Latest / UK Column Radio / The Ultimate Vaccine Timeline — with Shaz Khan

Transcript

The Ultimate Vaccine Timeline — with Shaz Khan · UK Column Radio

• 0:08
  Hello, I'm Charles Mallett with Auk column interview and today I
• 0:11
  have with me Shaz Khan, who has recently written the ultimate
• 0:14
  vaccine timeline. And my opener to Shaz is going
• 0:19
  to be to say, well, Shaz, we we live in an age of the
• 0:23
  prerequisite for almost any sort of discussion, debate, question
• 0:27
  or answer is that the person need be an expert.
• 0:31
  Now, you're not an immunologist or a vaccinologist or an
• 0:34
  epidemiologist or any of the above or below.
• 0:37
  You are not, in this particular regard, considered an expert.
• 0:42
  Why does that make you a suitable person to be looking
• 0:46
  into a subject like this? Well, thank you so much for
• 0:50
  having me, Charles. But first of all, I never
• 0:52
  planned on looking into this subject, to be quite honest.
• 0:54
  I mean, as you said, I'm no expert.
• 0:56
  I don't work in the field of science or in medicine.
• 0:58
  I've always been interested in science.
• 1:00
  And through my work in marketing and communications for the last
• 1:02
  20 years, it's it's come up often that we've used scientific
• 1:05
  language to sell products because it sounds good.
• 1:09
  But I basically got into this 10 years ago following my father's
• 1:13
  death, which I believe was provoked by a flu jab.
• 1:16
  Obviously, I'll never have any way of proving it, but it just
• 1:19
  asked, it just got me asking questions.
• 1:21
  And I knew nothing about vaccines at that point.
• 1:24
  And I came from a pretty neutral standpoint where I believe what
• 1:26
  I was told as well in school, which is vaccines save lives.
• 1:29
  They saved us from smallpox and polio.
• 1:32
  But in the last 10 years, I can say I've spent well over 10,000
• 1:35
  hours looking into this subject. And I've been looking in
• 1:37
  libraries, in the National Archives, not just on Google or
• 1:41
  on the Internet. I really, there were a lot of
• 1:43
  books that I read in the beginning.
• 1:44
  I think the first one I read was Dissolving Illusions by Doctor
• 1:47
  Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bistrianic and I, I, to be quite
• 1:50
  frank, there were a lot of things in there I really had
• 1:52
  difficulty believing. And that's why I went to the
• 1:54
  libraries, into the National Archives, because I just was a
• 1:57
  bit astounded by the fact that we could have been lied to on
• 1:59
  such a massive scale. So I never intended to write a
• 2:03
  book. When I started research, it was
• 2:04
  really just a personal project. But the more I came across
• 2:07
  outrageous documents within the National Archives, the more I
• 2:10
  said to myself, this has to be documented and has to be shared
• 2:13
  with the public so that they can see what the document, I mean,
• 2:16
  the government documents say, which are buried in the National
• 2:20
  Archives. I mean, they're in the public
• 2:21
  domain, so anyone can get access to them.
• 2:23
  But I got access to documents through Freedom of Information
• 2:25
  requests. So documents from the 70s and
• 2:28
  the early 80s and I, I think they're often closed for 100
• 2:31
  years. So we still have to ask for, for
• 2:34
  more recent stuff. But I would say I'm, I'm
• 2:37
  actually not an expert. I don't claim to be an expert,
• 2:39
  but I have spent, as I said, well over 10,000 hours on this
• 2:42
  issue. I don't have any skin in the
• 2:44
  game. I'm not even a parent.
• 2:45
  So this isn't even like a, you know, initially do I vaccinate
• 2:48
  my, my kids or not? It really was just following
• 2:51
  what happened to my father and then just being a geek about it
• 2:54
  and being shocked and outraged by what I discovered.
• 2:59
  Yeah. Well, I mean on the the way in
• 3:01
  which you went about sourcing and going through all the
• 3:05
  information that you refer to is something I definitely want to
• 3:07
  come back to because I think that in itself is a fascinating
• 3:09
  story. And now what what I would like
• 3:11
  to go into, although obviously a challenging and emotional
• 3:14
  subject, but I think the specifics around what it was
• 3:17
  that you believe did lead up to your father's death and how it
• 3:20
  was dealt with, I think are very crucial to your story and indeed
• 3:24
  your further investigation. Would you mind just going over
• 3:28
  what did happen and and how it was, as you say, with an open
• 3:31
  mind that you started to consider what you did consider?
• 3:35
  Of course. So, so I'm, I'm, I'm based here
• 3:37
  in Switzerland, but my father is in the UK under the NHS system.
• 3:41
  I to be quite honest, I was estranged from my father so I
• 3:43
  hadn't spoken to him in a while, but I found out from a family
• 3:46
  friend that he was in hospital and he was seriously ill.
• 3:48
  So I rushed over to the UK to go and see him.
• 3:50
  So I had no idea that he'd received a flu vaccine at this
• 3:53
  point, I just knew that he'd been diagnosed with stage 4 lung
• 3:55
  cancer, non-smoker. He was a pretty relatively
• 3:58
  healthy guy, 70 years old and within 24 hours of being
• 4:03
  admitted to hospital he lost the ability to speak and he lost the
• 4:05
  ability to walk. So it was a very very quick
• 4:09
  downslide and it was only after he passed away, which was
• 4:13
  literally 4 weeks after I went to see him in hospital, which is
• 4:16
  when he was admitted. So he died on the 4th of
• 4:19
  February 2015. I found out from my stepmom that
• 4:23
  in November he'd received a flu vaccination.
• 4:26
  Now I know didn't know anything about vaccines, but in my
• 4:29
  understanding you don't give vaccines to people who are sick.
• 4:32
  So if you died of stage 4 lung cancer at the beginning of
• 4:34
  February, chances are you would have been sick in November and
• 4:37
  shouldn't have received a vaccine.
• 4:40
  I didn't know exactly what brand he got so I just looked at all
• 4:43
  the package inserts that I could find and I was quite horrified
• 4:47
  to find out that he that it's acknowledged that there are new
• 4:51
  logical reactions following the flu vaccine.
• 4:53
  And what didn't add up with my dad and why I started asking
• 4:55
  questions is when he was in hospital with stage 4 lung
• 4:58
  cancer, he didn't have any respiratory issues.
• 5:01
  He didn't have any breathing issues.
• 5:02
  He only had neurological issues and inflammation in the brain,
• 5:06
  which for me, again, again, I'm no expert, but for me, if
• 5:09
  someone's got stage 4 lung cancer, they have trouble
• 5:11
  breathing. I've I've seen another friend of
• 5:13
  mine with a father who had a who was a chain smoker at stage 4
• 5:16
  lung cancer and he had problems breathing.
• 5:18
  But my dad had none of that. It was all neurological.
• 5:20
  And when I did discover the package inserts themselves
• 5:23
  declared that neurological side effects from vaccine, flu
• 5:26
  vaccines are known and acknowledged, I hope was pretty
• 5:30
  shocked. And obviously we know the NHSUK
• 5:32
  system of you get what, 5-10 minutes with your, your GP if
• 5:37
  you're lucky. So if you do go in there with a
• 5:39
  cuff and that you say you're not feeling good and it's the season
• 5:42
  of the flu, what are they going to do if you're over 65 is give
• 5:45
  you the flu vaccine, no questions, no real delving into
• 5:48
  what else is going on. And 5-10 minutes is really not
• 5:51
  enough to have a, a consultation with your GP.
• 5:54
  So that was his situation. And as I said, I have no proof.
• 5:57
  We'll never have any proof that that did.
• 5:59
  But since I have speak been speaking out about the flu
• 6:02
  vaccine, I've been quite not interested.
• 6:06
  It's quite interesting to notice that a lot of people have
• 6:08
  stories around the flu vaccine, either getting super sick
• 6:11
  afterwards or, you know, transmitting the flu to other
• 6:15
  people. The flu vaccine I, I spoke a lot
• 6:18
  to hairdressers because I believe that they have a lot of
• 6:20
  gossip in the neighborhood. And believe me when you bring up
• 6:23
  the question of flu vaccine, I've had people in the backroom
• 6:26
  who just heard flu vaccine and stardly perked up and said and
• 6:29
  had a story to share where they all said basically that they'd
• 6:31
  never get enough flu vaccine because it made them more sick
• 6:33
  than they had ever been. So anyhow, I digress.
• 6:37
  But that was the reason why I basically started going into
• 6:40
  looking into vaccines because as I said, I, I had no knowledge,
• 6:43
  but I had a lot of friends who were having children at the
• 6:45
  time. And I noticed that they were
• 6:46
  sick a lot. And it just kind of was strange
• 6:49
  because I don't remember being like when I was, I was a child
• 6:52
  of the late 8, late 70s, sorry. And I don't remember kids being
• 6:56
  that sick. And I had the measles, I had
• 6:59
  chicken pox, I didn't have mumps.
• 7:01
  But I remember those childhood diseases and I remember the the
• 7:04
  parties you would get like get them all infected while stay
• 7:07
  young. And I, it just didn't make sense
• 7:10
  that nowadays kids have got all these strange allergies, chronic
• 7:13
  diseases, ADHD, asthma. So, So yeah, that basically
• 7:18
  started the journey 10 years ago.
• 7:19
  And here I am with a book now that I've put it in a try to put
• 7:23
  it in a, in a, in a documented form, because there are lots of
• 7:25
  books on vaccines. They really are.
• 7:27
  But I found that on the historical level, apart from
• 7:29
  dissolving illusions, there weren't that many that really
• 7:32
  delved into the history of it. And from a perspective of what
• 7:36
  we found in government archives and also catalogues, like I had
• 7:40
  no idea that back in the early 20th century, we had vaccines
• 7:43
  against acne, against pneumonia already.
• 7:46
  We did have some flu vaccines against influenza, but they were
• 7:48
  bacterial based because we still didn't, didn't have the
• 7:51
  understanding of viral disease at that point.
• 7:53
  And I, I was quite shocked. I was really naive.
• 7:55
  I was very naive when I started my journey.
• 7:57
  So, but but yeah, so that obviously this personal story,
• 8:02
  like for many others, is what drove me to start researching
• 8:05
  more. Yeah, I mean, you know,
• 8:08
  obviously awful that those were the circumstances that did cause
• 8:12
  you to start looking that way in the 1st place.
• 8:16
  That's the conclusion you arrived at.
• 8:17
  As you say, not only will you never be able to prove it, but I
• 8:20
  sincerely doubt that anybody on the other side of the fence
• 8:24
  would try to do anything that would suggest that you were
• 8:28
  right. As in any of the any of the
• 8:30
  medics, any of the pharmaceutical companies.
• 8:34
  It is of course well documented that hospitals do prescribe or
• 8:39
  incorrectly prescribe medications, that there are
• 8:42
  awful lot of things that go wrong in hospitals.
