The Highwire with Del Bigtree - THE VANDEN BOSSCHE WARNING

Episode Date: May 11, 2022

Acclaimed vaccinologist, Geert Vanden Bossche, sits down for his second groundbreaking interview with Del to explain why the intense pressure mass vaccination is putting on the Covid-19 virus will likely drive it to become catastrophically deadly.#GeertVandenBossche #MyFinalCallBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

What we're about to play is an interview that I did on Friday. We always like to sit down with Geert ahead of time, though there's a lot we like to do live. When we're going to present information from Geert Van and Bosch, we know that it's going to be technical. We want to be able to sort of add some visuals and try and figure out ways to make it as understandable as we possibly can. I do sit down. Oftentimes these interviews are very long and try to cut it down so that we get to the basics. and I want to be totally transparent about what you're going to watch. I am breaking almost every rule in television that I learned when I won an Emmy Award at CBS on the Doctors Television Show,

which is keep things short, keep it in sound bites, think of everybody as about a third-grade mentality, and make sure that third graders will understand this. I will tell you this, third graders will never understand the interview that you are about to watch. In fact, I would guess that most of the population right now that are watching, you may want to turn this off at parts because you won't understand all of it. And what you're about to see is what makes the high wire different than any news platform in the world. Especially at times like this, you are not my main concern. My main concern is that the great scientists around the world that are not aware of all the details of what here Fendin Bosch has been focused on up in his home in his office in Belgium that they get it.

I could shorten this down to just the parts that we would all understand, but we would miss details that other scientists need to understand. So it doesn't just look like some bumper sticker, oh, well, that's a good theory, where he actually lays out the steps with which what he's talking about will work. So folks, this is not going to be your average show where you go, oh, I fully got that and we're moving on. We're going to get into the nitty-gritty details.

You were about to watch what may be one of the most important scientific discussions amongst scientists. Imagine Geert is talking to scientists. He's trusting that you will understand a good enough and a large enough part of this, and I know you will. We have a very smart audience. But like when I was a child and probably why I have this job now, when my parents would have friends over and they'd all be discussing politics and religion or whatever at the table and getting all raucous and loud, which my family does very well, I didn't tend to run around with the kids.

For some reason, I was more interested in sitting at the adult table and trying to understand what I could. In many ways, today, this show, we are all going to sit down at the adult table. Some of this will be very technical. But I want to say this. I have had several days to try and process what I saw in this interview and while trying to edit it, it has affected me emotionally. What you're about to see is very powerful.

I still am grappling with how I can. wrap my mind around what's being said, try to decipher what's true and what I can do about it. And for that reason, I am going to give a caveat I don't usually give, which is many of you use the high wire as one of your classes for your homeschooling. I will tell you this. I would not have my own children watch this interview, because for my kids, it will bring up questions, questions that I would like to have answers to. I don't have all the answers to what this question is about to be. And for that reason, I think it could be detrimental to have children pressed with the level of importance with which this conversation is about to have without

us fully understanding how we embrace them and help them understand what this could mean for all of us and the world. So for that reason, I would say personally, watch this yourself first and decide if this is something that your children are ready to watch. With all of that being said, We interviewed Gert Van Denbosch fully back in November. We presented many of the videos he had put out before then. This was just a little piece of what that original interview was, as we set up for Gert Van der Leyenbosch, and what he is really calling his final call.

Dear colleagues at the WHO, my name is Gierd van denbos. My background is veterinary. medicine. I'm a certified expert in microbiology and infectious diseases. I have a PhD in virology and I have a long-standing career in human vaccinology. I'm urging you to immediately open the scientific debate on how human interventions in the COVID-19 pandemic are currently driving, viral immune escape. I'm urging you to invite me for a scientific hearing open to the public and to scientists all over the world on this very topic. Ignoring or denying the impact of stringent infection prevention measures combined with mass vaccination

using prophylactic vaccines is a colossal plunder. Please do listen to my crime of distress and let's first and foremost deliberate on a scientifically justified strategy to mitigate the tsunami of morbidity and letality that is now threatening us. And let's meanwhile devise a strategy to eradicate the steadily emerging highly infectious variants. If you are now vaccinating people during a pandemic,

that means that the antibodies are mounting while they can be confronted with the virus. There you start to put immune pressure on the virus. So these combinations of doing massively, putting massively, having a population that massively, because you do mass vaccination, put pressure on the virus, combined with vaccination programs that are conducted in the midst of a pandemic, this can only lead to natural selection of the fittest and because many people are in a similar situation, this will be this variant that then can over-reactant the pressure will of course be enriched in the population and it will ultimately become the dominant ferreidding. In my analogy imagine you're a scuba diver and

you're going swimming and you're swimming in the ocean and there's killer whales in the ocean. Now the killer whales we know rarely attack human beings. There's also sharks in the ocean. Sharks we know love to attack human beings and do it all the time. They're much more dangerous to human beings. But killer whales out-dampete sharks in the situation with killer whales, they can eat a shark, so you don't usually find sharks and killer whales in the same water. But if the swimmer, the scuba diver, decides I'm afraid of the killer whales and that rare risk that I could be killed by them, so the swimmer kills the killer whales, wipes them out,

what you do is you take away that environment where they're out competing the sharks. Now the sharks come in because there's no killer whales around, and now the sharks become dangerous to the scuba diver, much, much more dangerous. They're the more dangerous variant. Now, all we have left is sharks, and now all of us are in danger in getting to the water. The analogy would even be better if one would say the scuba diver is using a weapon that can only kill

the killer whales. Okay. So the weapon, the immune system, so it doesn't work for the sharks. Got it. It only works for the killer wheel. What we call innate immunity very often, and I'm very often talking about innate antibodies,

in contrast to the naturally acquired antibodies, the innate antibodies, these are pre-existing antibodies, antibodies that are already, so to say, pre-primed, that you have at birth already, not as a result of antigen experience, right? A newborn all of a sudden gets confronted with a number of pathogens. Yeah, he or she, you know, the newborn cannot have all these antibodies read because he has never seen these pathogens. So there is, this is providing them with a good start.

So this is something that we have been completely neglecting and these are basically the antibodies that protect all these young children and people in good health from a disease. that is therefore, that is therefore not a childhood disease. Right. SARS-CoV-2. I'm guessing all of that talk of asymptomatic that we've heard about, those asymptomatic cases would have been those where their innate immune system reaction was so strong. They never went into a symptomatic reaction, which would have driven more of the production of those nationally acquired memory antibodies. Is that, am I getting that right?

Yeah. Andell, that is why we call it the first line of immune defense. The innate. Right? The innate antibodies. This is published early this year. Evidence from multiple experimental studies suggest that specific single mutants may be able to evade spike targeting vaccine immunity in many individuals and rapidly lead to the spread

of vaccine resistant COVID-2. In this context, vaccines that do not provide sterilizing immunity and therefore continue to permit transmission will lead to the build-up of large standing populations of virus greatly increasing the risk of immuniscape. Can you imagine what this means if you are now going to suppress this innate immunity on a permanent basis? Because that is exactly what you will do if you immunize them if you prime them.

So this is just going to speed up, to speed up the resistance. These people will have their innate antibodies completely suppressed and their acquired antibodies through vaccination are completely worthless. We are talking about is driving this virus into resistance, depriving the children from both their innate immunity and their vaccinal protection. and preventing in an irrevocable way the population from ever generating herd immunity.

So what we are going to do is instead of the population exerting selection pressure on the virus, we are going to allow this virus to exert selection pressure on innate immunity of the host. So that means only people who will still have this virus to exert selection pressure on innate immunity of the host. So that means only people who will still have the host, have their innate immunity intact, have a chance, have a chance to survive. What is the worst case scenario if you sort of game this out? What type of damage numbers on a population level are we talking about? I cannot talk about figures, but what is clear, the safety impact will be tremendous and will be of an order of

magnitude that is not even comfortable. Well, that interview was conducted back in November of last year just over five months ago and so it's my pleasure now to bring back Gert van den Bosch. Gert, I want to thank you for joining me today. Sure. Thanks for having me down. There's, you know, so many things going on now and so much has changed since November. We have a new variant in Omicron and even

B-A-2, so even new versions of Amacron. We are seeing mandates changing, restrictions being lifted here in America and in many places around the world. Meanwhile, we also have Shanghai that it seems be moving in a different direction, really locking down. I've been wanting to talk to you for some time, so I'm glad you've taken, given us this opportunity. Just to really recap, even though that we just went through a long recap, here's how I see the work that you've done. And I have interviewed, I believe, some of the best scientists in the world that have been willing to discuss this pandemic, this virus. I've been somewhat shocked at how accurate I believe that you've been. I think of all the scientists I've spoken to, I tell my friends and the people around me, I would be watching what Gert Van Den Bosch has to say.

