The Highwire with Del Bigtree - A STRIKE AT THE HEART

Episode Date: November 5, 2021

D.C. Panel Highlights Vaccine Injuries; CDC Approves Covid Shot for Kids; Conflicting Data on Myocarditis in Kids; America Stages WalkoutGUESTS: Brianne Dressen, Peter McCullough MD, Leigh Dundas, Esq.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you are out there in the world. How about we all step out onto the high wire? I mean, it's just an amazing week. We've got so much to talk about. We've got a childhood vaccine now that's rushing out into children. But when we think about all that we've been through over this entire pandemic year and a half, and then the rollout of this vaccine, there's numbers just skyrocketing everywhere, yet nobody seems to care.

Well, this week, somebody made D.C. care. That's right. Senator Ron Johnson sponsored an event in Washington, D.C., called the expert panel on medical mandates and vaccine injuries. Who was at this panel? We were talking about lawyers. We were talking about doctors, surgeons, and even trial participants who were discussing what had happened to them after receiving one of the COVID-19 vaccines. Now, D.C. can never say they didn't know better. No matter what happens. going in the future let it be known that this happened in Washington DC. Telling the truth in today's cancel culture is not necessarily easy. You can pay a pretty heavy price for it so I really appreciate everybody participating in this. It's a real shame that we're having to hold this roundtable. Had government officials, the heads of our health care

agencies, have they been doing their job? Have they been honest and transparent with the American public? We wouldn't be here today. I'm a wife and a mom and I'm a preschool teacher. I'm a 29-year-old professional mountain bike racer and three-time national champion. I was previously an active, long-distance biker and triathlete. I had no known underlying health conditions. I'm 35 years old and I spent most of the beginning of this year snowboarding. I'm working out in the gym. This is my daughter Maddie. She participated in the Pfizer COVID vaccine trial. I received my COVID vaccine when I gladly signed up for a clinical trial here in the United States with AstraZeneca. I was a father of a 16-year-old son.

A single parent, I raised my boy since it was a baby. We got the Pfizer vaccine because I thought it was to protect him. I thought it was the right thing to do. I received my first dose of the Pfizer COVID vaccine on February 1st. Within 30 minutes, I developed a severe stabbing headache that later became a burning sensation in the back of my neck. In less than 12 hours, she developed severe abdominal pain, horrible nausea, painful electric shocks on her spine and neck. She had chest pain, severe chest pain. The way she described it, it felt like her heart was being pulled out of her neck.

Right facial tingling back, numbness, throat tightness, tachycardia, wild fluctuating blood pressures, severe right-sighted headaches and brain fog. I'm intermittently dizzy, my vision is blurry, my right pupil is not dilating properly. My right leg has extreme burning pain, and I also get muscle spasms and twitches. I went to bed at 10 o'clock at night. I woke up at 2 o'clock in the morning, paralyzed. I had a blood clot in my leg. My entire spinal cords had swollen and hemorrhaged. I aspirated on water.

They said it was safe. Now I go home to an empty house. Two days after vaccination, I got in my airplane to do a job that would take only a few hours. Immediately after taking off, I knew something was not right with me. I pulled my airplane up to turn around and felt an extreme burst of pressure in my ears. Instantly, I was nearly blacked out, dizzy, disoriented, nauseous, and shaking uncontrollably. By the grace of God, I was able to land my plane without incident, although I do not remember doing this.

I've had six spinal taps over eight months to monitor my intracranial pressure and two surgeries eight weeks apart to repair the fistula's. My condition continued to decline and my doctors told me only an adverse reaction to the vaccine or a major head trauma could have caused this much spontaneous damage. I soon saw a neurologist who diagnosed me with transverse myelitis, a rare condition that involves a demyelated lesion of my thoracic spinal cord. I see a neurologist, rheumatologist, cardiologist, gynecologist, neuroophthalmologists, and physical therapists, among others. I lost my ability to speak naturally. I have become unable to walk without a walker and never know if or when the tremors will cammer go.

I can no longer cook, clean, or even pick up and hold my baby for too long before my body begins to shake uncontrollably or is thrown into excruciating amounts of pain. She can't walk. She's in a wheelchair. She is an NG tube for all of her nutrition. She has constant pain in her stomach, back and neck.

She can't feel her legs. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Today, I am an unemployed paraplegic who's learning an entire new lifestyle. And the only thing I did between full health and my current condition is take a shot. I have been bedridden, unable to work, and unable to exercise for months. I fear that my career has officially been ended. I don't know if I'll ever be able to fly on airplane. again. This vaccine has taken my career from me and the future I have worked so hard to build.

My career of 19 years, excuse me, that I took almost 14 years I trained for, is likely over. They did everything in their power to hide everything that happened to her. And that is why this is happening to every, all these other people and kids. They murdered my son and the other people that are suffering, these kids, with all these side effects, that's child abuse right there. I mean, why isn't it something being done? Assuming the FDA and the CDC would be alarmed at my diagnosis, I expected to be contacted soon after my VAERS submission. No phone call, no contact. In fact, weeks passed.

I then contacted the CDC myself. They acknowledged my various submission but stated my reaction was categorized as not serious, as I had not been hospitalized and I hadn't died. One word describes how I felt in the first few months after my diagnosis, abandoned. We did video conferences with Peter Marks and Janet Woodcock, constant emails with Janet Woodcock and myself directly. We have literally asked and we have begged repeatedly for them to acknowledge these reactions. They declined.

This experience has shattered in my life. Like all of you, I know where you are. The 24-7onitis has robbed me of every moment of silence and peace. The impact on my medical career, which I love and work so hard for, is immeasurable. I deserve to be heard and treated with compassion, but instead I have been called a liar and a fake, and I have even been told by the ER doctors that this is all in my head and that there is nothing medically wrong with me. Among the folks that have contacted our firm are many physicians from across the country who themselves have suffered vaccine injuries. One of the things that I often ask physicians who contact the firm is, will you make public the failing of our public health agencies?

And that's often has the same reaction as well. And that is one of immense fear. The fear of retaliation from public health officials and the medical establishment. After I reported to my command, my concerns that in one morning I had to ground three out of three pilots due to vaccine injuries. The next day, my patients were canceled. My charts were pulled for review. and I was told that I would not be seeing acute patients anymore. Everybody's sitting here today, all of the physicians and the medical professionals, PhDs who are attending here today,

their careers on the line to come here and do this. It should not be that any physician should have to quote unquote risk it all just to advocate for their patients. I know many mainstream scientists and medical professionals. professionals who similar to me think that the current narrative is extreme and wrong. But very few of them are willing to speak up. Any attempt to deviate from the main narrative today is faced with a wall of hostility, rejection and even elimination from the government, including funding agencies, from public media, and worse of all, from the scientific community itself.

legitimate scientific challenges have been set aside or dismissed as, quote, misinformation, unquote. I worry that young scientists may be reluctant to disclose evidence on vaccine harms. Being labeled as an anti-vaxxer could be a career ender. I'm saddened that we are super saturated as a society right now. In the attitude of everybody knows, but if hospitalizations and deaths were almost exclusively occurring in the unvaccinated, why would booster shots be necessary? There's something not adding up and we should all be asking. Is it true that this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated?

People should not be coerced or bribed to choose between their freedom to bodily autonomy or their livelihood and being injected. This is a human rights social justice issue. For everyone's suffering, for everyone being pushed, guilted and frightened into taking this thing or not taking this thing. I see you. I hear you. I believe you. I love you. I am you. Once we leave here, they're gonna forget about what we said here. Thanksgiving, I must spend at the cemetery. Christmas, get that cemetery.

I will continue to fight. I will continue to research. I will find an answer for people or I will die trying. I would like to finish with a letter from a friend. Bree, I cannot take this any longer. This has taken everything away from me. My career, my family, my life. My body will not stop attacking itself. And this is beyond the worst amount of torture.

They have further erased my very existence. Please accept my apologies. I must bid farewell to this world. Please tell our stories. Please make sure the world knows the cruelty that has been imposed upon us. Goodbye, my dear friend. I will see you on the flip side. If the government won't help us,

if the drug companies won't help us, who will help us? Well, I'm joined by organizer and participant, Brienne Dresson. Brienne, very emotional testimonies there. How did, you know, just watching it now again, now that it's past and you can look at it from there. What are your thoughts? It's, it was an amazing experience to be there with these really good people who did their part. You know, we all stepped up.

we did our part and for us to be together for the first time to be able to support each other in our suffering and and you know the injustices that have been dealt to us it was it was a very powerful experience to be part of but not only for the injured but for us to be backed up by you know senator johnson and these very well-accomplished academics and physicians who are all seeing these injustices firsthand for themselves. So to have all of us together in one place to be able to have an open conversation that has not been allowed to happen, it was very profound and it was beautiful, but it was also very heartbreaking to see the real reality of what is happening in this country, not just to the

injured, but for everybody's suffering under the oppression of mandates and, you know, scientific censorship, academic censorship, medical censorship, big tech censorship. Right. When you, I mean, you got the vaccine, obviously, which, you know, probably puts you in the situation. Was there a mandate at that moment when you got it? No. Would you have supported mandates prior to having this happened to you? Had you just been the Brianne before you had this knowledge, let's say, you know, you got the vaccine.

didn't affect you this way, are you a person that would have believed in the mandates? That's a good question, because knowing just how deep into the narrative that I was, I do suspect that maybe I would have been cool with the mandates before this happened. To be completely honest, had this not happened to me, I don't know what of this I actually would have believed had I not been living this firsthand. There's people that will see an event like this. I don't know how many, but there's those that are out there will say, well, that's just a tiny minority. You know, it's an accepted casualty.

What do you say? Is it a tiny minority? And does that make a difference? So how I see this, because there's tens of thousands of us that have found each other, and that's with the censorship, with the oppression, with the silencing that's going on, the aggressive oppression for these sick and injured people that are lost and scattered all over the country. They have no idea what's happening in their bodies. They have no one to turn to for help. And somehow we've been able to amass that number of people in just this short amount of time. It kind of, I'm not sure how rare it really is, but to me, suffering is suffering.

Yeah. You know, if we're, if we're burying kids and we're burying mothers and we're burying fathers, their lives matter just as much as anyone else's lives, you know, just as much as people that have died from COVID, their lives matter. We matter too. You know, I imagine that, I think you're probably right, and I imagine that should on CNN or MSNBC or Fox, we heard them say, you know, first of all, they didn't report on this. event, right? If they did, if they were going to be transparent, said, you know, thousands of people are claiming they've had injuries or deaths in their family due to this COVID. It's a small

group of people, but there's thousands, maybe tens of thousands out there. They could say that. I doubt they will because they know that just those types of numbers would start making people think twice, don't you think? Right. Yes. For you, you know, how did you get? How did you this together. I mean, what was it that sort of took you from, you know, being injured yourself to saying, I've got to put this in Washington, D.C., where these mandates are coming from? It's been a long process, for sure. I didn't talk about my own injury until June. I was actually injured a year ago today. So it's been 365 days. And you were in the trials? I was in the clinical trials. For which vaccine?

AstraZeneca. Asthma Zeneca. Okay. You're in the U.S. All right. So I stayed quiet for a long time. I thought maybe I was an isolated incident or, you know, so rare I couldn't find anybody like me. But soon, you know, in the early spring, I started lining up with other people that were having

the exact same constellation of symptoms that I was having, but from all of the brands available in the United States. And our numbers began to grow and they continue to grow, who were reaching out through the CDC, and the FDA and the NIH and we weren't getting anywhere. And then these injuries started happening to kids. And so that's when we realized that we needed to step up and we needed to act. And so that's when we started turning up the heat

on these federal agencies that are responsible to be tracking the safety and efficacy of these vaccines. Unfortunately, our repeated cries have fallen on deaf ears. And the media has branded us as misinformation, anti-vax, they've done everything they do. They've done everything they can to discount us. I mean, I myself, I've talked to three New York Times reporters. Is it on the New York Times?

No. I've talked to two reporters at CNN. Is it there? No. I mean, we've talked to every single major news outlet out there. We've talked to almost every single elected representative in Washington. We've talked to the drug companies. I myself have talked to the heads of the FDA.

CDC. We've had Zoom meetings with them. them. It's not like they don't know. So at that point, we realized, okay, we're going to have to actually, you know, start turning up the heat a little bit more. I mean, when you're talking to Janet Woodcock, you're talking to Peter Marks. What are they saying when you're talking to them? I mean, this is their job is we basically have released a almost untested product. You would think they'd have high interest in talking to anyone that maybe is having an issue.

Right. And the response that I have gotten after talking to several others that have talked to them as well, it's the same narrative that we get back. Oh, no, this is so sad. We'll look into it. Okay, that was maybe permissible, and we were okay with that in February, January. But now it's November, and we're still getting the same line. And Peter Marks himself said to me, you know, our system is not designed to identify multi-symptom signals. So there is no safety signal coming up for the injuries that you and your group are alleging to have, and we highly suggest that you go to the NIH and maybe they can help you. Well, that's not an acceptable answer. So we just continue to press forward. We're still demanding answers. We're still demanding that these agencies are doing their job, which they're not. They're not being transparent with the data.

They know about the sick kids. They know about the suicides. I mean, they know about the clinical trial issues. They know all of it. And still, they continue to say, vaccinate, period. Safe and effective, period. There's, is there any drug that we've had in this country ever where we have said, here's a drug, no side effects, safe?

Right. Especially in the face of people calling you directly and saying, I've been injured. I was injured. So let me just take it back because I haven't had the opportunity to talk. to somebody that was in the trial. So can I ask you a couple of questions I've been curious about? Number one, when you're signing the waiver on that, did it talk about antibody-dependent enhancement or immune enhancement or disease enhancement potentials of the vaccination?

It's actually strange that you say that because in my informed consent with Astorzeneca, it did talk about antibody enhancement in chimpanzees. And they said that it hasn't been proven in humans, but in the informed consent document it did have that in there. Okay. And you just went right through that thinking, that's okay. Basically. Okay, all right.

Good, but it's good to know. So my next question is someone that puts themselves in a trial, I would think, is probably a little bit higher up on the chain of pro vaccine, right? Your goal, I would assume, is to see this as a success. Right. Be a part of that success. So as you started experiencing issues, were you excited? excited to report them or do you feel that is there is there a conflict there that I might be

you know giving a bad report to something that I believe in well I mean for me I mean my husband's a scientist and so you know we're we're very scientifically minded right in our in our family and so I was actually as my side effects began I was logging everything by the minute as symptoms popped up I was like this is going to be critical data you know they're going to want all this information you know, and, you know, this is part of a clinical trial. Even though things are going bad, this is the important information that we need, right? That a clinical trial, that's the whole purpose, is to see what can go wrong. Unfortunately, none of that information is in the clinical trial report that was published

by the New England Journal of Medicine last month, end of September. So what's happening to these people when things go wrong? Where is that data? They say that they tracked serious adverse events. for 730 days. They followed me for 60 days. That was it. That's it.

