It's real.
Full speed, Kevin.
Into the wall.
The tunnel I mean.
Sure is a creepy video, isn't it?
This is also a really creepy video actually.
This is a video from the Danny Jones podcast at the end of 2024.
and it is an interview with a guy by the name of Kevin McKernan.
And I think it's really relevant to our discussion and to my sort of plea for help.
I kind of self-deprecatingly wear this jacket that says USA Basketball.
I really
I really feel like America is under attack.
We are being sabotaged from within with help from people all around the world.
A lot of the people that are helping these people are in Five Eyes countries, but not all of them, unless South Africa is a Five Eyes country.
And I'm worried for the future of my country.
I need help from my fellow countrymen, whether you wear a blue baseball cap or a red baseball cap.
or no baseball cap and a cowboy hat.
I need more Americans to understand the problem with what this video represents.
It is as close to an admission as we're ever going to get that we are being subverted.
And I know that's an absolutely spectacularly bold statement for me to make, but I feel like everything's on the line and has been on the line for a very long time for the five people in this house.
More than ever right now.
It is on the line for us.
We have only 111 Active subscribers to our send out and we have a few Subscribers to substack and that's really about it if we didn't have a couple people that regularly gave us a bigger than average donation we this would have ended a long time ago in some way or another and
And not that I would stop saying what I need to say, but this stream is only going to become stronger if it can find the support to do it.
And it's really important, I think, to understand the significance of this video, the significance of this man, the significance of his claims, the significance of his timeline, the significance of the people that he has interacted with, including myself,
and how that interaction has changed over the course of the COVID pandemic.
Because all of that well-documented history between myself and this gentleman intersects directly with a book written by the United States Health and Human Services Secretary.
And that intersection somehow or another reveals that this guy
is somehow a liar.
And I don't know why.
I don't know why Kevin McKernan is going on podcasts and lying seemingly from 2020, but certainly at the end of 2024, he lied several times on this podcast or someone told him and he believed these lies.
It's possible, I guess, that Kevin McKernan is just, you know, given a script and he reads it.
It's possible, but given his family history, given his career history, and given his history during the pandemic, his podcast history during the pandemic, it is extremely dubious to assume that this guy is just some dude who works on pot genomes and who's now, you know, kind of burning his career trying to warn people about
the DNA plasmid that is still present in these shots.
In this video, this man who purports to be a whistleblower, who CHD has promoted, who Robert F. Kennedy has promoted, who Mary Holland has promoted, who Brian Hooker has promoted, and who Senator Ron Johnson has put in front of a Senate committee to testify about this contamination,
went on the Danny Jones podcast at the end of 2024 and lied in the following ways.
First of all, he said that Barrick taught the Chinese how to make coronavirus.
This is a ridiculous lie because what he's talking about is making infectious clones.
And those are really easy to make.
Those are just sequences that you get commercially made and you order them.
Maybe you need to use some very basic ligation techniques in order to assemble those, but the suggestion that Barrick somehow gave them the recipe to make cake is ridiculous because the essential thing that they do is they make a lot of pure DNA and then they use it.
They transform things, they transfect things.
They can transfect things or transform things using that DNA, or they can convert it to RNA and then do the same, transfect things.
That is not virology, but that is molecular biology.
That is what these people represent as virology, and he knows that.
And so Ralph Baric knows that too.
Tony Fauci understands that.
That's one of the primary illusions here, that the experiments where they send around this clone of SARS Urbani, those are supposed to be virology experiments.
Those aren't virology experiments.
Those are transfection experiments.
Golden Gate Assembly, when he says it, is an admission that Baric's no-see-um technique is just nonsense.
So they made a big deal about Barrick calling it no-see-um.
But it's not Barrick's little tricks.
It's tricks that molecular biology companies that have been pimping restriction enzymes for years invented.
And he would know that because he
invented some of these technologies, found some of these technologies, or the precursors to them.
And certainly, the ubiquitous use of the suite of restriction enzymes that are available is known to anybody on any academic bench.
You just go look up, what restriction enzyme do I need to cut here?
And so this is an admission that this no-see-em thing is nonsense if he says Golden Gate Assembly in the same couple sentences.
Rixey was fired from CHD and the writing of the book, as far as I know, because it happened live over a weekend,
because he brought a guy by the name of Kevin McCairn into a private manuscript meeting that was supposed to be, you know, it's a, it's a book that's being written by a guy who's running for president.
So I guess we should try to kind of keep it secret and not have some random Englishman from Japan in my hotel room, but he did.
And then instead of communicating with the book staff,
just ignored them for two days, streamed with that same fella, and so they fired him.
But he is going to tell a different story in this chat.
So Rixey is a former Marine turned shoe salesman who worked for Seaburn.
and tried to get me to rejoin Drastic in 2021 that culminated in January of 2022, him coming to my house.
About two or three weeks after this guy was on my stream and I interviewed him about the, you know, I guess the PCR and the, he just blew me away.
The diffuse proposal had no evaluation.
So he's going to say that the diffuse proposal was, you know, they, they rejected it because they were like, something's going to leak from this, but they didn't get any evaluation like that.
And they, at best, the proposal was found on a database and not funded.
We don't even know if it got evaluated.
So that's, that's a lie.
The defuse proposal as being done is actually really interesting because that's one of my six quotes in the Wuhan book.
There's only six quotes of me in this book.
I don't think there are any quotes from McKernan or Rixey, but there are six quotes of me in this book.
And one of them is actually what he says exactly word for word right here in this interview, as though he's just explaining it, which is an odd coincidence.
Finally, the whole argument that he makes is based on the idea that we have to accept the exact sequence of SARS-CoV-2 that was reported by Wuhan or reported by whoever or leaked by whoever as real and worth debating, worth talking about the consequences of that sequence.
You must accept this or this whole argument falls apart.
And finally, just recall that James Lyons Wyler, the author of the 2016 Skyhorse publishing book, The Environmental and Genetic Causes of Autism, was the first guy that I could verify in January 2020 that had any knowledge about what this specific molecular details like a fear and cleavage site or something like that.
He's the earliest one, this guy, the earliest one.
And he was cited by Dan Serotkin, who was actually the guy's blog who got me started in this, you know, searching down the mystery virus thing.
And so knowing all of this, let's just listen to him tell this amazing tale.
Ralph Baric's the guy who arguably taught WIV how to create the coronavirus.
Taught who?
The Wuhan Institute of Virology.
So there were grants that Fauci basically boomeranged off of Echo Health into the WIV, because they put a gain-of-function ban on funding here in the States.
Obama did that, right?
Obama did that.
And so what Fauci's creative way around that was, well, we'll fund a nonprofit called Echo Health Alliance, run by Peter Daszak, who will launder the money for us into the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Therefore, it's not directly from Fauci to Wuhan.
It's going through some intermediary.
And through that process, they taught the Wuhan Institute of Virology how to do this seamless no-seum technique, which is a technique of assembling viral genomes so you don't leave any evidence behind.
It's a ligation technique that uses a golden gate assembly.
It's a clever way of putting stuff together so that you can't tell that someone built it, necessarily, from a laboratory.
However, they did leave behind some fingerprints that got them caught, basically.
And if you want to hear about that story, you should get Charles Rixey on here.
Charles Rixey has helped RFK write his book about this.
And Charles Rixey's a marine and he's been like a dog on a bone with this problem.
And he was the one who leaked the diffuse proposal.
Are you familiar with the diffuse proposal?
No, what is that?
So there was a grant that was proposed to the DOD to go build a weaponized coronavirus under the banner of we need to build a vaccine against this because if we can do it, the Chinese can do it kind of thing.
And the DOD turned down the grant because they thought it was too fucking crazy.
You'll have something to leak from this.
But as anyone who's written grants, I've been involved in writing grants for our company.
I've got like $30 million in grants from NIH.
You don't apply with a grant not having done 80% of it.
It's just, you're looking for the last 20%.
Let's just make sure you verify this here.
We're going to look in the book.
It's in the index too, so you can find this yourself if you happen to own a book.
If you want a copy of it, you just let me know.
And I'll get a copy and get it off of Amazon and sign it for you, and then send it to you I can I can arrange that This is on page 310 of the Wuhan cover-up, and it says Jonathan dr. Jonathan Cooley similarly observes mm-hmm
The fact that Fauci and NIH turned down DASAC's proposal is irrelevant.
The proposal itself is evidence that work may have already been done, and that's how modern research is conducted and funded.
The government's official claim that a rejected DASAC's proposal makes for a convenient public denial that the work was never done, and this probably was sufficient reassurance for 90% of the curious population, but since most people don't understand the grant-making progress,
But any working scientist will view this narrative with skepticism.
Okay, so of course later on I became aware of sort of the biology that made me firmly doubt this idea that the diffuse proposal could be evidence of something and instead what made much more
logical sense was this was like a doubling down on the lab leak narrative that I had already rejected.
Now what I'm suggesting here is that the diffuse proposal was actually leaked kind of by Rixie and Rixie definitely tried to use the diffuse proposal to convince me to consider myself part of drastic again.
It's really quite remarkable that about two or three weeks after I interviewed Kevin McKernan on my stream for the first time in 2021, at the end of 2021, in January of 2022, Charles Rixey came to my house and streamed with me.
And it is that stream that supposedly Robert Malone
told bobby kennedy he had to watch and that is the reason why bobby kennedy hired him me to help with this book and ricksy to help with this book think about how weird this is and so i i can't stress enough how how important it is to see that these are all it's all one malevolent show it's all one coordinated
network of liars that pings people off of one another and bounces people around between trust and not trust and skepticism and not skepticism and they pretend that they're working with you but in reality they're just making sure that you do a U-turn every time you start to make progress.
And yes, I am accusing Kevin McKernan of being one of the worst of those people.
Absolutely to the extent to which that he plays a central role
in the proper, successful execution of the fake pandemic which allowed PCR to become an accepted diagnostic.
and transfection to become an accepted form of vaccination, which is just absolutely criminal.
And it was primarily coordinated by Robert Malone and, and Kevin McKernan.
Now he's going to continue here after he talks about, uh, or, or tries to sort of absorb the thing that I said in this book and try to make it seem like, you know, that's what, what Rixey helped with the book, right?
You just can't.
The grant process is so grueling and so competitive that in order for you to succeed, you have to have all this preliminary data that shows we can get Xed on.
We've demonstrated this piece.
Now we just need to do this last piece.
And in that diffuse proposal, they had used particular restriction enzymes.
These are enzymes that cut at particular sequences in DNA.
Those are important because they help guide the way that you cut and paste DNA together.
So imagine if you're cutting and pasting a Word document, but your highlighter to highlight what sentence you want to cut can only start and end with certain letters.
Those are what restrictions are.
