Good. So at least John can ring Peter if he's got the hour wrong.
Peter's here. Peter's there.
Great. Very good. So it did work. Thank you, John. And thank you, Peter.
Hi, Peter. Hi, everybody.
You know a lot of people on this call here, Peter and John, you probably do as well.
If you look around on the names there, who knows Peter personally? Call out.
Say hello if you already know Peter and John. Hi, Peter. This is Susan Downs. Hi, Susan.
Hi, Peter. Hi, Peter. Hi, everybody.
Peter, welcome to Eagle.
You know all the ladies, Peter.
Very good. Well, it's a pleasure to bring on my co-author, best-selling, true crime author, John Leake, previously of Vienna, Austria.
He now lives in the great metroplex of Dallas, Fort Worth, where he started out.
And I'll let Stephen kick off the show when everybody's been checked in.
Peter, I'll let Charles kick off in Australia at five o'clock in the morning on Monday.
Okay. Mondays are good, Peter. It's six o'clock. Wednesdays are about five a.m., John, but today it's six o'clock for us Australians.
Alex Crainer is here as well, Stephen, who presented to us last week. So Alex, welcome. Welcome.
Thank you very much. Good to be with you. Greetings to all.
Great to have you. And welcome to our first-time visitors.
If you're new, please put your... Please put your... Please say we welcome you and please introduce yourself in the chat.
Show yourself with your name, proper name. We're going to full transparency here.
And I'm Charles Cobess, your moderator, Stephen Frost Medical Doctors for COVID Ethics.
We have Peter and John Leake who will tell us all about themselves.
And after Peter and John stop talking, as long as they would like to talk, then we have questions. Use the reactions tab.
We take them in order. Great to have you all here on the 5th of June in America and UK and the end of the Jubilee celebrations, I believe, Stephen.
So 70 years, eh? How many of... Do you realize, everybody, that the Queen was... became the Queen in the year I was born?
So clearly, that was a big deal. Anyway, welcome Peter and John.
So, Charles, in answer to your question, in the UK, if you don't watch BBC, which I don't, you don't know anything about the...
Well, and the mainstream media, then you don't know anything about the Jubilee.
Okay. There you are. Well, maybe I know more than you. We had other mainstream here.
Anyway, welcome everybody. Peter McCullough and John Leake over to you.
We look forward to listening to you and then quizzing you and getting the benefit of your genius. Thank you for being here.
Good. Well, I'll go ahead and kick it off, Charles. I'm Dr. Peter McCullough. I'm a practicing internist and cardiologist.
I'm also trained in epidemiology located in Dallas, Texas. And I spent about half my time in clinical practice and the other half as an academic scholar.
And since the beginning of the pandemic, I've been very involved in the response, early treatment, understanding the epidemiology and overall outlook of the pandemic.
And then in the most recent years, focusing vaccine safety and efficacy. And I think many know me. I'm a frequent commentator on almost all the major news stations.
I have a podcast, the McCullough Report on America, a lot of talk radio McCullough Report.
Many of you have actually been on the show that airs on radio on Saturday and Sunday hits the podcast network on Tuesdays.
You know, I have taken a view that from the scientific perspective, we have presented the data and analyze data now for into our third year.
And we haven't made sufficient progress, I think, in informing the public of what's going on with the pandemic.
And so a book or a form of a narrative or a story is a wonderful opportunity to, in a sense, describe a complex reality in the setting of a story.
And so John Leake approached me now about a year ago in order to work on such a story. And it's been a wonderful relationship.
We've worked very hard for a year in the last four weeks have just released our book.
So I'll let John take over and introduce himself and explain how we got started with this work.
Well, thank you for having me. Thanks for introducing me, Dr. McCullough. I'm a true crime author.
I work in a in a genre of literature that I think was really probably invented in the United States by our great prose stylist Truman Capote when he wrote the book In Cold Blood.
You take a crime story and with all these police and investigators and district and a district attorney and the local town and it's just no one knows exactly what's happened.
So you take the facts of the story, but then you tell it in the form of a narrative in which you introduce the characters and lead the reader into their perspective on the story, how they were seeing it at the time.
And there seems to be something in the mind of humanity. We understand things through storytelling.
I mean, if you read the Iliad and the Odyssey or the Bible, it's not just a presentation of factual data.
We were presented with stories. And so that's what Dr. McCullough and I have endeavored to do.
And I was talking with a publicist in Florida this morning, a very, very clever girl.
And she was saying, well, I think one of the things that's hard about this is it's all this complicated medical stuff.
Dr. McCullough, everybody loves him, but he talks and all of this complex medical terminology and it's hard to follow.
And I said, well, I think if the reader will give our book a chance, they are drawn into the narrative and it enables them to understand the factual data and information is embedded in the story.
So that's what we've done. And I have I have expressly investigated this and written this as a true crime story.
It falls squarely within the genre of true crime.
The crime is a massive, massive fraud that has been perpetrated on the entire globe, on all of mankind, hundreds, if not thousands of misrepresentations of the reality that we're up against.
And then a second element, which I think meets the legal standard of what we call negligent homicide.
We're not actually I don't think we could get a conviction in court of actual murder, which has a strong element of intent.
You actually set out to kill another human being.
Negligent homicide is you deprive you knowingly and willingly deprive human beings of something that could help them to avoid injury and death.
And so this this suppression of early treatment, I believe, is a crime.
And I believe it rises to the level of mass negligent homicide.
So that's how we've we've we presented the story. Dr. McCullough and his and his colleagues are the protagonists of the story.
And so we the reader will be led into their lives as they as they try to seek truth and justice.
So I hope that you guys will tell all your friends about the book. It's easy to read.
You could read it on a certainly read it on a plane flight from Sydney to New York.
You could probably read it twice.
And people seem to be very gripped by it.
So I hope I hope you guys will spread the word on the courage to face COVID-19.
You can find a book. You can go to our website courage to face COVID.com.
I put it in the chat box. Courage to face COVID-19.com.
Read a little bit about myself and John Lee can our concept in doing the book.
And then the the the website takes you to the Amazon portal for purchase, although we're working out some other distribution networks outside of Amazon in the last four weeks.
It's hit number one and on Amazon for viral diseases, communicable diseases and true crime.
And we're we're off to, I think, a splendid start.
There's not that many books in this space at this point in time contemporary and all of them take on different aspects of the pandemic.
It was a brief book by Diane Andrews that was really just focusing on President Trump and then Pam Popma was about how the organization of DARPA and Operation Warp Speed happened.
And then Scott Alice about his participation on the White House test force one and what he saw from the inside.
And then many are aware of Robert F. Kennedy's book focusing on the real Anthony Fauci and Kennedy's book was was widely read.
And most recently, Naomi Wolf has introduced a book called The Bodies of Others that Deal with Autonomy.
And then lastly, I'd say George Fareed, who testified with me in the U.S. Senate, has a book out titled Overcoming the COVID Darkness, How Two Doctors Treated 7000 Patients Successfully.
And George Fareed and Brian Tyson in that book actually disclose a monograph of their clinic results.
So it's a nice way of doing that. That's kind of the old timey way in medicine, how doctors used to publish their results.
But out of all those books, our book Courage to Face COVID-19 is the only one that's actually a story.
It's a narrative. And John's written it in a very talented way as a page turner.
People enjoy it. It has some funny and witty chapters to it.
Some of you will immediately look at the table of contents and see a chapter called Cuomo Sexuals and describes what happened to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and his brother at CNN.
Correspondent Chris Cuomo. And then there's books that chronicle what happened in the U.S. Senate, advances in France with Didier Rialt, what happened in Australia.
So many of you will be able to relate to this.
It also deals with some of the tragedies and successes that happen to people as they progress towards the inpatient arena,
including one sad case in Texas that even got into the Texas District Courts on a patient who was not adequately treated and sadly died.
So we'll open it up here for questions or comments.
Thank you. Thank you, Peter. Thank you, John. Congratulations on the book.
A number of people on this call have have bought the book already.
So, you know, how how good is that? So everybody, please put your hands up.
We've got them in order. And traditionally, everybody, Stephen Frost goes first.
That's the process that we do here. And Stephen, Stephen is the founder of this group.
That's what he does. And he ends with the last question. So, Stephen, over to you first.
John, I absolutely agree that it's some crime this and it's great that you've actually formed a narrative.
But don't you think that we do, in fact, have evidence of intent from Pfizer's own documents?
They knew in February 21 that these so-called vaccinations were dangerous and they continued and they have continued.
They're still continuing. Yes, sir. So there are two points there.
Dr. McCullough and I are going to do a second book in which we expressly focus on the vaccine and the criminal conduct with the vaccine.
This book, we certainly address the vaccine as a motive for the suppression of early therapy.
We go into how these two phenomenon are related.
But the criminal conduct actually examining the evidence of criminal conduct with the development and the mandate of the vaccine is something we will address in our second book.
The other thing is a true crime writer. And this is something I do that my colleagues in the genre tend not to.
I try to examine the evidence and present the evidence in a way that actually would hold up in court where you are going to have highly paid criminal defense attorneys before a jury, you know, doing everything they can to poke a hole in your case.
So, I mean, I try I look at this is if I were a prosecutor, how would I present this?
And as every good prosecutor knows, you have to choose the law or you're most likely going to get a conviction.
So with the suppression of early treatment, you know, it's it's we're going to deny or discourage this patient from receiving ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin or prednisone or I mean any number of things.
Now, do you know in advance when you deny the patient these repurposed drugs, do you know that they are going to die?
And I think a criminal defense attorney would say, no, you know, you're just as a matter of principles saying you don't think these drugs are correct or safe or there's not sufficient evidence.
All of this humbug that we were presented with, but I'm not sure it would rise to the level of murder.
John, we've got documents from Pfizer where they clearly admit that I think with respect to the vaccine.
So that's our second book.
1691. Yeah, exactly.
So the vaccine, the vaccine, I would actually be so bold to to set forth an evidentiary case in which I think murder has to be contemplated.
But our first book is about the suppression of early treatment.
I understand. Yeah.
And so stay tuned for the second book, because we are going to get more focus on the vaccine in our second book.
It's a book unto itself.
I didn't want to try and combine the two in the first book, because then it just gets too big.
But it would be good if we gave you some of our thoughts from our perspective so you can consider maybe that, for example, you might like to explore psychological torture, deliberate psychological torture of the entire world's population.
And we're all victims of that, in my opinion.
But, yes, we talk about the massive propaganda campaign, which clearly has elements what intelligence services called a Psyop.
It's an intentional campaign to terrorize and to confuse and to isolate and render an entire populace disoriented.
So we do go into that. Yeah.
Very good. Charles.
Thank you for that.
Peter and John, on this call we have, we have lawyers, we have doctors, we have journalists, we have scientists, we have patent experts, we have thinkers, we have IT experts, we have ex-military, we have Psyop experts.
It's a wonderfully diverse group and it's fair to say that this is a resource that Peter knows, Peter's presented to us before and knows that this is a resource.
So John and Peter, if you want any ideas, as Stephen says, there's a lot of people here who would be happy to say who's got a clue on whatever that's available.
On that note, if I could interject, and I was so busy, I was in the middle of juggling a hundred things.
I saw a video of an Australian gentleman of the old school.
He was wearing a beautiful black suit.
He had a marvelous accent and he was apparently an ex-military man who was seeking office.
And he presented the most hard-hitting campaign video of what we were facing, what he was seeing, you know, the way forward.
Who is that guy? It's now been a while.
John is a man called Ricardo Bozzi.
That's the guy.
And he is very impressive indeed.
And I'm trying to think of, as my mother said, if you can't, you know, he speaks brilliantly, impressively.
And from all accounts, from people that I know and others on this call know, he's very difficult to work with.
So it's hard to put a political party together if you're a loner.
But he speaks brilliantly.
Yeah, I was impressed by his video.
He looked like kind of a, I mean, we here in the United States have very romantic ideas of Australians being real tough guys.
He seemed like a tough guy of the old school.
Yes, that's a fair comment.
And they've turned all into wusses like the land of the free and the brave, you know.
Socialism is tearing at the fabric of people's characters and the Aussie tough guy is being seduced by free money from government.
Do you guys remember that film Breaker Morant?
Does anyone remember Breaker Morant?
So that was when I was a boy, that was my image of Australia was those guys.
Those guys were cool.
Anyway.
And it's very relevant, Breaker Morant, to your book, because Breaker Morant was executed and they got a dud lawyer to represent him.
And the case was badly presented.
And like many matters, they were executed and should never have been executed.
So there you are.
So the law not doing its job.
Yes. Well, the way that the film presented it was that the British had made their decision.
It didn't matter how good the defence attorney was or not.
They'd already made their decision in advance.
I mean, that's how I remember the film.
But anyway, great film.
My other my other my other knowledge of Australian womanhood.