• 8:45
  Were there other things that you looked at in addition to the to
• 8:48
  the flu vaccine or sort of alongside it or was it in a way
• 8:54
  the sort of the blindingly obvious stand out thing that had
• 8:57
  happened? Well, at the time, as I said, I
• 9:00
  didn't know he, he'd received the flu vaccine when he was in
• 9:03
  hospital. So my interest in health in
• 9:06
  general did start in 2009. So before his passing and I was
• 9:11
  very much learning about nutrition and understanding how
• 9:14
  much nutrition can help our, our health issues, help my health
• 9:17
  issues. So when he was in hospital, I
• 9:19
  didn't know about cancers. Like try to avoid giving him
• 9:21
  sugar. Like, I mean, the NHS system
• 9:25
  again, very good people trying to do the best they can with a
• 9:28
  broken system. But he was in the cancer ward
• 9:31
  where basically there was there was people with jaundice and
• 9:33
  people incredibly sick in his ward.
• 9:35
  And they were passing out white bread sandwiches with ham and
• 9:38
  cheese and white tea and coffee. Like the worst things you can
• 9:42
  possibly serve people who were trying to get better and heal.
• 9:46
  So at the time, my brother and I, who were both quite, quite
• 9:49
  annoying for the doctors, I think, as we put like signs on
• 9:52
  my, my, my dad's bed, like, you know, no sugar, no white sugar,
• 9:55
  no white flour, try to avoid any inflammatory foods, etcetera.
• 9:58
  And doctor basically kind of made us out to look like we're
• 10:00
  crazy. But he did actually get a little
• 10:02
  bit better at one point to where they almost proposed
• 10:04
  chemotherapy, but then they kind of backtracked and, and said
• 10:08
  they weren't going to offer him anything but just Hospice care.
• 10:11
  So as I didn't know during the whole time he was in hospital.
• 10:16
  I really learned, I think at the funeral when my when we were
• 10:18
  sitting around the table with my stepmom and my half sister and
• 10:21
  we were trying to understand what had happened and how he'd
• 10:23
  gone down so quickly. And then my stepmom said, yeah,
• 10:26
  I don't know why he got that flu jab.
• 10:28
  He never gets the flu jab. I don't know why he got that flu
• 10:30
  jab. And I was just like, what?
• 10:32
  Because my dad's, I mean, my dad was Indian, was one of those who
• 10:35
  never went to the doctor. He was quite a stubborn man and,
• 10:38
  and had old, you know, grandma, also a grandma.
• 10:41
  What's the word formulas for when he did get sick?
• 10:44
  So he really did barely go to the doctor.
• 10:47
  And it was very surprising for his, his wife and for me that he
• 10:50
  would go and get a flu jet. But there you go.
• 10:52
  That's that's what happens when you only have 5-10 minutes and
• 10:54
  that's all the doctor offers you and you're looking for help.
• 10:57
  Yeah, no, exactly. And I mean, of course, in the
• 11:00
  anecdotal, but the coincidence of people who have lived long
• 11:05
  healthy lives who have also said that they've never had any
• 11:08
  interaction with the medical establishment is one that really
• 11:13
  can't be ignored. However, it's so difficult to
• 11:16
  explain that, especially to a health service, as you say, who
• 11:19
  feeds apparently sort of on loop exactly the things you describe,
• 11:23
  you know, white bread and and sugar.
• 11:25
  I mean, the, the idea that the National Health Service really
• 11:27
  has anything to do with health in the genuine sense is, is, is,
• 11:31
  I would say, totally inaccurate. Now you've talked about your
• 11:36
  book, what sets it apart? And I think especially in the
• 11:41
  last five years, the subject of vaccination has become an
• 11:43
  incredibly hot, divisive and very sensitive topic.
• 11:48
  But to go back to where we perceive it all started, where,
• 11:52
  where do you go back to? And, and I mean sort of first of
• 11:57
  all in the medical sense, but then of course all importantly
• 12:00
  in the in the commercial sense. And are those two different
• 12:03
  things? That's an interesting question
• 12:05
  because the commercial aspect I didn't realize already started
• 12:08
  the end of the 19th century. We had a lot of vaccines on the
• 12:12
  market. And back in the days, there were
• 12:13
  absolutely no regulations. There was absolutely no, you
• 12:16
  know, kind of licensing that you needed even to put a product on
• 12:19
  the market. So I believe in 1910 already, I
• 12:22
  mean, in the US they already had that, that Biologics Act that
• 12:26
  came into place, 19-O2 as a result actually of injury
• 12:30
  following vaccine campaigns. But it still wasn't a sure thing
• 12:34
  In the UK. I'm not it was harder to find
• 12:37
  actual legislation on how they were controlling the quality and
• 12:43
  the purity of products they put on the market, but they were
• 12:46
  products on the market basically.
• 12:47
  So the commercial aspect has basically started already since
• 12:49
  beginning of the beginning end of 19th, beginning of the 20th
• 12:52
  century, definitely was accelerated in the mid 20th
• 12:55
  century with I would say biotech industries with the fact that we
• 13:01
  could be much more sophisticated than the development of
• 13:03
  vaccines. And of course, as we all know in
• 13:06
  the US, what was a huge factor for them was the 1986 Childhood
• 13:10
  Vaccine Injury Compensation Act, which essentially allowed
• 13:14
  vaccines to be brought to market and the manufacturers had no
• 13:17
  liability. So as before, the financial
• 13:21
  incentives were pretty low because there wasn't much market
• 13:25
  for profit. And then what profit they were
• 13:26
  making was getting eaten up by by lawsuits of people who were
• 13:30
  filing, filing damages because there were a lot of damages,
• 13:34
  especially after the DTP vaccine.
• 13:36
  It was the one that had the highest insurance because it was
• 13:39
  the most reported to have neurological damage and serious
• 13:44
  neurological damage where they were paying out millions.
• 13:48
  So after this 1986 act, even though in Europe we didn't have
• 13:52
  the same legislation, it seemed to influence how manufacturers
• 13:56
  in Europe were were also given the cycle liability.
• 13:59
  I mean, in in Switzerland it was covered under the epidemics law.
• 14:03
  So any vaccine that came out is automatically kind of covered on
• 14:06
  the epidemics law and automatically there is no
• 14:09
  liability by the manufacturer unless you can prove that the
• 14:13
  product is defective or that there was an intent to create a
• 14:16
  dangerous product, which anybody will know is incredibly hard to
• 14:19
  prove. I mean, you need discovery in
• 14:22
  the 1st place to be able to go through all the documents from
• 14:24
  the Pharmaceutical industry. And that's not really done
• 14:26
  anymore, especially since this 1986 act.
• 14:29
  But the commercial aspect has has is over 100 years old.
• 14:33
  And I would just say that it accelerated, I would say, in the
• 14:36
  mid 20th century with the polio vaccine, which was probably the
• 14:39
  first that we had such a media hype around.
• 14:42
  And that kind of, I would say, how do you say instilled this
• 14:47
  idea that vaccines save us, save us from disease, save us from
• 14:50
  these infections? And it was so mediatized.
• 14:53
  And like worldwide, everyone who knew who Silk was, it's the
• 14:57
  first time that anyone really know a scientist.
• 14:59
  You know, I don't think there's any other scientist who said so
• 15:02
  much, maybe Einstein. But then here in Switzerland, he
• 15:05
  was half Swiss. Anyway, I digress, sorry, but I
• 15:10
  would believe that it's definitely the mid of the mid,
• 15:14
  yeah, mid 20th century. Then with these liabilities that
• 15:18
  were given well liability free, sorry, that was given to the
• 15:20
  Pharmaceutical industry and then biotech, biotech industry when
• 15:24
  it came into the 70's, the 80s, that allowed a huge amount of
• 15:28
  innovation to be created around vaccines based on genetic
• 15:33
  engineering. Because now we were able to go
• 15:35
  and tinkle with the actual genetic code of these viruses
• 15:39
  and the bacteria and create genetically modified organisms.
• 15:42
  And then the first hepatitis B which was based on a genetically
• 15:45
  modified Organism and came out in 1986.
• 15:48
  And that basically just like you know, they are patents, the
• 15:51
  amount of money they can make that changed everything.
• 15:53
  The pharmaceutical for the Pharmaceutical industry who are
• 15:55
  making vaccines, that was a lot more profit to be made.
• 15:58
  And here today's is where kind of where we stand, where we're
• 16:01
  still in that. And it's obviously been
• 16:03
  accelerated with this whole mRNA technology which they they say
• 16:06
  they want to now use that for the flu vaccine.
• 16:08
  They're looking into it for other diseases.
• 16:10
  I've even seen an mRNA acne vaccine in progress through
• 16:13
  Sanofi. So this allows them to make more
• 16:17
  money with the patents, with the, you know, the exchange of
• 16:21
  intellectual, intellectual light, intellectual property.
• 16:24
  Sorry. And and yeah, that's where we're
• 16:26
  at at the moment. So if we don't kind of like step
• 16:29
  back and make sure that the authorities actually recognize
• 16:32
  the injuries already, which is one of the big problems we're
• 16:34
  having here, we're going to move forward to this, this absolute,
• 16:39
  I would say, explosion of genetic products that are sold
• 16:47
  as, you know, vaccines, but they're not vaccines by how we
• 16:50
  understand them because they change definitions.
• 16:51
  And that's something I've also seen in the research, which has
• 16:53
  been very instrumental, is the changing definitions of diseases
• 16:57
  of, of names, the changing of definition of immunity.
• 17:01
  All these influence how we perceive this market of vaccines
• 17:05
  and in the, you know, the protection against infectious
• 17:07
  disease, which is ultimately what it's supposed to be about.
• 17:10
  Yeah, well, that's exactly, I mean, there's so many, so many
• 17:13
  things to to pull out of that your response just there.
• 17:16
  But I think the, the one that we should go into is the
• 17:20
  terminology. What what was the, you know,
• 17:22
  what was the vaccination for in the 1st place?
• 17:25
  And of course, the, the approved sort of narrative version is, is
• 17:28
  Edward Jenner with Kyle Box and, and this sort of suggestion that
• 17:34
  illness could be transmitted from 1:00 being to another,
• 17:38
  which is something, again, that was a novel concept.
• 17:40
  And there's still huge controversy surrounding that
• 17:42
  very issue today. But, but now we are in an era
• 17:48
  where it seems that there are vaccines for absolutely
• 17:51
  everything. And, and you know, you've just
• 17:53
  referred to an acne vaccine. I don't know if anyone's ever
• 17:55
  suggested that's transmissible from person to person, But you
• 17:58
  know, we go back to this thing of what, what, what actually is
• 18:01
  it and what is vaccination? And of course then the other
• 18:04
  thing that the, the delivery method, I mean, interesting when
• 18:08
  you talk about the National Health Service and what they
• 18:11
  feed to people and this sort of this step away from nature.