So that's why it's really an honor to get to talk to you today. But for people that maybe haven't been following our work and watching your videos, here's how I see it. You originally came out. You said you were very concerned about a mass vaccination program stating that we had never vaccinated everyone in the world at the same time. That has never been done. We tend to just vaccinate a small group of people using the new entries into a population of

children. So to do a mass vaccination program was a pressure we had never put on a virus before. Also, that by doing a vaccination program while the virus was infecting people, also created a very bad problem where you're pressuring the virus while you're being infected. So the vaccine is able to mount a full antibody response prior to running into the virus. And so it's though it's loading the gun, as we said, as it's running into a war and it doesn't have a loaded gun. Therefore, it's not going to fight very well. So all of that, you said, would ultimately lead to the virus mutating in a way that it would get around the vaccine. And this is something that you've been saying from the beginning.

Doctors like Paul Offutt and them said they did not believe that that would be the case. So I want to say this. You were accurate. When we last spoke, I think Omicron was maybe a hint and a whisper out there in the distance. We did not discuss it. we were still fully in Delta. Delta was already managing to have some escape, you know, is getting around some people in the vaccine. But you said that you really believe that within weeks or just a couple of months that we would see a variant that would fully get

around the vaccine. And lo and behold, Omicron came along. And so I think that your ability to sort of predict these moves is why I think your voice right now is one of the most important in the world. I will also say that when we worked on that last piece, we spent many, many different days on Zoom calls, trying to understand things. And I really push back against you on the fact that you said that once the virus escaped the vaccine, it would also escape the immunity that was being delivered by a natural infection. That went against my understanding and some of my team of scientists on our side that natural infection is so robust that, you know, it would be able to handle a variant like that. And you said, no, I mean, there will be naturally infected that will be

infected by this future variant. That also proved to be the case to the point where, you know, I truly believe that naturally infected would never get infected again. So did Dr. Peter McCullough. In fact, Dr. Peter McCullough had appeared on the Joe Rogan show. And then very shortly after, Robert Malone was on the show. And I remember Robert Malone having to say to Joe Rogan. Well, let me just say one thing. Peter called me.

And he said, Robert, make sure you talk to Joe and make it clear that although I spoke clearly and forcefully about one and done when I was on his show. That was before Omicron. Yeah. And so Peter wanted me to make sure that your audience knew. No, yes. We've actually talked about that because I have several friends right now that have tested positive for COVID for a second time. It does appear now that Omicron is infecting people that were previously infected naturally with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Now, those didn't end up being very bad cases. and the naturally affected handled it very well. In some ways, I guess, you know, I'm sure they were boosted by it.

But I just want to be clear that even in the places where my team disagreed with you or wanted to push back, you have proven that you seem to really have an understanding of what this virus is doing, which is why we're here today. At this moment, most of America feels like this virus has, you know, has subsided. We seem to be able to open up. Now, I'm not sure whether that's because when we look at deaths, deaths is seems to be down, but infections seem to be still quite high. But if we're to sort of sum it up in America, I want to play a video for you.

This is January, but it's essentially where I think Tony Fauci from Niyadh, who has sort of been the voice of our lockdown campaign, This is what he had to say about where we're at now with Amacron and this virus. Take a look at this. I think in many respects, Omicron, with its extraordinary, unprecedented degree of efficiency of transmissibility will ultimately find just about everybody. Those who have been vaccinated and vaccinated and boosted would get exposed. Some, maybe a lot of them, will get infected.

So what's the box that we're all looking at now? That box is control, namely getting the level of infection that causes severe disease low enough that we can incorporate this infection. Some people have said learning to live with it that I believe we are possibly approaching that. So we are hearing this term learning to live with it, which is a little different than having eradicated a disease, which is what we were promised with this vaccine. That's the only way to eradicate it.

In fact, I'm hearing something I've never heard before. This virus isn't going away. In some ways, what I'm hearing is we are unable to reach herd immunity. We are unable to neutralize this virus. We are going to be infected with it. We're just going to have to learn to live and manage those infections. But he talks about control. And so I bring it to you.

Last week, Tony Fauci went as far as to say the pandemic is essentially over here in America. There seems to be some infection around the world. He's vacillating on whether he really meant the pandemic is over. So let me just ask you very clearly, is the pandemic over? Are we in control of this SARS-CoV-2 virus currently being called the variant Omicron? What is your belief? Are we in the clear? Well, Del, unfortunately, the pandemic is anything, anything but over. And if you hear Tony Fauci telling these stories, I can only conclude that really, with all

respect, but he has no clue. He has no understanding of the immunology. And what I heard him say last week, indeed, was that we are ending the pandemic phase and all of a sudden we can throw it all together. Natural immunity all of a sudden counts. When you add natural immunity to the people who got the vaccine, then we have sufficient immunity and then we can come also with Paxlovit with a number of antivirals and that is how we are going to control this pandemic.

The rules have not changed and the rules are very, very easy. You can only control a pandemic if you generate herd immunity. And herd immunity means that you have to dramatically diminish the level of transmission. We know that these vaccines are not doing this. On the contrary, I mean, now we have as well in the vaccinated as in the unvaccinated, many cases of mild disease or moderate disease where people don't even go to the hospital, don't even go to the doctor, etc. So the number of cases that we are seeing right now is tremendously, tremendously underestimated. And as you can see from the curves in the highly vaccinated countries, we see one wave after the

other. We never see that these lines join the baseline. Basically, you have a wave, and then the wave declines, and then it levels off way above the baseline, to then start another wave. And so the frequency and the frequency of the waves is increasing, the intervals between these waves, even if these are smaller waves, is also decreasing. So the infectious pressure is higher than ever before. So I cannot understand that within that context, you dare to say, You dare to say that the pandemic is over. So, I mean, the vacciners, as we know, and this has been published,

peer-reviewed journals, are now extremely susceptible to infection. So imagine, just to come back to the effect of the vaccines, we are using right now completely lousy vaccines. We know that these vaccines are no longer in using, inducing neutralizing antibodies. So the virus has become largely resistant to the potentially neutralizing antibodies. Nevertheless, we are pretending that these vaccines are a blessing because they are preventing severe disease. I ask you, and I ask Fauci, and I ask every single expert, have you ever heard about a vaccine that does not protect the

against mild or moderate disease, but that does protect against severe disease. Have you ever heard about a vaccine that enhances, for God's sake, that enhances the susceptibility of the vaccinees to infection, but decreases the shedding? Because there is publications that vaccinees would shed less, for example, than the unvaccinated. And have you ever heard about a vaccine that combines both effect that doesn't protect against mild or moderate disease, but that does protect this against severe disease, while enhancing the susceptibility of the vaccinees to infection. And all this by using a lousy vaccine that we know the circulating variants are almost completely resistant against. So I'm just telling you this

to make you and many other suspicious of what's going on. This is not a normal situation. We are living in a situation where we have high infectious pressure, cannot at all control this, we are not diminishing transmission or whatever, and we are seeing something like protection against severe disease. So this cannot all be coincidence. It cannot be that all of a sudden, Omicron popped up, and you know what, people are more susceptible, or the majority of the population, or the majority of the population, or more susceptible to this variant, the majority is, or of course the vaccinese. And at the same time, you know, nobody understands, you know, this, this, this omecrum is not causing severe disease. It's predominantly causing mild disease. And so all this would be a coincidence or would it be related maybe to the vaccines? Well, if it is related the vaccines, what we know is that these vaccines are no longer inducing neutralizing antibodies

against the circulating variant. But we do know that they induce non-neutralizing antibodies. There are a number of publications that are no showing that. So before we get into that, let me just recap for everybody watching the things that I hear you saying. To begin with, and you're right, for the first time ever, Tony Fauci and others in the health departments here in America and around the world are saying, we are going to be able to live with this

and they're finally mentioning natural immunity that so many people that didn't get the vaccine, that's okay, they have natural immunity and those that got vaccinated have immunity. Therefore, we've built this level of immunity so we can get to this place of control. So they are admitting now that natural immunity plays some part in this,

even though you've been demanding that they admit that from the beginning and in fact, celebrate and allow more of the young people and those that were healthy enough to achieve natural immunity, which is going to be far more robust, have better neutralizing capabilities, and will constantly be being boosted by the, you know, the variants that are out there, so it remains strong against in its protection versus the vaccine, which, as you said, is a lousy vaccine as it becomes less and less in an affinity to the variance as they're changing.

I think you're also pointing out, though, that because we have this massive pressure, both by naturally immune and the vaccinated and transmission is not going down, that is where you see there's a problem. As you've pointed out, what we would normally see is, you know, we see a wave, and then it gets down to baseline. We've hit herd immunity, and it basically disappears. Every flu season, flu goes like this. It gets back to the baseline. It's gone. Nobody has to worry about the flu as we go into the summer and maybe next winter, some days. new variant comes along, we do it all over again. But Amacron has never gotten back to the baseline.