I have the claim to fame.
I once had lunch with Elle MacPherson.
I mean, that's now that is the high.
That's a high, high, high credit to you, John.
Well, that may that may prove to be my greatest crowning moment.
No, it's going to come your moment, John.
It won't just be we stood up at the conclusion of one.
She was already seated when I walked into the restaurant.
And as we stood up, I was saying, well, Mr MacPherson, I'd love to take you out to dinner sometime.
And as we stood up, she was a full foot taller than I am.
It was a kind of a moment of shock and awe.
She stood up. She's probably six to or something.
Anyway, sorry about the comic aside.
It's not that it's also relevant, John, because Elle MacPherson, I believe, is going out with Dr.
Andy Wakefield. No, wow.
Wow. Yeah, he's been a big I'm sure you can arrange another lunch for John with Elle.
Well, you know, I wanted to say that some of the early feedback we've gotten is quite interesting.
One of the comments that someone gave me directly and through the Amazon portal is that our book can be viewed as a gateway.
And that is the public all over the world, you know, unbeknownst to them have been in a psychological operation, a psyops.
And they've been propagandized and they really can't believe that their governments would would do this to them.
And many have said that the way the story is written is understandable.
It just kind of tells the story and starts out with me as I was trying to figure out how to treat covid and my dad gets it.
And then, you know, Didier Rialt in France and Vladimir Zelenko, there's chapters for each one of these characters.
And by reading it, what I've been told is that even people who are kind of in the trance, they're in the mass formation, they actually start to develop some insight and maybe maybe could break the formation.
And it may take books that are written in narratives, there actually may need to be movies made about this so people can really understand what's going on.
You know, you know, two or three minute national news clips of which I've done many are providing some counter narrative to to our, you know, our major stakeholders.
Really, what's a vaccine syndicate, essentially, our US Senate and state Senate presentations have made some progress, at least to show that there is some counter narrative, some resistance.
And I know World Council for Health, for instance, doctors for covid ethics, some of these heroic groups have with their great work, their evidentiary work have made progress.
But it may be actually through stories and through movies that people gain understanding.
I agree, Peter.
So I did a course on Greek and Roman mythology and for a long time, the Greek myths were not written down from the 13th century BC to 8th century BC when the Greek alphabet was created.
And and and the reason that they survived when they were just being passed down by was because they were fantastic stories which had relevance to life then and still have relevance to life now.
And the same with Bible.
So and I've also understood very recently in the last month or so, it's kind of come to me that if we don't really have an established narrative as to what's happened over the last two points to five years and and that's really dangerous situation because
Because people we know that people will believe a false narrative if there is no other narrative, just as they will follow a bad leader who they know is bad.
But if there's no other leader who wants to put him or herself forward, they will follow.
And it's really dangerous. And we're dealing with human nature, I think.
And one of the books that I've realized is very important is Lord of the Flies by William Golding.
And the Navy officer at the end of the book. So the island descends into complete chaos with these boys, you know, on the island.
And so, and the boys see themselves as savages and they're all frightened of each other.
They're absolutely terrified. But the Navy officer who turns up at the end, a British Naval officer actually, he represents order.
But more importantly, perhaps he actually breaks the mass formation, the mass hypnosis on the island.
Because the boys, it actually said, I think I haven't read it unfortunately recently, but I'm relying on my memory.
It says something like the boys told their stories and some of them began to cry.
And then I realized, you know, thinking of what's happened in the last two and two points, two and a quarter years, that people are really confused.
Psychologically tortured to the point of post traumatic stress disorder, I think.
And no wonder they feel terrible and no wonder they feel they follow a false narrative.
But they are beginning to realize that it's not quite right. It's something terribly wrong.
And I just think we have to create a narrative which challenges the false narrative.
And it doesn't necessarily depend on on data. It depends on how the story is told.
Right. Right. Yeah, you hit it, Dr. Frost.
I neglected to say another foundational book that I think everybody should have on their shelf of showing how it came together.
The Wuhan Lab in China, the Gates Foundation, World Economic Forum, WHO, Gavi Seppi is the book by Peter Bregan called COVID-19 and the Global Predators Wear the Prey.
I think if one had these five or six books, if anybody said, you know, huh, you know, Moderna was not connected to the Chinese.
So listen, just go to Bregan's book. He's got a thousand citations. Moderna is really connected to the Chinese.
And here it is. And, you know, the World Economic Forum is not involved. Yeah, they are.
And here is the foundational piece to it. So I think the foundational pieces are good.
I think what John and I are going to do is we're going to do a series of these narratives relying on.
And we do actually cite these other works because they actually help support the evidentiary for us to be able to tell the narrative.
Ladies and gentlemen, if I may interject for a moment, I had to flee my own home yesterday because the air conditioning repairman came and turned my entire living room into a construction site.
And what I to my shock and horror, I realized I left my power board at my mother's house.
So if you lose me, it's I'm sorry, this is very unprofessional, but it was quite turning everything upside down in my entire house.
If you lose me, it's because my computer is run out of power.
Anyway, I'm sorry about that.
Couldn't you use your phone, John?
OK. Yes, fine.
Works well, John.
How does he do it though if he doesn't know how to do it?
Oh, no, I can figure that out. Don't worry. Yeah.
OK, let's get to it.
I'm just on the corner if you need a cord.
I think I need one.
Oh, good. There you are. There's an offer.
OK, thanks. That's wonderful. Peter Briggins book.
We've had Peter as a guest here with Stephen.
Let's go to traveling Doria, Dr. Doria School, who you know, Peter, I'm sure.
Hi, Peter. Good to see you again.
You're going to get sick of seeing me because I'm going to be at a lot of your events.
I've been invited to exhibit the Beamer device.
So just get ready for that.
Starting this weekend in Nashville.
But yeah, I'm just when John mentioned the words criminal negligent homicide.
Those are the three words I have been blasting on my shadow banned social media for over two years.
The lack of early treatment and the suppression of early treatment and the spawking that went on when Trump mentioned hydroxychloroquine.
Clearly, I don't know. It's a crime syndicate.
I'm just going to be as short brief as I can.
In my opinion, it's a criminal act crime syndicate.
And I believe that physicians through the professional medical society have been groomed mentally, psychologically groomed and insidiously became trusting of everything that's in these journals.
That is funded by the big pharma industrial regulatory complex.
And so when this happened and they were said, oh, no, don't treat anything.
It's just like they don't even question it.
And they act like I've just never seen doctors refuse to treat before.
And these are my own colleagues.
So I'm so grateful to both of you for using those exact words.
And I think volume three is probably going to end up being geriatric genocide, the nursing home assassination.
And that would definitely be something I hope you guys tackle in the future as well.
Well, in our in our chapter, if I could just dive right in, we have a chapter about what happened in New York in the state of New York, which everyone may recall was hit pretty hard at the end of March, beginning of April.
And we talk about all of the bizarre actions of the Cuomo administration and then in the New York Department of Health.
I it's it's a tragic comedy.
There's there's the tragic element of this incredibly bizarre directive that was issued stating that no one who is covid positive or presumed shall be denied readmission into nursing homes.
So it's it is quite literally a forcing of foxes into hen houses.
I mean, it's it's here's the fox.
You're and you're going to have to let him into your hen house.
I mean, they just quite literally did that.
And so we talk about that.
And it was it was devastating.
The tragedy of that is then leavened with what complete clowns Andrew and Chris Cuomo were.
I mean, it's it's just like the two stooges.
So in many ways, our chapter on the Cuomo's in New York is emblematic of the entire pathology.
You know, with elements of just utter nonsense, you know, sort of willful negligence and recklessness.
I mean, just everything about the New York response is just an just an unmitigated fiasco.
But but the nursing home tragedy is definitely covered in that chapter.
John, don't you think it was intended to be a complete mess up in New York?
Because New York has the the whole world looking at it, as does London.
And so what happens in New York goes around the world?
And yes, and it also it does.
It does. It does indeed look like there are elements.
And I thought this the same with Milan.
Remember, Milan is where all of the Italian media is.
So it looks like it does indeed look like there is a sort of catastrophic theater that is being played out.
It's like, let's make it look as bad as possible and even ensure that it's bad as possible where the media is.
So we we do countenance this possibility.
You know, the problem is, you know, how do you prove this stuff?
I mean, the attorney general of New York looked into it. The FBI starts to look into it.
A federal prosecutor starts to look into it.
But it's quite notable that it's like right as the Democratic Committee of New York State is starting to feel like Andrew Cuomo and his health department are a liability.
Suddenly, all of these women come out of the woodwork and just change the subject from catastrophic COVID pandemic response to the governor's inappropriate conduct with women.
And then that's what the press then talks about.
They then get rid of him because of his purported misconduct with women.
So the whole thing is properly looked into.
But so, John, we don't have much time, some people say, to get this right.
So we have to get the narrative right.
So I, for one, would like to help you get the narrative right, because we're all depending on you to save humanity.
You've got the...
Can I, real quick, I want to...
No, really.
Excuse me, I'm sorry, because I know you want to move on.
But real quick, John, this is critical.
You want a good story? Tell the Michigan story about the elderly gentleman that was beaten to a pulp by a 20-year-old mentally handicapped man that was put in the nursing home because he tested positive for COVID.
And he videotaped and played it out on Facebook streaming him beating this man and punching him over and over and over again to a pulp.
And the poor man ended up going to the hospital, had a brain hemorrhage, and later died.
Yes, I'm familiar with a lot of these individual atrocities.
We do discuss how the pandemic response with this indemnification of liability seems to have created a sort of atmosphere of carte blanche in our hospital and nursing home system.
And I think that's where, you know, suddenly, if you are officially involved in responding to COVID, suddenly it's kind of like you can do whatever you damn well please.
So we do touch on this as well.
You know, we could probably write, you know, 100 volumes about all of this.
There's sort of no end to the story.
In our first book, we really focus on the suppression of early treatment.
And then our second book, we're going to focus specifically on the vaccine.
Excellent.
Thank you for tiny requests and then I'm going to mute my mic because you got to move on.
Peter, be sure to bring hard copies to all your appearances of your book, so that you can autograph them and sell them at the table.
Okay, we're doing it but thanks so much for the, for the encouragement.
Oh yeah, don't forget I want an autograph copy too. I already have the digital.
You get it, Dr. Obvious.
Thanks, Dr. Big hugs to everybody.
So, John, my perception of this is we don't need proof, we don't need any more proof, we haven't made any headway with proof.
And nothing makes sense if you do not view this as a medical political alliance practicing human medical experimentation, and including psych.
I definitely view it that way but you know in the world of publishing you try and establish factually, you know everything if you can have, if you can have one thing that you can really establish factually then it enables you to go on to the next thing.
If you read the book you will see that we have clearly established a fact pattern with this book that the public I think will now they'll be able to understand I get texts and emails saying, now I get it, like, people have said to me it's a it's a it's a an American idiom, you've read
I didn't know until I read this book what was going on. So, you know, you're trying to kind of win over, you know, stratum by stratum, you know, people who can read the book and understand it.
So I think you'll see. Yeah, I think that's what we've we've done with this and so now people are awakened to what the hell has been going on here.
So very quickly, John, because this is absolutely absolutely crucial we don't have much time, apparently. And so, the boys on the island, you know Lord of the Flies, the boys on the island they saw themselves as savages.
The naval officer broke the hypnosis by viewing them as boys, naughty boys. And that's the importance of that line.
The boys began to tell their stories, and some of them began to cry the most. So, in other words, he was reflecting their humanity back onto them. This is my perception.
And that's what we need to do with the population of the world and how we do it. I really don't know. But we're taking advice from psychologists and psychiatrists.
So, so I really like the Lord of the Flies I remember the I read it several times and I remember it perfectly. That's what we've tried to do we've tried to tell a story.
If you told that story as a cognitive psychologist focusing on adolescence and presented the reader with a bunch of references to Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud and no he tells a story, you know there's a plane crash these kids wind up on this island.
Exactly. A hierarchical hierarchy that's established Jack Meridue is at the top of it, and they start behaving very badly so but that is you can follow that narrative.
So that that is what we've attempted to do with this book. Excellent. Yeah. All right. Well, very, very good and everybody Lord of the Flies so the other one we're going to Kathy now the what would be helpful for any thoughts that any of you have on the
legal cases so Daria mentioned one, if you've seen an angle of a of a of a potential cause of action, please put it in the chat will just collect them in the chat, everyone gets the chat when you want it.
And those insights that you might have one insight that leads to a very interesting angle on on a cause of action. And it's that insight that could be crucial. The second element that john is sort of touching on is the smoking gun we've talked about the smoking
Some of you might have one piece of paper that is incriminating. And, you know, digging that piece of paper out is difficult it's like the one piece of paper in the 15 million pieces of paper discovered by the tobacco industry in a court case, one email is what was what absolutely buried them so smoking
guns and causes of action Kathy over to you.
