Shaun Newman Podcast - Ep. #197 - Professor Steven Pelech

Episode Date: August 30, 2021

Since 1988 Steven has been working at the University of British Columbia we talk vaccine passports, natural immunity, the public's push for mandatory vaccinations & a whole lot more.  Let me know what you think Text me 587-217-8500

This is Glenn Healy. Hi, this is Braden Holby. This is Daryl Sutterin. Hi, this is Brian Burke. This is Jordan Tutu. This is Keith Morrison. This is Kelly Rudy. Hi, this is Scott Hartnell.

Hey, everybody. My name is Steele-Fer. This is Tim McAuliffe of Sportsnet, and you're listening to the Sean Newman podcast. Welcome to the podcast, folks. Happy Monday. Hope everybody had a great weekend. We got up to the lake and got on the boat, did a little bit of surfing and let the kids do a little tubing. for, I think, the daughter is the first time she'd been on the tube.

So pretty cool to see them out on the water, enjoying it, and enjoying, you know, hopefully we've got a few more weekends coming up that are as nice as this one was, but it was a beautiful weekend. So hopefully you got up to something, enjoyed some time with friends and family, or what have you. Now, before we get on to today's episode, let's get to today's episode sponsors, Carly Clause and the team of Windsor Plywood Builders of the podcast Studio Table.

For everything, wood, these are the guys. You know, deck season is slowly wrapping up here. Sad to say that. But if you're looking to upgrade your backyard, I highly suggest stopping into Windsor and seeing some of the products they got there. Just, you know, hop on your Instagram and do a little creeping, creep in,

and see what they got on the goal. They got some cool, cool products in store. And if you hop on, you can see all the different things they're doing. whether we're talking mantles, decks, windows, doors or sheds, Windsor's got you covered, all right? Give them a call, 780, 875, 9663. Agland, harvest season is in full force going hard, and they have a great selection of pre-owned combines with excellent financing,

so stop in a day and see how they can help you. A bit of agland history for you today. They started back in 1957 here in Lloyd as a John Deere equipment dealer with a staff of six. now over 60 years later, 60 plus years later, a lot has changed, including locations in Vermillion and St. Paul. They have a staff of 130, and they sell and service John Deere products as well as service a line of products, including John Deere, of course, Brandt, Brent, Bobcat, Dangelvin, and AA trailers. So here in, they're located Highway 16 and Range Road 14 on the west side of town. Stop in or give them a call today, 780-875-4471.

Jen Gilbert and the team for over 45 years since 1970. The dedicated realtors of Colwell Banker, Cityside Realty, have served limits from the surrounding area. They offer Star Power, providing their clients with seven-day-a-week access just like this. Yahoo. We texted Jen yesterday,

and we're looking at a place this morning. That's what they do, because they know big life decisions are definitely not made during office hours. And once again, Jen's fantastic. If you haven't worked with Jen, I highly recommend it. That's Coldwell Banker, Cityside Realty,

for everything real estate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Give them a call. Give the team a call over there. 780 8753343. Mortgage broker Jill Fisher. Now, obviously your name says at all. She probably serves the areas of like Mr. Bonneville, Cold Lake, and Vermillion, and she's looking forward to working with you for your mortgage needs.

Now, whether you're about to renew your mortgage or you're in the market to buy a house, a mortgage broker is fantastic because they can clear up some things, probably save you a little bit of money as well, just by knowing the ins and outs and what to look for and how to approach things. They just make all the confusion go away, essentially. Give her a call, 780872-2914, or stop in on our website, jfisher.ca.

Clay Smiley and a team over at Prophet River, update on the new building. They are moving into a brand new facility. Concrete is being poured. Interior walls and offices are being framed, and the front showroom is being painted. I drive by it every single day, and I think I'm just going to have to poke my head in there and take a little look. They specialize in importing firearms, of course, from the United States of America,

and they pride themselves in making the process as easy as possible for other customers, because you know, all of us. We don't, I detest paperwork. Well, these guys take care of all of it for you so that they can legally get the firearm across the border and into your hand and make that smooth. Just go to Profitriver.com and check them out today. They are the major retailer of firearms, optics, and accessories. serving all of Canada. SMP billboard across, while down by the airport, that's reading rights work. And I highly suggest if you're looking for any outdoor signage, or maybe you're moving

into a new office and you need some frosted windows, some wall quotes, give them a call, 306, 8255-3-1. That is the team over at Read and Write. They do excellent work. Gartner Management is a Lloydminster-based company specialized in all types of rental properties to help meet your needs, whether we're looking for a small office or a small office or a 6,000 square foot commercial space, give Wade Gartner call at A7808085025. And if you're heading in any of these businesses, make sure you let them know you heard about

them on the podcast, right? Now let's get on to that T-Barr-1 tale of the tape. In 1997, he founded Kinexas Bioinformatics Corporation where he's been the president and chief scientific officer ever since. He joined the University of British Columbia in 1988 as an assistant professor in the Department of Medicine and has been a full tenured professor since 1997. I'm talking about Stephen Pellick. So buckle up. Here we go. This is Dr. Stephen Pellick. Welcome to the Sean Newman podcast. Well, welcome to the Sean Newman podcast. Today I'm joined by Dr. Stephen Pellick. So

I hope I said the last name, right? And I appreciate you hopping on with me. Yeah, no, my pleasure to be here, Sean. I'm happy to answer your questions and hopefully he'll be informative to your audience. Yeah, I'm, I'm certain it will be. And like we were just saying, I got to listen to you for the first time on what's up Canada. And I just found it fascinating. And I thought more people need to be hearing these discussions. This needs to be information that people are digesting. And so hence, the reach out to you. And I do appreciate you hopping on and giving me some of your time. In saying all that, you know, standard protocol at this point in time is, you know, could you give us maybe some of your

credentials, your history, and just give a feel for who you are so the audience can get a feel for you, Steve? Sure. Thank you, Sean. My name is Dr. Stephen Pelick. I'm a professor in the Department of Medicine at the University of British Columbia, where I've been on faculty for about 31 years now. I'm also the founder of two biotechnology companies. The latest one that I'm the president of is Connectus Bioinformatics Corporation in Vancouver. And I may say a little bit about what we're doing there. And in all openness for conflict of interest, I am about 75% owner of that company. So that's something to bear in mind. And also, although I am from the University of British Columbia, What I'm going to say is not necessarily what they endorse, but with the opportunities that I have as a professor, I am able to speak fairly freely about these subjects. And then my background is a PhD in biochemistry, which I actually got from the University of British Columbia, too. And I studied abroad in Scotland and also United States, where I postdoc with a Nobel Prize winner, Dr. Edwin Krebs. And so that's sort of a little bit of my background.

I've published about 260 or so scientific papers and peer review journals over the last 35 years of research that I've been engaged in. So I'm pretty familiar with these subjects. And the reason why I got into the whole COVID-19 scene, obviously with the pandemic affecting everyone, that was something which was of great interest. And my company actually has technology where we can track the presence of specific proteins that are inside cells involving cancer and diabetes and neurological diseases. But that technology could easily be redirected towards understanding the parts of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that people make antibodies against when they're infected with that virus. and of course this is the virus that causes COVID-19. And so this is where I kind of got into this area.

