you
Oh, the next thing that I want to say is our lack of biological knowledge and the general poor health of the of America of the American people is being used to create the crisis.
They need to divide and conquer us to ruin maybe America.
I don't know.
Crash the dollar.
I don't know.
Steal the rest of our our what limited treasury value we have left.
I don't know.
But I know for sure.
that they are combining our lack of biological knowledge and our general society's lack of good health and access to health care to create a crisis to usher in all kinds of changes that would otherwise never be necessary, and more importantly, never be possible.
If you think about it, you know, if we're defining vaccine really liberally, and these COVID vaccines are vaccines, the flu vaccine is vaccine, okay.
But actually, they're kind of cheating when they're calling these things vaccines.
And, you know, anything with really rapidly fading efficacy, such that you need shots within a year, you know, Canada's saying nine months, is as actually J.J.
Cooey's insistence, and I think he's right, on calling them transfections rather than vaccines.
But I couldn't take the punishment And had to settle down Now I'm playin' it real straight And guess I cut my hair You might think I'm crazy But I don't even care Cause I can tell what's goin' on It's hip to be square It's hip to be square I'm rockin' my Vans and be in a suit
I watch them on TV.
I'm working almost every day and watching what I see.
You see it every day And those that weren't upon this route Have gone the other way
He's scheduled for 60 minutes next.
He's going on French, British, Italian, Japanese television.
People everywhere are starting to listen to him.
It's embarrassing.
Good morning, everybody.
It's 1118 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on this 16th of September 2024.
We are still battling against this immunomythology represented by high density cartoons and, and, you know, cursory explanations on
Social media and on the mainstream media for nearly five years now Because we have inherited these charlatans from our parents and we're struggling to get out But we're not we're not far away now, ladies and gentlemen, I think actually We've made a lot of progress in four years.
Maybe more than these people thought we could I
And if you start to see them as one malevolent concert, one malevolent sort of chorus of liars, you can start to really see the escape key and all we got to do is press it.
Ladies and gentlemen, intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
Ladies and gentlemen, transfection in healthy humans was always criminally negligent.
And I assure you, RNA cannot pandemic because viruses are not pattern integrities.
And we've got a lot of work to do trying to teach this to our children.
There's a lot of biology that edifies these ideas, but that biology is not readily available on television.
on television they show you graphs out of context like this one and tell you that a mystery virus can explain the excess deaths when in reality that's not the case at all and if you put it into context you're going to see that these mystery virus deaths are actually explained very little or nothing and instead it's a whole series of fraudulent bad ideas perpetrated on us by a malevolent chorus of liars
And that's why there is no epidemiological evidence of spread.
That's why none of these heroes are talking about strict liability or Seventh Amendment violations.
That's why they're not talking about the idea that we were trying to avoid these impending health care costs of an aging population.
And we were already worried about it in the 90s.
They don't want you to know that because if you knew that, then you'd have a pretty good reason to think that maybe there might be some murderous lies.
I think for sure we need a new consensus about transfection in healthy humans always being criminally negligent and most, I would say that most academic biologists should know this and if they really were to do the research that they need to do to really think about this carefully, they would know that there was no proprietary technology that would have changed this fact.
They might even find out that the vaccine schedule is a little less tested than they thought, a little less proven than they thought, a little different than when they grew up.
And that there aren't a whole lot of breaks on that system with regard to adding things to the childhood schedule, and there's a whole lot of incentive to do it.
And to hide that, they might have talked about how RNA can pandemic.
And that's something that I also think that most academic biologists ought to be able to think their way through, to just try to process those three words, RNA, cannot, pandemic, and then go back to your oral examination when you were standing in front of a chalkboard and they said, okay, explain to me how DNA can result in the protein expression of ion channels in the DNA.
in the plasma membrane and give us an explanation of all the steps and the terminology that describes those steps in between the DNA in the nucleus and the ion channel being expressed on the outside of the cell.
And so there's lots of academic biologists that could answer that question for you, but I don't know if they could readily defend the idea of an RNA pandemic.
They've just kind of taken it for granted because people as diverse as Tony Fauci and Peter Daszak and Peter Hotez and Robert Malone all agree that RNA can pandemic.
Of course it can.
Of course RNA can pandemic.
Of course we need to free, fear free-range RNA molecules.
They all agree on it.
That's the illusion of consensus that all of these people are trying to
very dishonorably mislead our young with this illusion of consensus and we need to break it and break it now while it's still available while the history is still available while our own kids and our own college age kids that were victimized during this pandemic can still look backwards and see that they weren't saving anything when they spoke out
they jumped in that chair, they grabbed the joystick, put on the goggles, and they retweeted other people.
And those other people were not usefully fighting against anyone in the CDC or in the FDA.
They were cooperating with them, cooperating with them to seed this narrative and a kind of new totalitarianism where the ruling oligarchy is kind of hiding behind a highly trained elite that will perform a show
that makes everybody think the elections are real and that the problems are being solved and the mysteries are being solved and this illusion of consensus that these are the things we should argue about is being actively created on social media by these acolytes of the ruling elite.
And you might see it as the social media oligarchs flexing their muscles to demonstrate to governments how powerful they are or demonstrate to their benefactors how powerful they've become.
But nonetheless, what you have to see is that weaponized piles of money have used their acolytes on social media to convince us what to argue about.
Oh, shoot.
And with whom to argue.
That's the magic trick that they're pulling on us right now.
And you might think that they're coming to our rescue to rescue the Republic and it's all well and good, but this is not what's happening here.
In fact, these weaponized piles of money that have used their acolytes on social media to convince us what to argue about and with whom to argue have gotten us to accept their narrative because that's what participating in the argument does.
and therefore we are governed by a theater that spans mainstream media to all social media platforms and includes all sides of their mythology.
Who are you speaking to, ladies and gentlemen?
You are speaking to, let me just get down here and see if this works.
You are speaking to a patch clamp physiologist.
I used to want tenure.
I spent about 15 years chasing that idea.
I really enjoyed myself as a biologist.
I got to meet a lot of interesting people and spend my time thinking about interesting questions, but I also,
was failed, sorry, was not trained correctly in terms of understanding how science can be done, but instead was trained in this traditional Paparian sort of iterative investigation using p-values and null hypotheses.
And I've only come in the past couple of years to realize through the help of friends like William Briggs and Greg Glassman and Emily Kaplan and others, how this
this kind of science, if done in a disingenuous way or governed by disingenuous mechanisms like grant calls and tenure, then you could very easily take a system that could be used to sharpen human knowledge in a way that benefits all, you could create
the illusion of knowledge and use that to manipulate a whole population into believing nothing but falsehoods.
And more importantly, the exaggeration and the lies that are necessary for a population to believe only falsehoods are enabled by this disingenuous application of null hypotheses and p-values and this kind of thing.
And yes, I participated in it,
But in a way where one of the reasons why I didn't succeed in the sciences is because the nature of my investigations were closer to a genuine application of the scientific method with genuine measurements, with genuine comparison between groups with an attempt to find signals.
And so those things are less well represented in the current
iteration of academic biology because the current iteration of academic biology has a lot to do with models.
It has a lot to do with extreme data sets that sample in ways where we create the illusion of a giant data set
but don't really adequately evaluate the fidelity of the data set.
So you can imagine a scenario where you might go and collect lots and lots and lots of different microphones, recordings of an event, and then think that all those microphones are useful data.
And then you'd load them up into some AI and realize that most of those microphones were left in their case and never even plugged in.
or those recording devices were never plugged in, then you would load all those devices in and you would make some, you know, I don't know, educated guests using that model and using the AI and using P values to say which microphones were most important, not even knowing that some of those microphones weren't even used or they were used in a poor way.
And so science, if applied correctly, and if applied in a way where, you know, there's an open discussion about how to do it and,
and we move forward in a way that is sort of intended but not done, we would have gotten somewhere.
But we have to see that for the last 30 or 40 years, medical sciences have been completely and malevolently distorted and used against us in a way where we have, because our parents were misled by the mentors of these charlatans,
that it was very difficult for us to grow up in that mythology, grow up with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, and then now suddenly be told when we're adults that actually, no, no, there's no Santa Claus, there's no Easter Bunny.
No, no, there's no RNA pandemics.
No, no, the vaccine schedule is not the single most beautiful part of Western medicine, like Brett Weinstein and his wife would have you believe, like Tony Fauci and his wife would have you believe,
you know, Barney, and the list is endless of people who have been in front of us for generations, the latest of which, covered by Mark Kulak, is this wonderful confirmation hearing of
of Margaret Hamburg for FDA commissioner, who now rumors are swirling around that maybe somebody like Robert Malone or Jay Bhattacharya would be able to sneak in with Bobby Kennedy into the Trump administration and be the head of the FDA.
This would be a disaster, ladies and gentlemen.
And I say that with very
I think I only have a few chances to say these things.
I am a recovering academic.
I was part of this.