Two months. Yeah, so I mean. No phone calls since then, no bringing you in to discuss anything? No, I mean, the only follow up has been on our part to ask them for money that they agreed to pay for our medical bills and it's in the contract that they should pay. They wired $590 to my account. That's it. That's it. So we're hearing a two and a half year ongoing study.

This study is not technically ongoing. as far as your participation in it. Right. I'm out. I was deleted from the tracking app. My data isn't there. It's not there. So they've taken you out of the data.

Right. So this is the concern with people that can't get the second dose, right? So, and this is happening in the public rollout too, right? There's a certain subset of individuals, a percentage of the United States, of people that have one dose and they can't get the second. Well, why can't they get the second? Why aren't we asking those questions? Why aren't we collecting that data?

That data matters. Because if you're going to have a reaction to the first dose, we shouldn't just erase them, right? Because those, what's the reason for them? Well, this is a known scientific issue, healthy user bias, right? Right. This is what happens when you only take the people to complete the entire thing and say we're only going to look at those that, you know,

get past the second shot. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that it's those that make it two weeks past the second shot, second shot since we're being told that inside that two weeks after the second shot, you're still considered unvaccinated. So I wouldn't be surprised if anybody that doesn't make it that two weeks are just erased from the trial because those are the only people that would have been had a benefit from it and we're not going to look at the casualty that took place before that healthy user bias, meaning the only people that get there were those whose bodies could handle it when the entire

purpose of a trial, especially one being rushed the way this one was, is to see how much damage is done from day one, day five, and they simply, in your case, one shot, you're out, we're kicking you out, we're erasing your data because we don't want the world to see what happened. Right, and it's kind of strange because, you know, AstraZeneca is one drug, right? It's one brand. This happened with Pfizer. BMJ actually released an article this week talking about, you know, the potential fraud that's

happened with clinical trials with Pfizer. We see that obviously with Maddie de Gary's case. In her clinical trial, she's coated as a stomach ache. I don't know anyone in the right mind. We're talking to the little girl that's in the wheelchair now. She's paralyzed and is listed in the data of the trial as she suffered a stomach ache from the vaccination. So does your child's stomach ache put you in a wheelchair? Does your child's stomach ache, you know, cause you to have a feeding tube because you have gastroporesis?

Does your child's stomach ache make it so you can't feel your legs? I mean, like, we obviously have a gross, there's many gaps in the system. But it starts with the clinical trials. If we do not have clinical trials that are collecting data with, you know, objective, full integrity, then what are we doing? I mean, after reading my clinical trial report, it reads like a marketing piece. It doesn't read like a scientific report. And that's unfortunate because we're just marching more people down to be harmed, you know, down the path of being harmed when really we need to have some protocols in place.

And at this point, I'm a year out, right? Yeah. At that point, you would think that if we were actually tracking people that were harmed early on, that we'd have some real protocols in place to help those that are injured later on further down the road. Your husband, as you said, as a scientist, you're both very scientific, obviously, and how you've sort of described how you've handled this whole thing. He's gotten really involved, too. I mean, you're setting this up, but he spoke before the FDA just over a week ago. Tell me what that, what was he speaking about and sort of set that up for me? So the FDA held a hearing for the, to review the Pfizer vaccine for kids, five to 11-year-old.

they, for every one of their reviews, they have to have a public comment hearing. My husband applied to be able to speak during that public commentary period. And he was selected. The whole reason that he wanted to speak is because, one, he sees the gaps in the clinical trials. Being a scientist, he understands acutely why research needs to be held to the, you know, the scrutiny and to keep the data pure that we all expect. and he sees firsthand that that's not happening. He also saw firsthand because of my reaction, just what the government is not doing

to prevent these injuries from impacting others. And so for us, we have small kids ourselves, right? I have a seven and nine-year-old. And so I don't feel that any parent in the United States at this point is being provided full and informed consent. They're not being given the appropriate you know, risk benefit ratios before they go and inoculate their kids. And so that's the whole reason why he decided to speak out. Let's take a look at that. My name is Dr. Brian Dresson,

a chemist who specializes in developing protections for the warfighter and first responder. I have an extensive career background and thoroughly researching and assessing the degree of safety and efficacy of new technologies. My work saves lives. I have no conflicts of interest. I agree with doctors Rose, Goetzko, and Setnik in their assessment of the data from the clinical trials. The Pfizer vaccine fails any reasonable risk-benefit calculus in connection with children. Your decision is being rushed based on incomplete data from underpowered trials, insufficient to predict rates of severe and long-lasting adverse reactions. I urge the committee to reject the EUA modification and direct Pfizer to perform trials

that will decisively demonstrate that the benefits outweigh the risk. for children. I understand firsthand the impact that you will or will not have with the decision you are going to make today. My wife was severely injured by a single dose of COVID vaccine in a clinical trial here in the United States last November. Because study protocol requires two doses, she was dropped from the trial and her access to the study app deleted. Her reaction is not described in the recently released clinical trials report. 266 participants in that trial are described as having an adverse event leading to discontinuation, with 56 neurological reactions being tallied.

Since then, we have met trial participants from the other vaccination trials, including the Pfizer 12 to 15 age group trial, whom have suffered similar reactions and fate. Injured support groups are growing, memberships numbering into at least the tens of thousands. We must do better. Those injured in a trial are a critical piece of vaccine safety data. They are being tossed aside and forgotten. The FDA has known firsthand about her case and thousands of others. The FDA has also stated that their own systems are not identifying this issue and that theirs

is not designed to identify any multi-symptom signals. The system is broken. My family's life has changed forever. The clinical trials are not appropriately evaluating the data. data, the FDA, CDC, and the drug companies continue to deflect the persistent and repeated cries for help and acknowledgement, leaving the injured as collateral damage. Until we appropriately care for those already injured, acknowledge the full scope of injuries that are happening to adults.

Please do not give this to kids. You have a very clear responsibility to appropriately assess the risks and benefits to these vaccines. It is obvious that isn't happening. I do not wish this nightmare on my worst enemy, let alone a child. The suffering of thousands continues to repeatedly fall on deaf ears at the FDA. Each of you hold a significant responsibility today and know that without a doubt, when you approve this for five to 11 year olds, you are assigning innocent kids and

uninformed parents to a faith that will undoubtedly rob some of them of their life. With COVID, you get recognition and help. With a vaccine injury, you are completely on your own. for your time. That was Brian Dress and your husband, Brianne. And first of all, it's obviously a family affair. Now you're all getting involved in trying to make a difference. How many kids do you have?

I have two little kids. Two. How old are they? Seven and nine. And so, you know, your husband obviously was trying to stop the roll out of the emergency use authorization as was, you know, we were. But it moved forward. We now have CDC's now even recommending it.

So this thing is going to roll out to try. children all across the country. Will you get this vaccine for your two kids? The NIH has told me and others in my situation that because of this reaction, my kids should not get the shot. Okay. So you're going to adhere to that, I assume? Definitely. What do you think when you just the idea of these children, five-year-old, six-year-olds, five to eleven, being lined up in schools, being lined up in clinics all across this, country. What does that thought bring to you knowing what you know now? It's very disturbing. I mean, it's one thing to have, you know, this happened to an adult.

We can articulate what is happening to our bodies. You know, my body still feels like it's being electrified 24-7, like just this painful sharp, electrical feeling. I could not ever, ever imagine marching a kid to that same fate before their life even has a chance to begin. And that's just, you know, one part of this problem that these vaccines are, you know, having with people. I mean, and so I am very concerned about it. You know, I want to say that we did what we could to inform the public so they themselves can make a informed decision for themselves and their family. But we can't even get the world. out to make that happen.

And it's heartbreaking to know that there are people all over the country that are totally blind to this, to no fault of their own. Right. So it's sad because you see that it is going to happen and it will happen at this point. It's not a question of if it will happen to these kids. They're going to be met with physicians that have no idea what to do with them. Because what are you going to find if you're not looking for it? not looking for it. You know, you can't see what you're not looking for. And you're being told by, you know, basically the archbishops of your religion, which is the

CDC and the FDA, that this is perfectly safe and anything you see is not being caused by the vaccine. You know, what do parents left with and what are those doctors left with? They're being blindfolded right as they're giving this vaccine to children. So many of the stories, one of the shocking similarities seems to be that they're being told, you need to see a psychologist. This is all in your head. Now, when children get it? Can you imagine, you know, adults being told, I'm telling you what I felt. I know where I was at. I can show you I was winning triathlons or mountain bike races, and now all of that has changed. But a child doesn't have that ability. A child's voice is their parent.

What is the parents not inside of that body? I mean, do you think about what those doctors, is that going to be the same thing? Your child just is having a psychological issue? Guaranteed, I mean, you know, even the adults, over 80% of us have been told that this is anxiety. Like when my legs stopped working and I became incontinent and I was in the hospital, it was because of anxiety. I didn't get appropriate diagnosis until I went to the NIH and that was in June. So I went from November to June with physicians telling me, your legs aren't working right because of anxiety. So I could never, I cannot imagine that happening to a child, let alone what likely would be. be thousands, if not tens of thousands.

Well, I know that your husband's, Brian's video, the video of that testimony was going viral and then it got shut down on the internet. As you know, probably our show is no longer available on YouTube or Facebook because we share stories like this, but luckily millions of people are watching the high wire and hopefully they will take this story and your story and the footage and all of that will even have the long form available for everybody to watch these incredible. testimonies so that we can get the word out. But I just want to say to you, I want to thank you. I'm sure it's hard enough to get through the day to take care of your children, take care of your

family while you're dealing with the injuries of these vaccines, but to go a step further and use all of your remaining energy to try and let the public know what happened in these trials, what happened to you. It goes beyond, I think, a definition that is, you know, of courage. I just want to say you truly are a hero. And I want to thank you for taking the time to come by, hear the high wire and sharing this with us. Thank you. Thank you for having me. All right, well, I mean, this is what your job is to do, right?

If you're watching the high wire right now, we're not just here to sit on our bark allow and go, wow, that's a really bummer story. Our job is to make sure that this doesn't happen to anyone else, and so it's upon you to take videos like this and the information. Of course, if you're on our newsletter, then you will get direct links to not only the short video, but the long videos and everything that you want to watch. everything that you want to watch, all the information that you need so that you can share it with your loved ones because they are going to be under attack.

A lot of this show today will be about that attack on the innocent human beings around this world and in this country. So to get further into the show and into more of the details that are going on right now, it's time for Jackson Report. All right, Jeffrey. Obviously, there's just so much going on now. this push is real. It's happening in so many different ways. It's affecting us all. And, you know, here we are, as we've been reporting. So many of these things we warned about. And I feel like we probably should have named this show. I told you so instead of the high wire. But what do we got this week? Yeah, well, for many parents, the line in the sand was the children, the

vaccinating of children and apparently as a country right now we cross that line in the sand and this is what it looked like in the news take a look a game changer for many parents in the fight against COVID-19 this is just really exciting news that we now have vaccine recommendations for 28 million children the CDC is now officially recommending vaccinations for kids age 5 to 11 and that is a huge huge thing young children ages 5 to 11 have started receiving Pfizer's vaccine after the CDC approved the shot. The vote was overwhelmingly positive, aside from being unanimous. The research is so clear on this that the vaccine definitely is saving lives. The data that came out from Pfizer is impressive, that it protects against 90% of disease,

and it looks overwhelmingly safe. I think what the trials have done, it really showed and demonstrated how, what a strong immune response the kids had after the vaccines were administered. One of the most important parts of this step forward is the risks versus, the benefits and the benefits of this vaccine far outweigh any risks. Thanks so much. Get your children vaccinated. I just can't help but think, you know, about when we're just talking, Brianne, the benefits outweigh the risks if you throw all the risks in the garbage can, if you erase all the people

that had risks and we're suffering in the middle of your trials. I mean, this is, this is, you know, a lack of integrity of malpractice by science and medicine in a way. As I look at this, It's just incredible to just suppose the hearing that we just watched and that to the sort of jolliness of woohoo, go out, get your child vaccinated the moment we find ourselves in in the news. And what we saw there for viewers is called echo chamber. That's a technique the media uses. They take one or two talking points and they bounce it around as an echo chamber. So that's why you're always hearing that. You're not seeing original investigation. You're not seeing anything like that in the news. You're just hearing talking points reurgitated to you. So one of the things they said was very accurate. The data is clear. So this was the ASIP meeting.

The ASIP was the CDC Advisory Commission on Immunization Practices. And they had a presentation here. And here's some of the data from that meeting. And the data appeared to be clear that myocarditis after MRNA COVID vaccines, seven-day risk period, is pretty high. So looking at this chart, anything in that like orange tannish color is over background incidents. So just for for reference, a background incident, according to this chart, is 0.2 to 1.9 per million. So we see there, there's actually more myocarditis higher incidences than not in this chart.

So if that's not a safety signal, I'm not sure what is. So if you're looking at the potential for a point two to even a 1.9, but 0.2 background rate. So that means when I'm looking at this 12 to 15 in the males after that second dose, we're talking about more than 40, could be even considered 80 times the lowest background rate when you look at 39.69 times the background rate of what normally should be there. But they didn't dwell here very long, did they in the meeting? It wasn't like, oh, let's really, you know, bum ourselves out with the myocarditis. They kind of just blazed right through that, didn't they? Yeah, it was only a couple hours. It was kind of couched in the entire two-day ASIP meeting, you know, the ones we've covered here,

it was just kind of an agenda point. A lot of it was about Pfizer's presentation, about Pfizer's data, which strangely enough showed no myocarditis incidences. And remember talking about safety signals, this is repeated everywhere. UK, the Nordic countries are reported around across the EU. A lot of the countries, Israel, they all have this myocarditis rate, this signal. So they blaze right past us at ASIP. And one of the big elephants in the room was, you know, you have this myocarditis signal and you also have children. In fact, the data they reported was 94 deaths, they reported at this ASIP meeting in children since the beginning of when they started taking tallies on this, which is about March 2020 in this age group from COVID.

Over a course of a year and a half, there's been 94. Is that what you just said, 94? 94, yeah, that's what they presented. Total deaths in America amongst our children. I mean, that has to be the lowest death rate of almost any disease in this country. I mean, everything else kills you more than that. And as they're speaking, I mean, we're at a lower point in deaths and cases just across America and at all age groups. So you have this group of kids, low mortality. So they're thinking, well, what else can this thing benefit? Is it going to benefit hurt immunity?