Good. I have two questions. One is, I'm sort of afraid to buy the book and give it to my blue pill friends because I'm afraid they'll just toss it and not even read it any suggestions on that. And then the second question is, I haven't read the book yet.
So, do you also cover the fact of, I believe, murder by the CDC and Congress in the US, due to the them passing the prep act that requires everyone to follow the murderers CDC protocol using remdesivir and intubating patients that they manipulated the study fraudulently when they approve remdesivir and
You know the fact that they were literally killing people in the hospitals with these harmful procedures and medicines, including I think, Stephen Frost said in the UK using meds meds alarm.
Yeah, so those are my two questions. We have an entire chapter on on remdesivir. And the, the, the really perfidious piece of legislation is the cares act.
Which was signed into law on March the 26 2020 it was it was drawn up. Well, I say it was drawn up in haste, but it was so long. There's no way they drew it up just between the arrival of SARS-CoV-2 and the
thousands of pages long. Clearly, this was already in the chamber and ready to fire. So the cares act all of its the perverse incentives that it provides for using these dubious emergency authorization use drugs like like remdesivir.
We do go into this in our book. The prep act is interesting. That's from 2005 in which it introduces the first major presentation of, you know, Congress is passing this in preparation to the first of its kind.
It's just a matter of time. And when it happens, the the head of the Health and Human Services Department can invoke a pandemic, which is going to be the first major presentation of the care act.
And when it happens, the the head of the Health and Human Services Department can invoke a pandemic. And that will automatically generate an enormous federal response of just creating massive amounts of federal money and giving it to anyone who is purportedly
in positions to respond to the pandemic, whether you be a drug maker or a diagnostic test maker or you work, you have hospitals or clinics.
The prep act is the foundational law for as soon as the pandemic comes, we're going to start giving money hand over fist to anyone who is real or perceived involved in the response.
So I think this really sets the stage for this massive corruption of the way we describe it in the book is you're creating a situation in which people don't want to diffuse the crisis.
Because if you diffuse the crisis, then the money won't flow. I mean, you act it's like it's the military analog to this. If there's a diplomatic solution, then Raytheon doesn't get to sell all of its missiles.
It's the same thing with the prep act and the cares act. Billions, hundreds of billions of dollars of money just created out of thin air. And and and Remdesivir is just part of it. It happens to be, I think, one of the most disturbing parts of it.
But yes, we talk about all of this in the book. We cover all of this.
Very good. Kathy, have we got any questions?
Quickly. Did does it also cover the way they organize the the hydroxychloroquine studies to give potentially lethal dosages to patients?
Yes, yes.
And then any advice for what I do about all my blue pill family members? Do I mail them a book and hope they don't toss it and they'll read it or?
I think I think people who are in the trance, people who are in the trance won't countenance the book.
What we're trying to do is find that margin of society of people who are experiencing something like cognitive dissonance.
They're beginning to think, you know, something doesn't really add up about this.
I don't really, you know, they're saying this, but that, you know, that doesn't really square with with with, you know, a doesn't really square with B.
It's the mind has to be in a somewhat questioning frame in order to be open.
So, you know, people who I encounter at a cocktail party, they let you know pretty quickly how they feel about things.
And I don't try, you know, a Calvinist, a follower of Martin Luther probably wouldn't walk into the card,
the College of Cardinals or the Holy Office of the Inquisition and say, hey, let me tell you about this guy up in Germany, you know, presenting a new idea on the church.
I mean, you're not going to get anywhere. Right. You've got to find people who are sort of open to the concepts.
All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Kathy, Albert, Albert, do you know, Albert?
Yeah. Hi. Hi, Dr. McCullough. Hi. Hi, John Leake.
First of all, God bless you, Dr. McCullough. I always pray for a hedge of protection over you and your family.
You are so important. And, you know, I just hope you hope you know, hope you know that you're protected by God and a lot of people pray for you.
Well, thanks. I think I'll need it after my Friday show with Laura Ingraham on the Ingraham angle on Fox News, where I likened Klaus Schwab to Ernst Stabros Blofeld,
the lead villain and head of Spectre in the James Bond series. Laura Ingraham almost fell out of her chair.
And, you know, it was going to be a humorous segment, but I'm waiting for some guys with sunglasses on and black SUVs out in front of my house.
You know, have a have a little conversation about that comment. But, you know, I got to tell you that the World Economic Forum and the CEOs of these vaccine companies, you know, they're just taking on the
continents of classic villains that we see in movies, including the evil accents.
Yeah, I feel you. So with that being said, I didn't know if you were aware of all of the mass Bears reports deletions going on.
You know, in the last eight weeks alone, they've deleted 10,000 reports, 90 of 90 of which have been deaths. But altogether for COVID-19 Bears reports, they've deleted now 18,000 reports total.
Five over 500 of which have been deaths. I've spot checked 2000 of these reports myself just giving them the benefit of the doubt that they're duplicates at least, and I can't find even 10% of the matching twin report.
But with that being said, I scrape down all the data from Med Alerts way back machine, because the creator Dr. Stephen Rubin has captured all that data of basically everything that they've ever deleted, at least back to 2003 when Med Alerts basically was in effect.
And with that, I've, I've revealed and this is a video that I that I put in the chat, you know, showing that they in 2009 in just one update, they deleted 65 polio live polio trivalent backs death reports 65 in just one drop.
Now, when you, I, you know, you've educated us, or at least me and I'm sure the world, you know that that they'll pull a product or a vaccine after 50 deaths or 25 deaths or what, you know, something like that.
But my question is, did you know about these mass deletions in 2009, or the mass deletions going on now because apparently it's not the first time that they've done that. And then, second, where are you are they getting the deaths from like when you say when there's 50 deaths is that like from from the various database or some combination of CMS or DHS or what.
Well, let me take the last question first that deaths that are reported to the pharmaceutical company are the ones that anything within 30 days it doesn't matter causality assessment is irrelevant if it happens within 30 days from a regulatory perspective it's typically 50.
And, and the company, either in conversation with the FDA or told by the FDA pulls the product off the market, most of the time it's a voluntary recall withdrawal from the market I was involved in the Oman test recall that occurred at about 60.
And there was a whole investigation afterwards so Pfizer, we know in the Pfizer documents within 90 days, they had 1223 does so Pfizer is the one wide open so it's at the time point where they had 50 does what I want to encourage everybody here on the US side of things.
You're doing so much work, and you're uncovering fraud, basically, you should reach out to Brad Geyser, and he's at former feds group.
Former feds group is a not for profit group, and they are taking effectively depositions from everybody is witnessing fraud in terms of data in the hospitals, and he's done thousands and thousands of these.
They're held confidential and Brad is building the evidentiary case, because right now we have nowhere to go the courts are corrupted.
You know the attorneys want a fortune if you try to do something individually we need a resource to keep building the resource. The other resource available for individuals, and those harmed in the hospital, or by the vaccine is the truth for health organization
and I encourage everybody to fill out their vignettes there, and because our systems are going corrupt and so we need independent systems to capture these vignettes ultimately it's going to come to some types of class action activities but it may be many years in the future so while everything's fresh in your mind to get it recorded.
Were you aware of the 18,000 reports that have been deleted so far for COVID-19 reports and VAERS?
You know I've been aware of instabilities within VAERS from what's a temporary VAERS number to a permanent VAERS number. I've been impressed clinically how hard it is to report a death of somebody that we've already reported a non fatal condition like a blood clot.
If we report a blood clot and the patient then dies of it, it took me hours to get through and get that log now as a death within CDC and I can tell you the CDC, VAERS, and the yellow card system and the uterus system must be vastly under reported, vastly under reported.
We're seeing just a tiny fraction of what's really happening out there.
All right, thank you. God bless you, Dr. McCullough.
Thank you, thank you, thank you Albert. Excellent, excellent points everybody. Courts are corrupted as Peter says but we need to build the data. Next is Jared Waters, Peter and John, a doctor from Ireland.
Who's been suspended by the way, Peter.
Yeah, by way of introduction I'm a GP for 40 years, over 40 years, refused to cooperate with the the schizoid directives from our Department of Health, refused to wear a mask, refused to social distance, got into an exchange with the Medical Council.
Back and forth it was going and then when they introduced the messenger RNA assault, I refused to point blank to give it. I wouldn't have it in my own system and I wouldn't have it.
So I refused to give it and I refused to cooperate with referring people for the vaccination.
Peter, first of all, thank you for all you've done. You're a great source of consolation to those of us who've been struck off the medical register.
Well I actually wasn't struck off, I was suspended temporarily in March of 21, which is 15, 16 months ago now. So I'm still temporarily suspended, awaiting a trial.
Like Alice in Wonderland, they gave me the punishment first and then I got the trial. You know, talk about a kangaroo court. But Peter, to come back to my point, as a GP, we're the guys who actually were writing the debt cert in the nursing homes.
And as a guy who's been around for some time in the nursing homes, I realised that our diagnosis of a debt in a nursing home is made on the basis of a best guess.
We go in there, we see a patient who's died, Mary has died last night and we go in and we see them. We take out their chart, we go through their chart and then on a best guess basis we make a, we sign a debt cert.
I believe that this is the reason why no young people were dying of COVID and old people were dying of COVID, because in young people they all have a debt, they all have an autopsy.
No old people in Ireland anyway have post-mortem examinations, with the result that this was the very smart part of it. We were told that if somebody had a positive PCR test within 28 days that they would go down as a COVID death.
I immediately start arguing that this was in fact, these weren't COVID debts, they weren't caused by COVID, they were in association with COVID.
I then went to the bother of having a tutorial with a immunologist, Dr Dolores Cahill. And Dolores, as far as I'm concerned, is an absolute genius.
The press in Ireland, the media in Ireland did a hatchet job on her, destroyed her reputation. She was sacked out of her job as a professor in UCD.
But I sought out Dolores and asked her about the whole basis of this hoax. The whole basis of this hoax is the PCR test.
She said it was useless. Ryan Hur Fullmitch, who interviewed 163 doctors and scientists, said the PCR was useless.
I believe that the true hoax, in effect, was turning a relatively minor coronavirus into a deadly pathogen.
Its pathogenicity was increased from a kind of a winter flu to pandemic levels. And I believe that is the true crime.
This is the true hoax. The actual inflation and the conflation of pretty much every virus. Like where did the winter flu go? Where did all the winter flu debts go?
Now, again, as a GP, I was aware that I was certifying people as winter flu debts, when in effect, I didn't know for definite that they were a winter flu.
But if there were a flu epidemic knocking around and a few people died out in the nursing home, I would throw down an occasion of flu.
Because they had a cough the night before or a sniffle or a headache. They got a few panadol from the nurse.
The reality of this is the PCR test is the true con.
And my question then comes back to how can anybody claim that they cured people from COVID or of COVID if in effect the basis of the diagnosis is a con?
I would like to respond to that as someone who...
I'll let Dr. McCullough talk about the technical aspects of that. But I would like to say one thing and then I'm going to have to get off the call.
So let me just say my last little piece here and then I'm going to have to bounce. We look at the PCR test.
We compare COVID-19 with the Spanish flu of 1918 in which the average age of death, as best as we can ascertain, was 29 years old.
The Spanish flu of 1918. So we contrast COVID-19 with that in which you see all of these deaths happening right around life expectancy.
Or even in Italy, the early data out of Milan, a lot of the people who the pathologists were actually conducting autopsies on, they'd exceeded life expectancy.
So we do address this. What we were interested in with respect to treatment were specifically people who were nowhere close to life expectancy.
Many of them were in their 30s and 40s. Now, statistically, that's not a large percentage of the population.
But when you live in a nation of 330 million people, even if these are statistically small percentages, it still amounts to a lot of individual men and women.
The people who I saw in my research, in my interviews getting into trouble with this were, for example, here in the state of Texas, a lot of people of Hispanic ancestry who were significantly overweight and had obesity and diabetes, untreated high blood sugar.
These were people who had, they definitely got into trouble with this thing. I think it was more than just an association.
And a lot of these people who did receive early treatment, you know, were able to get over it and to lick it. Those who didn't ultimately succumbed in hospital.
I'll let Dr. McCullough talk more about the medical stuff. I must say my farewell. Unfortunately, I have things left to do. There's never a day of rest anymore. Forget the Sabbath.
So I'm going to express my gratitude. Thank you for listening to me. And I hope you guys will buy our book. We worked real hard on it. I think you'll enjoy it.
So, John, thank you. Thank you for coming. Thanks, John. Thank you, John. I'll pay for you too.
So I want to address Dr. Waters, a very poignant questions regarding the PCR and diagnostic testing. Part of the propaganda and fraud of the entire COVID-19 crisis was diagnostic testing, in vitro diagnostic testing.
