.
I think I'm going to give my voice just a little bit of a break tonight.
I've got a long video to watch. I know how long it's going to take us to watch it.
But this is Giga on Bio crust.
.
Good evening ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the show.
This is Giga Ohm Biological at High Resistance, Low Noise Information Brief, brought to you
by a biologist, I've been in the gym yelling for about a half an hour and I feel like
I may have done some minor damage to the instrument so I'm just gonna try and keep my voice down
as much as possible.
It is December 1st, 2023, we are one month away from 2024 when really there can be no
doubt that we have been at this way too long for something very, very wrong not to be happening
at this stage.
There's no other conclusion to come to ladies and gentlemen, I mean if this was just an
accident, if this was just a snafu, this would have ended years ago.
That's the harsh reality of where we are at and Giga Ohm Biological doesn't want to
pull any punches about that, just in case you are joining me for the first time, I used
to be a patch clamp physiologist where I made electrical recordings from neurons and brain
slices and in those recordings, the recordings are made with electrodes which make seals,
electrical seals which are of the Giga Ohm resistance range and so we called the stream
Giga Ohm Biological at High Resistance, Low Noise Information Brief after this methodology.
We are trying to solve a mystery that we've actually been tricked into solving by the
government or by whoever is running this show and I say the government, I mean the
government as in world governments or the who or Gavi or Bill Gates or whatever you
want to call this amorphous, you know, bad guy set that we're supposed to unmask but
in reality, we have been tricked into unmasking the people who are responsible for the virus
and that's the Scooby-Doo.
We're not trying to figure out who's rigged our currency, we're not trying to figure
out who's been ripping us off for the last generation, we're not trying to figure out
where all the money went, we're not trying to figure out anything of value, we're trying
to figure out where the virus came from and who's responsible for it and our entire society
seems bent on it and that is the problem because we don't really have ourselves focused where
we need to be and of course the way that they've done this is with this consensus about what
the worst case scenario is.
Probably my favorite example of how this worst case scenario conversation went was a Twitter
spaces that was hosted by Kim.com where I think it was Andrew Huff actually who was
having an exchange with Kim.com and Kim.com suddenly came to the realization that with
a bioweapon you could kill many more people than you could with a nuclear bomb and it
was much, much, much better than a nuclear bomb or something like that, you know, much
more dangerous, whatever and that's what this is really all about.
That's what took almost three years to really settle into people on our side and understand
what really was at stake, what really kind of had been lined up to go and then whether
or not they would leave it up to Mother Nature to trigger that plan or whether they
would kind of, you know, give her a nudge and in this case I think they would just outright
lie about it as well and that's what we really have to consider because again we're playing
for all the marbles here.
We're talking about a complete rearrangement of the economic system, we're talking about
a complete rearrangement of the international order, we're talking about probably a drastic
reorganization of the American system, certainly of the financial system in America and so
this coming fiasco is something that I think probably and I'm not, this is not my idea
but I think probably needed some cover, probably needed some story, probably needed
something to get all the machinery and motion and moving in the direction that they wanted
it to move in under their control and I do think that it's possible that a pandemic
narrative as nice it is is to believe that it's just a bunch of virologists who are
lying and trying to make money, I think it's much more complicated than that, this is a
multi-generational plan and among the steps in this plan are a fundamental inversion
of our rights on the basis of this mythology and so we are really trying to understand
who is genuinely fighting against this idea, against this concept that we have to be afraid
of Mother Nature, that Mother Nature has this pandemic potential in store for us that we've
just experienced it but it might be a fraction of what she's capable of and we've got a really
break this faith because that's all it is, it's a faith in this idea and as nice of a
picture as it is, as beautiful as they can tell the story, it's still basically the push
pull of the train story as long as these people continue to agree and not step on each other's
toes and not write contradicting books, then pretty much everything's gonna be okay and in
this scenario we will continue to have defeated disease and epidemics using vaccination including
this time and novel coronaviruses will continue to be a threat to jump from other species and
definitely can pandemic because they just did, PCR false positives will continue to remain rare
and asymptomatic spread will continue to be real and the variants will continue to be a story that
they tell us to motivate us to do the next big thing like take a booster or get a test and so we
also believe the gain of function virus is real and we talk about it all the time they are definitely
we're hiding it right and this must be dispelled this faith in this story it must be dispelled this
Christmas is the time I can feel it and if we don't start dispelling this essentially we
don't escape because this is the trap everything else hinges on our, on our complying with the
World Health Organization and our complying with our own governments as they, as they pretend to
conform to the new rules and edicts pretend to have no choice to pretend that there's no others
there's no other choice here I mean with climate change and everything else we need to be awake
to the fact that this is the plan we are on that cosmic train everything outside of the train is
out of our control they're just showing us movies and they don't care because they know what's coming
they know that there's a fundamental reorganization of the world order coming very soon
where world superpowers are going to change where maybe even the meaning of national borders
will change fundamentally and certainly the way that the world deals with each other
on an economic basis has to fundamentally change at some point this
is the math of the dollar doesn't work anymore and I'm not an economist but this is beyond
needing to be an economist to know that this is a train going nowhere it's only a question of when
does the do the people who are running this show decide that that show is over and so we need to
have control of our system before they decide to do that that's the point we need to have
control of our freedom before they decide to pull the plug because once the
I don't even know really how to say it because I'm so worried about it sometimes
and I'm coming home from basketball practice and the only thing I can think of is wow we're really
we're really not pushing the ball very far I mean the best
the best thing that's happened to us on this side of the equation really and has been in the last
few months maybe even the last couple weeks
with a number of people in the center of this picture starting to come together
and start to understand what the primary message is what the what the way home is
and before that we were still pretty much just wandering around the cave in different
directions you know thinking we were all doing something
and until it became very obvious that there was something else going on that there was some
faith happening and then when it became very easy to understand the faith based on math
from people like Denny Rancor or from Martin Neil and and Jonathan Engler who did that stuff in
Italy and Jessica Hockett now in New York making these really poignant observations
about what's there and what's not there what the data supports and doesn't support
and so you can talk about bio-weapons all you want but there was no spread so it's not that kind
of bio-weapon and so then we're back to clones and we're back to purposeful release and we're
back to making large quantities of it or making small quantities of it and the rest is noise
but we're not talking about a worst-case scenario of a spreading pathogen of a bio-weapon that you