And they came up with this slide as well. So this slide here is, it's titled indirect impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on children. And actually, that's inaccurate. It's a COVID-19 pandemic response on children. So you see here, worsening of mental or emotional health, widening of existing education gaps, decrease physical activity, health, decuse, health care utilization, loss of caregivers, increase in adverse childhood experiences. That's like trauma in the home, sexual abuse, et cetera.

So all of these things were, you know, they're going to vaccinate the kids, get them back in school. So these things don't happen. But what's interesting about this. So basically, that's what we're going to cure. We're not going to cure the disease because we have no problem with the disease, but we're going to cure all of the pain and agony we have thrust upon you, your mask and all the social distancing and the destruction of your education and make you work from home and make you feel bad about yourself and afraid to breathe the air.

We can fix all of that with this vaccine. That's what this vaccine is designed to do, is to take you out of jail. It's the get out of jail free car, the jail we put you in. So the only thing they can really, the speaking to is the sort of success of this vaccine and children will be that it will remove all. of the pain and agony they personally put upon these children, that's what it's there for. Yes. And you know what's interesting was I saw this slide and I thought, this is data hypocrisy because these basically almost everything on this list was what the Great Barrington Declaration

wanted to protect against. That's why people got together signed the Great Barrington Declaration early on in the pandemic and said, do not lock down because pretty much all these things will happen. And it will be disadvantageous to kids and to elderly. and the people of low socioeconomic income and inequality. And so they're having their cake and eating it too. They're saying they were conspiracy theorists and dangerous for doing the Great Barrington Declaration. Right. But now because we cause this stuff, we're going to get you out of jail, like you said,

because this vaccine needs to be recommended. And that's what they did. Rochelle Wuluninski, the CDC director, did sign off on this. So it is a green light for the EUA to be extended in children 5 to 11. And shortly after that, I mean, we're talking minutes after that. San Francisco went right to work. This is the headline out of the, out of the San Francisco gate.com. San Francisco says children, 5 to 11 will have to comply with proof of vaccination mandate.

San Francisco is a very strict proof of vaccination mandate for restaurants, for gyms, for I guess it will be daycare centers now for the kids. But their health officer, Dr. Susan Phillip, said during a town hall meeting, that was on Tuesday, just a couple days ago, that they're going to give about eight weeks about eight weeks after the vaccine is available for kids, they're going to have to show this proof of vaccination along with their parents. So this is a first in the country because it's still EUA. A lot of states like Governor Newsom is saying, well, once it's recommended, then we're going to green light this thing and make it recommended for schools to get in schools and health care.

But not San Francisco. They're going for it. So one of the interviews I thought was really interesting. I think people should really listen to was a Yale doctor, Dr. Harvey Rice. He's an epidemiology professor out of Yale. And he was asked what he would do with this vaccine mandate if he had kids. Take a listen. If you're a parent and you have a seven or eight year old, the federal government is going to insist that those kids get vaccinated. Or if you live in a state like California where Governor Newsom is going to do that and so forth,

and he is a horrific record. Most of these governors do, not all, but most. What would you do? Would you get your kid vaccinated? Would you talk to your local doctor? What would you do? If the child has chronic conditions that make their risk appreciable, then there's a reason that they should be considered for vaccination. Other than that, if it were my child, I would homeschool them. Honestly, I would organize with other parents to take them out of the school and create homeschooling environments.

There is no choice. Your child's life is on the line. It's not a high risk. Vaccination is not. Vaccination is not a high risk that's going to kill every child by doing so. However, it's enough of a risk that on the average the benefit is higher for homeschooling than it is for vaccination and being in school. It always makes me feel a little bit smart when a Harvard professor, epidemiologist, says exactly what I've been saying on the high wire, get your kids out of school homeschooling them right now is the only answer,

not only to avoid this vaccine and the dangers of it, but the brainwashing that's led so many people to their own demise, they've learned to just accept what they're told instead of actually learning critical thinking skills and how to do their own research. So for all of those reasons, I think it's an important time that you pull your kids out. They are our future. And even if they survive, you know, getting through the masking and the social distancing and all the fears and concerns, what type of human being will they be in the future? What will they stand for? I think on multiple fronts, Harvey Reich is correct.

And back to the ACIP meeting, there was an audio clip. It was pretty much overwhelming praise for the vaccine. Unlike last week with the FDA, that meeting, we had some people asking some tough questions, although they voted, you know, almost unanimously. So in this ACIP meeting, they talked to one of the voting members asked a question about herd immunity, basically since, look, there's not much of a, there's not much of a mortality issue with these kids in this age cohort. So when we, when we vaccinate. these 28 million kids will certainly be doing this for herd immunity, right? This will be

help all of us and listen to what happened. When we look for herd or community immunity, when we speak of a number, 80%, 75, 90, whatever, we're looking at the total population of an area like the country, I believe. So that were we to get this 5 to 11 year old age group vaccinated, we would be getting closer to whatever the percent is that we need for herd immunity in the United States. Is that a proper extrapolation of the discussion? Hi, this Dr. Jones. Well, we would discourage a strict goal of a threshold where we think if we reach that, that community transmission will then cease, that it's going to be very common. complicated with waning immunity and you have protection against infection versus protection against severe disease.

And I think thinking that we will be able to achieve some kind of threshold where there will be no more transmission of infections may not be possible. I think that is a very fair statement. Giggles. Did I just hear giggling at the end of that? Yeah, the whole reason we told you. to get vaccinated. Actually, it doesn't work that way. Our vaccine is useless. Will not stop your infection. Will not stop your transmission. And any dream you may have if you still are believing

in the vaccine unicorn to come along and get us out of this pandemic is gone. I mean, it's shocking. It is so incredibly shocking to hear that acknowledgement that there's absolutely no reason to get this vaccine because you're protecting nobody. This is going nowhere. These children who are at no risk are going to do nothing for herd immunity by getting this vaccine. So what is the point? What is going on here? I mean, it's so infuriating. And it's just downright, you know, despicable. It's like a bad Disney character the way these people laugh at the fact that they're making us believe in something that doesn't do anything, except harm us. And if you heard at the beginning there, you know, he said the herd immunity, you know, whatever, 95, 75%, whatever it was.

And then the guy comes in, Dr. Jones, and says, let's not put a number on it. Don't put numbers on it anymore, you know, because Fauci tried to do that. And he was just lamb-baseded in the media because he kept having to change his numbers. We're not going to work with numbers anymore because it's not going to get there. We're going to keep changing the goalposts. And that's what this next story looks like. We covered this in September of 2021. The CDC changed its definition of a vaccine.

And this was because its old definition no longer covered what a vaccine was in this new COVID era. So kind of summarize that. Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massey put a tweet out and that really summarized these these three changes. So before, basically to 2015 and before, they said a vaccine, this is on the CDC's website, was an injection of a killed or weakened infectious organism in order to prevent a disease. And then 2015 to 20 to 21, they took away the killed or weakened infectious organism. And they just said introducing a vaccine into the body. And we're not preventing diseases anymore at that point.

It's just to produce immunity to a specific disease. But now these vaccines aren't even really doing that because they don't stop transmission or infection. So now they changed it to September. This is what it currently says. The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection. How much protection? Well, you know, that goes from 90% to 50% to whatever. Well, and to be clear, because we always have new audience members.

We're, as you know, growing exponentially. Let me just make that very clear to you because you still hear protection from the disease. So isn't that the same thing? No, it's not. It's not protected from the infection because they give in the infection a different name. SARS-CoV-2 is the infection. COVID-19 is the symptomatic expression of that infection. Sort of like HIV was the infection and AIDS is the disease.

So all they're saying is now all it needs to do is just reduce your experience of the infection you now have in our spraying and spewing all over everyone else around you. That's how far we have dropped the ball, the bar on this. And frankly, I think as we watch, and I know you're going to get more in coming up here into Israel and around the world, we're not even seeing that protection anymore. We are seeing sick and dying at record numbers in the vaccinated group. It's a complete and total catastrophe. But before we get there, I guess let's enjoy our little honeymoon here. And the idea that somehow this is even just reducing our own symptoms, but even that is now questionable. But so clearly, they missed the bar.

They couldn't, you know, achieve what we've known to be. the definition of a vaccine since like, you know, high school. Yeah, and that was a big story at the time. And a lot of people wondered, well, what was going on. And the CDC wasn't too forthright about exactly what they were doing. So now a FOIA request has produced some email documents. And it was posted in a substack commentary here, an article. It was titled CDC emails.

Our definition of vaccine is, quote, problematic. So looking at these emails, this is between the communication directors, you know, somewhat senior communication directors at the CDIC. And it says, hi, Valerie, I know you're busy. So I really appreciate your help. The definition of vaccine we have posted is problematic. And people are using it to claim the COVID-19 vaccine is not a vaccine based on our own definition, which it was not. So what they did was they proposed different updates to that.

Does the updated version look okay to you? I, you know, I rejiggered it a little bit. Can you take a look at that? Exactly, exactly. And these are the science communicators. So apparently that was good because she says in the next slide, this is for the general public, I'm good with the change. But then they found some morbid issues. They said, does this definition need to be updated as well? Uh-oh, we have a cascading issue.

And there it is the one that was brought up the act of introducing a vaccine in the body to produce immunity to a specific disease to something like the act of introducing a vaccine in the body to produce protection from a specific disease. This is how it's done, folks. Little emails between really the PR side of the CDC. How do we do better PR? We got to change the because we have totally missed the boat here. Right, right. And so that's kind of how I guess it works behind the scenes when you pull the curtain back. Right.

There's also, I mean, this is a big week for whistleblowers for FOIA documents. And this came out in the BMJ. Really, as ASIP was voting on the Pfizer vaccine, we have a Pfizer whistleblower. COVID-19 researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer's vaccine trials. We've already heard a lot about this. So it says in the article here, a regional director. who is employed at the research organization, Ventavia Research Group, has told the BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer's pivotal phase three trial. It goes on to say staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding. After repeatedly notifying Ventavia of these problems, the regional director, Brooke Jackson, emailed a complaint to the U.S. Food Drug Administration. Ventavia fired her later the same day.

Jackson has provided the BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, auto recordings, and emails. And what they're showing is basically a lack of timely follow up with the patients who experienced those adverse reactions like we heard at the D.C. trial by Senator Johnson, protocol deviations not being reported, staff being targeted for just bringing the problems up, all of the stuff that we've heard from people before. And just put in this BMJ article.

And what we just heard from the other side of it, from Breanne, right, that I was in the trial, I was reporting my issues, and not only did they not deal with me, but told me to basically take a hike and maybe talk to the NIH with my issues, but we're not seeing that. We don't have a name for it, so screw you. And then you go in and see,

I've been erased from the trial altogether, which is exactly, I mean, look, this, you know, an article like this comes out, and you say, well, if it's the only point out there, but when you start hearing every trial participants say the same thing, I, you know, I'm in a wheelchair, I mean, I got a feeding tube, and they reported it as a stomachache, clearly somebody on top of like these organizations and these institutes that were handling

these trials were in cahoots with the pharmaceutical company and anybody that decides to do what's right based on the Hippocratic oath that they signed, you're fired. Go ahead and pack up your boxes. Get out of here. We're going to promote this vaccine and we're tired of hearing about how buried you are in people that are injured from the vaccine in these trials. Right. And it's not clear from the BMJ article. You know, there was no links to the audio recordings, no links to the email exchanges. And it's not clear if there's going to be legal action moving forward or what the next steps are. But this is out now. And we'll be keeping an eye on what these next steps are, because this is a really big deal. These are the trials,

these phase three trials are the trials that are being relied upon for the FDA and ASIP to make their recommendations. So some big news there. I get such mixed emotions. On one hand, you know, I know we're going to know the truth. You know, as far as what we do here, here on the high wire, we will go down in history as having told the truth because everywhere we look, we are vindicated, everywhere we look, we are verified on what we're reporting is the truth. And if in the trials themselves in a totally controlled event where you were only bringing in the healthiest people you could find, you know, then, and now it's going out to the public and all those injuries were hidden, well, now are you going to be in the public where you're

not going to be able to hide this. We're not hiding. It's all over Facebook. It's all over It doesn't matter how many times they censored people, these stories are everywhere. Now you're going to give it to innocent children. I mean, and we're just talking about the initial injuries, none of the long-term antibody-dependent enhancement, or maybe the shutting down of the tolerated receptors and the autoimmunity, the cancer that's down the road. I just think to myself, you know, what so many scientists that I've talked to from Dr. Andy Wakefield when we worked on Vax to recently a conversation with Garrett, Van, Bosh, they always say the same thing. In the end, I will be proven that I'm right.

The issue is simply how many people have had to have died or lost their lives or have been injured before the truth is actually recognized. And that's what we're sitting here. It's like it's like just watching our watch. Like how long, how many innocent people are going to have to be destroyed before it becomes so completely obvious that this is one of the greatest scientific disasters in history. Yes, yes. And while we were reporting of the vaccine, the vaccination,

may be shedding or the vaccine may not be stopping transmission or stopping infection. Well, the media was out there saying it's 95% effective or 98% effective. And Rochelle Wollinsky and Biden were saying this was a pandemic of the unvaccinated. We're spreading the Delta variant. Now we have a study that came out that is really showing the opposite of that. This is a study out of San Francisco, an American study showing what really happened during these days that Delta was spreading. It's called predominance of antibody resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants in.

vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California. I remember when breakthrough cases were a rare thing. They would make headlines. Now they're being studied. This is a common thing. And let's look at what these researchers found. Incredible stuff. They said, quote,

we analyze SARS-CoV to whole genome sequences and viral loads from 1,373 persons with COVID-19 from the San Francisco Bay area, from February 1 to June 3, 2021, of which 125, 9.1% were vaccine breakthrough infection. Fully vaccinated were more likely than unvaccinated persons to be infected by variants carrying mutations associated with decreased antibody neutralization. Whoa. They go on to say, quote, differences in viral loads were non-significant between unvaccinated and fully vaccinated persons.

And according to lineage, viral loads were significantly higher and symptomatic as compared to asymptomatic vaccine breakthrough cases. And this is the kicker. And symptomatic vaccine breakthrough infections had symptoms. similar viral loads to unvaccinated infections. And that's a lot to say right there. It is. And we've heard a lot of that, right?