• 18:15
  Of course, in nature, anything that penetrates or punctures the
• 18:19
  skin is doing harm. You know, whether it be a sea
• 18:23
  urchin or a porcupine or a thorn, they're trying to do
• 18:26
  harm. And yet we've accepted that we
• 18:29
  should receive something that's meant to be beneficial in the
• 18:31
  same method. I mean, that might be something
• 18:35
  sort of outside where you've looked, but it is just
• 18:38
  interesting to note that that is how we actually receive until
• 18:43
  now. I know there are ways in which
• 18:44
  this is going to change, but but let's just go back to the sort
• 18:47
  of, you know, the Jenna period and the whole idea, you know,
• 18:49
  vaccination and or inoculation. I mean, what actually is it?
• 18:53
  What's it meant to be? Well, it's interesting because
• 18:56
  in many ways it kind of resembles homeopathy and people
• 18:59
  might like their ears perk up when I say that.
• 19:01
  But there was there was also a homeoprophylaxis, which was
• 19:04
  understood as you're giving the information of the disease in a
• 19:07
  controlled manner in a tiny dose to inform the body in a
• 19:11
  controlled manner in a small dose so that they can build up
• 19:14
  an immunity when they're next exposed to it.
• 19:16
  So I mean, that's the concept of vaccines basically as as we
• 19:19
  understand it, but that's also kind of the concept of
• 19:21
  homeopathy, homeoprophylaxis at least.
• 19:25
  But obviously people will laugh and say, well, there's nothing
• 19:26
  in homeopathy, you can't measure anything, etcetera, because the
• 19:29
  information is so small anyway, but that we can discuss about
• 19:32
  how limited sciences by what they can and cannot measure.
• 19:35
  But vaccination the day of Jenner was, was obviously not in
• 19:39
  an injection because they didn't even have syringes back then.
• 19:41
  It was, you know, it was a scrape, A scrape into to the to
• 19:44
  the arm usually. So you scrape an open wound and
• 19:47
  you you kind of put the pus in. And nobody really knows what was
• 19:51
  used as vaccines in the early days.
• 19:53
  Even even scholars who have spent like their whole
• 19:56
  professional career trying to understand exactly what was
• 19:58
  used, they don't know. So we think it's cowpox.
• 20:00
  It's also horse grease. So you can imagine how unsafe it
• 20:05
  was and, and how unsanitary because back in those days, we
• 20:07
  obviously didn't have sanitation, we didn't have
• 20:09
  disinfectant, we didn't have antibiotics, a lot of things we
• 20:12
  didn't have that people seem to forget back in the days
• 20:14
  vaccination came to life. It was a dangerous, risky
• 20:18
  procedure in itself. And yet still it was mandated
• 20:21
  and we still didn't understand how it worked.
• 20:24
  So, so Fast forward to pastor, for instance, it was the next
• 20:27
  big, let's say vaccinologist, shall we say, who developed the
• 20:30
  rabies vaccine famously. I mean, the whole Pasta
• 20:33
  Institute came about because of rabies vaccination.
• 20:36
  It was basically a place to go get a rabies vaccine.
• 20:39
  That's how it started. Obviously they had chicken
• 20:41
  cholera vaccine. They also developed anthrax
• 20:43
  vaccines, but they weren't very much used.
• 20:45
  And those were primarily for animals.
• 20:48
  And then we had the toxide vaccines that came along and it
• 20:50
  wasn't until about the 1940s, nineteen 50s that we started
• 20:53
  doing the systematic kind of mass producing plastic syringe
• 20:57
  based vaccination campaigns. So it was a jet injector, which
• 21:01
  was much cheaper and was easier as well to do the typical
• 21:04
  vaccine campaigns in Africa where you just want to, you
• 21:06
  know, jab them like they're, they're cattle basically.
• 21:09
  And it's interesting that nowadays when you look at the
• 21:14
  literature, they're really trying to focus on oral
• 21:16
  vaccinations like rotaviruses, oral typhoid at one point was
• 21:21
  oral, if I'm not mistaken, and use the Makosal immunity because
• 21:26
  they realize that injecting into a muscle is not actually putting
• 21:31
  the viral information where it needs to go, where you can build
• 21:34
  up an immunity, which is usually the mucosal lining of of your,
• 21:37
  your intestines, your stomach, your respiratory system.
• 21:40
  So they're looking more into mucosal vaccines.
• 21:42
  And it's interesting about mRNA because mRNA was was looked
• 21:46
  initially as hopeful solution for, for cancer patients, which
• 21:50
  admittedly cancer patients are already sick.
• 21:53
  Some of them have no other options.
• 21:54
  So when you're talking about an mRNA vaccine or product
• 21:58
  inoculation for a for a potentially terminal disease, I
• 22:03
  think they should be doing the research and I think it's great
• 22:05
  that they were were using that. But then to flip it and say
• 22:09
  we're going to use it for infectious diseases in healthy
• 22:11
  people. Knowing that the first human
• 22:13
  clinical trial for an infectious disease using MNRMRNA technology
• 22:17
  was in 2014 by Cure VAC in Germany, only on 101 people.
• 22:22
  And the results at the end of 2017 weren't even that favorable
• 22:26
  to three years later or four years later.
• 22:28
  To go and put that en masse on people, including children and
• 22:31
  pregnant women is just crazy. But but yeah, I mean, we have
• 22:35
  different types of vaccines. We have oral vaccines.
• 22:37
  Now they're talking about the needle free vaccines where it's
• 22:39
  like a patch animals, they get sprayed, they have aerosol
• 22:44
  vaccines because obviously it's not always so practical to
• 22:47
  inject every single one of them. So you can spray a vaccine into
• 22:50
  the air and then through the respiratory system, the animals
• 22:52
  will will will absorb it. I mean in France, in Europe,
• 22:58
  sorry, I'm not sure about in the UK if it's past as well.
• 23:01
  But there's the first self amplifying mRNA vaccine which
• 23:04
  has been permitted called Kostyov, which is really
• 23:08
  concerning because the mRNA is designed to self amplify in the
• 23:12
  body. So you don't actually know when
• 23:13
  is when is there, is there an off switch?
• 23:16
  Does it stop creating those toxic proteins?
• 23:18
  Then your antibodies are supposed to develop a response
• 23:21
  against. So that's, it's quite
• 23:23
  concerning. But the technology itself and I
• 23:25
  would say the philosophy itself of vaccination is, is, you know,
• 23:27
  it makes sense. But where we've gone with it,
• 23:31
  we've turned it into this massive market.
• 23:33
  We don't look at health anymore as an outcome.
• 23:36
  We just look at these surrogate markers, which are these
• 23:39
  antibody levels in the blood or sometimes your T cell levels.
• 23:42
  But we don't really have better health as a result in my
• 23:45
  opinion. And, and I can see this when I
• 23:47
  look at kids around me who are vaccinated.
• 23:51
  I think that's the thing that that is what I'd like to just go
• 23:54
  back into because a lot of people will be familiar with the
• 23:58
  graphs that show the decline in smallpox.
• 24:02
  And that those are always presented by people who are
• 24:05
  trying to demonstrate the vaccination against smallpox
• 24:07
  worked. And those that are looking at it
• 24:11
  perhaps in a different way would say, yeah.
• 24:12
  But if you look at where the vaccine came in, the decline in
• 24:17
  smallpox incidences, and I do caveat this with of course, that
• 24:20
  all statistics can be manipulated any which way, but
• 24:23
  nonetheless, there are, it's very easy to demonstrate with a
• 24:25
  graph depending on where you start it, that yes, the small
• 24:29
  smallpox vaccine absolutely did away with smallpox.
• 24:31
  Or the smallpox vaccine came in at a time where changes to
• 24:36
  hygiene, sanitation, nutrition, you know, all sorts of other
• 24:39
  factors came in and made it look like the vaccine may have played
• 24:44
  a part or indeed made it look like the vaccine made absolutely
• 24:46
  no difference or indeed created harm when none had previous
• 24:49
  previously existed. Where do you sort of fall on on
• 24:52
  that particular issue? Well, this is interesting
• 24:55
  because there were lots of scientific experts back in the
• 24:58
  days already who were highlight highlighting the issues with
• 25:01
  smallpox vaccination and the manipulation of statistics,
• 25:04
  especially in the UK. By, I mean, again, definitions
• 25:08
  are very important here because you can usually the most
• 25:11
  reliable statistics are mortality statistics.
• 25:14
  But still it depends on the definition of certain diseases.
• 25:17
  I mean, if you change the definition of disease, then
• 25:19
  that's going to affect your statistics.
• 25:20
  And I've noticed that's kind of like a playbook thing that is
• 25:22
  happening a lot, especially with measles and polio.
• 25:25
  Yeah, smallpox vaccination was already highlighted as being an
• 25:30
  issue with this, how the statistics were held, the fact
• 25:34
  that if they knew someone, because it was smallpox, you
• 25:36
  could tell if someone had ever received a vaccine because they
• 25:37
  usually had a scar. So they would be more inclined
• 25:41
  to diagnose something that looked like smallpox.
• 25:44
  But because the person had a scar to prove that they had
• 25:46
  received inoculation against smallpox, they'd call it
• 25:48
  something else. So there was a lot of that.
• 25:51
  And in the book that I have put in about 50 years worth of
• 25:54
  eminent scientists and doctors who who highlight these issues
• 25:57
  with this, the way statistics were held, Alfred Wallace is one
• 26:01
  of the main ones who spoke out publicly and then who was
• 26:04
  ridiculed. That's the same playbook as well
• 26:06
  that we see today. Anybody who does speak out
• 26:08
  against the orthodoxy is ridiculed.
• 26:10
  They discredit it and basically try to ignore all their previous
• 26:14
  accomplishments scientifically. There were many, many.
• 26:18
  I mean, Charles Creighton is another example, who was asked
• 26:20
  to write the entry of the British Encyclopedia at the end
• 26:24
  of the 19th century. And when he investigated and did
• 26:27
  a deep dive, he was again shocked to discover there was a
• 26:30
  lot of manipulation, a lot of also financial interest because
• 26:34
  vaccinators were making money for every injection that they,
• 26:37
  they gave. And he, he wrote that in that
• 26:39
  the, in the British Encyclopedia.
• 26:41
  I mean, they, they changed that entry a few years later, but and
• 26:45
  he was discredited as well, despite being a very eminent
• 26:47
  epidemiologist. So you see this already like for
• 26:52
  100 years ago. So it's really history repeats
• 26:55
  itself. So until we break the cycle of
• 26:58
  this repeating itself as we're going to continue.
• 27:01
  Because if you think in the 1800s and then scientists
• 27:05
  already weren't being listened to and we're already
• 27:06
  highlighting issues, problems with the smallpox vaccination
• 27:10
  and say it wasn't a smallpox vaccine that reduced smallpox.
• 27:13
  I mean, The Who says it was eradicated in the end of the
• 27:16
  1970s. That would be after like over
• 27:19
  100 years of use. How practical and useful is
• 27:22
  this? Small is this vaccine that takes
• 27:24
  over 100 years of several doses? Because it wasn't just one or
• 27:27
  two doses. It was, I mean, people there had
• 27:29
  received up to 789 doses in a lifetime.