So we've been working in my lab for the last 16 months, developing tests to determine whether or not a person has been infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. And if so, do they have actual immunity? So that's where my research has been going. Now, what have you learned since, like, you know, over the last 16, months since trying to determine that and taking your technology and focusing on that. What are some of the things that, I don't know, stick out to you, that you've learned that you find

surprising or that you're like, wow, this could be really beneficial. Yeah. Well, there's been a number of surprises for sure. First, I was surprised that the Canadian government wasn't very supportive of our company going out and making antibody tests for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We applied to many agencies and we were turned down by all of them. So there was much more interest in doing what we call PCR testing, which is a genetic test that will determine whether or not you've been infected with the virus

at the time that you are infected. The test doesn't work after you've been infected and recovered. But an antibody test will do that. And in fact, one of the surprises that we learned from the, development of our testing is that actually the immune response that people have when they've recovered from the virus can last for certainly in our hands well over 14 months. And if you follow immunology, you would expect it to last actually a lifetime. And I think that's what's going to happen with this virus. So I should explain how the tests kind of works very briefly. Basically

back last January of 2020. The Chinese revealed the sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. And so with the genome sequence, we can predict all the proteins that are encoded by the virus. And the virus actually has 26, sometimes people say 28 proteins, because there's a little overlap, but at least 26 distinct proteins. So with our technology, we're actually able to use

a gene sequence to predict the protein sequences of all of these proteins that are encoded by that genome. So we actually made it using artificial synthesis of short peptides. This is what we call these fragments that are parts of the proteins. So these peptides we can make predicted by the gene sequence. We made 8,000 separate pieces of these SARS-Co-2 virus. And these 8,000. pieces were individually probed with serum from people who have had had the disease. So these people, they recovered. They recovered because they have antibodies that will lock onto the virus and neutralize it. So we want to know what were the pieces that the immune systems of these people was recognizing

that gave them the protection. So from all of that work, we narrowed down to about 110 markers that we were we're the most consistent for giving us a good, strong immune response. And more recently, we've narrowed it down to 40 of those that we tend to use in a test that we're applying currently. Now, what we learned from that is that every person who's had the virus has a completely different antibody response. Although many of these markers that we have are common

to the COVID-19 patients, what we found is that which of the those markers they had very dramatically from person to person. So everybody has a unique antibody response because partly their genetic background, partly the history of what they're being exposed to during their lifetime, other viruses. So the SARS-CoV-2 virus is a coronavirus, and there have been many coronaviruses

that has hit humanity in the past. And there's four common cold coronaviruses that actually is endemic in our environment. So again, one surprise was the response was very different from person to person. So if you get a different response to the virus, you can expect that you will get a different response from person to person to the vaccine as well.

The other thing that I found that was fascinating was that when we have a pattern of antibody reactivities from our test for a particular person, had COVID and we go back a year later and test their serum again, the pattern was actually almost exactly the same. So the antibody response is very consistent and it's maintained from this natural immunity. So those were the two things that were the most surprising to me. I expected to see antibody levels decline over time because the way your immune system works is that you mount an antibody response and there's other immune response.

responses to T cells and the like, they give you a very specific response. And what we're actually seeing is where I expect the levels to drop off after you recover and you don't encounter the virus again, what we're seeing with that maintenance of fairly high levels of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 is that these people who have had been infected probably been re-exposed since then, and it's like little booster shots. going out in the environment and maintaining that antibody level. So it's kind of consistent with the idea that the SARS-CoV-2 has actually been present continually in the environment and people are just continually responding to it.

The other surprising thing is that we applied our test, along with a study that we did with Dr. Pascal LeVois at the BC Women's and Children's Hospital in Vancouver, They actually tested about 276 people that were healthy individuals. And these individuals were tested first with a different test for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies from an American company, mesoscale devices. And with their test, they determined that about 90%, that's 90%, of the people that were tested had antibodies that would recognize the SARS-CoV-2 virus. And when we applied our test, we found that we confirmed the data that they had with their same samples.

And independently, we have been doing a clinical trial of our own. And we've done about 500 people now. And we find that the vast majority, probably at least 80 to 90 percent of them, also have antibodies that recognize the SARS-CoV-2 virus protein. And more recently, we've tested people who've been vaccinated. And we find that the vaccinated people not only have antibodies against the spike protein, which is what the vaccine is supposed to do, but they also have antibodies against the other SARS-CoV-2 proteins as well. It's very rare that we find someone who's been vaccinated that only has antibodies against the spike protein. They usually have antibodies against the rest of

the SARS-Co-2 virus protein. So what that means is either they've been pre-exposed pre-exposed to the virus and already have antibodies before they're vaccinated, or the vaccine probably made it easier for them to get infected. And I know that sounds a little weird, but we call this antibody-enhanced, or antibody-dependent enhancement, ADE. And looking at the data that's been out there,

epidemiology studies for who's been infected and what happens after you've been vaccinated, there is a fair amount of support that would lend one to think that in fact this ADE phenomenon occurs with the SARS-CoB2 virus. And for reasons that I can explain, people who are vaccinated may actually be more likely to spread this virus than a person who's been unvaccinated. I know that sounds completely contrary to the general narrative that we're hearing from health officials. But the data is kind of pointing it in a different direction. And I think I can explain why this phenomenon is probably happening.

But the upshot of it is that there's a huge amount of natural immunity already in our community. And if you're trying to advocate that we should be having passports based on vaccination, the reality is that many of the people that are unvaccinated, especially the ones that have been infected and recovered. And by the way, most people don't know that they've been infected with SARS-CoV-2 already, because in most people, it's asymptomatic. That is, they have no clear symptoms that they were infected. I'm in a good example of that myself. I know I have antibodies against the virus, but I don't recall ever being infected. And so it's well recognized that many people that are unvaccinated may in fact have been infected.

and have made antibodies. So that's one thing. So there's a lot of what I'm, we call native or passive or acquired immunity from being infected with the virus. And then there's a vaccination. And of course, a lot of people have been even double vaccinated now in the country. So together, there's a fair degree of immunity. The problem with the vaccine immunities is they're not lasting at this point. it's pretty clear that there's a number of issues with the vaccination program.

But with respect to the passport idea, a lot of people that are unvaccinated, have immunity, and a lot of people who have been vaccinated, in fact, can still get SARS-CoV-2, and they can still infect other people. So there doesn't seem to be much point in having a vaccine passport. it. Well, you're living in a province where that's getting unrolled very quickly. I mean, obviously, Quebec on the opposite side of the country, rolling that out as well. I say this all the time, you know, and like with the federal election underway and some of the things Justin Trudeau has said, they make me, they make me rather nervous about where we're heading. And I think there's a lot of people

that share that thought. I had this discussion the other day, and I'm glad you brought up natural immunity is one of the things that you you rattle off so much there that I'm going to try and do my best here to probe a couple of questions in there. But so many people like five years ago, I think it was kind of like common knowledge or everybody just kind of agreed that you get the virus, you get over it, you're better for it, right? Like, you know, that's kind of what you, you want your kids to be exposed to things so they can improve their immune system or at least out on the farm. That's kind of what we had. Right. Now, lots of people are saying natural immunity is bullshit that they don't think that it works

at all. And on top of that, I'd heard, you know, like if we were really wanting to get to hurt immunity, right, let's get everybody up. They should have been investing just as much money into what you're talking about. So we could have shown that, listen, like actually, these people, whether they wanted the vaccine or not, have actually had COVID. So that number should be increasing exponentially as we get to see that. Like if we're actually worried about getting to this spot where, listen, we're here, herd immunity carry on with life, let's go. And I don't know, like listening to you, maybe the first question is, is natural immunity better than vaccine?

