uh uh uh
uh
Concerned, but one thing I am confident of from everything I've read is that this RNA exists, you can capture it, you can sequence it, you can move it to other cells and recapitulate disease.
A condition that we will not call autism.
I don't like the word autism.
He was vaccine damaged.
He was neurologically damaged.
A condition that we will not call autism.
I don't like the word autism.
He was vaccine damaged.
I think, 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, 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.
It doesn't matter much at all what you believe about vaccines until we invent really important ones.
know until we have a pandemic that's killing everyone you know and you know it's it's not it's you know measles plus and okay 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 but no when when we have this new pandemic that
is, you know, got 75% mortality and it's not, it's, 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.
This, this is serial passage and he said that their proposal was to use serial passage to alter or to perform these gain-of-function research experiments.
Serial passage.
The stuff that I just recently came to the conclusion probably wouldn't work to do what they say would work.
Now these guys are telling you a story that that's exactly how it worked.
has nothing to do with a shitty PCR test, has nothing to do with crappy protocols or lying to doctors about the danger or the amount of unhealthiness in America, the lack of vitamin D or putting hydroxychloroquine on the back burner or not allowing people to use ivermectin or
None of these things matter to Charles Rixey and Andrew Huff.
The only thing that matters is that Serial Passage works, and they proposed it in a proposal, and that obviously means that not only does it work, but they did it.
And I'm telling you that a coronavirus can't sustain a pandemic.
in such, and it's written so eloquently by Dr. Daszak, that you can't really tell that it's gain-of-function.
So he avoids the specific term gain-of-function, but it's actually there in sort of eloquent scientific language.
And that proposal was funded in 2013, and a number of interesting things happened with that proposal.
Basically, without that work, without the USAID predict program, you wouldn't have the relationships in place to start doing this gain-of-function work.
When this proposal, the understanding the risk of bat coronavirus emergence is submitted to NIH, a domestic ban on gain of function goes into place, which is sort of pushed by the White House and the Obama administration.
So all these things are happening simultaneously, but basically they find a way to outsource the research outside the control of the United States domestically to do the work.
Yeah, but just to clarify,
when they made their proposals to Antony Fauci and his government departments, they were understanding what this funding was for.
I mean, Antony Fauci was himself a scientist.
When he reads a proposal like that, he understands that this is gain-of-functioning
Yes, he understands that what they are going to imply with it is that coronavirus is potentially dangerous to the entire world and therefore requires an emergency use authorized rollout of new technologies that otherwise would not have been able to bring to market.
Just like that 2019 video where he says we might have to do it in a very disruptive way.
I can't implore you enough to see that the narrative that they are leading Kim.com through is the exact narrative they always intended to tell.
It's the exact narrative that Tony Fauci's emails were intended for you to buy.
And that's why both sides of the equation, the people out there that thinks that this is real pandemic and that the vaccines work great and that everybody should take them, all of those people now believe it's a laboratory leak.
And all the people on the dissonance side believe it's a laboratory leak.
And now mission accomplished.
Nobody understands that coronavirus could never have done this.
there was never any danger really except for wherever a clone might have been released and it could have been released in Iran and Wuhan wherever absolutely could have been but it cannot be the point release of a clone at a minimum quantity that spontaneously through normal RNA viral swarming spread around the world for three years that is impossible
And it doesn't matter what set of genes you put together, it doesn't matter how crafty you are, the virus will eventually return to a quasi-species defined by the minimum required replication-competent genome, plus maybe a few genes which impart a noticeable fitness advantage to those virions that have them.
But even then, we are talking about a much more complex gene sorting and genetic entity than what is a RNA infectious clone.
And the only thing we understand from a laboratory perspective, and a countermeasure perspective, and from an immunological perspective.
And the reason why is because that's the way they like it.
I just wonder if it's not important here just to point out, oh darn it, the progression that I feel like I have made that other people haven't made in this same space.
Hopefully this will be in focus.
You have a situation where you have people that are masquerading as anti-vax people, as health freedom people who have
come to the conclusion that this fight should be fought on the front of freedom, on the front of free speech, and on the front of free choice.
And by sticking to those very abstract ideas and fighting for a big top tent of health freedom, none of these people have made any progression in their understanding of what we're actually up against.
And that is precisely the same lack of progression that occurs if you jump to the conclusion that there are no viruses at all.
And just go on talking about the invisible rainbow and go on talking about how water at the molecular level is organized.
Yeah, good, thanks.
Look, these guys, this is the end of 2022.
Okay.
This is when I'm just figuring it out.
This, I just said that I just recently figured out that I don't think serial passage could do any of the things they claim it could do.
And I had just recently made that, that graphic where I said that that wasn't possible in animals or in cell culture.
I was taking a big risk at that time.
From my perspective, I thought I was going out on a limb and you know, somebody would correct me or that's kind of what I hoped.
And this is in December of 2022.
This is when I'm still working for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
I haven't been hired at CHD yet.
So, this is still this narrative spinning out of control.
There's a time here where he's going to talk about
evaluating a proposal for EcoHealth Alliance, and he's going to say, I'm really surprised that they wanted me to review that.
He's changing a script to fit the terrible place that they are, the off-rails
way out of bounds place that they are, where they're trying to recover a narrative that was supposed to be pretty easy to lay down, that a gain-of-function virus with all these different inserts had bypassed 100,000 years of evolution to become the most infectious coronavirus we've ever found, which is supposed to be a narrative that hides that none of that is possible.
that intramuscular injection is never medicine, that they've just been, well, they've been lying to us.
And this is all they had left back in 2022 was people like Andrew Huff, who has a Skyhorse publishing book, Charles Rixey, who has a Excel sheet, and this guy who apparently has a website because his name is .com.
Right?
Oh, absolutely.
And so you look at it from my personal perspective.
So this is my field.
Gain of function has been a hot debate ever since ferrets started dying from H1N1.
Ever since ferrets started dying from H1N1.
I mean, the jokes are too thick for 2022 frog throat Cooey to even follow.
The narrative is still too thick for this guy right here in the white hat to even follow yet.
I'm still trying to compute how much of this is gonna really fall apart.
I'm still considering the possibility in 2022, in December of 2022, if you look at my notebooks, I'm actually considering the possibility that Bailey and them are not so wrong after all.
That's where I am right now.
That's how honest this intellectual progression, this journey through hell that I've been on, where I thought I knew everything in 2020.
I thought I was in the top 1% of people who understood the real big questions in biology.
And I was lost like all my other academic colleagues.
And I've come a long way in these five years because of the hard work I put in.
And now I find myself really trying hard to catch myself in a mistake because I haven't made one in a very long time.
And I know only one person on earth besides me that feels that way right now, and that's Mark Kulak.
So if you've been following me or you've been following him, I hope you're enjoying the show.
It's about to get a lot better.
50% of the scientists in my field agree with it, and 50% of the scientists in the field disagree with it.
So this is his field, and what he's specifically saying is that some virologists think we should do gain-of-function, and some people think we shouldn't.
And the ones who think we shouldn't know that it's super dangerous and could potentially kill everybody.
Again, just on narrative.
Nothing about RNA-infectious clones being even better.
Like, that's the point.
If you released a small amount of the most dangerous coronavirus that Peter Daszak could have conceived, it would never go around the earth.
The only way that it could go around the earth is insufficient quantities, and these guys either are too unsophisticated to understand that, or they are purposefully telling you a story that they've been telling you consistently for more than a year and a half without pivot, without flex.
I used to call it a very brittle narrative.
Because that's what I hear here.
A very brittle narrative that involves the same Scooby-Doo nonsense.
They were tapping my phone.
They were sending drones over my property.
They were trying to stop the selling of my book.
And now, for some reason, they've decided to promote these guys on a platform like Kim.com and let it sit on Twitter.
It's fine.
But I can't be back on.
I can't be discussed.
Charles will never mention me again, even though supposedly we were allies for more than a year.
Charles will never say that I'm a intelligent, smart guy anymore, even though we were supposedly friends for more than a year.
He won't.
Because I'm going against the narrative that he is, for whatever reason, sure needs to be sustained, defended, and accentuated over all other parts of the narrative.
No PCR discussion, no sequencing discussion, no treatment discussion.
no censorship discussion nothing in fact he can't talk about the censorship anymore because he the first three things i mentioned there are just i mean it's it's like i keep hitting the home run over and over because i say pcr sequencing protocols pcr sequencing protocols the pcr was fake the sequencing of the virus is fake and the protocols are bullshit probably murdered well i will say very soon after this date this is more
than two and a half years ago.
More than two and a half years ago that these people have known I've been around saying this stuff and angry about it.
And their solution to that problem was to tell everybody he's just angry.
He doesn't know what he's talking about.
And everybody's had the same solution.
It's a, it's a remarkable place we're in right now.
He's seeing a huge rise in his stardom and that of Andrew Huff.
I still have 2000 followers on Twitch after, come on.
It's right in front of your face.
All you got to do is see it.
Boy, that guy was right.
Oh my goodness.
Was he right?
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.
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 really important not to be a liar.
I will have some extra homework for you, Housatonic, for being 15 minutes late.
Thanks for being here.
Thanks for joining on the show, everybody.
Good to see everyone in the chat.
It's June 3, 2025.
This is Gigo and Biological.
I don't care how you get there.
I don't care what you do to get there.
The goal is to live.
Well, good morning everybody.
Welcome to the show.
This is GigaOM Biological High Resistance Low Noise Information Brief brought to you by a biologist.
I'm sure you find yourself right in the middle of your daily grind, your hamster wheel.
I am very blessed to have this show be a part of my daily grind as well as some on the hardwood time with my sons every day.
I live quite an awesome little temporary existence right now.
I understand how temporary it is.
because so much of what I'm doing is dependent on social media and yet at the same time I feel in my heart it is imperative that I urge you to get your children off of social media now and to start more vigilantly
not using social media because it is only through social media that myths like the autism spectrum disorder will be sustained to make sure that kids never question intramuscular injection, never question virology, never question public health.
In fact, social media is the only way that the pandemic and the gain-of-function myth have been seeded so successfully in our minds.
And if you don't understand the trap you're in, you won't get out.
The cheese is free on social media because that is the trap.
And it is an illusion we are in right now.
Even the folding of proteins is an illusion.