We've been reporting multiple studies showing same viral load in the vaccine and the unvaccine. But what is so interesting here is that they're saying the variance where we're being told, like obviously we've been reporting correctly. We've talked about how Geert Banden-Bosch clearly stated that the vaccine is pressuring the virus, not that it's making the virus mutate, but it's selecting for more dangerous. restrains. If you're only attacking the spike protein of the alpha, otherwise known as the legacy version of these viruses that came out of Wuhan, and now you, you know, if you're just pressuring that and only leaving the more deadly or more infectious versions to be around,

then you're going to have a problem. You're going to make that spread. So, I mean, here we're seeing proof of what Deer Fandin Bosch, you know, I think warned us of probably was it six months ago when we first brought him on. Now what they're saying, let me get this straight, is that when they looked at the viral loads, the genomic sequence inside the virus and unvaccinated people, and inside the vaccine, I mean, the vaccinated people, they found that the vaccinated people were carrying the more infectious strain that was getting over the neutralizing antibodies, meaning getting around or what we know as vaccine escape, right, getting around their immunity. So, and more, so more of that more potentially deadly or more infectious strain as we move in the future

is being carried by the vaccinated than it is by the unvaccinated. Yeah, and to really drive this point home, let's look at some of the graphs from that study. So this is one of the more obvious ones right here. You see that fully vaccinated column up there on the top left. Antibody resistant, that 78% of that first big Pac-Man circle in red there, they were carrying 78% of the antibody-resistant strains compared to the unvaccinated right next door there, only 48%.

Wow. And then underneath in green, bottom left circle, the vaccinated were carrying at 85% more infectious strain than the unvaccinated, which was slightly less, 77%. But then, interestingly enough, this was, again, as the Delta variant was taking hold in the U.S. at the exact time, we go to this next slide here, we can see this is a really busy slide, but it's basically showing that the Delta variant is, and that big circle on the left, the bottom right of that big circle, the Delta variant is 35% of those fully vaccinated. or carrying those things around.

And, you know, as we know, it's more infectious. So I guess we have to hypothesize that they were 35% were spreading that. Compared to the unvaccinated, that Delta was just a little sliver on the right there. It's 5%. So this is, you know, this is scientific proof. This thing should be all over the front page news everywhere. I want my Barbie dolls back. Like, this is what I tried to show people just weeks ago, that, you know, in the end,

if you are, you know, the vaccinator carrying this much more infectious load in handing off because of the way the vaccine works, whereas the unvaccinated are filtering that out. If you saw that 13%, if the unvaccinated were the ones inhaling this virus all over, we would be keeping that as the lesser, you know, the lesser dominant strain. The more dominant strain, the unvaccinated are dealing with the Z alpha, and that's one is much easier to beat. We could have eradicated this, but the vaccine is continuing to bring in more and more infectious and dangerous variants.

Outrage. Right. And proof is right there. We're getting ahead of the news cycle here, just so everyone knows so they can watch out for the media trying to spin this. This is CNBC. This is their headline right now. A potentially faster spreading delta variant, A.Y.4.2 has been spotted in eight states. So this is just the first of the reporting. But if they start trying to spin this as this is a unvaccinated problem, they're spreading this.

You can point them to this study out of San Francisco showing that that may not be the case. And now just think about this, folks. as you have more, you know, more and more infectious strains now peaking out. We know that they're being carried by the vaccinated. Now imagine we're about to vaccinate all of our children that are still have these incredible innate immune systems that are going to be able to block that with a vaccine for the alpha that's not even in this country anymore. It's nowhere in the world. We are literally using an antiquated and old vaccine for an alpha variant when the delta is the one that is spreading, mutating,

and these kids are going to be taking a product that doesn't deal with delta at all. goes all the way around it. I mean, at the very least, if you believed in this product at all, you would think they would have gone giving you the courtesy to at least whip up a childhood vaccine that is focused on Delta. But clearly, you know, good science for any reason from their side, even if those were believers, they're not doing any of that. I mean, it's, it's, obviously I'm not speechless,

but this is as close to speechless as I get. Well, as his vaccines are rolling out in children, you know, pretty much around the world. The big question on people's mind is this myocarditis issue, is this heart inflammation issue? And some dot connecting, I think is really interesting to people that pay attention to. Instead of the media maybe warning or talking about, you know, this might be an issue, keep an eye on your kids. There actually seems to be a trend going on here. And it pulled some of the headlines. This is the first one. This is out of India. It's just to show it's happening all over the world. Heart attacks on the rise among young across India, says experts. And the

cardiologist they interviewed in there says he says intense workouts in the gym protein shakes and other factors can precipitate heart attacks okay well back to the united food is one of the most dangerous things you can do when you're young stay away for that because you could have a heart attack we come from full circle we've gone full circle of inversion I guess right so moving into the US now same headlines here is almost like an effort a marketing campaign how old do you have to be to have a stroke younger than you think another headline little known heart attack that strikes fit and healthy women as young as 22. And then this article, here we have actual evidence instead of PR campaign. This is NPR. ERs are now swamped with seriously ill patients, but many

don't have COVID, don't even have COVID. And it says in here, doctors and nurses say the severity of illness of the people swamp in the ER ranges widely and includes abdominal pain, respiratory problems. Otherwise known as paralysis. Right. Blood clots, here we go, heart conditions, suicide, attempts, among others, this is a big problem. And then out of the daily mail, it's interesting because this story, this next story, was not reported in the U.S. It was basically reported in the daily mail in the UK. They broke it. Americans who received the one dose Johnson and Johnson COVID-19 vaccine were 3.5 times as likely to develop aware blood clots compared to the general population, the study finds. These are researchers, it says from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota,

to compare data from the general population before the pandemic to data gathered from the reported vaccine side effects suffered by Americans. They said they found that a person who received the vaccine was 3.5 times as likely to develop brain blood clots as an average person before the pandemic. And this study is backbone. Yeah, this study's backbone. They took the information from VERS, the vaccine adverse event reporting system, which we know is under reported. And that's what is the studies being based off of. So they're taking that study, the information from there. Look at where VERS is at, everybody.

17,619 reported deaths now. This is just from the COVID vaccine. 86,542 hospitalizations, 94,000 urgent care, 130,000 office visits. And, you know, we show you VERS. I get attacked by newspapers all the time that I use VERS, but I have news for you out there, New York Times, Washington Post. So does the Mayo Clinic.

All right. That's what VERS is there for. It's the one, it's the one capture system. I don't think people realize this, that doctors are mandated to use if their patients are injured by a vaccine. There's no other, there's another system out there. There's not a better one. This is the CDC system for doctors, and they are mandated to use it. I mean, they never get arrested when they don't. As you said, it's underreported, but, you know, here we are. It's nice to see that at least Mayo Clinic has no problem using VERS because it has. important data for all of us to see yeah and an additional point to this story you know we're as we as we do research we try to connect the dots and i thought this was interesting to point out the FDA approved blood thinning medication for children on june 21 2021 and that's what it's called prodaxia these are pellets to treat children they have two types thank god pellets to treat children three months or less up to 12 years old with venous thromboembolism these are are basically blood clots that can lead to strokes. So is this a coincidence?

I don't know, but it's a heck of an interesting timing with all of this in the background. We have to look at this and really ask some hard questions here as a society. Especially for anyone that looks at the conveyor belt. Welcome to the conveyor belt of medicine. Start out with a product early on in life that gives you blood clots.

Don't worry, we've got a drug to handle that. America, America. It's really something to be proud of. Yeah, and you know, I woke up this morning, breaking news. This is as of this morning right before the show, President Biden, the Biden administration, the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for private sector workers to begin January 4th. This is a big deal. It's 490 pages. It was just released. Now, this is, there's two types. There's the federal contractor mandate. And this is, this is the OSHA mandate that was reporting on it's highly talked about. There it is, the Department of Labor Action, COVID-19 vaccination and testing. emergency temporary standard that's OSHA this is an interim final rule you know uh in in american history vaccine mandates have never been anything but really through the military essentially when it comes for the the federal level like this so this is beyond unprecedented this is for worker

this is for workers in companies with a hundred or more employees and already i can't even keep up with the headlines we have south carolina indiana ohio missouri kentucky tennessee i mean literally as of seconds ago, already coming out and saying they're going to sue the Biden administration. Fantastic. There's attorneys generals lining up against this. So this will be a story we'll be reporting on for several weeks, but it's just happening now. Well, it's the full court press. They're honest.

Americans stand strong. Hold the line you have so far. That's what we're here for. Please share all this information with your friends. They are now in harm's way. They're being brainwashed by a media system that is funded by the companies that are going to make tens of billions of dollars this year off of this product. Jeffrey, thank you for that incredible reporting. I look forward to seeing you next week. All right, Dahl. It's an honor to stand with you

and report this news. These are historical times. So thank you. They certainly are. All right, take care. If you like the Jackson report on the show, you should definitely check out our website the highwire.com where Jeffrey Jackson has his own page where he writes and gets deeper into many the topics that we're sharing here today. You know, when you look, at what we're reporting on here and you're thinking, why am I not seeing this anyplace else? There's not a lot we can do about that. I can't change the fact that the pharmaceutical industry gives about 70% of the advertising to the other news agencies that you're watching and you're funding with your dollar. You're buying, you're paying for the cable that funds them and you're saying that we love what you're doing.

We love what you're doing there at CNN and MSNBC. But the truth is, we need your help because this is a tsunami now. It's a tsunami that is attacking not only the United States of America, America, not only the state that you're in, but the entire world. And we are an international news show. We're the only ones bringing the truth. We're the only ones that are completely transparent with what we're doing. I've told you before. We call it the High Wire Protocol. There's a reason why we are presenting all of our information to you. And if you are not utilizing this tool, then you're not getting probably at least 50 to 75% of the value of what the High Wire

offers you for free, which is just sign up to our newsletter. So on Monday, when you say, I mean, you guys call me, where's that study you showed? It will be in your own inbox on Monday if you sign the email address. I'll just put your email address right in there. It's totally encrypted. We won't share it with anybody. We don't bother you with advertising or anything like that. It's simply so that you have the facts that you can click on the hyperlinks to the issues,

to the studies, to what we're talking about so that you're not forced the next time you're trying to wake up a friend of yours or a family member who's about to do something that could ruin their life forever. You don't have to say, well, Del Bigtree said you can say, you know what, here is the new study by health and human services itself. Or this is what the WHO just put out. Or the CDC, yes. That is where most of our information comes from, or the British Medical Journal. All that is made possible for you.

And all of that is made possible because of you. And so if you're out there and you keep watching the high wire and recognizing, you know, how incredibly unique this experience is. And remember, I want to be careful to say to you that we are careful here. There are a lot of different agencies or other bloggers out there that will bring you any story that they hear of. We don't do that. There are many stories that we are vetting right now. It is so important to me that when you watch the high wire, you recognize that what you are watching here is the truth, that has been vetted from multiple directions, not just the breaking story. I have no interest in telling you the story.

First, I'm the one that if you want to come to you, I want to be able to say it's right. We got it right. And so we are not rushing into this, many other, and I have nothing against them. Other shows that you're watching out there, maybe rushing out for the hot news story on this. We make sure we get it right. We're talking to world-renowned scientists that are working for us with us all around the world. We're talking to lawyers all around the world. All of that obviously takes a lot of funding, and the only way it's made possible is by you.

I refuse to take money from pharma or gasoline or diapers. And frankly, I don't want to take money from people that want to give you vitamins or, you know, the next elixir or a water treatment machine, even though I'm sure all of those things are great, I don't want anyone, not from their side, not from our side saying, I don't like how you cover that story. We cover the story the way we are guided to cover it with the scientists in the background that we have from a totally clear and objective space, and that's what you're getting here. So please, if you can help us, this is the time. It's obvious now we are under threat.

We need your help more than ever. Please donate to I can. Go and become a recurring donor because it helps us know what lawsuits we can file, what we can look to in the future, what we can afford, all that's made possible by a dollar a month or $5 a month. Or if you're doing really well, you know, maybe $100 a month. I mean, just imagine what those news agencies that you are funding every time you pay your cable bill. How much are they spending to take care of you to tell you the truth to do investigations into the real science? Zero, zero. But they're getting tens and hundreds of millions of dollars from pharma.

Help us compete with that. Keep us on the front lines. We need your help. All right. Well, speaking of the front lines, one of the great scientists that has appeared on our show before, that has absolutely nothing to gain for telling the truth, a world-renowned cardiologist who has time and time again been on the news trying to wake us up saying, I am not anti-science.

I am the epitome of science. I'm trying to draw attention. Before there was a meeting in DC showing all the injuries, before there was many of the other pundits that are out there starting to change their mind. Before even, you know, Joe Rogan decide to have an honest conversation about this. There was Peter McCullough, and he is everywhere.

Joining me now is Dr. Peter McCullough. Dr. Peter McCullough. Dr. Peter McCullough. Internist and cardiologists, he's been spearheading efforts to get this countervailing perspective. in front of Congress. Where's the conversation about the treatment of COVID-19?

Patients actually think that the virus is untreatable. And so what happens is they go out to get a diagnosis. Now, I'm a COVID survivor. My wife in the gallery is a COVID survivor. My father in a nursing home is a COVID survivor. You get handed a diagnostic test. It says, here, you're COVID positive. Go home.

Is there any treatment? No. That's the standard of care in the United States. Hydroxychloroquine's most frequently prescribed drug for this condition worldwide is the most studied drug. I can tell you firsthand, hydroxychloroquine does not cause giant scars in the heart. There have been cases all over the country of doctors trying to help patients. And hydroxychloroquine is one of four to six drugs we use for COVID-19. It is extraordinary.

There's not a single media doctor on TV who's ever treated a COVID patient. Not a single one. a single person in the White House task force as ever treated patient. Lancet published a fake paper that came from a fake database that implied that hydroxychloroquine hurt people in the hospital. And we looked at it in two seconds, I knew it was a fake paper. I don't want anybody to think that the myocarditis of the natural infection is anything like what we're seeing with the vaccines. It's a totally different syndrome. We're six months into the vaccine program and we've had no detailed press briefing on vaccines

safety. We've had 21,000 hospitalizations. The vaccine has no protective effect against the Delta variant. It's no time to rush out and get the vaccine. America has to wake up right here, right now. Well, you've seen him all over Fox News and different media channels speaking the truth, bringing in science, making it understandable to everybody. And I am so happy to be here in a conversation at this critical time right now. So, doctor, thank you for joining us. Well, thanks for having me, Dom. I'm Dr. Peter McCullough. I'm an academic internist, cardiologist, and a trained epidemiologist in practice in Dallas, Texas, but I'm very involved in the COVID-19 pandemic response, and my analyses have been relied upon by the U.S. Senate,

many state houses of legislation. And as you've pointed out, I've been asked in a lot of different media venues to give a particular analysis now on vaccine, safety, and efficacy. And you're doing an amazing job at it. And I think what's been so great for all of us in media, certainly, you know, alternate media, whatever you want to call it, but just media in general, your ability to sort of bring facts that we can count on. So much of the information you've provided us here at the Highwire, you know, we're able to look it up and say, there it is, there's the science. So while we're speaking about science, I mean, this may be, I think, a week that will live in infamy. We just on Tuesday watched as the advisory committee on immunization practices approved the vaccine for the use in children, the COVID vaccine, of course,

in five to 11 year olds. Just last week, obviously the FDA had sort of approved an emergency use authorization, and now it's being followed up by the CDC, which we now know whether or not there's, you know, people on these committees are like, well, I don't want a mandate, but I would like it available to people, which was some of the arguments that have been made. We know there's going to be mandates on children, probably starting in California, where Gavin Newsom, has said as soon as this is available for children, I'm going to mandate it to get into school. So now children are, you know, going to be directly in the firing line of this lightly tested at best vaccine, has not been through long-term safety studies.