• 27:33
  And every time there was an epidemic, they said that you
• 27:35
  have to get revaccinated. You have to get revaccinated.
• 27:37
  How useful is a vaccine if it takes that long to get rid of
• 27:39
  the disease? And then you're not taking into
• 27:41
  consideration the fact, yeah, we had better sanitation.
• 27:43
  Yeah, we had antibiotics. Yeah, we had better, better
• 27:46
  living conditions and working conditions.
• 27:49
  And there was there was something else with the smallpox
• 27:52
  vaccine was interesting. It's already in the end of the
• 27:54
  19th century, the symptoms of variola.
• 27:57
  There was variola minor and variola major.
• 28:00
  And variola major was the one that had a high mortality rate
• 28:03
  up to 30%. And then variola minor, which is
• 28:06
  the one that was already predominant in the 19th century
• 28:08
  and beginning of the 20th had a lower mortality rate.
• 28:11
  And it was called Alastrum, which I believe was the
• 28:14
  Portuguese named it that. So already that time smallpox
• 28:17
  was way less serious, but it was unfortunately was, it could be
• 28:20
  defigoring. It could for especially a woman,
• 28:22
  you'd leave pox scars. So yeah, and it was
• 28:25
  inconvenient. And yeah, there was always a
• 28:26
  risk for children, but it wasn't the same deadly disease.
• 28:29
  It was, it was like a century before that because of, you
• 28:32
  know, various factors. Also, as I said, working
• 28:35
  conditions were better. Sanitation was getting better.
• 28:38
  So all that had its influence as well.
• 28:40
  And, and often I would say vaccines take credit for, or
• 28:44
  they try to take credit for other changes, notably the
• 28:48
  introduction of antibiotics or the introduction of certain
• 28:50
  sanitary practices. And I remind anybody listening
• 28:53
  here in Switzerland, our public health office was called the
• 28:55
  Office of Public Hygiene up until 1975, and then it changed
• 28:59
  its name to the Office of Public Health.
• 29:01
  And I think that was actually quite telling, that change.
• 29:06
  It's very telling and and this strikes to the heart of I think
• 29:10
  so much of the environment surrounding this nowadays, which
• 29:14
  is that people are by and large utterly unaware of what you're
• 29:19
  describing. That the history, even going
• 29:20
  back a couple of decades, it's people have just been slowly but
• 29:26
  steadily brainwashed by the incredible media campaigns that
• 29:31
  get pumped out surrounding all of these sort of vaccination
• 29:35
  initiatives. And, and in actual fact, you
• 29:37
  know, what I'd just like to go back to is, is the in the UK,
• 29:42
  the Vaccination Act of 1853, which mandated the smallpox
• 29:48
  vaccine on, on all infants. You know, I think that's, there
• 29:51
  are things like that that are completely forgotten.
• 29:53
  And when you talk about breaking the cycle and we see now, of
• 29:57
  course, that with the commercial interests since, say, the
• 30:01
  beginning of the 20th century, which you describe alongside
• 30:06
  that, of course, you know, a responsible government says, oh,
• 30:08
  no, don't worry, it's fine, we'll regulate it.
• 30:11
  And and again, OK, well, how will you do that?
• 30:14
  Well, we'll, we'll set up an agency that's funded by the
• 30:18
  manufacturers of the products and then see what they say.
• 30:22
  So, you know, here in the UK, we have the Medicines and
• 30:25
  healthcare Regulatory agency. I've missed out the medical
• 30:29
  devices, but the MHRA and I mean, but by any description, I
• 30:35
  mean that that is corrupt. I mean the, the, the way in
• 30:37
  which it's done is absolutely corrupt.
• 30:40
  There's no possible way that they can give an objective view
• 30:43
  on it. And with that in mind, and also
• 30:45
  the the process of sort of so-called emergency
• 30:48
  authorizations and whatnot, how do you envisage a way in which
• 30:53
  the cycle can be broken either in so far as mass vaccination
• 30:59
  campaigns are sort of stopped or that people just have a better
• 31:04
  idea of what's going on? I think it's going to be bit of
• 31:07
  both and I think obviously during COVID we saw that because
• 31:10
  as you said in 1853 when they they want to mandate the
• 31:13
  smallpox, they did mandate the smallpox vaccine on on I believe
• 31:16
  it was they had to be in the first year of life vaccinated.
• 31:19
  That's what triggered the anti vaccine movement back in the
• 31:22
  days. That's what tried all these
• 31:24
  these groups, these parents, these scientists who got
• 31:26
  together and said, hey, we're not having that.
• 31:28
  And they managed to, I mean, it took a while, but they didn't
• 31:32
  manage to get it revoked and repealed.
• 31:33
  At least have conscientious objection and force the
• 31:36
  government under the the guise of the royal Commission to do an
• 31:39
  investigation into the injuries following and and deaths
• 31:42
  following the smallpox vaccine. So it, the fact that they pushed
• 31:46
  the public into a, in a, in a, in a, in a between a rock and a
• 31:50
  hard place is what actually encourage people to start
• 31:53
  speaking out and informing other people.
• 31:55
  And the same thing with kind of COVID like I have here in
• 31:58
  Switzerland. I'm, I'm working with a, a group
• 32:01
  of medical professionals who before COVID never questioned
• 32:04
  any vaccines. And because of what they did
• 32:07
  with COVID pushing, we never had mandates here in Switzerland,
• 32:10
  but there was definitely coercion.
• 32:12
  Because of that, they now question the whole schedule and
• 32:15
  they question the safety of all of them because of what the
• 32:18
  government did with COVID. So it really kind of backfired,
• 32:21
  I would say, by them trying to push this vaccine.
• 32:23
  And they did. I mean, they were successful on
• 32:25
  getting on to billions of people.
• 32:28
  They have created. They've eroded trust in public
• 32:32
  institutions in a major way. So that's, that's already, I
• 32:34
  would say something encouraging in the sense that people now are
• 32:37
  asking questions and that's going to maybe hopefully avoid
• 32:40
  the situation ever happening again next time there's a
• 32:43
  pandemic and the health institutions have less trust.
• 32:48
  I mean, it'll be interesting to see what happens in the US with
• 32:51
  Kennedy, what he's trying to do, what the influence on Europe is
• 32:55
  going to, because at the moment it's just Kennedy's a crazy anti
• 32:57
  vaxxer. Anything he does in the US
• 32:59
  doesn't isn't taken seriously. To be quite honest, the
• 33:01
  perception I see here in Switzerland and yeah, people in
• 33:07
  people. I mean, in the UK there are no
• 33:08
  vaccines which are obligatory. And the same in Switzerland.
• 33:11
  In the States, they have a different it is mandated for
• 33:13
  school attendance. But in the UK and in
• 33:15
  Switzerland, consumers also now have a choice.
• 33:17
  It's like if we don't want to take a product, we have a choice
• 33:20
  to say no. And then if enough of us stand
• 33:22
  up, they can't push us because what, are they going to fill up
• 33:24
  their jails with all of us? I mean, they can't do that.
• 33:27
  They can try to fine us, which is what they did, I believe, in
• 33:30
  Austria, but they had to, they had to again, stand down with
• 33:33
  the fines because it didn't, it didn't pass.
• 33:35
  There were way too many people who were revolting against it
• 33:39
  and people who did get fines, which is simply immediately
• 33:41
  contesting them. I mean, we got fines here in
• 33:43
  Switzerland if you're walking around without a mask, but no
• 33:45
  one got fined if you didn't get a vaccine.
• 33:47
  Like I think in Austria was even up to €500.
• 33:50
  So it's ridiculous. But it didn't last long.
• 33:52
  They tried. They really are trying in any
• 33:55
  way possible to coerce people into this.
• 33:58
  But by coercing, they've done more damage because now there's
• 34:01
  way more trust issues within the medical establishment.
• 34:05
  I can tell you there are lots of doctors I know who will not
• 34:08
  touch another vaccine for themselves, for their family, or
• 34:11
  even for their patients. I mean, they have to be very
• 34:13
  careful because here, I guess, like in most places, if, if a
• 34:17
  patient denounces their doctor saying, hey, my doctor suggested
• 34:21
  I shouldn't get the flu vaccine because I, you know, it's not,
• 34:24
  it's not effective, which I mean, I went to Oxford
• 34:27
  University and they said that themselves.
• 34:29
  Then a doctor could potentially get into trouble because he's
• 34:33
  not following the official health recommendations.
• 34:35
  But I think we also need to allow doctors to go through the
• 34:40
  potential repercussions that they might get from the health
• 34:43
  authorities because they realize if they go all the way to the
• 34:45
  end, if they make it and they they stay in their course.
• 34:48
  The government hasn't got much to prove that vaccines really
• 34:51
  are safe and effective and the best way to prevent infection,
• 34:54
  especially not for the flu. I mean, the flu is, I went to
• 34:57
  Oxford University for a vaccinology course back in
• 34:59
  October 2019 and I didn't actually remember and recall,
• 35:03
  but I had Neil Ferguson as one of the teachers.
• 35:06
  So the famous statistician from Imperial College.
• 35:10
  Now pretty much everyone I spoke to admitted the flu vaccine was
• 35:15
  30% effective if you're lucky. And I kind of was standing there
• 35:19
  going, But how are we why are we pushing this on the medical
• 35:22
  professionals? Like here in Switzerland, if you
• 35:23
  don't get a if you don't get a flu vaccine, they make you make
• 35:26
  wear a mask. And then anyone who does have a
• 35:28
  flu vaccine has got their little, you know, their virtue
• 35:31
  signaling badge saying I've got the flu vaccine when in case
• 35:33
  they actually could potentially be transmitting it more easily
• 35:36
  because the vaccine is not effective anyhow, Sorry, but why
• 35:40
  are we giving it to pregnant women?
• 35:42
  And the answer was it's better than nothing.
• 35:45
  And for me, health, I mean, that's just showing that they
• 35:48
  just want to push products on people.
• 35:49
  It's not about health because sometimes doing nothing is
• 35:52
  better than pushing an experimental, not so effective
• 35:56
  product that hasn't actually really been monitored in
• 35:57
  pregnant women over the long term.
• 36:00
  And neither has the pertussis vaccine, which would get to
• 36:02
  pregnant women. And now I've just checked now
• 36:04
  there's a fourth one, Abrevisio, which is being also pushed on
• 36:08
  pregnant women from 28 weeks in the UK and in Switzerland to
• 36:11
  prevent against RSV. Pregnant women are being
• 36:14
  bombarded by that. It makes no sense.
• 36:18
  But again, the, the people's power is what is I think the
• 36:21
  most important. People do not forget you have
• 36:23
  the choice to say yes or no. And if anybody is pushing you
• 36:27
  into the to it like an employer, get him to sign a sheet saying
• 36:31
  that he will take responsibility for any side effects or any
• 36:33
  problems that you have as a as a result, which is what some
• 36:36
  people did during COVID and and their their employers backed
• 36:39
  off. Yeah.