In fact, it is staying above the baseline and having shorter and shorter periods where it's just going in waves. So it's staying up here in a high transmission space, which is where you're very concerned when Tony Fauci says we can learn to live with it. We are just seeing a virus that is not getting back to baseline. It's not being controlled by herd immunity. Can we, we say is this is one of the first times that we've ever seen a virus in, you know, in a, in a population that does not, you know, sort of adhere to herd immunity that just sort of hangs and stays? Are there other examples of that throughout history? No. I mean, if you have a natural pandemic, you will always see, first of all, that you have

a limited, a limited number of waves, that after every single wave, you get back to the baseline. and that the mortality, morbidity rates follow very closely the case rates. Here we have completely disconnected morbidity and mortality from the case rates, right? And since these guys think that control of a pandemic per definition almost means control of hospitalizations, I mean, they are completely, completely, missing what in fact is the purpose of nature, which is to re-establish a natural equilibrium between the virus and the host, and that is only possible if the host population manages to control the transmission of the virus. In order to do that, you need sterilizing immunity. Sterilizing

immunity can be provided, as we discussed in the past, and I wrote many archivision already on this by innate immunity and also of course to some extent by acquired immunity. But now all of a sudden all these things, whether this is immunity induced by the innate immune system or by natural disease or by the vaccines, they consider this all these things being the same and they are mixing it up, whereas we know very clearly. clearly that vaccine-induced immunity is enhancing the infectiousness of the virus, whereas the natural immunity innate and the acquired as a consequence of natural disease is going to eliminate the virus, and that is the reason why during natural pandemic, a natural and you see the wave, and then the vacuum cleaners come in. The part of the population, you know,

has the innate immunity or that has built its sterilizing immunity and that eliminates the virus. We are not seeing this. We are having infections all over the place. It's just that they are underreported. So some people tend to say, well, infections, even infections are diminishing. And secondly, of course, because the whole system, you know, is based on a stupid criterion that has nothing to do with controlling a pandemic, which are the hospitalizations, they are making people believe that the pandemic is ending because the hospitalization rate is low and the mortality rate is low. This is not what conditions, what is conditioning the control of a pandemic. As I was saying, okay. So let me let me. By her immunity. Yeah. We don't have. Great. So to summarize

that and I think you've done it very clearly, but just to make sure I've got it right, that we've essentially then created a completely unnatural environment. We have, through this experiment of the largest mass vaccination program and the history of mankind created a scenario that we have never lived in before, which is we have a virus that is not getting back to baseline. And we may, I mean, I don't want to put words in your mouth, we may have vaccinated so many people that we may not be capable of achieving herd immunity because the vaccinated keep the transmission, keep pressuring it, making the virus more and more transmissible. We don't have enough natural immune or innate immune to just neutralize this virus and end its rain here. And so we are seeing, as you said,

this unnatural space. And yet they are claiming, and this is something else you're saying is unnatural about it. Not only are we not seeing it get back to baseline, but for the first time ever, are you telling that usually we see case rates and mortality rates go with each other? They move together. And so for the first time ever, the case rates are still up, but we've watched the mortality and the hospitalizations and morbidity sort of go down. And what they're saying is this matters, but you're saying what we should still be worried about is that the case rates are still high.

And it's probably even higher than we think because so many people are having mild disease. And so I guess the next question then is, in Tony Fauci's world, it's all okay because all we care about is people aren't dying and hospitalizations aren't happening therefore we're good and we're almost through this we've separated the two case rates may be high but who cares it's really just mild so to be clear we only we have a variant right now that is mild as far as hospitalization and death but that could change is that what we're worried about that another variant might come along that because of this continued infection rate that it is mutating still and there are future variants that could be far more virulent,

maybe even leading to death. Is that where we're going with this? Well, yeah, and in fact, they'll put things in a very simple way. When you're dealing with a pandemic and, you know, this is an interaction between the virus and the host immune system, a viral host ecosystem, if you like. There is only two possibilities when you have a virus coming in. Either the immune system is going to eliminate the virus. That is what you see after a wave during natural pandemic. And that is what is going to generate herd immunity.

Anything else that the immune system does and that does not achieve this goal is simply going to put immune pressure. And immune pressure within a context of a virus that can still replicate, because there is no sterilizing immunity, will of course escape to that immune pressure. The only thing is that, you know, everybody, including, to be honest, to some extent, myself for a very short time, we all of a sudden taught that Omicron was a blessing because we didn't understand how all of a sudden we could have enhanced susceptibility to a virus. On the other hand,

reduced severe disease, vaccines that induce primarily non-neutral neutralizing antibodies instead of neutralizing antibodies. And at some point I said, this is unprecedented. We have never seen this, this is not logic. Is this coincidence or is there a common denominator? Is there a common denominator that could explain this? And the common denominator, and that is important to say, to answer your question, because your question is,

is the immune pressure, according to my opinion, still continue? still continuing and are we therefore still promoting selection of more infectious or more virulent variants? And the question is the answer is yes. And in order to understand this, you have to understand and that is thanks to the contribution of a number of scientists that for some reason don't speak out. I don't understand why because they are doing a fundamentally important analysis, they have shown that these non-neutralizing antibodies that are induced, what they basically do is that they bind to the virus and by binding to the virus, they are enhancing the infectiousness of the virus. So that is the first important thing to understand.

We are no longer dealing with a situation where the infectious behavior of the virus can be solely explained by the virus, by the properties of the virus itself. The infectious behavior of this virus, Omicron, needs to be explained within the context of its binding in the majority of the population, that are the vaccinees, within the context of its binding

to non-neutralizing antibodies that enhance its infectiousness. That is one thing. So we already understand understand now why vaccinees are more susceptible to the infection. The other thing, why are they less vulnerable to severe disease? Well, other scientists have shown that the very same, the very same non-neutralizing antibodies at the level of the lower respiratory tract, they can prevent fusion of infected cells with non-infected. infected cells and therefore they prevent the formation of syncytia and those

syncytia have been correlated with severe disease. So in other words, the common denominator that is now determining the infectious behavior and the virulence behavior, the pathogenic behavior of this virus, is a combination of the virus itself and an environment that has been generated in the majority of the population namely the vaccine is and which consists of non-neutralizing antibodies that bind to this virus at the upper respiratory tract will enhance the infectiousness while the same antibodies by a mechanism that I've recently explained and that has been explained by others whereas at a lower respiratory tract it will prevent severe disease okay let me let me have nothing to do with with in fact

Let me make sure. Okay, so let me make sure I've got this right. What you're saying is a lot of the descriptions of Omicron, that Amacron has milder disease, that when we're listening to Tony Fauci described that and different scientists described that on the news, they're acting as though it's the virus that has these attributes all to itself. What you're saying is it is not, what we're describing is not a virus by itself, but it's actually the combination of the virus in what you're saying. with the vaccinal antibodies inside the vaccinated person,

that that high infectious when they say Omicron is more infectious, it itself isn't more infectious, but the antibodies from the vaccine that are attaching to it, which aren't the neutralizing ones that should be killing it, but are just sort of grabbing on or doing, and we've talked about this on our show, the vaccine is helping, and we've talked about antibody dependent enhancement,

disease enhancement in a way, it's enhancing the infectiousness, the binding of these antibodies, which aren't neutralizing antibodies are helping the infectiousness of Omicron. So what we're describing as an attribute of the virus is actually an attribute being given to the virus by the antibodies caused by the vaccine. And then what you're saying is so that makes it infectious. We now are getting it through the mucosal, all of our upper respiratory track, our throat.

But then what's happening is these antibodies which aren't neutralizing once they go into the lower respiratory track where severe disease happens. This is where you can't breathe and the issues that really start to kill people is my lungs, you know, crystallize. We have pneumonia that develop. What you're saying is those antibodies are protecting right now as they go down to the lower respiratory area. Even though they're creating more infection, they're helping the infection. Once it gets into a lower respiratory area, they're doing a good thing. They're keeping those infected cells from infecting other cells.

It's sort of keeping a transmission between cells from happening in my lungs where it would be very dangerous. And so that's a good thing, right? Isn't that what we, I mean, even though you're saying we've never seen this before, I would think most people that made the vaccine would be saying, see, look, we didn't know this is how this would work, but it's stopping the severe disease in the lower respiratory tract. So what's the problem? Yeah. So, well, what is the problem?

