The David Knight Show - INTERVIEW The Final Pandemic: An Antidote to Medical Tyranny

Episode Date: August 14, 2024

Does what you have been told about viruses and contagion stand up to scientific scrutiny?Science is never settled. In the case of virology, holding it to the standards of science with controlled trials and objective data would have saved us from the "pandemic" — and it is the only thing that will save us from future "pandemics" fueled by fear and traditionTwo physicians from New Zealand, Dr. Mark Bailey & Dr. Samantha Bailey join to explain their book "The Final Pandemic: An Antidote to Medical Tyranny"  and why their paradigm shifted when they applied science to the conventional wisdom behind "pandemics" Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to TrendsJournal.com and enter the code KNIGHTBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

Well, the science is settled. We've heard that so many times, right? That's kind of the refuge of a scoundrel. As I've said so many times, science is never settled. The only way that science advances is if people question some of the long-held assumptions. And so that's what we're going to do today. You know, when somebody tells you something, like a good math teacher, they should show you the work. They should especially show you the data.

If they don't do that, you ought to get ever more skeptical about this. And after four years of this nonsense, the masks and the lockdowns and the six-foot distancing and then the vaccines that weren't tested, if you're not skeptical about this stuff right now, this show is not for you. But I think most of you who watch this show are. And so I wanted to cover the book. We have a couple of doctors from New Zealand. The book is The Final Pandemic, An Antidote to Medical Tyranny. And it really is the antidote to medical tyranny.

We want, however, to make sure that we have answered the questions and the objections, and that's why I wanted to get them on. That's a very thorough book. My guests are Dr. Mark Bailey and Dr. Samantha Bailey. They are married. Both of them are physicians in New Zealand. So thank you for joining us. Thank you.

Thank you. And, of course, let me give the website as well it's dr sam dr sam bailey.com and uh so that's where you can find more information you can find the book everywhere uh but thank you for joining us and it is fascinating i haven't been able to read the entire book uh but i've read a great deal of it You've done another book that was 400 pages long, had 1,400 references. This one's about 180 pages long, and it's got, so I got it wrote down here, 444 references. So you document stuff very well. People can do their own research.

It's a great beginning point for somebody if they want to question the foundation of what has happened to us for the last four years. But let's begin by letting you give us a little bit of your background as physicians. What caused you to question something that most people say is an unquestionable orthodoxy? Well, thank you, David, for that really great introduction to introduce this topic. And as you mentioned, Sam and I were both conventionally trained doctors. I graduated in 1999, one of the last doctors to graduate from the last century, and was in the medical system for two decades. Now, during that time, there were definitely speed bumps for me.

I questioned what we were doing a lot of the time. Many of the things we did with regard to pharmaceuticals, vaccines and surgery were not things that I would do to myself or to my family. So there was always that uneasy relationship. Now despite having an established career in medicine I decided to leave in 2016 I hated the structure of the medical system was having increasing amounts of conflict with other practitioners within the system because of disagreements about what we were doing and decided to completely get out of it now the best thing to come out of my medical career was meeting my wife, Sam, next to me here.

So we met in 2007 when we were both hospital doctors. And we worked in all kinds of specialties, including clinical trials. So we were research physicians supervising first-time human dosing of new pharmaceuticals and spent quite a few years getting to grips with how the biotech industry worked and how the pharmaceutical industry worked and how they funded studies and how they got new products to market. So that was a fascinating insight for both of us. Now in 2016, I was so done with medicine that I said to Sam, I think you've got to get out because I really believe it's going to get worse. And Sam said, yeah, it's pretty bad.

But she had some work that she was enjoying. And I'll hand over to Sam before we get to 2020 and what happened. I'll hand over to Sam. Okay. Yeah. So basically I was still working in clinical trials and I had great patience and I loved the work and I loved I loved the work and I wasn't ready to kind of leave and anyway and then I formed my own business which was like an

online doctor business and this was kind of the first of its kind in New Zealand before all this became normal and by chance I got kind of invited to become a TV presenter on a health show like in a mainstream network in New Zealand. So I did that and I really loved it. And one of my friends suggested that I should start my own YouTube channel. So I did that at the kind of end of 2019 going into 2020. And then this was the real start of my awakening when you actually hit the kind of wall of what you're allowed to do.

And so people were asking about coronavirus and what it meant, and I didn't know. And I'd hunker down with Mark and we'd kind of research and answer a lot of these questions. And we came across this book, Virus Mania, which was a huge shift in everything that I once thought to believe. And it was actually Mark who sat me down because he read the book first. And yeah.

