to fallout with doctor Robert Malone and myself Jan Jekielek
what a hearing this was that Ron Johnson held just a few weeks ago
and encapsulation of where we're at today with COVID with gov
response with the media now pheasants I
I mean just kind of laying things out in a way that I had
seen before it's interesting you say that because it came
pass in kind of an organic way it was catalyzed by me just writing
turn saying we're going to have this International Code some
concurrent with CPAC and would you be open to having hearing
about the same time since we're going to have all these people coming
International Grand's mission was that each of these
people testifying had to conclude their testimony within five minutes
people have been pestering me that there's a need
for someone to summarize where we're at right now and I think
Rand's hearing catalyzed that kind of it embodied it
but first of all I was thrilled with the fact that there was this
significant section on the media and some of those media were actually international as all Canadians
and notably one of the journalists Rodney Palmer made a kind of an interesting observation which
really hit me and that was that
you know the media have been poisoned as a result we're kind of fighting over
what is basic reality as is supposed to figuring out like he did had
to deal with a things
right and in a reasonable way when the news is poisoned
so is democracy because we've stopped debating about what's right
and instead we waste our time arguing about what's true
one of these issues actually so Jessica rose was one of the earliest
people to testify and she laid out
very obviously in intricate detail how we know as a fact that
these COVID vaccines cause harm
causal harm not just correlational harm today I speak for the people injured by the COVID
19 injectable products through very data
analysis of the various pharmacovigilance data based in the context of the COVID 19 injectable product
has revealed strong emergent safety signals from myocarditis to debt
that are not being acknowledged by the owners of the data
this goes against standard operating procedures and begs the question why are the injured being hidden
fact the Bradford hill criteria are used to assess causality and epidemiological data such
as the verses pharmacovigilance system
fact the proportional reporting ratio is used to assess whether or not a particular
adverse event is more commonly reported in the context of a particular drug
if the PRR is greater than one a causal effect is indicated
fact the PRR calculation for death
from overs in the context of the COVID 19 shots used in current news
data is three point six
fact the underreported number of deaths successfully filed to veins by January
20th 20 21 was 634
based on historical guidelines this was a sufficient this was sufficient as a signal
not only to prompt an investigation
but to shutdown the rollout of the COVID 19 shot
fact in 19 99 a Rhode coronavirus vaccine designed to prevent rotavirus gastroenteritis
was pulled from the market due to an inter reception signal emanating from overs
which comprised 584 cases
question if 584 cases of in the deception were enough to prompt product removal
then why weren't 634 cases of death
not enough to prompt COVID 19 product removal
fact the early death count was hidden
fact currently one million 615 000 and 998 reports of adverse events have been
successfully filed to verse in the context of the COVID 19 and injectable product
with a staggering one million 13 000 and 442 reports filed in 20 21 alone
when considering both the foreign and domestic data sets the number of adverse events reported to
the domestic news data set for all vaccines combined has been on
average 39000 in total per year
and has been very slowly and steadily increasing in direct proportion to the increasing
number of vaccine products on the market
see slide one in 20 21 however a 14 17 percent increase in reporting occurred where
by 93 percent of these reports were in the context of the COVID 19 product
fact age is not deterministic for adverse Event Reporting
since administration of the COVID 19 products to the zero to four age group commenced
the rate of adverse Event Reporting has been increasing faster than for any other age group
fact the argument that this spike protein the spike in reporting spike protein
this spike in reporting is due to increased shot administration is false
slide two shows the comparison of the number of adverse events per million doses
in the context of influenza vaccines
and the COVID 19 injectable products in 20 19 20 21 respectively
on the left are the total adverse events on the right are the death
the COVID 19 injectable products are associated with a 26 and a one hundredfold increase in
total adverse events and deaths respectively
when compared per million doses with influenza vaccines in the same timeframe
fact the Bradford hill criterion reverse ability is satisfied
when a drug is withdrawn the side effects disappear a strong correlation of equals
point eight and a high covariance exist between shot rollout data
and my card id us reports filed according to our world and data new
vaccination data and virus data respectively
as shot demand wanes so do the pro card it is reports see slide three a
fact the Bradford hill criterion specificity is satisfied a very specific population
at a specific site and disease is reported with no other likely explanation