And in the United States, it originally relied upon methods that the CDC had was called laboratory derived methods. And I remember when our big health system was scrambling to emulate the CDC laboratory derived methods.
The CDC already had methods to detect SARS-CoV-2 before it ever came out of the lab in Wuhan, China, to give you an idea of the collusion that was going on.
And one of the things that never happened over time is the testing never refined. Remember with HIV, it started out with an HIV antibody testing and then there was confirmatory testing.
Even with hepatitis C, there's diagnostic testing, confirmatory testing that never happened with COVID-19. I was always of the mindset that we needed a PCR confirmed with something else. We needed some piece of information.
Our CDC at one point in time put out some guidance and said, listen, just don't call anything at a cycle threshold greater than 28. Don't call that positive. But none of the laboratory manufacturers did that.
And they did that when the emergency use authorization and the executive order came through on in vitro diagnostic testing, every single laboratory then provided a result to a database that was at the Bloomberg School of Public Health in Johns Hopkins.
And there was no control for duplicate testing or people arriving with different names. There was no control over who was getting a test to get on an airplane and who was getting the test because they were sick.
Asymptomatic testing was never cleared by any testing agency. Even the rapid antigen tests were never cleared. So there's a massive fraud in the case count of people because of these systematic methodologies.
And then there's a massive fraud in terms of cause of death because there never was a fair adjudication process to say who indeed died of COVID. At my big medical center, we had a very big pathology program.
Autopsies were suspended. They were suspended and we were not allowed to do autopsies. So these things I think will be things that need to be incorporated into evidentiary and into books.
I'm not saying that COVID-19 illness doesn't happen. There is obviously unique illness. It's unique because the lead cytokine is interleukin 6. It's unique because people die of microthrombosis in the lungs, very different from dying of influenza, whereas influenza patients die of secondary staph or coccul pneumonia without any microthrombosis.
So there is a syndrome there, but I agree with Dr. Waters that the PCR has played a great role into the propaganda and it may have actually all been planned that way.
Thank you. Thank you, Joe. Thank you.
It was definitely fine.
If I may go back to the sort of comparisons between the Spanish flu or the flu of the 19, 19, 1920 or 1918, the reality of that was that the treatment back then was things like bloodletting and purging.
Like the availability of antibiotics and that sort of thing. The vast majority of people that died in the Spanish flu, it was a W-shaped curve. Usually in a viral droplet spread viral infection, you've got a U-shaped, you've got a left-hand peak where young children die, babies die, and then healthy young people don't usually die of these viral infections.
And then you've got a peak on the right-hand side where people, elderly people die. The Spanish flu, there was a W-shape and in effect that the middle peak of the W was due to soldiers coming back from the First World War, where contrary to the rules of war, the Geneva, well, it wasn't the Geneva Convention, but the 38,000 tonnes of the flu were spread.
And then the thousands of tonnes of poison gases were thrown from one group to the other during the First World War. And these people came back with lung damage. An awful lot of people who died related because of this lung damage from the First World War actually went down as flu deaths.
And if you start comparing the COVID hoax with the Spanish flu, is in effect a bit of a red herring and one of those rabbit holes down which we should not go. Because when we go down these rabbit holes, we are confusing things.
And I keep saying this and I'll say it over and over and over again, keep it simple. We have to keep this simple. And my simple message is the PCR is a hoax. The COVID is a hoax. And I know people die of microembolisms, you know, in the small blood vessels in the lungs.
Absolutely, there is a condition. But I do not believe that it, well, we all know that it was not worthy of lockdowns, was not worthy of masking, was not worthy of any of the things that we came about.
And in effect, when you look back on the figures, there was no increase in deaths in 2020 around the world. And if they were, it was down to the treatment, the inappropriate people being put on respirators, the drugs that were used and the neglect in nursing homes and hospitals, as we saw in New York, where in effect people were neglected to death. I know I was there.
Okay, Jared, Jared, Jared, Jared, Jared, come on, we're going to keep moving. Payton, comment before we get to Theresa.
No, I think those are all fair comments. And I think we did a good job separating Spanish flu from COVID. I think you'll like what you see we have in the book. Okay, let's take the next one.
Theresa, thank you, Jared.
Hi, thank you, Charles.
I know I keep harping on about this, but the World Health Organization are bragging that they have now vaccinated or at least given one jab to 67.6% of humanity.
This is intended to be about 70% by midsummer.
And I think they're aiming for 75% of all humanity by Christmas.
Isn't it time we raised our game?
Well, you know, I think what you're implying is the line is the vaccine. That's the line, right? And so it's a matter of who sees that line and when they see it.
Many people on the call have never taken a vaccine because we saw that line very early on. What interests me is that it doesn't seem to matter which vaccine it is.
You know, in Asia, this Sinovac, Corona vaccine is heavily used. United States, all we hear is about genetic vaccines.
Pfizer, Moderna, J&J. But the vaccine syndicate, they actually don't seem to care which vaccines they are. It just seems to me, you know, take a vaccine, take any vaccine.
Even in the United States, it's always been that way, you know, take any vaccine. But I think recognizing that it is the line, there is absolutely nothing that's been good that we've learned about these vaccines.
Nothing. In fact, it's a steady stream of bad news. There's over a thousand peer reviewed papers now on fatal and non-fatal vaccines.
We're seeing catastrophic rates of mortality now that far exceed 2020. And our life insurance claims are off the Richter scale in the United States. And it's not due to COVID.
It's due to employed people who are dying every day in the news. Now, we open up the news, celebrities, sports figure, someone else, people in our circles die.
The line is the vaccine. The question is how far each and every one of us willing to go. The question is how many more people are going to take the vaccine so they can travel or for their jobs?
Well, it took for this vaccine bio weapon for me to realize that in my own personal life, I know four individual children who all became autistic within hours of having a vaccine, a childhood vaccine.
And it wasn't always the MMR. Now, obviously, for some reason I buried that. But then I realized very early on that we can't trust any of these big pharma companies.
We can't trust them. They've colluded to make a bio weapon with a spike protein that is common to all of them that happens to be a toxin.
So it just seems to me like I have to stand up now and I have to be an anti-vaxxer, not just an anti-vaxxer, but anti-big pharma. And I have to name it for what it is. I don't trust them.
Well, there's something very important you just said. The commonality to the vaccines is the spike protein. And there's no doubt about it that it's toxic and there's no doubt about it that individually it's lethal.
And the briefing book out for Novavax just came out for the US FDA meetings and Novavax stock tanked because in there, independent of messenger RNA or other features of the genetic vaccines, it causes myocarditis.
So the spike protein itself causes myocarditis. But I agree with your broader sentiment that many of us, myself included, I've lost my trust in vaccines.
Do you know this year, the flu vaccine in the United States, the data came out on the overall efficacy, the vaccine efficacy, 17%.
The 13-valent pneumococcal vaccine that we've been pushing in internal medicine and family medicine for years in JAMA published this year, vaccine efficacy against hospitalization, 9%.
These vaccines have such low vaccine efficacy. And you're right, they have the stochastic risks of all of these neurologic, neuropsychiatric, and we're seeing just this whole array as the vaccine schedule has been wildly expanded.
I think you're right. I think that there will be a group, an expanding group of anti-vaxxers or people who have lost their trust.
The New York Times on Wednesday had a piece there that said 35% of Americans have either not taken the vaccine or they're not taking the booster.
And I think that 35% is going to grow. Yeah, I looked down my Facebook friends lists and half my friends have got autistic children.
It's really quite shocking. You know, yes, Teresa, so, Teresa, you make a very good point because
Andy Wakefield was harassed, as you know, and for 10 years I've been helping on legal strategy in Australia for mothers of damaged children.
And one of the good things, Peter, about this crime that's been committed is the awareness that that's raised for people to go, hey, there's something going on here.
We cannot rely on this. And I, you know, I, who was our speaker two weeks ago who said never have another injection.
Steven, can you remember who that was? Or Teresa? I think a lot of people are saying it now.
I think a lot of people are saying it now. I don't trust injectables. I don't trust big pharma. But, Teresa, I think people are going to have to get to the point
where if the proposition is that they have to take a vaccine and travel, they're not going to travel. If the proposition is they have to take a vaccine to keep their job, they're going to change jobs or become an entrepreneur.
If the proposition is they have to take a vaccine to stay in school or training that they're going to take a sabbatical, we're going to have to get to that. The human body cannot keep taking shots, loading it with spike protein every six months.
It's not going to be workable. More and more people are going to drop out. It is a Russian roulette. Mark Giordano, who I don't know if Osama is calling out, Mark published a great sub stack about the Russian roulette of the vaccines.
It's like a revolver. It's probably got a hundred thousand chambers in it. And when that cylinder spins, it's just a matter of, you know, which one of those comes up.
But it is just this idea of taking a shot so you can have six more months of school is going to at some point in time, it's going to have to be dropped.
And it's just going to be a matter of when do people come to that realization, how many people will die before that time.
Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you, Teresa. Excellent point. Liam.
Points. Yes. Hello. And hello, Dr. McCullough. Thank you so much for being here. And thank you for everything you're doing.
You're a big inspiration for me. I completely agree. This aspect of having to tell a story and develop a narrative is very important as a strategic tool and also we're sort of writing the history books here.
And so I've got a few books here. I've got, you know, this nice special one here, which will be it's next on my list three.
I've got this guy here, which you may also recognize it's a little blurry, but it's called the great narrative for a better future by class Schwab and Jerry Mal.
And I bring those up to say, or to ask the question, how if if in are trying to educate people, we apply a narrative development process, how do we make sure we're not becoming the problem in terms of what class Schwab and his friends are trying to do with their narrative, how do we make sure we don't accidentally become the people telling the false narrative because we're all biased, hopefully in a good way, but biased nonetheless.
I think the truth test is absurdity. Where you see absurdity, that's the false narrative absurdity. So what would be absurd is that this is the first infection in history that spread from asymptomatic person to asymptomatic person like a bullet that's going across the room.
That's absurdity. People wearing masks while riding bicycles or driving cars by themselves. That's absurdity. To take a vaccine over and over again after one's had the illness and they get the illness again.
Anderson Cooper and CNN had three times the vaccine and Bill Gates reportedly had it four times and Anderson's interviewing Bill Gates and he says, Hey Bill, he asked for medical advice from Gates, who's not a doctor.
He says, Hey Bill, should we keep taking shots? And then Gates kind of pontificates and says, well yeah, just to be safe, we should keep taking these shots. So any observer would just view that as absurd.
Where you see absurdity, I think you can feel pretty solid that you're not going to be on the false narrative. One of the things that Peter Bregan says in his book COVID-19 and the Global Precise, and he's right, is that all of this is in the open.
There's no secret memos going on. It's absolutely in the open. So when Bill Gates in 2010 says that he would like to see mass vaccination as a way to reduce the world's population, he meant it. It was on the front of the UK tablets.
When the World Economic Forum and the Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust, when they made CEPI, the Center for Epidemic Evaluation, Preparedness and Innovation in 2017, as a pandemic response unit that they heavily funded, they wrote a business plan.
And they said that each pandemic that comes along is a business opportunity for all the stakeholders, and they offer one product that is a vaccine, a vaccine. So the World Health Organization, see, Gavy, Gates Foundation, World Economic Forum, they're in the vaccine business.
They're in no other business. They are in the vaccine business, and it's clear, and the money is flowing. Everything is in the open. Don't look for secret memos. And I think what we have to do on our side is we have to be bold, and we have to be relentless.
And when we lead with the truth, no one actually assails us. I've actually never been confronted with anybody of any academic standing or medical standing on any issue. I've never even received a hard email.
I receive certified letters trying to take away things or trying to cause injury in some way, because people are so fearful of facing the truth. I just think we have to be very bold with the truth. And we have to realize the other side is telegraphy and everything.
This book you showed, Klaus Schwab and the Great Reset, he means it. He means it. He means this is the opportunity for the Great Reset. There's no secret why these biotechnology CEOs are in Davos.
I mean, it's a plan. Through the context of a medical emergency, there is an attempt for a global one-world order. It's happening right in front of us, and it's through that context. I think we fight with the truth.
We fight with reason and this true narrative. And then in the end, the only thing that matters is public opinion. We're not going to be saved by any court decision or any member of parliament or any government. We're not going to be saved by anybody except for ourselves.
Beautiful. Well, thank you so much. And like I said, you're an inspiration for me. I do work with the Canadian COVID Care Alliance, and I'm trying to capture as much as I can of the facts of how Canada has been all looped into this, which I think is a pretty interesting story in itself. So I'll try to walk in your shoes. Thank you, Dr. McCullough.
All right. Good. Thank you.