Yeah, it was one of those situations, David, where I'd been out of medicine for four years when this whole COVID thing started and I wanted to stay out. And as Sam says, she started this YouTube channel. And by January 2020 2020 people are saying what's this rumor coming out of wuhan can you talk about it can you talk about these things and i started researching and the first thing i looked at was the world health organization documents and i said to sam there's nothing here these are just so-called expert opinions

they refer to some protocols. They refer to historical events. I can't find the foundational science behind what they're talking about here. Then around February, we start seeing publications claiming that they've found this novel virus and it's causing a new disease. Now, Sam and I as clinicians looked at these papers and said, what new disease? This is pneumonia. This is all of the same things we've seen before there's nothing special about these patients and then people would say well look at the CT scans and we'd say yep those lungs that's generic kind of findings for people with pneumonia this place Wuhan is obviously highly polluted there's

plenty of reasons why people are going to get sick there. And we don't see anything novel going on here. So that led, as Sam says, to the discovery of Virusmania. Sam subsequently became a co-author of that book. But at that time, it was new to us. And we started looking into biology. And we just couldn't believe it because there were two things that were apparent. One was that when we were at medical school and working as doctors, the wool had been pulled over our eyes.

We had not been shown all of the failed experiments that had taken place over a century. And also, we didn't realize that people had been trying to get this information out for years so we had the Perth group in Australia we had doctors different anchor David Crowe other people carry malice who you know had various views but one of them was that there were major problems with aspects of virology so we discovered this and our audience just kept saying, go deeper, go deeper. And so before long in 2020, we found that we were at the tip of the spear with Andy Kaufman and Tom Cowan and Mike Stone, Christine Massey, and all of these other

great individuals that decided in 2020 that they'd dedicate their time to researching these issues. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It is amazing. I came at it from a different angle, which we, you know, my audience is familiar with. It came at it from a dark winter in the germ games and things like that. And, and, you know, when they started doing this and there wasn't really anybody dying

and they declare a pandemic, like, wait a minute, this is not even an epidemic. So it truly has been an amazing thing to see how they were able to pull this off and how long it lasted but i want to get to the root of the cause and and that really is uh the pandemic and when we're talking about a pandemic we're really talking about uh it's not so much even really the existence of a virus or a germ, but it's about being able to prove that this is being transmitted, that you've isolated this, that it's able to transmit it as a contagion, that it can make people sick, that it can replicate, that type of thing. Talk a little bit about what the problems are with that.

Yeah, well, I guess contagion studies itself are one of the best first windows to get into because it opens people's minds because you don't know, well, most people don't know that there have been major studies that have been done in the past exposing the problem with contagion. And the best example I always, because this is what really woke me up, was the rosin experiment that were done in the states where they had a group this is during the spanish flu time so the spanish 1918. yeah the gold standard of all the pandemics that's one that everybody wants to talk about yeah and we've actually made quite a few videos on these

subjects because it's i think it's really important to unravel because there's lots of things going on. But what people understood, so with these Rosanau experiments, was that they had a group of about 50 patients that were prisoners who, on a condition of getting out of prison early, they could partake in the study, which was to be around extremely sick Spanish flu patients. And these are usually young men.

And at the height of their illness, and then they had to basically cough in their faces, take mucus secretions from their nose and eyes and rub it in the prisoners' eyes, these healthy volunteers. They took samples, blood samples. They did everything you can imagine to try and make these prisoners, these healthy prisoners, sick.

And none of them got sick. And they've repeated, these experiments were repeated. And again, they could never transmit the so-called illness and we have to remember here david these were allegedly the most infectious diseases that humanity has ever seen yes and yet when it gets put into the experiments no transmission and then these from there we looked into everything so there are two different things to consider one is the microbes that we can see so bacteria fungal cells etc and the other is these imagined ones which are the viruses and they have

tried transmission studies with all of these things and it is just astounding how the evidence relies on things take Take polio, for instance. That was a case of taking diseased tissue from a dead child and inject, mashing it up, some spinal cord tissue and injecting it into monkeys' brains. And if it killed them or gave them paralysis, they would conclude, well, that's evidence of transmission. Completely nonsensical, no control experiment,

and we all know that injecting foreign material directly into an animal's brain is likely to cause a massive reaction and possible death. Through to things like the measles and chickenpox. Now, we're all told that you're in the same room as someone, you're going to pick it up, or someone's going to pick it up, it can travel through the air, over distance, et cetera. This has never been shown in a scientific study.

Instead, what they refer to, and everyone relies on this, the CDC, Wikipedia, the textbooks, wherever you look, the medical schools, what they rely on are studies like with the measles and chickenpox, they will take fluid from a diseased human so you know they have the skin rash and the fluid build up take some of that fluid, inject it into an animal and then if that animal gets a rash declare that that shows contagion complete nonsense because these are not natural roads

and these are not controlled studies. And also with regard to the germ theory, there's no independent variable. So they haven't shown that they found a germ that by itself could cause all of these problems. And people will be astounded. I mean, this is everything. This is things like gonorrhea, the so-called sexually transmitted infections. We've made

presentations about this sam's done videos about how these things have not been shown to transmit via natural roots in settings that you would see in nature so it really is an incredible state of affairs and the problem is is that everyone comes at you with the anecdotal stories and says well explain this and we've spent a lot of time saying, well, that's not a scientific study. It's an anecdotal story because we go to the scientific studies which show something quite different. Yeah, and the foreword of your book, you talk about four different things. Circular line, well, kind of

explain that, the logical fallacies of this before we talk about some of the anecdotal stuff. Because I do want to come back to the measles thing. That's really the obstacle. Things like that, I guess, are the obstacle that we in the general population have in terms of, you know, leaving this paradigm. But talk first about what you have in the foreword about the four key errors that are there when they're trying to present this as a pandemic. Well, I think, so are you talking about the foreword? The circular logic.