dos too is associated with a fourfold increase in reporting of pro card it
is and fifteen year Old Boys
this indicates specificity with regard to age and gender see slide three b
fact the Bradford hill criterion dose response is satisfied
greater exposure leads to greater incidents of the effect
following dose two an increase in signal occurs see slide three b
fact my carnot's is not transient or mild
a new paper published by rose at all in the journal therapeutic advances in drug safety
shows that pro card it is associated with hospitalization in 76 percent of report
there are seven more Bradford hill criterion
criteria that are satisfy able that's a ten out of ten bingo
conclusion standard operating procedures for analysis of safety signals emergent from overs when utilized
reveal causal links between the covenotine injectable products and the adverse events investigated
standard operating procedures are not being followed by the owners of the
data namely CDC HHS and FDA
and this equates to hiding the millions of people reporting not only adverse events
but injuries in the context of the COVID 19 injectable product
Jessica's presentation was key and Ron specifically wanted Jessica there Jessica hadn't been able to attend
previously because of various travel problems etc
Ron had long wanted her to participate in the earlier presentation
and recently she's done a lot of hard work
you know all through the COVID crisis but it's really matured
in her analysis of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting system
the CDC and the stunning thing about this was this is all information
that the CDC has known about and has hidden has intentionally hidden as documented in
prior Epoch Times reports so there's this other researcher that jumps to my mind right away
as you're speaking Raphael canister why wasn't frankly that familiar with before but he's just completed
the fourth of a series of papers looking at how
the data that exist have been kind of used to exaggerate the safety and effectiveness of
the jabs which I thought was
you know fascinating I think Raphael has been one of the unsung heroes here
and he's done a lot of this publication together with Peter do Chi the
editor for BMJ who's based at University Maryland
and Raphael has driven a lot of that he's got a fascinating story he was
subjected to pressure in Australia to lose his job because he wouldn't take the jab he
put together a dossier of information
in his own defense saying this is why I am not willing to take the jab
I think one of the lovely things about Raphael is he so modest
and absolutely that was one of the things I noted this is the kind
of some of the most
understated incredibly hard hitting testimony we have found
in the studies varying definitions of fully vaccinated
and unvaccinated and generally what we find with the term fully vaccinated is that
they are ignoring COVID cases
covered infections in the partially vaccinated so this could be a few months
worth of time where someone who's received the injection
has a COVID infection possibly because of the injection as we've heard from others
speakers today with immunosuppression and so forth am and yet it's not count
is completely ignored and that effect was found to be up to 48
percent now adverse effects in the observation bad is relating to safety a lot
of these adverse effects are overlooked
due to very narrow counting windows including starting too late
so again not counting what's happening in the partially vaccinated
and ending too early usually just a few months when we know there are
long term effects such as Mike
and so forth yeah he's a great guy and understated
somebody that really ought to be recognized for his contributions during this
well and then there's this study reference that's been out for a little while now referenced
by Dell bigtree which had no 99 million
odd right you know simplest not bad this is a CDC study by the way the
conclusions being drawn from this study by let's call it the Legacy media act
tors are including Lenox news is that right are completely different from at least the conclusions
that we would draw I think
or they weren't Lind it out to me yet different in the
way that I read it
so this is a electronic publication in the journal vax I
which came out a few weeks ago and the paper version will becoming out in a
future issue but they thought it was so important that they went ahead
and published it electronically and as you say it's a survey of 99 million
drawn from public databases so these are government databases
associated with the vaccine administration
and the adverse events associated with that
administration the authors of this article
which as you say was sponsored by the CDC they received a ten million
dollar grant to do that
and many the authors have CDC affiliations so this is pretty close
an official publication in a major pier review journal ACA
but in the discussion the authors acknowledge that all of these databases that they accessed
were biased to under report adversity
now that's an easy thing to say but when you unpack that
we know the reality the average person that
just listening to this may not recognize what that really means
what it is an acknowledgment that
these public databases are biased
because physicians were unwilling to report adversity
they were all kinds of disincentives to do so and in many cases the