Is it black and white? It's black and white. And the reasons are this, firstly, do you know that there's people that just a few years ago they tested that had lived during 1918 influenza epidemic? And they looked at their antibody levels in like, no, 90-year-olds. And they found that actually they still had antibodies that recognized the original influenza strain from 1918. So we know absolutely that natural immunity can last a lifetime depending on the virus. In the case of the coronaviruses, a lot of us have these antibodies because we have been infected with these cold coronaviruses. So to put it in perspective, some of these proteins that are in the other cold coronaviruses are almost in the 80% and greater identity with the proteins from SARS-CoV-2. But although I think some of this immunoreactivity

that we've seen in people that could be due to previous infections with coronaviruses, the thing is that I think it's actually been spreading around British Columbia and certainly the rest of Canada for a lot longer than people give credit to. So one of the ideas is that, and it's been proposed really here in BC,

that the virus really started appearing in mid-March here in BC. We know that's absolutely false. And the reason being that because we've tested people who are very sick in December of 2019 and January and February, they clearly had antibodies against this virus. So if there is any place in North America where you would expect a virus that comes from China is going to infect North America, the epicenter would be Vancouver. And the reality is that this virus, virus was spreading around in Vancouver for at least three and a half months before any

restrictions were imposed on the population. And we accepted this as actually a serious health risk. And so during that time, Christmas and Chinese New Year's, this virus would have spread around very, very easily. And so that's why I think there's actually a certain amount of herd immunity in our community already just because by the time we introduced protective measures when we recognize that there was a threat, it was already a bit late. And then in BC, we had the lowest testing rates in the entire country when it came to the PCR test. And then across the country, when we applied the PCR test, we applied what we call cycle numbers, amplification steps, that basically, if you go like 26 cycles,

you're getting, if you take that same material that you can detect the virus, the 26 cycles, and you use it to infect cells in culture, it's clearly infectious. The virus is there. But if you go to higher cycle levels, and in some of the provinces, they're going almost up to 40 cycles,

you're starting to amplify fragments of the virus where it's not effective. You could just be breathing it in from some, somebody else, just the remnants of the virus, and then you would test positive by PCR. So we had very little testing initially. We did better in the second wave and the third wave, the second wave being around last Christmas, and then in Easter with the third wave. And what we're seeing with these is with each wave, the first wave, we don't know anything

about the lethality rates from that because we just didn't test people. If they were sick, we told them to go home. And then only if they were kind of blue in the lips, then they go to the hospital. We didn't advocate any kind of treatments for these people. Now we know of many treatments that in fact look very, very promising. But the idea was that if you're sick, then finally, if it was really bad, you'd go to the hospital.

Then we keep track of how many cases with the PCR test and how many people are hospitalized and how many people are going, ICU, acute care units, intense care units, ICUs, or go on to, you know, how many people died. And the death rate is such that we did not know early on in the epidemic just how deadly this was. And so numbers were being thrown around that this is, as just like influenza from 1918, people were talking about as much as 10% or greater lethality rates, that means that 100 people get infected and 10 of them will die.

And those are very high rates. We now know today with this virus that the rate of death in the entire population is actually less than 0.25% of the population that gets infected will die. However, you have to stratify that based on AIDS. So if you're very elderly, the risks are extremely high. It could be in the order of 10%. But if you look at young people, certainly people under 29 years of age,

the death rate is low. And if you go look at 18-year-olds and under, the death rate is actually 0.003%. So it's extremely low. extremely low. And this is very important because when you calculate, and I'll put that in numbers that make sense to people, what that means is we know from the U.S. Center for Disease Control, CDC, that if you're under 18 and between 12 and 17, and you get infected with the virus, your chances of going to hospital, okay, not death, but hospital, is about two in 100,000 cases, okay, if you're in that age group.

If you get vaccinated, your chances of going to hospital in that age group, the vaccination is actually about 41 out of 100,000. So you are 20 times more likely to be hospitalized in that age group if you're vaccinated than if you're actually infected with the virus. And I know that sounds completely contrary to what the narrative has been, that, oh, we should vaccinate our youth because if they get COVID, the consequences are far greater than if they actually get vaccinated for those few people to get mild carditis and many of the other ailments that's been linked to this. So if you look at the actual death numbers, if you're vaccinated, or if you're, you're in your, you're in your, infected for death, it's actually the same. So there is no clear advantage for anyone under 18, for sure. And of course, many other people that are very close

in age groups as you go on to higher ages, there's actually really no advantage to the vaccines. And the problem is the vaccines have much greater issues as well of concern. We have to talk about safety, but also the efficacy It's very clear that these RNA vaccines, which, so we're talking about the Pfizer vaccine, that just got approved, full approval, and the Moderna vaccine. And then there is the adenovirus vaccines.

These are ones where the adenovirus has had some of this genetic material replaced, so it has the gene for the spike protein of the SARS-CoV virus. So when that infect cells, that gene is used to make the RNA copies, and the RNA copies are then used to make the proteins. So at the end of the day, you result in the same situation with all four approved vaccines in Canada. And what that is is the spike protein is created, and after it's produced, it goes to the surface of the muscle cells, which is where it's supposed to be with the injection into your deltoid muscles. And in order to get an immune response, that is to develop antibodies that are specific

and get a line of T cells that are specific for that virus, those cells, those immune cells that are at the site, and these are we call the monocytes, they include neutrophils and others, they have to actually eat and destroy the muscle cell, and then digest the parts, present those parts when those immune cells travel to the lymph nodes, and that's where in the lymph nodes, they meet the T cells and the B cells,

that if they happen to recognize that sequence, then they're expanded. So the bottom line is you have to kill your own cells in order to get an immune response. And during that collateral damage that occurs with the, inflammatory reaction, you also have the possibility of making antibodies against your own proteins. And normally this would not be a problem because what happens is you develop what we call tolerance so that you don't make antibodies against yourself. However, you can break tolerance and the way to break tolerance is to have inflammatory reactions that attack your own tissues.

So this is the problem with these types of vaccines, is that they induce, reduce inflammatory reactions. Most people, it'll be fairly mild. And most people are going to be vaccinated. I don't want to get two people overly scared here. Most people are vaccinated will be just fine. And there will be no long-term consequences. However, there will be a portion of the people who are vaccinated

who will develop autoimmune diseases. The more that they're vaccinated with the same technology, the more likely they will actually develop autoimmune disease. And that's a great concern, especially when you're vaccinating very young people who have a lifetime in front of them. And it's also a concern to people who already have autoimmune diseases that this might exacerbate some of those autoimmune diseases. Because this virus can spread everywhere. Well, just to hop in here for a second. Because I'm, you know, as you talk, I'm a very fascinated. Just in, you keep mentioning that this may come as surprising. I'm sure to a lot of the

listeners, it does. It's one of the reasons I wanted to have you on is because it goes against what's being said to every parent right now. You know, like I just got to look, you know, look at the wall. I love hockey. W.HL, you got to have a vaccine to play. You want to play, like I just talked to one of my friends, and he's got two kids playing university hockey canada. you got to have the vaccine to play right and and and they're the greatest risk actually and the reason is greatest risk for what sorry for vaccine injury and the reason is that when you are an athlete you're pushing your body all the time and for that with these vaccines we know that we get thrombosis. We know, for example, Dr. Charles, Charles Hoff in BC has done studies now with

checking people who have been vaccinated, and he finds using what's called the D-Dimer test, 62 of his patients that have been vaccinated have microclots. These microclots are the sort of things that are clotting that occurs in the capillaries. See, the spike protein induces actually clotting. This is why many of the unusual symptoms that people have of bleeding occurs or thrombosis. The bleeding occurs because you deplete your platelets because of the clotting. And then what happens is you don't have enough of the platelets. So when you do bleed, you bleed more profusely. But prior to that, you actually develop clots. And in the case of these clots, like if you have deep vein thrombosis, like for example, let's say,

you go up in an airplane. In fact, it's kind of interesting. The pilots are probably the most concerned about this because they're flying all the time. They're sitting still. And when you go to higher altitudes, you have a greater chance of actually having these blood clots form that can, in fact, be lethal.

So an athlete is pushing their bodies. And so when they have these microclots, there's a greater chance that the clotting occurs when you're really pumping your body blood through your system and you're getting some of the breakages that can occur, you're actually a much greater risk if you're an athlete. Can you thrombosis? Can you explain that to the listener?