I didn't know any better in 2022 to protect my children from the vaccine schedule.
It wasn't until then that I learned.
It wasn't from who you might expect I would have learned it from.
It wasn't from experience or anything like that.
This was a, I was dedicated up until the beginning of the pandemic to my track and to my work and to my lab.
And the honest truth is that they had just let me keep going and given me a little tiny bigger office so that I could have built my microscope with a little, a few more protected outlets and a student.
I would never, I would have stopped my bike ride in a heartbeat.
Probably, I don't know.
I don't know because they never offered me that.
But that's how much I loved it.
And I still think that a lot of the history of the techniques that I've used and a lot of the experiments that have been done in the past using these techniques have really taught us a lot about the irreducible complexity of our brain and how sophisticated even a single neuron is to appreciate as a four-dimensional flower.
It's a thing that
evolves and not evolves, but it matures over time, over the lifetime of a young kid.
And then it continues to transform through the whole life of the adult.
And each neuron is like that.
And so the idea that we could even get to the point where we could study how that molecular pattern integrity, if you want to call it one, all by itself works in the context of the pattern integrity of the human body, the human brain, the human body.
It's just extraordinary.
We've learned so much.
It's much more complicated than people who just saw pictures of neurons under a microscope a hundred years ago could have ever imagined.
And so each one of these little things here can be shedding RNAs in small virus-like vesicles to signal to other nearby neurons that they need to express the ARC protein, for example.
That's just one tiny little gear that most of us had no idea, not even an inkling of, a clue that a gear that complicated could exist inside of a brain as complicated as our own.
And so it is with great humility that I say, yes, I was very enthusiastically pursuing this very fine and sharp understanding of a very particular subject in neuroscience because I wanted to get tenure.
I wanted to be able to teach for the rest of my life and be able to do experiments.
And I just thought it was fun and it's a great job.
And the insurance is good and the flexibility is nice.
And the colleagues can be very interesting to talk to.
And then the pandemic happened and I lost my mind like everybody else did.
But I couldn't understand it.
And this is a long list of things that I discussed two days ago or three days ago on my stream.
It's a long list of things that describes the alien that I've seen.
The number of times I've reached out for help.
I've innocently tried to ask questions or get an answer to something and been run over by a truck.
by a combination of lying and backstabbing.
And so it was a very dark year, 2023 for me, but 2024 is starting to turn out to be a very, very strong.
and beautiful year, if only because I feel like we're getting very close to a break.
We're getting far enough in the domino chain ahead where we might be able to kick one or two out and stop or delay or disrupt.
The current theater that is planned for us.
So it's the 16th of September 2024 and I just want to explain what my intention is today I want to do a journal club that I don't have any slides for I just have lots of PDFs for and I want to read them with you Scan them for their conclusions and and what they've done and just give you a
a brief taste of how much work is out there that could have been done by any MD before today.
So I mean any MD, any of these people who have been out in front from 2021 on, anybody like Naomi Wolf who came out in 2021 in June
any MD like Robert Malone or any biologist like Brett Weinstein or any biologist like Jessica Rose who had already been out for several months, any of these people that were hyper focused on the spike protein in 2020 and 2021 and the damage that it could do or the aging that it could do or the damage to mitochondria that it was doing or the amyloid or the prion, any of those people
could have looked into the protocols to try and figure out what was going on.
And any of these MDs, like Pierre Corey or Peter McCullough or
Kyle Seidel or Meryl Nass.
I mean, the list is endless of MDs that are involved in speaking out about some aspect of the pandemic.
But for the last few years now, I've been unable, apparently they don't see my stream or hear Mark or ever listened to Jessica Hockett when she was still talking to us and we were saying this regularly, that there's this one part of the protocol that was universally
accepted as good, but for some reason we don't think it's good.
It might actually be really bad.
And I think that this is part of the misleading of the young that's going on here.
I think this is part of this charlatan game that has been played by all of these people because they all understand it.
Because the opportunity was already visible 30 years ago.
the opportunity and the population pyramid of a spike in babies.
A spike in babies after World War II, where people came back and had six kids, like my dad's family was six kids.
And all those people had kids.
Some had as many as 12 kids.
And so there's this little bump in our population pyramid that started out at the bottom and then moved up the population pyramid.
And it's just now in 2017, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, coming in this prosperity after World War II and all the kids that were born then are now starting to age out.
And I assure you that the people that see the numbers, the people that are calculating the books, the actuaries, that are predicting how much money we're gonna have to spend on Medicaid and Medicare, which is somewhere like, I guess, 50% of the federal budget every year, I don't know.
Don't ask me, I'm not an economist.
But this idea that these people didn't see this coming is preposterous.
They've been talking about this, the economic doom that was coming for a long time.
But what else was it?
It was also just a numbers thing.
If you think of the deaths every week as going up and down and up and down every year,
Right?
In the winter time it goes up, in the summer it goes down, in the winter it goes up, in the summer it goes down, in the winter it goes up, in the summer it goes down.
That little process right there also moves up like this, right?
Because as it moves up like this, that's the population getting bigger in America.
If we were to rewind time and look at that graph, that graph would not be like this the whole time, right?
It would have started out down here and it would have been smaller for a smaller population and then it's going to get bigger and bigger and bigger until we got to the 20th century and now it's somewhere over here.
And now if you think about when these baby boomer people are going to age out and you think about
a system that has been worried about this aging out for a long time because aging out people are very expensive on Medicaid and Medicare.
Oh, shit.
What's going on?
Silly chickens.
I'm here all by myself.
Sorry, they're making a lot of noise.
This idea that these people from the baby boomer generation are now coming to the age where they could age out is not something that Tony Fauci hasn't been aware of.
It's not something that these guys weren't aware of.
It was an opportunity that was building an opportunity that was being grooved and groomed and and prepared for.
It would be no different than if you knew you were gonna get a 20-year bonus at your job that you planned to buy a house and move to a new house when you got that bonus.
And so you might've put that thing into motion a few months ahead of time so that when you got the bonus, you were ready to put down the down payment on the house right when the bonus came out.
And in the case of public health, in the case of population management, in the case of governance,
this increase in all-cause mortality that where we were going to go from this to this to this, that was known.
And so with very little effort and very little outright malevolence, you could create an agreement about the fact that, wow, something crazy is happening.
There's an extra few thousand deaths this week and an extra few thousand deaths this week and the next week.
And it looks like if we wanted to, we could project into the next couple of years that there's going to be more deaths than there were in the previous five.
And these next five years are going to be more than those past five years because we saw it coming.
We saw it coming already a long time ago.
They did.
And those people are helping them to pretend like it's all just a novel virus.
And they're doing it with a particular combination of malevolent lies that have nothing to do with remdesivir, nothing to do with even ventilators, quite frankly.
It's more specific than that.
It's more malevolent than that because it all starts with knowledge that was out there.
that pure oxygen ventilated into people is injurious.
Whatever the right word is, it hurts people.
You can hurt people with pure oxygen.
And they knew this for at least a decade already.
But they created an illusion of consensus about a zoonosis.
Did you hear Margaret Hamburger use the word zoonosis on Mark's program yesterday?
I did.
Did you see that she was being promoted by the people who started DITRA?
DITRA, you know, nukes, top secret, Department of Energy.
That's the reason why Kevin McKernan of the Human Genome Project and Claire Craig, a clinical pathologist interested in sequencing thousands, hundreds of thousands of UK citizens in pursuit of disease markers,
We're working together in 2020 to oppose the WHO PCR test, but not PCR testing.
Claire Craig helped the UK population to understand the many trade-offs involved in using PCR testing during a pandemic.
It's pretty complicated, she says.
And this guy was in America telling us that the only reason why he's an expert is because he sequences weed now.
And in fact, he was even screening the weed for COVID because he was afraid that it might shut down all of his places if we found out that COVID could be transmitted by the weed or something.
And that's also why George Webb blocked me at the very beginning of the pandemic.
I didn't even know who he was, but it was because I was streaming with Paul Cuttrell.
And I guess I wasn't supposed to know that Paul Cuttrell was connected to George Webb.
And so George Webb had me blocked at the beginning of the pandemic.
And the only reason why I found out is because somebody sent me a tweet that I couldn't see.
And that's how I learned what blocking was.
Jessica Rose has me blocked now.
This is a person who definitely has been playing along.
She's been traveling the world for the last four years, deciding whether she's going to be surfing off the coast of Israel or whether she's going to be in a hot tub in Iceland.
But she's got a lot of problems because the scheduling is just really tough when you've got to be in four continents.
I think now she's going to be in Japan this month.
And I think Robert Malone is going with her to Japan.
They don't take Dr. Z-Dog because Dr. Z-Dog has been a YouTube star since before the pandemic.
And they just used him for the standard, you know, the standard virus.
And oh my gosh, maybe some people were hurt, but not everybody's hurt.
And I love vaccine kind of thing, but they're all the same show.