And the biology that they will ignore forever because we are the opposite of what they're doing is gigaohm biological
Welcome to the show, ladies and gentlemen.
I hope I can get you a little closer to walking in the right direction, climbing your way out of this cave.
I do really believe that biology is the way out.
I really do think that
It is important.
Who am I?
My name is Jonathan Cooley.
I'm Chief Biologist at Giga Owen Biological.
You can find my previous work and career evidence on the National Library of PubMed.
And you can find some of my work distorted pretty poorly on a substack called Woodhouse 76.
I'm quoted six times in Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'
's Wuhan cover-up book, and I used to be good friends with Jayanta Bhattacharya.
I have a YouTube channel called JC on a Bike, which is a wonderful history of my thinking during the pandemic, especially when I was still employed by the University of Pittsburgh.
So I've stopped streaming there, and instead I am on a channel called JC in the Woods.
You can find me there right now live, I believe.
Don't be afraid to check that out and maybe even use that as a way of sharing my work because some people are afraid to go to stream.gigaohm.bio.
It looks funny.
There's no place to sign up, and so they don't trust it as much as YouTube.
So maybe a way to introduce people in America to me and other places is to use JC in the Woods or JC on a bike.
It's just that I'm not going to be live there anymore.
If you are here for the first time, you might be a skilled TV watcher or a skilled social media user.
But I assure you, if you've been here for a while, you're here at the top of the wave.
There isn't very many other places besides Gigaohm where you can stay focused on the biology.
We're not taking the bait on social media.
And we're trying to learn to love our neighbors, trying to figure out who they are, for goodness sakes.
The way this works is we've got a few people, about 110 people, that give money to the stream.
Some small, a few people give quite a bit.
And that results in a family of five having a father that has a news program.
That's basically the narrative, the story.
It's the best I can do in an elevator pitch.
I've got a website, gigombiological.com.
I've got a soapbox at gigaohm.bio, and I've got this peer tube thing at stream.gigaohm.bio.
And then I've got this link, Stuff.
Basically, Stuff is the link you need, because that's where you can find the stuff that you can download, the papers we're reading, the population pyramid report.
And you can go to Gigaohm Biological and find a way to support me too.
But right now, I need people to share.
It's the beginning of the month.
Monthly rent is paid so I don't need to raise a lot of money here today.
What I need to do is get the word out.
So let's keep building the independent bright web.
Let's keep spreading the word about this imaginary script that these people are following on social media.
You got to remember it's not just one of these dudes.
It's hundreds of them on social media and it's our use of social media that allows them to perform this
And more importantly, allows us to feel like we're helping them stop the train.
And you're really not.
And it doesn't matter if you also chalk up your hands or, you know, even if you got big gloves on.
It doesn't matter.
This is a script.
These people are scripted.
There's no other explanation for Brett Weinstein's lies and Heather Weinstein's lies about me, lies of my omission.
other than this is a scripted bullshit show.
And it is no different than the scripted bullshit show that is the Tommy podcast, where many of these meddlers have shown up many times, including Robert Malone himself, along with several co-shows with Steven Hatfield, probably one of the most treacherous and untrustworthy people in this narrative.
that few people talk about, but actually he's a nuclear bomb.
He's a millstone around the neck of all of these people, just like Sasha Latupova is, essentially.
Also just an admission of guilt, of traitorism, or at least of being puppeteered by people who are definitely traitors.
And so that's how we got Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
at HHS Secretary.
It's a combination of a media stunt, Steve Bannon with two Ns.
Darn it.
What is that all about?
How come nobody ever corrected that before?
It's two Ns, right?
I think it's two Ns.
I'm going to reshuffle that out there.
Brett Weinstein and his dad and his brother, Robert Malone and his wife,
Kevin McKernan and his associates that include people like Rob, Jessica Rose and Pierre Corey, etc.
You did correct me on that before.
Maybe you did, but I missed it.
I'm sorry.
Left-hand monkey wrench would be the guy to correct me because he's in the chat like all the time and one of the first.
Don't forget.
Don't forget this.
This is all a big show.
That's what we're really, that's the message we're really trying to put out in the last few shows, is this is all just a really big, slightly reduced size show.
That's better.
And so yesterday, we took a look at this, you know, what can now only be recognized as a pathetic performance by this guy.
and this guy, who is now at the head of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, a quite powerful position in the FDA, which we have come to the conclusion seems to be the target of a sabotage operation.
More or less, they seem to be either eliminating the FDA, purposely running the FDA into the ground, or undermining its previous
reasonably well understood mandate.
Now, I said this yesterday, but I want to repeat it again at the beginning of this stream.
It cannot be underestimated how important it is to hear and see and document for yourself that from the very beginning of the pandemic, people on all sides of the narrative were discussing the question of safe, safety, and effectivity.
Safe and effective.
Is something safe and effective?
What does that mean?
And that very discussion should not be dismissed as just people on the same script, because that script specifically applies to concepts and their definition, which pertain specifically to the mandate of the FDA.
And so that script cannot be just dismissed as a script with convenient words.
It's with words which have exact meaning for, coincidentally, what these guys are now talking about with reference to, is America really better off after 50 years of the FDA or not?
That's a question worth considering.
Isn't it, my Indian friend?
Yes, my Indian friend, it is worth considering.
It's a very deep question.
So I am a little bit alarmed that I have to bring this message.
It feels...
Quite frankly, from my 50 years of brutal multicultural training that started in college and pretty much went through until I was out of academia, it feels almost racist to point out how many Indian people are currently in American government, seemingly rising to fame and prestige and apparently also very podcast notoriety.
And I can't dismiss it anymore.
I'm sorry, but I can't.
Because this guy, as an anecdote, I guess I could kind of tolerate, except I just don't believe him.
I don't believe his resume.
I don't believe his history.
And I don't believe this shtick that he puts on now any more than I believe this guy's shtick.
And it's maybe easy to see one of these people as frauds, but once you start to see them all as interwoven together frauds, interwoven together scripted bullshit, and realize that for the last five years, and certainly the last five years since I realized that it was a population pyramid thing.
And the reason why I realized that in 2021 had something to do with this
this geopolitics guy with the beard that always talks about China and India.
He talks a lot about the population pyramids and whether China's gonna collapse or not and this kind of thing, but it never dawned on me until, it's Peter something, I think, but yes, Peter Zelhan, that's his name.
And I was watching one of his videos and it dawned on me, holy shit, wait, if the population pyramids are inverted,
and this is a problem for economies, then a way to manage it would be murder and lies.
And it suddenly snapped in my head why Denny Rancourt
was where he is.
It suddenly snapped in my head.
What is he up to?
What is he doing?
And it made perfect sense to me from that moment on.
And then trying to articulate, and more importantly, trying to imagine in my head, realistically, how much of a signal it could be.
And when you see this map here, and you see the signal that's coming.
Now look, this is 65 to 69 right there.
And we have the line is right about at 4 million people.
So 4 million people are in retirement age in America right now in that five year category.
and they have stopped paying taxes and they've started drawing on social security.
And if they're sick or need medications or whatever, they're drawing on Medicare and Medicaid.
And that is right there.
So if we start the advancement at 4 million, this right above the A there.
And if you go over to this side, you can see it's 65 to 69.
And then where my finger is 60 to 64 is at
about six million.
Now just watch as this bump moves upward.
This is not math that no one could do.
This is not math that no one bothered to do.
More importantly, this is the most important math that any of the ruling class people can do.
It's also coincidentally some of the most important math that any military strategist would be doing if they were trying to think about their adversaries in the future.
Because an adversary with an inverted pyramid and a very awful inverted pyramid might be in big trouble and it might not be a big deal if they build up their military and have a bunch of planes that nobody can fly or maintain.
Watch the carefully how it goes from 6 million and 4 million.
Now it's growing already.
Look at that one right there.
Look at it exploding.
Those are all people who are stopping paying taxes and starting to pull taxes out especially.
I mean, look at that.
Look at these age groups expanding there.
There is nothing else to see but a biological certainty that with
A bunch of people on social media on the same script they were able to use to get away with murder.
And as I said yesterday, I'll repeat again, this population report would have come out in 2020.
The signal that we were about to see would be obvious in it, but instead it came out in 2025.
And the signal that we're talking about that was especially pronounced in many other smaller Western nations is now gone.
How convenient is that?
And so we have a list, and I think it is a very succinct explanation for what happened.
Number one, because again, remember, in a system-wide orchestration that ends up in a signal that you can barely see on that background of dark red there of all-cause mortality, but it can only see it if you show it the way the PBS NewsHour shows it.
that was sculpted that was number one expected because you can see it here and i'll show you very clearly the dip here is at 50 000 and if we get up here over there at the end of the graph i'll use my arrow put the arrow over here that right there is almost at 60 000 so the dip
every year in the summertime went from below 50,000 with a maximum of around 60,000 or maybe 70,000 in 2016.
Look, these numbers have changed, but the dip here, it's not going below 60,000 anymore.
So the rise in all cause mortality is still really available.
It's visible right here.
And what did Denny Rancourt do specifically?
He went around the world declaring that there was no increase in all cause mortality until after the shots were rolled out.
Stop lying.
That's exactly what he said while he was on stage with Robert Malone and Steven Hatfill and all these people in Romania in November of 2023.
These people are not just traitors to their own nations.
They are traitors to all the grandchildren of earth.
They are traitors because they, they are aware that they are part of an elaborate ruse and they think they're going to get a seat on the arc, whatever that is.
They think they're going to get special treatment.
They think they're going to get 10 Bitcoin.
They think they're going to get something.
because this explanation has been available and has been trumpeted from the rooftops for more than two and a half years now.
Understand the video that I started this stream with is a video that completely and totally predates my friendship with Jessica Hockett.
which was a renewed relationship between the head guys at Panda, Jonathan Engler and Nick Hudson and their friend, Martin Neal.
That video with Kim.com and Rick C and Huff, his before Jessica Hockett ever even reached out to me.
Think about how remarkable that is, how much of this bullshit is still to come after December of 2022.
And in December of 2022, I was already here.
Mark was already pointing out that, look, the opioid deaths are creating a signal that everybody is ignoring.
And it's a really important signal because it's a drop in life expectancy.
that would never otherwise be present if it wasn't for this opioid crisis being allowed to just go on in the background.