• 36:40
  I mean, you know that that was a dire period for a lot of people
• 36:45
  for all sorts of different reasons, actually, you know,
• 36:47
  even the people that did believe there was a sort of existential
• 36:50
  threat presented by a novel illness or not, whichever way
• 36:54
  you looked at it, the the changes that were made to
• 36:57
  people's lives on mass were almost universally awful.
• 37:01
  And one of the things that's come out of that is, like you
• 37:06
  say, there are a lot of people who are within the medical
• 37:09
  profession who have in effect had their eyes opened, They've
• 37:12
  turned their backs on on this and the other.
• 37:14
  But there are also a lot of people who have in effect
• 37:17
  doubled down and the language that's being used around this
• 37:21
  particular issue and continues to be used by the media.
• 37:24
  You know, if you if you exactly like you say, you've got this
• 37:28
  suggestion that that that a pregnant woman should take
• 37:32
  something because it's better than nothing.
• 37:34
  I mean, pretty much the weakest argument you could possibly make
• 37:37
  when the outcome could be death. But sort of associated with that
• 37:43
  we, we see language like if you don't take a vaccine, it's not
• 37:48
  just that you don't take it, you've refused it or you're
• 37:52
  hesitant about it. Now, that is always run
• 37:57
  alongside the, certainly in the UK, vaccination campaigns that
• 38:02
  make absolutely no allusion to the possibility that any of this
• 38:07
  could be harmful. You know that the current NHS
• 38:09
  campaign for autumn vaccines is called Stay Stronger.
• 38:13
  All the imagery they use on social media features cartoon
• 38:16
  characters. And it's always a, you know,
• 38:17
  it's a parent with a child as though exactly like you say with
• 38:21
  the sort of white bread and sugar thing, as though, yeah,
• 38:23
  well, it's just going to make you healthy, isn't it?
• 38:26
  The because so the what I'm getting to is that the the
• 38:30
  medical profession is part of it.
• 38:31
  But of course, all of this is actually sewn up by media and by
• 38:37
  advertising. Have you seen a change in the
• 38:41
  wind direction as far as media are concerned or or are they
• 38:46
  just too closely in meshed with the pharmaceutical companies?
• 38:51
  I guess it depends what means you're looking at.
• 38:53
  I mean, I look the equivalent of the BBC here in Switzerland,
• 38:56
  which is the RTS, which is also kind of like state controlled
• 38:58
  and paid by the taxpayer. It seems like they're getting
• 39:02
  desperate. So the messaging, like we have
• 39:06
  our association, we usually didn't bother making complaints
• 39:09
  against the press because we noticed that there actually
• 39:10
  wasn't much consequence and it would take like 2 years before
• 39:13
  you would get a decision. And by that time people
• 39:15
  forgotten what you were talking about.
• 39:16
  So that made no point. But we've noticed especially
• 39:18
  during the immunization, the world immunization, which in
• 39:21
  April of this year, there was a lot of disinformation that came
• 39:24
  out of our mainstream media and we actually called him out on
• 39:28
  it. And we're, I mean, it's again a
• 39:30
  slow process, but we're going through the process of calling
• 39:32
  them out because we don't think it's acceptable.
• 39:36
  They weren't transparent about the fact that it was basically
• 39:38
  promotion for The Who during that World Immunization week.
• 39:41
  They were, you know, scaring the population against polio,
• 39:44
  scaring the population against measles, using all these scare
• 39:47
  tactics to try it. And and also saying that
• 39:49
  basically people who, who are hesitant against vaccines are
• 39:52
  responsible for the increase in disease.
• 39:54
  So you're also creating kind of like a, a hate and
• 39:57
  discrimination against a certain group of people.
• 40:00
  So I think they're, they're making mistakes because they're
• 40:04
  going too far and they're being, I think it's for me, it seems
• 40:09
  like. I see it as a positive thing
• 40:12
  because it's, it's desperation and, and going to the point of
• 40:14
  actually being completely dishonest with your public,
• 40:18
  which is also going to further about public health.
• 40:20
  I mean, public confidence is a proof to me that they, they
• 40:23
  don't have much else. They don't really have science
• 40:25
  on their side. They don't really have the
• 40:27
  arguments on the side, hence why they have to use fear.
• 40:31
  I, I, I have to laugh because, sorry, I was looking at my, my
• 40:36
  collection the other day and I actually have a Peppa Pig gets
• 40:39
  vaccinated book. Now, I know this is nothing to
• 40:41
  do with like a high level discussion, but it, for me, it
• 40:45
  showed how they're indoctrinating kids already from
• 40:48
  a young age, like, and, and it said, it just said vaccines keep
• 40:51
  you healthy. And that was it.
• 40:52
  There was no other explanation. And that's, I mean, that's not a
• 40:54
  scientific claim anyone can make because it's never been studied.
• 40:58
  Do vaccines really make us healthier?
• 41:00
  And that's the big question that Kennedy is trying to get to the
• 41:02
  bottom of in the in the US because there's so much chronic
• 41:05
  disease. I mean, even here in
• 41:08
  Switzerland, we have a fantastic healthcare system, but yet we're
• 41:12
  opening hospitals specifically for children who have chronic
• 41:15
  diseases and cancer, autoimmune diseases where behavioral
• 41:19
  issues. So I, I think they're getting
• 41:22
  desperate because I think they're losing people.
• 41:24
  I mean, they still are the majority, like still are the
• 41:27
  majority of people who believe that vaccines are safe and
• 41:29
  effective and we should get all of them and trust our government
• 41:31
  authorities. But there are more and more and
• 41:34
  I would say over 30%, maybe even 40 who are really, really not
• 41:39
  having any of it and especially in France.
• 41:41
  And why is that? Because the government mandated
• 41:44
  11 vaccines after there was a petition from the people who
• 41:47
  were just asking them to take aluminum out of the vaccines.
• 41:50
  Because Sanofi used to do vacc vaccines well before it was
• 41:54
  called Sanofi. It was as to bester, WHO, MELU,
• 41:57
  they used to do vaccines with calcium phosphate as an
• 41:59
  adjuvant, which is still approved as an adjuvant, but
• 42:01
  nobody uses it. And because there was a petition
• 42:05
  to get aluminum out of some of the vaccines, especially like
• 42:08
  DTP, and the response was to make 11 vaccines obligatory and
• 42:13
  obviously leave aluminum in most of them.
• 42:15
  Uh, now France is one of the biggest vaccine hesitant
• 42:19
  countries in Europe. So it, it does backfire when the
• 42:22
  government tries to push on people.
• 42:24
  But I think the media, especially nowadays is kind of
• 42:26
  running out of arguments of just using fear and you're ridicule.
• 42:29
  And that's the only thing that they have as the early arsenal
• 42:32
  because they can't really address the actual scientific
• 42:35
  arguments that people who are questioning vaccines bring up.
• 42:37
  Like typically why don't we use saline placebos?
• 42:40
  Why don't we do long term studies?
• 42:42
  Why don't we do an unvaccinated versus vaccinated study?
• 42:45
  All these questions they don't really want to address, hence
• 42:47
  they use fear. And that's going to, it's going
• 42:49
  to work against them, especially after COVID.
• 42:51
  Yeah, 11 would hope so now in the hope that there will be
• 42:55
  people listening to this who've come into it like you were years
• 42:58
  ago sort of open minded and and hadn't really thought one way or
• 43:01
  the other. Just just quickly on aluminium
• 43:03
  and calcium phosphate, what what, what is, what are the
• 43:06
  issues with those two things? So aluminium is is probably the
• 43:10
  oldest, what is the oldest adjuvant that we've been using
• 43:12
  since the 1920s. It's used in the vaccines to
• 43:15
  basically bolster the immune response because they noticed
• 43:18
  that often when they were trying to inject certain products
• 43:21
  wouldn't actually have any effects.
• 43:22
  So they needed something that they knew was inflammatory,
• 43:24
  which what aluminium is, and they use aluminum phosphate and
• 43:27
  aluminum hydroxide principally in ADTP vaccine, hepatitis B,
• 43:31
  Prevnar. I'm missing lots of vaccines,
• 43:33
  but this is the aluminum salt that they used since the early
• 43:38
  days. Now back in the 50s, I believe,
• 43:40
  fifty 60s in France, they obviously noticed that aluminum
• 43:44
  was creating some problems and they were looking for other
• 43:46
  alternatives, other mineral based adjuvants and they looked
• 43:49
  at calcium phosphate. Calcium phosphate was used in
• 43:52
  France manufactured by a Melu the Astute pastel sorry, and was
• 43:57
  used in their base vaccine. So the DTP polio they they have
• 44:01
  the triple DT polio Coclus, which is pertussis was was later
• 44:06
  combined and it was it was a quite successful adjuvant.
• 44:10
  It was a little bit more expensive than aluminum because
• 44:12
  aluminum is dirt cheap. So when and again, forgive me
• 44:15
  my, my memory is exactly not exactly correct, but I believe
• 44:19
  it was when Astute Pastel bought Melio or the other way round,
• 44:24
  Melio bought Anschu Pasteur. They sold calcium phosphate was
• 44:27
  costing them more and he decided to stop using it.
• 44:30
  So they went back to just using aluminum.
• 44:32
  Aluminum, sorry, because it's cheaper.
• 44:34
  And so that's why calcium, sorry, calcium phosphate was
• 44:38
  phased out of those French produced vaccines.
• 44:40
  As far as I know it wasn't produced in the US or in any
• 44:42
  other countries, but it was just a price issue.
• 44:45
  But today, as I said, still can be used by any manufacturer who
• 44:49
  decides they want to use a safer adjuvant because it's an organic
• 44:53
  adjuvant that had less reactivity than aluminum, which
• 44:55
  we know is highly reactogenic. But they it was a it's a price
• 45:00
  thing. And that's often, unfortunately,
• 45:01
  many of the decisions are made based on prices.
• 45:04
  And for the DTP shot, those who know a little bit about the
• 45:07
  wholesale, a seller discussion that from the 90s, we started
• 45:11
  using the a cellular version because it was less reactogenic
• 45:13
  and we abandoned the wholesale pertussis, which was really
• 45:16
  reactogenic and probably why the DTP was getting so much, so many
• 45:20
  lawsuits for neurological damage.
• 45:22
  They still use the wholesale DTP in Africa, in Asia, in South
• 45:26
  America, UNICEF still orders them and distributes them on a
• 45:30
  massive scale, on a massive scale.
• 45:32
  So why are we using these more reactive vaccines in these
• 45:37
  countries? It's because they're cheaper and
• 45:40
  obviously there's less surveillance in these these
• 45:42
  developing nations or low, low income nations, as they call
• 45:45
  them now, low to middle income nations, but it's they, they
• 45:49
  shouldn't be allowed. I mean, sorry, I, I get really
• 45:53
  upset. I want to think about just the
• 45:54
  finance like it's we're talking about pennies and these, these
• 45:58
  Pharmaceutical industry, obviously we know they make
• 45:59
  billions of dollars. I mean, Pfizer, Sanofi, Merck,
• 46:04
  GSK, they make billions and people who say that vaccines
• 46:08
  don't make billions, I'm sorry, but that's not the case anymore.