can stitch together and make a small quantity of in a little bottle and if it gets on the wrong
person it's over one particle as they say with prions and it's over all of this hyper terrifying
biology is antithetical to the fact that there's been life on earth for a very long time
and it's very unfortunate that what we're really dealing with here is people trying to cover up
for the biological facts that transfection was going to produce all kinds of unknown side effects
unknown consequences unknown short-term and long-term consequences
and so what better way to take care of that what better way to take care of that than to spend
almost three years telling everybody that the spike protein is some kind of special toxin
with all kinds of wizard sequences in it 20 amino acids of this and 20 amino acids of that and 20
amino acids of this and 20 amino acids of that so that oh my gosh the Swiss army knife of toxins
the spike protein is responsible for all of the myocarditis in the world
all of the Alzheimer's disease and my amyloidosis and everything that's never been detected before
is now all responsible for this magic protein never mind the fact that we're transfecting
everybody to that protein or purport to be focus on the virus
do you know how many people on this on this page right here we're doing that for almost three years
chasing around spike protein toxicity talking about amyloid and prion way too early
and they have been consistent about it from the very beginning but for some reason after four
years of the virus spread and after five billion spike protein shots i don't see anybody dropping
dead from prion disease yet oh you just wait kui you just wait it's all going to happen it's
coming really soon kui i don't know i think it's much more likely that there's a lot of people that
are lying and a lot more people have been misled and if you've been misled by the fundamental
principle that a small puddle of RNA can perpetuate itself and and high fidelity copy itself for four
and a half years well then i guess you're you've got a big problem
so today we're going to listen to david martin speak um and he's going to be interviewed by
alicek alicek is uh kind of the one of the the team captains of of the
um the virus hasn't been isolated or purified group i don't want to say no virus because i think
they're a little bit more specific than that actually they don't believe that the virus has
either been isolated nor purified and therefore there is no virus and until it is isolated and
purified there is no virus and it is a stance that one can take um but i think if one takes that
stance and then leaves it there which is what they do if one takes the stance that foyer requests
sent to police departments are evidence that there is no virus and you leave it there
and then you use that as a basis to attack everybody on this side of the ball
irrespective of your intentions it just doesn't seem logistically or strategically sound rather
because you try not to make friends you try not to listen to anyone and you pigeonhole the
debate into this one thing where you know either let's just say it like this and i i hope that this
is going to be a very good example of why this argument is so dumb and it is dumb and i shouldn't
use the word dumb i really should use the word it's dubious because it dumb implies that they
don't know better dumb implies that they can't they don't understand what they're doing but it's
hard very very hard for me to believe that they don't understand what they're doing and the reason
why um i believe that is because i've experienced a lot of their interpersonal communication and
and their direct communication by email i've experienced the the language that they use and
the language is not diplomatic it's not friendly it's not cordial it's aggressive it's insulting
and their their tactics are just they don't suggest that ultimately they want to win
in terms of like people being free and the new world order ending it feels a lot more like they
just want to dunk on people like chd and bobby which is fine i mean that's great but the amount of focus
that they put on people on our side um and then the amount of
of nuance that they lack so i want to play a video first um that i think will kind of speak to what
i'm trying to express here better than i'm expressing it um this video is from doctors for
ethics with mary holland and i'm actually not sure
if this video really should be up because it's from the question and answer session
which i think generally speaking isn't recorded and but it it's up here
um and it was posted by uh welcome the eagle i think that's welcome the eagle 88
um and so you know people are allowed to record i guess um and so mary had spoke at medical
doctors for covid ethics and um and then these two people uh william herst huston and christine
massy will ask her questions and i just want to prepare you it's not necessarily very comfortable
um and it's pretty aggressive toward um chd as an organization and because mary's there then
mary is taking the brunt of this so it's uh i'm gonna stop it in the middle of course and and
give my objective opinion if i can um and i think maybe i'll just leave it here you know you know uh
uh charles i believe check check check hello yes that works yep very good hi mary
i don't know um so i i i'm not sure where to start i'm not trying to uh get through this i have
some notes here um i don't know if you know this but i i used to kind of work i was a paralegal and
i kind of worked within uh the network and i won't say the attorney that i worked for but it was
somebody that i really uh value and appreciate i think she's a fabulous attorney um but so just
to start off um i just have a couple of questions here maybe i can get to the list and just turn
it over to you for your feedback so number one why does children's health defense promote
the core fraud of covid in the courts and in the pages of the defender and on chd tv
which is the very basis for all the countermeasures which you claim to be fighting
and i don't i do mean the virus issue but it's much more than just the virus because
there's really a two dozen ways the official narrative which you promote uh at chd is clearly
false uh like let's begin with step zero um to begin saying that you have a new disease you first
have to identify a new unique and defining syndrome there's no such thing for covid there's no test
there's no isolated pathogen there's no proof that the phantom cgi pathogen causes the
non distinguishing syndrome the whole thing is a joke but and i found it funny when you uh interviewed
dave rasnick and mike wallock will will will ask will i don't do it in these speeches this is
you've got to see here's a question i stress i said one question why does chd promote the
core fraud in the courts and everywhere why do chd attorneys accept the boundaries of the crime
scene a priori as defined by the perpetrator why does why does chd censor the no virus position
from your website for example the uh the the the paramount example is if you search for the name
christine massy what you did is no record found and why is that ironic because that is the answer
that christine got to from 212 institutions and 40 nations when asks were proof that sars
cov 2 exists no record found why is chd censoring this extremely important work uh by christine
massy and worse why does children's health defense apparently hire a team of consultants
like jakie and uh james lion's wiler and uh uh jeremy hammond and a bunch of others
maryll nass to attack and malign the people that are calling out the core fraud
okay all right all right all right will let's assume the questions we've got the intent of
the question so mary's got an opportunity to mail answer sure and i said christine massy
your questions yeah so um just to clarify what he the the things that he said he's saying that the
my notes aren't very good but he i won't show you them but he says that um they're promoting
the core fraud at at chd and it's much more than the virus that they're promoting of course there's
at least two dozen ways that the main story is a fraud and then he goes on to list like one
which is that the new disease needs a new syndrome so i'm not necessarily saying that that's an
uh not a valid objection to the pandemic as a whole um but i think that
the pretty easy answer would be that the cdc and all these other people would say that
the virus doesn't always cause blah you know they have a mealy mouth way of doing it and so
this argument all by itself the way that they portray it as a dunk right you know