Because, you know, it just affects people that nobody cares about anyway.
It's the attitude that people like Meryl Nass have.
It's the attitude that a lot of these elites or would-be elites have.
Because it's the attitude you have to take.
if you're gonna assume that murder and lies might be necessary to govern the United States during this crucial transition period, this crucial population transitional period.
You can see it very clearly, you can hear it very clearly if you sit down at a table with these people and they explain to you that there is an anticipated rise in all-cause mortality, that if it's not properly managed, could actually bankrupt our country.
And the transition to a population pyramid that's a little more off balance over the next 30 years could cost us everything, or we could use it to our favor to try and reorganize the whole Western world around a pseudo-global governance structure where nation states are kind of dependent on one another and govern, you know, kind of like the EU.
And if you want to be in on it, you want to be in on the transition to this digital currency, you might want to be in on this national security thing because we're just going to ask somebody else if you don't want to join in.
And all you really got to do is just not say anything about the opioid crisis for a while.
And if you're Jessica Rose, all you gotta do is just do a podcast or two where you say that you've done some research and you don't think it's the opioid crisis at all that's responsible for the reduction in life expectancy in America.
It doesn't seem to be that at all.
And if you're Pierre Corey, you just have to go on Jimmy Dore and laugh about it and make jokes about the fact that, you know, unless these crispy chips were introduced in the third quarter of 2021, I don't think so.
And so what's so dark about that one particular little clip that Housatonic has been so good about accentuating is that it also kind of pre
It hints at the idea that what's coming in the next year is this pivot of this health freedom movement from not even really focusing on the COVID shot anymore, but focusing on seed oils and petroleum-based dyes and all this other nonsense that they've now got people running in a hamster wheel about and kept them there for the last three or four months.
And so what I find so striking about that December, 2022 videos, I'm still already very good.
I've already started to always rank order my replies so that when I'm critiquing Huff or I'm critiquing Rixey, what I specifically say is they don't say anything about PCR testing fraud or lateral flow testing fraud or sequencing fraud, or
the deadly protocols.
They just talk about gain-of-function viruses.
Gain-of-function viruses, gain-of-function research needs to be prohibited.
And so I could see it already in December of 2022.
There was just more progress to be made in understanding the limits of molecular biology.
And I'm still making progress on that front.
If I wasn't, I would already be teaching the course and I would already have it there.
But I'm making sure that
I go forward and I'm in shape to do what I'm about to do.
I only would be here if it wasn't for the very, very strong work of Mark Kulak out of Boston at HousatonicITS.com.
If you're not following him, please do.
Of all of the people that I put up on this little screen here of meddlers, I've had personal interaction with almost all of them, and I think the only way that they have power
is because on social media they can perform.
And so if you don't use social media, you can't be spellbound by their interactions with each other, by their arguments with each other, by their backstabbing each other.
It all goes away.
And you'll never be possibly caught up arguing with one person in their many anonymous fake accounts.
uh all of which happens in condition that we will not call autism i don't like the word autism um he was vaccine damaged and it all happens because on social media there's children's health defense people and health council for health people and brownstone people that are agreeing with wellness company people or
arguing that wellness company people are shady, and promoting heart and panda people, or ICANN people that are promoting children's health defense people, or the Canadian Inquiry just has to do a few more interviews and they'll finally have their 10,000 page report on how the hell this happened.
And the FLCC Alliance, Honest Medicine by trademark, has become Independent Medical Alliance, you know,
This is what social media allows to happen.
None of these organizations, none of these nonprofits, none of these rescue the Republic, join the resistance.
None of this stuff would have happened without of social media.
They would have never been able to accomplish any of this nonsense if there wasn't social media to make it look like it was cool, make it look like they had momentum, make it look like that the word about vaccines was getting out.
I assure you, it's still not getting out.
The only people that hear it are the people that already have heard it.
Just like on your social media site, this is the best test that you can do, okay?
How much on social media do you see of the NBA?
How much on social media do you see of a particular baseball team?
Because I will offer you the possibility to understand that some people, because of the way that they engage with social media, see a lot of NBA stuff and a lot of a particular NFL football team or a National League baseball team.
Or maybe they get a lot about the Colorado Buffaloes.
And you and I have been working hard in a particular way to interact with social media in a particular way.
And what we get, if we are just getting the output of a machine learning algorithm that is somewhat adaptive to our choices, then we're getting whatever keeps us there.
And in this particular case, it might just be this kaleidoscope of shitheads.
that has a very, very prominent presence on social media.
And so if you're interested in following Jikki Leaks and the rest of this mouse army, then I bet you, you've seen a lot of Brownstone retweets and you've seen a lot of door to freedom stuff and you know, the world council for health and all of their worldwide chapters make sense to you.
But if you like the Pittsburgh Pirates and you like to argue about the batting averages of certain people and whether they matter or not, then you're gonna see a lot of that on social media.
But if you're like me or Mark Kulak, you will see virtually nothing of anybody.
And nobody will see you.
But because you can only scroll through one list, you don't know that.
No one can see that.
It seems like it's working.
Yeah, I get a lot of ads, but oh yeah, there's one guy I know.
It doesn't matter.
You might as well be in a phone booth, screaming and yelling.
It's as easy as a few variables.
They just switch those off and switch those on and it feels just the same to you, but nobody can hear and see you at all and nobody cares.
And these people operate on the opposite side of that system, where their accounts are amplified.
where the anonymous bot accounts and the anonymous accounts which are maintained by real people are all supportive of their work and their ideas and that games the algorithm in a known way because they're instructed how to game the algorithm.
And not that we can't figure out how to game the algorithm, but it doesn't have to work for us the way it works for them when it's programmed to work for them.
And you've got to get it in your head that social media has been programmed to work against us.
It is not a free press.
It is not a town square.
Social media is a military programmed control suite.
It is a narrative control software.
And there's just different versions of them that they've tricked us into thinking, oh, Gab's gonna be free this time, or Locals is where the real free people are working.
No, no, it's Substack.
Substack is where all the free press is.
And that's why she's on X now.
That's why Pauly Tommy is still working.
Darn it.
I gotta always it always runs out right there.
It's funny.
That's why Pauly Tommy is still working Because that's why Brian hooker is still working not just he's just saying autism just building a big health tent of health freedom Same as Mary Holland.
They're not they're not
They're not fighting against each other.
Brian's not.
None of this.
It's all one network.
And once you get in it, you either go along with it or they'll throw you out.
Or they'll kill you.
And with social media, maybe they didn't think they had to kill me anymore.
Maybe they didn't have to kill Brandy Vaughn.
I don't know.
She was the only one who was using her own money to put billboards up.
That's for sure.
So what do we really got to think about here?
What really got us here?
What are we really talking about?
Make sure that you understand all of these connections, understand these very well, right?
This is not just conjecture here.
There's just a mountain of evidence and metadata that suggests that we're right, that these guys are behind him, that he might just be a puppet, a real, a real tragic Truman show, really.
And if you watch him standing behind Jay Bhattacharya from that talk or that, that announcement the other day, boy, it's scary.
I don't see anybody swinging from chains or dropping to the floor and doing pushups with his shirt off anymore.
I see a guy who can barely stand up.
And I think that's why there's this fake anti-vax movement.
I think this fake anti-vax movement was never really, I never really thought they were gonna have to do that much.
If you look at the SPARS pandemic document and you go to about page 45 and start reading and you hear them talking about the post pandemic,
narrative control on social media about how the COVAX, or whatever they called it, they called it something like that, vaccine that supposedly was released to, you know, to save people from the SPARS pandemic, also had some side effects.
And there's this hypothetical imaginary character called Epi-Girl that apparently exposes the vaccine injuries on social media, and then the government has to cop to the fact that they hurt some people.
So yes, there is a document, S-P-A-R-S, the SPARS pandemic document that talks about a respiratory coronavirus hypothetical scenario that includes a social media person kind of exposing the people or whistleblowing on the hidden costs of the rollout of the vaccine.
Now, this seems like a much more elaborate show than that.
And I would argue that that's exactly what you see.
You see a show much more elaborate than the original script called for.
The real original script probably only needed people like Andrew Huff and Charles Rixey, but at some point in time, shit went off the rails and they actually brought in Robert Malone and he went public.
And from that moment on, I assure you, this script has been way off the rails.
And you can see that from Robert Malone's attitude change from literally podcast to podcast, where you start with the baseline of the June
21st 2021 podcast with Brett Weinstein and Steve Kirsch, and then you move on to the August podcast with Paul Cuttrell, and you see a very, very, very, very different Robert Malone.
Because in those situations, he's talking to two completely different audiences in his mind, and two completely different set of people are seeing him as the character that they know.
One was Paul Cottrell, a guy connected to George Webb, probably already briefed on Robert Malone's script from 2020, and
Brett Weinstein, somebody they probably never thought they would need to actually bring so prominently in.
It's really, really remarkable.
Where we are right now is that this might be, that lady right there, Mary, might be the most dangerous kink in their armor.
She was just on Joe Rogan yesterday.
I haven't seen the episode yet, but you see how close that is, right?
Because that lady is on Twitter right now pretending that I'm an anonymous account and that she doesn't know who I am.
Even though she was on my podcast in 2021, the same year.
Maybe it was 2022.
I have to check.
I still haven't uploaded it.
I apologize that, but I think it was 2021, the same year that Kevin McKernan was also on my stream.
It was right before or right after him, I believe.
But see, we'll put all these people on the timeline.
When did I have Jessica Rose on my stream for the first time?
When?
You will see it.
And now we're so close to breaking this because Mary is possibly somebody who could understand how she's been used.
Possibly.
I don't know.
I still haven't lost all my hope.
Mmm, what's happening here?
I gotta reset this, my bad.
It goes there and that goes there and then this will work.
Because we're all kind of ticked off, I think, about the COVID vaccines and so on.
Not all, but many of us.
However,
They're not all bad.
They do make some drugs that have helped a lot of people.
America's drunk on Ozempic.
But I mean, there are some actual serious drugs that can help people.
And so one of the concerns behind people who back big pharma is how much is all of this, some of the stuff we're talking about, going to slow down the approval process for new drugs or drugs in testing?
We're speeding up the approval process.
We made an announcement last week that we are reducing the requirements for some perfunctory things, like animal testing.
