Our Grave Concerns About the Handling of the COVID Pandemic by Governments of the Nations of the UK

Open letter from several healthcare professions to the UK government/administrators.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Mr Boris Johnson, Prime Minister

Ms Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister for Scotland

Mr Mark Drakeford, First Minister for Wales

Mr Paul Givan, First Minister for Northern Ireland

Mr Sajid Javid, Health Secretary

Dr Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer

Dr Patrick Vallance, Chief Scientific Officer

 

22 August 2021

Dear Sirs and Madam,

Our grave concerns about the handling of the COVID pandemic by Governments of the Nations of the UK.

We write as concerned doctors, nurses, and other allied healthcare professionals with no vested interest in doing so. To the contrary, we face personal risk in relation to our employment for doing so and / or the risk of being personally “smeared” by those who inevitably will not like us speaking out.

We are taking the step of writing this public letter because it has become apparent to us that:

  • The  Government (by which we mean the UK government and three devolved governments/administrations and associated government advisors and agencies such as the CMOs, CSA, SAGE, MHRA, JCVI, Public Health services, Ofcom etc, hereinafter “you” or the “Government”) have based the handling of the COVID pandemic on flawed assumptions.
  • These have been pointed out to you by numerous individuals and organisations.
  • You have failed to engage in dialogue and show no signs of doing so. You have removed from people fundamental rights and altered the fabric of society with little debate in Parliament. No minister responsible for policy has ever appeared in a proper debate with anyone with opposing views on any mainstream media channel.
  • Despite being aware of alternative medical and scientific viewpoints you have failed to ensure an open and full discussion of the pros and cons of alternative ways of managing the pandemic.
  • The pandemic response policies implemented have caused massive, permanent and unnecessary harm to our nation, and must never be repeated.
  • Only by revealing the complete lack of widespread approval among healthcare professionals of your policies will a wider debate be demanded by the public.

In relation to the above, we wish to draw attention to the following points. Supporting references can be provided upon request.

  1. No attempt to measure the harms of lockdown policies

The evidence of disastrous effects of lockdowns on the physical and mental health of the population is there for all to see. The harms are massive, widespread, and long lasting. In particular, the psychological impact on a generation of developing children could be lifelong.

It is for this reason that lockdown policies were never part of any pandemic preparedness plans prior to 2020. In fact, they were expressly not recommended in WHO documents, even for severe respiratory viral pathogens and for that matter neither were border closures, face coverings, and testing of asymptomatic individuals. There has been such an inexplicable absence of consideration of the harms caused by lockdown policy it is difficult to avoid the suspicion that this is willful avoidance.

The introduction of such policies was never accompanied by any sort of risk/benefit analysis. As bad as that is, it is even worse that after the event when plenty of data became available by which the harms could be measured, only perfunctory attention to this aspect of pandemic planning has been afforded. Eminent professionals have repeatedly called for discourse on these health impacts in press-conferences but have been universally ignored.

What is so odd, is that the policies being pursued before mid-March 2020 (self-isolation of the ill and protection of the vulnerable, while otherwise society continued close to normality) were balanced, sensible and reflected the approach established by consensus prior to 2020. No cogent reason was given then for the abrupt change of direction from mid-March 2020 and strikingly none has been put forward at any time since.

  1. Institutional nature of COVID

It was actually clear early on from Italian data that COVID (the disease – as opposed to SARS-Cov-2 infection or exposure) was largely a disease of institutions. Care home residents comprised around half of all deaths, despite making up less than 1% of the population. Hospital infections are the major driver of transmission rates as was the case for both SARS1 and MERS. Transmission was associated with hospital contact in up to 40% of cases in the first wave in Spring 2020 and in 64% in winter 2020/2021.

Severe illness among healthy people below 70 years old did occur (as seen with flu pandemics) but was extremely rare.

Despite this, no early, aggressive and targeted measures were taken to protect care homes; to the contrary, patients were discharged without testing to homes where staff had inadequate PPE, training and information. Many unnecessary deaths were caused as a result.

Preparations for this coming winter, including ensuring sufficient capacity and preventative measures such as ventilation solutions, have not been prioritised.

  1. The exaggerated nature of the threat

Policy appears to have been directed at systematic exaggeration of the number of deaths which can be attributed to COVID. Testing was designed to find every possible ‘case’ rather than focusing on clinically diagnosed infections and the resulting exaggerated case numbers fed through to the death data with large numbers of people dying ‘with COVID’ and not ‘of COVID’ where the disease was the underlying cause of death.

The policy of publishing a daily death figure meant the figure was based entirely on the PCR test result with no input from treating clinicians. By including all deaths within a time period after a positive test, incidental deaths, with but not due to COVID, were not excluded thereby exaggerating the nature of the threat.

Moreover, in headlines reporting the number of deaths, a categorisation by age was not included. The average age of a COVID-labelled death is 81 for men and 84 for women, higher than the average life expectancy when these people were born. This is a highly relevant fact in assessing the societal impact of the pandemic. Death in old age is a natural phenomenon. It cannot be said that a disease primarily affecting the elderly is the same as one which affects all ages, and yet the government’s messaging appears designed to make the public think that everyone is at equal risk.

Doctors were asked to complete death certificates in the knowledge that the deceased’s death had already been recorded as a COVID death by the Government. Since it would be virtually impossible to find evidence categorically ruling out COVID as a contributory factor to death, once recorded as a “COVID death” by the government, it was inevitable that it would be included as a cause on the death certificate. Diagnosing the cause of death is always difficult and the reduction in post mortems will have inevitably resulted in increased inaccuracy. The fact that deaths due to non-COVID causes actually moved into a substantial deficit (compared to average) as COVID-labelled deaths rose (and this was reversed as COVID-labelled deaths fell) is striking evidence of over-attribution of deaths to COVID.

The overall all-cause mortality rate from 2015-2019 was unusually low and yet these figures have been used to compare to 2020 and 2021 mortality figures which has made the increased mortality appear unprecedented. Comparisons with data from earlier years would have demonstrated that the 2020 mortality rate was exceeded in every year prior to 2003 and is unexceptional as a result.

Even now COVID cases and deaths continue to be added to the existing total without proper rigour such that overall totals grow ever larger and exaggerate the threat. No effort has been made to count totals in each winter season separately which is standard practice for every other disease.

You have continued to adopt high-frequency advertising through publishing and broadcast media outlets to add to the impact of “fear messaging”. The cost of this has not been widely published, but government procurement websites reveal it to be immense – hundreds of millions of pounds.

The media and government rhetoric is now moving onto the idea that “Long Covid” is going to cause major morbidity in all age groups including children, without having a discussion of the normality of postviral fatigue which lasts upwards of 6 months. This adds to the public fear of the disease, encouraging vaccination amongst those who are highly unlikely to suffer any adverse effects from COVID.

  1. Active suppression of discussion of early treatment using protocols being successfully deployed elsewhere.

The harm caused by COVID and our response to it should have meant that advances in prophylaxis and therapeutics for COVID were embraced. However, evidence on successful treatments has been ignored or even actively suppressed. For example, a study in Oxford published in February 2021 demonstrated that inhaled Budesonide could reduce hospitalisations by 90% in low risk patients and a publication in April 2021 showed that recovery was faster for high risk patients too. However, this important intervention has not been promoted.

Dr. Tess Lawrie, of the Evidence Based Medical Consultancy in Bath, presented a thorough analysis of the prophylactic and therapeutic benefits of Ivermectin to the government in January 2021. More than 24 randomised trials with 3,400 people have demonstrated a 79-91% reduction in infections and a 27-81% reduction in deaths with Ivermectin.

Many doctors are understandably cautious about possible over-interpretation of the available data for the drugs mentioned above and other treatments, although it is to be noted that no such caution seems to have been applied in relation to the treatment of data around the government’s interventions (eg the effectiveness of lockdowns or masks) when used in support of the government’s agenda.

Whatever one’s view on the merits of these repurposed drugs, it is totally unacceptable that doctors who have attempted to merely open discussion about the potential benefits of early treatments for COVID have been heavily and inexplicably censored. Knowing that early treatments which could reduce the risk of requiring hospitalisation might be available would alter the entire view held by many professionals and lay people alike about the threat posed by COVID, and therefore the risk / benefit ratio for vaccination, especially in younger groups.

  1. Inappropriate and unethical use of behavioural science to generate unwarranted fear.

Propagation of a deliberate fear narrative (confirmed through publicly accessible government documentation) has been disproportionate, harmful and counterproductive. We request that it should cease forthwith.

To give just one example, the government’s face covering policies seem to have been driven by behavioural psychology advice in relation to generating a level of fear necessary for compliance with other policies. Those policies do not appear to have been driven by reason of infection control, because there is no robust evidence showing that wearing a face covering (particularly cloth or standard surgical masks) is effective against transmission of airborne respiratory pathogens such as SARS-Cov-2. Several high profile institutions and individuals are aware of this and have advocated against face coverings during this pandemic only inexplicably to reverse their advice on the basis of no scientific justification of which we are aware. On the other hand there is plenty of evidence suggesting that mask wearing can cause multiple harms, both physical and mental. This has been particularly distressing for the nation’s school children who have been encouraged by government policy and their schools to wear masks for long periods at school.

Finally, the use of face coverings is highly symbolic and thus counterproductive in making people feel safe. Prolonged wearing risks becoming an ingrained safety behaviour, actually preventing people from getting back to normal because they erroneously attribute their safety to the act of mask wearing rather than to the remote risk, for the vast majority of healthy people under 70 years old, of catching the virus and becoming seriously unwell with COVID.