But unlike many of the conversations, the concerns of long-term issues, which we've addressed on the high wire, there are real short-term issues that have been visible to the naked eye right in front of us, and that is this issue of myocarditis, pariocarditis, this heart inflammation problem in children, which is what you've been speaking about a lot. So first of all, what are your thoughts on the advisory committee on immunization practices? These are your peers. These are people just like you that went through medical school. Of course, you know, you have this, you know, deep understanding of the heart that has been your specialty.

But as you saw them vote 14 to zero, nobody thinking it might be a bad idea to give this vaccinations to children. What are your thoughts right now? I'm a graduate of USC of Texas, Southwestern, and from there, I went on to University of Washington in Seattle. In the 80s, it was the number one medicine training program in the United States just ahead of the Harvard programs. And many of my fellow residents went on to the CDC to be CDC officers. I went off and did a tour of rural health and then did my public health training at University of Michigan and then on to cardiology training. So we are really kind of equal backgrounds.

And I think it's important for the listeners to understand that the CDC is not like the Supreme Court. The CDC is an outbreak investigation organization. And they do provide some guidance, but it's not considered high-level guidance in medicine. So for instance, the CDC recommends that we have less than 10 percent of our calories and sugar and saturated fat, for instance. They have dietary recommendations. It's not considered high-level recommendations. So I wouldn't think a CDC vote on a vaccine should carry much weight because the CDC in

general is just not a treating organization. They do not have members who are actually treating patients, making clinical decisions, or fielding the issues of risks and benefits. That being said, in the pandemic, the CDC, the FDA and the NIH have in a sense almost grown in power in terms of their recommendations as they come down to the public. And what we know so far in all of the meetings since the registrational trials in adults, so that includes the booster meetings, that includes ages 12 to 17, and now ages 5 to 11. All of those data have been with the legacy variants, have been with the Wuhan wild type spike

protein and then the alpha, beta, and some gamma. There are no randomized trials, none, and certainly no studies with any meaningful clinical outcomes with the Delta variant. And the Delta variant now is basically here to stay. It's 99% of the mutant strains that we have. It's basically crowded out all the others because it's thriving among the vaccinated. And so you can imagine having all this decision and data regarding antibody titers, regarding really pretty meager clinical outcomes, the occurrence of the upper respiratory infection, the cold, if you will, of COVID-19 in these different data sets, all being from the legacy variants. And we know that the vaccines in adults actually did have some protection against the legacy variant upper respiratory tract

illness. We knew out of registrational trials. It had about 90% vaccine efficacy. And and in a paper by self-in-tellate. Let me be clear, let me be clear because I want to make sure our audience understands what you just said. When we say 90% efficacy, when we think vaccination, we think that means it's 90% effective at making sure that I'm immune to the disease, that I don't catch it. I can't transmit it. But what you're saying, it's 90% effective at, you know, handling the symptoms of the disease, not the infection. I'm still going to catch the infection, but I won't, you know, go through maybe serious symptoms. Right.

So let me clarify. That's important, though. So let me clarify. So in the registrational trials, let's just take the adult trials. These were trials where they recruited people who were interested in being in research, and they could have received the active immunization or placebo. And in general, they were fastidious. I mean, the rates of infection, of just the binary infection of getting the cold, if you will, of COVID-19, was less than 1% in both groups. But what I mean by vaccine efficacy, if there were, 100 upper respiratory tract infections in the placebo group, then there would be 10 in the vaccine group. That would be 90% vaccine efficacy. You're right. It's just been mistranslated. People

think it's 90% protection, but it's not because I can tell you when it's less than 1% of people who got the infection, that means very, very few people were exposed to COVID-19. And that was in an era where we had 5, 10, 15% laboratory positive rates. So what I'm telling you is the registration trials were not a very good challenge of protection. And so sure enough, that's what we've seen now in the population. In the adults, we've seen a giant waning of protection. That's based on two things. One is based on the mutation to Delta, which is greatly resistant to the vaccines, and Delta can thrive in the nose and mouth of those who are vaccinated. And based on another problem, another problem is the immunization itself with the current genre of vaccines is not long lasting.

And there are very good data paper by Nordstrom and colleagues from Sweden had 1.6 million matched pairs of vaccinated versus unvaccinated. And what they showed with Pfizer and Moderna is they went from vaccine efficacies of over 90 percent initially dropping considerably down. Pfizer after 210 days dropped below 30 percent. Moderna dropped considerably, I believe, below 70 percent. And a paper by Israel and colleagues from Israel showed that the antibodies dropped by 40% per month with Pfizer. And we know antibodies against the spike protein is a very partial form of immunity. With the natural infection, we have a full library of antibodies against all the fundamental components of the vaccine. Plus we have robust T-cell immunity against the nucleocapsid, natural killer cells.

We have the full armamentarium. And now in the Brownstone Institute, Paul Alexander's accumulated 91. studies supporting natural immunity, robust, complete, and durable. Now, could I say that in many ways this is a second pandemic? I mean, we keep being told that this pandemic is now spread out over a year and a half, and we've got to vaccinate in order to stop this pandemic. But the truth is, is when I hear you saying that, you know, we are no longer in the legacy, as you put it, strains of this virus, we are now fully in Delta.

If we're in Foley in Delta, it is different enough, and we're seeing this through the sort of the success of the vaccine, that this is really a new problem, right? I mean, couldn't we say that we ended that first pandemic of the legacy version of these viruses and now we're in the pandemic of Delta? And perhaps should be treating that and looking at that differently, looking at the products we're using differently? I agree with that. I think that Delta variant is sufficiently different. It's the most mutated form of the variant. We have mutations up and down the spike protein, other parts of the virus.

It's clearly more contagious. And we know that it lives in the nose and mouth at much higher viral loads, paper by Chow from Ho Chi Minh City, one by Liu, from Guangzhou, China, showing 251 to a thousandfold higher viral load compared to other strains in the pre-vaccinated era. And we're talking about viral loads among those fully vaccinated,

The child paper, for instance, they're fully vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine. But we know now papers in the United States, one by Rimerizma from the Wisconsin Department of Public Health, and one by a charion from the University of California, Davis, showed among those vaccinated and unvaccinated who are coming forward for testing. So they're kind of in this insipient phase of COVID-19,

that they had equal viral loads in the nose and mouth by testing, PCR testing, the cycle threshold, median was around 22 to 24. And in the Rhymerisma paper, they actually even took the sample and tested it in the in vitro infectivity models. And the virus harvested from the vaccinated, it was equally as infectious as those unvaccinated. So I think these are proof positive now that the vaccines don't provide a safer work environment, for instance. They wouldn't provide any safety in terms of people say, well, protect your loved ones. I've seen families in a sense have the vaccine become weaponized and the family members say, well, take a vaccine to protect someone.

One isn't protecting anybody else unless they're paying attention to symptoms. So either vaccinated or unvaccinated, the most important thing is in the early symptom phase is to get out of congregate settings, get out of work, get out of school. I've recently gave some national presentations to all, very large crowds, by the way, interested in this. And I've made a note, I've actually stopped a couple times and just listened. And I remind the crowd, listen, we've got, you know, many people in the room. There's no coughing, sneezing, there's nobody blowing their nose. You know what's happened?

People are now much more conscientious of viral spread. That's far more effective than a vaccine. Right. If you're sick, stay home. I mean, and that's really, and to be honest, if the vaccine does what they say it does, which is reduced symptoms. And I think obviously we're saying that that benefit has probably been lost now with Delta. But even if it did do that in some ways, that really exacerbates the problem, does it not?

Because more likely an unvaccinated person knows they have the sniffles. They know that they're feeling really bad, that they're staying home and not going out. There's this potential that the vaccine does what it's supposed to do, which is reduce your symptoms. You're still a carrier. You're still as you're saying, carrying the same viral load, but you don't know you're sick. So you're more likely to be out spreading this everywhere. you go at a time where that spread is something we're trying to mitigate. So in essence, isn't it possible that the vaccine is doing the opposite of what we needed to do, which is helping this

virus to spread and reach more people? You know, we can't prove it, but in a paper by Arian at all from Oxford group that was published from the Oxford Big Data Group towards the end of September in preprint. They tried to analyze this issue of the vaccinated, spreading it to the unvaccinated. And what they did demonstrated, there was differential reduction in that spread, according to Pfizer and the AstraZeneca vaccine, maybe early on. But it wore off very quickly. And there was nothing mentioned about the perceptiveness of symptoms. I'm not sure if the symptoms have a different severity among the vaccinated, unvaccinated at that upper respiratory level. I bet the perception does and the interpretation does.

And what I mean by this is someone who's vaccinated is in a sense been told that they're protected. So they have maybe a confidence. And because of this, they may not seek testing as promptly. They may interpret it as being maybe allergies or something else. It may be the perception. And then the fear is we're getting behind on this. And, you know, there's some data emerging. And I want to be careful on my citation of this.

But importantly, the 43rd UK weekly reports, so week 43, the weekly surveillance report, where they have age over 50 in the different age strata, they have 82 to 90% of those in the UK fully vaccinated. Remember, they have Pfizer, modern, and AstraZeneca in the UK. Here in the UK now, of the deaths due to COVID-19, dealt in that age group weeks 39 to 42. So that's a broad span right in the Delta pandemic,

Dell, they have 81.1% of the deaths in the UK are fully vaccinated. What does that tell you? That tells you that it's either the vaccines have no protection against death, or maybe sadly those vaccinated are getting behind on seeking early treatment. Wow, those are incredible numbers. All right, let's dive into, you know, even more of your area of expertise, which is the heart. You know, when we were watching the FDA having meetings,

there was one interaction between doctors, and I'll just paraphrase it, where essentially they asked a heart doctor about myocarditis. And they'd looked into this issue and they'd studied these children. And the question being asked was, I think it was something like 800 cases of myocarditis. And they said, how many of those were biopsied so that we could see how severe it was? This question being, is vaccine-induced myocarditis as bad as, you know, the usual myocarditis brought on by a viral infection or other,

natural causes. And the answer was, well, to my knowledge, we might have biopsyed two of the cases out of like 800. But I mean, a tiny, whether or not the number is exactly right. As I'm saying, it's from memory. But for people like the FDA and the CDC, and for all of us that watch these regulatory agencies, we're under this impression that they care so much. They know they've got an experimental product that they're rushing out faster than they ever have before. So certainly, They're doing their due diligence to do really deep investigations. And when we hear things like that, that out of 800 of these cases, you didn't biopsy them. You didn't look to see, you know, how severe are these situations?

What is that, what are we supposed to take away from this? Can we trust that these regulatory agencies are looking at this condition properly? The audience should know that we actually have a safety set of terms and definitions and standards. There's standards of safety and research, and one of them is called a serious adverse event. We call that an S-A-E. And then there's a less serious event. It's called an AE or adverse event. When an individual is hospitalized, that is always considered a serious adverse event.

A life-threatening illness is considered a serious adverse event. And obviously, death is severe adverse illness. So what we know with myocarditis, the CDC and FDA originally, remember, were very few children were vaccinated in the spring. They already had, as you mentioned, I think 600, 800 cases. That was a universal cases. They reviewed 200 that were solid where they had enough data. At that point, there were separate meetings, CDC and FDA. At that point, Dell, 90% of these adolescents were hospitalized. So 90%, it takes a lot to hospitalize a 17-year-old. If a 17-year-old came in with some mild chest pain, something very nonspecific, the EKGs look fine, the exam was fine, maybe the blood

tests were pending, that child would have went home. Let me tell you what it takes to hospitalize some with myocarditis. We're talking about severe chest pain, early signs and symptoms of heart failure, abnormal physical exam, market elevations in cardiac troponin. This is the blood test we use to diagnose heart attacks and adults. We never see troponin elevated in children. We're talking about 10 to 100-fold elevations in cardiac troponin, indicating heart muscle is being damaged. We see dramatic EKG changes, SD-segment elevation across all the leads. And then importantly, in that review of 200 cases, they already had 25% had abnormal cardiac imaging, echocardiography.

And I infer actually as early left ventricular failure, signs and symptoms that the left ventricle is starting to fail in response to this injury. We know now from a paper by Ovolio, a pre-clinical paper, that the spike protein itself directly damages the periscites and the delicate cells within the heart. The spike protein after vaccination actually may be expressed on the cell surface of cardiomyosites. This is very abnormal. The Wuhan spike protein in no way should be anywhere close to the delicate structure of the heart, the cardiomyocytes, and periscites and other satellite cells. And so these children, and boys, way more than girls, develop infant. inflammation in the heart and enough damage to the heart to have these signs and symptoms.