Well done, Liam. Okay, Peter, we're going to have a whole bunch of questions that popped up now, so be quick on your answers. But there's some wonderful dialogue. And everybody, please note what Peter just said. We have to be bold and relentless, but not bold and beautiful. Otherwise, I'll make a TV show of you. Bold and relentless. Ariana from Finland, by America.
You muted Ariana. You muted Ariana.
She may have gone to sleep.
I'm here. I'm here. I haven't slept.
I just stepped out of the room for a second.
Okay, so hi, Dr. McCullough. I have a few questions for you.
I wanted to ask, first of all, are you still administering monoclonal antibodies?
Yeah, I'm still using monoclonal antibodies. The one we have now is Bepto-libamab by Lilly. It's a 2 cc injection. But quite honestly, there are so few patients with Omicron who have severe illness to warrant it. It's such an easy syndrome to handle. It hasn't come up much, but I still have, yeah.
Okay, it's Pepto. What is it? It's Pepto.
It's called Bepto-libamab. It's by Lilly. Bepto-libamab. Yeah.
Bepto-libamab by Lilly.
Okay, so I wanted to ask if, are you aware that the monoclonal antibodies is an mRNA vaccine?
I mean, do you want to make the case for that or?
Well, it's in the patents. It says that it's an mRNA vaccine, and I did write about it and put documented this in an article.
So, I don't think these are, okay, there are hundreds of monoclonal antibody patents that just came out in the last recently.
And I've read through dozens of them, and they're all mRNA.
So, I don't think that monoclonal antibodies are actually monoclonal antibodies. I mean, what they're using. It's all the new technology.
So, I can understand if you weren't aware of it, but I'm going to challenge you to read my article.
If you would please read my article, because we need to be aware of what pharma is doing. They're always playing their little tricks, you know?
Okay, and then I also wanted to ask you, are you aware that the monoclonal antibodies are targeting the white blood cells, the T cells, our killer cells and destroying them?
Do you want to make that case?
Arianna, the point is you should make it clearer that what you're saying. So, this is fraud by pharma, if it's true what you're saying.
So, I can't blame Peter for not knowing about that. I mean, there's a limit to how much fraud.
No, I'm not blaming me. I was just asking.
It sounded like that.
I'm not aware. No, I'm just I'm asking. I'm not assuming anything.
Here's the, I guess, Dr. Love, this is what I'd say, is that if the, if the, you know, if the hypothesis on the table is that monoclonal antibodies are a bad therapy by design, in order to get messenger RNA into people, if that's the theory, then it doesn't make any sense why the
governments are actively suppressing monoclonal antibodies. Monoclonal antibodies are very rarely given, because they're so heavily suppressed. We've had one product after another product after another product taken off the market.
So, in terms of kind of a conspiracy, it's just not that cohesive. If they were a tool to hurt people and get messenger RNA in people, they'd be widely promoted. They would be as widely promoted as vaccines.
Possibly. I mean, there are lots of psyops going on. I've been reading through all the patents. I haven't found a single one that is an actual what a monoclonal antibody is supposed to be.
They're all mRNA. As far as I can tell, I mean, they're encoding artificial genetic sequences.
And, you know, some of them even have HIV. Some of them have the malaria parasite. I mean, they're putting all kinds of nasties into these, these monoclonal, supposed monoclonal antibodies.
But I haven't found a single one that's an actual monoclonal antibody as it's supposed to be.
And then they're also doing gene knockout, but they all are targeting the main ones, the main big brands are targeting the T cells and destroying them through cytotoxicity.
So it's like, and I've had clients come to me who had monoclonal antibodies administered to them and they get blood work done and they have no white, like white blood cells.
And I'm like, there's hardly any of them. And then I have other people who are injured as well. All their stats are down. And I mean, it's just, I just wanted you to know that, that this is what I'm experiencing.
I would like, I would, I have posted my article into the chat. And I would appreciate if you would please read it, Dr. McCullough. You are a leading voice in the truth community and people follow you and they listen to you and they trust in you.
So it's very important that you are aware of these things. And I'm more than happy to share that with you or email you directly. If you would just please read my articles.
Just send it to me, Arianna, and I'll send it.
Thanks, Arianna. Okay, let's keep them moving because otherwise we're going to run out of Peter. Gary Finkelstein from the UK.
Oh, hi, Peter. Gary here. Peter, I've just got a very quick question, if you don't mind. You talked about all of the vaccines. It doesn't matter if it was the Sinovac or the DNA or the RNA, you know, the Astra's or the Janssen's.
There was a vaccine, I just, I forget the name, that was developed in Queensland, Australia that wasn't authorized anywhere in the Western world. But I believe it's used quite extensively in Iran.
Are you aware of that vaccine having any adverse side effects or not? I just, you know, this is hard to get any information. I just haven't followed it.
You know, there's a paper I'm going to try to bring up. I guess I'll bring it up as we move along. But there's one paper that summarizes 16 vaccines that are even that are out there in development. So I'm sure that one is there.
Peter, that was started by CSL and then it was pulled because it wasn't effective. And Gary, I'm surprised to hear that it's being used in Iran. But that was early in the piece, Peter. There were big announcements here in Australia about how good it was and then they dropped it.
Right. Okay. Thank you. Probably wasn't deadly enough.
Yeah, well, that's right. I mean, that's why I asked the question. I just thought that was one of the few that was developed with good intentions. And so I'm not sure that that one, you know, has the adverse reactions that the ones that are available are now, you know, in our countries.
I don't know.
Yeah, but let me just let me just say that that I have had a chance to work with Hamid Merchant, who's a vaccine developer regulator in the UK. And he's made the case and published in the British Medical Journal recently that the vaccine manufacturers have really missed the boat with this type of infection since it's pretty much a nasal pharyngeal infection.
With the Rod of Administration, he didn't think these these injections in the deltoid, you know, really didn't had any role at all that we would need a nasal mist. And now it looks like Ruben that just published in JAMA, Rita Rubin.
She may be married actually Dr. Rubin, who's heads up the New England Journal of Medicine, but she has a paper titled challenges of deciding whether and how to update COVID-19 vaccines to protect against variants. And there's about six, five concerning statements.
One of the concerning statements is we have the wrong Rod of Administration, that if they ever had one any hope of having an effective vaccine would have to be a nasal mist, not a systemic injection.
Okay, thank you. Jerry, you want to make a comment on that issue? Jerry from Queensland.
Quick, we've got to get moving. Joe, Jerry.
I'm sorry, Charles, you were just confusing two vaccines there. The Queensland vaccine was banned, totally different to the one used in Iran. That's why Nicolai Petrovsky.
Okay, thank you. You were discussing, you were talking, both of you. Yeah, no, no, no, it was Nicolai. I just forgot his name. Yes, the Queensland one was banned because of HIV positive HIV tests that were occurring.
But Nicolai Petrovsky's vaccine is still current and being used in Iran and is awaiting approval by the TGA.
Thanks, Jerry. Peter, got that? Yeah, thank you. Jerry, thanks for that. Craig Wex, doctor. What's a DO stand for, Craig? Remind me.
Sure, a DO is an osteopathic physician. So in England, in UK, DOs are only hands on diagnosis and treatment with manipulation.
In the United States for the last 140 years, DOs have been like MDs, except they have a holistic philosophy that integrates the body and they do musculoskeletal manipulation.
So they could go into surgery if they take a residency in surgery and what have you. My residency was three years in family medicine, which means I specialize in everybody's everything, apparently.
Thank you. So I hope that helps. Thank you. I just wanted to thank Dr. McCullough for doing his outstanding job of bringing everything together because he has been an absolute warrior on this and I'm glad to help support that.
And thank you for also mentioning, I heard you mentioned Prevnar 13. That's the pneumococcal vaccine, not the Pneumovax 23 that we've all used for years, but the one that Wyeth made is the Pneumovax 23.
So now they're a vaccine company and I guess that was to buy them credibility on this specific topic. Now we're not hearing commercials as much for the mRNA shots that they make.
However, we're hearing commercials for every manner of vaccine possible. I heard a commercial in May for flu shots. Go get your flu shots. And that doesn't make any sense, whatever, except to normalize the whole process of everybody getting shots quarterly.
And it's amazing to me where the shot number one failed, shot number two failed, shot number three failed. What's the answer? Get shot number four for another billion dollars.
And the worst part is, is it seems to me, and Dr. McCullough, maybe you can speak to this, it seems that these mRNA and DNA interventions are burning out components in the immune system.
And that's dangerous from two aspects that I explained to patients. One is it stops you from being able to fight off infections. But even worse, the immune system has a regulatory function where it does surveillance on one's own cancer cells, because we all have cancer cells right now that are abnormal.
And our normal immune systems, unhindered, are picking out those cells. I have seen not only neurodegenerative illnesses in patients that are inexplicable, I've also seen cancers in younger and younger people that just aren't making any sense, except for the fact that they've had two or three of these shots that have modified the immune system's ability to pick out and defend them against internal cancers. Dr. McCullough?
You know, there's a lot to unpack there. Let me say briefly that the genetic vaccines out of all the vaccines, I think, are the most worrisome. We have data from Stanford by Hulken and colleagues in cell showing the messenger RNAs found in lymph nodes for at least 60 days, it may be longer. That's when they stopped looking in their study.
In fact, in the study, Bruce Patterson from IncellDx in the United States has a database and believes the entire spike protein, S1 and S2 segments, are in the human body after vaccination for at least a year per shot. And they're in exosomes, so they're immunologically not generating antibodies.
You know, the antibodies after the vaccines fall off after a few months, but the pathogenicity of the spike protein in its full breadth of disease promoting capabilities is there in the body for over a year.
So you can imagine with each successive shot at six months, there is progressive loading. And the chances of this preserving health is zero. There's only one thing that can happen with successive shots is the human body becomes unhealthier and unhealthier and becomes progressively more disease. There's no doubt about it.
In the Pfizer documents when they said 1291 new diseases are special events of interest, they were serious about it. If you go on my Twitter feed, P underscore McCullough MD, I put out papers every day of new diseases that the doctors think are directly caused by the vaccines.
Today I put one out on interstitial lung disease, which it was very clear. It looks like, in fact, that's what was caused by the vaccine. But thank you.
Thank you, Craig. I had to pop out to get an in. I didn't have an in. I didn't have a needle so I couldn't inject the caffeine, Peter. So to make a cup of coffee.
Thanks very much.
Thanks, Craig. Mark Dyer.
Hi, Peter.
No, I'm not on mute.
Peter, thank you very much for everything you've been doing.
I'm not a doctor. I just have some very simple questions. I think they're simple and I don't understand the answers that I'm getting.
In the UK, the antibodies that have been notified in the ONS database, we are being told that about 99.4% of the population, 16 and over, have got good antibodies of 179 nanograms per million, I think, or ML.
Now, my question is, I'm not a doctor. So I had chickenpox, like everyone else. The chickenpox would have got the body to create antibodies.
I am assuming that those antibodies are not in my body at the moment. They're dormant, or there is a, I believe the T cell is the memory that says, hey, if your chickenpox comes along again, the T cell will activate the immune system to go and make the antibodies for the chickenpox.
So what I'm having difficulty understanding is why is the government insisting that we have to keep putting these antibodies or putting more vaccines into people to create antibodies when the body should have already said we know what to produce because we have got the antibodies, which would have been a creative memory in the T cell.
Now, the added complication for me is that if you have not had COVID, you will have only got antibodies to produce against the spike.
So when you get COVID, you won't have any antibodies for the rest of the COVID virus. So I'm failing to understand why they keep wanting to give you a spike, which we know that the, what is it, the alpha spike or the delta spike is the one they've given you.
And we've moved a long way from that. So what's going on?
You can try to think of it this way. Everything that's being done is trying to promote as much vaccination as possible, including an entirely false narrative on antibodies.
The vaccines only raise antibodies against the spike protein. It's a narrow library of antibodies to the original Wuhan wild type spike protein. The virus has mutated far away from these vaccines, far away from the vaccine.
So the anti-spike antibodies now are irrelevant to somebody who could be confronted with Omicron. They're completely irrelevant. And a paper by Israel from Israel showed that those anti-spike antibodies fall off at about 40% per month after vaccination.
So they all the vaccines run out of protection, effective protection at six months. The natural infection, there's a paper by Hakim and colleagues show that you get antibodies against at least 15 different epitopes or proteins, including the nucleocapsid and the envelope protein and et cetera.
And there could be way more and that there are plenty of papers showing that the cellular based part of immunity, which is far more important, is probably a hundredfold greater in the natural infection than the vaccine infection.
And then very importantly, the immunity in the sinuses, which is T cells, natural killer cells and IgA is not stimulated at all by the vaccines. That's the reason why the vaccines have completely failed and that the viral loads in the sinuses of the vaccinated, unvaccinated are completely the same.
So this whole agenda of measuring systemic antibodies is part of the false agenda, false agenda, the false narrative. And that's all designed to try to make people take as many of these, in my view, genetic shots as possible.