• 46:11
  It used to be maybe back in before the 80s, but now they
• 46:13
  make billions. And obviously the COVID vaccine
• 46:17
  has made over $86 billion for Pfizer in in the space of four
• 46:21
  years. Prevnar has made about 50.
• 46:23
  That's probably sorry, made about 80 billion as well.
• 46:26
  Since it's been released in 2000, Gardasil has made over $50
• 46:30
  billion. And these are companies who
• 46:32
  don't have to pay out a penny for injury or damages.
• 46:36
  So it's, you know, and plus the government markets their
• 46:39
  products and the government mandates their products in some
• 46:42
  countries. Yeah, it is deeply shocking, and
• 46:45
  to the outsider it it is apparently so obvious when when
• 46:49
  one's skates it away. It is also something you're
• 46:51
  never going to read in Peppa Pig because the propaganda campaign
• 46:56
  surrounding it is, is so, so well, sort of packaged and
• 47:00
  delivered. But on that, on the finances,
• 47:02
  because let's say, let's just let's just scrape away all the,
• 47:05
  all the sort of apparent health benefits, whatever it is about
• 47:08
  money. I mean, that is obvious to
• 47:10
  anyone who spent more than 5 minutes reading the instructions
• 47:13
  or all the, you know, ingredients of a vaccine or what
• 47:15
  it may do or indeed looking at any evidence of what it could do
• 47:20
  health wise. It is about money.
• 47:22
  Now this is going to be perhaps a difficult question to answer
• 47:25
  because I'm asking you in a general sense.
• 47:27
  But whilst you've got the pharmaceutical com companies run
• 47:30
  by people who are driven by a mania concerning profit above
• 47:37
  all else. And actually when one thinks,
• 47:39
  sorry, just on on the returns one gets.
• 47:41
  I mean, Bill Gates is a very good example of somebody who's
• 47:43
  not shy about saying he's at a 20 fold return on his investment
• 47:47
  in vaccines. You know, he giggles every time
• 47:50
  he says it, which is sort of repellent at the same time as
• 47:55
  being astonishing. But so you've got that, that
• 47:58
  tier of people who are driving the finances of the system and
• 48:02
  indeed greasing the skids where the regulatory agencies and
• 48:06
  bodies are concerned. But to make all of this happen,
• 48:09
  of course, you need people who are at least in some capacity,
• 48:12
  sort of scientists or chemists, biologists.
• 48:15
  And is it, is it at all plausible that none of them has
• 48:21
  any idea what's going on? I mean, you know, we, we cite,
• 48:24
  let's let's consider Andrew Wakefield, for example, who did
• 48:28
  what he did because he, he went to have a look at something that
• 48:31
  he thought nobody else was having a look at.
• 48:33
  How, how are we to regard those people who are, I mean, there
• 48:37
  are many, many, many of them who sort of who make this happen.
• 48:40
  Should it be blindingly obvious to them that this is happening
• 48:44
  Or, or is there some mechanism by which they are completely
• 48:47
  sort of blinded or blindsided? I think there are unfortunately
• 48:52
  a lot of people who completely blinded and blindsided.
• 48:55
  And and it's also it's an ideological construct.
• 48:57
  I mean, when you I mean, I'm not even in the field, but it was
• 49:00
  hard for me to go through the process of realizing, Oh, crap,
• 49:03
  like what we've been told about vaccines, It's not true.
• 49:06
  Or, you know, they've been hiding information.
• 49:08
  Someone who spent their whole career working in vaccinology,
• 49:12
  working on developing vaccines because they really want to help
• 49:15
  people. I mean, there are lots of people
• 49:16
  who work in farmer, who work in relic trade agencies, who even
• 49:19
  work for The Who, who really are good people looking to make a
• 49:21
  difference, a positive difference to help people.
• 49:24
  And it's incredibly, I can imagine so crushing to realize
• 49:30
  that, OK, maybe I was wrong. And there are some brave
• 49:33
  scientists who will, who will, who will leave the field because
• 49:36
  they're just completely disgusted.
• 49:37
  There were others who would just pretend it's not happening
• 49:40
  because they, you know, they have a mortgage to pay, they
• 49:42
  have a kid in college and all the rest of it.
• 49:45
  And there are some who believe what they're saying.
• 49:47
  They, honestly, they think that people who highlight injuries or
• 49:51
  problems after vaccines are crazy and need to be silenced.
• 49:56
  Now, is it because they're being so conditioned and brainwashed?
• 49:59
  Perhaps? I don't know.
• 50:00
  I mean, when I was in Oxford, again, it's interesting because
• 50:03
  I was the only known scientist in the room.
• 50:04
  And I'm, I'm doing a, a course on vaccinology with PhD
• 50:07
  students, with scientists with regulatory agent people.
• 50:11
  And Wakefield came up and actually at a lunch table, I
• 50:16
  said, well, has anybody actually read 1, his original paper and
• 50:20
  2nd the lawsuit against him And nobody had.
• 50:24
  And here I am sitting in a room with scientists and they haven't
• 50:27
  even read the source document. They just, they just based their
• 50:30
  opinion based on the media, based on what Brian Dear said in
• 50:33
  the Sunday Mail or the Times. And nobody has gone to look at
• 50:37
  the actual paper because people are still saying that.
• 50:39
  Oh, he said there was a connection between autism and
• 50:41
  vaccines. He never said that.
• 50:42
  He suggested a possible link that warranted further
• 50:45
  investigation. And that in itself you've not
• 50:47
  allowed to say. I mean, I think the big mistake
• 50:49
  that, well, big mistake that the what what pissed off the
• 50:52
  industry was when he went to the press conference and said you
• 50:55
  should get the individual vaccines and not the MMR because
• 50:58
  we don't have enough safety data.
• 51:00
  I think that was what they didn't like and hence why they
• 51:02
  pulled off the single vaccines off the market six months later.
• 51:05
  That wasn't Wakefield who did it.
• 51:06
  That was the Pharmaceutical industry who took the choice
• 51:08
  away from Barron's. It's shocking to discover a lot
• 51:12
  of scientists don't actually read.
• 51:14
  They don't have time or they don't have the interest or they
• 51:16
  only want to read the abstract. They don't want to read the
• 51:18
  actual, you know, the, the, the whole report.
• 51:23
  And, and yeah, I, I even had at that table when I was again in
• 51:27
  Oxford, APHD student who, ironically, who was working on
• 51:32
  the microbiome, who said I'd rather have autism than measles.
• 51:36
  And my mouth dropped because on top of it, she told me she got
• 51:39
  the measles after she had the vaccine.
• 51:42
  So she'd had measles, she'd had the vaccine, and yet she's still
• 51:44
  standing there saying she'd rather have autism than measles.
• 51:47
  And I mean, she wasn't a parent at that point.
• 51:50
  She was too young. Well, she could have still, but
• 51:53
  there are some ideas in people's head which just don't make any
• 51:57
  sense. And you have to ask, is it just
• 51:59
  because her condition that way? It's because they're they want
• 52:03
  to make sure they stay in their their lane because that's
• 52:05
  science is publish or perish. It's unfortunately become in
• 52:10
  itself also corrupted by money, corrupted by interest.
• 52:13
  You have to stay in in in the lane if you want to get your
• 52:16
  funding, you want to get your grants and you want to be
• 52:18
  acknowledged by your peers. And I used to be really, you
• 52:22
  know, have the imposter syndrome that I don't have a PhD or
• 52:24
  anything. And I'm still talking about a
• 52:25
  subject like this. But I've seen people with two
• 52:27
  PhDs who get absolutely discredited and completely
• 52:32
  demounted, dismounted because they're talking negatively or
• 52:35
  criticizing vaccines. It doesn't matter how much like
• 52:38
  scientific clout you have, you're still going to get bashed
• 52:41
  down by those who are trying to protect the industry.
• 52:45
  There's a lot of money in it. I mean, if you look at the
• 52:47
  amount of vaccine conferences there are in the world and all
• 52:50
  the, I mean, now with the biotech industry, it's gigantic.
• 52:53
  You're probably talking about like millions of people hired
• 52:57
  from the factories to, to the developing scientists to the
• 53:01
  distribution to the marketing companies.
• 53:03
  It's massive. It's absolutely massive.
• 53:07
  And yeah, sorry, I may have lost a little bit the, the, the chest
• 53:12
  of the question, but I think it's an ideological construct
• 53:15
  that has to be a little bit broken with, with honesty and
• 53:18
  with truth. But it's going to be hard for
• 53:20
  some. It, it absolutely is.
• 53:22
  And that's it. You, you articulate that that
• 53:25
  sort of tsunami of pressure coming the other way, I think
• 53:28
  very, very well. And your those anecdotes about
• 53:31
  people just taking it as read that Wakefield did or said or
• 53:35
  wrote whatever without ever checking.
• 53:37
  And indeed, somebody making that remark about measles and autumn,
• 53:41
  absolutely staggering. But they, anecdotal as they are,
• 53:44
  they absolutely encapsulate the, the, the, the situation and what
• 53:48
  you're describing now with the, the sort of, you know, financial
• 53:51
  resources and, and the messaging and everything else.
• 53:53
  What I want to ask you is how the heck did you get your book
• 53:58
  out? Because not only have you
• 54:00
  managed to publish it, but, but prior to that you were asking
• 54:04
  for the release of data and documents and whatnot that was
• 54:08
  in effect, to some degree classified.
• 54:10
  And given the sensitivity and all the stuff we talked about up
• 54:13
  until now, how did you make that happen and, and, and what were
• 54:16
  the challenges? Well, I have to say, people who
• 54:20
  work in libraries are very friendly, very helpful.
• 54:23
  And I, as I said, because a lot of things I was reading in books
• 54:26
  I didn't believe, but I decided to go to the libraries.
• 54:28
  I started obviously in Switzerland because that's where
• 54:30
  I was based. But then I, I, I invested in a
• 54:32
  research trip in the UK and I started with the British Library
• 54:35
  looking for the historical documents and then the National
• 54:38
  Archives to find out what the government had said.
• 54:40
  Now anybody can walk into National Archives in Kew Gardens
• 54:43
  in London and you know, they do a keyword search, you know, the
• 54:46
  Committee of safety on Medicines, 1980.
• 54:50
  I'm really interested to find out what this is going to come
• 54:52
  out with the MMR vaccine. It's precisely when Wakefield
• 54:55
  had that whole episode with social autism scare.
• 54:59
  And then you, you make a request.
• 55:00
  Sometimes the documents are closed and they will, they make
• 55:03
  a consideration if they open them because you've made a
• 55:05
  request even though it's before the 100 year mark.
• 55:07
  I mean, I've seen documents closed for 100 years for for
• 55:11
  privacy reasons, but obviously when they they do make them
• 55:14
  available, sometimes the names are listed.
