
And I have another interesting medical challenge question for you.
I've come to understand intramuscular injection of a combination of substances as medicine is generally dumb.
I can't even understand anymore how doctors believe that injecting a combination of toxins and proteins into the muscle could usefully augment a healthy child.
And yet we do it 12 times before six months in America.
And I don't think there's any biology to support that.
As a lifelong biologist, as a guy who worked with Nobel Prize winners in 2014 and have them on my resume, I am absolutely embarrassed
by not seeing this as a parent before I had already given my child the vaccine schedule.
This is a gross
misrepresentation of medicine, if we think that we have the understanding of ourselves as a biological entity through time, that we can augment a small baby by injecting a combination of shit in its arm.
And yet, this is the model of immunization.
And in America, we do it earlier and more frequently than any other country on earth.
And so I'm frustrated because I think that this is one of the central mythologies that is being sustained by the pandemic crisis.
While we argue about COVID and whether ivermectin works, we are accepting still this idea of intramuscular injection as medicine, and it's not.
It can't be.
There's no way it can be.
Can you help me fight?
Is that nuts?
Am I crazy?
Is that something that you can say?
No, no.
I mean, you're right to be concerned.
Many, many, many people are concerned about the hyperimmune effect of vaccines.
It makes you very hyper against one thing, ostensibly.
You'll never get polio if you get your polio shot, right?
Great, they never get polio, but what have you done that's make them hyperimmune against other aspects in your body?
And what have they done by using the adjunctive agents that make the absorption into the response tissue in the end better, the aluminum-based and mercury-based and other based thymersols and the like?
that make it easier for it to get into more tissues more deeply and create, that's creating other injuries and other diseases that have nothing to do with polio.
That's the negative, terribly negative effect about aspects of vaccination.
And if it was a pure vaccination with no thymer salt, no aluminum, and none of these other adjunctive agents required to get it deep into the tissues, then I guess, then it might be a safe and effective vaccine.
But the numbers are real.
They are not,
They might be effective in preventing measles.
They might be effective in preventing polio.
And I would just put might be.
But they are not doing it in a safe way.
That we can be certain.
I just have to do a wipe here.
I apologize.
Hold on one second.
That'll be done in a minute.
And then I want to put you here.
So I just want to draw a picture.
Can you see this still and hear me still?
I can, I can see it for sure and I can hear you, acceptably.
Great, so I'm going to draw a very simplified version of the mammalian body.
Basically, the mammalian body has an inside and an outside and it's got a tube that goes through the middle.
Can we kind of agree on that as the basics of an animal?
So here you have the lungs, right?
Here you have a tube going through the middle and then you have the body.
So my argument is that intramuscular injection to augment the immune system is injecting here and actually the skin
is oriented inside out.
That's why variolation probably worked on the skin.
That's why subcutaneous vaccination used to be how we did it.
Actually, the epithelium of the gut is also oriented inside out with Peyer's patches and that kind of thing.
And the lungs is actually oriented inside out and it's sterile.
So for me, it's very hard to understand how it is that you can rationalize this being a useful way to augment a system that is oriented inside out and designed not to attack here.
It doesn't matter what adjuvants you use.
You have to use adjuvants simply because putting crap behind enemy lines is not gonna activate the immune system.
So you have to call attention to it using toxins because the immune system isn't oriented there.
So you're actually admitting, not you, but the people who make vaccines are admitting that this is a dumb biological idea and that's why they have to use adjuvants.
Now, what I would caution you
to see, perhaps, is that a bait and switch is going to happen where the old vaccine schedule was bad because adjuvants are bad, but the new vaccine schedule just has sugars and ribonucleic acids in it and lipids, which we all have.
And so we've really fixed it.
It's going to be great.
Once we get the double-stranded DNA out, this stuff is going to be good to go.
I don't know that that's exactly what they're proposing.
Well, they're doing it in America already.
We're giving mRNA vaccines to old people for RSV and for pneumonia and for COVID and for flu.
So they're doing it.
And we're giving it to the people that need managing.
I am a complete opponent of every mRNA, and I would call it an mRNA DNA injection.
It has elements of DNA within plasmids, as well as the RNA within lipid nanoparticles.
The bottom line is they're giving both.
It's bound to be Frankensteinian just by its design, simply by its design, Jim.
Yes, I agree with that wholeheartedly.
And I think the thing that I would just try to push you to just think about is if I'm right, and any combination of substances interjected intramuscularly is pretty dumb, then we don't have to debate about the DNA or the RNA.
We don't have to debate about adjuvants.
We can actually just say that this has always been wrong.
And we could have known this a generation ago had it not been prevented, essentially prevented from the point of AIDS.
When AIDS came out, the mythology was carefully controlled by almost the exact same people that are responsible for the Human Genome Project illusion and are responsible for the COVID illusion.
It's the same humans that are... Isn't that very interesting that it's the same people?
It is.