obviously a new disease has to have a new syndrome and they didn't even have a new
syndrome and it was like cgi and phantom cgi you know they don't make a very skilled argument
i mean why not just list the two dozen ways that the narrative doesn't work and just be
succinct about it and start with a new disease needs a new syndrome and they never really
outlined that there's no difference between this and the flu and other syndromes next point
but see they can never do that because i don't really feel this guy's necessarily on the paid
squad or anything like that but he has the same sort of overzealous commitment to
these people are the bad guys and so because of that he gets very flustered and he's not
able to articulate and so instead of listing succinctly two dozen ways that chd is blowing it
he starts by saying something that maybe is the least impressive of all the things
um and then what he calls it fandom cgi then he goes right to foyas
and the foyas are apparently to 212 institutions and 40 nations a lot of those institutions are
police like police stations or you know local counties or this kind of thing which you can't
really have expected Pittsburgh Township to have an isolated a virus and so when you send a foyer
to the city of Pittsburgh and they don't have any evidence of of a pure purified sample of
SARS-CoV-2 it's not really that surprising so a lot of this is also kind of like silly
which is also frustrating but more importantly okay so how many of these foyas did you need to
send out before now you could move on to the next the next point the next way to fight the narrative
instead they they get those foyas and then the first thing they do is turn around and attack
Mary and CHD and Bobby the only organization in America that's been fighting against the
vaccine schedule since before the pandemic which you'd think they would also be aware of
and so if an organization fighting that important fight before the pandemic is now getting the
pandemic wrong there are a lot closer to getting it right than deserving of this kind of vitriol
you think you would continue to approach them with a little bit of respect
and say but you know maybe you can have a son for a weekly show then because we really think
that we're not getting enough you know airtime and why not be positive and constructive and come
with solutions instead of immediately going to attacking the organization trying to discredit
the organization and trying to make CHD part of the NIH CDC control mechanism
even if there are people working at CHD that are part of it which I guess there probably are
and if there aren't then CHD has been darn good at keeping them out because I'm sure they've tried
so it's confusing to me why this tactic is always the same it's no not friendly at all
I would I would never presume to act like this and they're going to say yeah you were that way
but I was that way because of the way they behave in private the emails that they send and the way
that they do it and so let's you're not going to it's not going to be any more fun the rest of
this video but but I think it's important to listen to it because I mean Mary is a samurai here
so yeah so I don't believe that we're promoting a core fraud I don't believe that we are censoring
the no virus point of view I don't believe that we are hiring people to attack people without
viewpoint I think it's a very important viewpoint I've had Andy Kaufmann I've had Tom Cowan
Dave Raznick Michael Wallach on CHD platforms to discuss this I've had long correspondence with
Ms. Massey and with others on this topic we are still hopeful to do a debate a bit further down the
line Tom Cowan is very insistent that he wants to involve Bobby Kennedy in this himself Bobby
is not able to do that in the foreseeable next couple months but we're we think it's a very
interesting hypothesis it's often brought with such sort of kind of emotion that it's it seems
difficult to respond to in a kind of deliberative way but I definitely think there are very serious
methodological problems with the way that COVID has been established I think it's a very serious
point of view that there is no such thing as COVID I absolutely we just had a Nick Panda Nick
Hudson on to talk about that last week I think it's a very defensible position but it's often
expressed with such venom that it makes it very hard to really sort of have a civil dialogue
about it I would really and Bobby Kennedy are very interested in having a civil dialogue about
this position that there is no virus I think it's an important point of discussion and we're certainly
not trying to censor that viewpoint thank you thank you Mary and now Christine
Mary um first of all the no virus people are not we're not we don't have a hypothesis we're
refuting a hypothesis so there is the key there is the key that they seem to think is like a dunk
or it's like a it's like them slamming the case shut that we're you know we don't have a hypothesis
we're refuting a hypothesis see that's the problem is that there may be no data being interpreted
correctly but there's data there may be no observations being interpreted correctly but there are
observations there may be no deaths that are being recorded correctly but there are deaths
and so it is not sufficient and I will say this very very clearly it is not sufficient
for you to come to this playing field of this level of sophistication and pretend to be engaging
in the discussion by starting out with the words we don't have a hypothesis we are refuting one
it is just so weak
and it is just so disingenuous because if you have a hypothesis or rather if you think you can
refute a hypothesis then there is a no
maybe someone with a better understanding of the scientific method will argue that I'm flipping
those two around but you if you refute if you're refuting a hypothesis then you're going back to
the previous understanding what's the previous understanding here what's the biology after you
refute this hypothesis about what about SARS-CoV-2 about a pandemic virus or about viruses in general
because Christine Massey is arguing about SARS-CoV-2 right now and that's where it's also a little
bit like shaky and a little bit sketchy because they flip flop back and forth between farewell
to virology and foyas about SARS-CoV-2 and discussions about whether or not the virus has been isolated
or or purified and whether they're talking about any virus ever being purified or SARS-CoV-2 being
purified it's frustrating because I know I know in my heart of hearts that
if they wanted to they could have already joined up and had sufficient influence to have shifted the
whole the whole dissident group toward the general acceptance that there was no spreading pathogen
and that they didn't ever isolate it and that it was probably made up and if there was one it might
have been some other molecular explanation but because of the way they went about it for three
years what they did was fractionate the resistance what they did was confuse the resistance what they
did was create confusion and so instead of first coming together under the idea that we are under
attack or that we are being fooled or that we are being misled and then let's figure our way out
of it let's discuss it together it became immediately the intent was to fractionate they won't even
talk to people the bailies won't even really interview with anyone they'll cancel interviews
if they think that you're somebody who is too virusy
and so it's super sketchy because this is not about winning this is about their own personal
something and not not all of them maybe maybe Christine really means well but when you listen
and you think about the fact that all they did was write letters many of them to police departments
I don't care if it's 40 nations
so then what do we have to dissect whether or not you wrote your foyer correctly
do we have to dissect the language that you got as a response and and decide whether or not you
asked the right question and is it plausible that a lot of the countries that you sent these
letters to wouldn't be expected to have a pure sample of the virus is it does it count if you
can mail one away and if the male ones are fake then why don't you order some and show that they're
fake like it seems really quite possible to push this further it would seem quite possible to make
allies and push this further but very few people on that side really actually set out
to make allies and push it further you got to fully get on board with them without any
without any reservations or they will attack you viciously until you ignore them for like half a