  1. Misunderstanding of the ubiquitous nature of mutations of newly emergent viruses.

The mutation of any novel virus into newer strains – especially when under selection pressure from abnormal restrictions on mixing and vaccination – is normal, unavoidable and not something to be concerned about. Hundreds of thousands of mutations of the original Wuhan strain have already been identified. Chasing down every new emergent variant is counterproductive, harmful and totally unnecessary and there is no convincing evidence that any newly identified variant is any more deadly than the original strain.

Mutant strains appear simultaneously in different countries (by way of ‘convergent evolution’) and the closing of national borders in attempts to prevent variants travelling from one country to another serves no significant infection control purpose and should be abandoned.

  1. Misunderstanding of asymptomatic spread and its use to promote public compliance with restrictions.

It is well-established that asymptomatic spread has never been a major driver of a respiratory disease pandemic and we object to your constant messaging implying this, which should cease forthwith. Never before have we perverted the centuries-old practice of isolating the ill by instead isolating the healthy. Repeated mandates to healthy, asymptomatic people to self-isolate, especially school children, serves no useful purpose and has only contributed to the widespread harms of such policies. In the vast majority of cases healthy people are healthy and cannot transmit the virus and only sick people with symptoms should be isolated.

The government’s claim that one in three people could have the virus has been shown to be mutually inconsistent with the ONS data on prevalence of disease in society, and the sole effect of this messaging appears to have been to generate fear and promote compliance with government restrictions. The government’s messaging to ‘act as if you have the virus’ has also been unnecessarily fear-inducing given that healthy people are extremely unlikely to transmit the virus to others.

The PCR test, widely used to determine the existence of ‘cases’, is now indisputably acknowledged to be unable reliably to detect infectiousness. The test cannot discriminate between those in whom the presence of fragments of genetic material partially matching the virus is either incidental (perhaps because of past infection), or is representative of active infection, or is indicative of infectiousness. Yet, it has been used almost universally without qualification or clinical diagnosis to justify lockdown policies and to quarantine millions of people needlessly at enormous cost to health and well-being and to the country’s economy.

Countries that have removed community restrictions have seen no negative consequences which can be attributed to the easing. Empirical data from many countries demonstrates that the rise and fall in infections is seasonal and not due to restrictions or face coverings. The reason for reduced impact of each successive wave is that: (1) most people have some level of immunity either through prior immunity or immunity acquired through exposure; (2) as is usual with emergent new viruses, mutation of the virus towards strains causing milder disease appears to have occurred. Vaccination may also contribute to this although its durability and level of protection against variants is unclear. 

The government appears to be talking of “learning to live with COVID” while apparently practicing by stealth a “zero COVID” strategy which is futile and ultimately net-harmful.

  1. Mass testing of healthy children

Repeated testing of children to find asymptomatic cases who are unlikely to spread virus, and treating them like some sort of biohazard is harmful, serves no public health purpose and must stop.

During Easter term, an amount equivalent to the cost of building one District General Hospital was spent weekly on testing schoolchildren to find a few thousand positive ‘cases’, none of which was serious as far as we are aware.

Lockdowns are in fact a far greater contributor to child health problems, with record levels of mental illness and soaring levels of non-COVID infections being seen, which some experts consider to be a result of distancing resulting in deconditioning of the immune system.

  1. Vaccination of the entire adult population should never have been a prerequisite for ending restrictions.

Based merely on early “promising” vaccine data, it is clear that the Government decided in summer 2020 to pursue a policy of viral suppression within the entire population until vaccination was available (which was initially stated to be for the vulnerable only, then later changed – without proper debate or rigorous analysis – to the entire adult population).

This decision was taken despite massive harms consequent to continued lockdowns which were either known to you or ought to have been ascertained so as to be considered in the decision making process.

Moreover, a number of principles of good medical practice and previously unimpeachable ethical standards have been breached in relation to the vaccination campaign, meaning that in most cases, whether the consent obtained can be truly regarded as “fully informed” must be in serious doubt:

  • The use of coercion supported by an unprecedented media campaign to persuade the public to be vaccinated, including threats of discrimination, either supported by the law or encouraged socially, for example in co-operation with social media platforms and dating apps.
  • The omission of information permitting individuals to make a fully informed choice, especially in relation to the experimental nature of the vaccine agents, extremely low background COVID risk for most people, known occurrence of short-term side-effects and unknown long-term effects.

Finally, we note that the Government is seriously considering the possibility that these vaccines – which have no associated long-term safety data – could be administered to children on the basis that this might provide some degree of protection to adults. We find that notion an appalling and unethical inversion of the long-accepted duty falling on adults to protect children.

  1. Over-reliance on modeling while ignoring real-world data

Throughout the pandemic, decisions seem to have been taken utilising unvalidated models produced by groups who have what can only be described as a woeful track record, massively overestimating the impact of several previous pandemics.

The decision-making teams appear to have very little clinical input and, as far as is ascertainable, no clinical immunology expertise.

Moreover, the assumptions underlying the modeling have never been adjusted to take into account real-world observations in the UK and other countries.

It is an astonishing admission that, when asked whether collateral harms had been considered by SAGE, the answer given was that it was not in their remit – they were simply asked to minimise COVID impact. That might be forgivable if some other advisory group was constantly studying the harms side of the ledger, yet this seems not to have been the case.

Conclusions

The UK’s approach to COVID has palpably failed. In the apparent desire to protect one vulnerable group – the elderly – the implemented policies have caused widespread collateral and disproportionate harm to many other vulnerable groups, especially children. Moreover your policies have failed in any event to prevent the UK from notching up one of the highest reported death rates from COVID in the world.

Now, despite very high vaccination rates and the currently very low COVID death and hospitalisation rates, policy continues to be aimed at maintaining a population handicapped by extreme fear with restrictions on everyday life prolonging and deepening the policy-derived harms. To give just one example, NHS waiting lists now stand at 5.1m officially, with – according to the previous Health Secretary – a likely further 7m who will require treatment not yet presented. This is unacceptable and must be addressed urgently.

In short, there needs to be a sea change within the Government which must now pay proper attention to those esteemed experts outside its inner circle who are sounding these alarms. As those involved with healthcare, we are committed to our oath to “first do no harm”, and we can no longer stand by in silence observing policies which have imposed a series of supposed “cures” which are in fact far worse than the disease they are supposed to address.

The signatories of this letter call on you, in Government, without further delay to widen the debate over policy, consult openly with groups of scientists, doctors, psychologists and others who share crucial, scientifically-valid and evidence-based alternative views and to do everything in your power to return the country as rapidly as possible to normality with the minimum of further damage to society.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Jonathan Engler, MB ChB LLB (Hons) DipPharmMed

Professor John A Fairclough, BM BS B Med Sci FRCS FFSEM,  Consultant Surgeon, ran vaccination program for a Polio Outbreak, Past President BOSTA, for Orthopaedic Surgeons, Faculty member FFSEM

Mr Tony Hinton, MB ChB, FRCS, FRCS(Oto), Consultant Surgeon

Dr Renee Hoenderkamp, BSc (Hons) MBBS MRCGP, General Practitioner

Dr Ros Jones, MBBS, MD, FRCPCH, retired consultant paediatrician

Mr Malcolm Loudon, MB ChB MD FRCSEd FRCS (Gen Surg) MIHM VR

Dr Geoffrey Maidment, MBBS, MD, FRCP, retired consultant physician

Dr Alan Mordue, MB ChB, FFPH (ret), Retired Consultant in Public Health Medicine

Mr Colin Natali, BSc(Hons), MBBS FRCS FRCS(Orth), Consultant Spine Surgeon

Dr Helen Westwood, MBChB MRCGP DCH DRCOG, General Practitioner

Click here for the complete list of signatories and if you wish to add your name to the letter.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image: Prime Minister Boris Johnson during a press conference on 16 March, with Chief Medical Officer Prof Chris Witty and Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance. Picture by Andrew Parsons

Stew Peters Show Interview with Former Pfizer Employee | Poisonous Graphene Oxide is 100% in the Vaccines

DEADLY SHOTS! Former Pfizer Employee Confirms Poison in COVID ‘Vaccine’ [Full Transcript]

I made this post: Doctors/Whistleblower: LARGE Amounts of Graphene Oxide Found in Certain COVID Vaccines detailing a few quotes/excerpts/studies that have purportedly shown that graphene oxide is indeed in the COVID vaccines. One source of information was from Karen Kingston, a former Pfizer employee and scientific data/clinical analyst.

While I highlighted some of the pertinent information from her interview focusing on graphene oxide in the above link, I also wanted to offer the whole transcript since she goes into further descriptions of her findings and the harm that graphene oxide can do to the human body.

The below video of the interview between Karen Kingston and the Stew Peters Show has been transcribed in full, with some emphasis added.

Stew Peters: “Well we have gone back and forth with fact-checkers – some independent researchers who have attempted to debunk the findings of Spanish researchers called La Quinta Columna, originally broken here on the Stew Peters Show by Dr. Jane Ruby. That video revealing that graphene oxide, a toxic substance – a poison!, was found in the Pfizer vaccines. Those researchers later found that the same applied to Moderna and AstraZeneca, is now being tested as a result of our reporting. The truth is here.

USA Today and Lead Stories, all funded by the cabal, were all over me, all over Dr. Jane Ruby, and out and out calling us liars for reporting those findings to the world in a video that has now soared over well I think about a million views on Rumble.