So it's serious. And now when we fast forward, we now have a very good analysis from Tracy Hogue at the University of California, Davis. Wow. So, I mean, it just seems like when we're looking with that much data and that much understanding, even a layperson looking at this has got to be saying, why would I put my child at that risk? And when we look at these numbers coming out of Israel, you know, there's stats saying things like, you know, you're three to six times more likely as a boy, as a healthy boy, to experience one of these heart, you know, events, then you are to end up in a hospital over 120-day period from COVID itself. And it seems to me for the first time ever that I know of, because, I mean, I've been investigating

vaccines. There's issues. But one of the difficult things to do is to really, you know, figure out that benefit, risk, reward ratio that we all talk about. But in this case, it feels to me or seems to me, unless I'm missing. something that it is clear that this vaccine is causing more injury to certainly young men than the virus is. I mean, we're talking about super low hospital rates and even, I mean, almost non-existent death rates when it comes to that group. How are they coming to their

conclusions? But let me pick up on that with the Hogue analysis. Tracy Hogue, Usset, California Davis evaluated the age 12 to 17 age group from the V-Safe data. So she had an enormous number of cases. Now the number of cases that was in the thousands, you know, from the most recent VAR's open data analysis were over 10,000 cases of myocardias or pericardias. Can you imagine we went from 2000 to 10,000? And what Hogue found is that still 86% are hospitalized. So these are serious adverse events. So I'm telling you, the vast majority are serious cases. There are boys way more than girls. And it's clearly a huge signal after the second shot. It's almost as if the first shot primes the children. And the second one, there's a dramatic spike. We know that the

tail of cases now, it's not just limited to younger individuals. In fact, it can tail off into older age groups. But what Hogue found in this analysis is you're right, the chances of being hospitalized with myocarditis are far greater than taking your chances with COVID-19 and being hospitalized with COVID-19 because it's such a mild syndrome in the young individuals. And don't forget, Del, a large number of the children have already had COVID-19, right? So you can't get it a second time. So when they take the vaccine, the only possibility is this stochastic chance of getting myocarditis. Now, for the listeners to understand, these are all very rare events. So the vast majority of children who get a vaccine, nothing's going to happen. They're not going to get COVID.

and they're not going to get myocarditis. But when these rare events do happen, they're meaningful to the people who are damaged by them. And so clearly, Hogue shows it's a bad trade-off. One would be much better off taking the respiratory infection than myocarditis. And one of the, I think probably one of the most reckless and reprehensible statements of all time was made in a regulatory meeting. It was made by Dr. Rubin. And he's the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine. And I can tell you, I'm an editor myself. So I know about what it takes to be a medical editor and how careful one's words need to be. He made this statement that will never really know about safety in children unless we just go out and use the product. And I think that

will go down in bioethics history right along with the statements that that Nazi physicians made with Nazi research. It came up in the Nuremberg trials with the Tuskegee experiment. This idea of taking brand new novel technology that we now does an install of the spike protein. This is very important, a paper by Bruce Patterson that was published by the end of July in preprint. Now, Bruce presented this in the September Rome Summit meeting. He showed with the respiratory infection, the S-1 segment of the spike protein is recoverable in human monocytes 15 months later. And what Patterson concluded is no wonder people have long COVID syndrome. And what I'm saying is, wait a minute.

With the vaccine, we probably have more spike protein loading than with the respiratory infection. And can you imagine with each shot, Dell, we've got 15 months for the body to clear out this spike protein, which we know is pathogenic. It incites inflammation. It damages delicate cells. It actually causes blood vessel injury and blood clotting. Can you imagine we're setting with each shot a 15-month sojourn to try to recover. cover from this and once we start to stack boosters on it'll be impossible to avoid the accumulation of spike protein in the bodies of these growing children as well as adults and I can tell you as a doctor

everything I know it is going to be a sure eventuality that chronic disease will come out of spike protein accumulation in the human body. Well, it's really incredibly powerful and scary statements. So on Tuesday, I at the advisory committee of immunization practices. Dr. Sarah Long, I understand, is a professor of pediatrics at Drexel University. She made this statement. Take a look at this.

I think of the typical viral or para-infectious myocarditis as the apple. And you and I are least comfortable treating this patient. They don't present usually with chest plane. They usually present with cardio or respiratory symptoms and exercise intolerance, and they get better very slowly and with great difficulty and sometimes don't get better. So they're the apples. I think the oranges are the coronavirus infection associated myocarditis. And I think looking at these patients and most of the case reports, that more than half of them are,

MISC. And MISC is such a different disease than viral typical myocarditis. It's like a stunned myocardium. They have function problems and their heart just doesn't work for a couple of days. And then they usually turn around and they're oranges. I don't say that I know anything about coronavirus associated myocarditis in adults with COVID, but in children, And this is, you know, somewhere between worse of what I think is myo-pericarditis, the vaccine associated, which is better, and viral myocarditis, which is worse.

And then that, so there's an apple and an orange and an avocado. You know, this vaccine associated pericarditis is predominantly periatal pericarditis. They have chest pain. It's worse with movement. And they have much less. Although their cardiac MRI are abnormal, yes, they have maybe edema, maybe myocytes, maybe inflammatory changes, but their function is much more usually normal and they're better. You've been, I think, pretty vocal about the fact that you are very concerned that the myocarditis being,

you know, expressed by those that have been vaccinated appears to be much more. dangerous than the myocarditis that you're seeing in from the actual illness or the the natural infection. Obviously, Dr. Sarah Long is making the exact opposite statement. Is there any science to back up her perspective or what did you think of that statement? Yeah, I could tell you that the difference is I have the advantage of practicing medicine, so I'm seeing examining patients and I'm having these patients brought forward. So in the setting of the vaccine, the children take the vaccine, they get really sick with chest pain and signs and symptoms of heart failure, they go into emergency rooms and then they're hospitalized

and then they have all the findings that I've described. With COVID-19, the illness, the vast majority of the children are never examined by anybody. They actually don't come forward for anything because it's so mild. So the vast majority of COVID-19 stays in the home. The child is, would never come into any type of framework to be examined. So what's happening is in the severe cases of COVID-19, where people are hospitalized, and there's relatively few children that are hospitalized, far more adults. There is literature generated in the adults. If someone with COVID-19 serious enough to be in the ICU, there's about a 50% chance

that the cardiac troponin, the blood test for heart injury, will be elevated above the upper limit of normal. But these are very small elevations in troponin. don't have any of the other characteristic features of myocarditis. They don't have dramatic EKG changes. They don't have early signs and symptoms of heart failure. And in fact, the Chinese were reporting this very early on in the pandemic. And we see troponin elevations, by the way, with pneumoccal pneumonia, with staphoccal substance. It's basically ICU stress and a troponin elevation is what's being described in COVID-19, the respiratory illness, as opposed to

form fruced clinical myocarditis and children. They're two completely different syndromes. They can't be construed with one with one another at all. And they have a different detection base, right? So everybody in the ICU is going to have a troponin checked as well as the CBC and other labs. The children at home, they are developing pretty severe symptoms where the parents finally pull the trigger and bring their child into the ER. So the discovery bias.

So we can't say it's rare and we can't say it's mild. The only way we can ever find out how frequent is is check all the children. And there probably should be studies to check every. every child who gets a vaccine to check the cardiac tropon, EKG, and other studies. Many think the threshold of risk is so sufficiently high that we shouldn't even do that research, that the children should not receive the vaccines. When this was breaking, I was asked to comment on national news a bunch of times I did for Laura Ingram on the Ingram angle, and I was very clear with America. I said, listen, no one under age 30, period, should consider one of these vaccines

because of these risks, the risk far away the benefits. That was before we had all these analyses. Now we have one coming in from Ron Costef toxicology reports. And by the way, the CDC and the FDA have heard these reports as informal meetings and presentations now for two months. The Costoff report looks at death. And Costoff, the title of his papers, why are we vaccinating children? And he has concluded that through all age ranges, the chances of dying, it's rare, but the chances of dying after a vaccine are actually more frequent than taking your chances with

COVID-19 and dying of the respiratory infection. So you would be an agreement on the one point that it is comparing apples, oranges, and avocados when it comes to the vaccine-induced myocarditis compared to the natural or the myocarditis from the natural infection. But yours is the opposite statement. The science shows you and your direct, you know, contact with these issues says that is far more serious when it's coming from the vaccination. The spike protein, the interaction with the heart cells is quite dramatic. That's true. So it's completely two different syndromes. And it's not just my opinion, but it's supported by the Hogue analysis and now a recent paper by Rose.

And I'm the co-author. That's an analysis from the VERS system itself. And it was fully published in current problems of cardiology. And, you know, publication involves peer review, editorial decision, publication, copyright agreement, authorship contracts, signatures, color figure, you know, agreements, etc. and then listing in the National Library of Medicine, it becomes part of permanent history. And, Dell, I was shocked as this paper was completely published and permanently listed in the National Library of Medicine, five days before the FDA meeting, Dell, five days before the five to 11 age meeting,

Elsevier pulled that paper down from its website and said that it was temporary withdrawing it because they thought maybe they didn't originally invite it. And we have a complete dialogue showing that between Dr. Rose and the editor is clearly invited. It was clearly welcome to went through the entire process. It's overt censorship. And I can tell you, it's breach of publication, a breach of the publication contract. And it's also what we call tortuous interference. They're actually interfering with the business of disseminating scientific knowledge for the world to see.

I think strategically timed so people could not see the data before the meeting. Wow. I mean, that's incredible. And in this time of censorship, with all that's going on, you know, there's so many doctors and specialists experts reach out to the high wire every week now saying, I'd like to supply you with information, but I'm afraid of being public because it could really affect my career. You're putting it all in the line, and this just seems like such an important time. You know, what do you have to say to those doctors and scientists that are looking at the same

evidence that you are and are not speaking out. What is this, you know, what is the message of this time? I mean, science seems to be under attack those that are stating the obvious and the provable and to watch studies being changed, definitions being changed. We just change the definition of what a vaccination does. It no longer creates immunity. It simply gives protection against the disease. I mean, it's like talk about moving the goalposts, and yet you're out there. Is science under attack? And is there anyone other than scientists and doctors that can step up and make a difference now? I think it's all about the doctors at this point in time.

You know, each and every physician, we have about a million doctors in the United States. About 90% are MDs and 10% are DOs. Each and every one of us took a Hippocratic oath that we would always be true to the art and science of medicine. And in order to do that, we have to be true to scientific integrity. That's actually part of the profession. It's both an art and a science. And I tell you, on the science side of things, we must have scientific discourse.

We must have disagreement. We must have skepticism. We must allow ourselves to have an interchange, which is free of censorship. It must be free of any threat of reprisal. That's the only way we can get ourselves out of it. Everyone is hurting the world right now through censorship, through threats of reprisal, professional threats.

We're actually hurting the world in doing that. Sure, there's individuals who are being hurt professionally, but we're hurting people. We're actually costing lives. We're causing much more pain, suffering, isolation, hospitalization, and death by not coming out and having robust discussions. We should be having meetings dealt. It shouldn't be me and you.

It should be a panel of doctors. And we should have a robust discussion on this because no two doctors agree. Now, I know that in science and medicine is really important to have facts, but, you know, obviously you must, when you think into the future, if you imagine the history books, looking back on this time, and should we, should we see a mandate for this childhood vaccine right now as this has now been approved by the CDC and should, you know, Newsom and New York? And, you know, let's just say the whole nation goes along with it, says no one's going to be allowed in a private or public school, their children, unless every child gets vaccinated with this vaccine. When you think, you know, sometime in the future, when we reflect back at the historic moment where we took this vaccine, we forced every employee, you know, that was in the country, but then we vaccinate all of our children. What do you think that will look like? What do you think that will be, what we'll be writing about this moment? We say, yay, science won the day. The vaccine saved the people.

Or what do you, you know, or is there a different headline or a different chapter heading that ends up being that page in history? I think scientists will originally be characterized by the authors as being, in a sense, blindsided by this. I know I was clinically. I had no idea this was on the horizon. And they're going to basically initially write about a respiratory infection that we weren't prepared for that put the whole world in a great. rip of fear. And the respiratory infection led to a mass psychosis. And the mass psychosis was led to irrational decision making and inability to, you know, start to use our usual and regular processes of peer review, regulatory science, open discussion, scientific discourse. All of that went away with this mass psychosis. We lost fairness in the courts. We lost fairness in the boardroom. And then the second wave,

after the respiratory illness was the vaccines. The vaccines were, in a sense, the only real provision by governments and public health agencies to address the pandemic. And now we see this entire single-minded attempt crumbling with failing vaccine efficacy and giant concerns regarding vaccine safety. I mean, to the point where it looks like, in a sense, the approach to try to ameliorate the infection is worse than the infection itself, this tradeoff. To have a vaccine that doesn't have a favorable tradeoff on hospitalization and mortality tell us something that this mass psychosis has now led to a global, irrational thinking. And there's victims of the irrational thinking. And I think most poignantly, it's children who are the victims of mass psychosis.

And in this, they can only be harmed. Wow. I mean, you know, so I think it's critical and I don't really see it much differently and and I think all the scientists and doctors that are stepping forward with courage they're doing it because of that exact notion that it is time to make sure that that is not what we end up being written about this time for all those parents out there that you know are used to just following the CDC and what the CDC says and and their pediatrician or what their their school says to do Maybe their ex-spouse is saying, I want my child vaccinated and perhaps they're just going to go along with it.

What do you say to all these people now that I think are going to be faced with one of the most difficult decisions they've ever made, which is, you know, does the concern over this virus make it that I should vaccinate my child? And is it worth it to get into a school to continue that education to vaccinate my child? You know, we never make decisions based on social reasons. Medical decisions should be clinically indicated and medically necessary. When we start making medical decisions based on social reasons, it is going to lead to disaster. Can you imagine if we prescribe diabetes medicines or heart medicine or something, not for heart disease or diabetes, but for social reasons, for either social status or some type of privilege. You can imagine how distorted things are.

Remember in Science Dell, the null hypothesis is the safe base. The null hypothesis here would say, listen, you know, the vaccines are not safe and effective, so don't do it. That's the base. And then to wander off the null hypothesis, you really need convincing proof that, wow, the vaccine is really going to do something here. I don't think we have enough to reject the null hypothesis. I think at this point in time, the safest thing to do is to stay on home base, be free of the vaccine. Most children have already gotten through the respiratory virus. There will be a few more who get it.

They can get early treatment. We know that sadly, there's about the same number of children so far who've died of COVID-19 that died of seasonal influenza. They're about the same. Those deaths are always sad. They tend to occur in children with cystic fibrosis or adult congenital heart disease or other problems and sometimes tough socioeconomic status. But the point is for the vast majority of children, COVID-19, in a sense, to get it, it's a blessing because they get through it and they get natural immunity.

They become an immunologic buffer. The last child I saw because I was looking after the child and the father, the child had a drippy nose for a day or two. She wheezed a little bit. I examined her. She was fine. She didn't have any treatment. Now, the father, we were deep into all kinds of other treatment. It turns out he actually, temperately, he gave the infection to her.

By the way, the adults usually give it to the children, not vice versa. So that's what happened in that case. But the point I'm making is, you know, the children now are the immunologic buffer. And in my view, from a public health perspective, the best thing to do is just go ahead and leave them alone. They're going to be okay. How, my final question is this. You know, how often do children have heart issues? I mean, I don't ever remember hearing about myocarditis or parocharditis or, you know, inflammation of the heart in children.

And if they're going to say that this is common, how common was it before we vaccinated so that we can see if it's changed once we start vaccinating? You know, there's always a very low background rate of parvovirus or adenovirus forms of rare myocarditis. Occasionally you'll hear about a child or a teenager who needs a heart transplant. The most serious form of myocarditis is called giant cell myocarditis. That's actually the one that warrants the biopsy. But these are so rare that cardiologists can think of one or two cases in their career where this would come up. I'm in my fourth decade of adult cardiology, and I've seen, I think, a handful of cases in my career.