It's an illusion of consensus that if you engage with these people on social media, you share their videos, you let them tell you what to think, then you will never think things that will free your children.
You will think things that will coerce you or trick you, wittingly or unwittingly, into teaching your children about gain-of-function viruses and vaccines are pretty good if they would just get their heads out and test them correctly.
I'm sure Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
will test the vaccines
with placebo and spend a trillion dollars on it as part of his first, you know, administration duties.
Murder and lies, ladies and gentlemen, it's murder and lies.
There are good explanations for how PCR can be highly accurate, but also a complete lie for SARS-CoV-2.
And that's the reason why Kevin McKernan needed to be out there early in 2020.
That's why they had people like Jessica Rose, why they had people like Claire Craig, why they had people
who could be out there and say, nah, using PCR for a novel coronavirus like this one with only one amplicon, without nested primers or anything like that, nah, it's fine, it's fine, I'm sure it's fine.
We don't need to worry about how many FDA EUA products there are in America.
Kevin McKernan didn't worry about that at all in 2020, even though by the end of 2020, I think there were more than 200.
how virology can be a lie, but transfection and transformation, it can be misconstrued as biology.
This is virology.
This is the thing that Kevin McKernan called a chemtrail retarded idea.
And very clearly, this is the truth.
And it is also the truth that is conveniently covered up by this insistence of discussion of purification, isolation, culturing of viruses by these no virus people, because they purposefully ignore the fact that
Synthetic DNA and RNA when applied to a cell culture is the most common, the most common virology experiment.
And it has nothing to do with isolation.
It just has to do with transfection and transformation being misconstrued as virus production.
And in fact, this is probably how any entity which purports to have a control virus, this is most likely what it is.
It is the transfection and transformation of a cell culture being misconstrued as a viral preparation.
And finally, I think it's really remarkable that I'm the one who brought up the population pyramid in 2021, and somehow or another, I'm the one who forgot to keep talking about it, but it's the booming opportunity.
It's the boomers.
These people saw this coming, and they've seen it coming for 30 years, and they've been preparing to call it a pandemic for 30 years in order to invert not our sovereignty, but the sovereignty of our children.
and they have not gotten as far as they wanted to, but I assure you the opportunity window is still open.
And I assure you that these people are gonna go for broke because it's for all the marbles.
It's for our grandkids.
So yes, murder and lies.
We need a new consensus about these things.
Please help me out.
The population pyramid might be a hidden explanation.
Look at this.
This is the New York City population pyramid in 2017 through 2021 five-year estimates.
Now I want you to imagine what this population pyramid might've looked like or what this population pyramid might've looked like here when these guys were kids.
Because when these guys were kids, the population pyramid might've been quite a bit smaller.
The numbers here are 200,000 and this is 371,000.
These are 559.
So the point I'm trying to make here is that this little bump right here in just New York City, that's visible in just New York City, will be several hundred more people per week dying in theory when these people age out.
This is just the New York City population pyramid.
I'm talking about the Western population pyramid.
America, the UK, Japan, Canada.
These population pyramids have a bump that is concealed here, but it is real.
These numbers that are down here have been more consistent than these.
These are about to be the largest numbers as they move up here than have ever found their way up there before.
That might already be here.
I didn't work hard enough this morning to get the right one here.
I just wanted you to see and imagine that as this population ages, not only are these people having less kids, but this is going to be a bump.
As these people go and get older, presumably Western medicine keeps getting better, right?
So these people are dying at an older age.
And so any bump like the boomer is going to be a bump that will also be a kind of exaggerated because
In decades previous, there was a sort of pyramid shape because people died when they got older and there wasn't much we could do about it.
But now that pyramid is getting wider just because Western medicine and successful treatment of gunshot wounds and everything makes people live longer.
Now, if you add the fact that there was this little bump of people that doesn't need to explain everything, ladies and gentlemen, it just has to explain a small bump.
and pneumonia cases, a small bump in pneumonias that die, a few thousand a week.
If they know something about this and they know that it's a few thousand a week, then the story that they can tell is these people die.
as they misconstrue these people dying as an increasing all cause mortality due to a novel something, rather than telling you that this was expected all along.
That's what they were griping about on TBS in 1990, about the impending crash of Medicaid and Medicare, and how it was all gonna go bankrupt.
That was the economic story.
This is just the numbers.
And the CDC and the NIH and NIAID and maybe the DOD and HHS have taken advantage of this known
increase in all-cause mortality that was going to happen as the baby boomers aged out.
And the known possibility that we might waste, need to use a lot of resources in the last years of these people's lives.
Wouldn't it be interesting if we just had an alternative story for why these people kind of aged out in the hospital?
Wouldn't it be interesting if we came up with a bunch of new vaccines that were really good for old people, intended for old people, and then we rolled them out while these people were old?
I could just test them and let them go.
We would get a lot of, you know, you get a lot of data.
You might as well use them.
More importantly, you could get the younger population to accept the idea that, you know, if grandma's getting this, this single shingles shot now, and grandma's getting this pneumonia shot now, then I guess in 10 years when my doctor tells me I should get it, it won't be crazy.
The illusion is breaking, ladies and gentlemen, because we haven't stopped looking back to 2020 and what these people were saying and how they were saying it.
We haven't stopped.
And we found people who were advocating for not vaccines being a bad idea, but for vaccines
hurting a particularly vulnerable population, that the only way we could really identify them would be to look at the population, to scan the population, to canvas the population for biomarkers.
You know, genes that will tell us that these people are predisposed to vaccine injury, and this will make it possible for us to mandate it for people who don't have these special vulnerabilities, and then, you know, then properly
let's say, exempt people based on a genetic screen.
That's what this guy is advocating for in 2019.
He's also talking about asymptomatic transmission of vaccine-preventable diseases as part of this illusion, instead of saying things like intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
And that's extraordinary because these people like Mary Holland, who were already around in 2017 supposedly publishing books and saying all these smart things about the MMR shot, and maybe thimerosal or mercury or,
or aluminum, but never that vaccines in general, you know, in general, augmenting a system that we don't really understand and looking for a biomarker as silly as antibodies and trusting that this person or that person's preparation says that it's the correlative immune.
I mean, we are at a stage where we are essentially in a dark age.
but it is not a dark age from which Brett Weinstein is gonna save us.
It's not a dark age that his dad, Les Weinstein, is gonna save us from.
They put us here.
We were scared into this hog trap by these people, and we are being now consoled that we're not yet in the trap.
There's still a way out.
No, no, we need to get and get fast.
and we need to get these truths into the heads of our kids and fast.
There's no other way to explain why in 2021, Jimmy Dore was on Joe Rogan, but it wasn't until 2023 that John Campbell got on Jimmy Dore and Josh Getzko gets on Jimmy Dore.
panda member, dual citizen, a guy who's been on my show in 2021, but seems to completely ignore the fundamental biology that we're trying to get somebody to challenge, that RNA cannot pandemic.
But he got on Jimmy Dore two years after Jimmy was on Joe Rogan.
This is a titration of the truth.
Whether Jimmy knows it or not, he is participating in the titration of the truth.
Because at the end of 2020, I was already telling Brett Weinstein in a signal chat, already telling Chris Martinson in a signal chat, already telling
Matt Crawford in a Signal Chat already telling Alexandros Marinos in a Signal Chat that transfection was a bad idea, that natural immunity, whatever it was, was definitely better, and that this spike protein might be imaginary.
They might have seeded this idea of a spike protein so that they would have an excuse to use an immunogen that they themselves designed.
And I explained that to them in 2020 and 2021.
And these same people are still obviously ignoring me.
because they include people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
I'm sorry.
They include people like Meryl Nass and Mary Holland and all the people that I've had countless Zoom meetings with and exchanged emails with and private phone calls with.
Bobby Kennedy's talking about a secret meeting about the truth of vaccines and whether they're tested or not.
It's like he's getting ready to be part of the Trump administration and start testing vaccines for real so that we know once and for all which ones are safe
course the lab leak is now being talked about by by the left as oh I guess it is so that there was a lab leak and guess who the right is now supposed to consider a hero besides Brett Weinstein and his brother and Elon Musk were supposed to think that Alex Jones has been smart and been a hero and been a patriot all along
Robert Malone is now free to post videos on YouTube about how he's stunned by this Pfizer video or that whatever.
It's all an illusion, ladies and gentlemen.
It's an illusion that was orchestrated by these people.
I think Robert Malone is one of the best red threads running through here because
He's in the hot tubs.
He's at the meetings.
He's backstage.
He's at the rally.
He's at the Senate meeting.
He's in Hawaii.
He's in Romania.
He's off the coast of Turkey on a cruise.
He's everywhere.
And now he's going to be in Japan this month.
That is not congruent with somebody who would just rather be breeding horses and emus on his small little, you know, thrown together homestead at the foot of the Shenandoah forest.
Come on, guys.
These rich men north of Richmond are responsible for this.
They are playing the same game as the slavers are.
They work for the slavers.
Robert Malone works for them.