physician reports like happened in Canada
would be deleted by the National Health Service
as for any reason they could think of saying that they were not accurate or valid
despite all of that bias and the data
these authors with this rigorous 99 million analysis concluded that there was
very strong statistical correlation
between administration of the jab and a 45 day follow up so it's a
short period to follow up after
vaccination and three key types of adverse events there's
cardiac damage there's the sinus thrombosis
so in the brain blood clots and gianbarac
drone this autoimmune associated paralysis
so those were the three that had really strong correlations despite the bias in the data
but the authors acknowledged there was a number of other ones
that looked like they were significant but they didn't meet their rigorous criteria for
a highly significant correlation but what they did say is these should all be followed up
and more carefully examined and the press took this
and they took the discussion section that had been written the discussion section can talk about
whatever they want cite whatever papers they want it was kind of a selective
a reporting and it cited a number of papers suggesting that these
were relatively infrequent or rare
now rare is in the eye the beholder if you're the person that has developed than
bare Sen dromey or your relative your child
it may not seem very rare to you so rare is subjective
but the authors in their discussion section talked about
other papers that had studied these things and said that they were rare and
the press picked up on them
they said well now the CDC this study is acknowledging
that these adverse events actually are happening but they're still rare
but that wasn't actually what the paper concluded the paper concluded that they were highly correlated
and that further analysis was necessary
and that this high correlation was detected despite the fact
that these data were skewed biased one thing that just jumps to my mind
also you know I had Kevin McKernan on the show on American Thought Leaders
sometime ago he had found these DNA fragments in the jabs that shouldn't be there
so what Kevin did was he took the actual vaccine material with its DNA contamination
and put it onto cultured cells basically to quiet down or address
the fact checkers that said that well this
hasn't been shown with these vaccines and so he took the actual vaccine products
put it on cells and showed that in fact he could get integration not
only could he get trans faction
the delivery of those and a fragments into those cells with High Frequency but
he could also detect integration
what I want to talk to you today is about the and a contamination that our
team medicinal jomicks discovered in the mRNA vaccine
specifically speaking about Pfizer and Moderna in this case this work has been replicated
by many labs around the world
and now the EMA and even Health Canada
I have admitted to this the regulatory agents have admitted that Pfizer also omitted
the sp forty sequences that are in their vaccine DNA contamination can lead to
in serial mutagenesis this is actually declared in moderna's own patents regarding mRNA vaccines
this is US patent ten million 8 9 8 5 7 4
this is also supported by limb at all which speaks to the rate of
spontaneous integration in the genome during trans faction we are using trans faction
all with Ellen pass the SV forty Diana is in fact functional
it is published as a potent Gene therapetul and a nuclear targeting
sequence as described by David Ian
the forty promoter Dina is also known to bind to the timber suppress regime
non this P53 we've applied these vaccine system cancer cell lines and have evidence
that it enters the cell
and can survive several Cull divisions we have preliminary evidence although this requires replication other labs
that this DNA can integrate into the agenda we found two
spike sequence integration events and ovarian cancer outlines off car three into
chromosome twelve and nineteen very recently
Kevin in this wonderful little concise segment basically says in order to address the fact checkers
I've done these things Bang Bang bang and they were wrong about this and they were
wrong about that and they were wrong about that he talks about that they
denied that the DNA was there
and now the agencies are all acknowledging that it's there and they
denied that it could be delivered
and he's demonstrated that it could be delivered and they said it couldn't possibly
integrate because that's what Peter Marks said
and in fact he's demonstrated that it integrates so all of that stuff is now moot
God bless you if I can Harp on this for a moment it's just
astonishing to me that this limp id nano of particle technology would be
specifically used like it's known as a method to cause integration in the first place
it's not perplexing to me I spent a
you know 15 20 years doing this I would sloping to what are the implications
of this like why we that's why I was so shocked when
I first heard about Kevin's finding
with the and a fragments and the forty sequences fragment that's present in there
in the nuclear localization sequence etc
this was first brought to me by David Weisman and he said
there's this date a Robert what do you think about this and I said heap
darn well better be sure that this is the
true plasma map and that it actually has the forty sequences in there because