• 55:16
  So often these people are dead and they're not, you know, alive
• 55:20
  anymore. But anybody can walk into the
• 55:22
  National Archives and do that. I didn't have to do anything
• 55:24
  special. The only pushback was some
• 55:26
  documents I asked for, I didn't get, I didn't get permission.
• 55:29
  Like I didn't get permission from the work compensation
• 55:32
  document because the work compensation scheme had a lot of
• 55:35
  information about vaccine injury within the hospitals.
• 55:37
  And the one, for whatever reason, they didn't give me
• 55:40
  access to that. So, but I can try again later.
• 55:43
  So that information is available.
• 55:45
  And in the US as well, in the UKI have to give you kudos
• 55:48
  because when they say Freedom of Information, it really is free,
• 55:51
  contrary to Switzerland where you have to pay for it and you
• 55:54
  pay sometimes up to 100 francs an hour for whatever you're
• 55:57
  asking for. And how did I get my book
• 55:59
  published? Well, I was very fortunate that
• 56:01
  because I was involved in this organization since 2021, so
• 56:05
  which is called Reinfor Sante. We were basically a coalition of
• 56:09
  doctors and medical professionals and health
• 56:10
  professionals who were thinking that, well, if we get together,
• 56:13
  we'll have a stronger voice together to counter what's going
• 56:15
  on about COVID, these ridiculous policies, you know, preventing
• 56:19
  treatment, et cetera. Didn't quite go that way, but at
• 56:22
  least we found each other. We felt less isolated.
• 56:26
  And in that context, I met up with a few people and I end up
• 56:29
  going to a conference in Stockholm in 2023.
• 56:32
  And during that conference in Stockholm, I was able to sit
• 56:35
  down with Robert Malone and his wife Jill.
• 56:37
  And I actually had a prototype of my manuscript with me.
• 56:40
  He'd obviously just come out with that book Government Lies
• 56:44
  My Government Told me that was printed with Skyhorse.
• 56:47
  Skyhorse was actually probably the the, the publisher.
• 56:49
  I was like hoping I would be able to approach for this book
• 56:54
  because again, it's not a book that exists already.
• 56:56
  It's really a compendium on a chronological basis of
• 56:59
  historical facts on vaccines. It's over 2 thousand 1300 facts
• 57:02
  on vaccines and Robert Malone and his wife were were
• 57:07
  interested in my project and saw how much work I put into it.
• 57:10
  I had two different manuscripts because I had one on vaccine
• 57:12
  safety and then one knows the timeline and he immediately
• 57:16
  acted basically like my agent. He, you know, he contacted Tony
• 57:20
  Lyons from Skyhorse and said, Hey, I've got this, this this
• 57:23
  person here who, who's written this book, you should take a
• 57:25
  look at it. And then I sent the manuscript
• 57:27
  to Tony Lyons, Skyhorse and the rest is history.
• 57:29
  But I mean, obviously it's a, it's a long process getting a
• 57:32
  book published. And I understand why people self
• 57:34
  publish as well, because the, you know, it, it gets out
• 57:37
  quicker. But for me being a a new author
• 57:39
  as well, I mean, I, I've, I've self published a book on the
• 57:41
  virus, which was the first book I wrote because I thought if
• 57:43
  people were less scared of the virus, of viruses, then they'll
• 57:46
  be less inclined to go and get injected with, with whatever
• 57:49
  we're told that we can inject. But it was, it was that it was
• 57:55
  making good connections, meeting the right people at the right
• 57:57
  time, basically that helped me to get this book out.
• 57:59
  And obviously Tony Lyons and then Zoe O'Toole, who's a very
• 58:02
  important editor at Children's Health Defense, looked also at
• 58:05
  the manuscript and because she was also enthusiastic about it
• 58:09
  and said, Hey, this is an addition to information that we
• 58:13
  have on vaccines. It's not just like saying
• 58:14
  something we already know or it's regurgitated.
• 58:17
  And thankfully, with her help, we were able to get the final
• 58:21
  draft and get it to print. Amazing story.
• 58:24
  I mean, I don't know what you'd say this week.
• 58:27
  It strikes me that had you not had those connections you
• 58:31
  describe and you'd gone to a publisher cold did, what do you
• 58:35
  think the outcome would have been?
• 58:37
  I think I would have been. I mean, I did go to do a writing
• 58:39
  course a couple of years before and I was told that if you don't
• 58:42
  have a Doctor Who's writing it with you, forget it.
• 58:45
  We're not interested. So that that would have been a
• 58:47
  serious handicap. Obviously, as I'm not a
• 58:49
  physician or a scientist. If I hadn't had an associate, if
• 58:51
  I hadn't written a book, Co written it with someone who was
• 58:54
  in science, I don't think I would have been able to get any
• 58:56
  interest. I still would have set my
• 58:58
  manuscript off to, to Skyhorse and, and see what my chances
• 59:01
  were. But it's true.
• 59:03
  The other publishers I contacted in the UK when I did my, my
• 59:05
  course with Bloomsbury, I believe it was Bloomsbury.
• 59:09
  Bloomsbury I think it was. Sorry, they, they, they set out
• 59:12
  right and we're not going to look at it unless you have
• 59:14
  you're Co writing with a scientist or a doctor.
• 59:17
  OK. Wow.
• 59:18
  Well, yeah, no surprise there. I suppose I'm just just going
• 59:21
  back to your the book you just showed up.
• 59:24
  It's very easy to make a case for the marketing of vaccines or
• 59:31
  indeed other medical products and indeed the sorts of control
• 59:36
  mechanisms that we saw put in place in 2020 almost all around
• 59:40
  the world as being predicated on the threat presented by
• 59:46
  something that is transmissible. Going back to your original
• 59:49
  position on vaccines that are being open minded, it is the
• 59:55
  very existence or indeed the sort of pathogenicity of what is
• 1:00:00
  described as a virus, something that you've looked at at all
• 1:00:04
  sort of in relation to your vaccination research.
• 1:00:08
  Absolutely. I actually started with this
• 1:00:10
  book on the viruses before I went and did the, the book on
• 1:00:14
  the vaccines because I mean, I, I, I, I never wanted to do such
• 1:00:18
  a, a large, dense book and I wanted to do something that was
• 1:00:21
  more friendly and approachable to, to parents.
• 1:00:24
  And I actually started with a virology course at the
• 1:00:26
  University of Columbia learning about viruses because I, I
• 1:00:31
  again, knew nothing about viruses and was interested about
• 1:00:33
  the whole domain of virology. How do we define a virus?
• 1:00:36
  You know, what are the categorizations?
• 1:00:37
  And again, I found out was like, whoa, it's massive.
• 1:00:39
  Like there are big zillions of viruses we have no idea about.
• 1:00:42
  And we're just focusing on the ones that we think cause disease
• 1:00:44
  and not looking at everything else.
• 1:00:48
  So yes, I, I actually, I would say part of the vaccine research
• 1:00:53
  was looking at viruses because a lot of vaccines are obviously,
• 1:00:56
  as we know, against viral infections.
• 1:00:58
  And I would say the majority of them now are against viral
• 1:01:01
  infections. I mean, Gardasil is HPV is a
• 1:01:04
  virus. COVID obviously is a virus.
• 1:01:06
  The flu is a virus. You've got RSV is a virus.
• 1:01:09
  And I think there are more going to come out and the way they
• 1:01:13
  can. Again, I say they, but I say the
• 1:01:15
  authorities create this fear that no, viral infections are
• 1:01:20
  what make us sick, not looking at any other factors like
• 1:01:23
  environmental factors or what else is going on, you know,
• 1:01:26
  you're immune, depressed or etcetera.
• 1:01:29
  I think it's important that people understand that viruses
• 1:01:32
  are as important as epic as bacteria.
• 1:01:35
  And the imminent scientists, again, it's not me saying this,
• 1:01:38
  but imminent scientists who have dared to say that viruses are
• 1:01:40
  super important to, to the evolution of humanity, to
• 1:01:44
  evolution of life, that there is no life without viruses.
• 1:01:48
  We shouldn't be fearing them. We should understand them
• 1:01:50
  better, Absolutely. But we have like simplified the
• 1:01:54
  concept just so it scares the crap out of people instead of
• 1:01:58
  educating them on what are viruses and the fact there are
• 1:02:01
  so many of them that we only know a small amount.
• 1:02:03
  And how do we check for viruses? Because they're invisible.
• 1:02:06
  Nobody's nobody. Neither you nor me have actually
• 1:02:09
  seen one, and most people have never and never will see one
• 1:02:13
  because it's simply not in the capacity.
• 1:02:16
  And we haven't got access to an electron microscope.
• 1:02:18
  And even if we did, we're not even sure we'd be able to
• 1:02:20
  isolate 1. So there's so much fear and
• 1:02:23
  ignorance around the issue of viruses and that fuels the
• 1:02:26
  vaccine uptake and that fuels the whole debate of, you know,
• 1:02:30
  you have to get a vaccine because this, I mean, we have
• 1:02:32
  now this Frankenstein COVID variant.
• 1:02:34
  I mean, they call it Frankenstein already.
• 1:02:36
  They should tell you something, but they're always going to be
• 1:02:39
  able to come out with new variants because that's the
• 1:02:40
  nature of viruses. They mutate.
• 1:02:42
  There's going to be different strains, but they're able to use
• 1:02:45
  every strain as a, as a fear mongering device to again, try
• 1:02:49
  to get people to to vaccinate. And it's really frustrating
• 1:02:54
  sometimes because people are still so, so, so have so much
• 1:02:59
  confidence in the public health authorities.
• 1:03:00
  And unfortunately, the public health authorities, as we've
• 1:03:02
  mentioned this, not just the regulatory agencies have maybe
• 1:03:04
  got vested interest, but the public health authorities as
• 1:03:07
  well. I've discovered very high up
• 1:03:10
  people in our infectious disease department were being paid by
• 1:03:13
  Merck whilst they were working for the government.
• 1:03:15
  And this is just kind of like, OK, you know, no one, no one is
• 1:03:19
  scandalized by this. No one sees it as a potential
• 1:03:22
  conflict of interest. But when you have got the profit
• 1:03:24
  motive behind potential products that you can sell, when you
• 1:03:28
  scare people that that breaks down the whole real discourse
• 1:03:31
  you're going to have about health.
• 1:03:32
  Because as you in the UK, you didn't see, I mean, here in
• 1:03:35
  system, we didn't see any communication during COVID
• 1:03:37
  about, you know, how to stay healthy, how to how to boost
• 1:03:42
  your immune system, keep your vitamin D levels.
• 1:03:43
  No, they told us vitamin D has there's no significance in
• 1:03:47
  health. I mean stuff which is just
• 1:03:49
  scandalous. So viruses, I think you cannot
• 1:03:53
  look at vaccines without looking at viruses, just as you cannot
• 1:03:56
  look at vaccines without looking at biological weapons because
• 1:03:58
  that's also a huge part of of how vaccines have been developed
• 1:04:02
  is through military dual use research into biological
• 1:04:06
  weapons. So those are those kind of like
• 1:04:09
  go part and parcel when you're doing analysis or an in depth
• 1:04:12
  research into vaccines. But I highly, I mean, I do
• 1:04:15
  highly recommend that people go and understand a bit more about
• 1:04:17
  viruses because they're only going to come out with more of
• 1:04:21
  them and try to use the scare tactic and information is power.