Yeah, the circular logic, the circular logic the you know uh isolating something instead of having an isolate having some kind of a computer uh sequence that they kind of guessed at the pcr test you know things like that yeah and his excellent um forward professor tibnox basically summarizes what us and other researchers have been exposing over many years now and this is the fact that the techniques of virology are not adequate enough to show what they are claiming so what they are claiming is that their the definition of virus for one has changed so many times and they continue to change it. Oh, yeah. They changed it just before the so-called pandemic.

They changed it significantly. They changed the definition of pandemic. Yeah. The definition of virus, the definition of pandemic, the definition of vaccine, they all changed right before. That's nothing suspicious at all, right? No. And the word virus is so ethereal that even the virologists don't seem to know what it means half the time and i suspect if you asked many doctors or scientists what it actually means

they wouldn't know because we actually spent ages researching this stuff and you find documents all over the place which talk about all these different things so but essentially what people imagine is that there is a particle an infectious particle tiny little thing that you can only see within electron microscope and that somehow the virologists have been isolating this and when we say isolating most people will think physically isolating not changing the definition of isolation, and then using these particles to do an experiment, using it as an independent variable. So for instance, we could say, if you suspect that a bacterial cell like E. coli, which is found commonly, causes disease, you isolate E. coli, and they do this all the time,

and then you run your experiments and see, is it pathogenic? Can it cause disease by itself? Can it attack healthy tissue? So that's all fine. The virologists can't do that because they can't find the independent variable. So when they take diseased tissue and extract it directly, they can't identify the viruses in there. It doesn't look any different than tissue that's said not to have viruses in general. So instead they resort to the cell culture technique, which Professor Noakes talks about in his introduction. Now the problem with this technique is that it's indirect.

They didn't identify the virus in the first place. So they start conflating things and instead of finding an independent variable they look at the results of the experiment, which is the breakdown of tissue and their cell culture, and then say well that must have been due to the virus, but this is a complete circular reasoning, logical fallacy. But I've seen the virus. It's a little spiky ball. It's on all the articles. Every time they talk about it, we got a little spiky ball there.

What's that? Sam did a whole video on electron microscopy because that is an issue in itself about the nature of what you can image, whether it represents living tissue. But here's the biggest problem with it. Those images appear after the fact, not before. So those little particles that they're imaging are the result.

So they're the dependent variable in the experiment. They're not an independent variable that was identified at the start. Now, this is not permitted in science. You can't create an independent variable after the fact. You have to start with it because that's the thing you're supposed to manipulate. But because they can't do that with viruses, they get into the circular reasoning, cell breakdown equals virus. You know, virus equals cell breakdown. And we keep pointing out to them, where is the independent variable?

How can we prove that this is what happened? So, yeah, a lot of the introduction is Professor Noakes outlining, summarising what many of us have pointed out over the years, is that these techniques that they are using and that's from everything through to the cell culture through to the genomics and PCR etc are invalid because they don't follow the scientific method they are not controlled experiments and they should never ever have been permitted to go this far because what we're dealing with here is a hypothesis that has been refuted it is not a theory because a theory implies that it has been tested and found to with withstand all attacks

you know all falsification which is simply not the case but there was another aspect a very sorry um i didn't mean to interrupt you go ahead did you want to finish yes certainly let us know if there are other aspects um genomics pcr etc that that you want to discuss because there are just so many areas to this but people need to understand it's all been built up on the foundational forward that a germ theory and contagion was never shown to be valid. And with regard to virology, the single biggest issue has been they never found these particles in nature. They were artifacts from experiments. They were imaginings in people's minds. They were not

solid scientific evidence. Yeah, and I want to talk about those other aspects, but I just wanted to interject here with the first one of these logical fallacies in the foreword that was written, I forgot, Dr. Tim Noakes. But there was an interesting article, and they made parallels between virology and physics. And they said the people who were doing, the physicists will tell you that they don't know,

and they're trying to get, so give them more money, because they've got to do more studying. The virologists will tell you they know everything. Give them more money. And when I look at it, it seems like when you say that they're observing but they can't directly observe that thing they can't observe dark matter they can't observe directly the the virus and they see the after effects of it and then they come up with this hypothesis that

that it existed is that right would you say that's that's correct way of looking at it or am i wrong definitely and i mean i've had people reach out to me who are saying that they realize the problems with virology because it's it parallels exactly their own experience with theoretical physics and the trouble is there's all these other things that make it real for people like you've got pcr tests which make it real for people you know the the lateral flow or rat tests people have one of those and they go oh i'm sick so this makes it real for people, you know, the lateral flow or rat tests. People have one of those and they go, oh, I'm sick, so this makes it real. They see pictures of it, which are just computer drawings of what a virus is supposed to be.