So imagine you could only cut and paste where there's a the.
So you would have to then build a paragraph knowing that the paragraphs that have sentences that start with the, we're going to cut with this enzyme.
And the ones that have sentences that start with maybe,
Now the next thing to remember, of course, is that the same guy that got Rixey fired, McCairn, is somebody that I met as early as February of 2020 on five consecutive weekend streams with two people who are intimately associated with George Webb.
George Webb has got to be some kind of, I don't know, FBI clown,
Um, I don't know who George Webb is, but I do know that he is a fake person.
And George Webb was put on 60 minutes, uh, in February of 2020, because he's a fake person.
And he was promoting Paul Cuttrell for more than three years.
Paul Cuttrell is also a fake person who Robert Malone also interviewed with despite Paul Cuttrell being a fake person and later saying that he was suing George Webb.
This is all one group of people.
It's very, very hard for me to stress how important it is to see that they are all one group.
And so if you think that you can sort through this, you are mistaken.
You cannot sort through this.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
cannot sort through this.
Mike Eden can't sort through this.
None of these people can sort through this until we figure out what is the group of people here who is coordinating their lying.
who has avoided consistently the scrutiny of the PCR, avoided consistently scrutiny of the transfection as transfection until it was way too late, and have avoided scrutinizing the expected rise in all-cause mortality.
the opioid crisis and its contribution to the falling life expectancy, specifically in America, and instead have focused on the novel virus, the spike protein, in order to hide the expected damage from transfection.
That's why somebody from the Human Genome Project, somebody from the 100,000 Genomes Project, somebody from DITRA and from
the WHO and from CEPI and from all these other things that he's worked for and advised, from Anthrax Merrill, the primary advisor, scientific advisor behind CHD, besides Brian Hooker.
It's really remarkable, ladies and gentlemen, but once you see that it only takes a few of these people at the center
And everybody else can just have ulterior motives.
Everybody else can just have bills to pay.
Everybody else can just not be sophisticated enough and really just interested in being a newswoman or being the next Joe Rogan in the UK.
What I find quite remarkable is this particular guy, the guy that I met at the beginning of 2020 and interacted with for the last six years, is still working almost exclusively
Half of his content is about me.
And he has done now two live streams with the ironically named Steve Kirsch Vaccine Safety Research Council, or Research Foundation, Vaccine Safety Research Foundation.
This guy has had this guy on twice now, one time with Kevin McKernan.
It's probably not for nothing that they chose that guy.
McCann, McKernan, get them all mixed up.
They presented to an Australian, you know, health freedom group.
So this guy, and this guy, and this guy, and that guy, and this guy, and that guy, and that dude, and that guy, and this lady, and that one, and that one, and that one, they're all in on it.
They're all in on it.
That's why I have selfies with all of them.
They've all told me they're great.
Some of them, I'm great.
Some of them have given me little love notes with their private messages and their telegram group and their private phone number that they never answer.
Shoot, Steve Kirsch has even left me voicemails a few times over the last five years.
These people are malevolent players.
that are trying to enslave our grandchildren, trying to take advantage of the dying dollar, get theirs while they're getting is still possible.
Because they know that if they didn't do this job, somebody else would do it.
You don't think they could have replaced Pierre Kory with a hundred other doctors?
You don't think, I mean, come on.
Six years back, I asked one question and I never got an answer from anyone.
Do you know anyone that died from COVID?
It's the fog of antibodies war and the procrastination of the fall of the toilet.
You're getting pooped up in the arse.
I don't know what that means, dude.
From where I'm sitting, there's a whole bunch of COVID brain going around.
Do I know anyone that died from COVID?
The problem is that my sample set is skewed.
Now this is important, right?
Because what I'm showing you here, I probably shouldn't show you, but I'm afraid that if I don't at least mention him every once in a while, he might stop getting paid.
So for the sake of his kids and for his family, I thought I would show that.
But let me go back to it for a second because I just want to point out what you see here.
At the end of this stream, while he's, you know, ragging on me and making fun of the fact that I guess I'm going to commit suicide at 9-11-2025, he's reading this chat, which says, six years back, I asked one question.
I never got an answer from anyone.
Do you know anyone that died of COVID?
It's the fog of antibodies war and procrastination of the fall of the dollar.
you're getting, you know, whatever up the arse, he says here.
So he reads that out loud and he says, I don't know what that means.
Now, curiously, I said almost exactly this in July of 2020, when I said that the background was being misconstrued as spread and that these people are probably just lying to us in order to extract the last amount of value out of America as the dollar collapses.
That guy has been on Steve Kirsch's Vaccine Safety Research Foundation podcast twice, once with Kevin McKernan, former Research and Development Director of the Human Genome Project at its beginning.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is gigalombiological.com.
That's my website.
You can go there and find a way to help support this stream if you think it's worthwhile.
We are at a crucial moment right now where this message will not be repeated by anyone else.
This information is not held by anyone else.
Nobody else is reading these books.
No one else is trying to put this together so that we can understand this background
and explain to our grandkids and our children how much lying has gone on for the last 20 years.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you want to share this work, share it from stream.gigaom.bio if you don't mind.
This weekend, we're going to try to do a stream exclusively on my own platform, just to see how it goes, to see how many people show up, to see if it can handle 50 people, if 50 people show up.
I won't tell you any more about that, but that'll be tomorrow and we do have a soapbox I'm not always there, but I try to be there and check in there Don't feel bad if I'm not there because you know, you can always send an email and my my wife is a very good filter If you send a bunch of nonsense, she probably won't forward it to me But if you just you know, give me a link or say hi or whatever it'll get through and I'll hear from you and then we'll have direct contact and
if you want to send anything to us, or if you want to get, if you want to get,
I got a lot still because nobody cares.
Right?
Nobody cares.
If you want to get stickers for your car, these are clear.
Or your water bottle.
Or if you want to get a velcro thing if you're a tactical kind of guy like I used to be.
Then send a self address stamped envelope to the address right here behind me in the lower, that would be I guess.
Is that the left?
Yeah, lower left of the screen there, JJ Cooey at P.O.
Box 802 Bethel Park, PA 15102.
It's a very interesting place we're in right now.
I have to tell you, I've been a liaison to ACIP for nearly two decades, and I'm so impressed and reassured by the multiple ways CDC and FDA work together to monitor vaccine safety.
Hello and welcome to the AMA Update video and podcast.
After postponing a meeting in February, the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, recently met for two days and voted in favor of new recommendations for three vaccines.
And here with us today to share all those details is the AMA's liaison to the ACIP, Dr. Sandra Fryhofer in Atlanta.
I'm Todd Unger, AMA's Chief Experience Officer in Chicago.
Dr. Fryhofer, it's so good to have you back.
Well, thanks for having me back, Todd.
Well, I want to begin with some logistics.
As I mentioned, this meeting was originally set for February.
You know, I really wish GigaOM Biological had a chief experience officer, but we don't.
So you're just stuck with me.
So it's funny, right?
This is going to be a story about the management of the population pyramid.
Anybody that's sick
or it's got advanced, you know, multiple conditions, you know, you probably should get a number of these shots because, you know, you never know.
I mean, if we can't see anything in your seroprevalence, so then just to be sure you better get a booster.
Let's listen to this one.
Yeah.
And then it was postponed, but there was a little confusion about when and if this particular meeting would occur.
Can you give us a little bit of background there?
Sure, the dates of these public meetings are usually set years in advance, and physicians and public health people from all over the country and the world look forward to them.
So when the ACIP's three-day meeting, which was set for the end of February, was suddenly canceled, it was quite concerning.
After all, this would have been the first ACIP meeting under this new administration and with a new HHS director.
Mr. Kennedy's previous views and actions have been somewhat anti-vaccine, which made it even a little more concerning and lead us to say the scientific community was sort of up in arms.
In fact, AMA, along with a bunch of other organizations, signed on to a letter to preserve the ACIP meeting, and it worked.
The February meeting was rescheduled to April.
The formerly scheduled three-day meeting was compressed into two very full days.
There were only three votes.
A previously scheduled vote on flu vaccination was not included.
All right, now you've been an ACIP liaison for almost 20 years.
Was there anything about this particular meeting that was new or different?
I heard there was a new orientation for one.
Yes, this was the first time we'd ever had an orientation meeting for liaisons, but it was a really good idea, especially for people that were new to being a liaison.
They had it the day before the meeting started and it sort of level set expectations.
They talked about the history of ACIP, how it was established in 1964 and was designated a federal advisory committee in 1972.
Its role is to provide advice and guidance to the CDC director on the most
I'm laughing because Jason in the chat says, people who vote in favor of vaccines should immediately receive those vaccines.
And I find that really remarkably funny.
Thank you.
Active means to prevent vaccine preventable diseases.
They also explained the evidence-based process ACIP uses in making its vaccine recommendations.
It's called the Evidence to Recommendations Framework or ETR.
At the orientation meeting, they also said that the people that usually help with the broadcast had been let go and warned there could be some technical difficulties.
And I thought, oh, no.
But the remaining staff was able to pull it off with only a few minor technical problems.
It was a really good meeting.
And Dr. Melinda Ward.
Did you hear the emotion in that?
It was a really good meeting.
who is ACIP's Executive Secretary, and Stephanie Thomas, ACIP's Committee Management Specialist, are really amazing.
We also heard some great presentations from CDC staff and others.
Now, I think there was some concern about maybe public comment being eliminated.
What happened there?
Well, we've always had time for oral public comment at these meetings.
I made a comment at an AICP meeting once.
Should I play that one right now?
Let me see if I can find it really quick.
I think it's on Peertube.
I have it in the Batcave.
So let's look at that for a second just because it's fun.
I'm gonna swing this up over here behind me.
So if you go to gigaohm biological, this is stream.gigaohm.bio, you see that?
This is my website that actually I pay for, but Mark also pitches in, Mark Kulak of Housatonic ITS.
And that's why if you go to channels, I think this is open to my account right now.
So certain things won't show up unless I go to the homepage.
So I'm gonna go to the homepage and see if that works.
And if you go to the homepage, which is just again, stream.gigaohm.bio slash home, you can see that up there on the top, I think.
You can click and you will find this is where the live stream will be tomorrow and only there This is where Jeff from Earth Jeff from Earth is also in the chat.
Yo, yo, yo This is where his clips channel is.
I've used one of them like six times today on X about the Neat experiment that either side could have proposed If you go down farther though, you will find the bat cave and the bat caves cool because sometimes you just have
recordings that you want to, you know, put up here, but you don't want to do a show about it, you want people to be able to look at it.
So this is where I've got the ACIP meeting one, that's this one right here.
Our first public comment speaker is Mr. Jonathan Cooley.
Hello, can you hear me?
We can, please go ahead.
Thank you.