They all work for them.
So supplemental oxygen or hyperoxia, is this a thing or not?
What's hyperoxia to you?
Have you ever heard of hyperoxia before?
I hadn't heard of hyperoxia before.
A couple of days ago, actually, I looked it up and tried to figure out if there was a name for it.
So what I thought I would do is just do a reading journal club.
I downloaded a bunch of papers that I have the PDFs already downloaded for, and I'm just going to go through them and see if I can answer the question.
Is hyperoxia a possible way that they created a COVID in a known population of people?
Everybody that went to the hospital could have been used for this if giving pure supplemental high flow oxygen can hurt people.
Then in theory, everybody that came into these what people are calling military controlled hospitals and military dictated protocols could have come into the hospital and if they met a certain criteria like Medicaid, yes.
Medicare, yes.
Any family, no.
Okay, COVID protocol.
And if the COVID protocol started with high flow supplementary oxygen given by a face covering mask or worse, like Kyle Seidel described, like Pierre Cory described, then the primary means by which COVID appeared in hospitals could have been just generated by the supplemental oxygen applied, if indeed,
Acute hyperoxia is something that's dangerous at all.
This is a book called Evidence-Based Practice of Critical Care, and it is the third edition, the copyright is by Elsevier, in 2020.
Now, there are quite a few critical care
physicians that are involved in the, let's say, dissident movement in America.
One of them is Pierre Corey.
Another is Paul Merrick.
Another is Kyle Seidel.
And there are more, probably.
But the point to understand is, is that people in critical care medicine actually have books, you know, that they can read and papers that they can read.
And people have studied this stuff before, it seems, because with my library connection with my previous job, I'm able to read the online text version of this.
And so I thought I'd read it with you just to see if this is really something worth
Oh, I shouldn't have done that, or what?
Oh, yeah.
This is the reading mode.
If this is worth considering, or whether, you know, maybe they're not ignoring anything.
Maybe these people are not ignoring anything.
Maybe we should still listen to Brian Artis about Venom, and we should still listen to Brian Artis that it was Remdesivir.
Maybe, let's see, I'm going to increase this a little bit so it's not so annoying for you to have me read.
I got to make this probably smooth.
That's not quite right, so I'm going to go back out one.
OK, so let's see.
Supplementary oxygen is the most frequently used therapeutic intervention in clinical medicine.
Oxygen is administered to treat hypoxia in acute and chronic respiratory failure, often in high inspired concentrations.
Varying amounts are given in the perioperative period.
Hyperbaric oxygen therapy, in which oxygen is administered in a high-pressure chamber, is used to treat decompression illness and carbon monoxide poisoning, enhance wound healing, and kill anaerobic bacteria.
Since the late 19th century, toxic effects of hyperbaric oxygen have been known.
So you can't do that for long.
If you've got to get rid of an anaerobic bacterial infection, maybe you can do it.
If you've got decompression sickness from getting pulled out of the ocean from too deep too fast, then maybe you can do it.
But
The toxic effects of hyperbaric oxygen have been known.
Since the 1960s, it has been believed that high concentrations of normal baric oxygen may be toxic, in particular to lung tissue.
Since the 1960s, normal baric, meaning that normal pressured oxygen in pure, may be toxic, particular to lung tissue, already since the 60s.
That's an interesting thing to have in a book chapter.
Oops.
happening here.
This chapter aims to unravel the published data on oxygen toxicity from both a normal barrack and hyperbaric literature.
These data are of varying quality, often conflicting in their conclusions, and rarely involve critically ill patients.
Finally, we conclude with the question, is oxygen beneficial?
So that's a pretty spooky question to ask in a textbook printed with the copyright of 2020, because that means that this is all based on literature that came before 2020, which means it would have all been available to people like Paul Merrick and Tony Fauci and Peter Hotez and Peter McCullough and Pierre Kory and Robert Malone and any other MD that you know in this story.
I mean, even like somebody like Ahmed Malik would have to know that this was true because he's a guy who was a surgeon.
So he's putting people under all the time and perioperative, you know, application they're talking about right there.
I mean, he must know this too.
So let's just keep reading, but don't underestimate what you're gonna learn here.
Oxygen is a highly reactive element, a property that leads to its toxic potential.
The oxygen molecule and electron acceptor is non-toxic and normal mitochondrial function reduces most molecular oxygen to water through the sequential donation of four electrons.
At mitochondrial level,
Less than 5% of oxygen molecules convert to the reactive oxygen species, ROS, that contribute extensively to oxidative damage.
So the reactive oxygen species there, we all should be familiar with that.
The term reactive oxygen species encompasses both free radicals and chemicals that take part in radical type reactions and gain or loss of electrons.
The latter do not contain unpaired electrons and therefore are not true radicals in themselves.
Most common reactive oxygen species include the superoxide anion, hydrogen peroxide, hydroxyl radicals, singlet oxygen, and the hypochlorous anion, and ozone.
Cellular sources of reactive oxygen species include the mitochondrial electron transport chain,
that's how they make ATP, oxidant enzymes such as xanthine oxidase, phagocytic cells through NADPH oxidase, cyclooxygenase during arachidonic acid metabolism, cellular auto-oxidation of iron and epinephrine, and metabolic enzymes such as the cytochrome P450 family, that's in the liver, I believe,
and the, well, not only in the liver, but it's, I think, enriched there, and nitric oxide synthetases when inadequate substrate is available.
So, there's lots of ways that that can happen.
Oh, I see.
Somebody just came home.
I smelled some
I smelled some exhaust there.
So reactive oxygen species cause structural injury to lipid membranes, proteins, and nucleic acids.
These structural changes lead to disruptions in normal intracellular signaling, protein transcription, and enzyme function.
Actively dividing cells are particularly vulnerable to oxidative damage due to exposure of rapidly replicating DNA.
Effective protection in this setting may be achieved by cells entering a transient growth-arrested state.
Therefore, the oxygen can lead to a wide spectrum of damage from disordered gene expression to disrupted growth and even necrosis.
Oxidative stress occurring as a result of reactive oxygen species production is thought to be an ongoing process at the physiologic levels of oxygen.
When the balance between reactive oxygen species and scavenging systems is altered, free radicals may contribute to the normal aging process.
The development of cancers, heart failure, and diabetic vascular and cerebrovascular disease may contribute, right?
May contribute.
But I'm sure there's some literature to support all of these, at least in as far as null hypothesis testing.
And the effect of oxidative stress are potentially increased during normal barrack administration of oxygen at high concentrations and are accentuated further under hyperbaric conditions.
So if you jam oxygen into the system by making somebody breathe pure oxygen, I don't know, say like 60 liters a minute,
or even better put them in a chamber where you can increase the pressure to shove more in to the blood, you can cause reactive oxygen species to kind of be abundant and more abundant rather in the scavenging systems be overloaded.
overwhelmed.
So, the effects are potentially increased under a normal barrack administration of oxygen at high concentrations, and endogenous scavenging systems include superoxide dismutases, a group of metalloproteins, catalase, and components of the glutathione redox cycle, including glutathione peroxidase and glutathione reductase.
Non-enzyme antioxidants include vitamin C and E, beta carotene, and uric acid also reduce reactive oxygen species to less harmful molecules.
However, in the presence of hyperoxia, these may become overwhelmed, giving rise to injury.
In summary, high levels of oxygen at cellular level result in the formation of reactive oxygen species.
Reactive oxygen species cause lipid peroxidation, oxidative injury to nucleic acid chains, and oxidative protein damage.
So sorry, I don't know why this is not working.
Do I need to?
Yes, there we go.
So hyper evidence for toxicity from bench to bedside.
This is the most important paragraph I'm going to read this morning, I think.
Hyperoxia is toxic in a variety of animal models, but data demonstrating similar effects in humans is scant.
Stop lying.
Thus, while lung injury from elevated levels of administered oxygen is frequently invoked in critical care, actual damage is difficult to substantiate.
Stop lying.
The bulk of the literature describing pulmonary oxygen toxicity was written in the 1950s to the 1970s.
Stop lying.
However, inspired fractions of oxygen, between 50% and 60%, are well tolerated for a prolonged period of time.
Remember, Kyle Seidel and Pierre Kory were not advocating for the application of inspired fractions between 50 and 60 percent.
They were advocating for application of pure oxygen, and it is most likely that if people were to investigate, most of the people that were killed during the COVID pandemic in 2020 and 2021 were probably initiated
with pure oxygen.
And that probably holds true for the UK and for the Netherlands and anywhere else where people were treated with any gas at all.
They were not treated with between 50 and 60% O2 with humidity.
They were treated with pure oxygen.
I can almost, I would bet a lot of money on that, even though I have no data for it, I dare anybody to look.
At higher levels, the potential for toxicity exists at higher levels than 50 to 60%.
Kyle Seidel said they were running out of bottles.
They showed pictures of the ship Comfort coming into New York City and then pulling, one of the things that was so cool about it was it had an oxygen plant.