if he's right the implications are profound
and then three months later it's now been replicated by multiple laboratories all over
the world and confronted the FDA and confronted Health Canada and they've all concurred
that in fact the and a fragments are there the implications have been
right out front from the very beginning and so in a very brief nutshell
why are the implications so profound because this tech is specifically used
to deliver poly nucleotides it's agnostic it doesn't care if it's a one or Diane
and there was all this discussion early on because of a Rudy Danish paper published in
proceedings in National Academy of sciences
so Rudy is one of the core molecular virologists at MIT
and he had said that in the presence of reverse transcript is this NDAA could be
turned into and and it would integrate based on some in essentially disrupt the GE no
of cells certain type of liver cells
and I'd always said well that's a very contrived system that
probably isn't happening very often in humans after administering this
and then along comes Kevin's data that there's Dan a that
that's a Slam Dunk as far as I'm concerned as somebody who gave rise
to this technology and is a on fight expert in it
that is specifically what this technology was originally developed for
was delivering Diana into cells
in order to create cell lines or enable short term expression of
proteins off of that DNA that's why it was created
it's also used for the crisper last nine system
right a so this is
exactly what the tech was developed well run and no surprise
and that it would have this effect when injected into human
and prospered that last nine system is the sitive
you know Gene editing system to right for everyone's benefit
when Kevin did that sequencing
identified those fragments and then reassembled a plasmodia
based on his core competency in genomic sequencing
using the available tools that he routinely uses
he had changed everything as far as I was concerned about the risk prof
and yet what was amazing was the response
from the official community the FDA
and kind of the academic supporters
that the press often goes to was full on denialism
that this could possibly result in integration
when any undergraduate doing cell culture work
and using and a to manipulate those cells knows that's exactly what
this tack is designed for
it must be done a million times a year at least
worldwide we developed these Catania a lip id compounds and sold them to the likes of
pro mega is the agents I was going to say a million times a
year but not in vivo
and human cells not in relive no in human cells but not in whole animals
right for me it's been an Allison Wonderland situation through the looking glass
to know that this technology is specifically used for this
it was designed for this it's marketed for this
I've developed marketed compounds for the research industry
that we had patents on we sold to research reagent companies to do their
and then to have the FDA denying decades of experience
that in fact this is the properties of this technology
was a bizarre moment in time since Kevin's data have come out it's almost self evident
so let's do a quick accounting as we kind of finished this segment of kind of
the issues right I mean I'm just
a kind of off the top of my head we've kind of used in these
Gene therapy you know vaccine named product
we've used a very toxic protein
right as the antigen yes which is you know this is a question more
engineer an aging it's engineered there's this
you know as IRS pseudo Eurydice in it which causes this
rift won't frameshifting so you know it gets eight percent of the
proteins are the wrong thing with
possibly some kind of ecological activity in itself so we've got that
we've got this and contamination and we've got the endotoxin which is the wall contamination
from that same process in there we've got
a lot of variation in the way production it seems like the quality control
ostensibly very poor and governments are blocked from actually verifying the
purity potency in identity of the products by contract
with wiser and madurlia yeah so run
really wanted to have somebody put down a Punch
of these kinds of specific
where do we stand with the vaccine science and the
and after all the dust settled of everyng everybody else organized he
asked me to rollout my
of what I thought were the key things that we've learned about the vaccine
adverse events and other characteristics much as you're doing and I came
up with this little list
the modified Marrone and Aden vectored products are not traditional vaccines
they employ cutting edge Gene delivery or Gene therapy technologies and should be regulated
as Gene therapy products that's still being considered controversial by the way
there are still fact checkers that are denying that this is Gene therapy technology
despite the fact that we had bar
pharmaceuticals right I come out the other day and explicitly refer to
these as Gene therapy products
and basically celebrate that now the populace is accepting Gene therapy products
and the field can advance
we're really taking that leap us as a company buyer
in sale in therapy which to me is one of these examples
what really we're going to make
a difference hopefully moving forward that's ammo that
ultimately the mRNA vaccines are an example for that Celestine therapy I always like to say
if we had surveyed two years ago