We have seen, first of all, remember, remember Del at the beginning of the pandemic and the mass vaccination, we were told, well, these vaccines are going to diminish the transmission and the infection rates. Okay, and I was saying together with a number of other folks, you know what, what is vaccines are primarily doing is exerting immune pressure via the population, of course,

immune pressure on viral infectiousness. So what you guys think is happening, namely blocking transmission or dampening transmission, is in fact a very bad thing because at the end of the day it's putting more and more immune pressure on viral infectiousness on the spike protein, which is responsible for viral infectiousness. And guess what? What we got was something like Omicron, the Omicron family which has overcome this immune pressure to a level that it is almost like completely resistant to the antibodies generated against pipe protein. Now we still didn't learn our lesson. Now we have a vaccine, so to say the same vaccine, where folks are saying you know what,

this is a very, very good vaccine because it is preventing severe disease. Don't we understand if we have a little bit of insight in the molecular mechanism that we just explained, that in fact what is happening is that now the population is exerting immune pressure on viral virulence no longer via the neutralizing antibodies as happened before, but now via the non-neutralizing antibodies. What I was saying is that the non-neutralizing antibodies are preventing severe disease at a lower respiratory tract. Do we think with this level of transmission of infection that we just were talking about, where we put the virus under more and more pressure,

that there will be no selection on the virus to overcome this? Because remember, I mean, also this is just immune pressure exerted by antibodies. The first phase was on the infectiousness via the disease. the neutralizing antibodies. And then if you like, this neutralizing antibodies, the virus has become resistant to the neutralizing antibodies. That makes now the non-neutralizing antibodies becoming predominant. We know the non-neutralizing antibodies, they prevent transinfection at the level of the lung. And the trans infection is responsible for severe disease. So in fact, what is happening is that we are converting, we are converting immune pressure on viral infectiousness

via originally denuteralizing antibodies, we are converting this now to immune pressure on viral virulence via the non-neutralizing antibodies, right? And the fact that the antibodies are so important, in determining the infectious behavior and virulence of the virus. That explains where nowadays you can have almost whatever Omicron variant provided it has these 20 mutations in the receptor binding domain and is resistant. You can have plenty of variation like we have every second day there is a new sub-variant because their behavior is primarily determined by the non-neutralizing antibodies, dose in combination with the virus are determining in the majority of the population,

the vaccine is, are determining the behavior of this virus, right? This also explains why this is becoming pretty age-independent. This is also why it is seasonal independent. When you have high antibodies, high non-neutralizing antibodies, you're susceptible, you're very susceptible to getting the infection, no matter whether it is winter or summer or whatever. I don't know, how the situation is in your country, but in my country, people get infected all the time. We're having nice weather, you know, the last time. It's independent because the infection, the antibodies are now determining to a large extent the behavior of this virus. So essentially what you're saying is they bragged that this vaccine would stop transmission,

that it was going to stop transmission. You said what you're going to do is pressure that transmission space, that infectiousness space. And eventually there will be a variant because you're putting so much pressure on it that the evolution of a virus will be to select for that, that virus that the infectiousness gets around that pressure, that pressure coming from the neutralizing antibodies developed by the vaccine. It did that. It started doing that in Delta. Ultimately, Omacron came along a full escape where the neutralizing antibodies from the vaccine no longer are binding or having any effect over the current variant. And so it has gotten free.

It no longer has a problem with transmission. It is highly transmitting. It is highly infectious. It is getting around the vaccine. And so now what you have left are these non-neutralizing antibodies that, as you're saying, in the lower respiratory tract, are protecting us at the moment. But all of the focus of this virus mutation is no longer spending its energy, trying to figure out how to be infectious.

It has achieved that. It has gotten around the vaccine. Now is working on its last issue, which is all I have to do is figure out how to get around these non-neutralizing antibodies. And lo and behold, now I'm going to be virulent. Now I'm going to be it right now. Those non-neutralizing antibodies are stopping trans infection between cells in the lungs. And that is what's protecting us. But this virus is studying those non-neutralizing antibodies.

And it is working to figure out a way. It is selecting for a virus, a very, variant that will get around those non-neutralizing antibodies. And once that happens, trans infection will then happen in the lungs. And we will start seeing people getting a severe disease in the lungs. So let me ask you this. Why are you so convinced that this virus will figure out a way around the non-neutralizing antibodies?

Is it possible that a virus will just give up and say, you got me, I'm not going to figure it out? You know, what makes you so sure it is going to evolve to get around? around these non-neutralizing antibodies and become incredibly virulent, which means deadly for a lot of people. Well, I mean, again, the basic rule is if you continue to exert immune pressure on the virus

without being able to block the transmission and without being able to induce sterilizing immunity, which the population very definitely cannot, that's the reason why we don't have hurt immunity, because we have been vaccinated, like hell. So if you like that, I mean, initially, remember, we were putting immune pressures on essentially the receptor binding domain of the spike protein. This was the major target, the major target. The connector, basically the connector to the ACE2 that was grabbing on and being

able to get into the cells. We said that the vaccine said, let's stop that connection. And so that was the goal was to keep it from connecting so it could get into the cell. the receptor binding domain. Okay. What you have to realize and these are things that have been published. I mean, it's not me, it's not my imagination or whatever. So when the neutralizing capacity of the vaccinal antibodies diminishes, then the affinity of the non-neutralizing antibodies become stronger. They can more strongly bind to their epitopes.

You have to imagine this. If, for example, the non-neutralizing antibodies, they bind to spike, because of this binding, you will have a structural change of the spike, a conformational change, which prevents the non-neutralizing antibodies from binding to their target. If now the non-neutralizing antibodies, sorry, don't bind or only very weakly bind to the spike protein, then the non-neutralizing antibodies can find their epitopes and bind to this, right? Because the structure is different. So in fact, what people have shown is that these non-neutralizing antibodies

are not directed at a well-defined side within the receptor binding domain, but within a well-defined site in the N-terminal domain, an antigenic side that on top is conserved amongst all variants. Now, to your question, I mean, every single time that you know get reinfected with Omicron, for example, these non-neutralizing antibodies are going to be boosted, even if there is like sub-variants or whatever. All these folks have the same antigenic side at which the not. non-neutralizing antibodies are directed. So what in fact is happening is when the vaccine is

get now reinfected, and we were just saying, they get reinfected all the time, they are very, very susceptible. You get a tremendous boost of these non-neutralizing antibodies that are directed at this antigenic side within the N-terminal domain, and that is exactly what is preventing, severe disease. So we are preventing this virus from, you know, becoming more and more virulent.

So we are putting this under tremendous pressure and the virus will, of course, find a way to come around this immune pressure because this is simply a general rule. If you cannot sterilize immunity, like during a natural pandemic, where people, people's innate and natural immunity has not been compromised by vaccine primed immunity. If you just, you know, it's like this. I mean, if you have a wave during a natural pandemic, you still have the population that has sufficient immunity or that has gotten the disease and that has built natural immunity or those who have sufficient innate immunity, they are the vacuum cleaners and they will eliminate the virus.

That's how you go to the baseline. If you don't have this, but you have these folks that normally, you know, or the vacuum cleanness, you start to vaccinate them, you're going to increase the immune pressure. And what you're going to see is that the viral infectivity will go up all the way to resistance, right? So with this system, there is no way around this, but, you know, to also induce resistance against the non-neutralizing antibodies that target this. conserved antigenic side within the end terminal domain and the antibodies are continuously boosted against so. So, and I mean, what I have been describing in a recent article is how mutations could easily overcome this because remember, and this is important. Sorry to be that long. Okay, so let's get that just let's get into your theory on how it's going to happen, but let me

make sure I've got this right. The, you know, we have the spike, which is what the, we use as a vaccine to create, you know, immunity to the spike protein, which is really the most deadly part of the virus. I think there's some questions to whether that was what we should have made the vaccine focused on or not. But when we have neutralizing antibodies, the non-neutralizing antibodies have a hard time attaching because the neutralizing antibodies are taking over and they were blocking what was called the receptor binding domain. This was the part that grabbed on to what we heard, the ACE2 receptors and allowed it to enter the cells. So blocking that seemed like a good idea, that way it can't, in fact. It found its way around that,

and now the neutralizing antibodies are no longer grabbing onto the spike correctly. Maybe it's sort of off to the side. It's not getting a good hold or it's not there at all, which allows the non-neutralizing antibodies to find a place. But what's interesting is they're not going after that receptor binding domain. The non-neutralizing antibodies are not trying to stop infection. That's over. That's where past that. It's going to a different part of the spike called the end-term domain, a different area. And what if I'm correct, you're saying this end terminal domain is a part of the virus that it doesn't matter what variant you're talking about.

It shares such similarity that no matter what variant it is, these non-utilizing antibodies are all attaching exactly the same way, whether it's Omicron or some Delta or some future, which means that they're all exerting the exact same kind of pressure on the virus, no matter what version of the virus. So all the mutations are focused the exact same way on the same place, the same enemy. You basically lined up your last line of defense in a way that this virus is understanding it,

it's seeing it, and it knows what it has to achieve to finally break fully into the castle. In some ways, I imagine, it's like you have the big gates to the castle that you're trying to defend and you've got your archers and everything. And eventually those being the infection, The virus broke through and they've gotten into the castle.

But lo and behold, this castle has a second set of doors, this end terminal domain, which is protecting people from dying inside. But now the battle is just on those inner doors. And once those inner doors open into the death or the mortality of this virus, now it's in. And there's no getting back to those front doors, the receptor binding domain that was supposed to block this. that's over. You only have the second door that will give in on the end terminal domain,

and now you have a serious problem. I know that at one point, Paul Offutt said, what Geertz saying will not happen because the virus will burn itself out. It'll mutate so much that it won't be, it won't have any mutations left. I would say on the receptor binding domain, but let me play this and let me see if I can get some clarity here. This is what Paul Offett said in an interview with Z-Dog. This virus also mutates, but much slow. lower than, say, influenza does. We'll see. I mean, it's like, I mean, the notion that we're, that, you know, you're creating a,

you've created a population, either from natural infection and immunization, that is likely to have several years of protection. That's a good thing. And although the virus may mutate to the point that it escapes recognition by current immunity from vaccination or immunization, then you come up with a second generation vaccine. That's what you do. I don't think that's going to happen, actually.