Right. One follow up question. The way I, as I explained with the chickenpox, right, the antibodies and then the antibodies. If I try and explain it differently, as I see it, my understanding is we've going into a battle.
We go and call up the army, the army come out of the barracks, they do the battle. And once they've done that, they go back to the barracks because we're not going to be wasting resources. We don't keep the army around when we don't need them. Have I got that right? So that there's no point in.
Yeah, so it's true. Yeah. If you get an effective vaccine, let's say that the tetanus shot every 10 years, you know, even though the antibodies will fade away pretty quickly, the T cells are there and they're going to recognize the antigen.
We actually have a test in the United States called the T detect test to see if your T cells will recognize SARS-CoV-2. So those who've had the natural infection, you know, they have the full ability to reawaken the plasma cells and produce the antibodies.
But I have to tell you in the sinuses, it's only IGA. It's not IgG that makes it's all about what's going on in the sinuses that protects somebody from the next SARS-CoV-2 infection. And I think this whole measurement of IgG and IgM in the blood is very far away from what's going on in the sinuses. And it's part of a false agenda.
What we know now is that if you've had the natural infection, there's a paper from Qatar showing that there's about a 60% protection about forever have needed again. But of those who do have it again, it's characteristically a mild illness limited to the sinuses and it clears away in a few days.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mark. Cordelia, who's a pathologist from the UK, Peter.
Hi, yeah, a quick question about coding for vaccine side effects. In Germany, the health insurance estate created a code for COVID vaccination side effects, not any of the other vaccination, but for the COVID vaccination, they created this code, which is helpful for invoicing
for GP so they can invoice the health insurance. And there was one CEO of one of the health insurances and he published his figures that the the codes, the number of codes is much higher than the officially reported side effects.
And he estimated that up to three million people were treated for COVID vaccination side effects. So, which is which is completely out of proportion with officially reported figures to the Institute that records the officially reported side effects.
So when he on the day he published his figures, he was sacked on the same day.
So my question is in America, you've probably got a similar system. Does that exist in America, like a code for invoicing for health insurances?
Yeah, I haven't found one. I'm in clinic tomorrow, so I'll be doing this every day now. My clinic is probably, you know, half of its vaccine injuries.
We have a code, the most common one I pull is called adverse effect due to a viral vaccine. That's as close as what I can do. We do have codes for COVID-19 vaccine decline and COVID-19 vaccine contraindicated, so I commonly pick those.
But no, I'm aware of and this is the reason why it's important that you bring this up is that's what's called occurrence data. So somebody may be going into the front end check in desk, and they actually interact with a clerk and the clerk dutifully is putting a code and starts to codify the chart.
Later on, the doctors and others may add codes to the chart, but it's the clinical occurrence data. And by the way, we saw that in our Department of Defense epidemiologic database that we presented at the US Senate on January 24th.
The same thing, the clinical occurrence databases are going to show much bigger numbers than the voluntary reporting to the databases because it's so arduous to make a voluntary report. And as we've heard, those receiving the reports may be in fact corrupted and not properly posting them.
Thanks. And your book, is it available on Amazon only or do you have any other website?
Right now it's Amazon and we just opened up a couple distributor deals outside of Amazon, but it's on Amazon. It's about 15 US dollars.
Thank you. But Cordelia, you might be able to get it at Blackwells. I don't know, Peter, do you think the big Oxford bookshop?
Not yet, because we have to work deals on this. So John's a professional author. I mean, this is what he does. He doesn't have another job. So he's kind of the business guy behind it. But he's been very successful.
He wrote Too Cold for Too Long and then Into Hades and they all became bestsellers. And he's well known across Europe because he lived in Vienna for so long.
OK, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Cordelia. Randy Stewart, I love your red shirt on your picture. I hope you're going to wear a red shirt.
Yeah, thank you. OK, that's weird. OK, I was going to show my picture, but...
Yeah, we can see the picture. We can't see you.
I know. I didn't know I had a background on it. OK, well, let's take that annoyance off. That's what I look like.
Anyway, so I'm glad to talk to you, Dr. Peter. Met you a couple of times at Clay Clark and the things I live in.
I live close to you and Dr. Artis. And you helped me a lot last year. Go through some things, figure some things out.
Anyway, I've got a couple of questions here when it comes to when they report things like negative efficacy.
I spend a lot of time on charts and it puzzles me why things that are being called negative.
So I guess the part of the question is why is negative efficacy not called positive causation or why is breakthrough infection not infection causation?
Yeah, I think they're unfortunate terms. You know, negative efficacy means somebody who takes the vaccine is more likely to get COVID than someone who's not taken the vaccine.
So we have that across now across Canada, the UK, anywhere that's keeping a fair track of data.
Now, the vaccines are backfiring and it gets back to what Dr. Wax said.
Probably loading the body with genetic material and spike protein is in a sense either distracting or causing dysfunction in the immune system, making it more likely, making it easier for these new strains to attack the body.
So, you know, I can tell you these people had three or four shots. They're getting more and more COVID.
And it's clearly backfiring. There's no doubt about it.
You know, a breakthrough infection, the CDC used that terminology up until May and they just stopped keeping track of it because the vaccines even early on with the wild type and alpha, they really didn't work, by the way.
The vaccines actually never worked. So in the clinical trials, there was reported 90% vaccine efficacy in the clinical trials.
And there's a recent paper out that I'll get the citation for you.
There's a recent paper out that got all the efficacy results according to the study sites in the all vaccine program.
So there's like 250,000 people in this paper. And basically in the paper, in areas where the prevalence was high, the vaccine efficacy was much lower, meaning that the vaccines never worked.
If there was COVID around and someone took a vaccine, even in the clinical trials, it was challenged with COVID, they were much more likely to get a breakthrough infection.
So the vaccines never worked. So when they said 90% vaccine efficacy, that was largely just in areas of very low prevalence, and they ended up with a wider differential.
That's how they came up with these implausible rates of less than 1% COVID for treatment and placebo. It was part of, in a sense, clinical trial fraud.
Yeah, it's framing the argument to get the ideas across that you want to get across. I write a critical thinking blog, and that's one of the things that I go into.
But now there's a paper to support, Randy, what you said. There's a published paper. I'll get it to you. It caught my eye. It caught my eye.
So we've got 250,000 people in anywhere where they had high prevalence of COVID, the vaccines weren't working from the very beginning.
Yeah, everyone I know that supposedly got COVID just recently, I asked, when did you get the booster? And no one's ever said, oh, I didn't get a booster. It's like, no, I got it last week. I don't know why I got COVID.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Randy.
Charles from the UK.
Great name, Charles.
Let me click that off.
Thank you very much, Charles. It's good to be introduced by another Charles.
Peter, Dr. McCullough, I'd like to echo what everybody else has been saying and we all owe you a huge debt of gratitude and although I've never had a chance to speak to you before, you can rest assured that I've watched you on about 4 million of your videos and
they're all incredibly helpful.
I've just got a couple of things I'd like to bring into this because I've been involved on the political side of talking to politicians and to company headquarters and the Conservative Party and one of the things I mentioned to Stephen before as well was actually in meetings with Sajid Javid, our health minister.
I mean, it's quite clear that they really, I really don't believe that they understand the dangers of this because of the way that the body language and the way that they've expressed what they're doing with this.
So it's kind of, it's quite hard to square the circle behind, you know, who actually knows what's going on with this and the harm that's being done and where those pressures are being applied.
So I just want to ask you to throw some light onto that because I struggle to see where this sort of big conspiracy fits in, given the ignorance of a lot of people that are involved in power.
The other thing, the other part to this question, which is a sort of an ongoing bet that I have with one of my good friends who's an intellectual and probably one of the few people that I've managed to have an ongoing debate over the vaccines.
He's a staunch vacciner, has even volunteered for injecting people himself, has had his children all vaccinated.
He believes it's good for humanity. He thinks that intelligent people are getting vaccinated, and that we're all just victims of Russian bots.
We've got a bet that sort of, you know, on an all-cause mortality basis that I've been explained to him that all-cause mortality is going to continue to accelerate.
The hard thing sticking and grasping the nettle on this is we don't see it really in the data.
I don't know whether the data is being corrupted, but everything that I see, you know, supporting our more concerned view of these vaccines seems to be more anecdotal and the official data seems to hide all the evidence.
I just wondered if you had anything to say about that.
Well, I think one way to separate people up front is who took the vaccine and who didn't.
Because those who took the vaccine, it's very hard to say that they made a personal health mistake.
Now, some are, and those who actually understood they made a personal health mistake, those are the people who come out and they're your allies.
You know, in the United States, Robert Malone, who thought he was going to get the Nobel Prize for messenger RNA development lipid nanoparticles, he was a graduate student, played a role early on.
When he realized this was technology going bad and he took it himself and he had side effects himself and so did his wife, and he got COVID anyway, he realized it was bad tech and so he came out.
So the first thing to understand anybody is did they take one of these vaccines or not?
I think the second thing to look for is do they start to tune out in a conversation?
I was at a church dinner last night and I was talking to various people. I noticed one guy, he started to tune out, like he didn't want to talk about it, he drifted off, he tried to say, you know, when people don't want to talk about this, this is obviously the biggest thing right now is the menace of the vaccines in our lives.
When someone doesn't want to talk about it, it means they're in the formation.
You know, there's an open offer in the United States for anybody who's willing to come to the table and defend these vaccines to get millions of dollars and no one will take up that charge to collect millions of dollars.
There's not a single doctor who really believes these vaccines are safe and effective to collect the money.
So what they're doing, what our boards are doing is they're not calling us, they're not having open meetings, they're sending us certified letters.
They're, you know, it's all sniping from the side trying to hit us and try to advance this kind of dark vaccine agenda, but it's a very dark agenda.
There's no vaccine celebrations going on in US cities. There's no Moderna rallies, no Pfizer rallies, nobody's celebrating these things.
They see it as a menace and they know it.
Yeah. Thank you.
Good. I have just, I only have two more minutes left you guys. I'm going to have to get off.
Two more questions. How perfect. Lawrence and then Stephen asked the last questions.
So that's perfect timing. Thanks, Charles Lawrence.
Hello, good evening, Dr. McCulloch and good evening everybody.
Dr. McCulloch, as ever, thank you for your courage.
Setting aside the science, doctor, are there any immediate plans for you to coordinate with other doctors and lawyers, etc. who are experts in this field to bring me
Breaking up a bit, Lawrence.
Right.
We've lost you, Lawrence.
We've lost Lawrence.
So Stephen, while we're waiting for Lawrence to come back, ask your question, it has to go shortly.
Yes.
So, Peter, I just want to draw up because nobody's mentioned it and we should mention it.
What do you think about medical ethics at the moment and what would you say to the doctors who are behind the vaccination nonsense?
Or if they're not behind it, the ones who don't say anything, they just keep their mouth shut.
When it's clear to me that this is human medical experimentation in breach of the Nuremberg Code.
I was just wondering what you think.
It's clear that doctors are in the formation.
You know, part of the propaganda strategy and the psychological operations is they went for the doctors first.
Do you know in the United States, they vaccinated the doctors even before the nursing home patients.
So especially the young doctors, they were calling the young doctors out in the lobby, giving them shots.
And I remember when they contacted me, they said, Dr. McCullough, come get your shot.
I said, I already had COVID. It's too late.
It's too late. I already had the illness.
It's too late for the shot.
Nobody can under...
Then the next day, you come out here and get your shot.
I said, no, it's too late.
And this was very early on in the vaccine program.
So doctors were co-opted early.
The key thing is to find help from psychologists or others in order to bring them back.
Now, I've had some opportunities to go on some college campuses and hopefully we'll have more.
We got to get to some grand rounds where doctors get to hear from other doctors right now.
All these doctors in the formation have been shielded from reality because no institution will have grand rounds on vaccine safety and lack of efficacy.
So Peter, crucially, if they don't know about medical ethics and they don't know about the Nuremberg program, for example, then they can't know they're in violation of it.
But so I just wonder, you know, in your dealings with doctors in America across the board now, not just the ones around you fighting like us, what do you think is the perception amongst doctors?
Well, remember last summer in August, again, part of this fraudulent campaign, the US FDA and even the White House, President Biden's time, came up with a fraudulent statement that the vaccines were FDA approved, that they weren't research.
And that was part of their fraud.
They were never approved.
They never changed the consent forms.
There was never a package insert.
That's just fraud.
And I think the doctors wanted to buy into that.
The US military, by the way, still uses that fraudulent aspect to force the vaccines on the soldiers.
So we need help to bring them out.
But you're right.
Doctors are going to walk right now, I think, a walk of shame.
And I don't know how they're going to how they're going to come out of it.
You know, I can tell you this much in my practice.
I'm in a big cardiology practice in Dallas.