Because I think everyone who listens, here's blood clot and they go, oh, yeah, okay, I get what that is. But when you reference, and I'm starting to really understand as I do more of these, why so many of the general population just goes, ah, just tell me if it's dangerous. Give me the jab and let's go back to normal. And it's just trying to understand everything because there's so much information and you wish it would go slowly. Nothing would change for a year.

But things are changing so rapidly on us. When you mention thrombosis, can you explain, you know, dumb it down to this guy right here on exactly what you mean? What is thrombosis? Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Well, thrombosis is basically the formation of blood clots. Thrombin is a protein that actually can stimulate platelets to become activated.

When they become activated, platelets, they release factors, and they actually bind to each other and to the cells around them to form a clot. And this is important that in the case that you get a cut or some sort of injury where there's bleeding, you want to to control that bleeding as quickly as possible. So this is what your platelets are for. They're protecting you from bleeding out. And so they're in small numbers. They're actually the tiniest of the blood cells. They're actually derived from a blood cell that they don't actually

have any DNA themselves. They can't reproduce. They're just almost like shed from these precursor blood cells. So they're good. and they protect you, but if you have two high levels of platelets, then you have increased risks of these clots to form. And if you have agents that are in your system, and we control platelet clotting sometimes with drugs,

but if you have agents like the spike protein of the virus, so the virus can cause clotting too, but it's because how it does this is through the spike protein. So when you use a vaccine and you inject people, and they're making that protein, that spike protein on the surface of their cells, and if these cells are lining the inside of your blood vessels, these are endothelial cells. And I have to explain that when you inject the vaccine, after a day or two, 75% of the vaccine is no longer at the site of injury. I'm glad you bring this up because I've had this discussion. as well, right? This is Byron Bridal's what he brought up.

So I've had the discussion and I don't know the answer. So I really love an answer to this, I guess. Is a regular vaccine stays in the arm muscle? It doesn't go everywhere? It depends on what it is that you have with it. Sometimes we have adjuvants that help try to keep it localized. To my knowledge, that's not the case with. this fire, with these vaccines.

And I should clarify for the listener, if they haven't heard this before, Byron Bridal, a doctor in Canada here out in Ontario, found, thank you, found that. And also a vaccine, too. A very smart man. And actually, when I played the clip, the news clip that he got infamous for, famous for, or whatever I want to call it, to my wife, because everybody lamped. him like he's just nut and whatever else and it's like and all he's saying is that uh he's finding it in different parts of the body that the virus is not staying or the vaccine sorry the virus

the vaccine is not staying in the arm muscle the injection point that it is um essentially uh going to a lot of different places which is concerning the thing that i got in the conversation of why is that concerning when you get injected with the flu vaccine And for instance, does it just stay in your arm muscle? Is that all it does? Or does it migrate? No, it circulates. It circulates.

And that's not a bad thing. But there's a whole difference in how these vaccines work. These are still experimental vaccines. They won't be completed their clinical trials. Even though there's been approval of the vaccine, the actual safety trials will continue into 2023. This is a distinction. I think your audience needs to understand why these are.

so different. All the other vaccines that you've taken, they usually are some sort of strain of the virus that's weakened, maybe even killed by heat treatment, could be some of the proteins from the virus is possible. In my company, we've made 1,600 antibodies against target proteins of interest in rabbits. We do it all the time. We do it for the last 20 years. In fact, I've been doing this for about 30 years with my previous company. So there's nothing special about that technology. And it's actually quite safe to the animals and people because, and just like the virus itself, the immune system is encountering the virus either in your airway spaces or in your blood system.

And it's eating the virus or the vaccine. it is not attacking your own cells in order to mount immune response. So that's quite different. When you have these vaccines, the immune system can't really recognize them. If they were to make antibodies, it wouldn't be against the virus itself. It wouldn't be able to recognize it because the gene, the RNA, is inside the liposome. So it's actually camouflored over it. The immune system can't see it. is only when you make the protein. So this is very, very different from how these vaccines work compared to the normal. Now, Novavex vaccine, which is a Canadian vaccine in late stage phase three trials, is quite different.

It actually has the spike protein made on the lipid particle. And so when your immune system sees that, it eats that particle, presents the digested particle, presents the digested spike protein to the immune system, and you get a normal type of immune response, very different from these RNA and identipiruses. So most of the vaccines that people have taken prior to this were completely different from these vaccines that were using and approved currently for COVID-19.

So to get a sense of vaccine injury, there is a large-scale study done tracking in in Europe. And you can calculate from that that about one in a thousand people that are vaccinated will have a serious adverse reaction that requires some sort of hospitalization. The various system in the United States is one where people can report their injuries. And in that system, what you can see is if you take all the various reports for all the vaccines, it goes back over 30 years, more than a third of all the total cases of vaccine injury

has been with these COVID-19 vaccines, right? 30 years and, you know, a third of all that to date is actually happened in the last year from the vaccine that we currently have. So there's been 11,000 plus deaths reported from the vaccine in the varis system in the U.S. Some people argue that number is a dramatic underestimate because what happens is studies have shown that in the varis system only about 2% of cases of adverse injury from vaccines are reported. I think the number is probably at least 10 times higher. I think it's probably likely that probably over 100,000 people in the U.S. have probably died as a consequence where the vaccine exacerbated, usually a pre-existing medical condition,

but it exacerbated to the point where these people probably died. So it's very hard because there's a large number of people are normally dying every day from cancer and diabetes and other diseases. So you're trying to figure out, well, what's your? your added death on top of what your expected death rate is. But nonetheless, there's clear cases of where we can associate death due to the vaccine. My own gut feeling is that probably about 1 in 100 to 1 in 500 people are seriously injured by the vaccines that they're taking right now for COVID-19.

I think that's a very realistic estimate. and is based in part also on actual experience of doctors that I've talked to with their practices, how large the practice is and how many people actually experience an adverse reaction. Well, yeah. Well, you know, Canada, there's an argument that, you know, we've done a great system in Canada in tracking vaccine injury. And I have to say that I'm really shocked by how actually it's been handled because if you have a vaccine injury,

only your doctor can really report it. It takes 20 minutes for them to fill out the forms. They're quite eight pages long. An individual can do this, but without some sort of background, it's very hard for them to fill out these forms and then they don't know where to send it. But your local health authorities

will get those injury reports. They will filter it to decide, well, does this meet the criteria where we think this is related to the vaccine injury? Now, if you're part of a formal clinical trial, any illness that you experience, regardless of where you think is actually linked or not, is tracked. But when it's out there in the general public and you're getting, you know, injected by your pharmacist, there isn't this tracking that's going on. People don't know who to talk to.

So what ends up happening is even the doctors, when they're filing these reports, they're finding that many of them are being rejected at the level of the local administration. Then those reports locally that pass, you know, the filter are sent to the national level, and then it's refiltered again. So now when you take a look at the reports that you can see online from Health Canada, you'll see it's very interesting data. The vaccines really started in mid-December, and of course it ramped up.