Why are we testing every single drug in chimpanzees and dogs, usually beagles, because they're obedient?
That's so sad.
It's sad and it's unnecessary.
So it's unnecessary to test things in animals I thought that all the things that I ever learned as an academic biologist.
We had very good moral reasons for testing on animals and that we were supposed to use the the least complex
Organism that was required to test the hypothesis.
We wanted to test you don't use monkeys to test Something that you could test in mice or even better something you could test in a cell culture So what he is telling you is the truth though we are at a point where our rudimentary knowledge of human physiology is actually limited by the fact that a lot of our
Our assumptions are based on physiology that we've only measured in other model systems.
Now, that is historically not because we are animal killers.
That is historically because it's easier and more justifiable to dissect a frog than it is to dissect a baby.
And I can't stress how malevolent it is that this guy is being used to talk about something that is actually quite nuanced and actually quite a sophisticated bioethics topic.
so dismissively as to say, well, we don't need these tests anymore.
And he's talking about one very small niche and one tiny little corner of the regulatory market where something that's approved in another country has to do some things in America in order to get approved in America.
And some of those might be animal tests.
That is such a small fraction of what he's actually talking about.
By eliminating animal testing, what he is admitting is that most of this stuff is gonna be done either in humans or even worse, it's gonna be done using AI and model systems.
Some of these drugs are already proved in other countries in humans.
So you have a drug already in use in humans in other countries and we're requiring animal testing before.
So we are now, we've put out a release that we are now taking steps to reduce the animal testing requirement.
It's cruel to the animals sometimes.
It's unnecessary.
And we live in a modern world where we have computational modeling using AI that can evaluate a molecule and predict its toxicity in humans better than the animal testing.
That's pretty convenient.
I mean, I know a guy, Robert Malone, who worked on this domain program, which I think was a Ditra-based program, that was in like three weeks in January of 2020, was able to go through the entire catalog.
of FDA pharmaceuticals and nutraceuticals and identify candidate compounds that would interact with a couple key viral proteins.
So this sounds like either a descendant of that technology or perhaps the conventional spinoff of it.
Really exciting, wow.
We also have something called organ-on-a-chip technology, where say liver cells are grown in the lab.
Sounds like a terrible appetizer.
Yeah, I personally cannot eat liver.
I've operated on the liver too much.
That's one food I cannot do.
No one wants organ on a chip.
Yeah, organ on a chip.
So in the lab, they grow these cells.
and then they introduce the drug.
And you can actually see whether or not it injures the cells better than if you inject some bunny rabbit that is not gonna talk to you and say, my liver hurts.
So these new technologies have the promise of replacing some of this routine animal testing.
You would cut.
So now they're signaling to you that they are going to invest billions of dollars in these technologies which have never worked
The only application where I know that this has been done in the past and really done with a lot of money and investment and intention is in neuroscience, because culturing brains, culturing an embryonic brain, even culturing a neuronal network is all
Stuff that they've been doing for the last 10 if not 20 years trying to figure out if it was possible figure out what is possible and so Claiming that these are new technologies or he put liver cells on a chip these are the kinds of sort of
not real advances that also, you know, just from a practical perspective, the robotics, for example, a lot of the stuff that McKernan is responsible for with regard to the progress of the Human Genome Project is just a question of brute forcing the same reactions and being able to do more reactions per day.
And I'm not saying that they're not technological advances, but they are technological advances that are
are irrelevant to the biology that they either push forward or don't.
And in this case, you know, being able to sequence a lot of DNA or longer pieces of DNA more cheaply with more accuracy hasn't resulted in any significant gains in our understanding
of how our biology is encoded in DNA as a real pattern integrity with a trajectory across time.
We're just thinking about genes as proteins and then assuming that if you make all these proteins in the right order, they'll just self-assemble into that beautiful teenage girl that you had a crush on when you were in high school.
And that's just absurd.
We don't understand any of that.
And now this guy, a surgeon, who can make jokes about not being able to eat liver because he used to do surgery on liver, this is not good.
This is part of an absolute sabotage of the FDA.
I presume
because that was the target or one of the targets of this operation all along.
I mean, this is a multi-decade operation with the idea of taking over the FDA.
I don't know about the rest of it yet, but for sure, one of the targets is the FDA.
Six months out of that approval process, you lower R&D costs for pharma companies and inventors, which could lower drug prices for everyday Americans.
And it reduces animal use.
There's too much animal use.
You know what's weird is that the times that we've gone to the doctor, my wife and I, since we've been back to the States, since I brought Phila back here in 2016, we've been to the doctor a few times.
I went to the dentist one time and took x-rays and then they asked me how old I was.
And I said I was 49 or 48, I think I said.
I can't remember anymore.
I might have even been 47.
And they said, when's the last time you've been to the dentist?
And I said, probably at least 16 years ago.
And they were like, holy shit, you have no cavities and maybe you should just, we'll clean them and you come back in another 16 years, whatever you're doing, you should keep doing it.
And the other thing that happens when we go to the doctor, when they ask you if you're on any medications and we say no, and they kind of pause.
And now he's talking about doing a favor for Americans by making their medications cheaper.
I don't think that sounds very MAGA to me or very MAHA to me.
It sounds very HAHA to me.
Are there any other areas where AI can come and help as we move into the 21st century?
Yeah, we're bringing in a team that is really exciting.
They're going to introduce AI into the review process to help the reviewer, to make the reviewer's work stream much more streamlined and summarize things.
There are parts of the drug application that are so perfunctory, that are outdated.
That could be streamlined.
That could be abstracted with AI to help the reviewer.
So here, like all other aspects of government that Trump is taking on, you're saying there's actually too much red tape.
And we're red taping the wrong things, it sounds like you're saying.
Why does it take 10 years?
It doesn't sound like he's going to look back at PCR as a diagnostic and question anything, is he?
Which means there's a whole
There's a whole industry and a whole sector of the market of diagnostics that will never be regulated again, essentially.
That's not even on the gun range.
It's not even among the targets you can choose.
They don't even notice it.
It's not even there.
It's as if it never existed.
A lot of the same way that Charles Rixey and Kevin McCairn and Andrew Huff and all of these people in the health freedom movement insist that it must be a gain-of-function virus.
I mean, obviously.
Without ever looking at the definition,
by sequencing or PCR without ever looking at the definition of murder by supplementary oxygen or by opioids and adding the numbers up, just doing the math.
They're just going to wait and rely on, you know, Dowd to say what he says, or Nick Hudson, the actuary, to say what he says, or Denny Rancor, the physicist, to say what he says, because I couldn't do the math myself.
It's pretty hard to figure out.
is to bring a drug to market in the United States because of the regulatory steps.
I mean, people are dying.
People need cures and meaningful treatments.
People are dying?
They need meaningful cures and treatments?
Wow.
I mean, what are you going to say with this?
My predecessor in this role was focused, as he stated, his number one goal was fighting misinformation.
Well, our number one goal is delivering cures and meaningful treatments and healthier foods for Americans.
That is our focus.
And so you've heard about consolidation, or changes, or cuts at the FDA.
Those were not cuts to scientists, or reviewers, or inspectors.
Absolutely none.
They were cuts to communications staff, FDA's lobbyists to Congress, and to the IT systems here, where there's a lot of opportunity for efficiencies.
Yes, definitely there's been pushback on IT systems here, the efficiencies of the patenting system, the efficiencies of the approval system.
This is not good.
using AI for the application process, for the approval process, for the screening process.
This does not sound good at all.
This sounds like sabotage of the FDA's mandate to make sure that everything is safe and effective that's sold in America.
the number of people who were ousted.
I think it was your predecessor who said the FDA, as we know it, is gone, that the experts are gone.
People with decades of institutional knowledge have been turfed, suggesting there might now be a safety issue here.
There is a mass.
Make no mistake about the fact that it's my understanding from my friends in the U.S.
government that a lot of the senior members of the FBI took the offer to retire and are gone.
A lot of senior members of many different departments in the government, when offered early retirement by Elon Musk, actually took it.
Not because, you know, they're lazy or whatever, but because it was a legally absurd offer.
And many of them are gone now.
The senior leadership of the FBI is essentially gone now.
That's the real explanation for why Comey did what he did with the seashells in the sand.
It was an overt signal to everybody who knows what they're seeing there that the FBI is effectively non-existent anymore.
It's got no leadership.
And that's why you have like, who, what's his name again?
Is it a Chinese guy at the head of the FBI or was it a Russian?
I can't remember.
His his mind his name will come to my I'll remember it's like Igor Chang or something like that, right or is it is it?
Guangzhou Guangzhou Skiborovich or something?
I can't remember who the who the guy of the the head of the FBI is.
But anyway, the FBI is done.
massive growth of FDA employees under the Biden administration.
And when the media reports that there were cuts, which many were early retirements, people took early retirement, none were to scientific reviewers or inspectors or law enforcement at the FDA.
They were to IT communications, legislative affairs.
And so what you're not hearing in the mainstream.
That's just absurd.
I mean, to say that none of them were important people, just the IT people.
And so since the IT people left, we're going to institute some AI.
I mean, what the?
This is just, this is just dumb.
I mean, now remember what we saw yesterday on Face the Nation.
This guy is good at what he does.
He's an excellent bullshitter.
He's excellent at staying his, this guy's good.
I'm not gonna say he's not good, but he's awful.
is that there was a 100% increase in the number of FDA employees since 2006.
You have about 18,000, and it's been cut about 3,500 since you and Kennedy got here.
So you're saying we had more like 9,000?
We had 9,500 employees at the FDA in 2006.
Oh, wow.
Doubled.
And so when you report that there were cuts and you don't report that there was a 100% increase in employees in the preceding years,
that the number of employees doubled in the preceding years, that is misleading.
And the people who we've gotten rid of, losing them is not going to slow down drug approval or safety procedures because they were, sounds like, more administrative people.
There were no cuts to scientists, reviewers, or inspectors, or law enforcement.
And my goal is to make sure that every one of those people has all the resources they need to do their job well.
Now, cuts are never perfect, and so we have done an assessment, and there are some individuals that we have invited back.
There were a couple people who were
taking the early retirement, and we were told of their, sort of, how well they performed here, and we encouraged them to stay.
And we encouraged them to stay.
You see, what you don't need to, I think instead you need to figure into your equation about what's actually happening with the Trump administration, is this is just a hint.