in the public would you be willing to take a gentgenos cell therapy and
inject it into your body
we would have probably had a 95 percent refusal rate these leaky products there's
no denying that these are
unsuccessful in preventing infection replication and spread of the virus
and we had recent testimony from the CDC representative
on the hill that acknowledged finally
and persistent questioning that these products don't prevent infection
and just to recap to reel back in time
at the very outset of this I did a Deep Dive into the history of coronavirus
vaccines which many other people did too
and the truth was there has never been a successful human coronavirus facto
because the things mutate so much so doesn't make a ten a whole lot of reasons
they're able to evade immune responses they mutate really rapidly to escape them
there's never been a successful coronavirus vaccine and I argue
there still has not been a successful coronavirus vaccine
in terms of preventing infection replication or spread we're down to arguing the new and
of whether or not there's a short term benefit
in terms of hospitalization or death
we know this not a long term benefit after receiving these products because of the negative
effectiveness that after two to three months
post vaccination you actually become more likely
to have significant co Ben disease or death
surprise point three in contrast to official HHS communications these products distribute throughout the
body so this is another lot
they go all over your body they don't just stay in the shoulder after you're injected
because that's what the lip id NATO particles are designed to do is go everywhere
and your body handles them like other lip is it distributes them all over your body
so who cares well what happens is not only as the lip id and
particle toxic so I that toxicity
goes with it wherever it happens to go in your body but
then when it produces these pro
both the frame shifted proteins and the spike proof
the engineered spike protein those are seen as foreign
and your body's immune system will attack those cells wherever they are in your body
because they're producing a foreign protein so that's a problem
the viral spike protein which these products cause patients bodies to manufacture
is a genetically engineered to
that's now well established the lip id and particle used to deliver the mRNA
has intrinsic toxic in human
that's now established fact these products do not deliver natural messenger ren
a but rather a synthetic
chemically modified form this is the pseudouridine
with its bizarre characteristics that it suppresses
inflammation and it also
causes these products to last a really longtime remember early on we
were told well the RNA
it goes into your arm it goes to the draining lymph nose doesn't go anywhere else
and it's gone in a couple of hours so don't worry about it
all those were wrogtwll except that this was the set Euridice was
Patten specifically to allow the
technology to work in the first place yet because otherwise because if it gets
gone in an hour or whatever it is then it actually can't work right actually the
a justification that Carico and Weisman used in their early papers
was that it would suppress the inflammatory response to the RNA itself
when they made that discovery
the whole science of pseudouridine was still in its infancy
and all of these other effects that we now know more about
but we still don't really
we're unknown so they kind of were out on the edge
and said hey let's take a back let's try this thing we're trying to find some
way to make this thing work
and they did it because they knew that the inflammatory response
triggered by the RNA itself was a major problem in of the side effect was that
it had this long lit longer lasting
these products are contaminated with previously undisclosed short dark fragments we just talked about
that this is Kevin mccern and tall many others have contributed this
but Kevin certainly deserves the gold star for being the leader and pioneering us
analysis of public databases clearly demonstrate a causal relationship between administration of these products
and a variety of toxicities
including cardiac damage central and peripheral nervous system damage
and damage associated with abnormal blood clotting and death
this was the stuff that was covered so well by Jessica rose
public health data from a wide variety of western government sources demonstrate
that repeated administration of these products
are associated with this problem of negative efficacy
and we also had testimony about that in particular the
elevation opening four also kind of inside baseball what using for
it's a variety of immunoglobulin it's a category of immunoglobulin
there's many different kinds of immunoglobulins Anding four is typically upregulated
conditions that involve allergic responses and it's associated with down regulation
adaptive inflammatory responses so anti infectious disease response
so the problem with elevating for particularly after repeated administration is this general problem of
immune imprinting original orogenic sin down regulating immune response
if here child has an allergy
and you go to an allergist what do they do they give them allergy shok
they basically expose them to ragweed pollen for example through
inter del mal injections your child eventually develops a tolerance for ragweed poll in
functionally what the sing for data show is that a similar thing