What would be the four or five top people who are literally in both groups as you perceive it, Jay?
Well, Tony Fauci would be one.
Francis Collins would be one.
Mark Lander would be one.
Kevin McKernan would be one.
All the people that worked for the Human Genome Project and then at the beginning of the pandemic were sure that PCR worked, but just not the way they're doing it.
And we're sure that there's a novel virus and that the millions of sequences are real.
Because that insistence is part of the illusion.
And remember, it may not be common knowledge, but DITRA
The DOD associated organization with the State Department in America, DTRA, is the entity that controlled all of the sequencing that was released in the world for the first year and a half of the pandemic.
The entire phylogenetic tree on which Omicron is based was curated by a military organization in secret in America.
That's not random.
And Robert Malone works for that organization.
That's where we're at right now, that we have a coordinated national security operation, probably coordinated through NATO, and that's why the same NATO performers are going around the world in these countries.
And that's why I'm losing my mind, because I think a lot of these people are
playing around in the background, controlling Bobby Kennedy's opinions, for example, and making sure that he never realizes that he could dunk on them legally, he could dunk on them biologically, if he had the right questions.
And hundreds of thousands of faculty members around the world would be scratching their heads going, why didn't I think about the fact that RNA doesn't have the properties of DNA?
So how could it pandemic?
There are so many molecular biologists who could have an epiphany in a moment if they were just made to ask the right questions.
And then you would have not, you don't have to worry about me, you'd have all kinds of colleagues that were telling you, holy crap, I never thought about that.
And then the idea that the NIH and Gavi and all these global people that want to govern us through public health for generations would lie about it wouldn't seem so preposterous anymore.
The multiple tugs and pulls that you refer to are things that the people that you personally actually know, and I just know of.
Yes, that's the reason why I often get very excited.
The ability of deep state elements to be in charge of the messaging is clear-cut that they can be so in charge of the messaging.
The messaging has been about a lie.
You know more of the biology.
as to why it's a lie, I'm not going to be able to name individual names, and I'm not pointing fingers at individual colleagues within my own area.
I believe most are absolutely trying to do the best thing they can.
I believe that.
Yeah, and I don't doubt it.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
And one way or the other, there's fingers on the scale.
There's fingers on the scale in terms of
real research being allowed to be perceived.
False research has been allowed to be perceived.
Of that, there is no question.
Yep.
Can I ask you just a random question out of left field?
What's the remnant situation like in Canada?
Do hospitals sell the remnants of operations and cesarean sections and foreskin and that kind of thing like we do in America?
How does that
I'll have to plead the fifth on that just because I'm not at that level.
I'm a mild mannered GP who happens to read a lot of articles, but I'm not in on the inside of those kinds of decisions.
Because one of the interesting things that you might not be aware of is in America, there are some lawsuits going on behind the scenes because
Some of these larger universities in America, we have big universities like Ohio State that have like 65,000 students.
They actually had contracts in place before the pandemic to sell testing remnants from their students.
So they were ready for COVID testing before COVID testing was mandated.
And then when they came back in the fall of 2020 and opened the schools and had the testings ready, they also had companies that were ready and buying the remnants as they were being produced.
That's very, very interesting that that description of readiness, you know of readiness and a specific area of tissue preparation and and the things you've just described what I was aware of as a physician being invited to go in and start giving shots and old age homes in early 2021.
with the fact, but it was the computer system, the computer system that allowed this to go full force right in January 2021.
It was unbelievable how sophisticated and ready it was.
That computer system alone, I can't quite recall the exact name, but it had a very, oh yeah.
Colvaxon.
Oh my gosh.
What?
That computer system would have taken four years to develop, James.
Four years to develop something with the sophistication of Colvaxon.
Oh, I know why they did that.
The doctor was able to sign into it in 2020, to be early 2021, but Colvaxon must have been sitting around since 2017.
No question about it.
Well, I have this idea.
I have this idea that one of the ways that they met the manufacturing goals that were obviously impossible for a billion shots was just to roll out a lot of placebos.
And now this kind of indirectly supports that idea, because if you were going to roll out placebos, you'd have to have a pretty good computer system to make sure you could keep track of the hot lots without anybody knowing.
And so in America, I don't know how well they did it, but I do know there are a couple databases associated with big hospital organizations that could have done it.
And those databases happen to be the databases that serve the health services of the universities that had the
the purchasers of the remnants ready to go.
So that was the first clue that I had that they were preparing to interface the the testing remnants with the kids medical records.
And so in Canada, that sounds like it would be very easy to do if they had that database already ready to go, then everybody gets the shots, they know what lot they got, and then whether they were going to expect something to outcome and what outcomes they would expect.
So this is really enticing.
Wow, that's
That's crazy.
I mean, I do still think the reason why I say Canada is exceptional is because I think you guys might be have more vulnerabilities as a
I don't want to use the word society, but like as a laws, as your set of laws, your set of laws might not protect you as well as our set of laws does.