My name is Jonathan Cooley, and I have no conflicts of interest.
The ethical principle of informed consent has been effectively ignored for the duration of the pandemic.
The FDA and the CDC long ago failed to meet their responsibility to ensure informed consent in those healthy adults who have been already transfected, most egregiously in the healthy college students and teens for whom there was never an emergency.
The CDC and FDA failed again just days ago to provide the opportunity for informed consent, this time for parents of children under five when recommending transfection as safe and effective.
After nearly two years of calling transfection by lipid nanoparticle an investigative vaccine, you have failed to provide informed consent by pushing a false equivalence between transfection and traditional live attenuated and recombinant vaccines.
You have failed to inform the public that transfection, the expression of a viral protein by injection of synthetic RNA, is a highly variable and tissue-dependent process that we are unsure can provoke meaningful immune memory, the goal of any vaccination.
You have failed to notify the public of the potential for autoimmunity while also failing to look for this known downside of this technique.
The FDA have no data to support recommending transfection for any healthy human in 2022.
After more than two years, you have failed to inform the public that you know the studies upon which these recommendations are based are woefully underpowered.
In place of informed consent, you have pushed the vague concepts of safe and effective until they were devoid of meaning.
The studies used to specifically recommend transfection to the under five age group are statistical jokes without clinically meaningful endpoints.
You know immunobridging to non-inferiority is useless.
Do your job.
Of course, the CDC, NIH, and NIAID also failed to inform the public that they knew late in 2019 that the virus had already several key molecular aspects that indicated both its origin and the many known countermeasures that would be expected to work.
Instead, they said they knew nothing.
They could see nothing unusual, and that our immune systems were equally vulnerable, and you ran with it.
Data from your own presentations demonstrate the vast majority of kids have been infected, a primary counterindication for the administration of any vaccine before 2020.
You are pushing products under the guise of a regulatory framework that we know by your actions is proforma only.
You failed to inform the public that you know from studying influenza and other viruses that the developing immune system is an impossibly complicated process that involves imprinting mechanisms that cannot be reversed.
The catalog of molecular immune memories that protects us for a lifetime has formed through the countless exposures of pathogens in our childhood.
And you have failed to inform the public that you know that transfection to a 2020 viral code protein cannot be useful in augmenting this process.
You know it will not meaningfully protect these children because there's a planet worth of data informing you of this.
It's biology.
Please get some and then do your job.
It's biology, please get some and then do your job.
That's what I said in 2022 while all these people ignored me.
That was when I had presented to Panda a couple times already before I realized that Nick Hudson was a traitor and would lose all of those presentations.
slowly, you know, take whatever ideas he and Jonathan Engler could and write their own substacks about them.
It's really gross what's happened over these last five years, but it's also really obvious once you see it and have it thrown in your face, and it's just irrefutable.
Members of the public could also submit written public comments as well.
There was concern that this public comment could be eliminated, and here's why.
Back in February, HHS posted in the Federal Register plans to end public comment on agency actions.
This essentially would eliminate public participation and comment in policy proposals and decisions
And the policy of- I guess I got it in right before the close, huh?
That's pretty good.
Soliciting public comment and feedback on proposals had been business as usual since 1971.
This is when former Health Secretary Richardson began this practice.
It's now referred to as the Richardson Waiver.
Now, prior to the Richardson Waiver, this type of public input had been previously excluded under the Administrative Procedure Act.
Patient advocacy groups issued a sign-on letter opposing this decision.
And fortunately, public comment was allowed at this meeting, and it was very informative.
Public comment is important.
People need to have a way to voice their opinions and be heard.
Now, there's a new CDC director.
Was she involved in the meeting?
Well, oftentimes at the first ACIP meeting of the year, we hear from the CDC director, particularly when the director is new.
And I was disappointed we did not.
But then I realized that the new director, Dr. Susan Monterrez, has been named, but not yet confirmed.
And she's actually the first CDC director to have to go through Senate confirmation.
But effective January 23, 2025, she was made both principal deputy CDC director and acting CDC director
But since she hasn't been confirmed by the Senate, I guess things are sort of in limbo right now.
But Dr. Monterrez holds a PhD in both microbiology and immunology.
She's a health scientist with more than 20 years of experience in health innovation, but she's not an MD.
I'm looking forward to hearing from her, to meeting with her and working with her.
Was there anything else different about the meeting?
Yes.
Usually on the second day of the meeting, we hear reports from agencies like CDC, CMS, FDA, HRSA, NIH, as well as IHS, the Indian Health Service, and OIDP, the Office of Infectious Disease, HIV, AIDS Policy.
They're usually really interesting and forward thinking.
Yeah, you can put like an iPad as a teleprompter at this stage.
It's not hard.
It could be a cell phone even.
That didn't happen at this meeting, and it was quite disappointing.
But who knows who's left after all the DOJ-directed cuts over just the last few weeks.
I'm just so glad we got through this meeting.
There were some important votes, and there's a lot to be done at our upcoming meeting in June.
Well, let's get into some of the detail.
For sure, she's reading and you can see it very clearly.
It's tough.
I think I've watched my streams back and often found myself when I'm not looking exactly at the middle of the lens, it looks like you're cross-eyed.
And so if you find yourself talking and talking, it's a little weird habit to get into to try and talk to a lens.
I'm not gonna...
I'm not gonna pull any punches here, it's just weird, right?
But we got used to it over five years and I can still very easily see when my eye is wandering around the room or when I'm looking at the whiteboard over there with the number of exercises I've done and how many days off I've had and oh my gosh, we are...
Our gym doesn't have power yet.
It's not gonna have power until Monday, they say.
I mean, we're in dire straits here.
It's really first world problems.
Let's let this go.
Around the vaccine votes for this meeting, you said there were three vaccine categories, meningococcal disease, RSV vaccines for adults, and yes, I'm gonna say it right, chikungunya vaccines.
Dr. Fryhofer, what's new for meningococcal vaccines?
There's a new MenABCY combo vaccine.
GSK's new pentavalent meningococcal vaccine, MenABCWY, brand name PenMenV, was added as an option when patients need both MenACWY and MenV vaccines at the same visit.
This new GSK vaccine had been FDA approved back in February.
Pfizer also has a penultimate version, both are a combo of men ACWY and men B vaccines.
Now you might remember that the men ACWY components are interchangeable, but the same type of men B has to be used for all doses in the series and for booster doses as well.
This vaccine was also added to the vaccine for children's program by ACIP.
All right, and now let's turn to RSV vaccines.
Does everyone 75 and older still need?
Are they just going to go past that?
No big deal.
This was just added to the childhood schedule.
Holy shit.
That's impressive.
That just was added.
No problem.
I guess we're up to 73 or four.
What is that?
Wow.
Just went through that real quick.
It does.
Yes, everyone age 75 and older should get a dose of the RSV vaccine.
That didn't change.
Everyone 75 or older should get a dose of the RSV vaccine.
That is.
I would say, although I don't give any medical advice out on this stream, that is a no, sir.
but the age range for the risk-based recommendation for those at high risk of severe RSV disease did, and was lowered from age 60.
I would say that Jason in the chat is right.
The childhood schedule was always the target, but more importantly, the debate about the COVID vaccine and its contamination and all this other stuff is keeping us off of this.
Where's Children's Health Defense's headline, another shot added to the schedule?
They don't even seem to know.
They're too busy trying to cover their bases by saying that there's this profound autism that's really special, and we're really into that.
That's our main message, that there's some severely profound autism that nobody ever sees.
Holy crap.
down to age 50.
The medical conditions that increase risk of severe RSV include chronic heart, lung, kidney and liver disease as well as chronic hematologic and neurologic conditions and also being frail.
Now understand that lowering the age indication to 50 increases
That's a good question.
I like that question.
I see a new guy in the chat, so I like to talk to the new guys when they come in.
I don't know if this is the first post you've made.
Is intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of getting jacked dumb?
That is the best question I've had all day.
Thank you very much for asking it.
There is less
I have less objection to the injection of chemically pure substances or nearly pure, whatever.
A hormone being injected into the body and intramuscularly is inevitably going to end up in the lymph.
And so intramuscular injection is going to do some local damage.
It's not likely to get stuck anywhere.
And so intramuscular injection is just a way of entering the blood and the lymph with less
Temporal accuracy.
And I really believe it's that malevolent.
It's that bad of an idea.
The only reason why you would do it is because you wanted something to leak out slowly.
And so actually, intramuscular injection, when the intention of getting jacked, might be one of those times when you would do it.
Now remember this, though.
Remember carefully that it still relies on you knowing the contents of what you're injecting and the contents being free of contaminants.
and being a biological molecule that you want there, and then intramuscular injection with the intent of getting jacked might work.
Is it good for you?
Are there risks?
I think the risks are very similar.
If you have a contaminated dose, if you have an impure dose, if your testosterone is contaminated with lots of other things, then you're risking all of these things.
It's also possible that you could, I definitely think that
The reason why intramuscular injection is advocated for is because it is a way of putting things in safer, safer than IV injection.
And so think of it this way, would you give your testosterone IV?
I think you would.
I think you would probably want to do it slowly.
And I think if you were doing an IV, you would just take the time to control
how quickly you put it in.
Maybe you'd do a drip.
But intramuscular injection is kind of like a ham-fisted way of doing that.
And it is very advantageous for somebody who wants to poison you and you not have any idea that what they did to you was poison you because the effects could be spread out over weeks or not even show up until then and then be spread out for weeks or months or years.
And so that's what I think is most malevolent about this idea of intramuscular injection, because it does kind of make sense, but it makes sense from the perspective of somebody who wants to get jacked and is willing to inject something IV, but doesn't really want to inject IV a lot.
So then muscle is a decent way to do it.
Just don't miss the fat, don't hit the fat, don't do it too shallow, because then all kinds of bad things might happen.
And if you could get it in your,
in a small artery or a small vein in the muscle, you will feel it.
And it will feel different than when you just get it into a place where it slowly leaks out.
So is intramuscular injection of a combination of substances with the intention of getting jacked dumb?
I think it's relatively dumb to just trying to do it without doing an intramuscular injection.
But intramuscular injection of something like a hormone
with the intention of you don't have the equipment or you don't want, you don't have the talent to do it yourself in intravenous, then it's like a, as I said, a ham-fisted substitute.
Because in reality the best way for you to do it would be to inject it in your blood and inject it very slowly and controlled.
And that would be, again, that would be the idea.
But again, I'm not advocating for any of it.
I'm still not saying that intramuscular injection is a good idea.
I think it's, in general, dumb.
But it makes more sense from the perspective of somebody who wants to take a shortcut to getting jacked.
than it does to, say, augment a healthy kid's immune system or a healthy elderly person's immune system, which is what they are advocating for here.