And they think that that makes it real. And this is the problem is that, was it the Perth group once said that they have the virus? Yeah, meaning that once they introduce this word into the public's imagination, it takes a lot to reverse it because everyone has witnessed people getting sick in clusters. They have seen what they believe is chickenpox and influenza, etc., which are all conditions that the body goes through, no doubt.

But the problem is an explanation was given to them and most people have accepted it. And we have to be honest, David, that when we were at medical school and practising physicians, we believed this too. And now we can see that it is so incorrect and that there are other explanations for these things. But that's why one of Sam's ideas was to systematically deal

with every virus that I've ever invented. But we realised that this is a big topic. You know, this would be like going through the Lord of the Rings and writing dossiers for every single character, writing about their background, da-da-da-da. And this is what we have to do. But we've sort of covered the main ones, you know, Epstein-Barr and measles and influenza common colds um obviously covid uh all this kind of

stuff hiv and making videos about every single one to show people that there are other explanations and that the entire foundation and people can find that at dr sam bailey b-A-M-B-A-I-L-E-Y. Yeah, you didn't do the Silmarillion. You just kind of stayed on Sauron. Kind of focus on that. And I think the genius of the PCR test, abused by Fauci from AIDS on, is that it gives us illusion of objective measurement,

which is not there at all the way they magnify this stuff is absolutely absurd but i think that's the real genius as you point out the pictures that they create uh of you know the little spiky ball and and everything and and so you know they create these pictures computer animated pictures they got pcr which is about as connected maybe not even as connected to reality as the computer generates stuff but then talk a little bit about the computer generated genetic sequences that they use because since they can't observe they say they create a genetic sequence and they send that around right you know what we focus a lot on here is the origin and significance of these sequences.

And I wrote a paper, A Farewell to Virology, a couple of years ago. It's about 29,000 words. It carefully lays out the problems of the virological techniques, including a lot of it being dedicated to genomics now and we've shown that take something like these coronaviruses for instance and they say well we've been sequencing these typing them for years we can go back to our databases we can trace their evolution through their so-called phylogenetic trees all this kind of stuff well we don't get distracted with that because you know a lot of people will look get stuck in the weeds and they'll go well look at this sequence and look at that sequence and look how that's mutated sam and i just go all very interesting but show us the source documents

here and what i did in a farewell to biology with alleged coronaviruses was traced back to the original papers where they claimed that they were coming up with the genomes of these entities now I carefully document this this is around 1982 to 1984 those papers are complete pseudoscience there's no controls in them they simply have diseased tissue that they're doing experiments with chick embryos and such tissue. And then they are sequencing the genetic sequences. But at no stage did they find any viruses. They just assumed. They said, oh, we've got tissue breakdown.

We've got these lesions that are forming. We suspect that there's a virus in there. We're going to take sequences. These were mixed tissues, okay, these have got all sorts of things in them with the chick embryos and other fluids etc. And they said well these sequences they don't seem to come from where we expected so we'll call them quote viral sequences and they were deposited into a database. Then other people all around the world started doing sequences and said hey we've found very similar sequences therefore we

have also found the virus and the thing is David you can do this anywhere and this is the whole problem now with what we call metagenomics, which is simply taking environmental samples. So this could be the snot up someone's nose. It could be the sewer. They seem to love taking samples out of the sewer. They do. It could be an orange. Cow's milk.

It could be cow's milk, wherever you want to go, and you look for these genetic sequences. Now, the power of PCR to amplify sequences is incredible. So it can find the tiniest amounts now so there are two issues here one is where did they come from because they never ever showed that there was a virus that contained these sequences and even if they did show such a particle where was the evidence that that is the cause of the problem in the organism because we know and every scientist who's involved in genomics should accept this because it is fact that different sequences can appear when organisms are sick so when you get sick and have a cold or a flu your body your cells

will start expressing different sequences and they will start coming out in your snot and fluids etc it doesn't mean you got attacked from the outside by some microscopic entity it just means that your body is going through a process where it will produce these sequences and again we've been very careful with the stuff we traced back things so for instance the spike protein sequences which cause a lot of excitement in recent years. Well these are nothing new, these are just sequences that were described as far back as the 80s or at least 1990 from our investigations and you find them in tissue breakdown experiments, you find them in mammals and birds, you will find them in humans, etc.

But it doesn't mean that you've found the virus, etc. Because the same techniques have failed over and over again. They can't isolate these particles, they can't use them as an independent variable, etc. But yeah, you'll see, like I've been engaged in debates with genomics experts and stuff, and it's really difficult because I think they honestly believe this stuff, and you can't get them to just go back, back, back to the foundational studies. Where's the virus, we always say, because it's simply not there. Yeah, and when you talk about the spike protein, the spike protein that seems to be generated by the mrna vaccines what do you make

of that uh is you know and the fact that it seems to be replicating uh is that our first virus yeah i mean yeah we there's a whole lot of problems here is um one it's not sure if it does generate once it's been injected because a lot of the experiments are done in vitro in test tubes so when you do that you've got single cells and you can transfect them you can put genetic material in there and get them to start producing proteins so that's technology that's been around for a long time i mean what would we say is that it's an inflammatory type product whatever whatever it does inside the body but i guess for us david we always focus upstream and say you don't ever inject these products because their effects are unpredictable even uh quote regular products that they inject in the childhood schedule. The effects are highly unpredictable,

even though much, much more is known about what they contain. But you'll get anything from no reaction to children that are permanently disabled by the injection. So I think like all things, we don't focus too much on that except to tell people who think that the spike protein is something new and novel etc is that it's not it's simply a class of protein that's been described for many decades now and uh yeah if it does get produced in your body not a good idea but that's we would emphasize that that's the same principle for every single injectable product in this category. There is no possible health benefit to the recipient.