year it's impressive it's really an impressive game they've played
so obviously my question for you is related to what Bill was just saying
I want to know what is children's children's health defense is a current position on the issue
does the virus exist or does it not and the reason I have to ask this is because in April of last
year eric cappolino question Robert F Kennedy junior at an event it was recorded it's on eric's
website he asked so eric cappolino also did a pretty crappy interview attack with me right
he interviewed me for three hours we talked very very very frankly about it I think we had a really
good discussion and then he wrote a really really negative sub stack to promote it
and there's no question in my mind that what he wrote in his sub stack reflected a preconceived
notion about who I was and the fact that I was helping Bobby Kennedy meant I was already
corrupted in some way or bamboozled or even worse
and I kind of went into that whole situation pretty naive I didn't really know who eric was and I
didn't really look it up and it didn't really matter to me and he seemed like a pretty nice guy and
he's you know I've got all these radio shows and I've been doing it for years and that's great
but I felt bad afterward because I should have probably looked into it better and should have
realized that he was going to attack Bobby using me no matter what I said or how I said it
and it's it's tough because these people don't want to acknowledge that
what I'm saying is so nuanced that it's it's almost comical to me because when I first figured out
the clones or what I what I thought was the clones when I've come to the hypothesis that
I'm currently working with I reached out to these people and tried to explain how I think wow listen
to this you might be right and we might be right and like we're both right but not right and so
let's talk about it no no no no no no no no no and in fact that's really what the response is that
she's going to complain about here that I wrote to them and didn't supply any
I didn't supply any papers with it no citations at all because you can go on PubMed and search
for infectious clones and start reading and you can understand what these virologists think
and so if you understand what the virologists think then you can understand where perhaps
that whole field is thinking incorrectly and then Christine Massey and me and the virology
or the no virus people are all pretty much on the same page but what's very curious is that they
don't seem to want to discuss the possibility that a small tank of semi-pure infectious RNA
could be made and they don't want to think about what that might do to a cell culture or what that
might do if you put it in a vaporizer they don't want to think about what they would that would do
if you put it into a lipid nanoparticle and then released it aerosolized they don't want to think
about what would happen if you tried to culture somebody who had been transfected with that agent
they don't want to think about transfection agents even though it's all out there that
Peter Cullis has said it that you know we can pretty much put any size DNA or RNA inside
of a lipid nanoparticle that's very easy
and we know already that these things can be aerosolized because there's countless countless
grants for this stuff I mean so what are we talking about here we're talking about the fact
that you need to be a bit more nuanced when you talk about bioweapons and how they might be used
you need to be a little bit more nuanced when you talk about okay if there are no viruses
what do you mean by that because what they want you to say that what they want to say is that what
what the foy is show and what their debunking of those paper shows is that there's no nothing
there that's the bad conclusion of course there's something there every time you spin down that
that range of size of particles you spin it down you find RNA in DNA and you find it oftentimes
coded in lipids are those viruses I don't know are they pathogenic I don't know are they self
replicating pathogens I don't know maybe a small fraction of them are maybe none of them are
maybe all of them are just RNA signals that every mammals immune system produces and sometimes those
those travel or that they produce symptoms that we call the common cold that we call
respiratory disease which is essentially inflammation caused by the interaction of two immune systems
the point is is that if you come to this with no hypothesis then how do you explain all of this
this anecdotal data over the last 50 years of spreading illness and of immune of immune activation
it could be very possible that our understanding is wrong our understanding is not as as perfect
as we thought it could be that all the cartoons are wrong but there are RNA and DNA signals at this
size scale that are occur in nature that occur within our own bodies and that can be artificially
created if none of these things are obligate pathogens that replicate themselves and go around
the earth then I'm completely on your page but that there was no virus that there are no viruses
that there are no exosomes that can cause immune activation that there are no extracellular
vesicles that can get released that there are no exosomes with with proteins from your own body
or from your own immune system or from that of mammals around you in the air I think is a pretty
big statement to make so have these signals been confounded as viruses maybe possibly that's what
I'm trying to argue that's what I'm trying to understand that's that that's I'm trying to come
up with a hypothesis to explain the last 50 years of biology is not all phantoms that some of these
biologists have been making making measurements the measurements have been repeatable but we have
misunderstood what those measurements mean because of things like virology and this hyping up of this
size scale is containing obligate pathogens that we have to be afraid of it's very possible
but then you're not going to get there with this attitude where I've written more foyas than you
and and that's it we don't have a hypothesis we're refuting one
we don't have a hypothesis we are refuting one
I don't know I just I I don't really know
Robert to comment on the hundreds of freedom of information responses that my colleagues
and I have collected from around the world showing that no one has a sample of the alleged virus
no one has any record of anyone on earth obtaining a sample of the alleged virus
okay so what does that mean then what does it mean does that mean that we've all used PCR
incorrectly does it mean that you see no one has a sample of the virus so it's really not
the argument that they're really making that this is like a little disingenuous performance
because Mark Bailey is making the argument that there are no viruses
Sam Bailey's making the argument that there are no viruses measles was a hoax
and this is a problem it's a problem because I don't think it's sophisticated enough to count
for what we know and don't know and I don't think that going back to the first papers about measles
disproves the more recent papers about those particles and about their immunogenic properties
and about our responses our immune system responses to that it just doesn't
if you want to say the coronavirus research is weak I already did that that's why I tried to
get in contact with them because I wanted them to understand that I was coming on to their side
that I think they might have something here but understand that these people that are finding
these little signals in the wild whether it's through metagenomic sequencing or through weird
PCR fishing expeditions they are making infectious clones of these sequences and if you make infectious
clones it's only a question of quantity if you want to make enough
then you can put it everywhere and I don't think they've considered the possibility that if you
could put a few trillion RNA molecules in somebody's lungs that you might be able to get a positive
PCR test that they might get sick and that it might be limited contagion that the exhaling and
the shedding of exosomes caused by a transfection like that if the if the shedding is a spike protein
and the spike protein is an irritant
is an immunogen then what do you have
but that wasn't there that wasn't something that jumped out of a laboratory and ran around the
world that would be something that they would have to make and make in quantity and put it where
it needed to be and then purposely find it and wave about it which is very different than there