We have sought the input of many medical experts, world-renowned doctors, Dr. Jane Ruby, Dr. Tenpenny, Dr. Judy Mikovitz, Dr. David Martin, they have all confirmed that report. But despite all of that confirmation, the assaults on our truth continue.

On twitter, you may have recently been following the hashtag ‘pfizerleak’ [#pfizerleak]. We want to know what’s in them. We want to know if it was pre-planned. Who’s behind all of it. We want to know what to believe, so today we’re going to get the confirmation that we need.

It’s hard to fact-check documents. It’s hard to fact-check publicly discoverable propriotary ingredients. It’s hard to fact-check Karen Kingston. She is a former Pfizer employee, currently an analyst for the pharmaceutical and medical device industries.

Karen, thank you so much for being here. We really appreciate your bravery. We admire your desire to expose the truth behind what appears to be, to me at least, one of the most, if not THE most, evil agenda mankind has ever been subject to.”

Karen Kingston @1:50: “Well, thank you for giving me a platform to share my findings and to spread the truth. And you’re right, it is extremely difficult to find this information and link it together.

I do have a unique set of skills, this is what I do in the industry; I analyze intellectual property, the legal landscape, for both physicians, pharma and consumers, and then I’m also a scientific writer and do the clinical analysis as well. So you can’t expect everyone to have that skill set to find this information, and the truth is I’m – you know, the whole do your own research was born out of the reality that the mainstream media has been lying to us and big tech and social media have been blocking the truth. And that’s why people have had to do their own research. And that’s – that violates our first amendment.”

SP: “Is graphene oxide in these shots?”
KK: “100% it is, and it’s irrefutable.”

Stew Peters @2:38: “So, just lay it out there. Is graphene oxide in these shots?”

Karen Kingston: “100% it is, and it’s irrefutable. And I’ll walk you through it.

So, what’s really important to know is that all of the mRNA vaccines contain what’s called a PEGylated lipid nanoparticle. And that’s what we’re going to go through. So if you take a look at the Moderna patent, it says, right there, that this contains lipid nanoparticle formulation. And as you go through the patent, which I’ll show you, they specifically talk about various ingredients and various PEGylated formulations that have alpha-numeric codes. And then you can also find them in the filings with the FDA with the IND [investigational new drug] and phase 3 trials for both Moderna and Pfizer. And you can also find them, you know, across the pond with the UK filings. I hope that’s making sense so far.

So here’s the important thing about the patent. I read the patent; it’s 193 pages plus attachments. And I read the patent to look for graphene oxide. It is not listed in the patent because it is a trade secret. So remember Bill Gates saying that there was a trade secret? Trade secrets are not, you know, privy to the public, so they cannot be in the patent. So graphene oxide is not listed in the patent, and it lists everything BUT that. But I’m still going to show you evidence that these contain graphene oxide and the patent in China that shows they contain graphene oxide.”

Stew Peters: “So let me just ask you, why would they put every other ingredient on the patent, with the exception of the standalone, graphene oxide? Why would they not put that on there?”

Karen Kingston: “I would say the number one reason is because it’s poisonous to humans and well-known that it’s poisonous to humans.

Yeah, and the other reason is because it is the main ingredient in hydrogel, which is the liquid, you know, AI template that’s used for some of Elon Musk’s, you know, research and Bill Gates, as far as that creating an interface between humans and, you know, the internet, if you will.”

Stew Peters: “So there is a legitimate theory that these shots are actually designed to create some sort of connectivity between humans, 5G – whatever this is, controlling your thoughts, your memories, all of these things, I mean, those are realistic and plausible possibilities?”

Theory: Humans as guinea pigs | Injecting people with as much graphene oxide as possible before they die

Karen Kingston @4:56: “That’s not possible with this round. They rushed this thing out. They’re just seeing, you know, how much they can put into people before they die, I think, honestly.”

Stew Peters: “So this is a dose finding study? Basically a live dose finding study, and those that are dying or multiple sclerosis, Guillan-Barre, these tremors, the magnetism, all these things – “

Karen Kingston: “Well remember, we’re supposed to get boosters every 6 months. So we’re gonna get graphene oxide boosters every 6 months, to see how much we can build up in the system. We’ll go through this, because when you see the nations that are being injected, we’re the guinea pigs, you know, and so once they perfect this technology, I think there’s a second plan. I actually am not super comfortable talking about this stuff, because I don’t like to, you know, opinions on things, you know, and hypothesize, so I’d rather just stick to the data, if that’s okay.

So if you take a look at chemical and engineering news, there is these non peer-reviewed journals, we call them RAGS in the industry, every industry has it. And it’s basically, you know, the whales of the industry, the who’s who, and they just kind of brag about what they’re doing. So this article talks about the PEGylated lipid nanoparticles that are in all the COVID-19 vaccines. And there’s 4 lipids. And I’ll go over this.

So the first lipid is cholesterol, and that’s, our body loves cholesterol, it makes it go through the blood. Then there’s a phospholipid; the phospholipid adheres to the cell membrane, so that allows permeability to enter the cell membrane. There’s an ionizable lipid, so that gives it a positive ionic charge to help penetrate the mRNA to get into the cell. And then there’s the PEGylated lipid.

And so the reason why they created these is because mRNA is very unstable. Whether it’s synthetic or zoonic, which means it’s from an animal, you know, or a human. It’s very unstable. 80 degree weather kills it. Sunlight kills it. If you breathe on it, it dies. I mean, and researchers all say this. It’s just – it rarely gets past the nasopharynx area of any healthy individual. It just – you know, your saliva kills it. It cannot survive on its own, so it needed this kind of biosphere that they created for it. And that’s why we have these four lipids and then they put the graphene oxide.

Now what’s interesting about the graphene oxide is that it’s 4,000 times stronger than titanium, and can withstand seventeen hundred degree fahrenheit temperature. So we took this very unstable virus, single helix virus, and we made it indestructible. Or “we”… they made it indestructible. So the PEGylated lipids, if you take a look, it’s ‘peg’: PEG, they’re made by a company called SINOPEG, which is [SINOPEG], and they’re located in China.

Now, how did I find this out? Well if you take a look at the Pfizer EUA filing, they list the 4 lipids – they have 2 lipids, each of which have 4 lipids of them in there, and so does Moderna. And Moderna’s is called – it’s called a Material Safety Data Sheet, this is what they use in industrial products. And it has a cast number, and there’s is SM102 for Moderna; and then if you go to Pfizer’s filing with the UK, the number – the 2 lipids that are in there, are called ALC0315 and ALC0159.

So when I googled MSDS cast, don’t ask how I know all this information, and I put in some of those numbers, I found SINOPEG. I didn’t find SINOPEG by googling SINOPEG. I literally put in the MSDS number. And so if you go to the website, you’ll see the, you know, extremely long, like I don’t know, hundred alpha-numeric name of each of these lipids. And you’ll see it under a tab called COVID-19 Excipients. And it says ‘polyethylene glycol PEG 2000’, right? And then here you’ll see it’s ALC0159, and this company is located in China. And then if you pull from the patent, from the Moderna patent, it lists out all the different polyethylene glycol 200, PEG 200, PEG 2,000, and you will find those listed under the COVID-19 Excipients in SINOPEG.

So… it’s right there. It’s manufactured in China. And so, there’s other vaccines that are mRNA vaccines that are not being sold in the United States. You can find those excipients here too, by the cast number, the Material Safety Data Sheet cast number.

Graphene oxide as a conductor of electricity | “positive charge annihilates anything that it comes in contact with”

Karen Kingston @9:15: And so if you want to know what is graphene, you know, what they explain here on SINOPEG, is, it is the ‘core-shell structure polyethylene glycol functionalized graphene for energy-storage polymer dielectrics: combined mechanical and dielectric performances’. So what that means is that graphene is a conductor – it can be a conductor of electricity. If it has a positive charge, and this is in all the – some of the studies from the NIH and Moderna and stuff, if graphene gets a positive charge, it annihilates anything that it comes in contact with. Right now they’re not charged. They’re neutralized.

You know, well like, how does a positive charge get into the cell? That’s that other lipid. That ionizable lipid that gives it the positive charge for cell penetration. But these currently are not – they’re neutral, they have a neutral field. But if they are, if there’s an electrical magnetic field that activates a positive charge, potentially there’ll be damage and potentially death, depending on where these nanoparticles ended up in people’s bodies and how much of them did.”

Stew Peters: “So it’s apparent to me that they’re lying, to the world. (Karen Kingston: “Yeah.”) They’re trying to hide this; this is the secret ingredient.

Lead Stories, USA Today, and all these other publications fact-checking this program, it appears to me that they are out and out lying. We’re going to get to who’s in on all of this in a minute, because I’m going to ask you, but, why are they using this graphene oxide? It’s a toxic substance, it’s poisonous. Why would – why are they using it?”

Karen Kingston: “Because it’s a great conductor of electricity and it can host magnetic field. So it can literally – it can connect you to the internet. That’s why.”

Stew Peters: “All right. I just wanted to make sure that I was clear on that. Because I know that you’re not comfortable opining opinions, things like that, but I just wanted to make sure factually that that’s what it can do, that’s what it’s capable of doing.”

Karen Kingston: “Yeah, and I mean, I haven’t had the chance, but I could probably go into some tech publications and AI publications, and we can find more information on how graphene oxide is a great electromagnetic – “

Graphene oxide is poisonous/toxic – Who’s responsible for it being in the vaccines?