We had a supply problem in Canada, so there was a long lag where really it's the elderly that got the vaccines pretty much first because they were at the greatest risk. But what happens is 10% of the population in the country was not really fully vaccinated until sometime in May. So when you look at the, it really ramped up during that period of time. And when you look at the reports of vaccine injury, and there's two types of injury defined. One is mild and the other is severe. So severe vaccine injury is you have to go to hospital or you die. Okay. So early on with the vaccination program, there was a big spike actually early on,

probably because there's many elderly people that were probably killed by the vaccine. but then it just goes baseline so that since probably around March on, the total number of cases doesn't really change. Even though your vaccines have ramped up at the same time, you would expect that as the vaccine's increased number of people get vaccinated, at least there should be a parallel curve in the report. injuries. You don't see that. In fact, what you see, apart from it being fairly flat, is that the ratio of severe cases to mild cases, which initially is about 10%, 15%, now when you look at the last few

months, about 40 to over half of the reports are severe. Now that's just not possible. So that basically tells you that your your surveying system has a heavy bias and a lot of people aren't even just bothering to file those reports. And so we don't really know in Canada how severe the injuries are from the vaccines, unfortunately. Some of the conversations I've got in and just you know around the water cooler, so to speak, is yeah, but, uh, could they treat it? Like the, you know, whatever happens to the vaccine, right? You get abnormal effects. You get these. Yeah, but, you know, they have a list of side effects on it, right? Like, isn't that you know, you walk it in? If you get vaccinated, the statistics are that more than half of

people that are vaccinated, certainly by the second shot have very severe symptoms that that approximate the can the symptoms that you would have if you actually got infected with the virus. Because in both cases, what's happening, whether you're infected with the virus or whether you're vaccinated, is you're trying to mount an immune response. And your elevated temperature, you're coughing,

the achiness, those are all symptoms actually from the immune system, not from the virus. So if you're trying to avoid the discomfort of what would happen if you're infected, for most people, provided doesn't progress, it's actually the same as getting vaccinated. And most people that get infected don't actually realize that they've been infected.

So you actually have a less chances of having these symptoms if you're naturally infected compared to actually if you're vaccinated. Now, the point that you were kind of alluding to earlier, I think, is that, well, if you start to develop these symptoms, isn't there something that we can do? And the reality is there is.

There are a number of different compounds drugs, which seem to have an actual clinical effect. Now, these aren't in large-scale studies. No one wants to fund these studies, it seems, for large-scale. But, and I'm sure Dr. McCulloch talked about this with you earlier, but really good evidence from probably close to 100 studies now with ivermectin, you know, a very safe drug used to kill parasites. I mean, for, what was it, six cents a day, you can have a child in Africa able to drink

the water there and not, not, you know, suffer from getting parasites. Well, that's ivermectin. It's been around for 40 years. And it's one of the over billion people have taken. it. It's a very safe drug. We, we, like I say, we use it for parasites. In Canada, it's not recommended by the, sorry, the Health Canada for use for COVID-19, but they don't recommend against it. They just want to see a more formal clinical trial in Canada. But this, this drug, given early on, prevents going to the next state.

and requiring hospitalization. We may have been able to save about half the lives in Canada. How do we use this drug or some of the other drugs? Hydroxychloroquine still looks very promising. Another one would be the fluvoxamine, where, in fact, a Canadian trial that was just completed indicates that the fluvoxamine actually has a beneficial effect. Doesn't it blow you away?

Vitamin D3. Like none of this is, none of this is, None of this is talked about right now. Listen, like, I'm trying my best to understand what's going on. As I'm trying to bring my audience into the goal. Right. So many people right now are gearing up for another lockdown, for kids' sport to be canceled, for masks to be mandated again.

All this. It's like it's like, it's just boggles me. my absolute mind right now, how we can all be, like, listen, last year it was, we're waiting for a vaccine. When the vaccine comes in, then we're going to be free and clear while we've had our summer, right? And everybody points at the unvaccinated and said, that's the reason why we're having all these things. Well, now there's more and more information coming out from everywhere. even the CBC has it on their their their their newscast now that oh wait the vaccinated are getting infected oh wait the vaccinated can spread it okay so like what is next

and I'm trying really hard here like you know like you can see that kids are healthy and honestly we know from a long time that listen if you're going to get sick you might to get sick and let your body fight it off and natural immunity and if we need some preventative measures, some early treatment, geez, we should be telling the public about that too and making it readily accessible, especially

in Canada for Pete's sake. I mean, that just makes complete sense to me. Instead, Steve, we're going the other way. Actually, if it was accepted that these compounds and these drugs

had efficacy, which believe me, there is 100,000 of people have already had this and, you know, in other countries. Because interesting, the countries where they have parasites is quite commonly used. And so they don't have quite the higher rates of COVID. It's when in those countries, they start to ban the use of Ivermectin for treating COVID. That is spiked. That cases went up. And when you do these clinical trials in those countries, because a lot of those people originally were taking those drugs, and then they're entered into the control group where they've already had been exposed to it.

And then they see how COVID-19 happens. You get all kinds of weird data. And so sometimes it doesn't seem like it's working. But at least three meta-analyses have been done where they've combined the results from, you know, at least more than 30, 40 studies in each meta-analysis. And it's very clear. There's more than a 50% benefit of reduction in hospitalization from ivermectin. So, but if these drugs were approved or recommended, we would not have been able to have used these experimental vaccines.

in the United States, they have the emergency use authorization. Yeah. That would not have been available for allowing these vaccines to be used. So in order to have these vaccines available in Canada and United States and other countries, they have to basically say that there is no other available treatments. And I understand that. You know, I've had the discussion. When I first heard that, I was like, like, wow, that to me is right there.

why they don't talk about anything else but the vaccine. Because as soon as they open up that door, then they have to pull the vaccine from the shelf as like, we can't do this anymore. That's right. Now, I'm just sitting here as a simpleton, I guess, and I go, you know, for all our genius, couldn't we have made an exception for a year?

Like, listen, we're going to have the vaccine. Normally this wouldn't be allowed, but under these dire circumstances, we have this and we have this and we have this, we have a bunch of different options to try and get the population to buy in. And, you know, maybe the elderly, the people over 50, the people over 60, I don't know. Maybe you love the idea. Maybe you've done your research and you don't know.

Just give me the vaccine. That's what I want. Yeah. Like couldn't we have made a stipulation for a year or two while this is, we're in the middle of this to try and get us out of like lockdown after lockdown after the fear mongering after like instead. It's just, I don't know. In Canada, any doctor can prescribe any medication that's already on the market for off-label use. That means any doctor in Canada could, for their own patients, say, I want to prescribe ivermectin for that patient for treating COVID. So why aren't they doing that?

And it strikes me that one of them is that first, a lot of doctors aren't aware of the benefits of ivermectin. They want to be very cautious in terms of treatment of their patients, which is reasonable. But when you've got a patient where you have what, especially if they're elderly, they're at high risk. In fact, it's very interesting where ivermectin was originally discovered, was actually in a nursing home.

And I think it was in Ontario. And what they found was that they had a parasite, I guess, epidemic on one of the floors, and they gave ivermectin to everybody at high dose there and lower doses in the rest of the building. And that floor had almost no cases of COVID, whereas the staff had COVID, but those patients did not. So a doctor can do this, but they're very afraid because they've been instructed by usually their their associations that they if they go against the narrative against vaccination or they're using these drugs they might face actually a reprimand and their their ability to practice can be um can be taken away from them a good example this would be for example of dr charles

hoff and was in lytton yeah who you know sent a letter to bonnie henry concerned that he had no death or sicknesses from COVID-19, but he was getting, you know, IDF at least, and serious sicknesses from the vaccination. And basically his ability to, for his clinic, and they only had two people in his clinic, was open four days a week, and they basically revoked his privileges to see patients in that clinics.

So now this town of about, I think, and over 900 people that was in his practice, they would only be able to go to a clinic two days out of the seven days a week. And then, of course, after that, the Linton got a fire and most of it got burned down. So, you know, it's a serious threat for anybody who practices medicine. If they're going against the mainstream narrative, they could be in serious trouble. that's it's so concerning on like so many different levels like i i i i uh i get it that i'm i'm just speaking of myself right now no medical doctor by any stretch of imagination but at the same

token what's starting to happen in society right now in canadian society we don't have to go i mean you can look across the world is it's just like we're getting to this place and of like, I don't know how we get out of this. And like the next one is this vaccine passport. You know, like I hate saying the sentence over and over again, but it's become such a common terminology in order to participate in society, you're going to need to have a card. And everybody points to a driver's license or drinking and driving or smoking or whatever else.