was no virus and while they waste all their time on this they'd never talk about anything else
they're not talking about remdesivir madazalam or the protocols killing people or ventilators
they're just talking about isolation isolation isolation isolation there are other ways
there are other methods and there are other questions to ask in order to prove that there
wasn't a pandemic and that's the best refutation of these people that there is
that if they wanted they really wanted to win and they really wanted us to win as in us as in human
kind to win against this tyranny then they wouldn't stop at isolation and purification
they'd also talk about PCR and sequencing and all this other stuff
and they would talk about protocols and how many people were killed
and they would talk about how dumb transfection is and how many people were killed
and before that they would have talked about how many people are going to be killed
but for some reason they never have they've never wasted a minute on that
they've wasted hours writing and compiling foyer reports but almost no time at all on the
people that were murdered to create the illusion of a pandemic no time at all on Jessica Hockett
no time at all on Denny Rancour because Denny won't say there's no virus so we don't want to talk to him
even if he has evidence that there was no virus
Jay won't say there's no virus so we don't want to talk to him even though if he says that there was
no virus you see it's it's a thing it's ridiculous it was a game and even if they stop playing it now
understand how much damage they did understand how how dangerous the game that they played because
it really it really took interesting thinking people out of the fight
it really did and it saved them that's one good thing maybe they didn't take the shot
but now they're not useful allies now they've been completely disarmed
and now they are not critically thinking at all instead of considering the possibility of how
evil these people actually are how far would they actually go to get what they want when it's
all the marbles that they want
and these people spend time attacking CHD
the organization that was the only one legitimately fighting the the vaccine schedule in America
before this and of course if you don't have a sample of the alleged virus you can't have any
science whatsoever and you can't have a validated test you can't have any any COVID-19 science whatsoever
and Robert's response basically he became very tongue tied tried to laugh it off and in the
end said he wished he had just shut up from the beginning and said that he was not going to answer
the question and then later in 2020 there was a private email from robert of kennedy jr to
a prominent person in the no virus movement who had been asking robert to help us because we've
been busting our asses since early yes she is about to start crying which is also fake i'm telling
you this is ridiculous and it is a purposeful dramatic attack on chd to try and make it seem like
chd is this evil organization that won't talk to them won't give them a platform when they
totally had a platform and they totally blew it they were allowed to talk they were allowed to
present and they set the the the parameters of the debate and it didn't have the results that
they wanted so then chd's band and i've told you many times on on the on the show that this book
is another book about again a function virus it's another book about the narrative that we are
trying to break the scooby-doo but i also told you that bobby wanted to write the book about the
scooby-doo about the narrative about what everybody said what all the people said
because one of the things that the no virus people ask you to do and more importantly ask
anyone who's not yet taken a side to do is to really accept is really to accept the maximum
inversion of reality all at once there was no virus there is no virus is a complete
inversion of the reality that everyone has experienced on tv and with their friends and family and
with social media and with their whole life because they have been prepared for this for 20 years by
the messaging of this same system and the reason why i took until 2022 to wake up was because of
this same system and so without compassion without understanding without empathy
they approach you with ultimatums and and tell you that you have to accept
the hardest thing to accept instead of seeking ways to bring people closer to accepting it
which is what i tried to do several times with them trying to explain to them that
the use of recombinant DNA to make large quantities of what people call infectious RNA but an
RNA that can be transfected into cells
we don't know but i think it's a very likely possibility that what happens is that RNA
translates it copies because that's what it does that's what they've designed it to do
and it produces exosomes that are are immunogenic
that's it it's real simple
and so all of virology is based on this principle and virologists accepted as evidence of viruses
and anybody who understands it to the sophistication level that i think we have come to understand it
understands it as a as an illusion that they they choose not to break
when they nanopore sequence the results of transfecting a clone into a cell culture
they just ignore the fact that they can't find full genomes they make excuses that the nanopore
you know it can read those really long things and when we're selling it for grant proposals
we say it can read two million bases at once but when it comes to finding full genomes of
coronavirus as well hand wave hand wave excuse excuse even though you find 600 000 copies of the
subgenomic RNAs of some of these structural proteins and so we know the the immunogenic proteins are
made and if they're made in sufficient quantity then we know they're shed as exosomes and so the
only real debate is how many times does it get a fully infectious RNA inside of it as it's released
probably not very often if ever but that doesn't matter for virology
and so they're a hundred percent right as far as i can tell they're a hundred percent right
especially when it comes to coronaviruses it is really spectacular how little good evidence
there is for the fidelity that they're now claiming in the virus literature previous to the pandemic
if you look at how they found coronaviruses how they cultured them and how they characterized them
they just simply did not have the fidelity that they claim to have now they just don't have the
accuracy that they claim to have now it now they claim to be able to sequence them on a whim
from beginning to end and before the pandemic that was just unheard of it was very difficult
to do so much so that Ralph Barrick had invented a way of creating and substituting
the sequences that you probably most likely would not find when you find hints of coronavirus
and so the most likely hypothesis i think a valid hypothesis would be to explain what these
particles are and explain what these RNA signals are in the wild are they really just noise
or are there RNA signals which are released by these animals produced in these animals either
by their own machinery or by a pathogen but i think it's more likely to be their own machinery
their own their own immune system or their own and epithelial cells
but if it is their own immune system or their own cells producing RNA signals and those RNA signals
because of some kind of receptor overlap can occasionally activate our own immune system
that that's not surprising to me and the fact that if the NIH and the NIAID found this signal range
signal range by accident when they made a hepatitis v vaccine in the 70s
in a primate cell culture that also had exosomes of immune origin in it
and then they realized that wow this is crazy the immune system communicates with retroviruses
and with with exosomes that can have RNA in it and we didn't ever know it and now we made vaccines
and we contaminated humans with with another species exosomes
now that's a lot better than coming to the table with no hypothesis and only refuting one
that's a lot better than coming to the table and insisting that people accept your premises
of debate and stay within it rather than having a broad spectrum debate about why
a lot of this biology is weak
and i am telling you folks with almost 100% certainty the reason why they did this for three
years is exactly to get us here where we're still talking about this
where people are still debating it as if i haven't said it already for a year and a half
almost two years that there is a way for both sides to basically be right there's a way for
all the molecular biologists to be right all the the they did this to us people be right