Now we're talking about 10,000 cases in the VAIR system, which is probably underreporting. You can imagine as vaccination comes into full swing, how many more children are going to develop myocarditis? And I think you're right. I think it's a gross representation of this mass psychosis of trying to normalize something like this. There's another sign on the side of a bus that says that a stroke can happen in a child. Well, you know, acute heart events and acute stroke events in children shouldn't be happening. The parents should think, you know what, this should not be happening.

My children should be having a normal growth and development pattern. They should be free of acute diseases like this. Wow. All right. Well, you know, I want to thank you for taking the time to do. You are obviously out there. I don't know how you find the energy. I see you everywhere. I see you speaking in front of congressional members and senators and on the news. And obviously you're passionate about this. And you're facing censorship, ridicule. But yet, you know, we can see behind you the fact that you obviously have done your work. You are decorated with confidence from multiple universities and a history and a career that stands for itself. I want to thank you for bringing us the truth here on the high wire and around the world. And I only pray that your words are, you know, listen to by the parents right now who are going to have to make the final decision.

And, you know, we're not here to tell them what to do. It's everybody's choice. But certainly at this time, people really need to do their research. And so I want to, you know, we'll make sure that all of the different papers that you cited here will be available to our audience. so they can read them because that's the most important thing. We don't want to just take any experts' word for it. We want to look at what we're talking about. So, Godspeed in all of your endeavors, keep up the great work,

and I'm sure if you're ever in the neighborhood, it would be great to get you in here in the studio, and we'll do a sit-down interview. Thanks a lot, Tau. All right, take care. Well, as I said, if you are not signed up to our newsletter at the highwire.com, then you are not getting the best piece or tool that we offer here at the highwire. which is the evidence, the facts, the proof in your hands.

There's no other news agency I know in the world that is more transparent than we are. That's why we call it the high wire protocol, which is you should be questioning me. You should be questioning Dr. McCullough. And that should drive you to investigate and research what we're pointing to. What is our data? Show us the data. It should be stated by every civilian and every person, certainly every doctor and science out there, no matter who you're listening to. And we're up to that challenge.

That's why if you're signed up to our newsletter every Monday after the Thursday show, all the science that we're discussing, all the peer-reviewed journals, all the articles will be in your hands so that you can say to your friend or your loved one when you're discussing this issue, not Del Bigtree said or Dr. Peter McCullough said, but right here is the science. This is the peer-reviewed science that is making my point. So please take advantage of that. And right now, sign up to the high.

wire.com. And for the rest of you that are out there, and maybe you know somebody that has been injured by a vaccine, there is a lot of difficulty and figure out what do we do with VERS? How do I get into VERS? Who should I talk to? What are my legal choices? What can happen there? We want to be there for you. And so that's why we have developed injured by COVID vaccine.com. If you or a loved one has been injured after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, including if you are a participant in a clinical trial. Go to injured by COVID vaccine.com. Submissions are confidential. We are here to help provide support, including connecting with medical specialists and potentially securing legal representation. To assure the safety of COVID-19 vaccines for everyone,

it is imperative that every person injured by this product report their injury. We can provide assistance completing a report to the CDC's vaccine adverse events reporting system. system. So if you or a loved one has suffered an injury from a COVID-19 vaccine, go to Injured by COVID vaccine.com now. All right. Well, you know, just a few weeks ago, we saw all of the airlines, you know, get blocked up, thousands of flights being canceled, you know, we thought, wow, that really affected our lives. But can you imagine if the entire nation went on strike? What if all the food supply? What if everything moving, everything across this country is going to shut down? Spoiler alert. It's about.

to. We have proof that's going to happen. You may want to know all the details on that. But before I get to that, let's talk about one of the great speakers of our time. She's been viral all over the place. This is one of those videos that I love watching time and time and time again. Check this out. Lee Dundas, human rights attorney, late last week, I am informed a meeting occurred between Orange County Health Officer Dr. Clayton Shaw and Orange County Board of Education Superintendent Al Mahars, during which time they apparently tried to find a way to, quote, sidestep and entirely remove informed parental consent for the COVID vaccine and also turn Orange County school campuses into vaccination centers. The COVID-19 vaccine is an experimental medical protocol

authorized under the Emergency Use Authorization Act, and as such, you cannot mandate it for anyone, nor can you sidestep informed consent. There is a reason that kids cannot smoke, drive, drink, have sex, vote or die for this country, and it is because the law says they lack the capacity to understand those decisions, and that applies here more than ever. Hear me loud and hear me well. We will not be morphing our school campuses into COVID vaccine centers for delivery of an experimental medical protocol that killed every damned ferret in the last animal study they did until such time they had to abandon that study. And then, and then they didn't even do the study this time around because we are the study. The last time humans launched a plan like this to conduct

experimental medical protocols on vulnerable populations was in Joseph Mangala's direction. He was an MD known as the Angel of Death. Okay. And he was part of the SS. And he was part of the SS. In 1943, he was assigned to Auschwitz, where he saw an opportunity to conduct gene research, quote, focused primarily on children with no regard for the health or safety of the victims. This is off the internet. You can Google it. You know what else is gene research? Experimental COVID vaccines with the trans gene inside of it.

If you don't believe me, go pull the EUA application for the J&J shot. I come from a long line of Eastern Europeans, Hungarians and Romanian groups, groups that fled the persecution of the Red Terror Communist Death Squads in the early 1900s and those of us who didn't make it to America ended up facing the Nazi death squads in the lesser-known Holocaust that was the Romani Holocaust. There is a reason my daughter is named Katia. Her Romani great-grandmother was Katarina Choma and I, for one, have not forgotten the lessons of our history. The Third Reich did not end with experiments on children, nor when those children died. The Third Reich ended. In 1946, when we put the doctors who committed these human experiments on trial in Nuremberg,

and then we put them to death. It ended with the adoption of the Nuremberg Code, so we would never repeat the sins of history. And it states, and I quote, the voluntary consent of this human subject is absolutely essential. Dr. Chow and Dr. Maharish, you are hereby on notice. Last week, you appear to have knowingly hatched a plan to sidestep and or violate international, federal, and state law,

not just the Nuremberg-in-formed consent language, but also the black-letter law of the EUA, as well as California state law, which punishes. And I quote, the willful failure to obtain a subjects informed consent by imprisonment in county jail for one year or the imposition of a $50,000 fine or both. Through the plan, insertion of experimental gene altering protocols onto the very children, you were elected and charged with protecting. And tonight we are asking the Board of Education for an immediate letter of censure to these individuals. And if they don't resign for an immediate notice of termination, and that letter also needs to go to the professional boards because they have no business being in the. these positions. So help me God, the people of Orange County will hold this policy to account.

Your time is up. I'm aware. She's fiery. She's fantastic. She's attorney Lee Dundas and is my absolute pleasure to have her onset with me right now. Lee, seriously, I think that that should go down in history is like one of the great testimonies of all times. I mean, it's amazing how much information you poured out there, but also your passion. you know, on this issue. Why? Why are you so passionate about it? Well, I don't know if you know, Del, and by the way, thank you for having me here today. But I've spent the last 10 years in Southeast Asia fighting the child brothel industry. And I'm just one of those people who really, you know, it chaps my hide since we're here in Texas. I think that's how you say it out here.

Injustice is chap my hide. I firmly believe what Martin Luther King Jr. said is accurate. And that is that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. And I think it's our duty as citizens of this country and this planet to stamp it out where we see it, when we see it, so it doesn't take root and spread. And as bad as the child brothel industry is, it's a second largest crime right now fastest growing on the planet. What we've had going on over the last 18 months is potentially worse. It's a planetary-wide potential genocide if we don't stop it. Yeah. And obviously you're in the thick of it. Orange County, California, Gavin Newsom, just leading this insanity, you know, can't seem to promote these vaccines fast enough for adults.

and now we're looking at children. We just found out this week that, you know, ASIP, advisory community and immunization practices is to prove this unanimous vote. Incredible, unanimous of a vote of 14 to zero to give this to children when the only thing we really know for sure is that it causes myocarditis. And so we're just in this incredible time.

But, you know, instead of getting really depressed about it, I think what's fascinating is the amount of people that are sort of rising up. Absolutely. You know, and I know that, an attorney a lot of people are reaching out to you. I know you know our law firm with Aaron Siri and the work that's being done there so many people looking for exemptions some way forward and what is your experience in the work that you're doing? You're getting a lot

of people reaching out. A lot would be an understatement. Every attorney I know, I never thought I'd see the day where I was thinking we had too few attorneys on this planet. I used to think we were overpopulated with my profession. Now there's not enough. Even attorneys need their own attorney like everybody could stand of a pocket attorney in their back pocket. I would say my phone is probably going off with email, text, or phone once a minute. And I'm not lying. That's not an exaggeration. And as exciting as the lawsuits are, what we've seen in the blue states, and I know that you're no stranger to this, having come from a blue state, is that we have, you know, in America, we're supposed to have three different branches of government so they can

each run checks and balances on the other when one of them gets out of line. Right. But what we've seen in many states this year is that the executive branch is completely gone, the legislature's out of control and the courts who are usually raining the other two in when they've gone off the rails are not. And in that case, when you've got three out of three failing you, the question becomes, what do we do? And the answer is in our Constitution. This is a country of the people, by the people, for the people. We have the power. We always have had the power. It's the great lie that we don't. And what I have seen is people are calling me yes for legal advice in the first instance. But the second thing they're saying is, you know, mad as heck and they're not going to take it

anymore. They're ready to do boots on the ground action. And I know that's sort of why we're here tonight is to talk about what's going on out there. Right. Well, and, you know, before we get fully into what I know you want to talk about is, you know, the big question, two lawyers, you know, that I know is going on all the time. You know, they're threatening to fire me from my job if I don't get the vaccine. You know, they're threatened to, you know, kick me out of the university if I don't get the vaccine or work for the university. And so, you know, I know, in talking to Aaron, he has a perspective. All lawyers are different. You all have a different perspective. But in many ways, there's a lot of power in the employers when it just comes to what they want to do. I mean, they can

demand whatever they want. It's their choice. You can go work. I mean, the argument really is, seems to be you can go work somewhere else if you don't like it, right? So you do have freedom. Is that sort of your perspective? I mean, are these, you know, is the courtroom going to be a place that we're going to have any effect there? I am hopeful. I think what is happening is patently unconstitutional. I'm certainly not alone in that. If you had Googled, as I did, the day after the fake mandate that came out of the White House, because, of course, it's not a mandate. It doesn't have the force of law. If you put in Biden unconstitutional mandate, you saw lawyer after lawyer, not just on our side of the fence, but very liberal, talking head, law professors on the other side of the equation, saying, this is never going to hold water.

It's basically a press release. OSHA isn't charged with doing what he's asked them to do. They're about workplace safety and removing environmental toxins from rooms like this. They don't have any jurisdiction over a virus in people's bodies that is all over the world, not just here in the U.S. and workplaces. In the last time they tried the emergency regulations out of OSHA, it was in the 1980s, with an actual threat, asbestos, and it didn't work then. So the notion that they're going to resurrect this dead skeleton out of the closet and

what OSHA actually get anywhere with it is false, but it doesn't matter. If everybody bows down and they've left their way through when a court says six months from now, you didn't have to do it. Well, 90% of the employees got vaccinated. Biden doesn't care. I didn't got his goal achieved. Well, in many ways, right? It's just, it's what we comply with.

Whatever we decide, whatever we give value to or give, you know, power to, then that's what, you know, controls us. And so in many ways it's a personal decision. I don't think people are really realizing that. And obviously, you know, like you, I'm traveling all over the country. I am, you know, speaking every single weekend. I have been for two months, meeting as many people as I can. But they all keep saying the same thing.

Like, I don't know what to do. And, you know, one of the things that I think is such a big, problem and it's really part of the genius of the design of you know our oppressors is to make it you know um so impossible or at least to make people feel so bad about this topic that they don't talk about that i don't want to get the vaccine that we're ashamed they've had a shame to it and you know you should have empathy for everyone around you and the only way to express that is to get the vaccine like everybody else did like this compliance measures but because of that we're not really talking to each other one of the things i keep saying is

That's how they're going to win. If you're the only one standing up against your employer, then you don't have a very big voice. And there's not a courtroom right now, certainly not in these blue states that looks like it's going to side with you. But you have the power of enlisting everyone at that business. We've had so many people reach out and say, you know what? I just got together. I knew all the other guys that didn't want to get vaccinated, whether it was a dentist office or, you know, even there was a construction worker that just said, oh, hell no, we're all walking out. They go, hold on, wait a minute, wait a minute, we don't want to like. You know, and so that's what I keep trying to get across, right, is that our power, when it is the power of the people, it's not the power of the court system. It's not the power of the legislator. It's not the power of the executive branch. It's the power of the people.

And that's why when you reached out to me just a few days ago, with some really quite compelling information, I thought we need to get you on here to talk about it as soon as possible. So what's going on? You're talking to a lot of unions and businesses. and people. I am. So what's in the works? Well, this is, you know, it's exactly what you said. The powers of the people, if they hold the line, most businesses are in business to make money,

and here's the brass tax. They can't make money if half their workforce walks off. Right. So as long as we don't allow ourselves to be picked off and hold the line and keep our numbers firm, we've got the checkmate move. We've got the trump card. And so what I was gratified to hear as about,

I would say two weeks ago now, these employees were reaching out to me, And they're like, hey, we're 30% unvaccs. We're 50% on backs. We're 70 plus percent unvaccinated at my work. A lot of them were blue collar. These are the people who make products in our country and move products in our country. And to a man and occasional woman, but blue collar, a lot of it was guys.

They were saying, we're not playing ball. You know, Biden can take a long walk off a short pier. We are not bending over and getting that shot. We don't believe in it. We're religious people. We've got lots of objections to this. And we aren't doing it. And we're going to walk off the job.

job. And I said, really. And I heard this over and over and over again. And it suddenly occurred to me with the people that I was talking to that they actually had the power to push a checkmate move. And what I mean is, we live in a first world country, so we don't often think about how supplies get from where they are made to sitting here in front of us. This cup didn't just fall out of the sky into Dill Studio. It was made somewhere and then it was shipped to you, well, shipped to Amazon or Target or Walmart, where you bought it and brought it here. And those are the boys that aren't playing ball. and they control the supply chain. What's a foot now, and I just said, hey, you know, you guys are self-organizing at this point. I'll do this favor for you. I'll be your mouthpiece because I do think this is the move to be had and to make. So they are walking off November 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th. These guys are doing a four-day consecutive back-to-back hit,

and they're doing it for a reason. It is two solid weeks. There's the flyer right now just so that it is representing all these people that are walking off. There is stand for freedom, protest, the mandates nationwide strike. November 8th through 11th, Veterans Day. If you work in health care, education, telecom, supply chain, or transport, industries, government, or in any sector, boycott all employers mandating the VACs. Assuming you're not prohibited from doing so by the law.