And I'm like, I don't know if this is exactly that. It's a big difference. And, you know, people have asked me, well, okay, if at the end of the day, what we really want to know is, are people, are they, do they have immunity? Are they not going to be able to pass this virus on to other people? So whether you even vaccinate or not, I think we've established, it doesn't mean that that you can't get it after you've been vaccinated.

So for example, it just came out the other day out of the United Kingdom that they tracked the number of deaths due to COVID-19. and two-thirds of all the deaths now are in people who've been double vaccinated. So that means that they were infected. In fact, in Israel right now, their population is getting the third shot of the Pfizer vaccine. They were vaccinated earlier than we were, and actually more according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Because in the original clinical trials, you get your first shot, and then a month later, you get your booster shot.

And then what they're seeing is people that were vaccinated in January and February, they're the ones that are having now the breakthrough COVID. So about probably 80% now, the cases in Israel that are in hospital are people who actually been double vaccinated. So it's very, very clear that the efficacy of these, certainly the Pfizer vaccine, and I'm sure it's true for the other ones. It's not long lasting, maybe six months. So you have to get another shot.

One of the things that's been kind of advanced is, well, it's because we have the delta strain. And the delta strain is different. And I think your viewers have to understand that when you have a mutation that's creating these various strains, it's less than 0.3% of the structure of the virus that's actually affected. And 99% of the structure is still there.

And you're making antibodies against all the proteins if you're infected. But if you're vaccinated, you're making against at least the spike protein. So most of those antibodies, you'll have hundreds of different antibodies against the different parts for each person. So having one part different that you don't have an antibody

against anymore, you still have 99% of your immune system in town. So there's no reason to suspect that your immunity would be reduced because you're being infected with a different strain. It's slightly different in its structure. Now, the Delta variant is more infectious. The alpha variant was about 50% more infectious than the original Wuhan strain. We call it the L strain. And now the delta strain is 50% more infectious than the alpha strain.

So it is more infectious. This is exactly what we would expect that in order for a virus strain to become the predominant strain, it has to have two properties. One, it has to be more infectious, just like a common cold is highly infectious. And two, it has to be very mild in its symptoms. It should not kill or distress its host. And so what ends up happening is when you have a very mild symptoms, the people who are infected don't realize they're infected. And so they go about their normal daily business and spread the virus, the virus which is more infected and in fact is more mild. So when you look at the data that's come out of other countries like the United Kingdom, for example, that had the Delta strain predominant in their society at least two to three.

months before we did, now 95% of their population, I think by June, was Delta strain. There was no increase in deaths. In fact, at this point, it may well be that there's fewer deaths. The problem is we can't really tell as easily because we have increasing natural immunity and vaccination happening. But in terms of actual deaths, I think what's happened in Israel now where they've got their their incidents of the COVID-19 is actually very similar to what there was in March in that country so they're getting all these cases but they're not getting the the deaths that associated with that even in Canada our second wave had had substantial deaths associated with that but the

third wave in the spring the death rate remained very very low one of the elderly people that were sensitive socombed or they had immunity, either from natural immunity or from the vaccination. So I do expect there to be a large wave in the flu season, as we see every year. This year, the virus that is going around is going to be the delta strain. And I think we'll see quite a large peak. But I do not think we're going to be seeing the death rates that have been associated with that. We're just going to be seeing that more younger people are getting it.

And we can talk about why that might be the case, but it's not the elderly now that are at the high risk. The average age of a person who's had COVID-19 in British Columbia is 85 that's died. The average age of person in British Columbia that dies is 81. So what this virus has been doing is taking people with pre-existing conditions, in rare cases, healthy people,

but usually, really, really, people with pre-existing conditions and exacerbating their condition. And this seems to be true with the virus. And I think it's also to a certain extent with the vaccine. So as you sit here right now, Steve, what is the thing that's concerning you the most as we move, you know, into the fall? All the talk is about Delta, all the talk, you know,

I just, you know, I know, I know everybody wants it to go away. let's just get on with life. Like tons of people. I know there's people that don't want that, but there's so many people that just want to get back to life. They want to, can we stop talking about this? I want to stop.

Or even Poland, where most people are not vaccinated and they seem to be doing much better than we are now. Yeah. Because they've got herd immunity that's been established and they haven't had it with all the baggage of lockdowns and masking. And people do get vaccinated.

there now, but it's really not necessary because most of them have natural immunity anyway. I mean, I'm not arguing that someone who's really elderly that's at high risk shouldn't go and get vaccinated, even with these crappy vaccines that they're giving us now. But for most people that are, you know, not in retirement age, it actually, there's no real advantage to doing this, and there may be disadvantages. And that's my concern. People have this, this, this, But we're in a situation now of mass psychosis. In fact, I think it's out of control. I think that even the health authorities

are happy with what's happening right now. A lot of my colleagues are, you know, I'm in the Department of Medicine. I know I have colleagues. I talk to them all the time. And I try to get their take on what's happening. And some of these are involved in COVID research too. And the concern has always been.

that we don't overwhelm the hospitals. The reality is in some places, the hospitals have been pushed to their brink at the peak of an infection. But in other places, it hasn't happened. I would say in British Columbia, it really didn't happen. Last spring, we emptied 5,000 beds in the province, and we emptied half of them.

And what ended up happening is at the peak, maybe around 200 people got COVID and were hospitalized in the entire province. That was in the spring of last year when they emptied these beds. And the reality is that all these people that would have been in hospital to get surgeries and other conditions, they didn't get treated as quickly. And I'm sure that there was consequences, both in terms of the health and maybe even the lives of people. The hospitals were dead.

that there was a lot of the people didn't know what to do because they didn't have patients. So, you know, you have to have a careful balance about, you know, making sure that your hospitals have the capacity to deal with the sickness that would come from the disease from COVID-19. But I think we overdid it in certainly in BC early on. We will get at the waves, get close to capacity. but I think in some places in Ontario was worse. In BC, like last spring, it was very interesting.

The death rate per capita in Quebec, for example, and hospitalization, was about 15 times higher and even higher than that, depending on when you're sampling the information, than in British Columbia. So, you know, how do you explain why in BC, where the virus should have hit first, that we were having, you know, at least 10 times lower hospitalizations and deaths than in Quebec. So there's a lot of, a lot of unanswered questions about what's going on.

But if we have that, if we can understand what's happening, we can actually adjust our policies in a more appropriate fashion. So, for example, if you have people in nursing homes that are getting these disease, why do you quarantine the nursing home so nobody can go in and out except for the health care workers and the people that are sick there are very vulnerable and you're just allowed you should be taking those people out and putting them into isolation away from the other people that are at risk instead we we basically created almost killing zones for these elderly people by leaving these other people who had and were shedding these viruses. And this virus is primarily acquired in aerosols,

not really so much from touching surfaces. So unless you have really good filtered ventilation systems in these institutions, you're spreading the virus around within those enclosed spaces, especially with a population that can't really even get out and wasn't very mobile. So we've mishandled a lot of what is, going on and you know this thing with the masking um you know maybe people are physical like like their

physical bodies are okay with all this but the psychological damage that's occurred the the outfall from this has been absolutely devastating like for like another example be okay you look at that in British Columbia, we expect 100 people to die every day in BC. This is normal. That's the rate for the last 10 years. Out of that 100 last year, three people roughly would have died from COVID-19. If you look at that same year, we had six people of that 100 died from illicit drug overdose. Now, if you go back to the previous year, 2019, we had about three and a half people die every day of illicit drug overdose. So with the COVID restrictions and the way we've been handling this, we've actually increased anxiety and depression in the population.

And that increase is most, it is strongest, the younger you are, the more likely that you are depressed or anxious. and more in females than males. These are epidemiology studies that have been done here in BC, but it's actually been done across Canada and worldwide. This is consistent. When you are depressed and anxious, your immune system gets depressed too.