Thanks for the question.
Welcome to the chat.
And this is because studies show black patients are more likely to have more chronic medical conditions at an earlier age as compared to white patients.
We now have three RSV vaccines, but right now only two of them, the two protein-based RSV vaccines, Arexiv and Abrizo, are licensed for adults age 50 and older.
Moderna's Mresvia has applied to FDA to lower its age range indication, and that should be decided by June.
And the work group's now looking at giving RSV vaccine to even younger adults, so more to come.
How can she say that with a smile on her face?
Like, the goal is to have as many vaccines on the schedule as possible, available for as many people as possible, with enough potential boosters as possible.
You know, if we could make a vaccine that was so safe you could take 10 boosters, then that would be the ultimate thing, according to this lady's rationale.
What about boosters for RSV?
Is there an update there?
They're still under study.
For now, only one lifetime dose is recommended, but that will likely change, but no new recommendations yet.
All right, now for chikungunya vaccines.
What's the news there?
This is more of a risk, I think, for travelers, isn't it?
Exactly.
And you did a great job pronouncing that, Todd.
I hope I can do it as well as you did.
A second type of chikungunya vaccine, ChikVLP, a virus-like particle vaccine, brand name.
I know some guy by the name of Sina Bhavari who's got a virus-like particle patent that looks a lot like Ebola, which is kind of cool, good for him.
I don't think he's an American citizen, but he's the head of a very important American
military organization, which is strange.
Sina Bavari also put out a really interesting paper with the Ralph Baric's last postdoc before the pandemic started, Allison Totura, who was also on Jeopardy.
And that paper is featured also in this book that Kevin McKernan, the former research and development director of the Human Genome Project, is lying about with regard to a gentleman by the name of Charles Rixey.
America is under attack.
I don't know what to say.
We are being undermined.
I think Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
has been misled.
I think Jay Bhattacharya is way over his head.
And I think at the heart of it is Kevin McKernan and Robert Malone and a bunch of scrubs.
And we can win.
That's what I think.
But we have to come together as a country to understand that this side is just as absurd as that side that is behind Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
They do not mean to win.
They are not anti-vax.
They are not for health freedom.
They are liars.
They are for mandatory vaccination.
They are for advancing new vaccines and making them mRNA.
And they are for personalized medicine driven by AI.
Even Mary Holland has said that.
Chikungunya was added as an option for adolescents and adults age 12 and older traveling to areas with active outbreaks of this mosquito-borne illness, and also for laboratory workers at increased risk of exposure.
Also, a new precaution for those age 65 and older was added for the other Chikungunya vaccine, ChikLA, a live attenuated virus vaccine, brand name XChik.
This precaution was based on post-licensing surveillance safety studies.
And I have to tell you, I've been a liaison to ACIP for nearly two decades, and I'm so impressed and reassured by the multiple ways CDC and FDA work together to monitor vaccine safety.
This includes programs like VAERS, CDC's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, V-SAFE, VSD, the Vaccine Safety Data Link, and CISA,
So remember that none other than Jessica Rose has been paraded around the world, specifically blowing the whistle on the VAERS data with regard to the COVID shot.
And the implication of her work is that there is a signal present from the COVID shot that was not present before the pandemic.
It kind of implies that the previous vaccine schedule in America was okay.
Even though she does a lot of podcasts for CHD, she doesn't seem to be aware that VAERS was never that useful.
And yet she has perpetuated it as a source of data on the COVID shot, which is pretty extraordinary.
And it's pretty extraordinary when you realize that there is a document
called the Spars Pandemic, S-P-A-R-S, and you can look online for the PDF, Spars Document PDF.
And around page 47, you will find a narrative about a hypothetical internet personality called Epigirl.
who spends a couple years during the spars pandemic exposing the vaccine harm caused by the shot that was rolled out in this hypothetical scenario.
And yes, I am saying that this likely NATO coordinated operation had people in place on social media.
And one of them is Jessica Rose, the Canadian Israeli surfer girl with five post-secondary degrees.
She is intimately related to Robert Malone and Kevin McKernan and the sort of curation of this narrative.
There is no other explanation for her existence.
And more importantly, there's no other explanation for their insistence on us accepting this resume of hers, which is just, as far as anybody trying to apply for a job, she would be essentially a failure because she just did a bunch of postdocs on a bunch of unrelated things.
Some of which were HIV, some of which were some other virus, some of which were ticks or something like that.
It's really bizarre.
that we have been force-fed Jessica Rose via somebody like Peter McCullough.
Somebody like Peter McCullough who has been as far afield as Australia to testify about what happened in America.
because what happened in America has to be a virus because that's the justification for the lockdown in Australia and New Zealand.
That's why they had to go to Australia and testify.
Oh yes, lots of people died in America and Pierre Kory traveled the world to tell everybody that.
And it is this coordinated effort to insist that there was dying, that there was somebody dead.
and that they died of COVID.
And that's why there's no doubt about this.
And all of these people were put in place to make sure that they would never be any doubt about this, despite the fact that we have no data from before 2020 about any of these signals that they say are evidence of a spreading novel pathogen.
And these people are way too unsophisticated to understand that because they were already on the wrong side of the ball
when the fake anti-vax movement was just barely getting started.
And now it is in full bloom and present in the current administration in the White House.
Will it be a self-destruct signal for the administration?
Will it be a way for them to implode the government or to further ruin what's left of our trust in the government?
I mean, what else could we possibly see here?
the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment Project.
They also collaborate with government and non-government partners to ensure vaccine safety.
And I am hoping that once Mr. Kennedy can take a breath and really has time to get a grasp of how these safety monitoring systems work, he'll have confidence, more confidence in the current system.
Now, we have to remember he's not a physician, but in his current position, he is going to learn a lot about the intricacies of vaccine development and the rigorous testing these vaccines go through before coming to market.
We've talked about the votes, but are there any other items of interest that you want to share?
Was there a measles update?
Yes, and of all infectious diseases, measles is one of the most contagious.
And if you're exposed and you're not immune, 90% of the time, you'll get it too, but you don't have to because there's a vaccine.
We've had one since 1963.
I hear, see people in the chat talking about old videos.
If you find old videos like that, please send the links forward in any way you can.
I'm archiving things like mad.
Mark is archiving things like mad.
I think it's absolutely vital that we accurately catalog what these people were up to before the pandemic and right at the start of it because it will inevitably reveal their malevolence.
It's safe, it's effective, and it works.
Two doses of MMR, the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine are about 97% effective at preventing measles.
One dose is about 93% effective.
Now, the discussion at ACIP showed lots of maps with outbreaks and vaccine coverage comparisons.
You need 95% coverage of vaccination to provide herd immunity.
And in Gaines County, Texas, and that's where the most recent outbreak started and is where it's most concentrated, two MMR dose coverage is only 82%.
This outbreak is spreading and now half of our states are now reporting cases of measles.
Two children in Texas who had no previous underlying medical conditions and one adult in New Mexico have died.
None of them have been vaccinated.
Representatives from the CDC have been deployed to Texas, but understand it's only April and we've already surpassed last year's 2024 total of 285 measles cases in the US.
And as per the CDC website, as of April 17th, 2025, a total of 800 confirmed measles cases were reported.
And that doesn't include those that are measles cases that have not been confirmed.
And Todd.
As you know, HHS Secretary Kennedy... Okay, I'm not gonna watch this script anymore.
We got another video queued up here.
Thank you very much for being here.
This is a Geo and Biological High Resistance Low Noise Information Brief brought to you by a biologist.
May 2nd, 2025.
RNA cannot pandemic.
Intramuscular injections are in general dumb.
Transfection was always a crime and the population pyramid is something they are definitely
definitely managing actively right now.
And the more vaccines they roll out, the easier it is to manage.
Don't let this, these people put sand in your eye.
Don't believe all of their stories.
Don't accept everything that they insist on accepting.
Start over.
The most important thing is to start over.
And I mean start over with the biology, is what I really mean.
You need to start over with who you have faith in, start over with who you believe, start over with the premises, with the fact that PCR was telling you something, because it wasn't.
That's the most important message I have for you.
PCR was the primary illusion.
so
Once again, thank you everybody for being here.
The voice that you hear is that of Jonathan Couey, Chief Biologist at Gigome Biological.
You can find me on PubMed using my last name and my first initials J and J. You can find a lot of my ideas regularly represented on the sub stack, Woodhouse 76.
That sub stack is written basically by two people, mostly Jessica Hockett and Jonathan Engler.
They use my ideas to have dialogue with Claire Craig.
the 100,000 Genomes Project person in the UK, the head of the Heart Group, or with Pierre Corey about the fake things that happened in New York.
And they write a lot of articles.
Her and Jonathan Engler from Panda are very busy absorbing what they can from the three talks that I gave at Panda that Panda somehow lost and didn't put on Rumble.
That's too bad.
Anyway, that's fine.
Children's Health Defense had me as a staff scientist for a while, but once I started calling out Robert Malone, they didn't like that.
They fired me because that's not selling books.
But I did help them write a book.
I actually helped Bobby write the Wuhan cover-up book.
You can find me.
I mentioned it before.
This is GigaOM Biological.
Biology is the way.
Thank you for being here.
This is for all the marbles indeed.
And that's why we have a fake anti-vax movement in America.
That's where we are.
I'm trying to teach a way out, and the way out is to discard this, to reject the bad biology 101 that's in all of our textbooks.
Evolution because DNA.
Instead, remember that they have lied to you about a background, an irreducibly complex background of bacterial activity that includes
They're phages, and that is a level of genetic noise that no PCR was ever capable of seeing through.
And so what they have done is essentially taken non-specific PCR tests on an incredibly loud background and claimed that they were showing us a high-fidelity signal when RNA cannot pandemic.
And if it can,
It's only pandemicing because bacteria are making it or we are making it or other entities are making it.
It is not all by itself from a mud puddle into all the white-tailed deer in North America.
That is not what happened over these last five years.
And for sure, the only reason why more people are not acutely injured by what I've called the transfection since the very beginning is because they use placebo.
And of course, that's what made it so easy
for them to get as many doses available as possible.
Understand very clearly, if you want everybody to wear masks, but they can't get one, then it's not a very big, it's not a very good PSYOP.
But if everybody can get tests, and everybody needs a test, and everybody agrees that the tests are evidence of something, then suddenly the ghosts are real, and suddenly the Ghostbusters are heroes.
but I assure you that using their tests to find their ghosts does not make their ghosts real, nor does it make you a ghost buster.
But Kevin McKernan and Kevin McCairn were both busy in 2020 from the very beginning, telling us this was a worst case scenario where PCR worked to find ghosts.
And this ghost might've come from a laboratory.
And that's how you know it's a lie, because that's the scooby-doo.