and that there's no virus people all of them can be right if you accept the fact
that infectious clones can be used to seed the narrative anywhere they wanted to safely and effectively
so that molecular biologists would get their proof that cultures would work
that sequences would be robust and they would be high fidelity matched across these locations
i think they could do it for under a hundred thousand dollars and that's paying everybody
that's doing it very well that's how easy i think it would be and yet for some reason or
another by bringing up this idea that means i believe that there are viruses
that means that chd believes that there are viruses
wow 2020 to get this truth out with no help whatsoever from children's health
defense and like those saying you guys are just underlining rubber stamping the cord
live the cord fraud and uh robert's response was i'm grateful for your courage and intellectual
integrity i have an open mind on this issue i admire and i encourage you but i must take off
on this war for the time being i'm more likely to join you if you get it near the goal line where
the cost returns ratio improves and so now we think about how arrogant it is that she says it that way
to robert f Kennedy jr who has you know i've been putting his whatever reputation on the line
to defend the vaccine injured in america for five seven years before this and marry as well
and so now this is how grateful they are they've already put their life and their liberty and their
professional reputations on the line before the covid pandemic ever brought you out of your little
house way before the pandemic ever made you more than a fluoride activist
think about this very carefully what could possibly motivate you to to behave this way unless you've
been encouraged to do so it's not smart how do you win people over like this you think that's how i
got my job at chd just bullied my way in it's an organization of people that have all got skin
in the game except for like three of us like real skin in the game
like they've got a kid at home or a teenager at home or a young adult at home that is still
completely devastated by quick onset vaccine induced autism
and these people have been fighting before anyone cared to listen
Mary's been fighting long before anyone cared to listen about covid
and they opened their doors wide and they listened to all these people who just woke up
because of covid mandates wow man i can't believe how screwed up this state is
boy chd should listen to me because i've really figured it out
if there's one thing i've learned since joining chd is that you didn't figure it out very early
if you're just figuring it out now you've been asleep for many many years while people were fighting
and that's me that's me included that's why i'm saying it because i've never ever ever felt like
this i've never felt like this no matter how disappointed i am in the stance they take or who
they have on or or who they talk to
i have never felt like that i've never ever felt like that because then what
if chd is bad who you're going to i can network you're going to mickey willis he's going to make
you a movie like i can network is not the same people
like i can network doesn't have its own i mean i don't know who you would go to honestly i don't
know why you would attack these people i don't know why you would not try to win them over and
then change their mind as opposed to bully your way to the to the goal which you're never going to get
to i i am upset and i'm breaking it up because it's going to get much worse and then in late
last year we i contacted you and robert f Kennedy jr and i asked you what science or you rely
relying on your website is full of content about a virus a pandemic um all sorts of things relating
to the alleged virus i asked you what science you related uh relying on you gave me no answers
whatsoever and then you put me in touch with jay cooey you're the who you and jay both told me
that jay was um chd science consultant jay cooey also was not able to cite a shred of science
and then um on one of his videos about two months ago he admitted that in for the last 20 years
virology has been been based on indirect observations of things that virologists see now what's wrong
with this what's wrong with this he admitted so what does that mean that i was lying before
i was covering something up before you see this is an attack
rather than saying that it seems like you guys are changing your mind it seems like that he
understands that i'm very encouraged by it and i hope that you will realize maybe maybe we can
meet common ground and maybe we need to have another meeting maybe we should have Andy
Kaufman on again and have him talk to jay instead they take exactly the opposite move accuse me of
lying rather than finally figuring it out and if you don't see how obvious this is
i'm not sure i can help you but this is how the game is played this is what the joke is
you want to see fifth generation warfare i'm afraid
willing or unwilling that's what you're watching right here i don't think christine is
necessarily a waiting participant in this so she might just really think that this is the
there are one chance to take it to that whole organization that she's become convinced is
just a bunch of of well it's like a second government she's gonna say
as she almost breaks down in tears
i'm sorry but we need to beat this and the way we're going to beat it is when we start to call
people out for the charlatans that they are either you you pick up the pieces every time
they fall apart a little bit and you keep walking you you drop all your stuff or you trip and fall
and you keep going or you trip and fall and then you sit there and you complain and complain and
complain and complain you trip to me you trip to me
they've given them plenty of time on their on their forum they've given them articles they've
shown their opinion they've they've represented it quite well
and in the end the reason why the argument doesn't succeed is because exactly what she started out
with which is that we don't have a hypothesis we're refuting one so then you can't really have a
discussion with them about what really happened because as she's trying to say here he admits that
virology is based on a lot of indirect measurements yeah and so let's make a bridge
not let's burn one and not even prove exist this is your science consultant saying this
so my question what is chd's crimp position on the alleged virus does it exist yes or no and if yes
then what science are you relating on
i don't know that i can answer that in a way that you will find satisfying i think we're open to
the idea that there's not a virus we're open to the idea that there is a virus we i'm sorry but
refuting there's there's always two hypotheses there's the null hypothesis right that's what the
truth is if your hypothesis isn't right i think that's how they talk about it i don't really care
what the exact and the exact discussion point is if if the theory is
i don't know i don't have a good i don't i don't have a good analogy for it because it's such a
simple proposition the floor is wet in my office my hypothesis is that somebody left the door open
and then the rain came in and you refute the hypothesis you say that well no the door was locked
so there's no there's no way the rain could have gotten in here so you refuted the hypothesis so
then what's your hypothesis what do you think happened again no i just want you to admit that
the door was locked and therefore the rain couldn't come in anymore okay well i i kind of agree that
that's a really good point so then what do you where do you think the water came from no don't
you see there's no water well okay so then if it's not water what is it there's no pathogen there's
no spreading there's no sickness there's no signals there's monomolecular biology
it's all made up because we have foyas and the foyas say that they don't have any purified virus
they didn't isolate anything and so it's kind of this circle thing like this circling circling
circling and they never seem to get to the point where oh yeah they murdered people
they killed a bunch of people in hospitals they should have never ventilated those people
i think they lied about protocols maybe they shouldn't have used remdesivir
i think they should have told people to take care of better care of themselves i think the lockdowns
killed a lot of people foyas foyas foyas foyas foyas
they were part of the reason why humankind is still trapped in the scooby-doo
they are the reason because the only alternative to the scooby-doo was a refutation of a hypothesis