I think that the virus is there's probably been already about 12,000 mutations on this virus already. I mean, it's, and I think you may get to the point if they're resisting all immunity, or meaning that you're, it's as if you never got a vaccine, you've never got naturally affected. I think that's probably a lethal mutation. Yeah, so in other words, you're kind of running the runway out on the virus's ability to change itself. Lethal to the virus, not lethal to us. That's right. Lethal to the virus, right.

So he says here that it's a lethal mutation, that the reason that the reason that. your theory was never going to work out is the vaccine will hold up, which clearly he's wrong. We didn't get three years of immunity. He's wrong. We're inside of the two years of this vaccine and we have Amacron, so it's getting past it. So he's wrong there. But he talks about a lethal mutation, meaning it has burned itself out. It has mutated so much really, you know, in the spike or the receptor binding domain that there'll be no mutations left. Is it burned out? Has it run its course, as Paul Offutt said, on some part of this virus. Is he right in some way? Well, of course, he is not right. And I'm so sick of this talk of virologists who have no clue

whatsoever about immunology. That is the biggest problem in the whole debate that we have major contributions of virologists who have no understanding. Let me tell you already one, wanting to completely, completely undermine his credibility in this regard. If you come, for example, with second generation vaccines, right, what are you going to do? You are basically going to change a number of epitopes, but you are not going to change, for example, the full spike protein. You are not going to change, for example, this very conserved antigenic domain that I was talking about that is eliciting non-neutralizing antibodies. So that means as soon as you come with the second generation vaccines, remember about the

antigenic sin, the first antibodies, the first antibodies that will be stimulated or those that have been primed by this conserved antigenic domain of the non-neutralizing antibodies. And of course the new antibodies, so to say, against the epitome that were changed, it will take time for them to establish. Remember, this is again a kind of mass vaccination during a pandemic. These new antibodies will take time to build. They will first be at low concentrations, they will immature. Whereas the non-neutralizing antibodies,

but they will immediately go through the roof, because they are boosted, right? right and they will simply they will simply dominate these non these neutral these new neutralizing antibodies so these guys have still no understanding that despite all my explanations they are still using these vaccines as if we were outside of a pandemic as if we were using them in a prophylactic way where you first tell people wait a minute we give you plenty of time to first built your new full-fledged immune response against the changed epitopes and then we will bring you in the pandemic or we will bring you to the country where you know the infection is this is a

second mass vaccination during a pandemic a pandemic of a high infectious virus this time right with non-neutralizing antibodies that have been boosted that are going to be boosted because they are directed against an antigenic side so your No neutralizing antibodies have no chance whatsoever. And with regard to his mutations, I mean, does this guy have any clue about the evolutionary capacity of the virus to come up with new mutations? I mean, there is not just the mutations, of course, in the, sorry, the receptor binding domain. There is also the mutation in an internal domain. and I've not spoken about one aspect, Dell,

that is completely, completely neglected in this whole debate, which is the crucial importance of glycans. This virus is covered for 40% of its surface, is covered by glycans, which we know, and glikens, sugars for the audience, that are synthesized by the machinery of the host, that are therefore, self or self-like glycans that are therefore not recognized by the immune system,

but that can shield underlying epitopes so that you are completely masked. One sugar can shield all the potentially neutralizing epitopes that are situated within the receptor binding domain. One mutation, right? I mean, what nonsense are these guys talking, right? I I cannot understand this. I mean, it should be forbidden for any virologist, you know, to mingle in this discussion because they have no clue of immunology. Look at Fauci, innate, natural immunity, vaccine-induced immunity. It's all the same, right?

Of it, vaccination outside of a pandemic or during a pandemic, it's all the same. And the member of mutations are limited, right? I mean, these guys have no understanding of an evolutionary binary. let alone of the evolutionary capacity of the virus when it is put under tremendous immune pressure while leaving the door open for the virus to replicate. And it must do so because the infections here with Omicron are too mild. This is not the most of them are asymptomatic. This is not a good situation for the virus.

If it doesn't do anything, if it doesn't react, it will get eradicated because the best way for the virus to propagate is when people get moderate disease, severe disease, disease, severe disease, etc. So it is under tremendous, tremendous immune pressure and it is very, very clear that it will mutate and it is even clear or very likely how this will happen. Because remember, it cannot afford to just become virulent. It has to maintain its high level of infectiousness. So it needs to combine boating, enhanced binding of the neutralizing antibodies to ensure enhanced infection at the upper respiratory tract while preventing, you know, through this very same antibodies, trans infection at the level of the lower respiratory tract.

And that is how I figured out that, you know, glycans need to come in to be able to meet both of these challenges because responsible antibodies are the same, the non-neutralizing antirexious, But at one hand side, they need to bind to the virus at the upper respiratory tract to make sure you get enhanced infectiousness, whereas you have to prevent them from binding to the virus that is absorbed on the migrating dendritic cells that brings the virus from the upper respiratory tract to the lower respiratory tract. There you have to prevent their binding in order to enable virulence, right? So these guys don't do homework, right? They talk, they talk. talk, they are loaded by administrative questions, but they don't do the signs anymore. That's the problem.

Let me see if I understand what you're saying. No, I appreciate the passion because we're talking about the future of humanity here. I get it. You care. You've obviously put a lot of focus on this. And I feel like I just understood something that I haven't quite understood before. So you're saying that this mutation, the current Omicron, got around the, neutralizing antibodies so the receptor binding domain you know was freed up in fact and and that the

way that the neutralizing antibodies are grabbing on is helping it infect cells faster it's enhancing the disease that the divide but those same antibodies that are enhancing infection are limiting once they get in the lower they're they're doing two different jobs very beneficial to the virus in infecting but stopping the virus from trans infecting cells which is how it gets to virulence But what you're saying is this virus is not going to try and mutate a way to get rid of the neutralizing antibodies. It doesn't want to totally block those. It needs them to be infectious. So what it's going to try to figure out how to do is how to use them, the non-neutralizing antibodies caused by the vaccine.

It wants to use them because it helps infect. It uses them to get through the doors and infect. But it wants to figure out a way then how to continue trans infection, which is being blocked. So you're saying it's not going to mutate a way that pull off it might think in the receptor binding domain or maybe not even in neutralizing binding domain, but it's going to use a sugar in some way to sort of coat itself and hide itself so that then that blocking of trans infection can happen and it can trans infect by hiding that, you know, those antibodies that are using it to be infectious, hiding it in sugar so that then it will get in and then we have serious problems. Is that sort of the basic idea you're getting across?

And the way why this can happen is simply, and this is really to simplify, is because the non-utilizing antibodies at the upper respiratory tract, they bind at the spike that is presented on a free virium, on a free virus particle, right, at the upper respiratory tract. A number of these virus particles are bound on dendritic cells that are resident at the nasal mucosa, at the mucosa of the upper respiratory tract. And that is the way how they vehigulate the virus through the lower respiratory tract or other distant organs, right?

The virus is absorbed, is absorbed on the dentistry. cell and the dendritic cell serves as a vehicle to bring the taxi cab. The dendritic cells the taxi cab. It's the taxi cab that takes the virus to the other parts of the body. They take the virus and they... Remember, I was saying at the upper respiratory tract, it enhances, is enhancing the infectiousness of the virus.

Whereas at the lower respiratory tract, it exactly prevents this. It prevents the transfer from the virus. from the dendritic cell to which it is absorbed to a susceptible cell in the lung. So it prevents the transfaction. In one hand side, it prevents the transfaction, and at the lower respiratory tract, at the upper respiratory tract, it enhances the infection. This is simply due by the fact that the confirmation of this antigenic side

to which this non-utilizing antibodies bind is different depending on whether the spike is present on a free virion or a viral particle that is absorbed the dendritic cell. And that is how this different behavior can be explained. Of course, somebody who completely has no clue says, wow, you know, that is fantastic. We prevent severe disease and we have a virus that spreads, you know, very massively. So we're going to have herd immunity in no time. And then you also add to that the vaccine-induced immunity. So all immunity is good, folks, don't bother.

And we have no hospitalizations or low rates of hospitalization, low rate of mobility and mortality. So this is the end of the pandemic failure. I mean, this is an unbelievable, dangerous nonsense. This virus is just preparing. It's the valley of fitness. It is just preparing itself and it is it is fostered by an enormous force to do that, namely a high level of infectiousness that is fostered by this non-neutralizing antibodies and it's just preparing to overcome, to overcome this hurdle. And as I was saying, a glycan, it can hide, it can shield the whole receptor binding domain, for example.

So with one mutation, you overcome all this, you substitute, so to say, all the mutations that Omicron has incorporated to 20 mutations within the receptor binding domain. One glycan can simply substitute for that. So you can easily maintain that level of resistance to the neutralizing antibodies while using the same glycan at a low respiratory tract to, shield the conserved antigenic side to which the non-neutralizing antibodies are binding and by doing so preventing virulence of the virus, right? I know this is very, very difficult, but what else? Did people really think that this would be simple? And it is like, you know, everybody gets a shot and that is how we vaccinate ourselves outside of the pandemic. I mean, this is just. So let me ask you this and I think we I think we all have a basic understanding clearly I mean by the way how much time

I mean you are so of all the people I've talked to you are so deep into this virus how much work have you put into this I mean how much time does it take to have the understanding you have of of Amacron well you know Della I told you this is putting pieces of a puzzle together and you know there is only one principle. You cannot leave any stone unturned. You cannot leave any question unanswered. And you come up with a theory and you need to see whether this matches with what you're seeing in reality, for example. And, you know, it takes an awful amount of time.