Stew Peters @11:24: “Well the bottom line is that it’s poisonous. It’s poisonous (Karen Kingston: “It is poisonous.”) – it annihilates if it has a positive charge; it annihilates anything that it comes into contact with. It’s toxic for humans, it should not be in there and it is. That is what I needed to know. Who’s behind this? That’s what I’d like to know. Who’s behind all of this?”

Karen Kingston: “Well, I don’t… so, hold on, I didn’t put this in here but, there’s a company called Shanghai Nanotech, and they filed a patent, and you can – for graphene oxide for the use in COVID-19 excipients, and this is a meeting of them at their headquarters and that looks like, I think his name is Tal Zaks, the chief technology officer for Moderna, and if you go to the World Health Organization website, there is a page where they talk about how the global world needs to work together on these COVID-19 vaccines. It’s from some time last year. And you’ll see the usual suspects there. You’ll see like Peter Daszak and the names from Moderna and several names from the NIH and NIAID, so… there is a large group of billionaires and millionaires, many many times over that have coordinated for the development and execution of these products.” 

Stew Peters: “So you knowing this, you bringing this confirmation, why would the – I guess, I mean this is opinion, so you can just tell me if you’re not comfortable answering this, but I gotta ask, why would people like President Trump, Ron DeSantis, Sean Hannity, what do they have in – what stake in the game do they have? How do they not know this stuff? They have – I mean…”

Attempts to expose these vaccines as bioweapons are silenced/censored

Karen Kingston @13:05: “No, there’s no way they can know this stuff. I want to be…[long pause], when I – sorry, when I found out, when I read this information, I didn’t know a woman could cry as hard as I cried.

So I sent an email out on May 26th, to about 30 outlets with this information; I sent an email summarizing that these are bioweapons. I even spoke to – and I don’t mean to be disparaging to anybody, I even spoke to American Frontline Doctors and stuff and after I spoke to them, you know, some of the doctors still went on saying, “Oh, as long as you’re – if you’re under 30 you shouldn’t get the vaccine.” And I called them up and I’m like, “What the hell are you doing? These are bioweapons.” They’re like, “We can’t say that.

So the cognitive dissonance of the depravity and the evil of these “vacc” – injections, is very difficult for anyone to understand. And you have to also understand that for the whole year and a half these were being developed, anyone that came out and said, “Hey, this virus isn’t that bad”, they were mocked, they were ridiculed, they were ostracized, doctors were threatened to have their license taken away. So the truth couldn’t get out there. And then when people, anyone that was questioning about the speed for any of these vaccines to market, the need for them, even the FDA documents, they talk about “Hey, we don’t think someone under 18 should get these things. We’re worried about viral shedding.” If you show this like here – the manufacturing section of the application is redacted!

No one in good conscience should have approved this. But there is such brainwashing going on, such control of what basically the big tech wanted us to know as “the truth”, which was a bunch of lies, that it’s very difficult then for when someone says to you, “this is what’s going on”, to believe it.

I would compare it to anyone that’s been in a marriage where they had a spouse that was cheating on them. Your friends can tell you they’re cheating, there’s tons of evidence, but you are not going to believe it. You’re not going to believe all your trusted – all your trusted advisors have been telling you this stuff is safe, everything on the media says it’s safe, and then someone says “No. It’s actually lethal, and this is a planned, you know, planned genocide.” It’s impossible to believe.

Stew Peters: “Wow.”

Karen Kingston: “Does that make sense?”

Questioning people’s complicity with these agendas

Stew Peters @15:25: “Yeah, and, you know, I’m just, I’m having a hard time. I mean, honestly, I mean, I’m a human. You know. And so just knowing people that have subjected themselves to this inoculation; knowing how hard, how difficult it is to have a conversation with somebody, doing what I do, downloading to my brain, terabytes of information, every single day. Trying to determine what’s real, what’s not, what’s mis- and what’s dis-information? Who’s deepstate, who’s trying to throw me off, who’s controlled opposition?

You know, I mean it really – it happens. It sounds like some kind of a sci-fi movie, but you’re living in it, so you understand. I’m just trying to process all of this as you’re saying it. And I’m imagining, you know, people in the media. You know, I’m imagining, you know, people that they don’t understand that there are billions of lives at stake, or maybe they do, which makes it even worse. Because they’re complicit in this. They’re part of this – the carrying on of this.

And then, I think about everybody who’s going to be mandated; these shots. Um, listen, I’ve – Karen, I got an email this morning. I got an email this morning from a very concerned mother, of a young woman, who is going to be attending a Christian college in South Carolina. And they’re going to mandate this thing for her. 18 year old young woman with her entire life ahead of her. And she’s just one of millions of stories like this that are happening here in this country. What we’re doing to our young people. Poisoning them.

And so, then you got healthcare workers. I mean, I have a dozen emails in the last 48 hours from nurses, healthcare workers, doctors, people who are working at these facilities, in these clinics at these hospitals that are going to be mandated this. They don’t want to do it, they need help! And, you know, the DOJ is telling everybody that they can do this. The governors can mandate this, that businesses can mandate this. And so…”

“There’s no benefit to your health when you get injected;
the only thing it can do is poison, harm and kill.”

Karen Kingston @17:15: “Well, the DOJ – just because someone says something, especially in this current administration, doesn’t make it true. Okay? The DOJ can say, “We recommend this is mandated. We’re saying that this is  – we mandate these vaccines.” But I, you know, it’s a memo, I read the memo, okay? It’s a memo that was written by Dawn Johnsen. She’s the acting assistant attorney general to the president, saying that, under title code 21, section 564, you can – private companies and local governments can mandate the vaccines under Emergency Use Authorization.

Her interpretation is reckless, and it has no merit. So it’s just an opinion. It is not enforceable. Period. You know. And on top of that, what’s happened with these vaccines, or these injections, these EUA injections, not only is all the campaign and the propaganda a bunch of lies to terrify people into getting injected, which is a violation of human rights in and of itself, on top of that, she doesn’t mention title code 21 in her memo, which is what this falls under, because they violated 4 other sections of that title code under drug safety: drug and vaccine safety.

They have, under section 502, it’s false and misleading labeling, because this thing is NOT a vaccine, there’s no benefit to your health when you get injected; the only thing it can do is poison, harm and kill. So there’s false and misleading labeling. It doesn’t tell you that it contains graphene oxide. Adulterated drugs and devices, it also violates section 501, which again, adulterated drugs and devices is if it includes a toxin, which is the graphene oxide.

It also violates section 312.23 under initial new drug application. So if you go through an IND, you have to prove safety in animals before you move on to humans. They signed a letter of intent for pregnant rats. If that doesn’t make you furious, and we’re injecting pregnant women? And under the IND it says that if there is shedding, if there is risk to people of child-bearing age, then you need to stop the trial.

We KNOW there is shedding. We KNOW there is risk to child-bearing age. And the FDA even talks about it in their protein therapy and oncolytic virus that treatments that shedding is a real thing and you need to do animal studies first, then you need to do phase 1 human studies, and if there is, you know, if there is shedding, then you need to come up with controlled measures so that you don’t infect the uninjected. Which is what’s going on right now. They also violate section 312.42, which is clinical research holds and request for modifications. So that says if any of these things, I said, there’s at least 3 dozen, you need to stop the trials.”

Difference between trials of the past, and the COVID injections

Stew Peters @20:08: “Trials have been stopped when 25 people die; when 6 beagle dogs die.” 

Karen Kingston: “They were supposed to have stopped the trials when they did the mice study, and all the mice – 80% died in 24 hours, and the rest died by the end of the week.  […] They should’ve stopped the trials – “

Stew Peters: “But there is no threshold here. Is there? I mean – that’s the bottom line. There is no threshold. It doesn’t matter how many people die, they will continue this incessant push, won’t they?”

Karen Kingston: “Until American people speak up, and say ‘Enough is enough. Stop it!’ They will keep pushing us until, you know, they basically wipe out America. And they’re going after the children. Which is what is so disheartening. There is a – there will be no posterity. There will be no America. You know, if people of child-bearing age become infertile, and then children are at most risk for having serious adverse events and death from these injections. I mean, just look at the myocarditis numbers. They’re 1 to 25,000 reported, we know that’s at least 10%, which would be 1 in 2500, and it’s probably more like 1 in 250, which would be 4% of children are getting – having decades taken off their life or dying.

Stew Peters: “I am up against a hard break. And I have to go. Will you come back on this program? Because, we are dedicated to the truth. You are a wealth of information, and I’ve got so many more questions that I would like to continue this conversation with you. Will you promise to come back? I mean, are you comfortable with doing that?”

Karen Kingston: “Oh yeah! No, I’d love to be on. If I’m not comfortable answering your question I’ll just say that I’m not comfortable answering the question. I’m okay with saying that.”

Stew Peters: “Yeah, because I mean I have so many more, and I know that there’s going to be pouring out of questions on my social media and my DMs and my protonmail, ‘please ask her this’. And so I just want to reserve the future opportunity to have that conversation with you.”

Karen Kingston: “Absolutely. And I sent you a lot of the documents from the FDA website and the patent office and – “

Stew Peters: “We’re going to post all of those at stewpeters.tv. Karen Kingston, thank you so much.”

Karen Kingston: “Put it all up there. And, I do, I drafted letters to healthcare associations, and I’ve just been so busy, but obviously after talking to you I will finish those letters today, so that people can send them to their employer and they can send them to their school, they can send them to healthcare providers saying that, you know, I have the right to informed consent. I’m not saying it’s going to stop them from getting fired. But what will happen is eventually justice will prevail and our constitution always prevails, and you will have evidence that they can’t, they can’t plausibly deny that they didn’t know this information.” 