with no alternative no alternative explanation
how easy would it be to go across the street to your neighbor's house and say hey did you know
that there was no pandemic because there is no SARS-CoV-2 and then they would just put all their
stuff to oh wow jeez i took this man wow i'm so glad you told me i'll never listen to everybody
else on the planet again that's what you get when you don't have an alternative hypothesis
you get nothing you have nothing to offer then you have nothing to teach
you have no clarity or peace to offer if you have no hypothesis but only a refutation
what is the way forward not that way it's not that way i don't know what we should do but
we shouldn't go that way okay great
so once we agree as as she says once i admit that virology is based on a lot of smoke and mirrors
now what i guess nothing you write about both dimensions to that uh jay kui is somebody who
has studied virology and so i think he is and has been delving more deeply in that i don't
we're trying to cover the issue i don't think we've stated that there is the virus we haven't
stated that there's not a virus we're exploring what the reality is and we clearly agree with you
that there are very serious problems with the narrative i don't think we have definitive answers
on a lot of this bobby's writing a book with all of your stats your your website is full of
content about a virus gain of function see so now she's going to go on a rant
because her job is to attack chd her job is not to win people over or to teach or to build bridges
or to change chd's mind her goal is to paint everybody at chd is a liar by saying words like jay
admitted and your website is full of and Robert of kennedy jr has a whole book coming out about the
origin of so-called covid you have not been dealing with this an imbalanced way interesting
because there's a line in here interesting isn't it wow it's really cool that this book is out now
in like a day or two because there's an index and in the index you can go and find out all the
places where i'm quoted and you can go to the last one on page 441
and you can read the words as jonathan cooey said no actual virus would even be necessary
interesting choice of words on page 441 of this book about the origins of the pandemic
this book is going to bring the rain whether they like it or not
i guarantee you this book is going to bring the rain
and it could have brought the rain a lot sooner and they could have been a part of it they could have
occurred it helped it could have been a bigger part of the book
it could have been a more important part of the book had they
genuinely pushed their argument from the very beginning
but actually it was an extremely coordinated dance because if you will remember there were a
couple really really early opponents of the andrew koffman and no virus crowd really early
opponents in the ring they showed up in february of 2020 already adamantly opposed to two things
the 5g people and the no virus people and so they already had courageous opponents
planted in the internet from the very start like from the very very start the no virus people
and the anti no virus people were seated and they're still going they're still going
those people are still going right now the no virus people stick into the same story that they've
been saying basically since 2020 and the crazy part is is the anti no virus people that started
also in february of 2020 opposing the no virus narrative and opposing 5g are still there
and the funny thing is is that those people those people were pushing the spike protein
and amyloidosis and prion disease also extremely early in 2020 and they're still pushing it now
and so what's this all about it's about seeing these groups these little teams
that were feigning opposition to one another way too early in the pandemic for it to be
grassroots oh i heard about these people i'm gonna be sure to start on them early yeah right
how come i'd never heard of any of these people at the beginning of 2020 how come none of these
people had heard of any of these other people in 2020 except for these two groups the worst case scenario
group who was getting tips from the c cdc and phone calls from taiwan saying that remdesivir would be the only thing that could save us and speculating about a billion people dead were also anti no virus.
anti-no virus. As early as February 2020, already knew Andy Kaufman's name. Andy
Kaufman, who I have pictures of with Andrew Cuomo because he got a contract
for a biometric device in prisons right before the pandemic. Oh, you didn't know
that. We're coming strong now. This is not, this is, this is for all the
marbles. We, we are saving our children here. You don't think this is a some kind
of stream for fun. I've never seen this video. I had no idea that Mary Holland
went to bat for me like this. And I had no idea that they attacked CHD like this.
And in my name, basically, I don't know what I had done back in when this video
was made. I might have overreacted. I might have blown it. It's really good that I
didn't see it. But this is just blatant because she's not critiquing me. She's
critiquing CHD. And she's critiquing CHD despite the fact that CHD does not
have a blemished record of bungling, you know, stances on things. They have
Brian Hooker working for them.
You gave, or you had David Raznik and Michael Wallach on one time. And I
think there's one presentation with Alex Zach or one other, one other
something on your website compared to what hundreds and hundreds, maybe
thousands of articles, interviews, conversations about COVID-19, as if it's a
real phenomenon. So no, with all due respect, you have. So it's all up to CHD to
ignore all the doctors, all the CDC, all the TV, all the, it's up to CHD to do
that. An organization that is opposing childhood vaccination, trying to advocate
for vaccine injured people before the pandemic. Now, it's all on the shoulders
of CHD to figure this out. And to be on the right side, as opposed to just
giving a voice to everybody in hopes that it'll sort itself out, giving a
voice to these people, where they can't get a voice anywhere else, except for
in really fringe places.
And so instead of saying, thank you, but you're still making a mistake, being
respectful and saying, hey, we should have another argument because one of your
science advisors seems to really be coming around to understanding the flaws
of this argument. And maybe we can come to a new understanding, it is immediately
crap. And that's how you know this is not real. And if you combined it with
their, their behavior in 2020, and the way that exosomal communication just
slowly disappeared from all their talks, starting in February and March when they
still had it in. And then Andrew Kaufman never talked about it again. There is a
game being played here, ladies and gentlemen, and the Scooby-Doo is a lot
more complicated than most people ever dreamed it was. And I think this video
is one of the best examples of how you can really see through this. And I'm, I
think it's unfortunate. I think it's very possible that Christine is unwittingly
participating in this and very much convinced by other people that CHD is
the proper target for this kind of hire.
And she's happy to do it. But I don't know, I'm super skeptical. It gets worse.
It's not been, you have been, you have not been helping at all. You've been
extremely one sided, which to me is just blatantly unethical, unlawful, you're
misleading your, your people rely on you guys for accurate information. And they
think for God's sake, if there was no virus for all people's children's health
defense would be warning us. It's what it's been like for the last three years.
It's been like having another layer of government to have to deal with, to
dispel the all the nonsense coming out of your organization.
Because there's like, I'm sorry, I just I
know I appreciate that. With all due respect, I brought on, you know, Andy
Kaufman and Tom Cowan to debate this with some of the other scientists who
are on this call. And it wasn't as fruitful as I would have helped. And like
I say, this is still something that we want to hear. I'm sorry, it's disappointing to
you.
Now, now, can I just say for this issue, you know, this, I've been thinking,
you know, I'd love to see a debate. We've had presenters, we've had Andy
Kaufman here, Mary. And we've got people on this group who absolutely buying
Christine, you know, with no, the no virus, they're very, very well, Mark Bailey
here. And you've shared the perspective, we're not going to have a big debate here.