Of course, it takes weeks and night. And I was already well prepared because, you know, I do have, I think, some substantial insights in immunology, vaccineology, virology, et cetera. But then you, instead of, you know, like these folks, like these key experts do, they're talking all the time, they're all the time on TV, they are, you know, politicians playing a political role, they are engaging in press conferences, etc, etc.

I mean, this time, all this time, I'm investing in doing the research, in looking at the science, of course, It's a full-time job. But it's worth doing this. Somebody needs to do this, but my frustration is that the message is so difficult to convey, whereas this naive narrative that these guys are spreading

is so easy for people to understand. It's basically, you know, shut up and get yourself vaccinated and also get your kids vaccinated, which is the biggest disaster ever, because this is the biggest reservoir for herd immunity. They have innate immunity. They can clear this virus. You know, this is from a public health viewpoint, a disaster,

not only for the child, but also. And the more children we will vaccinate, the more we will, of course, expedite his immune escape and get to this kind of variant that will not only be highly infectious, fully resistant to the vaccines and also highly virulent, right? And that is where these guys, you know, if they don't believe me, they should simply wait and see what is going to happen. But it will be too late. It'll be too late at that point.

So here's my next question. That variant, that's going to use a glycan to finish its job. It's super infectious now. All it wants to do is figure out how to be, you know, to be raising mortality, to be infecting the lower respiratory. track. How long do you think it is before a variant figures out how to do that with the amount of pressure that this vaccine program has put on it and what we're watching in science? How much time do we have? Well, it's, it's of course, well, what I can say very fast. The virus has now an enormous, an enormous choice of all possible mutants because, remember, first of all the infection

rate is very high. Second, we have plenty already of animal reservoirs. We have plenty of opportunities for co-infection where you have recombincedents, etc. Some of those have already been described. And you also have to imagine that we have already identified. Well, I didn't do this, but researchers do this, did this to glycosylase, glycosylation sites. So where these gligens would be inserted on the end on the terminus of the receptor binding domain and those glycosylation sites already available it just that the glycans are only present right now in trace amounts but these sides would be ideally situated they simply need to grow and then you have to have some mutations in the end terminal domain that can

accommodate make sure that you know when there is a conformational change due to the growing to the growth of these glycans, that it will not disturb the spike protein to an extent that it would no longer be infectious, so to say. But it doesn't need to be two or three mutations. You have plenty of mutations that could easily accommodate. And in this end terminal domain, and all this has been published, you have plenty of opportunities for mutations that would match perfectly to do this. So within that, that being said, I think. I cannot imagine that this will take more than like a month or two months before we start to see the first combination of highly infectious variants that are also more virulent. Remember, these glycan chains can grow and the more they grow, the better they will be able to do the job.

So it's not like we will have only one variant and that will be the super variant. No, we will have a series of variants that have more extensive glycosylation that will manage better and better to overcome the immune pressure that we are putting. And that will lead to a series of rapidly successing variants that have a level of of infectiousness that is even higher than Omicron. So this will not be prevented by the glycans because the glycans will not cover this small receptor binding motif

within the receptor binding domain that will be responsible for enhanced infectiousness. So the glycans, they will do it all together. So it's easy for the virus to do. People have already shown that in reconvalesan syrup from, well, people who recovered from the disease, that upon a few passages in cell culture, they ended up with a variant that has this oak-like oscillation chain

and that rendered the virus completely resistant to the reconvalescent serum, right? This was of course in vitro. So if you would ask me to set up an experiment where I can induce this resistance and generate, a highly infectious SARS-CoV-2 virus with a high level of virons that is completely resistant against the COVID-19 vaccines. The experiment that we are doing is exactly what I would do, exactly that, right? The experiment we're doing on humanity.

Preferably immunize all the children, right? It's criminal. It's not going to have a happy end. Believe me, it's not going to have a happy end unless we do a dramatic reduction of the infectious pressure. We do, of course. Okay. So before we get to the solution, let me understand. Just a couple quick questions, because we've been at this a long time, I feel like the scientists that really understand what you're talking about, you're speaking, you know, very specific language, but from a lay position, my understanding is this, that the mutations, as you say now, you believe, and I was hoping, I was thinking we're going to say, like, next fall, maybe, the next flu season, six months,

You believe within the next month or two, these types of mutations that will figure out their way using glycans to get back to this trans infection, which is where serious illness and death occurs, we'll start seeing variants that are going to get better and better at doing that starting a month or two from now. It'll probably be in the nations with high infection pressure because the highly vaccinated nations will be where we'll see this happen. Now, am I to understand that this problem, and it will probably be deadly for some, will it be specific to the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated? Will there be a difference between how the vaccinated will handle this new variance compared to the unvaccinated, or will they both be in danger? No. I mean, as I was always saying, for the unvaccinated, just for the record, for guys like, like, like, like, like, like, folks. and others who don't understand the difference, as we have discussed multiple times, you first have, for example, innate immunity, right?

We know that these innate antibodies are broadly protective. They don't care about, they recognize, that is what they do, they recognize cell of glycan patterns on pathogens, for example. That is what they have been conceived for, right? And if you have a change, for example, in the glycosylation, that is not going to prevent them from recognizing. I'm not saying that these people cannot develop mild or moderate disease,

but basically think about this, Del. It's just common sense. The Omicron, for example, is like a live-attinuated vaccine for the unvaccinated. I've published a number of things, articles about this, just pulling from other authors is that through epigenetic changes, the immune system can adapt, the innate immune system can adapt and do a better job the next time around. Of course you can get mild disease, you can maybe get moderate disease,

be a few days in bed, but next time around, you will do better. Let me just, so to say the unvaccinated and the innate especially, when we're talking about we didn't get back to baseline, we're in this highly infectious space where the virus is not going, going away. So all of us that weren't vaccinated, we're constantly coming in contact with the virus. It's all around us. Someone around us is infected. You're saying that's acting for us like a booster shot. If there's any mutations that our immune system hasn't seen yet, it is learning from that. It's re-boosting itself. We might get a light cold or something or moderate if it's, you know,

if it's bad. But for the most part, all of the naturally immune are constantly being upgraded by the contact with this infection that's out there so that this is just going to look like another mild mutation, this new variant that you're worried about for the unvaccinated. We're already just this far away. We need a slight adjustment. That immune system will do just fine. You might get a light cold.

But the vaccinated are going to have a severe experience with this because they're not getting this upgraded immunity. They're not taking in all the glycans, all the, you know, the whole virus, the whole thing, they're not going to handle it well. Is that pretty clear? The vaccinated are going to do much, much worse than the unvaccinated. Is that what you're saying essentially?

Well, yeah, it is simple. I mean, in the vaccinated, unfortunately, they are mounting antigen-specific responses, right? And this antigen-specific responses, they are doing a fantastic job outside of a pandemic, but they're just putting immune pressure if you vaccinate them during a pandemic, Whereas the unvaccinated, they are still relying on, we call this pathogen-specific immunity. And that is what is to a large extent going to protect the unvaccinated, certainly as long as they are in good health. So the situation is completely different. And therefore, it makes me so sick when these guys not understanding anything about immunity or mixing up all these different things.

They don't even understand what natural immunity is, let alone innate. immunity and there is vaccine induced immunity they are mixing it up and and it just like it fits it fits in their agenda natural immunity didn't count now all of a sudden it counts and they add the vaccine induced immunity and then pacts and of it and that is why how we get rid of the of the pandemic it's okay it's shame shame so from the very beginning when you your first concern was that pressuring this virus was a bad idea with a mass vaccination campaign during a pandemic. Now when you look at we are in the final stages. This virus has mutated in all the ways in many things you said. I'm guessing some things not exactly how you thought, but it has mutated. It's made this journey. It's in the final part of the journey that you were always concerned about. As you watch for this final mutation or this final set of mutations, and I only say final in that it truly achieves that goal of being both more virulent, and also more infectious, which is the perfect storm, as you will.

Do you feel now that the situation is this dire, especially for all of those we've had now, I think over a billion people vaccinated, hundreds of millions vaccinated just here in America, do you think the situation is more dire or less dire than when you originally sort of projected that it was a concern? Are you as concerned or less concerned about what damage this future variant could do? Well, I am more concerned and the reason is that when I launched my initial call, I think I understood 75%, maybe 60% of what exactly what was happening. As a matter of fact, I know understand that the virus is even more sophisticated in working in two stages.