Stew Peters: “I believe that to be a 100% true, and I appreciate your optimism because that is what I’m trying to hold on to here as well. Unbelievable.

Thank you so much for being here. Really appreciate it.

The Stew Peters Show continues in 60 seconds. Go nowhere.”

Stew Peters @22:51: “You know what this is, right? Number 2 pencil? Everybody’s got one. Everybody’s got – everybody remembers filling out tests-  we should all be filling out our ballots with these number 2 pencils. That’s what we should be doing. But you know what’s in the tip of every number 2 pencil, right?

Lead! Put it on paper, it turns into graphene; that’s graphite, right? Lead! They want to inject you with lead. Lead is poisonous. Graphene oxide is poisonous. Graphite is poisonous. This is – they want to inject your children with lead!

‘Oh, but it’s just a little bit, Stew. It’s just a little bit. Don’t worry about it. Just a little – just a tiny little bit of lead.’

Remember when they wanted to inject the world with just a little tiny bit of mercury? It’s not going to – the point is, it’s not going to stop, unless you stop it. I stop it. Unless WE stop it. And you can. No matter what weight, no matter what muscle they come at you with; the federal government – blablabla, propaganda this –

No! They cannot mandate this. Mandates are NOT legal, not at work, not at school, nowhere! They are not legal; they cannot force you to inject yourself or your children with this poison! Please! Share that video everywhere. We have once again been vindicated.

So USA Today, Lead Stories, Politico, all these other people you – if you google Stew Peters and click on news, you’ll see right now, “No graphene oxide!” We showed it in the segment. What are they going to do? Redact? Retract? Correct? I don’t think so. Say ‘NO’. Do not allow them to do this to you or your kids.”

[outro promotion for CBD @24:21]

Really appreciate the Stew Peters Show and Karen Kingston for informing us and reporting about the composition of these vaccines and the possible agendas that are in place.

They, as well as others speaking up, show great integrity and bravery in exposing these egregious narratives and spreading awareness so that people can make their own educated decisions and be discerning to the corruption and lies that surround us due to government/big tech/mainstream media/”health” & pharma industries’ collusions to keep the truth hidden.

And a big thank you to everyone for reading and being/becoming informed. If you have already taken the COVID vaccine, please read up on some resources that may be able to help reduce the toxicity of the injection from your system.

How to Neutralize Potential Damage from mRNA Vaccines (I take no liability or responsibility for the remedies listed at this link. It is just one source of information that may be beneficial in reducing vaccine harm. Please research further and get in touch with HONEST doctors to find the best treatment for you. Anyone who is blindly “trusting the science/the experts” and endorsing the COVID vaccines is NOT HONEST; and if they are honest, then they are honestly misinformed/deceived.)

Featured image by nts01 from Pixabay

Dr. Peter McCullough Interview with Mike Adams | “All to prepare the population for mass vaccination.” [Transcript]

“It’s astonishing how dangerous the vaccines are.”

In keeping with providing written transcripts for those who prefer to read text as opposed to watching videos, I have transcribed the following interview between Mike Adams and Dr. Peter McCullough.

Another in-depth/informative video with Dr. Peter McCullough that is transcribed in full can be found here: Dr. Peter McCullough / John Leake – Full Interview [Transcript]

Thank you to Mike Adams and Dr. Peter McCullough. While all of the information is incredibly helpful and insightful, I did highlight some pertinent topics that were discussed and some embellishments were added for emphasis.

 

Also thank you to all the doctors/scientists/researchers, etc. who have been brave enough to stand up for their patients and for humanity in general. Your bravery and integrity speaks volumes of your character and exemplifies what it means to be a strong, compassionate individual, especially in the midst of adversity and vitriol.

Mike Adams: “Welcome everyone to another extraordinary interview here on Brighteon Conversations. Remember, we are the platform where we can exercise free speech that is not allowed on the major big tech platforms. And today we have a first time guest, but you’ve seen him in other interviews, or perhaps you haven’t since some of those interviews have been banned.

But, his name is Dr. Peter McCullough, and he is just an extraordinary individual. He’s a professor of medicine, Texas A&M, Dallas; he’s published I think 42 peer reviewed papers on covid. He’s been on the forefront of trying to help save lives in this and he has a very powerful and very timely message for what’s happening with medicine and science, and covid.

So Dr. McCullough, it’s an honor to have you on, thank you for joining me today.”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Yeah, thanks for having me, Mike, it’s great to be here.”
Mike Adams: “Well, it’s great to have you on. You’ve been one of the most requested guest for our audience; they’ve been just really enthralled by what you have said in other interviews. Can you give us kind of a summary of where you think we are right now with covid, and the failed response by government authorities around the world? Why are they not doing the right thing?”

Safe treatment for COVID is available – NO VACCINE NEEDED (and in certain cases, treatment isn’t even needed)

Dr. Peter McCullough @1:49: “Well, a quick summary is that doctors, independent doctors innovated and learned how to treat the virus. So your audience can really settle down and understand that if someone’s over age 50 with multiple medical problems, they can be treated with a standard multi drug protocol plus nutraceuticals, get through the illness just fine, and avoid hospitalization and death. So we’ve taken the fear out of covid-19, we treat it at home.

Individuals under age 50, no medical problems, they can breeze through the illness, no treatment needed, unless severe symptoms develop, and again it just it’s nutraceutical bundle, which is probably modestly helpful. The drugs that really helped, I mean, we used EUA monoclonal antibodies, the Regeneron products – all doctors can make a call to their local emergency room, patients get an antibody infusion, just like president Trump got. You saw how he breezed through covid, that can be done. So if I got a senior call me today, I’d have him go to the Baylor ER, get an antibody infusion, they’ll breeze right through it. We used drugs in sequence, oral drugs to reduce viral replication, we use inhaled and oral steroids – “

Mike Adams: “Can you list some of those medications, please? Because people want to write these down.”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Right, so the first thing we do is we use nutraceuticals, that would be zinc, 50 milligrams / vitamin D, 5,000 International Units / vitamin C, 3,000 milligrams / quercetin 500 milligrams, twice a day – that’s a good nutraceutical bundle right there. Probably modestly helpful and actually there are some supportive data. For the antibodies we have a Regeneron product that’s given IV and it’s given over an hour, with an hour observation down in the ER; you can go in by schedule in the first couple days of illness, but to get it done.

If someone is admitted, on the other side of the admission we can actually give a GlaxoSmithKline monoclonal antibodies. These are very helpful drugs and patients should demand them. So they should ask for these drugs, they shouldn’t be a mystery to get them. Just ask for the Regeneron antibody infusion – it’s what president Trump got – “

Mike Adams: “What’s your take on hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin?”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Yeah, so after the antibody infusion, then we can use oral drugs. And we have hydroxychloroquine, over 200 supportive studies, 200 milligrams, twice a day; ivermectin about 60 supportive studies there, and we can use about 18 milligrams a dose every other day for 3 doses. And then outside the United States favipiravir. We combine them with azithromyacin or doxycycline, to reduce bacterial super infection and to reduce overlap between what’s called atypical organisms, and then we use inhaled budesonide, 800 milligrams twice a day – micrograms twice a day. If on day 5 respiratory symptoms, we use oral prednisone for about a quick 5 days, no taper. We use a drug called colchicine once a day, for 30 days. Reduces inflammation. And then really on the backend we use aspirin, 325 milligrams a day as a blood thinner; then high risk patients we use lovenox.

So the doctor will decide with the patient which kind of program it’s going to be, but it’s typically things to reduce viral replication, things to reduce inflammation, and then thrombosis. None of the drugs are individually essential. There are protocols where no hydroxychloroquine and no ivermectin is used, and just the anti-inflammatories and blood thinners are used. That’s the South African Pedi approach. Others kind of, kind of feature hydroxy or ivermectin – that’s fine too.

Access to doctors treating COVID (free services available)

Peter McCullough @5:30: But what the listeners need to know is that there are adequate signals of benefit and acceptable safety to use drugs in combination. The only people who get admitted to the hospital and die, are the ones who get no outpatient treatment. So we have to demand treatment. We have the American Physicians and Surgeons, AAPS, online’s got a free guide. Download it, everybody should have it; it’s been downloaded millions of times. We have a list of treating doctors.

There’s another wonderful site called the Frontline Critical Care Consortium, FLCC. They also have a great network of doctors. We have 4 national telemedicine services. The featured one is called MyFreeDoctor.com. And that’s a free service! You don’t need your insurance or anything. You just give a donation if you want to. Doctors work 24 by 7, they will take your intake, they’ll get the medicines called in to your pharmacy. If your pharmacy won’t fill them, we’ll use a mail order pharmacy, we’ll get the drugs to you – get going, and nobody has to suffer through this illness. There are 15 regional telemedicine services, 500 treating doctors, It’s called Sequence Multi Drug Therapy, it’s published in the peer review literature – been used millions of times.

Let me say this much, this has really kicked in the early part of January. We crushed our curve – that’s what crushed our curve. That was before anybody was vaccinated. We crushed our curve. Since that time we’ve been flat, kind of flat at leveling out through the pandemic. Mexico City crushed their curve with the early treatment. Down in South America, countries did; India just crushed their curve with early treatment. Early treatment treats the problem! Masks and vaccines don’t actually treat the illness. We need to treat the illness with multiple drugs.”