• 1:04:25
  And if you don't get scared anymore, then you're impervious
• 1:04:27
  to to their propaganda, which is again, what it is.
• 1:04:31
  I mean, you're saying stay stronger with like kids
• 1:04:34
  animations. It's it's they're really talking
• 1:04:37
  down to us like we're idiots. And they've been doing that for
• 1:04:40
  a long time with everything to do with vaccines.
• 1:04:42
  Even here in Switzerland, they use like little cartoons to try
• 1:04:45
  to explain things to us because, you know, people are too stupid
• 1:04:47
  to understand it otherwise. But they they don't give correct
• 1:04:50
  information. They don't empower people with
• 1:04:53
  the information about health because ultimately that's the
• 1:04:55
  most important resource we have after our time, if not maybe
• 1:04:58
  more important than our time, because our time is is worthless
• 1:05:01
  if we don't have health to optimize the experience.
• 1:05:05
  Yeah, exactly. No, you make you make very, very
• 1:05:07
  good points on the way in which fear is first of all sort of
• 1:05:11
  constructed or confected and then and then weaponized.
• 1:05:13
  And in fact, I mean, this will be the case everywhere, but it's
• 1:05:16
  so obvious in the UK that the people who fund or produce the
• 1:05:21
  pharmaceutical answer of the same people who are funding
• 1:05:24
  research into what are described as emerging diseases.
• 1:05:27
  I mean, it's, it's just so blindingly obvious.
• 1:05:30
  And again, the, the sort of narrative surrounding the idea
• 1:05:33
  of a virus and what it may be and what it may do has again,
• 1:05:38
  interestingly, created a, a sort of resurgence in the terrain
• 1:05:42
  theory. You know, exactly what you were
• 1:05:44
  talking about the, the environmental considerations.
• 1:05:47
  So it will be very interesting to see where this goes.
• 1:05:49
  Now what that brings me to, and I think we'll have to sort of
• 1:05:51
  conclude on this is, is what would you advise or recommend or
• 1:05:57
  suggest that people can do? Because this is exactly, you
• 1:06:01
  know, going back to the sort of the hairdresser conversation or,
• 1:06:05
  you know, what flu vaccine people do get, rightly so, very,
• 1:06:09
  very emotionally charged and philosophically too about this.
• 1:06:15
  And yet, you know, we spoke about the Victorian period in in
• 1:06:18
  England when there was the National Anti Vaccination
• 1:06:21
  League, but it exists no longer. There are, you know,
• 1:06:24
  organizations that have countering this sort of thing as
• 1:06:27
  part of their remit. Is that to your knowledge, you
• 1:06:32
  know, and organizational organizations that are
• 1:06:35
  specifically sort of single issue on on this kind of thing
• 1:06:38
  or just in general terms, you know, what would you recommend
• 1:06:41
  to people to do to to help push the swing the pendulum the other
• 1:06:44
  way? I imagine there are local
• 1:06:47
  parents groups which are specifically dealing with issues
• 1:06:50
  of vaccination. I mean, I'm looking more at the
• 1:06:52
  general health groups which look at health as a larger, in like a
• 1:06:55
  larger perspective, larger image.
• 1:06:57
  Which obviously the World Council of Health is, is one of
• 1:06:59
  the main ones which is based in the UK, which has done fantastic
• 1:07:01
  work, have fantastic resources on our website.
• 1:07:04
  This is a Children's Health defense, not just about
• 1:07:07
  vaccines, about health in general, but I think the most
• 1:07:10
  important thing for parents, for grandparents, because everyone
• 1:07:14
  is, is touched by the subject vaccines.
• 1:07:16
  Now, even if you're an adult, they're going to push you to get
• 1:07:19
  the flu vaccine or they'll push you to get your update on your
• 1:07:22
  tetanus. I think it's really important
• 1:07:24
  that people read. And if they don't like reading,
• 1:07:27
  then what could watch your documentary or, or I mean,
• 1:07:30
  obviously there's faxed, which is documentary specifically
• 1:07:32
  about the cover up in the CDC about the, the unpleasant
• 1:07:35
  statistics on autism and vaccines.
• 1:07:39
  But there are loads of documentaries out there.
• 1:07:41
  There are great books. I would especially recommend
• 1:07:44
  Dissolving Illusions, as I said, by Suzanne Humphreys and Roman
• 1:07:47
  Bistrionic. I also very highly recommend
• 1:07:50
  this book by Aaron Suri, who is a fantastic attorney in the US
• 1:07:53
  who's worked with ICAN, who has written a fantastic book where
• 1:07:56
  he's got again, he's a legal background.
• 1:07:58
  So he he looks at evidence from a court legal perspective.
• 1:08:03
  And I think that people need to have conversations and not be
• 1:08:05
  afraid to have difficult conversations, but to ask
• 1:08:09
  questions because I've had a lot of people who are, you know,
• 1:08:12
  very strongly opposed to vaccines and they'll get
• 1:08:14
  accusatory. Like all they're doing is
• 1:08:16
  they're doing that la, la, la. I think if you're going to have
• 1:08:18
  a conversation, which is productive, you need to ask
• 1:08:20
  questions. Well, what do you think we
• 1:08:22
  should put in our body? What do you think is, is, you
• 1:08:25
  know, does it make sense to be putting these products in this
• 1:08:28
  and don't you think that we should be testing all these
• 1:08:30
  vaccines on the schedule before we recommend them to babies?
• 1:08:35
  I think that's the way forward is entering into a dialogue with
• 1:08:38
  questioning, with humility, with no accusations, but not being
• 1:08:43
  afraid to have those conversations cause a lot of
• 1:08:45
  people just shut up about those conversations, 'cause I mean,
• 1:08:47
  I've, I've lost friends on this journey.
• 1:08:49
  This is obviously, but that's OK.
• 1:08:53
  You know, life is about change, So, and it's important to have
• 1:08:57
  these conversations. It's important not to censor
• 1:08:59
  yourself. And I've been doing that for
• 1:09:01
  years. Why I would censor myself
• 1:09:02
  because I didn't feel like I should say anything because I'm
• 1:09:04
  not a scientist or anyone. But I think conversations are
• 1:09:09
  important and it's OK to disagree.
• 1:09:12
  We're not all going to agree on the same thing, but I think
• 1:09:14
  we're all, if we can all agree that the health of our children
• 1:09:17
  and of ourselves is our most important resource and we don't
• 1:09:22
  want to threaten that. And, and if we're going to,
• 1:09:25
  we're going to try and do everything we do to preserve it
• 1:09:27
  basically. So, But people have to spend
• 1:09:29
  time reading because no matter how much you listen to someone
• 1:09:32
  just telling you something, if you don't actually go through
• 1:09:34
  the process of understanding and realizing yourself, it's not
• 1:09:37
  going to have the same impact. And often, unfortunately, that
• 1:09:40
  happens through tragedy. So either, you know, a vaccine
• 1:09:42
  injured kid and the parent who suddenly realizes, or in my
• 1:09:45
  case, you know, my dad. So, but yeah, I think it's
• 1:09:49
  important that we have open conversations, even if we know
• 1:09:52
  we're going to disagree, but be humble and to ask questions.
• 1:09:56
  Absolutely. Very, very good advice, which I
• 1:09:59
  think will be passed far and wide.
• 1:10:01
  And you talk about being humble now you have been far too humble
• 1:10:05
  because I noted in your list of resources you didn't talk about
• 1:10:09
  your own book, but you're going to have to do so.
• 1:10:11
  No, no, the ultimate vaccine timeline.
• 1:10:14
  I mean, it's very obvious from the discussion we've had that it
• 1:10:16
  is incredibly thorough, and it sounds like exactly the sort of
• 1:10:20
  thing that anyone who's listened to this interview not only
• 1:10:22
  should read, but should tell others about.
• 1:10:23
  Where can we get your book, Shaz?
• 1:10:25
  So my book is available on Amazon I believe in the UK.
• 1:10:29
  I'm not sure there's other big platforms in the UK.
• 1:10:31
  But I'm also a very ardent supporter of local bookstores.
• 1:10:34
  So if you do have a local bookstore where you want to
• 1:10:36
  support, order in because they can order it from their
• 1:10:39
  distributor. But otherwise Amazon is probably
• 1:10:42
  easier. And yeah, it's the vaccine.
• 1:10:43
  I I also recommend getting little tabs because it is dense
• 1:10:48
  and I think there will be certain parts that you might
• 1:10:51
  want to refer to back. But but yeah, that that's where
• 1:10:54
  you can get it in the UK and I believe in mainland Europe.
• 1:10:58
  Perfect. I'm sorry.
• 1:11:00
  No, that. Well, that's great.
• 1:11:02
  That's really useful. Now what about any other
• 1:11:05
  websites, social media? Is there anywhere else that we
• 1:11:07
  can sort of follow what it is you're continuing to do?
• 1:11:10
  So I have a website that accompanies the book which I'm
• 1:11:12
  updating slowly with with a new material is called the ultimate
• 1:11:16
  vaccinetimeline.com. I also recently started a sub
• 1:11:19
  stack where you can follow me, which is called Indie
• 1:11:21
  researcher, so Indi eresearcher.substack.com.
• 1:11:27
  And then I have a website where I publish information about
• 1:11:30
  health in general, but not vaccines, and that's called
• 1:11:33
  Health Science simplified.com. So yeah, I'm not, I'm, I'm not
• 1:11:38
  very social media active, but those are the places where I
• 1:11:42
  share information, where if you want to reach out to me and
• 1:11:44
  contact me, you can and, and yeah, that's it.
• 1:11:49
  Lovely. OK, And for those of you dashing
• 1:11:51
  for a pad and paper, don't worry about all these will be written
• 1:11:54
  down in the notes that accompany this interview.
• 1:11:56
  And on that note, we we will have to draw to a close.
• 1:11:59
  But it Shaz, it's been a fascinating journey through not
• 1:12:03
  just the research and indeed the results of your book, but but
• 1:12:07
  also the stories that have sort of bookended it and indeed the,
• 1:12:12
  you know, the issues that you continue to to confront and your
• 1:12:15
  message. So thank you so much for joining
• 1:12:18
  me at UK column and I and I really do wish you well with
• 1:12:22
  with everything that you're, you know, doing in life and and in
• 1:12:26
  particular with the book. Thank you so much and thank you
• 1:12:29
  for everything that you've been doing with the UK column.
• 1:12:31
  And also I read your personal story I thought was very
• 1:12:34
  interesting about your your background and why you left the
• 1:12:36
  police force. And I want to thank you for
• 1:12:38
  everything that you're doing. So thank you very much.