But I can tell you from friends that I have, that this is not a joke.
A lot of people took this very seriously.
And when they got that letter after years of service to multiple administrations, they said, you know what?
You're gonna send a letter like this to me about early retirement after 15 years of service, I'll take it.
See what you're gonna do now.
And I think you can't really underestimate how much narrative control is required in order for them to keep this hidden.
because it affects senior leadership at the FBI.
It affects senior leadership probably at the CIA, if there's anything of that organization left.
It's affected a lot of places in the government because, you know, let's screw it.
If you already know that people have been, you know, looting the place and you already know that it's gonna get much worse before it gets better, why wouldn't you take an early retirement?
I think that things are much worse than we are being allowed to see.
And I think one of the main reasons why you should think that is because of how much time this guy already occupies on national public media, Sunday morning shows, walking this bullshit line that I told you they were gonna walk already in 2021.
It's remarkable and also terrifying.
But to not report that the agency has doubled since 2006 before this cut, in my opinion, is not telling the whole story.
No, it's dishonest.
It's dishonest.
Is it swampy here?
And by that, I mean, we had a report that when Secretary Kennedy came over and addressed the troops last Friday, some people got up and walked out.
They were disgusted by him, which seems like a bad sign.
Yeah, I was in that room.
Nobody got up and walked out.
Oh, nobody got up and walked out.
So again, now we're setting up this narrative where some people believe that lots of people got up and walked out.
And other people believe that nobody got up and walked out.
And it's, it's these little games that are only possible with social media.
because again, if he just tells this story, it doesn't matter.
The point is, is that X users already heard this.
And, and Megan Kelly is something that is saying something that was already on their mind because the script already put it on social media a few days before this interview.
Do you understand how malevolently it's designed and how militarily it's deployed yet?
because I feel like that's one of my jobs now, whether I like it or not, is to try and demonstrate to people how an illusion of consensus on X can be reinforced by a few questions on a podcast.
And it might be so subtle that you never noticed it.
Just like when Joe Rogan says that, you know, he eats a certain pasta or something like that.
It's a subtle advertisement, but advertisements hidden inside of the dialogue of a podcast are not what's dangerous.
It's the myths.
biological myths, the societal myths, the economic myths.
I can't even say myths anymore because there are so many freaking myths.
And they're all reinforced by this illusion of consensus about what questions are important to ask and what answers are important to consider without actually choosing one.
Now, we did stream it, so if somebody was watching it in their office and got up to go to the bathroom during the speech, maybe that constituted getting up and walking out.
I don't know.
I was in that room, and there was incredible energy in that room because he talked about how agencies that are set up to defend public safety sometimes become captured by the organizations that they are set out to regulate.
And he talked about the EPA has had a history where they have cycled.
It's almost as if
This guy has a better media presence than Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
can have, and so they're substituting him in.
He's talking about what Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
said, but I thought Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
was this fantastic orator that is descended from a long line of fine orators that have included senators and presidents and attorneys general.
Am I wrong about that?
And at times have been captured by the industry.
And he encouraged people at the FDA to speak up, think independently, and that he had his full support behind them.
So it was an incredible talk.
And of course, you're gonna hear a clip or a phrase pulled out out of context.
But I was in that room, nobody walked out, and it was incredibly a strong message.
The FDA is strong.
And we're going to continue to be strong.
And that's because we believe in the scientists.
How's your relationship with Bobby Kennedy?
It's good.
How's your relationship with Bobby Kennedy?
I don't know what to say, ladies and gentlemen.
I really don't know what to say other than you've got to see it for the show that it is.
And not everybody needs to know that the script is bad.
Some people just accept that they're scripted, like Megyn Kelly accepts that she's scripted.
She's done that career for a long time.
She's never been somebody who's seeking her own answers and putting out her own interpretation.
And so there was a question in the chat a few minutes ago about how do we know if anything is real anymore?
The only thing that you can do is to trust and verify.
The only thing that you can do is go with your gut and your heart, listen to the words that people say and decide whether or not you think they're lying to you or not.
And I think that that's the way forward.
I think then if you trusted your friends, you trusted your neighbors to do the same thing, then eventually what would rise to the top are people like me.
who although we make mistakes, although our interpretation of past events in current context will change, we strive to remain honest.
And we are sort of focused on maintaining a unblemished record of integrity rather than trying to protect some facade of having always been right.
And I think that's where my whole
problem for them really went off the rails was when I decided to go public and say, you know what?
I was a shithead.
I was, I was pushing a lab leak so far as to write a review about lab leaks and write a review about how spike protein vaccines might cause the lab leak to mutate.
And I'm sorry, because me doing that was part of the reason why maybe my friend Nathan thought, well, you know, if this wasn't a lab leak,
Maybe it would be, you know, maybe I could kind of skip the vaccine, but since it's kind of like maybe a lab leak, maybe I should avoid getting it.
That's the reality that I live with and I will live with for the rest of my life.
Because like it or not,
blame it on all these actors on social media, it doesn't matter.
I didn't figure it out until it was too late for Nathan, and too late for my father-in-law, and too late for my sister-in-law, and too late for my friend Annie, and too late for many other people who aren't dead, but probably are suffering or will suffer more, and could be dead in the future.
I have to live with the memory of having Nathan laugh at me
when I said that I still think you could just drop dead from it.
And that the only hope you have is that it was a placebo.
And he laughed at me and said, but what if people don't die?
Then how do you make a living going forward, Jay?
How does this sustain itself?
And 34 days later, he dropped dead.
Something like that.
Maybe it was 44 days later.
It's all scripted bullshit, ladies and gentlemen, but it's very malevolent scripted bullshit that has been altered and fine-tuned.
And a lot of that altering and fine-tuning took place before the pandemic, and it took place because of Brandy Vaughn, around Brandy Vaughn.
to try and build a fake anti-vax movement despite Brandy Vaughn, so that at the start of the pandemic, they would have control over that narrative.
And I guess at some point they decided, you know what, kill her.
Because we're not going to be able to do this.
And then two weeks after she was dead, Brian Hooker was on a stream with a bunch of people telling everybody all about how COVID worked.
all about how the testing worked, all about how antibodies worked, all about how asymptomatic transmission worked.
And coincidentally, nobody on that fricking stream said anything about injection versus ingestion.
Nobody like Brian Hooker with 16 years experience as a geneticist in plants, making medicine in plants for a genetic laboratory of the government.
was never going to tell anybody in that Zoom chat that this is a transfection and you shouldn't take it.
He was just going to complain that they hadn't tested it enough yet.
Stop lying.
This guy who in 2013 would not use the word autism.
He didn't like the word autism.
His son was vaccine damaged.
He was neurologically injured.
He didn't like the word autism.
He won't use the word autism.
He was vaccine damaged.
And now Brian Hooker is spouting scripted bullshit for the last few years about a big top tent for health freedom in hopes that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., when he got somewhere important, he would fix the problem.
Like it or not, Brian Hooker is a traitor to our children.
And he could do us a huge favor by confessing to the fact that he put his eggs in the wrong basket, that he should have stuck to his principles in 2013, that he better off would have collaborated with Brandy Vaughn instead of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
And he should apologize to all the children that have been injured by the vaccine schedule that he had no effect on.
No effect.
Mary Holland has had no effect.
She saved virtually no one while she's been singing harmoniously with a high salary with Paul Offit on all these shows for so long.
That many people out of this picture are bad.
That many people have had personal interaction with me and I can verify are bad.
They deserve a cream pie in the face, all of them.
Only Wolfgang Wodach and Thomas Binder have been completely supportive of my narrative.
And in fact, I should really color in Sukrit Bhakti because he says that now that there's, you know, no debate about RNA camp pandemic, we should stop talking about it, which is of course bullshit.
It's what we should be teaching our children.
And so what was this scripted bullshit for?
You want to know what it was for?
You got to ask the right questions.
What was this murder and lies for?
You got to ask the right questions.
Like why in 2013 did a guy who worked for a government laboratory genetically modifying plants to produce medicines, why did he not use the word autism?
Why did he not like the word autism in 2013?
But now he does.
You got to ask yourself how it's possible that Mary Holland and Paul Offit were on Democracy Now in 2015 arguing about a certain kind or part of the MMR vaccine causing some damage to her son and essentially promoting the idea of Wakefield and seeding the narrative in America that it's some component of the MMR vaccine that's causing autism.
You also would need to explain why on April Fool's Day, ICANN was conceived and became a legal entity on the same day that the Vaxxed movie produced by Pauly Tommy and Andrew Wakefield was released in America.
You also gotta ask yourself why in 2018 the World Mercury Project became Children's Health Defense.
when in 2018 learntherisk.org was putting billboards outside of Paul Offit's hospital and Larry Cook's little stop mandatory vaccinations website was being promoted by Paul Offit and ZDogg in a stunt
which I think Mark Hulak has nailed as a stunt that it was where some fake anti-vaxxers came outside of the window with a perfect shot at the at the monitor and at Paul Offit and at them lying and then they happened to drop blinds that you could still see through.
You also got to ask yourself why in 2019 there are so many weird coincidences like like Sasha Latupova's daughter being on Alex Jones three times.
Like Brett Weinstein at the end of 2019 having Sam Harris on to say that there's the next pandemic, we won't be able to tolerate any anti-vaxxers.
With Peter Thiel on the first podcast of Eric Weinstein saying, you know, he doesn't trust science because the specialization allows people to exaggerate and to lie.
And so he starts with skepticism.
Where in 2019, James Lyons Weiler is going around the United States telling people that vaccinated diseases, vaccination preventable diseases are still circulating asymptomatically in those people who are vaccinated.
And that damage to vaccines has a complex bouquet of genetic and environmental explanations, causes.
You got to go down to 2020 when Brandy Vaughn is killed.
And then two weeks later, Brian Hooker is telling us all about his knowledge of the coronavirus and coronavirus biology and immunology to coronavirus and vaccine testing.
And then you gotta accept the next five years of bullshit where all these people have us on this never-ending hamster wheel where they never question the basics of the biology of the pandemic.
They always accept the novel virus that millions were killed, that millions more were saved from, that might lead to gain of function, therefore it could come again.
And it's all based on bad biology, evolution because DNA, intramuscular injections, the best invention we've ever come up with.