It bypasses the natural route of how we deal with, I guess, foreign material into our bodies. So every time an injection, you're just bypassing so many natural routes. And this is the problem. The biggest problem with vaccines is that if you get loaded with aluminium, we can deal with it if we ingest it because it just passes through our system.

But if it's injected, it doesn't. It's sequestered in the bone and the brain and that's the problem with it. And so an analogy for people is that the reason you can swallow snake venom but you cannot inject it because that can be potentially fatal whereas most people wouldn't notice if they're swallowed a bit wow yeah i didn't know that about snake venom but i'm not going to try i'll take your word for it uh you know just out of curiosity just out of curiosity we i think uh last i saw we were over 90 injections that they put into kids in america i know we've got more than any other country. What's the ballpark figure there in New Zealand for childhood vaccines? Yeah, it's high.

I don't think we're quite as high as America, but the worst part in New Zealand is that we have a very high uptake, percentage-wise, anyway. But it has gone down in saying that people have woken up to so many different vaccines since COVID they've started questioning everything I don't know the I think I mean we're still in the dozens

and dozens here and the one difference is the United States starts right from day dot whereas in New Zealand they tend to wait a few weeks not that either approach is the correct one but I mean as we point out in the final pandemic this is one of the biggest scams in history and if you want to expose it people can simply ask their family doctor well what is in these injections like so my child's coming in you're the expert apparently tell me please what is contained within these injections that we're

putting in um and also you know perhaps asking what is the the history of this disease you're supposedly presenting because i mean it's so apparent that most of these things uh and there are problems with diagnosis of entities called smallpox and measles, and they're all just conditions that the body goes through. But even on their own terms, the work of the team of Dissolving Illusions, the charts that have been produced by Greg Beattie and Jordan Henderson are so damning for the whole vaccine story. Some of these diseases were down in mortality by over 99% before the

introduction of the vaccine. So what a preposterous situation. I think that was a flipping cough, wasn't it? That was down by 99%, I think, in the book here. Yeah, lots of them were. And yeah, we include some charts from um christianic and humphries from dissolving illusions there which is just superb and the crazy thing is um here david is that last century it was so apparent that these so-called infectious diseases had all

but disappeared they were not significant at all and yet here we are in 2024 the narrative is is that they're worse than ever and we're being attacked by even more germs now and you need to have 10 times the number of vaccines that your grandparents have yeah when i was going through and looking at the childhood schedule here in the united states i was surprised first of all to see how many there were and then when i saw the schedule the fact that they're giving the same vaccine over and over and over again i thought that was something that was new with the covet stuff i'd never uh seen that that they're doing something on like a you know quarterly basis or a six-month basis for young kids it's no wonder that we have this epidemic so many epidemics of illness autism and other things like that when they load it up and it's simply for profit now in the united states we've had i think it was children's health defense talked to a physician

a pediatrician who was explaining the economics of it and the fact that the insurance companies would actually require a high up a high uptake percentage from the patients or they would basically uh destroy the practice financially. Now in New Zealand, they have a government is paying you if you're a physician, is that correct? And they're setting all the different policies for how many vaccines, is that correct? Exactly. Well, they have in New Zealand what they call a socialist system where it's capitation.

So the doctors get a three-monthly slab of money if they do what the government says. And one of the requirements is a certain uptake of vaccines. And what's really interesting with it too is that how they classify whether someone's been vaccinated or not. So, for example, with COVID, people keep getting reminders, you know, to say, come in, come in, come in, because it's to do with their funding and the target they're supposed to reach. And so the way to get off that system from the medical practices perspective

is to say we're going to class you as what? What was it? Ineligible. This is why in New Zealand you'll see these ridiculous statistics and they'll say all this area of New Zealand had 98% uptake. It's because many of the people who were not injected said they didn't want it and then they'd put ineligible. No, that's a refusal is how it should have gone down. And I mean this is nothing new. We've exposed

this before with the CDC statistics with things like tetanus. They will say things like you're unvaccinated if you couldn't remember when your last vaccine was done. So this is a long-term trick that's been done. And it's often used to try to make out that vaccines are effective and safe and all this kind of stuff

when the statistics simply do not back that up and the big teller is um and we didn't know this either until we started researching in 2020 just look up randomized control trials involving vaccines and there are virtually none and the ones that they do have are so preposterous like the follow-up is for a week or a month that's it they don't follow them after that or they do crossovers where the people that didn't get it then get it so that you can't see any of the long-term effects that might have happened because otherwise it's unethical and and also there are a couple of randomized control trials that sam and the team mentioned in uh virusmania, where they had worse outcomes for the ones