is happening with a covaje
and strangely what the CDC recommendations are doing
is driving people that are fully compliant to
have a response Akin to what your allergist might have your child to
with ragwheed pollen where it's actually pushing down
the ability of your body to respond to COVID these are I think the key thing
that are really at the center of an update of
wear we at right now with these products while the CDC
is once again recommending that the elderly take their next
dose to my eye the data show that the elderly
have more adverse events than do some of the younger cohorts so
they both have more risk
from the virus but they also have more risk from the vaccine
the CDC also is now
kind of normalizing COVID saying that we no longer have to have this five day quarantine
period we can treat COVID more like
any other respiratory virus they're trying to get
all of their guidance for respiratory viruses align so that basically we have one guidance whether
it's flu or rsv or mob it
it seems that we're in this bizarre through the looking glass world
where the data are completely misaligned with the public policy
I think we've covered the and a state of the jab part of the hearing
pretty well here today but frankly I think the entire hearing deserves
watching I mean there's some highlight reels around I know it
senator Johnson's you know Twitter feet
as rumbled I completely agree and some of the highlights are
stunning like Lara Logan's talking about the media and what's happened
some of the Canadian testimony we had as you mention a Canadian
journalist and also a Canadian politician
and data from Romania showing that there was very low uptake basically Romanian resistance
to the green card and yet they have the best
outcome in Europe in terms of all cases mortality
just as we might you and I might expect less jab's better outcome
a paradox so that there's room for some kind of observational study
possibly to look at Sweden to look at Romania and then look at some of the
places that had Borman lockdown yeah and heavy
yeah it's interesting and I'm hearing from a lot of other people
that somehow this one feels like a turning point
because I think in part it was broader
it was multinational international and it was more aimed at
the questions that real people have so actually that's what I heard as well
so I want to recommend everyone all our viewers check out the
hearing check out the highlight reel
learn a bit more it's packed full of amazing information and I think we should actually
shift gears a little bit and a
head over to a different vaccines think about the flu vaccine now
a little bit of its background
so we're going to take a shirt break right now and after that we're going to
hit you with some vax facts
let's talk about the flu vaccine I really like using the flu vaccine as a starting
an entry lowell a thing for talking about vaccine
because it covers so much of the whole vaccine technology
and in the case of flu what's interesting is
in many ways what we covered a couple of segments ago when we talked about the
history of the 19 18 one union
pandemic the myth around that pandemic
is really what underlies not only the entire vaccine enterprise but especially the influenza enterprise
because the government has taken as a policy
that it's their responsibility to prevent an 19 18
one and one from ever happening again and we think that now
that there might have been
other factors than the actual influenza virus that cause this
those the data that come from Walter Reed looking at old army autopsy Sam
hundred percent we'll get our folks to check out that episode if they're not familiar
yes so in a way the whole influenza strategy is kind of built
on a myth that we now know isn't really true but it has a
life of its own like many bureaucratics
and in the case of flu the reason why we all get
pushed to take an annual influence vaccine here in the United States
as opposed to Brazil or many other countries that don't mandate
and don't promote annual influence vaccines is because there's a need to maintain
here's the keyword warm based manufacture
him what that means is the government believes that
in the event that a 19 18 like thing happens again
we're going to have to be able to make enough influence vaccine for everyone
but you can't just stand up an influence a vaccine manufacturing facility and not fall it
you have to keep it in production
because otherwise you can't really turn it back on again
well and you and you need eggs right that's something a lot of people
don't know yes so most influence vaccine are manufactured in eggs because
flu will grow in chicken
flew grows like crazy in wild birds
and so all the migratory geese and ducks and everything else
carry a lot of influenza with them and they poop enormous amounts
of influenza into the water but
so the whole idea that we could somehow vaccinate all chickens in the United States
and stop bird flu is false the thesis is that we have to have
this massive ability to rapidly manufacture enough flu vaccine to inoculate the entire population
of the United States and preferably the rest of the world
to prevent some horrible outcome that might occur like
19 18 and how are you going to do that if you just
have in people elderly the
children that are immunocompromised the people that are really at risk for influenza for dying