So they could make oxygen for the hospitals in New York that needed them.
At higher levels, potential for toxicity exists.
The development of toxicity depends not only on the partial pressure of oxygen, but also on the duration of exposure, and there's likely to be significant inter-individual variation.
You know, like maybe if they're super old, or they're already sick, or they already had the flu, or they were already ill for some other reason, or they had, you know, overweight or whatever.
In addition, animals who survive exposure to high concentrations may acclimate and adapt.
I don't know really what that means.
Let's keep reading.
Pathologic examination of animal lungs exposed to high concentration of oxygen identifies distinctive features at both the macroscopic and microscopic levels.
Gross examination reveals lungs and respiratory mucosa that are inflamed.
Atelectatic.
At a, sorry, at a, where is it?
At a lektatic.
Collapse of part of the lung caused by a blockage in the air passages or pressure on the lungs.
Risk factors for at a lekta, at a lektasis, a lektasis, probably a lektasis.
I don't know.
Prolonged bed rest with a few changes in position, allowing breathing and underlying, oh my gosh.
And areas of consolidation and fluid in the plural space.
Huh, interesting.
I wonder if that would reduce the, you know, expected.
Microscopic changes include pulmonary edema with diffuse alveolar membrane damage.
The clinical progression of diffuse alveolar damage mirrors that of acute respiratory distress syndrome.
An initial exudative phase characterized by increasing dysnipia.
Bilateral crackles, frothy and bloody sputum, and widespread infiltrates on chest radiography may involve into a fibrotic phase.
While some studies have attempted to identify, or define rather, the impact of oxygen toxicity on acute lung injury in a critical care setting, the large number of confounding variables and conditions, ventilator-associated pneumonia, ventilator-related barotrauma, which is pressure, and volutrauma, which is too big of a volume set for the lung.
Imagine this!
It's hard for us to tell whether it was the high oxygen or not, because a lot of times these people are also being given a volume that's inappropriate for their lungs, or they're giving a pressure that's inappropriate for their lungs.
So the underlying disease process makes interpretation difficult, but it seems to be that the application of pure oxygen can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Many of the off-sited studies carried out in otherwise healthy volunteers, which limits generalizability to patients with comorbidities.
Available evidence reinforces results from animal studies that demonstrate earlier dysnipia, dyspnea, cough, and chest pain.
Absorption atelectasis, you know, that's the stuff where their lung is collapsing, leads to reduced lung volumes with spirometric evidence in falling vital capacity.
Your lung volume goes down.
I wonder if that was one of the strange symptoms of COVID.
Application of finding from an oft-quoted 1967 study is limited because a 1967 study is limited because strategies for mechanical ventilation so profoundly differ from those currently used.
Thus, damage from oxygen cannot be separated from that from villi, which is ventilator-induced lung injury.
oxygen toxicity in practice from the cradle to the grave.
In neonates, particularly those born prematurely are at particular risk for oxygen toxicity, so they already know that in neonates.
Traditionally, both adults and neonate resuscitation were performed with 100% oxygen.
Now, high quality data now demonstrate that substitution of air is associated with a benefit of up to
30% lower oxygen concentrations during resuscitation are associated with a decrease in overall duration of oxygen support, development of chronic lung injury and markers for oxidative injury.
Do you read that?
When they use less oxygen when resuscitating babies,
The babies have a less need for oxygen support.
They develop less chronic lung disease.
And they have fewer markers for oxidative injury.
Data from BOOST and SUPPORT studies reveal the association between higher oxygenation targets and retinopathy of prematurity.
However, both data from studies also suggest that lower O2 targets were associated with higher mortality.
Importantly, the higher saturation targets of 91 to 95% would be considered conservative in an adult population.
I don't even know what they're talking about.
A saturation target of 91 to 95%?
When we were talking about this at the beginning of the pandemic, the FLCCC told you to go seek help if your pulse ox was saturated at 94 or less.
Now we're talking about a paper where the saturation target was between 91 and 95.
You mean you can't get to 99 unless you're an athlete with good lungs?
Interesting, isn't it?
This literature is available in a textbook.
And this is a review, an introduction.
Adults, while there's compelling evidence for, while there is compelling evidence for oxygen, pulmonary oxygen toxicity or hyperoxic lung injury in both animals and neonates, the evidence in adults is less clear.
Stop lying.
The problems start with the use of the nomenclature that's confused.
I wonder where else the nomenclature has ever been confused in medical and biological sciences.
Stop lying!
The evidence in adults is less clear.
The problems start with the use of nomenclature that is confused, while the term hyperoxia is used ubiquitously.
I've never heard it.
Pierre Cory never said we got to watch out for hyperoxia as we have this weird dichotomy of people rushing into the hospital with like 80% pulse ox.
So weird.
There is a difference between hyperoxia, a high inspired concentration of oxygen, which is what Pierre Cory and and Kyle Seidel, etc, were advocating as the only thing that was working.
They were running out of bottles.
and hyperoxemia, a high partial pressure of oxygen in the blood.
There's a difference.
And hyperoxia is making people inspire pure oxygen.
Hyperoxemia is the state of having a high
concentration of oxygen in the blood, usually denoted as a PaO2 between 100 and 200 millimeters, with a PaO2 less than 100, 200 millimeters, characterizing severe hyperoxemia greater than 200.
Interestingly, one study identified a linear relationship between the time spent in hyperoxemia and mortality.
So if they barely had enough bottles,
And they were putting people on this shit in the hallways in Italy, and in the hallways in these makeshift hospitals in Wuhan, and in the hallways in these places in New York, where Nurse Erin was saying that they were doing it.
then you could easily have a direct correlation between mortality and the time spent in hyperoxemia.
The majority of human studies that were performed in healthy volunteers involved a small sample sizes, thus the relevance to clinical practice, particularly in the critically ill is uncertain.
No, it's irrelevant.
Those didn't help you at all.
Of course, somebody with already injured and terrible lungs, scarred from a lack of breathing good air in a city, or smoking, or no exercise, or mold in their apartment, or the list is endless.
Identified clinical features include early retrosternal discomfort, pleuritic chest pain, cough, and dyspnea.
Inflammatory change become visible on bronchioscopic examination after six hours of breathing oxygen at greater than 90%.
Do you see?
Resolution of symptoms usually occurred over the number of days.
In a small retrospective study, Elliot and colleagues attempted to define predictors for lung.
They're talking about healthy people here.
predictors for lung function and survivors of ARDS and found that a duration of administered oxygen was the only variable related to diffusion capacity at one year.
These people are damaged by the O2 after one year.
Can you say long COVID?
If you have a reduced lung capacity because you were given oxygen in the hospital when you were treated for COVID and nobody in your corner knows anything about it, then if you had a reduced diffusion capacity at one year and they put you on oxygen for three days and nobody in your corner understands this, how bad are we?
I have no responsibility for the current pandemic.
A larger retrospective study that corrected for severity of illness uncovered an independent association between mean FiO2 during intensive care unit and stay in hospital mortality.
See, an independent association between the two that kills people.
The effect of hyperoxia on respiratory measurements are unclear and the pathological substrate remains unknown.
But of course, in this article, they're implying that there's just an imbalance in the lung tissue.
Something goes drastically wrong when you start to increase the oxygen concentration beyond normal baric concentrations by making people breathe pure oxygen.
That's why there isn't an oxygen bar in every city in America after these many years.
the effects of hyperoxia on, okay, sorry.
The contribution of oxygen toxicity to morbidity and mortality in the critically ill is difficult to identify.
Stop lying!
At least in part because of the confounding effects of mechanical ventilation.
So mechanical ventilation can hurt people.
Hand ventilating them with pure oxygen can hurt them, but because we do it often together, we're not really sure which is doing the damage.
If it's the oxygen or the mechanical ventilation, it makes it harder to see.
Stop!
Much of the early literature was reported before the advent of lung protected ventilation and as such, further trials are required to elicit the contribution of oxygen to VILI, which is ventilator induced lung injury.
A single center study by so-and-so demonstrated an association between conservative oxygen management and demonstrated an absolute risk reduction of mortality.
So people survived if you just reduce their oxygen.
Holy shit, look at this.
And the difference was only 94 to 98% measured versus 97 to 100.
They already saw an 8% risk reduction in dying.
If they went from a 100 to 97% down to 94 to 98%.
trial of hyperoxia in patients with septic shock was stopped early due to an excess of adverse events in the hyperoxia group.
A trial of hyperoxia in patients with septic shock was stopped early due to an excess adverse events in the hyperoxia group.
Pierre Corey, Master of Critical Care.
In a large systematic review and meta-analysis of 16,037 acutely unwell patients, oxygen strategies where the mean FiO2 was 0.52 were associated with increased 30-day and last follow-up hospital mortality.
Indeed, for every 1% increase in SpO2, the relative risk of in-hospital mortality increased by 25%.