that were getting very bad in terms of death rates. But of course they don't publish, or they do publish, but then they quickly sweep them under the carpet and pretend that it didn't happen. And you probably may have got to that chapter of the book where we point out what happened when the United States Dr. thomas collected his own statistics on childhood vaccines and he said guys major problem here that all the kids getting vaccines are having far more of these so-called autoimmune disorders and allergies allergies disruptions in their behavior etc and he said i've got this is the

one of the biggest data sets ever being collected uh what was the response in the united states they revoked his medical license and said they would prosecute him so i mean this is the outrageous situation and people have to understand that that if you're going to see a licensed md most of them are restricted by legislation. And by money. Yep. A, they are incentivized, and B, they will be punished severely if they go against the vaccine narrative. Well, and so I really appreciate both of you, you know, putting your career behind you and

in a sense, so that you can tell the truth and follow the science wherever it goes let me uh let's get back to the contagion stuff uh we definitely all agree on on the vaccine thing um i thought it was very interesting when you talked about the uk's um common cold unit uh i'd never heard of that something that they operated for about 50 years 1946 to 1990 so about 45 years 44 years uh tell people about that what they did at their common cold unit well it was a bit of a holiday park really it was a it was a it was a getaway for involving coronavirus apparently yeah it was a the housewives and things that were just a little bit, wanted a bit of a holiday, they could book into the common cold unit where they were discovering lots of different, you know, trying to find out the cause of the common cold. out an excellent book too yeah by the australian author daniel reuters just published recently can you catch a cold because he looks at this stuff in great detail and he looks at 200 plus

transmission studies which really go against this whole contagion model anyway the common cold unit so they were convinced that because common colds you know cause the british population to have so many days off work that wouldn't it be great just to get to the bottom of it and work out what caused them and how to stop them etc and it became apparent you know pretty early on that they were not really getting anywhere with um a trying to work out what exactly caused them, or B, how to prevent them. So instead what they resorted to was discovering, quote, viruses. And this is where everything you've heard about adenoviruses, rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, it all stems,

or a lot of it stems from this common cold unit that was operating just after World War II. And what they were doing was operating just after world war ii and the what they were doing was basically just people would come in with symptoms of a cold and the virologist would take a sample of snot from their nose and he would put it in a vial and he would say i have just isolated a new virus. Actually. And we were looking at it going, how did, well, he said, look, I put it in this file and I put a label on the side and I'm going

to call this one an adenovirus or a coronavirus. And they simply did experiments by adding things like ether, et cetera, and saw if it broke down. And on these sort of indirect measures, they said that they were discovering these contagious entities. But, I mean, it was farcical because for four decades, they basically came up with nothing. Now, keep in mind, they were trying to invent vaccines.

And when they closed the unit down, they basically said look it's it's not possible we've tried it with um these entities and it just um there's just nothing doing basically and it was the same with the pharmaceuticals they came up with no drugs etc so we didn't know about this i mean at medical school they don't teach you these things. And what they show you is the fake highlights reel, which just shows you all these papers purporting to show quote viruses. But when you look at the methodology, all of the problems we've just discussed, no isolation of the physical particle, no independent variable in any of their experiments. And many times they found that people and this is really important would

get the symptoms if they expected to get the symptoms so they were sneezed on by someone and they were told this person has a cold and you may now get the cold and the next day the person would say yes my throat is a bit scratchy or whatever. And then they would say, oh, well, actually, the original person didn't have a cold, so we're not sure what's going on there. Or they would put inert substances like just saline, just salt water, and drop that up someone's nose. And, you know, they did attempt to do some,

well, you can't really call them controls because they still didn't have an independent variable, but they tried to. They would put completely inert substances up people's noses and then say we've just infected you with the virus sure enough within hours the person's coming down with what looks like a cold and then they tell them oh no sorry actually that was just normal saline and then within hours the everything disappears and they go back to normal so amazing the psychological effects and to see but in general these so-called highly contagious entities were not shown to be anything of the sort and most of the time they really struggle to get sick people to make well people unwell and and perhaps too, I think we should point out

some classic examples here of particularly men who have worked in stations around the Arctic Circle in these highly remote areas where they are not in contact with anyone for weeks, months at a time. They also get these cold and flu symptoms. Yeah, well, it's very cold there. That's what you're always saying. It was like the temperature. That, well, it's very cold there.