It makes it easier for you to get infected. And not just with SARS-CoV-2, but any of the other viruses and bacteria that are out there that are pathogenic. But when you also are depressed and anxious, you're more likely to be taking drugs. So you increase your illicit drug use. And although the drugs may be no more dangerous from 2020,

from compared to 2019, with increased use, you increase the probability of such an event to occur. And so you have a 75% increase associated with COVID-19, largely driven by the restrictions. And now the funny thing is that, that in 2021, where the death rate is actually plummeted ever since Christmas time, it's continually going down with a little blimp maybe in the third wave, the incidence of illicit drug overdose is actually escalated in 2021 compared to 2020.

So now we're definitely killing a lot more people per day in our province by just the restrictive measures that we're doing. And we're not even talking about the psychological damage to children and the general public. So I think what's happened is a lot of the health authorities here in BC, and I think probably across other provinces, they are recognizing that we shouldn't be so worried about the case count of COVID-19, but be more focused on hospitalizations and deaths. But what's happened is because of mainstream media

and a year and a half of this constant bombardment and restrictions, and if you want to see how far it can go, just go down to Australia, how ridiculous they can get where they have barely anybody's died in the entire year from COVID-19. But nonetheless, they have these very draconian measures that they've taken, this could easily happen here. And I think what's happening is the health authorities, they recognize that the vaccination probably doesn't really make much difference.

And they recognize that COVID cases are going to increase that this is an endemic virus, but it's relatively mild in most people now. But what's happened because of mainstream media, and I can give you this example at the University of British Columbia, we plan to have open classes where we were going to have, we encouraged people to get vaccinated officially. We planned for face-to-face classes and to have masking and social distancing all in places. This was going on for months.

And then two weeks before classes are supposed to. to open, we get a mandate. And interestingly, this happens across the entire country in many of the different universities, that they want to have mandatory vaccination for faculty, staff, and students. The university has now actually planned for all of this. That's not what they were going to do.

So something is driven this. And so the health, like Bonnie Henry here in British Columbia, She does not advocate mandatory vaccination of students. In fact, I have to give her kudos that even last year, when many of the other high schools and elementary schools are being closed in other provinces, ours remained open. And we've had studies that show that 100 70 schools

that were analyzed, three quarters that had no cases of COVID. And the other remaining ones, assuming only one or two cases of COVID, very little evidence of transmission between students. If anything, it's the families of those students were where they got their COVID from. Really no evidence of transmission from students to teachers.

And so, you know, we were only shut down for two weeks for that entire school year. So, you know, and that's the data that we got. So she recognizes that and she herself has not mandated to have mandatory, vaccination. But what's happened is because at UBC, the University of British Columbia, the president of the Faculty Association has publicly called out for mandatory vaccination of staff and students and faculty. The president of the student association, the alma mater,

has called out for mandatory vaccination of students and faculty and staff. And the president of the, I guess it's the Federation or Association of University of BC, of BC universities has called for this. So what's happening is we're getting a call from the general public who's not necessarily got any knowledge and scientific background in this, demanding that we have these mandatory vaccinations. The population has been polled and the polling suggests that the vast majority of people, people want mandatory vaccination because they're scared, because the mainstream narrative has just terrorized people that even if you give this, that will not be enough for most people. So what's driving the politicians to make these decisions isn't that it's necessarily

coming from the health of investigators that have these knowledge. It's coming from the general public because they've been so brainwerect. washed by what's going on. We've put so much fear into the environment. If I get this straight, we've put so much fear into the environment that now, instead of

like, we saw it here in Alberta, right? Hinshaw came out and said we're going to reduce all the restrictions on it. It's endemic. We're going to get away from everything. And then like a week later, oh, we're going to push that six weeks and we're thinking whatever. What you're saying is, I think,

is that the entire population, or very big chunk of it, majority of it, is so fearful of this thing now that they're, without any listening to anyone anymore, they're pushing hard for, let's just mandate it everywhere, let's get it so that everybody's safe and that there's nothing going on wrong. Except that the data now shows that that's not exactly correct, except the ball's rolling so fast that you can't even stop it. It's just, it's being pushed by us. That's right. It's the general public. fear that the politicians have picked up on that all of this policy is not being driven by science anymore. It's being driven by sheer fear. And, you know, this election that's coming up,

it's very interesting. I don't think that the Liberal Party realized that so quickly, when we learn that these vaccines are failing and that there's increasing evidence, that these vaccines actually have safety issues and a significant number of Canadians, I don't think they anticipated this. And this is all coming to a head now. And they do know that the general public wants this because if you look at the mainstream narrative,

they don't know otherwise. No, they hear things like, oh, if we look at hospitals, the number of cases in hospitals, only 1%. are vaccinated people and 99% are unvaccinated people, you know, since this program started. Well, you know, step back and think about what that actually is saying. Number one, very few people were vaccinated in the country until, like I say, May, maybe 10% were vaccinated during that period. And those, that's the same period that we had the peak

of the most cases of COVID on hospitalizations, the second peak. And then the third peak occurred in spring. And then after that, then we start getting a significant portion of the population that's getting vaccinated. And it's during a time, and there's been very few cases of COVID-19 in the country for the last few months. So technically, yes, only 1% of the people that have been in hospital were fully vaccinated. And 9% were not. But you can't make that kind of a calculation and give the impression to people that you have a hundred times less chance of being in the hospital if you're vaccinated versus if you're unvaccinated. And the actual data is now showing us in these countries that have a large portion of the population vaccinated,

they account for most of the cases in hospital and most cases in death. Oh, man, this is, this is hurting my brain. I mean, it's good, right? I appreciate all the the candidness, right? Like just being very open about it. It's what's very powerful about podcasting and having long form discussions.

I don't know where we're going. And the fact that you just, you know, walk me through just the UBC, right? Like just how that was going and what the thought process was moving into it is honestly is a bit terrifying. And I don't know as a population, how we reverse course or how we get out of this cycle, so to speak, right?

Of like, I just don't know how we get out of this. You asked me what was my number one concern about all of this. And it's how the censorship that we have our mainstream media, and I can give you a good example of this. First of all, I should say that one of my credentials too is that I'm the chair of the Scientific and Medical Advisory Committee of the Canadian COVID Care Alliance. So this is a group of actually more than 300 members now. Most of us are actually medical doctors and professors and other health practitioners that we meet usually about twice a week, most of us, with daily

exchange of information, the latest scientific papers that are out there and really critically assessing what's there and putting it into context. Because we really want to know what is actually going on, scientifically evidence-based. And then our goal is to put this information out, ideally in a way that the general public can understand. And so we've created a website. It's www.

Canadian COVID-care Alliance, all one long word. Dot org. So we have a lot of materials that are there where you can see the references on this. So what I'm saying is not just coming from me or Dr. Bridal, who's also a member of our organization, but it's the collective intellectual input of a lot of people who have knowledge in these areas that can critically evaluate what's happening. And this is what we come to conclusion as a group about what's going on. And it's reflected in what you can see in that website.

So we as a group have recognized that, you know, we have concerns about the vaccine that are currently being used. We're not anti-vaxxers. We know there's about 200 vaccines that are in development. We think that some of these look really promising, like I mentioned the Novavax earlier. And in fact, some of these people are involved in development of vaccines. So we're not anti-vaxers. We do not think the vaccines are full of graphene and that you're going to be controlled by electromagnetic, We think that's nonsense.

We do recognize that shedding seems to be a phenomenon. We don't understand it. I have no theories of how it's working. We're trying to investigate this. We've been critically evaluating the drugs that are out there that are promising. And so there's a lot of things that are happening

that are very positive that we're going to be able to deal with this virus. And I think what's happening is, in reality, the virus is moving in the direction direction of becoming more infectious but more benign. And that'll give you the best, if you're infected, that'll give you the best immunity. You can get much better than any of the vaccines.