Huge censorship from big tech/media and health agencies | Medical dictatorship

Mike Adams @7:11: “Well how shocked are you in observing the official response to this? How shocked are you as a trained, published physician, who has the, the right motivation to help save lives, to help people get well, to reduce human suffering… This is supposed to be the moral code of being a physician. How shocked are you of the suppression of all the things that you just mentioned? From big tech censoring the mention and the CDC censoring, and the WHO censoring – why didn’t we have a national response that said, “Hey, let’s use what works.”?

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Well, we should have. We should have had doctors in charge who actually are real doctors who are board certified who are taking care of patients with covid-19. We needed doctors who had courage, who actually behaved like trauma surgeons. We don’t need doctors on TV who are not working in teams, who are not board certified, who have never seen a covid patient. That’s what America in the world has been looking at here and it’s really an atrocity.

You know, doctors always work in teams. We should never have a single doctor say anything on TV. Get a team! Get a team. We work in teams in rounds. We’ve seen no international collaboration. Do you know, I gave […] rounds today by webex to France. And we were collaborating. We were exchanging ideas. Americans have not seen any exchange of ideas between doctors on TV. They’ve basically seen a medical dictatorship. From one person. And Americans should be very alarmed on where’s the teams of doctors, where’s the international collaboration.

You know here I’m sitting here in Texas and you know a few hours south of us they’re handing out treatment kits by the millions! In baggies. And Texas would never know about it. Because there’s not any window to the outside world.”

Deliberate suppression of medical treatment and malfeasance in the health industry

Mike Adams @8:57: “Now, you’ve published many, many papers. You’re one of the most prolific writers in the area of internal medicine, and your work is sided by thousands of other studies and papers. So your history here of research and medicine is unassailable.

And what you just said about a medical dictatorship seems so true when last year, remember when states and I believe Michigan was one of them, actually outlawed the prescribing of hydroxychloroquine for covid. Why would a state government criminalize – oh, and by the way, that happened after the Lancet published that, later retracted, a bogus study that said hydroxychloroquine caused heart tissue/scarring and so on. But this seems like a medical dictatorship as you said, prohibiting the practice of good medicine by doctors who are on the frontlines. Would that be an accurate assessment?”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “It’s accurate. Someone just sent me a treatment protocol from one of the Baylor Scott & White hospitals in our health system in central Texas. Kind of right applies to you. And that protocol to this day says ‘Do not use hydroxychloroquine to treat covid-19.’

We have 200 supportive studies. Lancet published a fraudulent paper. The FDA, based on the fraudulent paper said ‘do not use hydroxychloroquine’. Here we are, a year later, and hospital treatment guidelines say don’t use hydroxychloroquine. No one reviewed the literature. No one updated the literature. We have 200 studies. There’s a 30,000 patient study from Iran showing a giant reduction in hospitalization and death with hydroxychloroquine based program.

So what you’re seeing here is bad research. It’s bad medicine. People aren’t updated. There should be weekly updates. Monthly guidelines updates. Here, we’re frozen in time, fraudulent paper, ill-advised guidance from the FDA, and frozen in time with no contemporaneous review. None. It’s malfeasance.

Mike Adams: “Well that’s the thing. It seems, at least in my assessment, they deliberately pushed a fraudulent study through the Lancet, and I believe also in the New England Journal of Medicine, knowing that the retractions might never really happen. Like they’ve established now that hydroxychloroquine is dangerous and it’s hard to ever get that taken back out of the medical literature or even in the minds of the people who rely on that literature. So it’s kind of like, you know, the New York Times publishing something that’s false and then the retraction comes on page 8 in small print, you know, a day later – nobody sees the retraction.”

Intentional corruption for the purpose of hurting people | Attack on hydroxychloroquine

Dr. Peter McCullough @11:36: “I agree with this. I agree with you. I think it was intentional. I think the entire action was intentional and it was aligned to do harm. It was aligned to hurt people. And hydroxychloroquine became the focal point of how individuals with intent to do harm could do harm.

You know hydroxychloroquine, the second largest hydroxychloroquine plant outside of Taipei, was mysteriously burned to the ground. We heard words of hydroxychloroquine being burned at night in the pharmacies across Africa. In Queensland, Australia, in August, or – in early in April of last year, Queensland, Australia, they put it on the books that they would put a doctor in jail if a doctor tried to help a patient with hydroxychloroquine.

Now come on! I prescribe this every day. Rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, we can give it to pregnant women. I mean we prescribe hydroxychloroquine – you can give it to patients with dry eyes and other rheumatologic conditions. And suddenly in covid-19, we can’t use a simple, safe drug to help people?

Something Americans should think: something is REALLY wrong. We should have been, you know, we had the right idea – we stockpiled hydroxychloroquine, we had it ready to go, but then we didn’t release it from the stockpile! We made it impossible to use.”

Mike Adams: “Well, you just hinted at something, I want to explore this a little more deeply with you, that you got to intent. You believe that the intent was to cause harm. And I think most of our viewers would absolutely agree with you. And I do too, although I’m here asking your view, not really my views here today, but, if their intent was to cause harm and not just complacency or bureaucracy or inadvertent mistakes, what does this mean about this, the institution of medicine and science in the context of this pandemic? I mean, why aren’t they trying to save as many lives as possible? What’s going on here?”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “It’s in the minds of doctors. In fact, there was a doctor who has done some of the, really just, I think, probably low-quality research, some very poor randomized trials that were stopped early – and they always stop early. Hydroxychloroquine is always a little bit ahead, and it’s winning; they stop early and say, ‘Oh, there’s no difference. Hydroxychloroquine didn’t do anything.’ Well, there’s a doctor who’s been leading some of these studies, he put out a message on twitter and said, ‘Oh, most good doctors have moved on from hydroxychloroquine.’

It’s like, you know, why state that, when hydroxychloroquine is a worldwide standard. It’s a standard, it’s always been a standard in Europe, in Rome, in Italy, it has a whole program called Treatment Domiciliary at Home. [Erik Rimaldi – sp?], who leads that effort, they’ve had major rallies in piazzas all over Italy, declaring ZERO hospitalizations with an early approach to hydroxychloroquine. Thousands and thousands of people. It’s standard in Iran. It’s standard in Russia. Used widely in India.

And you know what? When the first wave of covid-19 hit, in March of last year, that was the Wuhan version. That was the wild-type. That was the most serious version. You know, covid’s gotten easier and easier to treat. But the most serious wave, we had a very little blip in the United States. You know why? Because we had a massive use of hydroxychloroquine. It was then when agencies tried to kill it. That’s when the epidemic got out of control. We should have stuck with hydroxy hard all the way through. And you know, ivermectin works fine. We don’t use them alone. But when we sync them in with aspirin and steroids, blood thinners and colchicine, the program works tremendously. 85% reductions in hospitalizations and death.” 

Mike Adams: “Well, how much do you think a profit motive is behind this? I mean, do you get the feeling that if hydroxychloroquine were a new, on-patent drug, that just came out, Johnson & Johnson let’s say, and it were a thousand dollars a dose, and all governments offered to buy it at a thousand dollars a dose, do you get the feeling that suddenly it would be a miracle cure in the media if that were the case?”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “No I don’t, believe it or not. I don’t think it’s a profit motive. You know, Merck, in Santa Fe, have had oral drugs. In development. They’re a part of Operation Warp Speed. They’ve been on slow gear with these oral drugs. Slow gear. You’d think if these companies wanted to make some money on oral drugs, then these drug companies, they know how to do big trials. They know how to move fast. Why are they moving at a snail’s pace? You know, we are overloaded with millions of cases of covid-19. You know what we needed? We needed 20,000 person outpatient trials of multiple drugs. And we needed it last year. Nobody did that. And believe me, they all had the resources. So I don’t think it’s profit driven.”

MOTIVE: Mass vaccination | “A NEEDLE IN EVERY ARM”

Mike Adams @16:30: “What do you think is the motive of this suppression of the treatments?”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “I think it was all to prepare the population for mass vaccination. I think it was very intentional, to maximize the amount of fear, suffering, hospitalization and death, to prepare the population to accept mass vaccination. And when mass vaccination came out, they didn’t say targeted, or just for the seniors, or just for the maximum benefit is, they said ‘A NEEDLE IN EVERY ARM’. And they meant it.

And nowadays, that’s all you hear about, morning/noon/and night, is vaccination. You don’t see a word about treatment in the hospital, any updates on treatment; it’s vaccination morning/noon/and night, and people are dreaming of mass vaccination. We have doctors screaming at patients telling them they have to be vaccinated. Doctors saying that only vaccinated patients can be in their waiting room. I mean, everything has been set up on this vaccine. There’s been Saturday Night Live skits, about the vaccine. Since when do we do that? Vaccines are never that exciting!”

McCullough Report available on americaoutloud.com

Mike Adams @17:36: “I want to ask you more details about the vaccine, I just want to remind our viewers here that you have a broadcast; it’s on americaoutloud.com, americaoutloud.com. It’s the McCullough Report – is that once a week, or what’s the schedule on that?”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Yeah, it comes out – so it’s run twice on weekends, and then it comes out on the iheartradio and the big podcast platforms – what I do is I bring in experts, who are absolutely – and we go through their backgrounds, so America knows these are the top people, all over the world, and we do interviews. You know, I try to go 8 to 10 minutes and really get the key information out. And I’ve interviewed absolutely the top people in order to break through to America.

“We are going to squash any valid scientific information on treatment and on safety and just mass promote the vaccine.”