That's what this stream has been trying to break and has pretty much settled on this slide for the last four or five years.
So there is a, we need a new consensus about how social media is being weaponized against us.
We definitely need a new consensus about it.
I don't have the video in here, so I'm going to go to it right now and put it in live.
I've forgotten to drop it in and I can see already that it's not coming over here on this side.
Let's see, it would be in here.
And it will be a little bit earlier because I downloaded it earlier.
What was it called again?
Yes.
Time now for our series On Democracy, where we hear a range of perspectives on how government should function, what led to this moment in American history, and where the country goes next.
Our primary focus tonight is Project 2025, the conservative policy project authored by former Trump administration officials, which became a flashpoint during the presidential campaign.
So this is like the diffuse proposal, but for Democrats, right?
This is the, Oh my gosh, there's a document out there.
And this document says all kinds of crazy things.
So if a couple of these things happen, then they must be going to do all of these.
So this is the basis of this theater, right?
But the guy who's going to come out and talk about this is going to show you a map.
And I don't think the map is that bad.
Angelo Carusone has studied that 900-page document.
He's president of Media Matters, a progressive nonprofit focused on researching and analyzing news media, including disinformation and online ecosystems.
I spoke with him days ago.
Angela Carusone, welcome to the NewsHour.
Thanks for having me.
You have emerged as an expert on Project 2025, this roadmap that then-candidate Trump, during the campaign, repeatedly disavowed.
Now, the architect of Project 2025 is just quoted as saying, the way that Trump has implemented it has exceeded his wildest dreams.
When you look at the way President Trump has expanded his executive authority, he's dismantled federal agencies, he's purged the federal workforce, how much is Project 2025 guiding this work?
What Project 2025 provided was sort of the core story here, which was to, who's the bad guy?
And that was the deep state.
And they basically said, essentially, most of the federal government, most of the federal workers were part of this deep state, a conspiracy to sort of prevent Donald Trump or anybody else from implementing major changes and sort of a conservative agenda.
And then the second thing it did was not only provide who the bad guy was, but then who's the good guy.
And in this case, the good guy is not just Donald Trump.
It's a unitary executive.
So that is it.
Obviously, there's a lot of policy that Project 2025 has sort of provided the framework for.
But essentially, it was a story.
And it was a story of who's the bad guy and who's the good guy.
And to that extent, that story is playing out exactly according to plan.
The only major difference is the timeline.
It's just moving along a lot faster.
We're basically in sort of like the fifth or sixth month of Project 2025, according to the book, even though we're only in the second month of the administration.
So where does this head next then?
Well, one is that we're barely through even through the layoffs and the terminations.
We've only gotten rid of about 70 or so thousand federal workers.
Project 2025 calls for somewhere around 300,000 to about a million federal workers to be removed.
So where does it go?
More layoffs, more terminations.
The second thing, and this is the big one, is to sort of set up a collision between the executive branch
and the judicial branch.
One of the big parts of Project 2025 was to make it very clear that the president and the executive has ultimate authority.
And that means that you start with Congress, and Congress has largely abdicated itself to the administration.
So that was sort of their first target.
But politics basically said, we're not even going to try to fight this out.
We're not even going to defend our sort of co-equal status.
So now where it goes next is sort of a showdown with the courts.
If the strategy is all laid out and President Trump, you can argue about what he's done.
You can't argue that he hasn't been entirely transparent about it.
Yeah.
How should those opposed to what he's doing, how should they fight back?
I think the thing that's really important here is that we are not fighting a standard political battle.
Project 2025 is really unpopular.
Nobody actually really likes the policies there, except a very small extreme view.
But they don't see how those policies are actually affecting them.
There has to be a bigger story here, and that starts with connecting the dots to the administration's actions and the harms that people are experiencing.
That's a political issue, but that's as much of a media issue as well.
And then broadly, not this.
Consensus around not this.
And if we are not able to win the hearts and minds, Project 2025, whatever it becomes called, will be the new norm.
And the right and Trump-friendly voices have an advantage here, because the other part of your work is looking at their saturation in the media ecosystem.
Tell me about that.
I think the biggest challenge right now that we're grappling with, and there are lots.
This is the part.
But they all sort of play out in one arena, and that is an information landscape.
And the real battle, from my perspective, is in the information war.
And the right just has an enormous advantage there.
They've had some advantages along the way.
There's always been a little bit of an imbalance.
You know, talk radio and Fox News in the 90s and early 2000s, they had dominance.
They had a lot of listeners.
But there were other things that counterbalanced them.
So they weren't dominant in the entire information landscape.
So now what's coming, I'm sure you can predict it, but I want you to predict it yourself right now,
is a description of an alternative media podcast landscape that is dominated by right-leaning conservative podcasts.
And they heard so many cats.
And what I'm going to argue is that essentially what you have is a fake anti-vax health freedom truth movement that has been turned into a fake populist movement.
And at the heart of it are people as diverse as all of the people that are ultimately behind CHD, ICAN, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
All of this movement, all of this weird nutrition, you know, 12 worst anti-vaxxers out there.
This is all one network of people that has always been actively herding cats.
not acknowledging one another, not building useful networks, not building common truths, but separating people from each other and making them choose a particular mascot.
Is it Joe Mercola or is it CHD and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.?
Or maybe Del Bigtree is more your thing.
But no one has ever made a united front on a particular issue.
You know, like the most important issue.
The one where they're injuring kids or something like that.
It hasn't happened by design.
And he's going to show you how it is very visible how social media does it.
It is a network of people who agrees to agree with each other while absorbing all the other people.
Oops, that was not the click I wanted.
This is the click I wanted.
They just spoke to a very consolidated few.
That's just not the case anymore.
So we just did this really big study that looked on online voices and sort of the largest programs, sort of political and non-political adjacent, left, left adjacent, right, right adjacent.
When you add it all up,
The right and right-leaning and right-adjacent programming accounts for 82% of the major online shows.
That's podcasts, that's streaming channels, that's just... I think that this is largely the doing of a guy by the name of Steve Bannon.
I think it also could have to do with Elon Musk and Peter Thiel and the other guy that works for Palantir understanding that there is a way that people come to know things.
And maybe the most powerful way that people come to know things is listening to people that they like, respect, or are attracted to have an agreement with other people about what the truth is.
That, these are all more powerful from a psychological perspective than me coming online all by myself and just talking to you.
going on a podcast with anybody, in theory, has this extra potential to create this illusion of consensus, where if I convince the podcast host that I'm cool, or I'm smart, and the podcast host reacts that way, then you're more likely to receive the information that I'm giving that way.
Whereas if I just sit here all by myself, controlling my own stream and queuing up my own videos and making my own mistakes, you really have to have a one-on-one evaluation of what I'm saying.
You really have to think about what I'm talking about.
And you really have to see through all the emotion.
You have to see through all of the confusion and the frustration that I have.
And so it's real communication, not an illusion.
Because again, remember, the idea is that these are not spontaneous conversations, but they are people who know the script.
And know where the script should be steered in order to score a goal.
You know, Ben Shapiro does a podcast, and you can think of it as like, okay, how many times can you get him to say Israel?
That's his main shtick.
Joe Rogan is just, you know, how long can you make it?
How wandering can you make it?
How many pot jokes can you make?
Russell Brand, it's all the same thing.
They're just looking for people with the skill, the raw skill to herd cats, and then they will fund them and script them.
Finding people who can herd cats, then they train them, they fund them, and they script them.
That's all this is.
There are almost no independent podcasts that are just out there besides somebody like me or somebody like Mark, with a legitimate professional background to do it, with a legitimate thing to say, and able to produce hours of useful content without interviewing anyone.
That's how you can see that we are legitimate.
It's harder work.
Harder work for you as a viewer, harder work for me as a presenter.
But this is a joke, and he is showing you how much of it a joke it is, and it should be seen as such.
He's presenting it as a danger to America's democracy, and in some ways it is, because these people are pretending to be patriots.
In many ways, it's dangerous then, isn't it?
whoops, I did that same wrong click again, you see?
It's narrative dominance, that, yeah.
And that includes podcasts that aren't overtly political, like sports and comedy podcasts, for instance.
Yeah, that was the part that was the most, to me, surprising and yet disturbing about the study, is that of the 400 plus shows that we looked at, 100 or so of them were non-political, sports, culture.
But when you actually looked at an analysis of the program, I mean, you listened to them, you coded them, we found that 72% of them
72% of explicitly non-political programming contained not only political content, but right-leaning political content.
They just branded it or... Please understand that this is as malevolent as it gets because some of these right-leaning people are going as far away and being on the news in Australia, representing COVID skepticism there.
It's all one malevolent show.
It is a narration control network that is probably auctioned to or sold to the highest bidder.
Look what we can do.
Look what Robert Malone and Kevin McKernan can do.
Look what George Webb and Paul Cottrell and his network can do.
Look at what we can do with Jessica Rose.
Look what we have done with CHD.
We can do that for you.
That's what you have here.
And the US government may be a customer.
How can we censor without censoring?
Well, we don't want to censor anybody.
So instead of censoring, why don't we just program it so that by the time anybody finds the people that they're following, they've already been distracted by something else.
That's not censoring.
That's just programming.
so that you always end up at the Teo Vaughn podcast or the Lex Friedman podcast or the Joe Rogan podcast or the PBT podcast.
You're never, no matter how much clicking you do, there's no path in random clicking that gets you to giggle and be like, whoa, I guess you would really like this channel.
It's not, it's not groove shark, you know, where it's judging based on the last videos, except,
Where can we get you to go where you waste as much time as possible?
That's also built in.
It's not Groove Shark.
These people are where you end up.
I framed it as something different.
And that's where this really becomes key, is that that is the lens through which people see the world.
And so when all of that programming is sort of tilting the scales in favor of the right, the story that the majority of Americans are getting day to day is right leaning.
And I see no better illustration of that gap than if you look at in particular what's happening with young people.
Young people are accelerating and moving to the right faster than any other demographic.
And I don't think it's a coincidence that they just happen to consume online media more than any other demographic does.
That's their primary source, and yet they themselves are moving at a faster and faster clip to the right because that landscape is so heavily dominated and saturated by the right.
It's quite an asymmetry.
I mean, is there any way that Democrats could... Sounds like asymmetric warfare.
That is the key issue here, right, is that they're playing with a very old playbook.
They think that the issue here is about messaging and message discipline.
Say, well, if we all just go out there and say the same thing at the same time, that will get our message out.
That model worked 20 years ago.
That doesn't work now.
In fact, it feeds into the opposite.
They are feeding into the story that's being told about them.
I think actually it does work and that's why I have that graphic of all these people that I've met and then they just went on talking their shit.
Because it does work to have a bunch of people on a script and make them stick to it.