That's what you're always saying. It was like the temperature. That's why people called it a cold. George Washington goes out riding by himself in the cold, and he gets very sick, and they bring the doctors in, and they basically remove most of his blood and gave him massive amounts of mercury, and he died. That's the kind of, I i said you know when we look at all this stuff it really is talking about the psychosomatic stuff there uh the science in this

is really mostly behavioral science we saw uh throughout all this but we've been told all these years that um you know they can't find a common cold a common cold cure because it keeps mutating and we saw we heard that same stuff throughout all the COVID stuff. We've heard it throughout all the years when they try to sell the flu shot, the same type of thing. And the way that they marketed the COVID pandemic and the way they marketed the vaccine at the beginning was very similar in the United States to the way they always marketed

the annual flu shot, scaring everybody about it and saying, you know, well, we got a massive number of cases here and you're going to have to get this because it's going to minimize how bad this case is going to be for you. Same stuff recycled that they've been doing for years and years. Yeah. And I think another important point to bring up is the psychological priming that goes on with things like movies and press release science. So the public is conditioned to expect this is what's going to happen with a pandemic, and there were so many movies like that that were brought out to kind of, so that when we actually see it,

we're kind of expecting it and go, oh, yes, this is in my memory. There's something there that you know it feels really familiar and so conditioned response to to that yeah and I think to not only within the Hollywood and TV sector if they've been preparing the public particularly since the 1990s that's when a whole lot and we were coming off the back of the you know the fake HIV epidemic. You know, AIDS is something that's a real syndrome, but the cause of it is not what they've been telling people.

And so we had these movies, of course, like Philadelphia, and, you know, they really did scare the public. And then on top of that, we had Outbreak and Contagion and all these other movies, which were massive, massive massive blockbusters and they became almost more popular in 2020 when people started watching them again thinking that that represented some kind of reality and as you say I mean they will just make up a story like it's mutating so that just simply means that you can take some samples and detect some

new genetic sequences and then claim hey presto it's a variant or it's mutated but all of these things come back to these unfalsifiable hypotheses it's not scientific even the whole concept and i know this really pushes people and it's it's taken some unraveling for us as well given our training and immunology etc is that we don't believe in this concept of immunity that they have presented in medical science because it's unfalsifiable they just say to you well why didn't i get it so people will look at the human transmission experiments like the rosemar one sam talked about from spanish flu era and people

will say well obviously they were immune that's why they didn't get it. How can you prove that? So now that's the excuse they're using they're saying well you know we'd say to people why didn't we get this entity called COVID because we didn't do any of the face masks or social distancing we were out and about in the community we didn't take any of the products and the vaccines, and yet we didn't get sick. Well, people say you must be immune. And this is just, how could you possibly, how's that a scientific notion?

You can't falsify it. And we've done deep dives into the antibodies, for instance, which they try and claim indicate immunity, and that simply is inconsistent because they are not specific. They do not relate to some sort of clinical condition necessarily. And, yeah, so there's so much unraveling to do. And certainly for us, there appears to be years of work ahead. But, you know, given, and we point this out in the book,

look what we're up against here. These are billion-dollar industries, you know. These are hundreds of billions of dollars that people are making. And COVID-19 was one of the biggest wealth transfers of all time. It's one of the all-time record holders. The population just got absolutely fleeced. Most people don't understand how it happened or or exactly why it happened but you could see from 2020 what they were doing and why the population

was going to end up poor and a small number of corporations and vested interests were going to end up with far more resources yes it is so ingrained in our language and our concepts. We talk about something going viral, a video or a meme going viral. Or we talk about a computer virus. And there's just so many different ways that they have put that in there. And, of course, massive marketing, the drumbeat that we have seen in the last four years of obvious patent lies i mean but just repeat it over and over again it's very effective but but let's talk and we mentioned it

just briefly so one last thing i'd like to cover before uh before you go and um we mentioned it and as you're talking about the fact that we don't have an isolation uh we don't have uh you know the proper scientific studies it's kind of anecdotal but just a simple case i know you've got a an entire video about rabies that you have on your website where you talk about that and again the website is dr as dr sam bailey b-a-i-l-e-y.com uh so you got a video about um rabies but let's talk about something that's really common um you know these childhood diseases that kind of began all of these vaccine movements uh when i was younger we didn't have measles vaccines and everything so we would get together and then all of a sudden you you know, red spots start appearing.

What is your idea about what is going on with that? That's the, I think, the real, the experiential hurdle that's difficult for people to get over. Yeah, so I guess with children, they've got a very large skin surface area. And our skin is the largest organ so it's one of the easiest ways for the body to eliminate um toxic buildup i guess filth from from inside the body and so rashes are essentially an expression of that and you often see children uh have rashes it's kind of you know the end of a healing crisis because it's trying to eliminate. We've actually made videos on measles and chickenpox parties specifically to address this. Oh, good.

It's such a common thing. But in terms of it, we tend to, as we grow up, we have other ways that are more efficient at removing you know build up but essentially that's the yeah and i guess david it comes back to what we talked about earlier is that sam and i always go to the foundational documents and say well where is a controlled study that shows um the spread because we know about these anecdotal stories and it's easy to counter with other anecdotal stories for instance when i was about 10 or 11, I was diagnosed with chickenpox. I was in a household of six.