Number two, because a large portion of the population has natural immunity and has been vaccinated, this, the death rates for this is gonna just plummet. It's gone through our society, even in influenza, in 1918, which killed off, Some people think as much as a quarter of the population, it lasted for two years, without vaccines, without special medications. It's the natural course of a deadly virus.

So, you know, it's coming down because of the evolution of the virus and the immunity that we're acquiring in our population. So that threat, to me, is not really a big threat anymore. The big threat that I see is this censorship that occurred, And in fact, here, the Canadian COVID-Care Alliance, we wanted to put out a press release earlier this week. We want the press release, and it'll have like me as the person that's narrating it, but they have to pick somebody.

So I'm the one giving the comments. So in that, we made a nice three-minute video that explains to the lay person, what's the difference between relative vaccine efficacy, an absolute vaccine risk analysis. So everything that we've heard about these vaccines being 95% effective, most people thinking in their head, oh, you have 100 people and maybe five of them

will get the virus, but 95 of them will not get COVID-19. I mean, I think that's the impression that most people would have. I would agree. And that number, that number, That number is called relative risk value. And that's taking two groups of people, a control group and a placebo group. And then from that, you compare how many

at the end of the day get infected. And you might find with typically with the trials we would have today, maybe 16 people would get COVID and 64 people would get, let's say, COVID that's in the placebo group, that we're not vaccinated. Well, the relative efficacy there would be about 75%. But when you have the FDA and you're reporting the efficacy of a drug or a vaccine,

you actually use what's called the absolute efficacy number, because that gives you a better sense of your real protection. So when you calculate this out for the COVID-19 vaccines, Something that is a relative efficacy of 95% has an absolute efficacy of less than 1%. Okay? Less 0.8% for the Pfizer vaccine. This is acknowledged in the Pfizer documentation.

I mean, what was picked up by the media is 95%. Okay, so we did a little video explains this and the importance of informed consent. When most people go out there and they get their vaccinated, They're not told all the possible side effects of the vaccine and what the benefit is going to be. And what's the difference between relative efficacy and absolute efficacy?

So we made a little video for this. So we wanted to announce this video. And at the same time, I had a line in there that the efficacy of these vaccines is waning from based on evidence from Israel and Iceland and the United States. Send it out the Canadian Newswire services, right? Rejected.

Outright, rejected. They would not send this information, this little press release, out to any of the newspapers, radio or TV stations because it was seen as going against the vaccination program in the country. So then what we did was,

well, we went to another newswire service. And that newswire service would not run it either for exactly the same reason. You know, now when you go, let's say you use your browser, I use Safari and there's some websites that I check out on Safari. And I can't get to those websites. If I go to Chrome, I can get those websites. So even the browsers that we're using on our platforms for our computers are filtering it. We certainly know with Facebook and all the social media platforms, they're filtering. what it is that you see.

That if it's against the mainstream narrative, it's automatically viewed as being misinformation. So when you have legitimate information, it's very hard to get it out to the general public. This is where these podcasts are so important. So you can listen to people that have the knowledge of this stuff and talk about it in a credible way because that's what they do. This is their work.

and we can slowly get the general public aware of what's happening. But the problem is mainstream media. I have CBC reporters that have prepared stories that give a balanced view that have interviewed me that have told me how frustrated they are because when they take their stories to their producers, they will not run the stories because it's against the narrative that we've been all fed.

So we have our number one problem is censorship of the scientists that want to basically let people know, and the doctors, let people know what they experience and why they don't agree with some of the policies that are out there right now. And so this suppression is really making it hard for Canadians to make informed decisions about how they should handle their own bodies and that of their loved ones. And this is very, very frightening.

So this censorship and the government taking these actions and making promises, I mean, how long ago was it that we heard lockdown for two weeks and we should be able to get rid of this virus? Here we are, you know, a year and a half into the pandemic, and we're talking about more restrictions, and now mandatory vaccinations, It's very problematic. And these passports, even if we accept the idea that, okay, being vaccinated doesn't mean that you can't get the virus or spread it.

So what we really want to know is do you have immunity? And so we should have immunity passport. But this is just one virus. Do we have to have immunity passports for HIV or for tuberculosis or for hepatitis? Is this the root that we're going down? So personally, I don't support really any kind of a passport that's related to a person's own health and whether or not they've been infected or protected against the latest virus that's out there. Because we've never done that before.

and even though you might have this sense of some sort of false sense of being protected by working in a system like this, that system is actually going to eradicate many of your other rights. Maybe we start saying that if you smoke, maybe you should be paying more. You know, like a society, there's a penalty for that because our system is going to suffer. Like this root of censorship, so you're not. don't have any debate and then imposition so that you're forced to do something because some small number of people decided that this is in your best interest with really no debate, that is extremely dangerous. And that's my number one concern. Not the virus, not the vaccine even.

Well, I appreciate you giving me some time. I'm watching the clock for you and realizing you're closing in on when we said we had to have you out of here. It's been a fascinating discussion. I just have one final quick question for you. The final question brought to you by Crude Master, and that is simply, you know, along this journey of interviewing professors, doctors, lawyers trying to find and get the word out and get some dialogue going on exactly what is going on. Who's one person you think would be good for me to try? track down and sit down and have a discussion with. Oh, I've met so many outstanding people that have had the guts to go against,

you know, a great, great exposure for themselves. I'm able to do this because I'm a tenured professor and I'm close to retirement. And it's just my nature. If I see something that I don't think is right, I'm going to speak about it. And, you know, I've got scars for it. But nonetheless, you know, there's a number of. people, but you've already interviewed some of them. I think Byron Bridle, he's really good. And Peter McCulloch has been really good. There's, there's lawyers, like, I don't know,

Rocco, I think is. Rocky Galardi, yeah, he's, he's been very outspoken. Some people are more radical than others. So I don't know if I can really, recommend anybody directly, but Dr. Charles Hoff, I think, speaks quite well. And there has been, I guess, another person who's experienced this and talked quite a bit about it, I guess, is Francis Christian and Dr. Mark Charlesy. I think he's been very active and has a lot of information in his fingertips. These are Canadians I'm talking about. Yeah, the reason I I ask is, you know, like, it's how I found, you know, it's how I got brought to listening to you is. And I feel like the people just need to hear the different side of this and hear what's going on.

Because that's only, I'm not sure that we can change anything. Maybe we can't. Maybe it's already set. Maybe the wall or the 100 foot waves already coming. But the more people that hear about it and start to realize what is actually going on, I feel like that's empowering and it's easy and they can just flick on the podcast and listen to it and go, oh. And so I appreciate a couple of different names to think of. I certainly know a lot of those names.

Paul Alexander is another one who I think speaks quite well. Okay. And he and you know, I mean, people should not give hope. You know, whatever happens with this election, I kind of wonder whether the conservative government was in power where they would have been. done anything differently. I don't know. I do think it's very important, though, that whoever you decide to elect, especially in your own local writing, it's the character of the individual MP that's running in your writing. And you have to ask them these questions and see where they stand on those issues. And no political party or platform is going to be perfect. There's going to be

things that we like and don't like in each of these parties. I think though you have to figure what's the most important thing to you and I can't think of anything more than, you know, and I'm partly an environmentalist too and those are important to me, but I can't think of anything more important that if we don't have open debate and the decisions are being made more as a collective rather than by a small number of people, I think we're in big trouble on all aspects of the operation of our society. I would agree. Thank you, sir, for giving me some of your time.

Thank you very much, Sean. It's pleasure to be here talking with you. Hey, folks, thanks for joining us today. If you just stumbled on the show, please click subscribe. Then, scroll to the bottom and rate and leave a review. I promise it helps. Remember, every Monday and Wednesday, we will have a new. guests sitting down to share their story. The Sean Newman podcast available for free on Apple,

Spotify, YouTube, and wherever else you get your podcast fix. Until next time.