From as wide an audience stream from Brett Weinstein all the way to Sam Harris.
It's all controlled on both sides.
This guy is just kind of naive to the fact that both sides have a script.
He's naive to the fact that the natural virus script is a script, just like the lab leak was a script.
And so he looks at these people as rejecting science and being conspiracy theorists, not understanding that his dismissal of that idea is as programmed as their acceptance of it.
It's all a Scooby-Doo mystery.
They're artists in a way.
They're storytellers.
They're creators.
They just need the resources to continue to do what they're doing.
That will help balance out the scales.
The second is to stop being so afraid.
So it's a really interesting thing, right?
Because I have a pretty interesting story.
I'm a pretty good storyteller.
I have a good story about current people in government.
And so I would be fundable by any democratic source that would want to, you know,
Shed light on this in in terms of the Trump administration, but I haven't gotten any phone calls from that side either That's how you know that this is one big malevolent show
They have steak dinners with each other, ladies and gentlemen.
It has an advantage.
That asymmetry doesn't just give them the ability to project a story.
It also gives their leaders comfort and confidence.
If I know that I could go out there and face plant, and I have a massive ecosystem that is going to be like sandpaper to smooth out all the edges, and not only make that face plant look like the greatest acrobatic feat ever, but somehow turn it into a reward system for me, I have a lot more comfort.
I have a lot more confidence.
And that speaks to the broader... What if you could, you know, use social media to fake a Trump assassination attempt?
Would that sell the president on the effectiveness of your social media network?
I wonder if that would work.
Could you sell a presidential candidate on the effectiveness of your media network if you did that with him?
Hmm.
Just curious.
It actually affects the rules of their algorithms, what their systems are doing.
That imbalance is only going to speed up because the very systems that support them are actually privileging right-wing lies and right-wing misinformation.
Angelo Carusone, president of Media Matters, thanks for being here.
Thanks for having me.
Interesting, huh?
Interesting stuff on the PBS NewsHour.
So we need a new consensus about this stuff that they can lead us to believe anything really, you know, they can and they have.
They've hidden this anticipated rise in expected deaths and the murder that was used to sculpt it.
and lied about this RNA pandemic for five and a half years now.
This is murder.
If I step aside, you can definitely see we had pneumonia under control and then lost control of it.
And then at the end of 2022, we gained control again.
This is just- Hey everybody, it's me, Sam Stein, Managing Editor at The Bulwark.
And I am joined by Jonathan Cohn, who writes our Breakdown Newsletter, which everyone should be reading.
If you're not already, subscribe to that.
We are going to be talking about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
What else?
But in this case, he's made a series of, well, I don't want to call it perplexing because we all kind of predicted it, but it is still perplexing announcements on vaccines that if you're Senator Bill Cassidy, you really should be probably ashamed at this point.
But we'll get to that later.
Before we do, subscribe to the feed.
Really appreciate it.
And it's helpful for us.
Share the stuff.
We're all prisoner to the algorithm.
All right, Cohen, let's talk.
There's been like four or five major RFK Jr.
announcements.
Not all of them are on vaccines, but the big ones are.
And I just want to kind of go through this list, and then you can give us the real rundown about how serious this is, how much it matters, and why you think he's doing it.
So the biggest one is, in my estimation, that he is going to be requiring, or he says HHS is going to be requiring, placebo testing for new vaccines.
This has been something that he has talked about
Repeatedly prior for new vaccines for new vaccines not for old vaccines for new vaccines properly Tested and so there's a lot of ethical concerns about this What do you make of it?
Yeah, yeah.
So I, first of all, I think we can say he doesn't think they're safe.
I mean, he has said that over his career as, you know, along the way, as he has, you know, at various times needed to seem more acceptable, for example, and you were mentioning Senator Cassidy when he needed confirmation votes, he would say things like, well, I'm not anti-vax.
I want to make sure they're properly tested.
Yeah, just, you know, we want transparency.
I just, I want to give people, and in fact,
It is absolutely positively not by accident that it seems as though they're just able to dunk on him.
Just able to dunk on CHD, just able to dunk on Brian Hooker.
But in reality, they are able to dunk on Brian Hooker because Brian Hooker in 2013 did not use the word autism.
He didn't like the word.
And because Brian Hooker didn't have the principles to stick to it, instead hooked his wagon in his hopes to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
all those years ago and got in a couple movies.
because he didn't stick to his guns after, you know, he was at the time had 17 years experience transforming and transfecting plants to make medicine, a genetic, you know, biotechnology expert had skepticism about the whole rationale of vaccines and didn't use the word autism, didn't like the word because his son was vaccine injured, vaccine neurologically damaged.
And if Brian would have stuck to his principles,
not waited for the promise of a book publishing 10 years later, but have stuck to his principles and said, I don't use the word autism.
We wouldn't be here now in 2025, where CHD is trying to say that they always knew there was a difference between, you know, the unseen profound autism and all these other people that are on YouTube that just have gifts and, you know, are coping with some anxiety.
And so over the last 20 years, the myth of autism has rolled up all kinds of people into it.
People with attention deficit disorder and all this other shit.
And it's encouraged them to call themselves part of this autism spectrum disorder with the specific reason that that hides
What at the time in 2013, Brian Hooker had the guts to say is not autism.
It's just vaccine neurological injury.
My son is damaged.
He made a, he reached a toxic tipping point.
All things he doesn't say now.
And it's by design because you know, we got to get Bobby Kennedy in the white house and then they'll write my book.
and 10 years, and 13 years later, and one pandemic later where Brian Hooker said, yeah, asymptomatic spread is totally real.
Antibodies, definitely important.
They just need to test these vaccines a little more.
The numbers are a little low.
That's how we got here.
And now, instead of being able to say we've been fighting for something for the last 10 years and it's finally gonna get to a touchdown, we are about to be destroyed by the entire rest of the country that can be shown quite clearly that these people have never been fighting for anything.
It's by design.
Even if Bobby Kennedy is
Blissfully unaware that he has been used He has been used and it is probably because of some very specific People that have been whispering in his ears for years like some kind of macabre Truman show You want to be president?
You want to be president?
I got the perfect way to do it All you got to do is be the health freedom guy, you know Like all these all these just just the health freedom guy.
You want to be president?
I can do it You know what?
We're gonna do we're gonna write a book
I got this guy and his name is, uh, his name is, uh, he's the, he's the, he's the governor of Minnesota.
We'll write a book with him and we'll put the whole thing in, in a narrative already in 2008.
And then we're going to find this.
I got this friend in the UK and we're going to hook you up with him.
And he's going to come over here in America and make sure that we hit this out of the park, dude, in 10 years, you're going to be everybody's hero.
Well, not everybody's hero.
One of his claims is that the vaccines out there have not been adequately tested.
And he says that's because not every vaccine has gone through placebo testing.
So the things to realize here is actually most vaccines, the new vaccines do in fact go through placebo testing.
That's part of the process.
What we're talking about is different iterations of existing vaccines that they are trying to bring to market.
Right, right.
So, you know, the latest flu vaccine.
You know, a new iteration of the new COVID vaccine.
A new variation on the MMR vaccine.
Now remember, CHD has been shouting from the rooftops that their hero and savior has finally done it.
Thank goodness.
Straight from heaven.
But he hasn't done anything.
Placebo trials for the new vaccines?
What does that even mean?
when for 15 years these people have been reciting the hamster wheel narrative.
There's no long-term placebo-controlled trials.
And Paul Offit has been saying exactly what this guy said.
For the last 15 years, you can't have a placebo-controlled trial when there's a vaccine that already works.
That's not ethical.
And around and around we go for 15 years until Bobby Kennedy didn't make it to the White House.
And now we see that that whole shtick is now gonna unravel, of course, because they're gonna start talking about the unseen profound autism that happens like hours after intramuscular injection or days after intramuscular injection, rapid regression over a couple of weeks.
They would never need a placebo-controlled trial.
You can give them both, which we explained a few days ago and just heard crickets because that broke the narrative.
There has always been an experiment to test vaccines as intramuscular injections, independent of what they are.
And the more vaccines you give, the better.
And you just give a placebo and a vaccine in a random order.
And after four weeks between those things, everybody gets their vaccine.
Nobody was put in danger by not vaccinating and everybody got their placebo.
And I can guarantee you, if it is done in good faith with active shots and real placebos, there will be no side effects in the placebo group ever, except for maybe some local pain.
And there will be incredible numbers and varied numbers of effects in those people when they get their hot shots and they'll know it.
That's the brilliant thing about it.
You could even design it that way.
And they could have said this years ago and any doctor that's for vaccines would do it.
Any doctor that's skeptical of vaccines would obviously see that at least we'd know about SIDS.
and they could have proposed this question to any of these people at any time from either side and they didn't.
Instead, we now have Bobby Kennedy at Health and Human Services and I think that's the best they did.
And sometimes you don't do a placebo test on a vaccine that's been around and you got the new iteration because number one, you can be very confident and safe.
I mean, how many millions of Americans have gotten
the MMR or by now the COVID vaccine.
We have a vast amount of information.
And by the way, we have probably more information on adverse effects from vaccines than almost any other kind of medication precisely because we watch these so carefully.
What a remarkable thing to say when you absolutely have no idea.
That is just crazy, isn't it?
And that's how this is happening.
This is not a small podcast.
This is a disaster.
They are ramping it up on both sides, driving us farther and farther apart, and more importantly, driving the certainty nail right in as deep as it goes.
I'm very worried about America, I really am, because they managed to get everybody to believe that there was a novel virus.
We are still not out of the trap, because these people have failed.
Because these people are sabotaged or saboteurs or all traitors because it is very simple.
Intramuscular injection is dumb.
The only person that I can find that said it before me was Brandy Vaughn.
She said it very well.
She was an excellent presenter.
I don't know if she was a good guy or a bad guy, but certainly what she said, the biology, the things that she pointed out, they were magnificent.
So if somebody wasn't happy with how she is as a dating partner, or somebody doesn't like the way that she sells business cards, I'm kind of skeptical because I like to focus on what Brandy Vaughn taught.
what Brandy Vaughn's message was.
And all of these people that I've worked for, all of these people that I've collaborated with over the last five years are no longer interested in what I'm teaching.
They're just interested in making sure that nobody listens to me.
I was born in 1998 and virtually every vaccine that he received that could have samarasol, samarasol is the mercury containing organic preservative that they used
in vaccines and still used in some instances, but he had a very, very high dose of thimerosal in his infant vaccines.
And then he basically reached a toxic tipping point at about 15 months and regressed into a condition that we will not call autism.
I don't like the word autism.
He was vaccine damaged.
So that's Brian Hooker telling you the truth in 2013, that instead of telling you the truth to save kids from the shot, my daughter came, we came to America and my daughter was born and got two shots on her birthday because I didn't know they were coming.