But Mary, you've raised it with Mary fairly. Will has raised it. And Mary is
just going to have to go, okay, that's the, that's the criticism and the valid
comment. And I would love to have that Mary, that that CHD debate. I really,
you know, it would be fantastic to have, you know, three hour tongs and all
because we've got people on this call, highly qualified doctors who say there
is no virus. And then we've got doctors who believe in the virus, who are
criticizing Christine and anybody who questions the virus. Like, you know,
Stephen gets it. I get it. We get criticized. How can you have anybody on
this call who questions the virus? So everybody free speech. Will has
it better? Christine's expressed it. Mary's heard it. We go to the next comment.
And we don't, you know, that that it's, it's a, it's an issue for Mary to go,
okay, from a CHD with all the great work that CHD is doing. I have not been
able to work through as a lawyer in my mind, you go, right, oh, are we going to
go back to this? What handling judges and all of these issues? It's a big
strategic question. I would love a big debate. And Christine, I totally
honor your work and your passion for this and Mark Barry and Alex Kaufman
and Tom Cowling. All right. So in my opinion, it would help enormously if
the no virus people took away the emotion and the recriminations and the hard
done by, yeah, we've all been hard done by in the last three years. And it's not
attractive to hear all the emotion. Mary has answered very fairly. Let her do her
thing. Yeah, I love it. I think Mary did really well there. I probably made more
of it than I should have because it was an hour and 22 minutes, but it felt, it
felt like it needed to be wrung out. Because again, just the FOIA request thing
alone is really a joke to me because I have only been working for CHD for
like three months and I've already helped with a few Foyas. I was already
busy with it with another friend of mine before. But a Foya is a real art
thing. It's like a and and it's also a bit of a cat and mouse game that has not
simply played by making a form letter and then sending it to a lot of offices
and waiting for the letters to come back. It's a it's much more nuanced than
that. And it is possible that if you request records that don't exist, it
doesn't necessarily mean that the things don't exist. If there's no record at
that police station because they didn't make a piece of paper, there was no
communication about it, it doesn't provide evidence of something. And it's
very, very disingenuous. As I said, a few key Foyas to a few key places, it was
all that was required, not 212 institutions in 40 different countries,
where most of those would probably already you could have known you were
going to get a negative. But that's again, that's why this is obviously a
stunt. You would never waste that much time doing that many Foyas if your goal
was to win. Like you would have already established your point with the first
30 or 15. And then you would put your energy into something else. And instead,
you know, it's always an attempt to attack. And so it's it's not good. I'm
going to see how far I get with this. What time is it 1143? Maybe I should
just end it here and do this. Alex Zec thing tomorrow. What do you think? I
think that might be a better idea. I'm gonna have to change the title of this
one then. Yeah, I think I should I should rest my voice. I'm gonna I'm gonna
leave it here. I really want to be sure that everybody is is happy with
things and understands that we are about to it's about to get really rocky. And
so we've got to be very, very good about being succinct. And so we don't we
don't we don't play the game of we don't have a hypothesis, right? That's not our
game. We definitely have a hypothesis. We have a hypothesis and the hypothesis
is infectious clones. That's the hypothesis. And the hypothesis is that
there was no spread. But rather there was limited release enough for sequencing
to work and enough to augment a probably already existing background with that
infectious clone release. So again, let's be very clear. I think that this slide is
pretty good. But you know, I've been using it for a while. So I get the fact
that not everybody likes it. But in 2018, the good the idea is that in 2018, the
earth was clear. And in the end of 2019, something leaked. And that leak resulted
in the vast majority of the human population being covered in a replicating
RNA pathogen, an RNA molecule that's coated in a lipoprotein coat. And despite
that, that entity not being a pattern integrity, not needing energy to sustain
itself, not undergoing homeostasis, not being able to replicate on its own. We
attribute a lot of biological concepts that should only apply to pattern
integrities to this idea. And that illusion of consensus about the fact that
these concepts are applicable in this stage, have allowed us to be bamboozled
into the idea that there is pandemic potential. Because they've convinced us
quite frankly that viruses are all for all practical purposes alive and capable
of the same fidelity as other living things. That's how they got us to believe
there's a pandemic. Once you realize that an RNA molecule coded in a lipoprotein
is not capable of the kinds of behavior, let's say that a living organism is, and
that behavior includes expanding across the planet. RNA molecules cannot do that.
No matter what all the stories they tell us. And that faith involves all of these
things from PCR being effective to asymptomatic spread being real and gain a
function virus is being real. And vaccines working great in the past and
working great this time too. And I'm telling you this is their train. This is
their train. They are performing an act. And that act is a lie. Because there is a
conflated background signal, I am sure of it. Because when they spin down these
samples to look for exosomes they find exosomes when they spin these samples
down and look for viruses they find viruses when they spin these samples down
and look for things they find them because when they spin these samples down they
get RNA and DNA. They get cellular debris they get everything at that size scale
and everything at that size scale is a lot of things. And so if they tell you
that they found something in there based on some partial signals it's very easy
for that to be a lie or a confounded background signal. Hey I think we found
something. Well what is it? It's a page of a book. I guess that means that the
whole book is in your backyard. Well it doesn't have to be. Yeah but I mean
there's newspapers back there and there's papers blowing all over the place so I
mean I found one book one page of the book so I imagine the whole books back
there. Okay perfect. All kinds of conflation. And why? Because they really
want us to be completely confused, completely fooled, completely unmoored
to reality. So that we just shrug our shoulders and say okay give me a digital
ID, give me digital currency, take my genetic data, take my medical data. Maybe
you can give me a little bit of a universal income for it in exchange.
HUHA. I don't know what this show was. I guess it's a shout out to Mary Hall and
for coming to my to have in my back and to taking the shells from Christine
Massey for all of CHD. Here's to you Mary. Well done. This is GIGO and
biological stop all transfections in humans because they want to eliminate
the control group by any means necessary. Kind of a mediocre stream tonight
I apologize. I had planned to do the Alex Zek video and not watch the the no
virus video for very long and then I don't know. I might have to take this one
down. I don't know how I feel about it. But thanks for joining me. I'm sorry I
was so late. Best of all practice tonight. Saturday and Sunday coming up
long December. I'm probably not gonna miss a day so I'll see you tomorrow. Unless
something crazy happens. I'll be here in some capacity or another state for
taking these things. Intramuscular injection and many combination of
substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
Transfection and healthy humans is criminally negligent and viruses are not
patterned integrities.