And so it's possible that the nastiness that occurred in Canada was much more than happened in America in some ways.
And that's hard for me to tell, but it feels as though that's the case.
Cause they really, you guys sound a lot more like you were Australia where people were just forced to do it with,
with real thumbs.
I agree with you, Jay.
I would call Canada and Australia very similar in terms of autocracy by its government, by its liberalistic, quasi-communistic governments that are in both of those two countries.
And the desire of the people at the top to be in power and be in greater power over their people was huge.
Further censorship information, further laws to make censorship of individual opinions even stronger are going into Canada right now.
Bill 293 that's going through right now is going to allow people in Brussels to decide what kind of crops you can grow in Alberta.
And we're going to be not allowed to say anything about it in the public sphere, because if we speak against it in the public sphere, they'll freeze our bank accounts, remove our property and the like.
Well, I gotta say, we need some more migration from Canada then because the migration that we're getting right now isn't helping us.
So maybe you guys should move down here and we join forces.
I don't know.
We'll stay in touch and one way or the other, come to meetings together.
It'd be a pleasure to be at a meeting sometime together, James.
Yes.
Is this a good place to end?
I mean, it's like an hour.
I feel very much like it was a vigorous talk where nobody got mad and you were able to keep me level-headed, which is not everybody can do that.
I just got done with like a three-hour stream before I came talking to you.
So I think that's why I was a little riled up and I apologize if that felt abrasive.
Um, no, I've enjoyed every moment.
I think your energy, your knowledge, your expertise has, has been terrific.
You, I happen to know a little bit thing about the Kovacs on that.
I let you know about, and you certainly have let me know some things that I didn't know about that during the chat.
But the one thing we both know for sure is that there is Joseph Goebbels once say, there's nothing, there's no lie like the big lie.
There's no better lie than the big lie.
The bigger the lie, the easier it is to hide because it's so damn big, people can't believe it's a lie.
And that's the deal with false COVID-19.
Yes.
Well, RNA cannot pandemic might be the way to get out.
Challenge some of your friends if you can.
Say that you met some crazy guy who says RNA can't pandemic.
What does that mean?
And see how they respond.
Well, that's cool.
But one thing additional is that
The ability to help has to have multiple fields and levels.
There's a time for antibiotics.
There's a time, not all times, but there's a time for ivermectin.
There's a time for inhaled steroids.
And there's certainly a time now for proper treatment of vaccine injuries.
The vaccine injuries are so incredibly real that there are many, many people who are six feet under right now.
17-year-olds who shouldn't be dead, perfectly healthy 17-year-olds who after a shot or two of the vax are dead because of myocarditis or irritable ectopic foci in their electrical system, their heart, and they are dead because they do have these 1,000 or 1,500 side effects
But when the effect hasn't been to kill you, when it's only been to make you disabled, when it's only made you to have terrible vasculitis throughout your body, ringing in your ears, paralysis in your spine, oh, that's all.
It's done those things to you.
In other words, it's destroyed your life.
Oh, and then on top of it, the doctors aren't allowed to see it for what it is and start treating it with multimodal mechanisms.
I'm not saying one mechanism is perfect or ideal.
But let the doctors pick and choose among the mechanisms that might be utilizable for COVID vaccine injury, because the VAX was not a VAX.
The VAX was an immune-harming, immune-damaging, and it hacked the immune system so our immune system would attack you.
Once spike is in the cells, once spike is noticed by the immune system, and this spike or bits of genetic material, whatever you want to call it, when these bits of genetic material are making your immune system or my heart system, Jay, will take us down.
And we have to have the mechanisms that will fight against that.
It's a terrible, terrible thing.
I'm so delighted to have spoken with you, Jay, and I hope we get to do it in person someday.
Yes, I think so too.
I think we can.
It's going to happen.
Maybe you'll be at the next barbecue or something like that.
Or we can bring you to the next GigaOM event in Pittsburgh where Karen, Jeff came too.
That could happen.
Great.
Well, thank you.
Thank you very much.
Bye for now.
And we'll, we'll talk soon.
Very good.
Bye bye.
Thank you.
Bye sir.
Bye.
That wasn't that bad.
I don't know what to say.
That wasn't that bad.
I liked talking to him.
I'm happy that Karen Jeff hooked that up.
He was very good at pushing back.
He was very good at not making it personal.
And I liked that.
I liked it a lot.
I felt good about it.
I felt like he was listening to what I said.
And so yeah, Dr. Schumacher, thanks very much for your time.
Sorry, I didn't do a fancy intro or anything like that for him I am so tired now and I've got to get to the gym pretty soon for the practice today So I got to do another JC on a hardwood on the hardwood video Episode 2 will be edited tonight episode 3 will be filmed this afternoon Thank you very much again for everybody your support for having the patience for me to get this rolling again And I'll see you guys again soon