No one else got sick. None of my classmates got sick. Apparently, it's highly contagious, and yet nobody around me seemed to have it or get it. But that's what the family doctor told us is what I had. And the other thing is we do not deny that people get sick in clusters so if you go to a birthday party and afterwards half of the kids break out in a rash probably the best thing to do is to look at what they were exposed to at the party because if they were eating things that have colorings whether they're soft drinks or lollies, et cetera,

that's enough for a child to break out in a rash if they ingest these synthetic chemicals that are now put into foods. There are all sorts of factors that Daniel Reuters has outlined in his book, Can You Catch a Cold?, about clusters of illness that were put down at the time to germs but later were found to be environmental toxins psychological influences and nutritional deficiencies so a whole lot of yeah it's and this is what we find one thing that has really encouraged us particularly in the last year or so more and more people around the world are now contacting us saying look we recently had this sickness in our family once upon a time i

would have put it down to a germ or a virus etc this time i put that aside and thought what did we do what exactly did we do in the last week and people are starting to identify things you know whether it's something they ate or whether it's a place they went to visit and possibly got exposed and some sort of chemical etc so that's what we need to encourage not this silly uh it's a gem someone else made me sick and we're no further ahead nobody knows anything at that. We're stuck in the same silly model. So, yeah, I would encourage people to, if you're thinking measles, chickenpox, what about these parties, et cetera, please watch Sam's videos where she does a dive into these topics

and exposes the actual science and the actual claims behind these things. Because another thing, just really quickly, I wanted to bring up is that there was something I didn't realise with virology and just infectious diseases in general is that all the assumptions are based on just a couple of papers. So these scientific papers that were made and everything else they just constantly cite back to those original studies because people sometimes say well we've got new studies now that show that so it's the same with you know covert and sars-cov-2 they you know there's literally thousands and thousands of studies but the only ones that are important are the original foundational ones and that's what we always go to and unpick for people and show how farcical it is because then everything else follows on from it and people can see that

all these are just assertions these are assumptions and say well those guys did it so you know we're going to carry on from those assumptions yeah it is a group think it's an echo chamber and as you point out and you show many examples of it in your book, the fundamental papers are something that they didn't do science at all. And when you talk about the anecdotal thing, it made me think of 2009. I was diagnosed with swine flu. I had really bad pneumonia, and they diagnosed me with swine flu. But nobody else in the family got it. My wife didn't get it.

Nobody got it. So, yeah, it is interesting. And I think it's very important for us to look at it and your focus is now on what we can do to make ourselves healthier instead of as you said before instead of a focus on disease you're focused more on health is that correct yeah and just my biggest focus from the beginning is to reduce people's fear because I think fear is the massive driver of illness and people get, and behaviour, they do crazy things because they think they're going to get sick or, and once you understand that this is a myth,

germs don't cause disease, it's so empowering and enlightening and it makes you see the world in a different way and i that's my focus is just to reduce people's fear and go you don't need us and i mean we're reformed doctors we're like you know we're not i don't want to be associated with that group anymore but i'm like become your own doctor you know we want to teach people how to be well so they don't need us anymore. Yeah, and it is. I mean, for us, David, it was amazing that our health as a family has improved so much since 2020. We always thought we were healthy and we thought, well, we're trained doctors and we know this and that.

And we didn't actually. We missed a huge amount of it. And since that time, we've reformed the way we eat, the way we interact as a family, the water that we drink. And nowadays. And spiritually. Spiritually as well. Much more connected and much more understanding of this beautiful world

that God's given us, that it has been created in perfection and it's up to us to make sure that continues rather than ruin it and one of the big things for us is and I think all parents should take this message home is that there's no such thing as these childhood diseases there's just parental neglect and I know that sounds harsh and it took us a bit of time to get used to this but when your children do get sick you have to reflect well what did I do you I've missed something here. And we have found with our own children that they have just got, they've thrived more and more as mom and dad have moved out of the old allopathic germ theory paradigm and into the paradigm of saying, what can we actually do to

make things better? And it has worked. That's a great note to end on. Yeah, fear is contagious, isn't it? That is one thing we can attest to, the psychological fear that is there. And as you're talking about connecting spiritually, I've been told that is the one phrase that is in the Bible more than anything else, fear not. So we will end it on that. It is the mind killer. It it destroys us and that's the

thing that we need to push back again people uh the um the website is dr sam bailey a dr sam b i b a i l e y.com the book is the final pandemic and uh this is the way that we end medical tyranny it's the antidote to medical tyranny by dr mark bailey and dr samantha bailey thank you so much for joining us it was great talking to you thank you david we're big fans it's been a pleasure yeah thank you david keep keep doing what you're doing thank you i appreciate that and uh again their website as well as their books are a wealth of information uh they lay it out there for you but they have references to all these other things and videos about the measle parties and things like that so a great source of information and we really do need to

get to the bottom of this i am tired of being uh jerked around by these people that i know were lying to me and ripping me off and stealing everything that we've got. I think it's enough. We need to figure out their game and expose it. And that's a great resource to do it. Thank you so much. And thank you all for joining us. Have a good day.

Let me tell you, the David Knight Show, you can listen to with your ears you can even watch it by using your eyes in fact if you can hear me that means you're listening to the David Knight show right now yeah good job and you want to know Right now. Yeah. Good job. And you want to know something else? You can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at the David night show dot com. That's a Web site.