Well, that's what I was going to ask you. So, I mean, there are some people that, you know, technically probably shouldn't be doing that. Well, and I'm not here to give legal advice to anybody. I'm just here to make note of what's going on on November 8th through the 11th. But certain industries are prohibited from striking unless they exhaust collective bargaining remedies first. Like air, like rail, which is why you've seen Southwest getting sick, I believe. I'm not part of that. I'm just extrapolating what I've seen.

But for those who are not prohibited from striking by contract or by law, these people are walking off. And I've got to tell you, Adele, if I could name names, which I can't on air, you would be floored at the employers and employees of these employers I'm talking to. They are ginormous employers. and they are up to 70, 75% on backs. These guys are walking the heck out. And I said, all right, you boys and girls, you need to do it on the same days, and you're doing it two weeks before Black Friday. They were already organizing, and we can all, you know, read the writing on the wall,

but when that goes. The goal is twofold. The goal is to make the employer realize that they need to actually protect the employee, and to make Biden realize this country runs not when he says so, but when the people who are living here agree to play ball, and they're not plan ball this coming week. You know, I have mixed emotions about it, right? On one hand, it's incredibly exciting.

And we've been staying here on the high wire how important it is that you stand together. We've got to stand together now. We've got to hold the line. This is absolutely unacceptable. It's illegal. People are being put in harm's way. But beyond that, no matter what you think of this vaccine, this idea that we're going to be reduced to what I keep saying everywhere is about the same rights as a farm animal. I mean, if I don't control my body.

They have more rights. They're not muzzled. Yeah, that's true. Right, right. Right, yeah. They don't have to wear an ass part being ejected. Right. No, but we're being ejected as though, you know, farmer Biden has this decision, you know, say over my body and my life and how I walk on this planet, which is pure insanity.

So at a certain point, it's just been pushed too far. Now they're coming at the kids and now the mandates. And so, you know, I've been talking to pilots and, you know, we had one on and whether or not we know, I don't know. But certainly it had a huge effect, right? These pilots and these people working the airlines, one of the ones. we start seeing that they are standing up and they're saying no, I think all these other industries are recognizing, wow, that has some power. We're seeing some changes.

We're starting to see even judges start to maybe look at the difference of this. Maybe they recognize, you know, what I'm about to decide here affects the future of this nation. And, you know, do we want to bring this, you know, crashing down? This is manifestly unfair to the employees. Some of these guys have 40 years with their companies. They're two months or a year out from their retirement and their pensions. And they're like, look, here's the other reality. If you're going to fire us in a month, why would we stick around?

You know what I mean? Like, what do we got to lose by doing a strike? And to me, this is a resurrection of everything that made this country great. This nationwide strike from November 8th to the 11th, and by the way, if you want more details, you can text the word freedom to 5344, 5. But this is about, this is the triangle shirt waste factory. This is the miners from the last two centuries who rose up and said, we are not being treated fairly.

We are being treated like slaves. These are unsafe, hazardous working conditions. What the heck do you call this? A mandate that's killed tens of thousands of people, and we know that that's a 99% underreporting because bears is always 99% underreported. If you don't call this a workplace hazard, I don't know what qualifies.

And by golly, if you were for the people who went on strike last century and the century before, how could you not be for the guys who are striking next week? The earlier guys were striking over wages. These guys are striking for the right to keep a kill shot out of their body. I was just watching testimony of a pilot that said, you know, he got into a plane right after getting the vaccination. As soon as he got to altitude, all of a sudden, tunnel vision, started losing control, like, turn the plane around and tried to get it down to the ground.

Doesn't remember landing it. But when we think about someone driving a train, what about somebody behind the wheel of a 16-wheeler that just got this vaccine? Suddenly they black out. This will affect other lives. This could potentially affect other lives. And so you're not just putting these employees in danger, putting, you know, the people around and the citizens at risk. Well, and that's what the female Air Force colonel said before they stuck a gag order on her a couple weeks ago. She said, I'm grounding my guys. This thing, you're putting these people at altitude when you know you've got thrombos side effects. You are asking to have these fighter pilots go down. And I'm not having it on my watch. And the military, as far as I can tell,

promptly shoved a gag order on her, so you can't talk about this anymore. But she was spot on the money. You don't want these people who are stroking and having heart attacks in control of your train, plane, automobile, or otherwise. So we know for a fact now that there are, you know, large groups of employees that are going to be walking out November 8th or the 11th. And they're asking, you know what, while we're at it, why don't we get support from all of you out there that see this moment, let's do this together. Let's do this as a nation.

Let's show as a nation that, number one, we stand together in these moments. When it comes to freedom, you know, just as Thomas Jefferson said, you know, if a law is unjust, not only do you have the right to, you know, disobey it, you're required to do. do so. And so what I would say though is that we're sitting here going, wow, this is exciting. There probably are some things that we should also, those of us that use goods that are, you know, being transported, prepare ourselves. What are your thoughts on that? How do we all as a nation prepare for this supply chain disruption? Well, I think, by the way, the supply chain was going down whether this happened or not. I do think this is potentially going to cause it to occur at a certain

date and time potentially. But who are we to tell people when they have to work and when they don't? This is a free society. We're not living in communist, Russia, China, or North Korea. So if these guys don't want to play ball next week, okay, I can tell you this. I'm going to do all of my shopping before November 8th. I am talking to nerve centers and critical sectors that control critical parts of our country. And I believe that they will be not showing up to work. And I don't want to be at the effect of that. fully support them. And on that note, I think if you remotely call yourself an American and you believe our forefathers gave their everything, I mean, right back to our framers who never should

have won the Revolutionary War, did it with 1% of the guys. And really, by all rights, the statistics and odds were well against him. And they won anyway because they had freedom and God on their side. And every man who's been in the military or women's sense, fighting for freedom, fighting our wars, if you think that they didn't fight in vain, I think it's your civic duty to get out there and say, I'm pro-vaccine, I'm gay, I'm Muslim, I'm whatever, but fundamentally I live in this country because it is based on freedom and I'm going to support the boys who are saying my bodily freedoms are being overridden by both my employer and my president and that is unconstitutional and I'm not taking it, I'm not having it, and I'm walking off my job to make that point. November 8th through the 11th, there will be rallies probably in every city. Again, we're encouraging folks to text that number so they can stay apprised of those rallies and go out and show support. So text, once again, freedom to 53445. Text freedom to 53445 to be kept on the hotline, on the front lines,

because Lee, you're getting this information as it's coming. I want to thank you for taking the time to come here on the high wire on such an important issue. Number one, because it really, we're all about sort of standing up for freedom, standing up for the truth. I don't care whether someone's vaccinated or not. It's none of my business. But I also, I don't care if you're on Ridland or. or if you're on Prozac, or if you're taking, you know, hormone replacement, you know, therapy because you're planning a, you know, future gender reassignment surgery. The point is, is it's none of my business.

No, I'm not. It's none of the government's business. For sure on that. And so when it comes down to, you know, tracking and vaccination passports and this thing, the government has no place in our health decisions at all. And you and I both know that beyond, even if the vaccine worked, you know, we would be here. But the truth is, is it does not. It does not stop infection. It does not stop transmission.

cannot reach herd immunity. In fact, you know, when I'm looking at the world-renowned scientists now that have been coming on the high wire, it looks like it's going to block us from getting to that herd immunity that would happen naturally had we just left this thing, run its course, protected those who were high risk. So, you know, in every, you know, when I look at this, it seems scary, right? It seems scary that, you know, a nation is big. We know there's people that are not prepared for moments or supply chain disruptions. We're all starting to get panicked. You know, I am anyway. I mean, I went into a, you know, a drugstore the other day and I'm like there are empty shelves everywhere and then went into a grocery store and you're starting to see empty shelves so there is something going on anyway but now I think you're right we feel we act like everything's just getting facts to us like it's just magically food and water and you know you know all these dry goods just appear out of the sky and that's probably why we just can allow the president to tell people what to do but we're about to know there's really human beings there the employees are revolting and uh and and They have every right to do so, and I expect that what will happen is what happened when

Southwest caught the flu. I read, I don't know if you saw it, comment after common, they're like, oh my gosh, I'm stuck in Nebraska, there's a five hour wait for a rental car. It's going to be a grand for a rental car for a day, and I have a 24-hour drive. I don't care. Viva la Liberte. Absolutely. And you know what, this is a great country.

Nobody's going to starve to death. Let's be real. We may get to work off the fat of the land for a minute, but this is about freedom, and this is a checkmate move. and I support the guys who have the guts to do it. They have my support. They have my backing. They have my mouth and they have your microphone right now.

And God bless you for it. They need to be supported. If the courts aren't listening, if the legislatures and the executive branches aren't going to protect us, it's up to us to protect us. This is a peaceful, non-violent Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King style.

Let us show you that the people are the ones who protect freedom in this country and that it's equality and freedom for all. And that includes not being forced to take a kill shot if you don't want it. Cannot be said better than that. Lee Dunnest, thank you for helping all of these brilliant, beautiful American citizens find a way coming together,

which is how we make change, how we stand for our rights here, playing such a critical role. It's an honor to have you here for all of the testimonies and all the speaking and the incredible dedication you've had. It's just nonstop. I know I've seen you out there. But thank you for bringing this to us so that we can be on top of it.

And we can support those that are standing for their freedom. So keep up the good work. Did it and my pleasure. All right, I'll see you out there. All right. Well, you heard it here on the high wire. Now you know what is taking place. You know that there's going to be disruption to supply chain.

You know that these are people that we should be standing with. We should be standing with them for freedom. This is what we've been dreaming about. This is that moment. Will we recognize the power of the people? This is our nation. We control the government. We control everything that happens here.

We decide whether or, your food gets to you, whether, you know, your goods get to you. We decide how everything's taking place. And if they want to take away our right to make decisions for us, that we can make decisions for everybody. And so together, we're in on this, but I also want you to recognize that between November 8th and 11th, there will probably be some serious disruptions and things that you think are creature comforts that should always be there in the United States of America. So govern yourselves accordingly. All right. Obviously, you know, we are seeing a shift. We're seeing a shift all over this nation. People standing up in so many

different ways standing up November 8th to 11th, but I was just standing with a brilliant group of people in Colorado, my home state where I grew up in Boulder, Colorado, just outside, 45 minutes away in Fort Collins. They were trying to bring a vaccine passport, make it so that you couldn't get in the certain establishments without that tracking system, that ankle bracelet of sorts to, you know, usher in some sort of, you know, martial law experience where we're all under house arrest of one way, you know, one kind or another. There were a lot of people there that weren't going to have it. In fact, it was the largest audience I've seen in Colorado yet. Newspapers may have said 500 or more, I can tell you, it was at least 2,500 people. It was spectacular.

It was in a blizzard on a Monday, and that didn't stop anyone from being there. Take a look at this. state I grew up in Boulder, Colorado, so I got the call. Obviously I'd be here. Now, frankly, I'd be anywhere where they try to take the freedom of American citizens away. The media may tell us that this is a small group of just one extreme of the political spectrum, but I want to tell you that I have friends all over the political

spectrum that agree with us. They call us a conspiracy theorist for connecting the dots and following the money. We're the ones who are out in the field breathing free without our masks standing up for our children. I'm gonna break some bad news to me. All of us are to blame for what's happening in this country. We were culture corrupt.

We gave our power to the government. We gave our children to them. They're saying they're going to inject an experiment with biologic into our children. Can you imagine that? The MRNA vaccine technology, it's so brand new that that vaccine has never, ever been injected into a single animal ever. The first animals to ever receive this vaccine is us. We're denigrated for being anti-science. when the big elites of the scientific establishment are full of hot air,

when they lie to us every day, when they give us false narratives and change the goalposts to keep us in fear and to keep us under their boot. Tony Fauci, the people inside this health department, Joe Biden, and anybody pushing these mandates and taking away your right to proven treatments, They are the ones murdering us in hospital. Public health officials who work for us who believe that they can break the law.

I would like to remind them what the inside of a jail says. Is this about a virus? Is this about health? Is this about control? com package. Right to track from womb to tomb. We are done with your mask. We are done with the...

The slave passport is the gateway to the... catch me sleep. I think it's time for people to stop bowing down to the government and for the government to start bowing down to the people. I look my children, my grandchildren in the face and say, I did nothing. I can't do that. Local pastors, I plead with you to get a backbone. This nation was not founded on the concept of the king is the ruler. This nation was founded on the principle that we the people are the sovereign rulers of the government. Of the free, because in the greatest country in the world, we are the speaking of right to the world. Be afraid to decay, though we are walking. Say you get it, we, one more time.

It's happening around the country, I can't get to them all, but for those of you that are showing up by the thousands, every time there's the opportunity and maybe asking yourselves, is it making a difference? Then let me show you some of the headlines that clearly show that we are moving this needle and we're moving it fast. Political is saying companies are now mole-mull ending government contracts over a vaccine mandate. Literally, let's just ditch our government contract that they want to force this on us. Judge halt Chicago's vaccine mandate deadline, sides with the police union up in Chicago. Ford won't impose COVID-19 vaccine mandate for Ontario health care workers up in Canada. as the Attorney General joins a lawsuit to stop vaccine mandate for federal contract workers.

20 states are now suing Biden over federal COVID-19 vaccine mandate. They're coming from all sides. Attorney General is coming from everywhere. And obviously with the mandates and what we now know today coming down from OSHA, it's going to get even more intense. We're making a difference, but we have got to do more. And now we have been handed an opportunity, an opportunity to support each other. We now have a date on November.

eighth, peacefully, all those that legally can are walking out of their jobs with employers that are telling them they're going to bring this vaccine mandate or that are, you know, looking at the government mandate. This is our time. This is how we do this. Prepare yourselves. Get your houses ready so that you can enjoy that eighth or the 11th with your family. Let's go ahead and have this vacation with each other.

Let's celebrate what it means to be Americans. Let's dream, what would we have done if it was time and we're being told, hey, why don't you come down to this boat that's sitting in the harbor? We're going to dump some tea over in the harbor. We think it'll make a difference. Nah, it won't really make that big a difference. Oh, yeah, this is how we make history. We hold the line.

We say, I will not comply. And we stand with every one of our brothers and sisters that says, I will not comply. Remember, if we do not comply, they do not exist, and we take back our power. That's the higher wire representing every single week we're here. I will be here next week and telling you once again, I will not. Comply. I'll see you then.