And then about a week after she was born, she had a seizure.
While I wasn't there, I was already away in Portugal teaching a class.
We had an ambulance come to our house for our third baby, you know, not the first two, but our third baby while she was breastfeeding.
They said that she was choking, but that's not what, that's not what mom and grandma said.
And every day that I think about that every day that I think about the fact that I joined CHD and nobody ever talked to me about vaccines.
They just put me to work on the book.
It was months after I started working for CHD that they were talking about Vaxxed.
And I said, I never saw that movie.
And they were like, what?
That's because Team Worst Case Scenario is what's behind all of this.
They allowed PCR to become a diagnostic that's used all over the United States now, providing the genetic samples that these people have needed, the remnant stream, and more importantly, the product stream.
This is done by Robert Malone, and Kevin McKernan, and Jessica Rose, and Peter McCullough, and Pierre Corey, and all the people that are under them.
Team Worst Case Scenario, I call them, because they were about Worst Case Scenario, making sure that we never figured out that this was just murder and lies.
That's what the team Worst Case Scenario's job was.
But I think we can think our way out if we have the right biology coach.
It was an anticipated rise and expected death, sculpted by murder, protected by liars,
And some of them are behind Robert F. Kennedy Jr., I'm afraid.
Some of them are behind Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
They're behind CHD's long-term, you know, lack of progress.
And they are behind the social media network that is curating this narrative, that's passing out this horrible script that unfortunately even somebody like Jay Bhattacharya is actually on.
That's what makes it most disturbing.
Remember, we have Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
allowing his name and the good name of HHS to be used to sell syrups and gold and whatever other things that this should have been already discredited and retired and thrown vegetables at for 10 years.
Dr. Phil,
Somebody who was brought to me when I was a kid by Oprah Winfrey.
I mean, this is awful.
This is discrediting everything that America is, if you see it from the left side of the aisle.
going on with Jay Bhattacharya talking about, uh, with Dr. Drew all the while behind these people are a, a, a previously run, uh, scheme about the MMR vaccine, where in the end, the very star of the show Vaxxed, her son was cured.
I didn't hear that in the movie Vaxxed.
I haven't heard that from her at all.
I didn't hear that, that Secretan cured, uh,
Any of the kids.
I've never heard anything about that.
I've never heard anything about the fact that, that also, uh, that Jenny McCarthy saved her son.
I didn't know that you could save people from autism.
I never, I never heard anything about that.
And yet Billy's our new boy.
Secret and work.
They even left it out and he regressed and they gave it back to him and then he got better again.
And this guy used that narrative, used that shtick to get himself close to power, get into the White House, into the executive branch, and this is as far as he got.
And he is a puppet.
Otherwise, he would be on NBC News.
Otherwise, he'd be making the phone calls, not going where he's told.
Just like Jay Bhattacharya would be making his phone calls, he wouldn't be going where he's told and promoting Dr. Drew
But he is.
And neither of these guys is talking about the very simple biology behind the pandemic, the very simple predictability of the pandemic, the very simple economic explanation for the pandemic, the very simple list of things that explains the alternative to a mystery virus very clearly, including the drop in life expectancy in America.
But none of these people
Some of whom I've worked with or been to multiple barbecues with and talked to at length.
They're just doing their role, man.
I'm shocked.
I am absolutely shocked.
Well, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, thanks so much for joining us and taking the time here today.
So I want to start out because you were in Stanford, California, one of the most beautiful places in the country for decades.
So what made you want to leave the comfort, the beauty, everything that you knew and loved to join this administration?
It is an absolute honor to actually use the things I've been working at for decades.
I was at Stanford for almost 39 years, which is hard to say.
And it was really hard to leave.
But what President Trump offered me this chance to lead the NIH
Who could say no?
We can use this institution to actually make America healthy.
Well, that's what I've been working toward my entire career.
It's a very different environment in D.C.
than in Stanford.
I'll grant you that.
Well, there has been so much to do in so little time, right?
That's what they say.
What do you want to get accomplished in your time here?
How would you describe your approach to taking on this job?
So what I want to accomplish is I want so the hiss is from that video, right?
I know I'm not the best producer of a show But this is the NIH director going on a blaze TV podcast and that's the sound that they're giving us This is an extraordinary level of amateur hour here
I'm glad you joined the, uh, you, you managed to get here for, for what probably is the best show on the internet right now.
I don't think anybody does it better than me.
Thanks for being here.
To fulfill the mandate that President Trump and Secretary Kennedy gave to me, which is to use the NIH to do the research so that we can understand how to make America healthy.
So for example, we just launched this major initiative where we're going to get the scientists across the country to actually answer the question, why is autism rising?
I'm a scientist.
I don't know the answer to that question.
And frankly, it's a taboo question.
I would like to have the NIH
to essentially get the sides of the country to focus on it.
And when they focus on it, they will get an answer because we're really good at that if we can do that.
Yeah, let's dive into autism a little bit more because if you look at it, the last 30 or 40 years, it has now become an epidemic, right?
But how do we go through and as a government just say, okay, we see the rates rising and allow this to go unchecked for now, we're going on decades.
Well, somehow, the problem with autism is that, first, the rise, when you look back, is just meteoric, right?
So 1 in 1,000 just maybe a decade ago, or two decades ago, 1 in 10,000, and now 1 in 31 is the latest number.
But it's one of those things where it's a slow boil, right?
Where you don't notice it.
A lot of families just deal with it.
And then on top of it, there's this overlay of like, if you notice it, that you're somehow anti-science, that somehow you automatically anti-vaccine if you just notice the fact that there are so many more autistic kids than there were when I was a kid.
You put that together, and what you have is millions of families that don't have an answer to this question, but like, why is my child acting in this way?
And there's a wide range.
There's kids who are high-functioning, lots of friends like that, and they're just, they function a little bit different than other people, but they're like.
Did he say he has lots of friends like that?
Did you hear that?
Did you hear what he just said?
He's got lots of friends like that.
They're high functioning autistic.
Holy shit.
Really just, you know, they're great people.
All of them are great people, actually.
But then there's instances of autism where it's very severe.
And, you know, where people have repetitive motions and they think they're nonverbal.
And the problem is, like, if scientists can't ask why the rates are rising, then we can't get answers to these families.
How best can I care for my kids?
Right?
That's really the question.
You mentioned you and Secretary Kennedy are working on this together.
Now, obviously, if this was simple to solve, we would have already done it.
So there's not going to be a one-stop-shop approach to this.
So what benchmarks do the two of you plan on using to measure your progress throughout this?
Well, so first, we're cutting red tape so that we can actually get an answer, right?
So the NIH is really good at providing these answers.
But often, there's so much red tape to make it so that we get the support of the scientists that have the insights to answer the question.
We're going to gather data from across the country in a way that protects confidentiality of the patients and the patient's rights.
It's not we're going to go find autistic kids and put them on newspapers.
No.
What we're going to do is we're going to make sure that the scientists have access to the data so they can actually answer the question.
The benchmarks will be, in just a few months, we'll have a dozen or more research teams where we chose them competitively from lots of research teams across the country.
We'll put their proposals in.
We'll choose them competitively to say, okay, who are giving the most promising questions?
There'll be a range of methods.
basic science, lab work, to epidemiology, to you name it, and with no holds barred as to the hypothesis, right?
Whatever the scientists think might be promising as a cause, they'll be allowed to look at, and then we'll have answers for them.
So raw milk, or honey, or exercise, or the age of the father, or toxic exposure,
It is, if you can't see it, this might not be the stream for you.
We'll get them to say, here's what our bottom line is over the course of the year or so.
I think that a lot of Americans are still just outraged that we don't have any answers for this.
Another thing that that is true for is COVID-19.
And if memory serves correctly, your face was on posters all over Stanford's campus back in the day.
So what was it like?
to be in your position, knowing the things that you knew, and actually being one of the lone voices that was willing to speak out against this when the rest of the industry was saying, no, you're wrong, and don't say the things that you're saying.
It was a shocking experience for me.
I thought that scientists had free speech.
I thought scientists had academic freedom, and I learned differently during... In fact, probably the biggest problem during COVID was that.
Like, normally... I might be the only person at a United States medical school that he personally knows was fired for speaking out.
It's actually possible that besides Martin Kildorff, who he wrote the
Kulldorff who he wrote that that declaration with and the lady from Oxford Neither of whom I don't think lost their jobs in 2020.
I'm the only one that he knows He's not a subscriber to the stream he's never donated a dime He has asked me most recently in our last conversations to stop talking about Robert Malone stop naming names Just teach the biology
I'm going to be NIH director.
Listen to this guy do an interview and try to believe that he's a good guy, not reading a script that he doesn't understand.
Try, try your best because that's our only hope.
If you can't have free speech, then you can't have science, is what I learned.
And I think that's why we had such bad outcomes with COVID.
We suppressed... He absolutely told old people that we should dedicate most of the doses to the old people.
Absolutely he did.
We should lock down the old people.
speech of scientists, we suppress speech of the Biden administration, suppress speech of normal Americans who questioned the school closures, the lockdowns, and all the policies that didn't actually protect anybody that yet ended up harming so many people at scale.
That's actually another one of my priorities.
I want to restore free speech in science.
I'm going to put in place policies within the NIH itself so the scientists at the NIH can
say what they think.
Maybe they'll disagree with me, that's fine.
And restore the sense that Americans have that scientists respect their rights.
We're not trying, a lot of times actually what happened during the Biden administration, you had the scientific institutions in this country funding scientists in order to suppress the free speech rights of Americans.
It was absolutely shocking.
President Trump, I think one of the first actions he did was to say no more of that, no more suppression of speech, no more censorship.
And a big part of that is to make sure the scientific institutions in this country never again play a role of papering over, giving scientific cover to the censoring of speech.
Yeah, so you along those lines, you have been critical of past NIH admin in the other previous administration.
So when you look at this, you actually, I believe, called it a culture of cover up, especially around COVID-19.
So what are some of those things that you want to do that you want to just signal to others that could potentially be in your shoes in the future?
Well, I mean, I think the cover-up actually, probably the most important element of the cover-up was what caused the pandemic in the first place.
Americans deserve an answer to that question.
I've seen a lot of evidence from the outside which convinced me that it's very likely that this virus was the result of human experiment, but humans conducting experiments in China primarily, but unfortunately also with some NIH money.
And support it is not for nothing that I am choosing to display him like this There is a reason a very specific list of reasons why the mystery virus does not equal excess deaths and I've explained it to him many times including on my own stream and Here he is on blaze TV
I don't know what to say anymore, ladies and gentlemen.
I'm very disturbed at where we are.
I'm very disturbed.
Americans deserve to know, the world deserves to know what happened.