I'm now very, very, very concerned that because we are already having a second mass vaccination ongoing, namely the Omicron vaccination, that there is no way we can stop this unless we massively, we massively diminish the infectious pressure, you know, which can only be done with mass antiviral hemoprophlaxis campaigns and at an individual level, also with antivirals, to treat people. So it could be very, could go very, very fast. So I hope that the antiviral treatments

and the early treatments will be sufficient to help these people, but at the population level, in highly vaccinated populations, if we don't do this, if we are not going to massively intervene with antiviral chemoporphylaxis, and I don't care whether it's either mectin or pachshlovit, it should be safe, it should be readily available at low cost and, you know, it should be very effective, then we are for sure going to face a disaster.

And if these guys like Fauci, Ovid, et cetera, think that this is just going to die out, you know, the end of a pandemic phase, just spontaneously, because we have Ombron, and then from time to time, we will give an additional shot and we will come with the new O'Micron vaccine and you know, if that doesn't help, we add a little bit of Paxel of it.

I mean, this is just a shame. This is an insult to science. This is an insult to all people who have been coerced and forced into these vaccination campaigns. I have no words for this. Yes, I'm more concerned, more concerned than before. And to be clear, what you just stated is the solution. So let's, let's end this, you know, with a way out.

And your way out, as you're saying, as I understand it, is we need to use prophylaxis of antivirals like ivermectin, Pax-Lovid. Now, are you saying who should be taking that? If you were, if you had your choice, if you were a king for a day, is your idea that in all of these highly infectious pressure countries where there's a huge high vaccine uptake rate, the UK, the United States of America, others that should they immediately put everybody that's been vaccinated on these prophylactic drugs? And then the result of that being that it would sort of take down the pressure on the virus

so that we stop it from mutating. We just release the pressure so that we're not like putting it on steroids and making it really, focused on having this variant shift that could be deadly for countless millions of people? Yeah, well, we need to diminish, of course, this infectious pressure. Is this going to be a solution? Well, we will have, of course, to repeat this, right? To repeat this after six months, maybe one year, but I guess at the beginning after six months. And we will need, let's be very clear, to do this for as long as long as, long as the part of the population that is capable of generating genuine herd immunity

is, represents only a small part of the population. This population will need to grow again. They are the vacuum cleaners. These are the people that naturally are responsible for inducing sterilizing immunity and herd immunity and terminate the pandemic. So as long as that population has become very small in highly vaccinated countries, we will need to do this on a regular basis. So there is no other way we could reduce this infectious pressure because the infectious pressure, as I was saying, comes with the immune pressure. Those both in highly vaccinated countries are intrinsically linked. So you have to start somewhere, and I prefer to start with the virus rather than to start with the people.

Because of course, if you eliminate those who are generating the immune pressure, then of course you will also diminish the infectious pressure because the virus will no longer be put under pressure. Do you want to do this? I mean, if you let nature do the job, that is what is going to happen. People are going to die. So essentially what you're saying is if we live, leave nature to do this. If we step aside right now, that nature will eventually bring down the level of pressure, am I to understand by killing people, by killing hosts, and ultimately getting rid of

so much of the population that there's not enough population to pressure it, and thereby those with the innate immune system still intact will become a large enough percentage of the population to get to herd immunity. That's what you're saying, that at this point, that the only way we are going to have to use drugs, prophylaxis for those that have been vaccinated in order to compete and try and give some advantage to the innate and naturally immune

to do the job of getting to herd immunity, or nature will reduce that pressure by bringing down that size of that population so that those that are naturally immune are a larger part of the population. Nature will re-establish the equilibrium in that ecosystem, right? It's not like the virus has a plan or, you know, the host has a plan.

This is simply the equilibrium, right, in this ecosystem. Let's be honest and just to finish this up to really sort of get a full understanding. Between you and I, unless this video is spread far and wide, and the scientists of the world jump on board and get through to the WHO and the CDC and the NHS, these large, you know, health bodies around the world. If we do not get this word out, odds are they will not use a high prophylaxis campaign amongst those that really need it. And so as you sit, you know, in your home now, and you brace for this variant that is coming

and recognize that the likely scenario is nature is going to have to establish its equilibrium because anything else would require Anthony Fauci and Paul Offutt to admit that they were wrong, that we have a serious issue that we've created. We've created a man-made unnatural scenario and an environment that should have never happened, and we now need to use a drug to try and get out of it. I doubt they're going to say that to the public, and therefore you won't have the uptake that is necessary. So when we look into the future, over the next few,

months going into next fall. What is your what is again I'm going to I asked you last time the worst case scenario as nature attempts to find this equilibrium. What type of percentages are we looking at as far as severe illness and death? I don't know but what I can say and I mean I'm really very serious about it because I've been thinking a long time about it, the losses will be unprecedented. I'm always saying Africa will win the countries that barely vaccinated their people. You see this, for example, now in South Africa, I don't know whether you have seen these curves. You have a steep increase of one Omicron variant, and then it was calm, like for a few months,

and then you had another steep curve. You don't see this in our countries anymore, in the highly vaccinated countries. South Africa has approximately 30, 35% of vaccinated people. So you still have an important young population that can clear the virus. And that is how these waves can still be brought down. But yeah, as I was saying, this is going to be dramatic for highly vaccinated countries. And I really cannot imagine. if we don't intervene with mass antiviral chemoporphylaxis. I, you know, yeah, of course you could say we need a baby boom.

I immediately dilute this whole thing so that we have Earth immunity, but that cannot happen within a short time. You could say we can have massive immigration from people coming from poorly vaccinated countries, but like, for example, now with Ukraine, etc. What I'm seeing is that they get already vaccinated at the border when they come in, right? So none of this is going to help. And, you know, this cannot be put back into balance without major sacrifice. If you don't act on the virus, if you don't want to do this,

and you just drive it into more and more infectious variants, then the other alternative is, of course, the host population. I mean, what else? It's not 25 different factors that are contributing to this. You hear us all the time talking about infectious pressure and immune pressure, right? And that is the two factors you can play with. When would you dare to speculate? We have 340, 30, 40 million Americans people, 60% of which, you know, I think are fully vaccinated or in that space. So, you know, two-thirds of the nation vaccinated. So if we're looking, you know, at 200 million

people that are going to have trouble with a future variant, what are the potential numbers? I don't know, I don't know, Del, but, you know, I don't want to think about it even. And, of course, there is nothing we can base it. There is nothing we can use as a comparison. This experiment is completely unprecedented and it is massive. It involves all age groups, right? It is massive. So that is why I'm saying the damage will also be massive. But don't ask me to, you know, for numbers,

but the only thing I can say is that according to my humble opinion, it will really be unprecedented. It will be unprecedented. You know, I still hope somewhere that, you know, one or the other force will convince those who are in charge to change their mind. But as you were saying, it's very unlikely because it seems like they prefer to die themselves before, you know, admitting that they were completely wrong. And for people it's extremely difficult because for them it's very, very difficult to understand. There was only one thing we needed and you started the interview with my first video. We should never have had vaccine mandates.

We should have had debate mandates, a mandate for debate. Scientists should have been obliged to get together to discuss with us so that people could understand like we are doing right now, that it's not all that simple and that is very complex matter that that have been shaped throughout, you know, millions of years through evolution and that it just like, you know, during a war where you destroy one piece of architecture where people have been working for tens of years, sometimes, you know, hundreds of years, to build something fantastic and then they just throw one bombshell on this and it's all gone. That is the kind of image that I have in my in my head the stupidity of mankind and the stupornness

that will have of course major major consequences that are unpredictable but as I was saying unprecedented unprecedented I know it's devastating I mean it's yeah well Geert I want to thank you for your continued passion for your work on this subject. It is clear, as I've said before, that of all the people that have looked at this, I don't know anyone that seems to have evaluated so many different aspects of the science from all around the world. You have predicted in many ways very, very accurately where we have come to this point. I will end this, I think, probably the way I ended the last time. I pray to God that you are.

are wrong. I hope that there is some greater power than all of us that somehow finds empathy for our arrogance and the mistakes that we have clearly made and goes light on us. But for the rest of us, I think the message still stays the same. If your kids have not been vaccinated for God's sakes, leave them alone. For everybody that is questioned whether your natural immunity is the right way to go, stay away from the vaccine. You are the future of the world. The future of the world is hanging in the bodies of those who have not touched this vaccine. And whether through nature or science, we need to make that the dominant population in order for our species to correct itself in this time. Yeah. I absolutely agree. And thanks, Del, for conveying, helping to confirm

this message which is it's basically my last call to have things changed and you know if some of these experts want to react to my document want to fact check it right I've distributed it broadly widely there's plenty of references the literature it's also of course on my website and you know I mean if they if they really think they have an argument that is still justifying mass vaccination. They should react to this. This is pure science. But yeah, I'm afraid we will not hear from them once again.

Well, they have any opportunity. If they want to make it public, they can do it right here on the high wire. We put our call out to Anthony Fauci, Paul Offutt, all of you out there. If you want to challenge Geert, I'd love to hear how geared is wrong. Nothing would make me happier in this world. Geert, I hope you continue your great work. We will do our best to get this message out. I know we're not the only, you know, group you're doing this interview with.

We are not in competition. We work with everybody. Every great film crew out there should be interviewing you. We need to reach all of humanity now. I want to thank you once again for your time. And I look forward to brighter, better conversations in the future. However, that has to happen. Take care.