if they're the only ones that are getting the vaccine you can't sustain the manufacture
if you don't have the market that they've created a market
through the annual influence of vaccine campaigns in order
to sustain the warm base manufacturing in case
someday we have in 19 18 that's the chain that's happening
and what's happened overtime is they've kind of changed the gold post
they used to focus on whether or not the vaccine would protect against infection
that was efficacy now they've changed efficacy to whether or not it protects against severe disease
reminds me of another vaccine seence awf
familiar doesn't it an just like co be at the same game
and that's no surprise because that's kind of how CDC grew up their whole vaccine enterprise
well so the other thing that jumps to my mind is you know we've talked about
a number of times on this show and certainly on American Thought Leaders this
idea of immune tolerance sometimes it's called
and negative vaccine efficacy imprinting is are other word and there's other fancier words that are
kind of inside a baseball for immunology
and back sinologists I've lost two key clients
in the past by even talking about this was a third rail in influenza
vaccines for years and years and years
you weren't supposed to talk about this problem
of negative efficacy or of immune tolerance
but it's influenza literature and what's shown
again and again is that when you have these annual boosters when you're repeatedly vaccinating
somebody against influenza they actually become less responsive
to a new influenza infection their bodies get trained to respond to the last
influenza or the one that had the biggest impact on their immune system perhaps they're first
and then you keep boosting them but what happens is you end up boosting
and a bodies an immune response from an antiquated Strain lot time
and so then your body isn't able to adapt and respond
rapidly to a new Strain that's different this
annual influenza vaccine strategy while it may be great for maintaining warm base manufacturing
it isn't so great for the patient because they actually become more likely
in some cases many cases to become infected with the latest influence
if you keep giving an agent you keep giving an influenza shop
again and again and again what you can do is train somebody's immunity
system to not react to influenza I've heard that you can actually
get influenza from getting a shot
and that's a little bit complicated to answer it turns out that
one of the influenza act
product it's restricted to people I think it's four to 49
can't be used in pregnancy it can't be used in May compromise
because it is a live influenza art
it's a weakened one that's what the word attenuated is
and it goes into your nose but it can cause disease in some people
so yeah the answer is in the case of flu mist you absolutely can
get influenza if you are somebody
who has basically a week commune system should people be getting this
vaccine that's a good question you're basically putting me on the spot
to go against CDC guidance
and lose my medical license and God only knows what else these days
but I'll say it this way I don't take an annual influence of it
many countries throughout the world do not recommend annual influenza action
if you're an elderly person with a history of upper respiratory infections
or immunocompromised it may make sense for you
but I think for the average person it's just like with cove
if you get an periodic
influenza infection it's going to generate a robust immunity
that's complex it's cellular and humor as and it's going to be
against all the different influenza
an agent's and that's probably some of the best immune response you can get
to not be afraid of any of
the annually circulating influenza there's another one where we're surrounded by fear messages
you must get your influenza vaccine influenza kills people
well the truth is the people that are at high risk for death
from upper respiratory viral infections like influenza is
COVID Beta coronaviruses other respiratory viruses are people that are already
not well people that already have compromised immune systems that are elderly
in some cases it's just the thing that tips the ball
you're already on the edge in terms of your health
and you get a pneumonia and that knocks you out
you can also have that from an ascending urinary tract
on that's a common way that old people die and there's also you know ways you
can kind of protect yourself to strengthen your immune system and apps for vitamin d
you know comes to mind media brand Vida and plus zinc a healthy living
getting outside getting sunshine maintaining your health in every dimension is the best
protection you have so I guess that's a rap and next week we're going
to be talking about this paper that doctor Jessica rose talked to about earlier
along with doctor Peter McCalla and a few others published the first paper actually calling for
the withdrawal of the COVID 19 genetic vaccines went through extensive peer review
was published and then mysteriously retracted so we're going to look into the pure review process
something you know a lot about absolutely and for our viewers out there
can you do me a favor the next time you see an outrageous headlong
something that just seems to be upside down put it in the social media
tag it his fallout and put it in the comments below here
so that we can pull those things together for a segment