Ladies and gentlemen, I am just reading a textbook available to everyone at the start of the pandemic based on literature available before the pandemic.
And you probably don't have access to this text because you don't have a university subscription to a library, but I'm reading it to you right now.
A Dutch study revealed hyperoxemia in greater than 40% of 126,000 arterial blood gases obtained from mechanically inventilated ICU patients, which means that you can get hyperoxemia from either pure oxygen,
or from just jamming it in with a ventilator, and then you could probably use lower concentrations to reach it.
Finally, hyperoxemia during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with cardiac and respiratory failure was associated with increased mortality.
So when they tried to use an alternative method, ECMO, to get the oxygen in, in hopes that it would help people,
with cardiac and respiratory failure, it was associated with increased mortality.
In summary, hyperoxic lung injury in healthy volunteers is associated with a syndrome analogous to ARDS.
starting with an inflammatory phase followed by a fibro-proliberative phase in critically ill patients, hyperoxia or hyperoxemia appear to be harmful.
and oxygen should be tailored to the individual patient's need at the lowest safe level that is compatible with life.
Does that sound like what Kyle Seidel and these other doctors were arguing was the standard of care at the beginning of the pandemic?
How long did they use a standard of care which did not understand this or seems to not understand this?
So let's just go through a few papers just to see if there's any more that we could kind of pay attention to here.
Mortality and morbidity in acutely ill treated with liberal versus conservative oxygen.
In acutely ill patients, high quality evidence shows that liberal oxygen therapy increases mortality without improving other patient outcomes.
McMaster University in Canada.
So I guess they knew in Canada already in 2018 because that's when and in New Zealand because that's where this comes from.
Canada and New Zealand in April of 2018.
So I guess they knew about this already there.
Let me see if I got another one here.
Excess oxygen in acute illness, adding fuel to the fire, April 18th, 2018.
Oxygen is essential for life, is the third most abundant element in the universe.
This abundance is evident in the treatment of acutely ill
adults administered to intensive care and progressive units, care units around the world, in whom excess oxygen is frequently provided for inhalation.
The typical motivation for liberal oxygen administration is the prevention of hypoxemia.
By contrast, few health care providers are concerned about hyperoxemia, i.e., highly elevated arterial oxygen concentrations.
As a cardiologist working in cardiac intensive care, oh,
I wonder if Asim Malhotra knows anything about hyperoxemia.
Intensive cardiac intensive care, I am familiar with the panic often incited by a patient with hypo-oxemia.
Bedsides alarms ring, nurses justifiably fret, and pagers vibrate.
However, I have never been called to treat a patient with hyper-oxemia.
On the basis of accumulating observational evidence and compelling meta-analysis random trials,
perhaps this is about to change.
So, there's a new paper in The Lancet in 2018 that this is a little preview for, that apparently says an accumulating observational evidence and compelling meta-analysis of randomized trials suggests that this is about to change.
That maybe people with hyperoxemia are having cardiac problems.
Before reviewing the primary results of the study by Chu and colleagues, it is worth reflecting further on why healthcare providers typically rationalize the administration of excess oxygen to their acutely ill patients, thereby presenting an opportunity for hyperoxemia to develop.
Adults with acute illness are often, but not always, oxygen deficient at the cellular level.
Mechanisms include reduced uptake of oxygen in the lungs, impaired delivery of oxygen to the cells of vital organs, or abnormal cellular bioenergetics with the mismatch between supply and demand.
Oxygen deficiency at the cellular level can usually be addressed with liberal oxygen inhalation.
Sorry, I lost my screen.
Oh yeah, sorry.
While the underlying cause of the acute illness is identified and treated.
After all, oxygen drives anaerobic metabolism and is the fuel that burns the cellular fire under these conditions.
Therefore, it makes sense to provide oxygens to patients who are deficient.
But what about patients without oxygen deficiency?
Can this fire burn too bright?
And by burning too bright, can the fire burn out more quickly?
Indeed, in 1775,
Joseph Priestley noted that candles burn far brighter in pure oxygen than in atmospheric air.
As such, the most common accepted danger of excess oxygen administration in adults without hypoxemia is the overproduction of reactive oxygen species, which we discussed earlier, and would result in cellular damage and inflammation, as well as various other physiological abnormalities.
The aberrations might paradoxically serve to further deplete cellular energy.
Thus, on the basis of biologically plausible foundation and building on previous observational meta-analysis, the data presented by Chu and colleagues have an important and immediate clinical implications.
In their meta-analysis of 25 randomized trials across a wide spectrum of disease, the authors report excess mortality among acutely ill, non-hypoxemic adults exposed to excess oxygen.
So it's definitely not good for healthy people.
So one of the ways that it might have been done is with these stupid things and convincing doctors that if you don't have anything else and their oxygen is below, let's say 95, maybe we should put them on some supplementary oxygen, which could be a disaster for somebody who doesn't need it.
It makes perfect sense why the pulse oximeter was so, you know, reported as this thing that is so weird that everybody had, according to Pierre Corey.
who in the same month as he testified to that in the Senate in 2020 was also a written in expert in the George Floyd trial testifying that it had to be suffocation, it couldn't have been something else.
Let's see if we got another paper over here.
Oxygenation targets in acutely ill patients, still a matter of debate.
December 8th, 2018 in the Lancet.
We read with concern Derek Chu and colleagues systematic review of the meta-analysis and find that liberal oxygen therapy increases mortality.
It could be misleading and potentially harmful.
Oh my goodness, we wouldn't want to learn the truth.
heterogeneity of diseases.
So again, this is the same song and dance that you would have expected to occur if the truth was starting to leak out, that one of the ways that we can get rid of this huge population of annoying old people would be to start using oxygen in an inappropriate way on them should they show up in the hospital and be supported only on Medicare or Medicaid.
And so we wouldn't want to have that truth get out.
And so of course there's gotta be a couple months later somebody who says, well, that was a little too much.
Let's assure you that pure oxygen has saved millions of lives.
It's very safe and effective when done correctly.
bacterial oxygen tensions in mechanically ventilated ICU patients and mortality.
This is from Denmark.
We scroll down to the conclusions.
In mechanically ventilated ICU patients, hyperoxemia was common.
Although oxygen supplementation was often reduced when hyperoxemia was observed, several patients remained hyperoxemic.
Hyperoxemia was associated with increased ICU mortality in these patients.
I mean, I don't know really how much clearer it could be.
That's like, right?
Doesn't that just say it?
Doesn't it just say that Pierre Cory is guilty?
Doesn't it just say that anybody that applied pure oxygen in the context of COVID is guilty of something?
Malpractice, being a dipshit, not reading the literature?
I'm not an MD.
I wasn't supposed to know this.
Association between intra- and post-arrest hyperoxia on mortality in adults with cardiac arrest, a systematic review and meta-analysis.
It's like they're copying the guys.
In adults with cardiac arrest, inter-arrest hyperoxia was associated with lower mortality while
A post-arrest hyperoxia is associated with higher mortality.
So post-arrest hyperoxemia was, hyperoxia was associated with higher mortality.
So after you have a heart attack, they should not give you supplementary oxygen.
That's what this says.
Okay.
I might have to close some of these.
Hold on one second.
Let me blank this out.
Early hyperoxia in patients with traumatic brain injury admitted to intensive care in Australia and New Zealand, a retrospective study.
Early hypoxia may be independent risk factor for mortality in critically ill traumatic brain injury people.
Conclusion in this large multi-center study of TBI, that's traumatic brain injury patients.
Hyperoxia in the first 24 hours after ICU admission was not independently associated with greater hospital mortality.
Hypoxia remains associated with greater in-hospital mortality risk and should be avoided where possible.
Notice what this is.
This is a study in late 2018, which is supposedly refuting this idea that hyperoxia is dangerous, but they only look in the first 24 hours after ICU admission.
They're not looking if they leave these TBI patients on for longer, which they probably do, whether or not they are worse off, because that's what happened in COVID.
Patients were put in the hospital and left for hours, if not days sometimes in the UK.
So no wonder they progressed into ARDS.
Even if you leave them with just high flow nasal oxygen in the hallway of a hospital for two days on a movable bed, that might be enough.
But anybody in the ICU, it would be more than enough.
Harmful effects of early hyperoxemia in patients admitted to general wards, an observational cohort study in Korea.
Conclusions, hyperoxemia during the first three days in patients outside the ICU is associated with in-hospital mortality and ICU transfer at day five after arrival at the ED.
You can get, please understand what this means.
It means that according to this study in South Korea, you can actually get people to go to the ICU after five days in the ER if you give them hyperoxemia.
Hyperoxemia during the first three days in the patients outside the ICU is associated with in-hospital mortality and ICU transfer at day five.
You go to the ICU after day five, if you get hyperoxemia during the first three days of the hospital.
This sounds like a pretty easy way to create the illusion of a novel virus in every hospital in America that you wanted to, that happened to be under military control or financial coercion or a combination of both.