It's as good as the wheel or the airplane.
Pandemics are real and we can make them.
Not only can Mother Nature do it occasionally if she's a bitch, but we can make them now.
And it's really easy because of the Human Genome Project.
You are a human, you're not a person.
You're definitely not a man or a woman or a young man or a young woman.
You're certainly not a future mom or a future father.
You're not even a father or a mother right now.
You're a human.
You should think of your kid as a human.
Not your kid, but our kid.
And finally, we all descend from the same puddle.
So accept that you're just the consequence of your genes and accept that your life means nothing because you're the consequence of billions of years of evolution.
Give it up.
You can't change anything.
And these are all lies that take away the sacred
Everything sacred that should be present in our lives.
Everything sacred that we should be handing down to our children is effectively erased if you believe bad biology 101 and evolution because DNA.
That's the thing we need to fight.
If our children grow up understanding this bullshit as the bullshit that it is, then our future is set.
Our grandchildren are going to be fine and these slavers have no chance of winning.
It doesn't matter how good their iPhones get.
I believe that with all my heart.
I really do.
It's been a long strange trip, but I believe more than ever.
that we are gonna get our way out of this.
We are gonna push our way.
Hey everyone, Dr. Z. Welcome to the ZDoggMD show.
Today, I have a special guest.
Look, I moved back to the Bay Area so I could talk to smart people at places like UCSF and Stanford and in the Bay Area.
We're gonna keep reviewing this video because I want to explain to you why Jay Bhattacharya is not my friend anymore.
I want you to understand how it is impossible that somebody who on my stream defers to me as a biologist whose work he can't evaluate
could be possibly, in September of 2020, so sure about so much viral biology?
As you said, at Stanford University.
I've been at Stanford on the faculty for about 20 years.
I've an MD and a PhD in economics, and I study health policy and health economics.
I've been working on infectious disease economics and epidemiology for 20 some years now.
So the reason I wanted to have... That's actually an admission that his CV is bullshit and it has been manufactured out of some whole cloth.
It's a joke, actually.
That's not how he presented himself to me as an infectious disease expert and economist.
What does that even mean?
Does that mean he knows how to make money on a pandemic?
Or does that mean he knows how to make money on the concept of a pandemic?
What is that?
Wow.
What you just said, you have the MD, Stanford trained and a PhD in economics.
All of his degrees are from Stanford.
All of them, which is really not how people usually do it.
which means you can see in a way that many frontline healthcare people, including public health people, aren't able to see the bigger picture.
Now, you came to prominence during the pandemic as one of the co-authors of the Stanford Seroprevalence Study, which raised all kinds of interesting... I mean, tell me about that experience, because I was talking about your piece early on, saying, hey, this is true,
The actual... So make no mistake about it, there is a mountain of evidence about the pandemic at the start of the pandemic, which comes from or to us via Indian sources.
The first paper about the virus sequence and the fear and cleavage site was written by a husband and wife team in Drastic, who are Indian.
the anonymous person that found the PhD and master's thesis that supposedly had the viral precursor sequences in it and had this outbreak in the mine in Wunan province, Moyang province, sorry.
That PhD thesis, that master's thesis was found in Mandarin by an Indian who read Mandarin.
And that was the seeker in drastic.
Now we also have a Indian guy at Stanford who gives us three, not one, but three seroprevalence studies and also helps Major League Baseball define the presence of infection in their organizations and teaches them how to do it, teaches them that the virus is real, teaches them that the virus may be spreading and you don't know it.
This is expert class, military level narrative dissemination.
Make no mistake about it, these are also two Indian men.
Infection fatality rate of this disease is actually much- The HIV paper came out of India.
Don't forget the HIV that got retracted because it was crazy.
lower than we thought.
It's still higher than flu, but it's not, you know, as high as they've been saying in China.
I mean, what was that experience like?
I mean, that was incredible.
Piper Stover is on a podcast in December of 2019 talking about biotechnology with the former Obama administration ambassador to India.
It's getting uglier by the second.
If you add all these things up, it cannot be like, oh, wait, wow.
Oh, wow.
Those, those line up pretty good actually, don't they?
It's just an amazing, in some ways dispiriting, but also exciting experience.
So can I go back just a little bit?
Absolutely.
So what got me into it was I had done some work during the H1N1 flu epidemic in 2009.
I remember that one.
I mean, it was a big deal at the time, right?
But luckily it didn't turn out to be as bad as COVID, but especially at the beginning, people were really, really panicked over the high fatality rates, the case fatality rates that were coming up all around the world.
I remember I was on practice.
And so they are in agreement again, and I just want to illustrate it.
They are in agreement that case fatality rate is a number that needs to be measured.
And if you don't measure it accurately, you could make the wrong decision.
And so all the words that they're using here are making their listeners that are passively engaged in this illusion to assume
that these numbers are valid or validating them is important.
And more importantly, once we know that number, we will know what action we should take.
Because if that number is high enough, as jackass number one will say, then that would be reason to lock everybody down.
to Stanford and everybody was like, we're all going to die.
It was a kind of a catastrophization.
Yeah, no, it's actually in the early days, there was good reason.
There were these case fatality rates that looked like, you know, Ebola.
I mean, it just, it looked terrible.
So in other words, if we could fix the case fatality rate at some crazy number, we could trigger all kinds of responses that would otherwise never be triggered.
Essentially, we are already being technocratically governed, if that's the way this works.
Just publish the right paper, and you trigger the PrEP Act, and now all bets are off for five years.
Think about that, because that's essentially what they did with EcoHealth Alliance, and sending the fat man, Peter Daszak, over to China with some money, some USAID money, and now all of a sudden you have, well, I guess it's out there.
Holy cow, it's crazy.
Seems real to me.
in H1N1, and the infection fatality rate, which turned out to be about 100 times less than the initial case fatality rates in the H1N1 case.
So from Mark's work, you also know that Li Min Yan is tied to Sri Lankan families that are tied to the National Cancer Institute, that are tied to
the real event 201 in 2018 and you know that the original SARS was actually identified or described or somehow some very scientific understanding of that phenomenon was contributed by people associated with Li Min Yan.
This is all very bizarro world unless you see it as all one malevolent show that has been orchestrated over more than a decade.
That's why Mary Holland and Paul Offit have been going at each other ineffectively for more than 10 years running with no progress on either side because it is the exact hamster wheel that they want us to pass down to our children.
And it's the exact hamster wheel that we get out of if we stop listening to this argument
So let me reiterate that for people who don't understand some of that terminology.
So case fatality rate is when someone is actually tested for a disease, presents to care, and is diagnosed with the disease, and then how many people die out of that group.
Infection fatality rate is, well, of all the infections that exist, including ones that we weren't able to openly diagnose, what's the rate of fatality in that group?
And it was 100X different in H1N1.
And so this got you interested then.
So they're on a script, you see.
He's not, didn't know that.
He knew that already.
He was already there.
It's like a lead in.
It's like a toss back and forth.
It's like Dr. Kendra and Dr. Hooker in that Zoom meeting where Kendra's like, hey, Dr. Hooker, isn't that about B cells and T cells?
What do you know about antibodies and B cells?
I mean, when COVID came around, I imagine.
It looked like a repeat to me, right?
So it looked like the people were finding enormously high case fatality rates.
I think like World Health Organization said 3.4%.
There was a piece published in JAMA in February that said, you know, Journal of American Medical Association that said 2.2%.
And these are, now I know we did a lot of this, so I'm just going to fast forward to a random point and see what we find.
Cause I haven't watched it yet.
I have to confess.
I haven't watched it yet.
So.
I don't know what there is.
I could actually miss the biggest nugget by doing this, but I also wanna be done in about 20 minutes.
So just see what I get.
These are terrifying numbers.
These are the kind of numbers that would cause you to lock down the entire planet instantly because you're gonna lose that percentage of your population if everybody gets infected.
So it's kind of like what Kevin McCarran was saying in March of 2020, right?
It's just like what Kevin McCarran has been saying since March 2020, still saying in 2024 and every year, it's the worst case scenario.
And all you need to do is believe that the worst case scenario is possible, and then you can justify almost anything.
That's one of the key issues to understand here.
The way that the national security state is set up to respond, you just have to believe the worst case scenario is possible, and then all of these preparatory activities, all of these layers of the response are justified.
The very language of the PREP Act is assuming that the gain of function is real and that bioweapons can be made which can kill the entire planet like Kim Dotcom thinks are much better than nukes.
okay, we're gonna go forward.
Millions and millions of people dead.
Right.
If that number is, in the United States alone.
Alone, right.
If the number is right.
But that was what happened to H1N1.
I thought, okay, well, do we really know how many people actually have it?
And now, you're on team denial because you did science that doesn't support the press narrative of X, Y, and Z. Yeah, I mean, I think,
what I was taught in public health.
That was a nice one.
So he, XYZ, he can't even be specific enough to say what it is that he's not supposed to talk about or what it is that he contradicted.
And that's on purpose.
That lack of specificity makes this enchantment more effective.
Why?
Because it allows the listener to fill in what X, Y, and Z are and assume that they're getting it right.
It's neuro-linguistic programming, ladies and gentlemen, and you can just catch it by going to a random portion of, I just went forward random and got it instantly.
Because we actually give people the right information, the true information.
unduly stoked panic just in order to get the result we want, which is essentially you're gonna comply with this order or that order.
We don't do that.
We tell people, okay, here are the risks, here are the, and people are, you know, we have to trust people to.
So they're being honest about the real risks of the virus.
They're being honest about the real biology of immunity.
They're being honest about nothing because they're making everybody accept
that there is a virus that you have to consider the danger of and that actually, like it or not, he could be wrong about.
React to that appropriately.
Not many times they won't, but many times they will.
But on net, if you want to maintain trust in the public health community, the absolute first thing we have to do is tell them the absolute truth about what we know and what we don't know.
And yesterday, for example, when Vinay Prasad made fun of people trying to mask kids at daycare centers, but not when they're in the nap, actually kind of implied that if they masked them during their naps, then it would make sense and be a consistent policy, and then he wouldn't have any problem with it.
But it's the lack of consistency in the masking policy that made it questionable and lost the trust in the system.
So make sure you understand how complex this web of lies is if they are scripted to make you feel like you came really close to saying something profound, but you didn't, because that's what they've been doing since day one.