The doctors actually within the practice refer me the patients with vaccine injuries.
So they actually somehow recognize that these are vaccine injuries.
And I guess I'm developing some skill and trying to manage them.
So I think they are waking up that way.
But so many people, so many doctors do not believe their participants in this.
Remember from the very beginning, they were told COVID is not their responsibility.
They should not treat it.
And it's still to this day, not the responsibility.
The vaccine and treating COVID is somebody else's responsibility.
I think that's possibly believe as doctors that they shouldn't treat the patients in front of them.
Well, they've been they've been propagandized for a psychological operation.
And it worked the vast majority.
I think initially because they were so fearful of it, they didn't want to contract it themselves.
And when they were told by the government, they don't have to treat COVID.
They were happy to shut down their clinic.
They were happy not to treat patients.
Exactly.
Because that's a good explanation, actually.
Yes.
And also, so they use the fear propaganda on the doctors.
And actually, I could feel that building up.
But anyway, I just wanted to ask you, have you seen the brilliant film Dope Sick?
No, I haven't.
About the farmer involvement in and FDA as well in in the the huge opioid fraud in America in particular,
but also came to the UK.
But the people who discovered it in the UK didn't understand what it was about.
I highly recommend that you have a look at it, Peter, because it's highly relevant to what we're discussing now.
Right. Yeah, I need to do that.
The other book I need to read is Empire of Pain.
And it came out in twenty twenty one.
John read it.
He references it in our book that this has a lot of analogies.
This whole opioid pandemic, it was created.
This was this whole market was created.
One thing that John does, he's a great historian, is that he points out so many times that things are not new.
You know, there you know, there was mass formation around cigarette smoking and lung cancer.
And the doctors smoked.
They didn't believe it caused lung cancer.
And in the Emperor of All Maladies by Mukherjee and his first book, one that Pulitzer Prize, he chronicles the surgeon,
actually the lead surgeon who actually did the most on lung cancer surgery, who he smoked through surgery.
So he took out lung cancers.
He himself died of lung cancer and he still didn't put two to two together that the smoking caused his lung cancer.
That's how deep the formation was on smoking and lung cancer.
There was a deep formation on opioids, that opioids were a good thing, that pain was a vital sign.
The nurses were pushing the doctors to prescribe it.
These drugs were incredibly addictive.
This whole house of cards was built on the opioid pandemic.
And now we're in this vaccine.
There's been a house of cards built on this vaccine that the vaccines are safe and effective.
They've been proven safe and effective.
I mean, they were assumed to be safe and effective.
There's an entire fraudulent literature out there about vaccine efficacy, non-mandimized data, all kinds of flaws in the literature.
Knowing the Journal of Medicine and JAMA are loaded with fraudulent papers trying to support the vaccine.
At least the British Medical Journal gives a little different view.
But that's what we have there.
Did that person come back who had the final question?
Yes, yes, Lawrence.
Let's try Lawrence again before Stephen asks any other questions.
Lawrence?
Thank you very much, Charles.
Can you hear me now?
Yes.
Dr. McCulloch, first of all, thank you so much for your courage.
And thank you, Stephen, Dr. Frost and Charles for setting this up.
Dr. McCulloch, I'm going to step aside from the science at the moment.
I want to ask you if you're able to answer.
There are lots of very, very good groups with professionals like yourself, like this group, with wonderful information about what we know is going on.
We all know this is a poison.
We all know this is a deep state agenda.
May I ask you, are you with other doctors and lawyers getting together to form a group with the possibility of getting together for a public rally or let's say a press club conference?
Something which the mainstream media cannot ignore.
Because while I appreciate, I'm not a doctor, while I can appreciate the importance of this conversation with the science, we need to get this to the broad demographic, to the public.
So are there any plans that you can talk about at this time where we get all these wonderful groups together and make a noise for the mainstream media to take notice of?
Thank you so much again.
Well, great comment.
The mainstream media has completely co-opted.
The mainstream, we could have the biggest event under the sun.
They're not going to cover it.
The World Council for Health is the broadest group that exists led by Tess Lowry in the UK, where there's 70 resistance organizations under the World Council for Health.
Many countries, the UK, Europe, they've had much bigger rallies, public rallies, than the United States.
The United States, we've had two, one in Washington and one in LA.
I spoke at the one in Washington.
We've had four sets of US testimony, Senate testimony that we've televised the best we could.
Even US sworn US Senate testimony was censored on a lot of stations.
We've had a vaccine injury, two vaccine injury press conferences, legislation introduced for vaccine injured victims.
We had a strong legal response to the federal vaccine mandates and we defeated four out of five of those.
And they relied on my testimony and that of Dr. J. Bhattachar from Stanford.
We have had multiple, multiple state Senate testimony in the state House of Representatives.
We nearly have Ivermectin over the counter in New Hampshire and Tennessee.
We have some states that actually will and have to recognize vaccine exemptions.
So we're doing everything we can.
But I am not hopeful that we could do a big enough event where people would suddenly wake up.
I somehow what's been handed to us is a whole series of little small battles that we have to fight and win and fight and win and fight and win.
And that seems to be the strategy.
And so because of that, there's going to be incredible variability across countries and across jurisdictions.
And there's going to be a back and forth.
We recently in the United States had a victory where a young Florida federal judge overturned the CDC and said, listen, you can't mandate masks on airplanes.
And the whole country celebrated and we took masks off airplanes.
Now, Anthony Fauci, through the Department of Justice, is trying to restore somehow powers to the CDC that they never had and trying to reinstitute masks on airplanes.
You can see how these battles just keep going back and forth.
Thank you very much for that. Thank you.
OK, you guys, I'm going to have to get off. It's been a great conference.
Thank you so much. Please look for our book right now on Amazon.
Courage to face COVID-19.
Everybody say thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you. Bye bye, everybody. Bye. Thank you. Sleep. Bye.
I don't think he gets enough sleep.
Very good. OK.
Yeah, I really don't.
Amazing. He's going nonstop.
Yeah, superhuman. Yeah. So what's so what's he on?
What's the stuff that we need, everybody, so that we can be like the energizer bunny and not require sleep.
That's my that's my aim here to not require sleep.
And as Theresa says, the good don't sleep anymore.
That's that's true. So with so with John Leake.
So everybody, we've got 20 more minutes and we ended the two and a half hour mark.
And then those who want to join the Telegram group, Tom Rodman has put that in.
There's another bit of a Telegram video chat for those who want to keep talking after two and a half hours.
So, Stephen, anybody, if they've got hand questions, comments, please put your hand up.
Lawrence, thank you for yours. Dari has got her hand up.
Yes. Yeah, I just put my hand back up because Charles, this is just me being a doctor, talking doctor stuff.
But I learned the hard way not getting enough sleep is not the answer because your body does most of its healing at night or whenever you're sleeping.
So even if you get three, three hour naps instead of nine hours of straight sleep, you do better than if you just get three hours in one night.
In other words, burning the candle at both ends depletes all of your body's recovery capability.
So I would encourage people to get their sleep and to keep right.
You know, all the other good lifestyle things that all of our other caregivers on the line know about and all the other people that put it into practice every day that are on this call.
But yeah, there's no way around. Not. I mean, there's no way around not sleeping. I mean, you have to sleep.
Dari, have you ever seen any figures on, so for example, you know, the importance of sleep and the importance of food?
Has anybody ever tried to quantify these good food?
I mean, so has anybody ever tried to quantify these things like sleep in particular?
Because I think if you've got a very active mind, there's a very good chance.
So they've asked Dave Asprey, Dr. Stephen Gundry, Dave Asprey is the father of biohacking.
He started Bulletproof. He's got studies on that. And Dr. McCollough, there's a lot of those out there.
Yeah, so I think the importance of sleep is, you know, so I must admit, I'm a bit guilty of this.
So if you've got a very good, good medical history, then you and you, you know, you've always been kind of pretty athletic.
Then there's kind of a temptation to work and work and push your body, you know.
And so cut down your sleep to kind of four hours.
And I've realized that that's not such a great idea, even for someone who's got a fantastic medical history, you know, it's possible to break your health, I think, through lack of sleep.
But I don't know. I don't know how dangerous it is. And I would like to know.
Well, Daria, you say Daria.
I've never done that. It's a form of.
You're stopping.
You're breaking up, Daria.
Oh, sorry. Yeah, I'm driving on a highway in Georgia. So.
All right.
Daria, what's the temperature in Georgia?
When I get closer to Atlanta, I'll unmute you. I'll finish.
Okay.
I don't know what the temperature is in Celsius.
Is the asphalt in Georgia hot? Like it said in Wild at Heart, you know, I think it was Laura Dern.
Laura Dern.
Even in Indiana, if you're on hot asphalt, I can tell you when I ride my motorcycle in the summertime, if you park on asphalt, you have to put like a snatched Coke can or something underneath your kickstand or it'll sink right into the asphalt.
So it does soften up. Yes, it's very hot.
Like turns into a car.
So do you remember the line in Wild at Heart, Nicholas Cage and Laura Dern?
I can't remember whether it was him saying it to her or her saying it to him.
But she, I think one of them said to the other, you're as hot as Georgian asphalt in the summer.
I thought that must be pretty hot. And you've just confirmed it melts.
I know, I agree. And as a matter of fact, my dogs, they don't like to walk on asphalt in the summertime because it hurts their paws just like walking on, they're walking barefoot, you know, dogs.
And same thing in the winter. They can't walk in the snow. It's, you know, we kind of don't pay attention because they're dogs. But yeah, it's uncomfortable for them.
Yeah.
They're walking on their little finger pads, you know.
We can't walk on the sand in summer in North Wales.
That's a joke.
Oh, I bet it's hot.
Well, anytime the sun, you know, the Earth in general is going to hold the heat.
So if you have a relentless sunny day, even if it's a little bit cooler, the ground is still going to get hot.
And give off that heat, you know, at night or when a cool rain comes in and you see the steam coming off off the road.
Kind of interesting. But yeah.
We don't have that in North Wales.
You don't get sunshine? No sunshine in Wales?
No, no heat.
Nine degrees today. Nine degrees.
Oh, that's cool.
There's a lot of chemtrails in the sky.
I know you're probably not going to agree with that, Stephen, but I really do think that they are spraying the skies.
Yeah.
Can we jump back onto the subject again?
Yeah.
Oh, I'm down.
Yes. Go ahead, Charles.
Yeah, because I'd really be very interested if somebody else might be able to help me with my question, because unfortunately, Dr McCullough wasn't able to answer.
I'm not sure whether it's possible.
But to the point before that I'm seeing a lot of information that keeps on coming across Telegram and every other source talking about anecdotes of people, children, adults, celebrities, sports,
people having strokes, cardiac arrest, dying here, there and everywhere.
And I don't see the all-cause mortality data coming out to the degree that everyone's sort of ringing the alarm bells.
And we've got a situation where I'm being told that the life insurance companies in the States are showing some dreadful data, but it's not being published.
I mean, does anyone have a sort of good access to better data?
Because at the moment, I think there's just a huge cover up or I don't know what's going on.
But Gary Finkelstein is a what you call it, an actuary in the insurance industry, I think.
Can I can I type in because I've been looking at some of this data.
There is data right from the UK.
If you go to the official documents, you have to go to two different version, you know, two different weekly documents.
And you can do all this analysis and you quickly find out that the vaccine efficacy is negative.
There's actually now documents from other studies.
Sometimes they don't put everything you need in one document and you have to go looking for the denominators.
In other words, the numbers of people that were vaccinated versus unvaccinated.
But but you know, who's done some really good articles lately is the expo.
Have you read their articles?
And they always give links to the documents as well.
And they seem to do pretty good work, particularly when they give the rates.
Like if they just compare numbers of vaccinated with numbers of unvaccinated, that doesn't tell you anything because you need to know how many people you need the denominator to know how many people in the population were vaccinated unvaccinated.
But they do quite a few where they actually do, you know, divide by the number of people that were vaccinated and unvaccinated.
And also Jessica Rose did a really interesting one.
I think May 22nd, where she it was really clever.
She used Swedish data and she compared.
She showed how if you miscategorize the definition of vaccinated like the way the CDC does by claiming that you can everyone is unvaccinated unless they are two weeks after their second or final shot.
And you categorize them as unvaccinated, then you can show there's a pandemic of the unvaccinated.
But if you correctly categorize them as vaccinated, all of a sudden, the the whole thing reverses and you can show that there's actually a pandemic of the vaccinated.
So it's it's pretty easy to get that data. If you want, you could email me.
I'll put my email and chat.
Very good. Very good, Kathy and Charles. That's Jerry Brady. That's some good work.
CNN News. So get Kathy's data and then we've got Albert here, Charles, who's also into data.
Thank you very much, Kathy. I'll look for your email.
Okay, I just stuck it in chat for anyone that wants to shoot me an email.