Association between arterial hyperoxia and mortality in critically ill patients, a systematic review, also from 2018.
Conclusion, the result of a current meta-analysis suggests that arterial hyperoxia may be associated with increased hospital mortality in critically ill patients.
Here's a Chinese review in 2018.
I guess they knew it all over the world.
I guess they knew this all over the world.
It's really bizarre because it seems to me like Pierre Kory, the hero of America in 2020 and forward, doesn't know shit about this.
It appears like Ahmed Malik, the master surgeon turned dissident, doesn't know anything about this.
It seems like Robert Malone, never treated a patient in his life, doesn't know anything about this.
Or Tony Fauci doesn't know anything about this.
It's extraordinary how many doctors don't seem to know about this, even though I'm having a hard time, I'm not even halfway through this list.
Hold on, let me see if I can find another one.
These are only from 2018.
I mean, only from, think about what I'm saying to you.
Impact of conservative versus conventional oxygenation on outcomes.
Just go down here to the conclusions.
The authors conclude that conservative oxygenation therapy could result in significantly lower rates of ICU mortality, 28-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, and new-onset non-respiratory organ failure.
Holy shit!
Authors conclude that conservative oxygenation therapy could result in significantly lower rates of ICU mortality, 28-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, and new-onset non-respiratory organ failure.
Further randomized controlled studies showed that clinical outcome improvement in multiple parameters may be worthwhile to assess the true efficacy of this practice.
Holy shitbirds! 2019.
I mean, are we gonna keep talking about the fear and cleavage site?
Are we gonna keep talking about the spike protein and spike protein therapy with these people?
Or are we gonna ask some of these MDs to talk about this for one fricking second?
Maybe we need to back the truck up and look again at all these medical records from 2020 and not leave it to people who are just gonna look for vaccine injury, not gonna look for transfection injury, but are gonna look for hyperoxia.
Because I don't think we have anybody in our movement doing it right now.
And I think that's by design.
I think that's why I'm the first person to get here to do this.
not Jessica Rose or Walter Chestnut or any of these other people that are pretending to be patriots for their home countries, but in reality are playing for this narrative of gain-of-function viruses, of gain-of-function proteins, of amyloidosis and prion disease, of getting this out there as a transfection without anybody knowing it and protecting the vaccine schedule as a criminal enterprise and distracting us from it.
I'm gonna just keep going.
effects of a lower versus higher concentration oxygen target in intensive care unit patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.
Let's see what these guys find.
ICU patients with COPD, is that what they call it?
And acute hypoxemia, do they call it that?
Are you telling me that people with hypoxemia can also be described as COPD as having like long COVID?
A lower versus higher oxygenation target did not reduce mortality.
There were no in-group differences here.
interesting.
But what I find interesting about this is that they refer to ICU patients with COPD.
You see, this is that chronic fatigue syndrome is from ventilation.
It is from hyperoxemia in the hospital.
And that's why it's been around for so long.
They've been working on this for a while, I think, ladies and gentlemen, adjusting the technology of ventilation to more
Fine-tune this use.
That's where I think this goes.
You want my malevolent interpretation?
The worst case scenario for me is that.
That people like Margaret Hamburg and all these other people that have been working with our government have been doing this for decades already, planning this to take advantage of this bump in the population pyramid and blame it on a novel virus that they know what it's from.
They're just killing us.
Association be transcutaneous oxygen saturation within 24 hours of admission and mortality.
Retrospective analysis.
Again, Chinese data.
In patients with severe subarachnoid hemorrhage, that's underneath the surface of the skull, the association between oxygen and mortality at 28 and 90 days demonstrated a U-shaped pattern.
When oxygen levels were between 95 and 98, short and long-term mortality rates were at their lowest.
Patients with significant subarachnoid hemorrhage had lower chances of survival when their values were either higher than or lower than this range.
It sounds exactly like the paper we just talked about a few minutes ago that showed that a small reduction from 97 to 100% range to a 94 to 98% range target was associated with all kinds of reductions.
Chinese knew it in 2019, too, apparently.
No, this is 2023, it says here.
So they keep doing the same paper over and over again, it seems.
Association between hyperoxemia and mortality in patients treated by eCPR after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
Conclusions, we found an association between mortality and hyperoxemia in patients admitted to the ICU.
So in France, they knew in 2019 that this would hurt people.
Of course, that's not the only paper.
Let's see again here.
Oh, here's another French paper from 2019.
The conclusions are, in patients referred to an intensive care unit for acute heart failure, we did not find any difference in outcomes according to the presence of hyperoxia.
OK.
I can't find it in every p-values, right?
I mean, let's just keep looking.
Oxygen treatment and intensive care, let me close some of these here.
This is a German study from, let's see, 2018.
Hypoxemia should certainly be avoided, but the fact that the liberal administration of oxygen to patients in intensive care units and emergency rooms tends to increase morbidity and mortality implies the advisability of a conservative normal oxic oxygen strategy.
Holy crapola.
Hypoxemia should certainly be avoided, but the fact that liberal administration of oxygen to patients in intensive care units and emergency rooms tends to increase morbidity and mortality implies the advisability of a conservative normal oxygenation strategy.
I mean, am I, did I choke anybody out yet?
Have I choked this narrative out yet?
Is this over?
Is somebody gonna tap?
Is Pierre Corey gonna tap right now?
Is he gonna do a sub stack to respond to me with multiple videos like he did with Jessica Hockett?
Is there gonna be an interplay now between his explanation of how this doesn't hold true or he doesn't know or whatever?
Is he gonna do a video response to me?
Hell no, because we're not on the same team like he was with Jessica Hockett.
Is Jessica Hockett gonna promote this video?
Has evidence of the fraud of the pandemic?
Of course not.
I guess I'm a meddler now because I don't like Jonathan Engler and all these other foreigners that she hangs out with.
Before the ICU, does emergency room hyperoxia affect outcome?
Another one from Germany.
There is now ample evidence that hyperoxemia, that is, increased inspired oxygen concentrations and the subsequent rise in arterial oxygen tensions, coincides with aggravated mortality.
This is a review.
about all the ways that necessitating mechanical ventilation due to exacerbation of chronic lung disease.
While there are no clinical studies on the impact of hyperoxemia in patients with community acquired pneumonia, a recent retrospective study in this journal showed that hyperoxemia increased the risk of ventilator associated pneumonia in patients receiving mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours.
That's exactly how they did it.
It's not the ventilation, ladies and gentlemen, it's the oxygen concentrations that they used.
You can ventilate somebody if you use normal air.
You can ventilate somebody if you use normal volume and normal pressure.
And ventilation, although it involves sedation and whatever, is probably not that dangerous if done non-malevolently.
where you don't ignore the fact that it's lower, it's like, it's all over the world, ladies and gentlemen, and hundreds of publications in just 2018 alone.
They know this.
And yet the main way that they treated COVID at the beginning of the pandemic, according to Pierre Corey in New York City, was with up to 60 liters a minute of pure oxygen.
They were running out of bottles, says Kyle Seidel.
Let's go and just take a look quick, if we can.
If we just look at Housatonic ITS and I don't know how to do this here.
I got to figure this out myself, but we got to find the archive and we have to look for like the ventilator stuff or the protocol stuff.
Playlists, maybe.
Shared videos, 2023 series, ambiance, biographies, the flu, real Fauci, do no harm, there's me.
Maybe you can put a link in the chat if you're there, Mark.
Let's see, just looking through all these playlists to try and find the one on the protocols because he's got a video here on his website that I'm not finding very well right now, which I apologize for, where you can see.
Kyle Seidel talking about 60 liters a minute.
You can also find videos where he interviews people who have the medical records of their loved ones who were killed and they start with this high flow oxygen stuff.
So, if you're unfamiliar with this website, please get familiar with it.
It's something that's really important for everybody to know where it is and know what's going on.
Let me see if this helps me at all.
I'm not going to do that right now.
We're just going to keep working on this.
Let's see.
We'll get this out.
If you want to drop a link in the chat, Mark, if you end up showing up here, if you can hear me and you're getting down from your ladder, don't fall.
Just take your time.
We got lots of time here yet.
Let's see.
My voice is starting to go though.
I can feel it.
I had a sore throat already today.
Hyperoxemia and hypertonic saline in patients with septic shock.
And here we go.
Let me go over here and click that.
And here we go, Oxygen and 19 Protocols.
Thank you very much for that link in the chat.
That is Mark Kulak of Housatonic Live.
This view is no longer available on YouTube because why?
Because they terminated his account.
It's pretty hilarious there.
I'm gonna read, this is redirecting me to Rumble.
Let's see if this has got a little.
need to understand i'm going to use a lot of terms which align with this is marks let me see that's not the way
That's all everyone.
Thank you.
Take care.
God bless.
Okay.
Anyway, it doesn't matter.
I want you to see this.
This is the list.
This is a Leslie Batts interview.
Um, here's the, the little video that I did on it.