It's felt like they're really saying what I'm thinking, but actually they're just telling you that there is a virus that could kill millions of people.
I mean, billions, perhaps.
Just depends on the numbers that people calculate.
So what you've nailed here, again, is something I talk with Vinay Prasad on the show about, which is authenticity.
We suck at it in medicine.
We prevaricate, we think we don't trust the public to do the right thing.
We are paternalistic to a fault.
So when Monica was on the show yesterday, she said, you know, I'm an HIV researcher, I believe in harm reduction.
So Monica is also on his show a lot.
She's also an Indian who purports to be some kind of infectious disease expert, and she's on all the time with this guy.
How dare us preach at people, wear a mask, you dummy, you stupid person, and do you wanna kill grandmothers and this and this and this?
That's not the way to communicate public health.
You communicate the uncertainty, but you- He doesn't disagree with the idea or the intention.
He just thinks they're the wrong words.
Stop lying!
to communicate what we know and her whole thing as well.
If mass reduce inoculum and it's a low risk intervention, then maybe you guys should do that, right?
But it's your decision.
I don't wanna mandate it.
And so that Monica Gandhi spent hours and hours on his podcast talking about inoculum and what that means in her lingo is that it depends on how many viruses you're exposed to.
You know, Stephen Hatfield will tell you that kids carry a lot of viruses.
They're really infectious.
They have a very high viral load.
And so they're really dangerous.
You got to wear an apron when you're interacting with them.
They should have a separate shitter.
And so she spent a lot of time talking about how, you know, if you're like a teacher and you get a very high inoculum, then you could have a very severe case.
But if you get a very low inoculum, then it could be a little bit more like a vaccine.
Holy shit, these people are awful.
And if we get 80% compliance according to our data, maybe that's a tipping point.
But you know, again, it's a hypothesis.
Yeah, I mean, I think, I mean, I'd amend that a little bit.
So I mean, I agree with that actually.
But the only thing I'd amend.
He agrees with that.
He's not a biologist.
He doesn't know jack shit about virology, but he's an expert on H1N1.
And yeah, it's just crazy.
It's absolutely crazy how awful this guy played me, how many times he just lied to me.
Because in 2020, he is an expert on all this shit.
And it's related to the harm you really, really are seeing.
So if we really are seeing it's a 3% mortality disease, yeah, then I'm okay with more aggressive.
But if on the other hand, we're really uncertain about that 3%, which we were.
If we really don't know, we should tell people.
Look, it's looking like 3%, but we don't know.
Let's see.
The fact that this man is on this podcast in 2020 talking about this bullshit makes him a traitor to our American kids.
The American government has currently been infiltrated more or less by a Trojan horse.
The Trojan horse is Secretary Kennedy.
and everybody that he brought in, or let's say allowed to be brought in because everybody was cheering because Bobby Kennedy's HHS secretary, good thing that, oh, we win.
Meanwhile, this guy, this liar is the head of NIH.
And I will say liar because he played me for years pretending that he was my friend.
met me at multiple barbecues, pretending he was my friend.
He just happened to show up there again.
Good to see you, Jay.
And the last time that happened, he took three separate moments to tell me, man, you got to teach more biology and stop saying Robert Malone's name.
You know, it's just not, it's not really helpful.
It's not constructive.
And I could soon be the head of NIH and I could really help your family once I get there.
just got to stop mentioning Robert Malone.
Now for me to make that story up would be pretty diabolical and pretty malevolent and pretty off sort of the last five years of just trying to tell the truth and see what happens.
And so there you have it.
This guy admitted
without actually saying it, that Robert Malone is behind this.
Robert Malone is behind him.
Robert Malone is behind the hijacking of, and probably the sabotaging of the FDA, effectively to allow the back rollout of PCR diagnostics, the generation of all these remnant streams, and more importantly, the introduction of all these new technologies that are better than the first generation, that he actually joked about with,
The previous generation of mRNA vaccines, he's joking about it because he always knew that's where this was going.
Just the same way he always knew that using an AAV, an adenovirus, an ADV to transfect people was gonna be bad.
but it would be a great story to tell everybody.
We'll pull that off the market and make us look like champions.
And then later on, five years later, we can tell them that, well, we rushed it.
And so there was endotoxin and DNA in the shots.
So they weren't perfect, but the next round will be even better.
Or maybe we'll put it in a different place using electroporation.
This guy is a puppet of a intelligence operation that basically put Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
at the head of HHS so he could do whatever the F they wanted to with the organizations in HHS.
That's why Marty Makary is so good on camera and so good at being on Face the Nation.
and why Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
is not on Face the Nation and PBS NewsHour, but just clips of him are.
It's very bad, ladies and gentlemen, but we can wake up as a country.
We can wake up.
Here's what we're doing to try to figure it out, right?
We should just be honest about what we don't know I think that's to me has been the most shocking thing that we've done that the public health people and doctors have dawned this mantle of Absolute knowledge in an in a place where I've read a lot of this literature We there's a lot we don't a lot.
I don't know even though I've been reading the literature scientifically, right?
So we just don't know we should say that and
Why is it bad to say that when we just don't know?
You know, and what it does, there's a side effect of that, that we're seeing now, which is when doctors and public health officials say, don't wear a mask.
And then in the next breath, wear a mask of any kind.
I don't care if it's just lace panties over your face, wear that.
We look like idiots.
And on top of that, the public then, which isn't as dumb as they're portrayed by the intellectual elite, goes, now, wait a minute.
And they should.
And then what happens is, and you see it in the comments to my own videos, right?
If I do a video kind of leaning in one direction, a billion people comment the other direction.
If I lean in that other direction, a billion people comment.
The public just is trying to find truth.
And just like Joe Rogan's guest a few weeks ago revealed, they can do experiments with it, right?
They can see what happens if they change a few words in a post and show those posts to half the people and change the words to different words and show those posts to the other half of the people.
And I hate to break it to you, ladies and gentlemen, but they did these experiments already years ago.
They already know how to do it.
They knew how to do that before the pandemic.
That's the reason why the pandemic was successful.
Because when we went to resist it, we fractured.
And then we fractured again.
And then we rolled in our own little hamster wheels about natural immunity, or lab leak, or amyloidosis, or the VAERS data, or cardiac problems, or whatever the hamster wheel was that we got caught in.
And those hamster wheels were only possible
because they already knew and had already weaponized social media against us.
The actual buyout of Twitter was also just an orchestrated stunt to get more people to accept Twitter as the freest version of social media.
And it's tough.
I mean, you know, that's okay.
Like we're having a conversation.
There's stuff I'm learning from you.
I hope there's some stuff you're learning from me.
And we basically, that's what science is.
It's a conversation that leads to more data, that leads to more conversation.
That's what it is.
So what you just said is absolutely reasonable and rational and Buzzfeed attacks your family.
Yeah, so I mean,
That was tough, I have to say.
I mean, that was probably the hardest part.
That was tough.
They attacked his family.
I guess they told a story about his wife or something like that.
And so that was pretty tough.
You know, didn't lose his faculty position, didn't lose his job, got the head of the NIH.
You know, it's pretty tough being him.
It's pretty hard to be Jay Bhattacharya, lots of racism in America.
The whole work on this was just feeling like I dragged my family into something.
If there's one thing to go after me, it's another thing.
Ten minutes ago, he said it was an exciting time.
He likes these cloak and dagger games, I guess.
He likes being an intelligence agent and finally getting called on stage.
Man, I've been waiting for this for 20 years.
But in any case, let's leave me aside.
So we put this paper out.
Let me see if I can try to get us back on narrative.
I got to remember what Robert told me.
Find this number, 0.2 to 0.3, and then a whole series of studies start coming out from around the world to find the same number.
Many of them published, you know, it's the... So the signal couldn't always have been there.
It's just a new signal that's everywhere on earth.
Do you see how much of a liar this guy is?
Because after six years of being my friend or five years of being my friend, where I tried desperately to explain to him that even his own data doesn't tell him anything because he didn't invent the fricking test or define the test that he used, he just bought something.
ordered it from China.
And if these things were all confirmed all around the world, they don't tell you anything.
If you don't have any data before 2020, you lying traitor.
It doesn't take anybody with that many degrees from Stanford very long to understand what I'm trying to say there.
And yet it seems to have taken at least three barbecues and three years for him to still not understand it.
But he's really sharp in this video.
September, 2020, he's an expert on all things virology.
peer-reviewed literature, I think, now has established it.
So let me ask a question, though.
So what?
Two to three times a flu is still catastrophic, man.
Well, how do you respond to that?
No, it is.
And there's also, I'd amend that, there's also no vaccine.
Right, no vaccine and we didn't have treatment.
Yeah, absolutely.
It is worse than the flu for those reasons.
Thank you.
Because I think that the denial of
I think a lot of people perceive a denial, this comparison with flu is very charged.
And the truth is, yeah.
It's worse than the flu.
And I think- I started to suspect Robert Malone pretty early, but he never really confirmed anything until the change in the scheduling of my Defender podcast.
So my Defender podcast, which was in the end of 2022 or October of 2020, I don't remember exactly the date off the top of my head, but it was 2022.
That Defender podcast was originally
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
called me and asked me if I would record a podcast with him and scheduled it for the following week.
And it was going to be an hour.
That's what he told me.
We usually record for an hour.
So you can have as much time as you want.
And then only a couple of days before the scheduled recording date, his nephew, who's the producer of the show, called me to say that you're only going to have seven minutes, and we're going to have at least two people, Robert Malone and Meryl Nass, respond to your presentation.
And then they added even two more, with Tess Laurie and Jessica Rose.
And I got seven minutes, and I was just, I'm still shocked.
I felt so discombobulated and so confused for those three days before the podcast occurred as I tried to distill down the number of slides I had that Robert Malone was making fun that at some point I started with 130 slides and he asked if that was a joke.
I have those emails.
This is all real time
awakening to these people's meddling and their lying and their two-faced behavior.
I didn't want to know.
I thought they were good people.
I thought I was joining a team of patriots.
for older people, it is absolutely, we should treat it like it's much worse than the flu because it is worse than the flu.
So for instance, nursing homes, right?
So I just looked at a paper that said that nursing homes often share staff workers.
So like one,
often share staff workers.