Peter McCullough @18:21: Because we have what’s called the Trusted News Service. I hope everybody understands this. We have an overt censoring program that all the major media signed on to at the beginning of December. And the agreement was, that they were going to mass promote the vaccine, and they were going to suppress all information on treatment and vaccine safety. And everybody signed off on it. Everybody did! So MSNBC, NBC, CNN, twitter! Youtube! They have explicitly said, ‘we are going to squash any valid scientific information on treatment and on safety and just mass promote the vaccine.’ And that’s what we got.”

Mike Adams: “Yeah, and you’re exactly right. It’s just been propaganda and a couple of things that I’ve noticed in the media about vaccines, is number 1, any vaccine injuries are always designated ‘rare’, no matter how many people they impact. Such as the myocarditis affecting young healthy men, right now.”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Can I address that, because I agree with you. It has been said to be rare – any claim that something is rare means, that you have to go through every person vaccinated and see if they got it! You just can’t take a small number of cases that got pushed forward and divide it by everybody who got it and, and on priority, say that people who on the denominator didn’t get it, that’s not true.

So last night I was on Fox news, and the announcer said, ‘Well what about, you know these are rare cases.’ I said, “Listen, there’s 387,000 safety reports with the vaccines. That’s more than any medical product in history by a mile.” And he goes, ‘Well these are rare.’ I said, “Well, I don’t think so. That’s not rare.” So the answer is with these vaccines, none of these things are rare. In fact, they are far too common and it’s worrisome.”

Mike Adams: “Well, and it shows the intellectual dishonesty. Because they can use that word ‘rare’ in whatever way they want. You can bet that if a dietary supplement were causing this number of reports, it would be called a danger to the public and common. It wouldn’t be rare.”

Excessive deaths from COVID vaccine shows it is NOT “safe and effective”

Dr. Peter McCullough @20:31: “Well let me give you some standards: 1976, Swine flu pandemic, 25 deaths, 500 cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome, it was 22 million people vaccinated, it’s off the market. Ok.

A drug, typically a drug, 5 unexplained deaths, gets a black box warning for death. 50 unexplained deaths, off the market! Ok? With all the vaccines combined, 500 million shots a year, 70 vaccines, we get about a 150 or 160 deaths that roll in, not related in time to the vaccine over the course of a year.

Covid-19, we’re at 6,100 deaths; 44% occur in the 48 hours after the shot. And we started to see the mortality diverge from expected, on January 22nd, and there’s been NO safety report from the FDA or NIH. Or nothing on the media. No press briefing on vaccine safety. None!

Americans should be alarmed that we have not had a press briefing on safety. We should be very alarmed! The vaccines, it may not work, but it should be safe! And if we don’t have any update or press briefing on safety, no publication of safety, I think Americans should be greatly alarmed.”

Mike Adams: “Well, but the other thing that the media does is they say, even when they acknowledge some adverse reactions, they say the benefits are worth the risks. But, as you know, as a scientist yourself, when you’re talking about an age group that only has maybe a one in a million chance of mortality from the vaccine – I’m sorry, from covid, what possible benefit can there be that outweighs any substantial risk, right? There’s no benefit to taking it in those age groups.”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “No, there’s some countries that really – for instance, Germany, is pretty similar to the United States, I want to say maybe they have 30% of people vaccinated? They’re just kind of focusing on people over 65. I think Governor Ron DeSantis in Florida had the right thing. Remember, he didn’t fool around. He got the people over 65 vaccinated then the rest of it.

It’s very hard at this point in time with the amount of safety and amount of neurologic damage, heart damage, blood clots and deaths with these vaccines, it’s very hard to find any group that would benefit right now. I was, you know, encouraging the vaccine to my patients, about 70% of them got it in December/January/February, and right now based on the safety, I can’t in good conscience – I can’t, you know, I can’t recommend it to anybody. Maybe on a case by case basis.

There’s going to be a far safer vaccine coming called NovaVax, and NovaVax… [indistinguishable] and should be much much better in terms of safety. We’re hoping that they can speed this one in and phase out the first generation of vaccines.”

Deceptive terminology used to mislead the public. Vaccine consent form says “This is not approved.”

Mike Adams @23:37: “So another thing that I’ve noticed that the media doing on this is they conflate emergency authorization use with quote “approval” of the vaccine. So you’ll see newscasters tell their audiences things like, ‘Well, the FDA has approved all these vaccines’, but they haven’t, really. It hasn’t gone through the long-term clinical trials, it hasn’t been declared safe or efficacious, either one. What – do you think this is just part of the deliberate deception, or what?

Dr. Peter McCullough:Yeah, I think it is deliberate, deceptive. Americans who have gotten the vaccine, and 45% of Americans have gotten the vaccine, so that’s about half of your audience, Mike, they’ve signed the consent! They know exactly what the vaccine consent says. It says ‘This is not approved.’ It says ‘We don’t know if this is going to work.’ It says ‘It’s investigational.’ Means it’s research. Means you’re signing up for research. And they collect your personal information to track you. And it says ‘We don’t know what the side effects are.’ They can range all the way from a sore arm to death. And that’s what the consent form – 45% of Americans signed up for this.

Genetic gene delivery vaccines create dangerous spike protein that cause damage to cells, blood vessels and cause blood clots.

Peter McCullough @24:47: The vaccines that they signed up for are considered genetic gene delivery medicines. Ok? They are genetic, biologically active products. Ok? The typical vaccine is either a protein, or a dead virus, or an inactivated virus. It’s never a gene transfer substance. So whoever signed up for this, and 45% of your listeners signed up for this, they took Pfizer, Moderna, or J&J, they took a genetic product. Ok? That product transfers genetic material into your cells. That’s what it did. And then inside the cells, and there’s cells all over the body, they produce a dangerous protein called the spike protein. And wherever the genetic material goes, and we know, it goes to the brain, it goes to the heart – it produces the spike protein, which is inside cells, damages those cells, it damages the surface of those cells, causes inflammation, and then from there it travels in the body for about 2 weeks causing damage to blood vessels and causing blood clots.

So Senator Johnson, last night, had a townhall for vaccine injury victims. And there were dozens of them and they told America about how they’ve sustained brain damage. Or heart damage from the vaccine. And this has occurred in thousands and thousands of people. 21,000 people have been hospitalized after the vaccine. 27% of them are below age 50. It’s astonishing how dangerous the vaccines are.

Mike Adams: “Yeah, and you just mentioned several bombshells there that I want to get into. You referred to the bio-distribution study – one of which I’m aware is out of Japan; and the mainstream vaccine industry claims that these spike protein nanoparticles do not circulate throughout the body, but the studies show they do. Think there’s another pharmacokinetic study as well that establishes that.

What you just mentioned is huge. I mean, just based on that research alone, it seems like the FDA should pull the emergency authorization and say, ‘Wait a second, we need to study this in more depth. We can’t inject people if this is circulating throughout the entire body.’ But they’re not doing that. What’s going on?”

Nanoparticles in the vaccines concentrating in the ovaries – causing drop in fertility

Dr. Peter McCullough @27:11: “The vaccines that Johnson & Johnson/Pfizer/Moderna have a very dangerous mechanism action. We cannot have genetic substances circulating in our body in lipid nanoparticles or other forms of matrix nanoparticles and go to our brain! We can’t do that! I mean, that cannot be allowed. It’s a dangerous mechanism action.

The Japanese did not trust Pfizer, and when Pfizer said it stayed locally in the arm, the Japanese said ‘We don’t trust you. Show us where this goes’, and it was a biodistribution study done of the nanoparticles, not the messenger RNA, but the nanoparticles, and they went everywhere. They did wash out of organs in a couple of days but they hyper-concentrated in the ovaries.

In Europe, they didn’t trust Moderna on fertility. And they asked them, ‘What happens to fertility with Moderna?’ They did an animal study and Moderna dropped fertility.

The FDA, Mike, told Pfizer/Moderna and J&J,  ‘No pregnant women. No women of child-bearing potential who cannot assure contraceptive.’ They did that for a reason. They knew the vaccines should not be used in young women and they knew that.”

Mike Adams: “And yet the vaccine is being promoted for pregnant women all across America today by the medical establishment, but just getting back to that study, as I recall, one of the other areas where the nanoparticles tended to cluster was in the adrenals. So now we’re talking about a hormonal interference which could affect fertility, it could affect mental states, moods, it could affect SO many things. Right? In the body. Unknown effects.”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Right. Well there have been nanoparticle studies, there was one from China published about 8 years or so ago that tested these nanoparticles. And they asked, ‘Where did they go?’ And they made a brilliant nice rainbow of all the organs where the nanoparticles showered, and they did show that they go to the ovaries. So the point is, and the adrenals, so the point is, the FDA, Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, they KNEW or they should have known that these particles are gonna hit these vital organs. And then when they drop their genetic payload then they’re going to start producing the spike protein and damaging cells in those organs. So it was not surprising when young women were ill-advised and took the vaccines they started having problems with their periods. That was not unexpected.

“These vaccines are directly killing babies in the first trimester and it is absolutely atrocious. Horrible!”

Peter McCullough @29:41: In a New England Journal of Medicine paper of pregnancy, women who took the vaccine, the authors concluded that it was safe to give the vaccine in pregnancy. Now, no woman carried the baby 9 months because the vaccines haven’t been around 9 months, but they looked at different windows of time, and they divided all the pregnancy loss rates by the largest denominator possible, so it was really false reporting. When we zeroed in on the first trimester, and just divided by those who got the vaccine in the trimester, not those who got it later on, there was an 83% loss in fetal – in the babies. So these vaccines are directly killing babies in the first trimester and it is absolutely atrocious. Horrible!