Um, so anyway, you can see here's Kyle Seidel again, talking about this.
Um, look at all those oxygen tanks outside of the hospitals.
I mean, look at this picture here.
Um,
This is also another video that he's archived.
This is really extraordinary because this dovetails directly into this concept that these people didn't want us to talk about this.
This is something that we kind of figured out and they couldn't put a lid on it.
And that may be why Jessica Hockett made the mistake that she did at the time that she did while sending me this really, you know, very friendly and happy message about the recent video that she released of our presentation to Senator Ranjan's staff.
I mean, at the same time, I don't know, somehow accused Mark of being some kind of meddler and
and wanting to call the cops on him when they were, as me, you know, getting photos of her family and stuff.
Unsolicited photos, unsolicited, you know, voicemails and voice recordings.
I mean, it was weird because then all of a sudden it just all stopped.
because she's a traitor.
She's part of this illusion of consensus about what we need to talk about that doesn't want us to know that they killed people with simple supplemental oxygen.
And the trace and the stain of this stuff is available in the literature.
And it's been available for a very long time.
It's been available to all of them.
And it was probably part of the plan.
It was probably part of the plan.
I think it's this one that I want.
They're not always opening.
Hyperoxemia, this one is, was not associated with increased, but, oh yeah, there we go, this is a new one.
Hyperoxemia was not associated with increased 28-day mortality when compared to normal oxemia.
However, both moderate and severe hyperoxemia is frequently observed in trauma patients and the presence of severe hyperoxemia showed a tendency to extend hospital stay.
So robust randomized control trials are necessary because, you know, vaccines haven't really been tested, so we better do it.
Just like, you know, we don't know for sure, according to that textbook we were reading, whether or not oxygen can really hurt people, but it definitely hurts animals in all the studies we've done.
Holy balls.
It is amazing how easy it is to do this work because nobody's doing it.
No MDs are doing it.
You know, where are they?
Where are the MDs leading our way through understanding how people were murdered in the beginning of the pandemic?
Hyperoxia may be associated with increased mortality with people with stroke, traumatic brain injury, and those resuscitated from cardiac arrest.
However, these results are limited by the high heterogeneity of the included studies.
Stop lying.
Wow.
I mean, I'm not stopping yet.
I'm going to keep going.
Oxygen in the neonatal ICU in the United States and in Leiden and in Spain.
Uh-oh, that didn't sound good.
What's going on out here?
No fighting, you doughheads.
Oxygen in the neonatal ICU.
In this review, we will discuss the physiology of neonates in relation to hypoxia and hyperoxic injury.
Oh, has that happened?
The history of supplemental oxygen in the delivery room and beyond, supporting clinical research, guiding trends for oxygen therapy and neonatal care.
This is in 2024.
Let's just go to the conclusions, shall we?
Wow, I mean, it's just extraordinary how many excuses they make for not finding it.
Ongoing investigations into automatic oxygen control and near-infrared spectroscopy to shed light on the optimal strategies for oxygen threshold while avoiding oxygen toxicity and stress.
Further research in antioxidant systems, stem cell therapy, optimal, optimal, optimal, optimal strategies.
They know it hurts them.
That's why they start with the introduction that says oxygen hurts things, hurts people.
Right?
Oxygen remains the most commonly used medication in neonatal intensive care.
Supplemental oxygen can be life-saving.
However, oxygen use in neonatal period must be judicious as there can be toxic effects.
So that's not something they didn't know.
Association between hyperoxemia exposure and intensive care unit mortality.
in the UK.
Patients with ICH admitted to the ICU.
ICH is intercerebral hemorrhage.
Patients with intercerebral hemorrhage admitted to the intensive care unit, we observed an association between hyperoxemia dose and ICU mortality.
I mean, I kind of feel like at this stage,
you know, what are we doing here anymore?
Like, could we find, you know, there wouldn't, there wouldn't be a study from Washington University, Wash University and Washington University in America.
That would be crazy.
Like the best medical school in America wouldn't know about this, would they?
I mean, that would be just nuts if, if that was the case.
And yet in, in 2020, when they did this to people in hospitals, so ED,
Exposure to hyperoxia is common and associated with increased mortality in mechanically ventilated patients achieving normoxia after admission.
This suggests that hyperoxia in the immediate post-intubation period could be particularly injurious.
So if they put you on a ventilator and right away start you with high oxygen to try and get you to 100%, it can be particularly injurious.
It sounds like exactly what Pierre Kory and Kyle Seidel and all these people were doing.
The whole FLCCC protocol suggested it because 94% pulse ox was already caused to seek medical attention.
And yet literature exists from 2018 that says 94 is pretty good.
94 is a good shoot, good shot.
That's a good thing to target.
Hyperoxemia by short term promotes oxidative damage and mitochondrial dysfunction in the brain of rats in 2022.
Oxygen therapy is used as a therapeutic protocol to prevent or treat hypoxia.
However, a high inspired fraction of oxygen promotes hyperoxia, a harmful condition for the central nervous system.
That's just how this rat paper opens.
This rat paper just opens with that standard statement of assumption, that this whole paper is justified.
The whole experiment in rats is justified because
High inspired fraction of oxygen promotes hyperoxia, a harmful condition for the central nervous system.
Have they been injuring old people in the hospital and anyone in the hospital with this for decades already?
Chances are, yes.
Have they been calling it chronic fatigue syndrome?
Well, I would strongly encourage anyone with chronic fatigue syndrome to question themselves if they bend on ventilator or bend on supplementary oxygen, because that could have caused it.
Not all of them will have that answer, of course, because I don't think it is just that.
But it can be a source of it.
It can exacerbate it.
Ladies and gentlemen, please wake up and apologize to your kids.
I do it every day.
We've got a lot of work to do.
There is a reason why murder and lies were necessary.
And it is because of the fact that the population pyramid was going to provide them an opportunity that they knew was coming for decades.
This slope that you see here, this slope right here should be like this.
The slope of this graph is going up.
And if you could zoom out, you would see it.
And the slope is going up because the population is going up and because the baby boomer generation was aging out.
And they have taken advantage of this in combination with the opioid crisis and all kinds of other random ways of turning up all cause mortality to make us, coerce us into believing in a novel coronavirus.
And there is a good explanation for how PCR can be highly accurate, but also a complete lie for SARS-CoV-2.
And that's why people like Jessica Rose and Kevin McKernan and Paul Cottrell and any of these other people who would have pretended to know what was going on in 2020 have never gotten you there.
And it's 2024.
How the population pyramid provided a booming opportunity.
Yes, the boomers, and they had to do this.
Otherwise, all of these Western democracies would have been in big trouble.
The last six months of life of some of these baby boomers can cost as much as a half a million dollars on Medicaid and Medicare.
And so what better way to take advantage of this opportunity that they could see coming for three decades
that people like Margaret Hamburg saw coming, the same way that Tony Fauci saw it coming, the same way that all the people that planned the Human Genome Project saw it coming, as a way to use public health as an excuse to invert our sovereignty so that they could get the test subjects they needed.
And that's why they also need to lie about virology.
That's why HIV is a lie.
That's why coronavirus biology is a lie.
It's a lie about transfection and transformation.
It's not a lie about created wholly out of thin air.
These technologies that Kevin McKernan is protecting, these technologies and their lack of fidelity that these people are protecting are real.
and they are being actively used to misconstrue our fidelity in our understanding of our own biology, misconstrue a fidelity in the study of disease, the control of disease.
That's without a doubt.
Virology is definitely a lie, but it is a much more complex lie.
And if we're gonna save our children from that mythology and from enslavement by it, they're gonna have to understand it.
They're not gonna just have to dismiss it, because if they dismiss it, chances are pretty good they'll still be enslaved by it.
They have to take ownership of their biology again, and understand how the vaccine schedule in America is a criminal enterprise, understand how transfection was always criminally negligent, and all their college professors that purport to be biologists should have known better, and RNA cannot pandemic, and all of them should know better than that too.
and they use murder and lies to cover this up, ladies and gentlemen, that's for sure what they did.
Tonight, I'm gonna be live on The Levine Show with Denny Rancor.
I'm gonna take a shower, play some basketball, eat and drink and relax in the sun for a little bit and pet my dog and get ready for that.
I suspect it's gonna be pretty innocuous and easy because again, I'm gonna let Denny do all the talking, he's got all the numbers.
And if they need me for anything biological, I'll be there to help.
So hopefully that'll be an interesting conversation.
Hopefully you'll be able to join me.
And if you liked what you saw today, you wanna share that with people, please share gigaohmbiological.com or stream.gigaohm.bio where the video is archived.
Thank you very much for joining me.
Thanks for being here.
I'll see you again tomorrow.
Thanks, guys.
I'll see you again.
Like I said, it's 8 o'clock Eastern.
I think it's 6 o'clock Mountain or something like that.
So, I think it's 8 o'clock Eastern time tonight on Rumble at The Levine Show.
Thanks very much.
See you guys again tomorrow.