So now we're talking about whether or not the staff workers at old folks homes are responsible for transmission of the virus between homes.
It has nothing to do with clearing the ICU using dexamethasone.
Nah, nothing to do with that.
Staff worker works in nursing home A also works in nursing home B. We should be using our testing resources to make sure that when shared staff workers move back and forth, they don't bring the virus back and forth with them across these.
So we should be testing staff workers to make sure that they're safe to move around.
That means that we should also be testing people on Hollywood sets.
That means that mandating the vaccine when it comes out won't be crazy.
And so if he calls for a vaccine or makes a story about how we don't have a vaccine yet, so some of these measures are necessary, you will see him for the naked traitor that he is.
nursing homes.
That seems like a completely reasonable outcome of the fact that older people are much more vulnerable, especially people with comorbid conditions.
And you've been a big advocate of protecting vulnerable groups.
Yeah, that's the whole point of this is to learn who really should we be using our relatively limited resources to protect.
And when we raise alarm, who should we be doing it for?
their cost of raising alarm, right?
So like if I panic you, you may take actions.
That's the whole point of the raising the panic and the alarm.
But those actions will have very little effect or much less effect on the spread than the cost that you pay and society pays for those actions.
The spread is real.
Don't make any mistakes here.
The spread is very real to Jay.
And the problem with those costs are they're often intangibles, like the- And the murder in New York City stopped, right?
There was five weeks of either mass death, like a bomb went off, or it was just mass murder, or death certificate fraud, or something like that, a combination of things.
That's already long over in September of 2020.
I have had fans who've become fans of my show since we started.
In September, 2020, we're bringing the college kids back and we're debating whether or not that's good or whether we're gonna kill half a million people.
Richard Ebright is arguing in November of 2020 that if we opened all of these schools without the testing and stuff, we're gonna kill a quarter million Americans by Christmas.
That's what the context is of this conversation.
the medical establishment was complicit with because they are seeing it on the front lines in a very biased way.
Oh my God, my ICU is full of people who are dying, including some young people.
And therefore anything we can do to get the public to behave is gonna be important, right?
And then what ends up happening is these...
poor individuals who have a tendency to anxiety are losing their minds.
So they tell me, I watch your show because you seem rational and you have opposing viewpoints and you're not just saying we're all gonna die.
And I think, why should I be the one who's doing that?
Well, you have a good audience.
Yeah, but that ought to be the general.
You have a good audience.
You could be useful.
I don't really understand it, but it seems like people want, especially the press, seems to want to create this panic.
So every time there's a study that comes out that a child has died, which has happened, absolutely, for this disease, you're gonna get this panicked headline from the press.
Now, one of the things I've learned from the seroprevalence studies, again, from around the world now, not just mine, is that there's a very wide range of clinical presentations from this disease.
It ranges from somewhere between 30.
A very wide clinical presentation of this disease.
It sounds a little bit like autism spectrum disorder.
You know, it's a wide clinical presentation.
You can have people that can have YouTube channels, or you can have people with 12 times a day projectile diarrhea that bang their head into the wall.
I mean, it's a wide spectrum of stuff.
And with COVID, it can be anything.
I mean, really, you know, I mean, urinary tract infection could be viral.
You better not give antibiotics for that.
It could also be multi-system inflammatory sepsis shit.
Like, it can be a lot of stuff.
And, you know, I'm just an economist and whatever, but I'm an expert in all of this stuff.
Cause I did three seroprevalence studies and used to work for the major league baseball owners.
80 to 40% of the people that get it have no symptoms whatsoever.
They can't remember, they have the antibodies, but they have no symptoms that they can remember from it.
Even, you know, maybe even a larger part have relatively mild symptoms.
It's like a cold.
And a small fraction have this horrible viral pneumonia that kills them, right?
We focus all our- This horrible viral pneumonia, which is a horrible lie.
There is no viral pneumonia.
It's a lie.
Understand that.
Viral pneumonia is a myth.
Our attention on the viral pneumonia and none on the fact that 998 people are gonna recover from it.
Yeah, that's a feel good hit of the summer right there.
Like that's a positive story and they're gonna develop immunity and this whole panic about, well, no, we're never immune.
That's another press thing.
Yeah, that's insane.
No other virus does that, right?
Exactly.
And the related piece to that, like you said, one story about a child, M-I-S-E-A, HIV, I guess strep throat, you also can't have a vaccine.
Oh yeah, HIV.
The other thing that he's an expert in and did a lot of epidemiology for, like a lot of other Indians that we know that were in this, like Murthy,
Vivek Murthy and like, you know, Rochelle Walensky, both trained in HIV, both Indians.
They were pretty prominent role at this time too, weren't they?
Holy shit, if you don't see it now, we got a big problem on our hands, and I'm a racist, crazy person.
Actually, it's a legitimate scientific question, but it's the one we now have an answer to.
Right.
You do develop immunity to this virus.
And the thing is, because we have now millions of cases, and we can- You do develop immunity, the exact same myth about the novel virus that
Mike Eden was making the argument of, wait until you watch my stream with Mike Eden and Paul Alexander again, because Mike Eden is squirming.
He is struggling.
He is looking at a script to his left and trying to figure out how in the hell do I use this shitty script to respond to this guy because it ain't working.
Tomorrow I will show you a video of me talking to Mike Eden and him looking like a traitor Today I'm showing you a video of Jay Bhattacharya that is Not very good for his track record and not very good for him as my friend He's looking really
like a liar, like a traitor, and part of a very elaborate Trojan horse operation, probably scripted by Robert Malone and Kevin McKernan, using Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
as the ultimate Truman Show Trojan horse.
Look, and there's been like, I think, two documented cases of actual reinfection.
One was like, it was totally mild.
The other was more severe.
And so you could think in a population there's variants, right?
Don't forget,
The UK never controlled China with the opioids, but they definitely ruled India.
They definitely ruled China, or sorry, Canada, excuse me.
They definitely ruled Australia and New Zealand.
In fact, they're still on their money.
And so it does feel more and more to me like protectorates of former colonies of the British crown have been used to undermine the American experiment.
And that traitors, American traitors, seem to be cooperating with Indians or people associated with these other Five Eyes crowny countries.
I don't have an explanation.
I just know it's a crime.
I know it's a multinational operation.
And I know a lot of the people on the screen that I use are definitely involved.
And that's why I've had them on the screen for this many years.
But still... Well, two out of millions, right?
And as you said, the first case that was a reinfection, it looked like the guy was protected.
Mild, yeah, which is what you would expect, even with a cold.
Like you get a cold one year, you may get it again the next year, but it's gonna be minor, mild.
Yeah, if it's the same virus, even if the antibodies fade, you may have T-cells or other mechanisms of immunity that make it...
T-cells.
Yeah, that's right.
I wonder who, oh yeah, that's right.
Ryan Cole also said T-cells.
And also, yeah, T-cells.
Yep, that's good.
That'll get them running for another year or two while they learn the subtle immunology of that.
Or if they don't learn the subtle immunology of that and they just take our word for it, they'll just say T-cells every once in a while and it'll be good enough, which is exactly what most or all of them did.
Because if you take the time to learn
what T-cells actually are, how complicated they are, he'll start to appreciate the immune system as much more than whatever they're talking about, which is an antibody production line, I guess.
Much more.
So it's not that you won't get sick, but you'll get sick much less.
Right.
It won't create a severe illness.
Paul Alexander's not Jamaican, and he's Canadian.
Sorry.
Now one thing that's gonna come up, and this comes up a lot, again, in the catastrophization camp, but what about the long haulers?
He is from an island, but it ain't Jamaica.
I can't remember which one it is.
the terrible damage to the lungs and the cardiac damage and the brain damage and all the other things.
You know, those happen with influenza.
Exactly right.
So my son, my young son, 13 year old now, a couple of years ago got the flu.
Now he'd had the flu vaccine and he still got the flu, right?
Which happens.
Yeah, it happens.
I mean, and it was fine.
Like it was a little worse than I thought you normally would get.
And he was getting better and he woke up one morning and he couldn't walk.
Oh my gosh.
I was going through all the panic things that if you, when you go through medical school, you always have.
You're like Guillain-Barré.
That's exactly right.
Oh, there we go.
Now we're going to make up a story about vaccine injury.
They all worked out.
My son woke up after a flu vaccine, couldn't even walk, but it was just normal and it went away.
And I'm like, oh God.
So it turned out it was a benign myositis.
Thank God.
And within a week he was walking again.
Flu has all kinds of strange side effects.
It has neurologic side effects, it can have cardiac side effects.
We put these in context, right?
These are things that happen, absolutely can happen, but we have a lot of information about how frequent they are, are they likely, how long-lasting they are, if it was Guillain-Barre it would have been terrible.
Funny that flu can do all that shit, huh?
Funny.
benign myositis at last week and he's okay.
So that's funny because my daughter had a viral syndrome when she was three and couldn't walk and again benign myositis.
Holy shit, that's got to be a lie.
That's ridiculous.
Oh my gosh.
Have you ever heard of benign myositis before?
What a bunch of bullshit.
Wow.
But again, you go through the panic.
So the point being, these things happen with viral infection.
This is a new viral infection that we don't have a vaccine for.
The point being that these things happen with a viral infection.
Holy shit.
or that is novel to the degree that it's novel, although we seem to have some innate immunity from cross-reactivity to coronavirus, and yet we are spinning it as if the world is ending.
And the thing is, that would be fine if we thought it was actually gonna cause less harm to spin it that way than not.
I can't, I can't.
I know that you could.
If you wanna, you can go see it.
It's bad biology.
It is, these people are traitors.
And we need to start teaching our kids the way out.
This has been Gigo and Biological, a high resistance, low noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
I'm actually gonna end it right here.
I should be playing music and stuff, but I need to get lunch in me quick.
And I need to get to the gym with my kids.
I might do a stream later.
I'll definitely do a stream tomorrow.
Mark seems to be on a multi home run per day streak.
So I guess if I don't make anything later this afternoon, I'm sure Mark will.
Thank you very much for joining me.
I'm just gonna fade out.
I love you very much.
If you want to support this work, if you like what I'm doing, please go to GigaOMBiological.com and find a way to support my family and this absolutely fundamental work to American history and to Americans' future.
I love you very much.
Thank you for your support.
I'll see you again tomorrow.