Thank you. Thank you, Del. Thanks. It's difficult to know what to say at this moment because I know many of you've just watched this. I've had several days to try and absorb what Gertes just shared with us. And let's be clear, even if you only understand 50% of the science that was just laid before us, it is terrifying.

It is absolutely shocking. And let me also say this, if you understood 50% of what Gert just said, you know more than any doctor that has ever injected a vaccine into your body. They never studied this. They don't understand this. Paul Offutt himself has clearly proven he doesn't even understand what he's talking about. We are in a totally different world now that we have created. Now, I also want to say, I think it's very important to also remember that, as Gert said, this is all unprecedented. We are in an unprecedented world, so even his theories are still just theories that we don't know if they will play out the way he has said.

He has no reference point. There's never been a time in the world where we have removed herd immunity as our way out, which is what we have done. We now live in a time where we're being told to learn to live with it. Now, I want to just go through a couple of things just to be clear. for all of us that are out there, I saw a lot of, you know, there's a lot of questions being asked, well, what if I've been naturally infected? Or what if I haven't gotten the vaccine, but I haven't been infected? Don't think I've been infected.

I believe all of that was covered there. There is no way that you are not boosting at this point in this world. If you've been walking around in this world, you have everyone has come in contact with Omicron, especially. And it is highly infectious. And so you, if you haven't felt it, your body's been reboosting, you are in a, great position. In fact, those who have either had the infection naturally, never got vaccinated, or those that have had such a strong innate reaction, maybe they've been asymptomatic and didn't know it. You are the future. You are that equilibrium that nature is trying to find. It needs those people

to reach herd immunity and it needs it to be a large enough part of the population or we have to do something else to deal with an unnatural situation like we're in right now. That leads us to those of you that watch this show that have been vaccinated. I'm just going to say what Gert is saying is you need to go out and start a prophylaxis process. Your body has an antigenic sin, is what we call it, an original antigenic sin. I've done the football scenario. If you haven't seen it, go back and watch it where the X's and O's.

Your body is only looking for the old version of this virus. It is blind to all new variants. And when that variant comes along, that is not. not only infectious but deadly, your body doesn't know how to fight it and you're going to be in trouble. So all of these things that when you got vaccinated said, well, Ivermectin doesn't work and hydroxychloroquine doesn't work. He mentions Pax-Lovid. That's a brand new drug. We're going to do some investigations of that, there's some questions to whether that's as effective as Ivermectin or as safe. But what he's saying is you need to reduce the pressure using those, that those that

are vaccinated now all need to start, probably a very light dosage of a prophylaxis, so that that prophylaxis makes sure you can't be infected, that you're taking a drug that blocks infection so that your body can't mount any more mutant resistant and drive this thing. We need to remove pressure now off of the virus. And so that is his solution. Will it work? Who knows?

Who knows? We've never been here before. To me, this is him grasping at whatever opportunity now. How do we get ourselves out of this natural situation? If you are naturally immune, know this, that whatever happens, you're the one that can rush into the burning building now. We are perfectly set up now with strong, robust immunity to help in whatever scenarios come into our future. And let's just think into that for a moment and what has been on my mind. What does this look like? What does it look like if he's right in a month or two the same antibodies that are inside of the vaccinated people that have been having.

helping this virus infect them. Remember, we've talked about immune enhancement. That is already happening. It's no longer a theory. Immune enhancement is happening or disease enhancement. The antibodies from the vaccine are helping this virus infect people. I showed you that with the Walgreens data. Compared to the unvaccinated, the vaccinated are catching it more,

meaning it's making them, you know, the vaccine is helping them be infected more. And so what he's saying is one more step. not only is going to help them be infected, it will help them die, which is the ultimate antibody dependent enhancement we saw in all of the animal trials. The high wire has been warning you since before this vaccine was ever delivered into a single human being. We said this was our concern. And it was hypothetical, but Gerbend Mosh has been laying out accurately the entire time every step, as I pointed out in the very beginning. So what happens? This is clearly a what if that I think we have to sort of think about but not dwell on. What happens if large portions of

the population that are vaccinated suddenly start getting severely ill and dying? I can assure you there will be a panic like we have not seen before. Will we immediately look like Shanghai? I don't think it's out of the question. Will the media say that everybody's having this problem? definitely. They will never tell you that it's not the, it's the unvaccinated or not in hospitals, that it's only the vaccinated or getting the severe disease. They will probably even go as far to say that the reason that this new variant came along that we didn't see coming was because of the unvaccinated, as we've heard them say before. They will try to blame us for the mistake that they have made. We need to be prepared for all of that. What does that world look like?

What happens if so many people start getting sick, they lock us down like Shanghai? Can we eat? Where's my food going to come from? Do I know a local farmer? All of these things are, I think, practical discussions that you should have. Hopefully, and as I said, I pray that we look back on all of this and say, well, it was scary. It was a little over the top, but we were wrong. I hope at that moment we can say, Yirt Van Den Bosch was wrong, who was right about everything else,

But that final closing, you know, call that he made was over the top and didn't end up coming to fruition. But let's be clear, everyone that has been against here at Vanden Bosch, the Anthony Fauci's of the world, have been wrong every single step of the way. They promised us the vaccine would end this pandemic by creating herd immunity. It no longer does that. Can we see the headline one more time? Tony Fauci says, learn to live with COVID because we're not going to eradicate it. Let me make this clear.

If we get nothing else out of Geert's interview, here is what is happening. For the first time in the history of man and viruses and bacteria that we know of that has ever been documented, we did not eradicate this disease. We did not make it to herd immunity. enough people did not develop a natural resistance, create neutralizing antibodies, and destroy this virus, as we've done with every single virus that we have ever come in contact with since the dawn of man. These fools, these people experimented on us and it is the greatest failure that has ever happened.

Now they are telling us that we have to live with constant sickness, with high rates of infection that are never going away. Do you realize this is their brain trial? This is their dream. They got it. Oh, good for you. You managed to talk enough governments of the world into letting you try your experiment where you were going to overcome God and natural immunity.

Because remember, we have only with vaccines ever vaccinated the children and we were basing its ability to achieve herd immunity on the fact that we already had natural herd immunity and we're just vaccinating the remaining few in claiming, we did it. No, you did not. Your vaccine never created immunity just like you're already having problems with polio that I pointed out before. No, when you finally had the opportunity to say, let us step in and do what God has done, or for those of you that have trouble with religion,

then let's call it evolution, the perfect design of your body. When the pharmaceutical industry and these geniuses said, no, let us take over. What did they achieve? They did not. achieve herd immunity. They achieve something far worse, a constant state of unending illness. That is what they've achieved. So whether or not Geert van den Bosch is wrong about how severe this is going to get, which in many ways when you think biblically, this could be biblical if it plays out. This mistake, this arrogance, this hubris that we've been warned about through every religion known to man. our egos or Satan or whatever you want to call it, make us do something that overrides our humility and our understanding of nature around us. We are in that moment. And I mean it, may God spare us

and have empathy for what we have done here. We have created a world where at the moment herd immunity does not exist for the first time ever. Does nature get us out? of this? Is it going to be some horrific event? Can we find balance through homeo or chemoprophylaxis or anything else? We will be looking for all of those answers as we move in the future. Today's show is intense. It is a time capsule. I put it all in here. His original interviews, all of it, because we need to be able to say the science was known. It was completely in full stated, not a sound bite, not letting anyone guess, it was all there for often and everyone to study. They should have told you the truth. They should have come together. Stop the freaking

censorship for God's sakes and let all the doctors in the world speak to each other. Let Malone on his LinkedIn. Let Peter McCullough. Let everybody come together to try and find a solution together for the mistake that we made. That has to happen now. But no matter what, let us learn this lesson, that we are not smarter than nature, that we are not better, and that these scientists have no clue what they are doing to us. Let's get out of this world where we just saw what they'll do if science gets to run the world. We will be forever sick, unable to make it to a equilibrium of health. Sure, they'll have drugs to deal with the fact that we are always sick. And imagine not just coronavirus, but flu and measles and chickenpox and all of it constantly infecting us because we cannot eradicate it because all of those who had natural immunity have already passed away.

As I've said many times, the baby boomers being the last truly immune. Do we let science take us into this dark place that is a state of constant illness? Or do we wake up and say, let's get back to the human body. When it won this battle every time it came in contact with a virus, when it won the battle every time it came in contact with the bacteria, where it persevered and reached herd immunity, sure, there were a few people that were very sick that didn't make it through that battle,

but we got back to zero. We got back to perfect health. Let's get back to winning the battle with nature, which means working in concert with nature, instead of this future where we lose every single day to virus, where we lose and we have to learn to live with being losers. That is what science has done to us because we have not studied the science. We have a lot of work to do. There is still hope because we are here speaking the truth.

But no, if this horrific moment, takes place, censorship, lockdowns, all of it could be back upon us. What will we do? We'll have to work together. And that's what the high wire is all about. Thank you for taking the time

to understand the potential future of our species. Obviously, we take it very seriously here with the high wire.