@30:27: [indistinguishable] – college right now, is recommending that women, pregnant women, take the covid-19 vaccine. Pregnant women can breeze right through covid-19. There has been some bad outcomes, but it is very treatable with our drugs, we can even use hydroxychloroquine through pregnancy, we can use prednisone and other drugs. No woman should EVER take the risk with the covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy. Period! If the FDA, Pfizer/Moderna didn’t allow it in their clinical trials, it should be – not be allowed in practice today.”

Mike Adams: “Yeah, and that’s – you’re talking common sense medicine, here. But it seems like common sense has been thrown out the window. But I’m so glad you brought this up, because it seems like beginning in about maybe 6 months and continuing on we may see a collapse in birth rates, and maybe ongoing infertility problems. But that brings up the obvious question: do you think that there is an infertility or long-term population reduction agenda? Many people believe that. Lots of my guests have discussed that. Is that something that you subscribe to, or is it – we don’t have enough data yet to conclude that?”

Addressing “conspiracy theories” and the brainwashing of the public

Dr. Peter McCullough @31:32: “You know, I can’t – I’ve been so focusing on the medical response and taking care of my patients. I know others are working on, you know, people have called them “conspiracy theories”; the, you know the rapper, RC rapper, says, you know, it’s not a conspiracy theory if it keeps coming true. And I’m not going to comment on conspiracy theories but if you ask me, do you think these vaccines are going to have an impact on fertility, I think the answer is yes.

We’ve already seen that with the Moderna application and now with the fetal loss. Data fairly calculated from the New England Journal of Medicine study, there’s no doubt about it. Pregnant women are going to lose their babies if they take the vaccine. And it’s worse than that. Once they’ve conceived and they’re breastfeeding, we now have events in the Vaccine Adverse reporting system where women take the vaccine, they generate the spike protein, and we infer the spike protein goes through the milk and kills the baby.

So these vaccines need to stay away from babies and mothers and women who are trying to conceive. I mean, that can’t be a more clear message.

You know, women are concerned about drinking half a glass of wine during pregnancy. How in the world can they take a shot of a wildly experimental, unproven, unsafe vaccine for the first time? How could they ever do it? It’s almost as if Americans and doctors and everybody are just brainwashed together. They are brainwashed! They’ve been propagandized and they are blindly accepting something that they should just stay away from.”

Doctors getting silenced, threatened, fired for speaking out against the narrative

Mike Adams @32:58: “Well I think most of our audience would agree with that. And by the way, you mentioned earlier about the percentage of people getting the vaccine, and I think I’m proud to say close to zero percent of our audience has taken this vaccine. Very close to zero percent. Because they’re well educated and well informed.

But I want to ask you about possible pushback because, you know, many doctors have been threatened, censored, fired for speaking out. They’ve been silenced. Even early on. I remember New York City, back in late March of last year, one particular doctor was saying, ‘Woah! We need to be treating this as an oxygen deprivation condition affecting hemoglobin.’ And he was silenced! And this has happened ever since then. What kind of pushback are you getting? Are they trying to silence you from doing interviews like this?”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “No, I have to tell you, I have over 600 peer-review publications. I’m the editor of two major journals, senior associate editor of a third. I’m the most published person in my field in the world. I’ve had covid-19 myself. I’ve suffered through it. My wife’s side of the family, we’ve had fatalities in her side of the family. I can tell you right now, I am supremely qualified to give my opinions. I have the right to give my opinions. And anybody who thinks they can threaten me or take me on, bring it on. No one’s had the guts to do it. And they would absolutely, positively be pummeled. And be ashamed.

Lack of courage and lack of compassion in the health care industry | Long line of shame

Peter McCullough @34:25: In fact, I’ve had a couple people in Indiana, I think they feel shame. They feel ashamed for their lack of courage and their lack of ability to compassionately help patients. Patients cried out for help. 600,000 of them cried out for help. Doctors, health care systems, and clinics turned them down. They suffered. Then they were hospitalized. They went into isolation, Mike, they never saw their families again and then they died.

We have a long, long line of shame. And there’s a lot of people walking that line of shame. Most of them can’t look me in the eye. I’ll tell you right now. They cannot look me in the eye. They are so ashamed of themselves.”

Awakening out of the trance | Facing the horrific blind actions of “just following orders”

Mike Adams @35:05: “Do you think that there will be, at some point, looking back, some kind of awakening? In previous interviews you’ve described some doctors as being almost like they’re in a trance. Or under a spell of some kind. Do you think that they will be able to awaken from that trance and look at what happened and recognize that that was not a high integrity practicing of medicine?”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Some people have said that the awakening out of a trance will be like a Nazi war crime doctors. Where they’ll somehow come out of their trance and they’re going to be terrified at what they did. And I would bring obstetricians right to the very front. And when they come out of their trance and they realize in horror that they were advising pregnant women to get injections of genetic biological – these are gene transfer platforms. Wildly experimental, that produce in an uncontrolled manner, a dangerous protein for the human body that gouges blood vessels, causes blood clots.

We KNOW this. We’ve known that this is a blood-clotting illness for a long time. That they advise this – I think these obstetricians are going to wake up in a cold sweat and they’re going to be HORRIFIED with what they recommended! They are going to be – and it’s going to be – I gotta tell you, we have years of reckoning on this. We have years of reckoning. There is a line of shame that these doctors and nurses and mid-level providers, and clinics, and hospitals will walk, that is atrocious.

In pregnancy, above ALL conditions, it’s “primum non nocere”, we will never do harm to a pregnant woman. We would, you know, we have drugs. We have pregnancy classes, A, B and C. We would NEVER ever give a drug that we even thought had a chance of causing harm to a pregnant woman. Let alone just jack’em up with a genetic juice which we now know is absolutely, positively dangerous.

It is atrocious what’s going on right now and we can’t be more alarmed. I think any woman listening to this, who has any ounce of common sense, ought to absolutely talk to every other woman – and you know what? Have some real conversations with your obstetrician. Give them a phone call. Send an email. And say, ‘Listen. Wake up. What are you doing right here, right now? That’s causing harm.’

Worldwide distrust | Grandparents demanding grandchildren to get vaccinated

Mike Adams @37:22: “And now along with doctors at one point waking up, as you were just describing, do you think that there’s also a very real risk that… when all of this eventually comes out, and looking back on it that the public’s faith in the entire institution of medicine and science, may be so fractured that at that point the public may refuse to even consider helpful interventions and therapies that could save lives. Because all of it may be discredited at some point depending on how big this thing goes.”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Right. So with things are really going off the rails, so public […] doesn’t trust the media, doesn’t trust the public agencies, doesn’t trust their doctors or doctor groups, and they don’t trust each other! They don’t trust – do you know right now that there are grandparents that say that they won’t see their grandchildren unless they’re vaccinated! So now they’re putting – and the grandparents are vaccinated. So now they’re putting the risk of blood clots and myocarditis and death onto their grandchildren and saying that they won’t see each other for Disney.

Colleges mandating vaccines for students while faculty (and the FDA/CDC/NIH) are not taking it.

Peter McCullough @38:25: Do you know we have 9% of colleges that are mandating the investigational vaccines. So they’re actually mandating their student bodies participate in research with this, which is openly dangerous biological products. They have no ability to help these youngsters. And you know in many of these colleges: there’s no policy, there’s no exemption process.

And do you know that in many of these colleges their faculties aren’t taking it! Now the FDA, the CDC and the NIH, they’re not taking the vaccine! They’re not taking it! And the faculty’s not taking it! So they’re going to make the students take it under duress!

So the vaccine has been propagandized and now socially weaponized so the universities can hurt the student population! Just like the obstetricians are hurting their patients. Like the grandparents are hurting their grandchildren.

Mike, something is REALLY disturbing; wrong. And there are so many players in this.

The need for integrity, courage, principles… and justice.

Mike Adams @39:23: “Well said, and we’re up against the time here, I mean, we can continue to talk. Maybe, hopefully you can come back and join us again but, I just want to say, the people watching this, thank you for your integrity. And thank you for your courage but also for sticking to your principles. You want evidence, you want to show efficacy, you want to reduce risk and save lives. And that’s what every doctor should be in America, and somehow that – that seems like it’s lost. And that’s what freaks people out as much covid. It’s that ‘who can we trust anymore?’

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Well, I gotta tell you, if there’s ever a time for courage, for integrity, for commitment to principles of medical ethics, and commitment to biomedical science, and lastly, a commitment to justice, now is the time. And listen, if that’s my role, and that’s your role, that’s our role that we’re serving right now. And America needs to get behind its heroes. Because we’ve got a long uphill battle. There is a disturbing trance that is basically like a black cloud over the world right now. And we’re trying to find a way out. There’s so much harm and suffering going on, and NONE of it is needed.”

Mike Adams: “And I’ll tell you, and you are one of the bright points of light in this darkness, and the AAPS, this is a shining moment for that organization. They are so right, they – I don’t even know what to say, but we’re going to interview, I think, other prominent people from the AAPS because their voices are desperately needed right now to save lives and end human suffering. And also help stop this pandemic.

So, thank you Dr. McCullough. It’s an honor to have you on. I really enjoyed this conversation. You’re a wonderful person; I really honor your knowledge and your courage. Thank you.”

Dr. Peter McCullough: “Thanks Mike. Great interview.”

Thank you to everyone reading and/or watching the interview. Please help spread the word and stay informed. Research is incredibly important, especially in these uncertain times and with the incredible amount of propaganda and deliberate media suppression.

Thank you to everyone exposing these corruptions.