And even more importantly, the Americans deserve to know that our taxpayer money will never again go to doing experiments that have the potential to cause a pandemic.
And, you know, I think there's lots and lots of action within the administration on this.
And I've seen just very hopeful signs that we ought to put it... Most scientific research is not like this.
We're not going to pose a danger of causing like... Now remember, Robert Malone, remember that Robert Malone told us that anybody can do this in their garage now with some equipment they buy on eBay.
Anyone with a molecular biology undergrad degree or, you know, undergraduate experience in molecular biology can do this in their garage, according to the illustrious Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA vaccines and hero on a white horse with his wife from the UK.
Something very malevolent is happening in America, ladies and gentlemen, and if we don't become aware of it now and unite against it, they will fracture us
and tear the American government right down to the studs.
Please help me wake up our children.
Mass-scale destruction, right?
We're not generally, you know, exploding nuclear bombs or something.
But some scientific experiments do have that capacity to do it, not just the gain-of-function work that we were talking about.
I want to make sure that the American public can say no to that kind of experimentation, that we use the money responsibly to make America healthy, not put Americans at risk.
I have to ask you just on a personal note, when you see places like the New York Times coming out and they're like, oh, by the way, it was a lab leak.
And people were so frustrated for years that it was only like a few voices out there saying, okay, these are the things that could possibly be there.
And the silencing of information.
And now to see publications like the New York Times and others come out and just say, oh, we've been here all along.
We knew what you guys were saying the entire time and count us in that group.
That's how you know you've won.
It's unfortunate.
Again, the censorship was the key thing, right?
The censoring of voices, the censoring of scientific data, that on the lab leak, on vaccine injury, on the inefficacy of lockdowns, the harms for school kids, all of that, the censorship was the reason why we had the policy failure.
And we're going to reverse that in this administration.
We've already worked to reverse that in this administration.
President Trump has done a fantastic job on this.
Well, we look at the COVID shots and that's the thing that is still ongoing at this point in time.
We see all the virus numbers that are out there.
We see there are still so many unreported side effects that are out there and they're still, you know, in many people's minds, dangerous.
So are they still on the market right now?
Is that what they should be?
Are you going to take steps to address that?
So that's the FDA's job, right?
So the kind of job that I'm in charge of at the National Institute of Health is we can, and we will, put in programs so that we can ask questions about vaccine injury.
Again, these are questions that are normally taboo.
You have the FDA sometimes
sort of slowly look at it after the fact.
Too slow, actually.
The NIH should be involved in making sure that those questions can get asked.
The scientists can get support for asking them and answering them.
You know, I think there's going to find a range of, like, I think with the COVID vaccine in young men, there's really good evidence that we cause myocarditis, a heart inflammation in a lot of young men for no reason, really.
The use of the COVID vaccine is really, at this point, I mean, it's very, very low fraction of the population using it.
I think the FDA's policy, I don't know, I shouldn't speculate where it's headed, but what I'd like to see is more rigorous evaluation before you approve vaccines.
Because when you're asking millions of healthy people to take it, you want to make sure that you have excellent evidence that you're not harming subgroups of those people and that you actually are preventing the disease you say you want to prevent.
So will NIH try to go through and fund future studies looking at mRNA and making sure that this is something that we should allow or not allow based on research?
I think the NIH will absolutely fund studies to understand better the safety profiles of
new technologies, mRNA among them.
So I think, but that's, you know, again, the answers are going to be whatever science finds, I'm not going to put a thumb on the scale of it.
I just want to like make sure, make them clear, like a lot of the childhood vaccines are really worthwhile.
I mean, I gave my kids those childhood vaccines, you know, measles, for instance, right?
A lot of the childhood vaccines are worthwhile.
A lot of them.
What precision, what precision here?
So I'm not against vaccines.
What I'm in favor of is that we are honest about when these vaccines aren't working, and that we tell the American people that we've taken an honest look.
And that's what the NIH can do, is we can say, let's support research to do that.
And I think that's all Americans are looking for is a fair shake of everything and not just looking at one bias or another, but just saying here is all of the research and here's the conclusions that we found.
But we're on our way to making America healthy again.
Everybody is out there.
It's all the rage right now.
And you guys, artificial food dyes are no longer a thing in the United States.
We are no longer going to have kids having, ingesting petroleum based dyes
You know, it's funny, some of the pushback I heard was, well, there's no proof that they're harmful.
Well, why would you give your kids petroleum-based dyes?
If I were to run a study like that, you'd call it unethical if I randomly inject petroleum-based dyes into kids.
Is that how the NIH director thinks a study on the dangers of a particular dye would be done?
If it's in food, that we would start with injections?
If you don't see how much trouble we're in, how incompetent this person who used to call himself my friend obviously is, how way out of his depth he is.
If he can't even in his own mind, keep ingestion and injection straight with regard to something that is either ingested or injected.
That is some of the most remarkable dumbassery that I've ever seen in the last five years, and it is frickin' scary.
Because this guy pretended to be my friend for a couple years, and ultimately tried to burn our friendship because I wouldn't stop talking about Robert Malone, the same guy who apparently got me fired at CHD.
Mary Holland fired me for talking about him.
Because that's not selling his books, of course.
Um, so why are we feeding our kids that at scale makes no sense.
And red dot, you'd sit, you'd call it unethical.
If I like randomly inject, uh, put petroleum based dyes into kids.
Um, so why are we feeding our kids that at scale?
So you see that he is not even biologically sophisticated enough to understand the contradiction.
He just spit out the NIH director.
America needs help.
Because Kevin McKernan and Robert Malone and Meryl Nass and Mary Holland created and enabled a fake populist movement that has absolutely fooled millions of people in America into believing that these people are really who they say they are and they are not.
the hopes and dreams of thousands of Americans that have been falsely misled and put in the hands of these guys, they are about to be horribly disappointed.
And also simultaneously discredited and made fun of by the people on the other side of the aisle, on purpose, by design, by this military program, and the other ones that we acquiesce to.
Makes no sense.
And Red Dye 3, I remember they said that it was banned from cosmetics decades ago, but it's still safe for you and your food.
It's OK.
Don't worry about that.
In a lot of ways, putting things on your skin that rapidly absorb can be a much faster way to take in a toxin than if you allow it to go through your guts and through all the microbiome and then pass through the liver.
There's a better chance for a lot of things to be never make their way into you and just pass right through you than if you put it on your skin.
It's interesting, right?
Because it's almost like he's not a biologist.
Oh, wait, that's what he said on my stream.
You're the biologist, Jay.
I mean, what Dr. McCary, the head of the FDA has said, and he's right, there are alternatives.
Like you can put beet juice in, if you want red.
You can put watermelon juice.
I mean, there's other alternatives.
The dyes that were approved here in Europe, the same companies sell them with
When you saw him speak at a conference, Jeff from Earth, you saw him speaking on a script, and it was a very limited script, probably about antibodies and seroprevalence, and those limited scripts were well rehearsed.
This is not a rehearsed script, and he is not adapting quick enough.
Beet juice with watermelon juice with actual natural ingredients rather than petroleum-based products.
All right, final question for you.
It's just about D.C., about the swamp.
What's life been like for you in these last few weeks?
It's been, it feels, it's probably been a month.
I've been in office and it feels like it's been four years.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
and Jay Bhattacharya are no more important than the mouse, the guy in the mouse costume at Chuck E. Cheese's.
Maybe he sets the tone.
Maybe he makes everybody happy when they sit down.
But if the pizza sucks, or the fries are cold, or the drinks are watered down, or one of the kids is crying the whole time, then the birthday party is going to suck.
That's all these guys are.
They don't have any real power.
It's feels like four years, but it's only been four weeks.
Bullshit.
And that's why he's on with Dr. Drew.
And that's why he's doing the rounds with all the rumble people.
Come on.
But it's exhilarating, actually.
And it's also this sense of great responsibility that I want to use the power the NIH has, which is really to induce excellent science for the benefit of the American people.
That's what I, at the end of my time here, and eventually will end, I hope I can look back and say, yeah, we really did the work that made America healthier.
I think that if you're able to do that, the American people will be very, very happy with that.
Thanks so much for your time.
Thank you.
It's possible to understand what really happened.
It would have been possible for them to tell you.
There is slave speak out there though.
There's a lot of mythology out there.
You got to reject it all.
None of it's real.
It's all an illusion.
Virology is an illusion.
The PCR is an illusion.
Intramuscular injection is an illusion.
The vaccine schedule is an illusion.
Language is even an illusion, ladies and gentlemen.
And that's why acquiescing to scrolling on social media is incredibly dangerous.
You cannot surrender your thoughts to social media anymore.
Get off social media.
Get on Soapbox.
Make your own Soapbox.
Get on PeerTube.
Make your own PeerTube.
Please, ladies and gentlemen, it's cheap.
It's easy.
You can do it too.
Let's start our own independent bright web ladies and gentlemen.
Thanks for being here Thanks for all of your time and all of your thoughtful thoughts.
Thank you for your support I'm gonna play out with a different song today just for fun Thanks for being here guys
on a western bay and it serves a hundred ships a day lonely sailors pass the time away and talk about their homes and there's a girl in this harbor town and she works laying whiskey down they say brandy
fetch another round.
She serves them whiskey and wine.
The sailors say, Brandy, you're a fine girl.
What a good wife you would be.
Yeah, your eyes could steal a sailor from the sea.
Brandy,
wears a braided chain made of finest silver from the north of spain a locket that bears the name of a man that brandy loved he came on a summer's day bringing gifts
Far away, but he made it clear He couldn't stay, no horror was his heart They said, they said, Rainville, you're a fine girl What a good wife you would be But my love, my love of my lady is the same
Brandy used to watch his eyes when he told his sailor's story She could feel the ocean fall and rise She saw its rage and glory But he had always told the truth, thought he was an honest man And Brandy does her best to understand
At night, when the bars close down Brandy walks through a silent town And loves a man who's not around She still can't hear him say She hears him say, Brandy, you're a fine girl What a good wife you would be But my life, my love of my lady is the same
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, for joining me.
I will see you tomorrow only on Peertube.
You guys on the mailing list will get a link.
It'll just be the regular Peertube link.
So if you go to Peertube and it's live, you will be able to see it.
You don't have to like log in or something.
But I'm not going to stream to Twitch.
I'm not going to stream to YouTube.
I didn't stream to YouTube today again.
Darn it.
I keep forgetting to open that window.
Anyway, thanks for joining me again.
Tomorrow's gonna be more relaxed a lot more interaction with the with the chat and maybe even a guest or two I don't know.
We'll see who who calls in but we'll also take live calls tomorrow from the campfire.
I hopefully the Hopefully the weather will be nice.
Thank you very much for joining me guys.
I'll see you again tomorrow