Kathy's a mathematician, Charles.
Yeah, so I've done cost benefit analysis using different data, but I haven't done it lately.
But as of February of 2020, let's see, when was that?
Twenty, twenty. Yeah, February this year, 2022.
You could already tell there was no efficacy for the vaccinations.
But now you can tell there's reverse efficacy from the same data doing the same calculations the way I did.
I just haven't bothered to do them because there's so many other people doing them right now.
Kathy, how many hours a day do you work?
Oh, too many. Just collecting, you know, updating my website and collecting articles to send out on my small email list and so forth.
And my house is a mess. I'm under construction.
I have plastic ceilings and I'm trying to get my house finished so I can get a roommate to help me pay the mortgage, etc.
Did you lose your job then, Kathy?
Well, I did, but I feel I'm too busy to get a paying job right now.
I'm too busy and with Covid.
So I'm sort of spending down my savings right now.
I see.
And hoping to eventually get myself back into a position where my income equals my outgo.
Well, you're doing some great work.
You are. Well done, Kathy, and well done for that sacrifice and all of you who are doing much.
Yeah, I think there are an awful lot of people like me right now.
Yeah, yeah, and he's in the same boat. So I'm in the same boat.
Charles, are we done with you, Charles?
Kathy, don't you have young children?
Oh, thank you so much. No, I'm 70 years old and my son is in his 30s.
Very good.
You didn't have to tell us your age, Kathy.
Well, why not? What the heck?
Okay.
Well, that's because I have that.
I've set my zoom picture to, you know, auto blur my, you know, whatever, auto correct my looks.
Thank you.
Albert. Okay, everybody.
We've got seven minutes to go.
Albert.
Yeah.
Yeah, so you so you were asking earlier for like possible litigation ideas and whatnot.
And, you know, I am sorry to keep revolving around bears because I just I'm just the bears guy.
But, you know, with all the mastelations, this past week was really good because my work got highlighted on Children's Health Defense and Merkola article.
And at pock times all in one week.
So, but so the mass bears reports deletion, which I brought up to Dr. McCullough.
He didn't. I mean, I got the sense that he didn't realize that 18,000 reports have been deleted that have already been published.
You know, and and remember that they have four to six weeks to rigorously authenticate reports before they even publish them.
So in those four to six weeks is typically when you would think that they would say, oh, this is a duplicate or this is a false claim and never publish and put it in the public domain.
So, you know, with that being said, there's 24,000 ID numbers that have never been published and probably 95% of those never will be published.
So that there's a question there.
I filed a report on a various report on my uncle's behalf.
76 year old healthy as a horse double jab Moderna stroke the month 30 days after his second dose permanent disability.
Anyways, I filed the report and the finalized report had diagnoses and SMQs in there, which basically symptoms that he simply did not have nor did I write a document in the write up like Parkinson's and and psychosis, just just to name two of them.
And they altered my my official firsthand write up. They omitted words and then and then changed phrases.
So, I mean, that's got to be some kind of violation. But anyways, there's an idea like they filed a false report on my behalf.
That's that's what I feel like they invented stuff. So how many other reports do they doctor up before they.
I took, I took a note of that earlier, that the doctoring of those reports are probably criminal. And the other thing we've had a conversation here, there is a conspiracy now conspiracy is not people agree that conspiracy is an agreement by people to do something illegal.
And what you're talking about is that that is indeed a conspiracy to doctor that data. So your evidence on that Albert have you as you said to others will become very relevant. And that's a crime.
Yeah, as Peter as Peter rightly said, the courts have been corrupted. So getting the crime investigated. But there will be a day of reckoning and that indeed is a crime.
And I believe in fact, I'm certain that there are conspiracies that will be proven that are criminal that should lead to jail. Yeah.
Yeah, and, and I don't know, ask you ask you because you're an expert on this. I wonder whether so who of all the people who've spoken out in various places, who do you think are our biggest allies as far as evidence goes?
Oh, well, no, I mean, I love I love team enigma Sasha, Craig, party Cooper, Jessica, great. I agree. They're brilliant. Yeah.
You know, and, and, you know, I'm finding my lane amongst these stars, you know, these guys, all these people, I know they're all smarter than me.
But I don't think I don't you know what, Albert, I don't think Craig and Sasha was stars before but they have become stars. I agree.
Yeah, no, no, they're, they're intelligent. They got their they got their lane. And so do I, you know, I've been doing medical billing and a revenue cycle management for for 25 plus years.
I can run the billing operations of the largest hospitals in the nation.
That's kind of my, Albert. So I'm trying to ask you to, you know, an overall view now. So you've noticed Craig and Sasha, who else?
Oh, there's a lot of people on on some physicians on on sub stack, I can put a list together. It's the same people, Steve, Steve Kirsch ferrets ferrets out these people.
And I kind of find them through there. But a lot of there's a lot of good analysts out there for sure they just they document through sub stack. And I, since I don't like to write, I make videos.
I think it's like easier to make videos.
But question, Charles or Stephen, where can I'm sorry, welcome to Eagle. What's your real name?
Oh, Albert Benavides. Albert. I'm sorry, Albert.
You need to get together with Albert's.
Well, no, I'm saying Albert is one of the best people to actually give testimony right now because he has expertise that no one else has in this deletions of bears records and studying bears.
And so I wondered, remember, Peter McCullough said that people that have the kind of evidence that Albert had should go talk to a certain person. Could you post that person? I've forgotten who it was.
Yeah, it's in the same. I saved it in the chat. If you save the chat, you can go back to it and find it later. But I forget that.
It's Brad Gaia, Brad Gaia. So, you know, save the chance, Kathy.
You know, I do it and it seems to disappear somewhere on my computer and I never see it again.
You can also you can also copy and paste it.
Yeah, I'll give it to you, Kathy.
So you write that quick.
So I think Albert should make an effort to contact that person.
I will. There it is.
I think you have more than one testimony to give you have your personal testimony of your father. And then you also have all your other.
Oh, yeah. No, no, no. The two year old Alaskan kid who died, you know, was a bears report that was never officially published, which is different than all other 24,000 total reports that have ever been deleted from bears.
This one is different because it's never it's never made it to the public domain, but it was available for a few minutes in the download.
And and that's the one that Aaron Siri when we got to when I got when we got to Aaron Siri, they took it and they filed a FOIA because they understood the value of this particular report.
They understood the value of this particular report. Sorry for that two year old kid. But this points to this points to their throttling. This points to the fact that, you know, this under reporting factor to say, oh, wait a minute, does that mean
the reports that are received or the to them, the reports that bears receives or the reports that bears publishes because those are two distinct numbers because it's my contention.
I think that they do not publish every single legitimate report that they receive.
Okay, stop.
Sorry, I'm Albert. What would that crime constitute?
It's fraud.
Right.
It's fraud.
Absolute fraud. No doubt it's fraud.
And in this context, in this context, the fraud would constitute in America, in America is also likely racketeering, because the people who are who are doctoring the data now come on we're finishing.
We're going to finish over so Albert, you're doing great work.
And everybody so cat.
And then Dorian. Let's go.
Thank you, Charles. A couple of things World Council is actually publishing COVID-19 vaccine pharmacovigilance report that's going to include various yellow card, the Euro pharmacovigilance is going to have four different reporting systems, all in one.
That's going to be coming out tomorrow.
Second, for those of you who are on Twitter, follow Texas Lindsey she puts the best graphs, based on as the vaccine is getting introduced in the country on causes of death and stuff like that and I just published one of her graphs on athletes and
number of deaths that we have since the vaccine has been introduced.
And number three, the unity for COVID, one of the groups I'm associated with Ryan Cole is a board member as well.
We are putting a campaign and then I mentioned it but we're putting campaign to respond to the FDA because they're about to approve the vaccine in six months to
Four year olds Jerry Brady is also helping with that campaign. A lot of people that are here are helping so please go to the FDA put your comments in, because once it's approved in children then they're going to have indemnity and Texas Lindsey L-I-N-D-S-A-Y.
If you, my tweet is in the chat and in my tweet actually give her credit for the graph.
Thank you guys.
Thank you for that. I put the links in the chat earlier with the posting that we sent out.
So you can you can get the PDF file as well as Sam Dubay doing the promotion for that. So that gives a direct links into the FDA site.
Yes, thank you everyone. Thank you. Thank you, Kevin. Great work on World Council for Health. I think just one other. Peter McCulloch said they were only 70 members but I think that's a good one.
I think we're above 150. I think we have 50 some countries. And if anyone wants to join you can actually join on the website directly. If you have trouble you can email me. I put my email for the World Council in the chat.
But yes, more groups we have. It would be great because we need to represent the world and work on this together. We're going to be doing projects on vaccine injured and making sure that we can raise awareness and things like that.
Thank you. Thank you.
Sorry, Kat. Were you able to talk to Mark Stein?
Actually, no, but I am working through that because I think I told you I have a friend who they are in the same office. He's not in UK as you probably know, but I was able to talk to Neil Oliver as well and he's been very good with everything that he's doing.
He's putting out great stories out there.
Thank you. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Kat, last comment. Doria question and then we're going to end. We're going to end the two and a half hour mark so it's good.
So Doria.
Yeah, Edward Dowd was on Getter and somebody posted this in C19 and it seemed notable and it had to do with the insurance actuarial statistics of disability disabled workers claims have spiked astronomically, and I put I just copied and pasted it in the chat just now from what I saved in my notes, and that might help the other Charles with what he was asking for some evidence, you know, of statistics, and that was Bureau of Labor statistics.
The little graphic that went with that particular post. So that might be helpful but to park it back to what Charles said, Stephen I'm sorry, Stephen had brought up about Lord of the Flies.
Those kind of unique stories and narratives that you know that that lay down a, I guess a parable if you will. They always show you how a group of ordinary people that are obscure and maybe don't even know what their potentials are suddenly could rise to either great, evil and diabolical behavior or rise to great heroism.
And I think that's what we're seeing in all these individuals who were quietly working on their academic careers or their medical careers or their statistical analysis careers like Albert, and all of a sudden.
Now you're up front because what you're doing is very important and you have the courage to speak up. So I think any, you know, basically we're all given a role to play.
And I just applaud everyone who stepped up that was never get gotten this kind of attention before, and isn't doing it for the attention it's doing to get the truth out so bad bless each and every one of you.
And I'm honored to be able to chat with you all.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Daria. Okay everybody save the chance. Likewise, Daria.
You can go to the, you can go to the Telegram video, the Tele video conversations Telegram has that ability to chat.
Thank you for joining us. Stephen, who is coming on Tuesday night?
Well, it may be Wolfgang Wodarg, but it might be someone else. I haven't finalized that.
Keep us in suspenders. Stephen, last words from you, anything else you want to say and I love being in suspenders.
I think it's very important what Daria said because there are some people in this group who are so damn bright and they've got no clue.
And then you've got other people who get lost in their own propaganda.
So, I think it's very important for each of us to think about what honestly as honestly as we can do in this crazy time, which in my opinion is much more upsetting than people are admitting.
That's just my opinion. I got, can't really back it up, but I just get the feeling.
We've all been tortured psychologically, deliberately and severely.
And there's no way as a human being that you can live through this time and not be affected by it.
So, what I wanted to say was the people who've been thrust into the limelight without their really wanting to be like Albert, the best guy, you know, Kathy, the mathematician in Massachusetts.
These people really need to, yeah, we all need to assess what it is we have to offer and believe in ourselves because actually this may be our moment.
And it's really important that we all work to maximum ability. Sorry, I'm not finding the right words, but anyway.
No, no, that's precise. Buckminster Fuller said it beautifully, Stephen.
Each one of us has to do what we see needs to be done and not get frustrated that others aren't doing what you want them to do. Each one of us.
Exactly. So, the things that we think about, people ask me all the time, shall I do this or shall we do this?
You know, meaning shall someone else do it? And I say, well, you've thought of it. Why don't you do it?
The fact that you've thought of it means that you're ahead of everybody else. Yep, that's it. And unexpectedly in the whole world.
So, so, you know, I think, you know, after this experience, I think that, you know, all these people who've invented incredible things.
Yes, some of them it was predictables, but some of them is a big surprise to them.
Okay, everybody, our time is up. Well said, Stephen. There's a beautiful close. Thank you for being here.
When's Tuesday night at eight p.m. Not nine p.m. Correct. We started. Sorry, eight p.m. on Tuesdays. That's correct.
Okay, thank you for being here. You can switch over. Tom Rodman has put the link in if you want to keep your conversation going.
Thank you for joining us. And we look forward to being with you on Tuesday night. So, Stephen, thank you very much. Bye, everybody.
Yes. Bye bye. Bye bye. Bye. Bye.
Thank you so much.
Yes, Stephen. Thank you so much.
Okay. Bye bye.