The Last American Vagabond - Denis Rancourt Interview – The COVID-19 Illusion: Biological Stress-Induced Bacterial Pneumonia

Starting point is 00:00:00 There is no doubt that the science was such that if they didn't know they were purposefully being blind, you know, they, there's no way that they cared about people. There's no way that they wanted to apply methods to minimize harm. It's the opposite. They wanted to apply methods to oppress and be dominant and impose their will on entire populations. That was the goal. It's easy for them to fund scientists to say that. it's real. And it's easy for them for those results to be published in the top journals. They control everything. Okay. They control all the editors, all the journals, all the scientists

Starting point is 00:00:40 are funded by them. All the scientists that don't want to play ball can't publish and lose their careers. They control everything. I would say that 99% of medical trials nowadays have to be false. They're completely funded and controlled by the industry. Welcome to the last American bag of bonds. Well, between 2020 and the end of 2022, the COVID-19 illusion dynamic, 31 million in excess deaths estimated. About 17 million estimated due to the COVID-19 injections. So where did the other 14 million go in that conversation? We've discussed a lot about the idea of the COVID-19 timeframe, the illusion therein, and the different ways you could mean that, whether these things were non-existent, whether it was an illusion in regard to the repurposing

Starting point is 00:01:51 of different parts of the data, the metrics. So somebody who I feel has been on top of this conversation, I mean, more than just about anybody else, is Denny Rencoo. We've had him on more than once to discuss his kind of evolving research around this topic, really kind of tip of the spear on this, around the idea of the all-cause mortality. Now he's got some really powerful research coming out around the idea of something he calls the, rather what he frames in the study, is biological stress-induced, transmission-less, spontaneous bacterial pneumonia, essentially a self-influformational.

Starting point is 00:02:21 affection caused by environmental stress. And so he discusses this as one other aspect, if not the possible primary aspect of what was going on there. But I invited back on to discuss all of this together, the illusion around this, the possible factors, and how it's all these together, the injections causing very clear death injury and so on in conjunction with repurposing of data, but also something that we may cause us to reevaluate how we view these things in general. This starts to come very close to the conversation, if not right in it, between terrain. and germ theory. So Danny, always good to have you on the show. How are you? Hey, it's a pleasure to be here. Pleasure to be back on your show. Ryan, I love it.

Starting point is 00:02:59 Thanks for inviting me. Thanks for joining me again. I really do think your work is, you know, ahead of the curve around the idea of what these things are. And I was saying kind of off air before, the reason I respect your work so much and what you do is that you, you don't shy away from pointing or leaning into contentious conversations or data sets, even, you know, really if it makes sense. I mean, it's funny to even say that out loud because you'd think most people that seems like that would just be the normal, but it's not. Most people today seem so afraid to step into certain conversations if they think it's contentious.

Starting point is 00:03:31 I just wanted to shout you out for that. So I kind of wanted to start today with this bigger picture, right? So all these different parts, he's moving parts around what I argue come together to be the COVID-19 illusion. But as we've heard over this kind of evolving point, you know, some people think that it was not there at all, right? There is no such thing as a virus or if there was, it was not. really there in the first place. Some people argue that the vaccine caused all the death,

Starting point is 00:03:55 and it was, you know, just the illusion they were in. They were calling it something else. And then you were pointing out something new in all this, which is more so a, you know, kind of an evolving understanding of how the, I guess, germ versus terrain theory dynamic actually works. So these are different parts, but all come together potentially to cause what we're watching. And so the first part of it, as I see it, is sort of the repurposing manufacturing illness, like the flu, pneumonia, becoming COVID, the false PCR tests, the vet. ventilators, remdesivir. Now, these aren't necessarily in chronological order, but ultimately come together to kind of represent the category of the illusion, something else being done,

Starting point is 00:04:30 then a calling that COVID. Then you've got the psychological aspect, the lockdowns, the mandates, the poor treatments. And then what you add is sort of a, and I want to get into explaining this, the biological, environmental reaction from your body and causing sort of a self-infection. Then there were the injections that are obviously dangerous. And all those together, you know, combining them, it creates a picture of obviously something that is, very damning, being dangerous. So let's start with, you know, the first part of that in regard to repurposing manufacturing illness. You know, so is there, in your mind, a COVID-19, massage cobb two, or, you know, where do you place in that conversation? Well, okay. Well,

Starting point is 00:05:07 first of all, everything that I, all the hypotheses that I put forward and the conclusions that I come to as a scientist are based on hard data. What I mean is I go straight to the, to the mortality, The all-cause mortality, I feel, is the most reliable data you can have. It's been collected by nations for more than a century. And they're legalistically bound to collect this data, and it should be of good quality. And you can test the quality by various measures and so on. So it's hard data, and that's what I generally have relied on. So the very first thing is there is no doubt that there was a lot of mortality way before the vaccines were rolled.

Starting point is 00:05:49 out. There was excess mortality in large amount before the vaccines were rolled out. So that you can just you can just establish right off the bat. Anyone who says that mortality only started with the rollouts is simply wrong. It's incorrect to say that. Another example is that the all-cause mortality when you look at its temporal and spatial dependence where this mortality was occurring and as a function of time by day or by week, when you look at that in detail, you can be demonstrate unambiguously that there was nothing spreading. This was not spreading cause of death or spreading pathogen. There was no spread in the sense of the epidemiological beliefs at the moment in mainstream science. There was nothing spreading. And that is unambiguous because you get these

Starting point is 00:06:42 hot spots of death and the neighboring regions do not experience the same hot spots of death. Their mortality does not increase following those hot spots. And so there's no spread. And you can really see very distinct regions of high mortality that stop at a jurisdictional border. It's that simple. You know, county to county in the U.S. or country to country in Europe or sub-country region to sub-country region in Europe, they're delimited by these jurisdictional borders. In other words, what local governments were doing in their hospital environments, if you like, and what directives were being given, that determined the deaths at the beginning of, in 2020, more than anything else. And it's very, very clear from these boundaries. So this was not at all the model

Starting point is 00:07:38 of a spreading pathogen that is a pandemic in the sense of a spreading pathogen. You can disprove that, absolutely. And my very first paper on the subject looked at this hard data way back. It was published on the 2nd of June 2020. And there I said, there is no spread. This is institutions and governments killing people by the measures that they're applying mostly in hospitals and so on. I was very clear. I spelled that out in that publication right away and showed the data that demonstrated that. Really quick question. Anyone that stands out in your mind is the top of that, ventilators?

Starting point is 00:08:15 What do you think was the peak of that? Oh, well, it's different in different jurisdictions, for example, but definitely in northern Italy, in Milan region, and also New York City, both of those did heavy use of mechanical ventilators, yes, very heavy. Like in Milan, they actually told people, don't just stay at home. Come straight into the hospital. will save you and they developed an improvement they considered where they could put two people on one ventilator and they were just putting everybody on ventilators now the ventilators are accompanied with

Starting point is 00:08:54 sedation and sedation makes your breathing even worse and the ventilators are known to be strongly associated with developing pneumonia and at the same time they there was a hesitancy to treat pneumonia because everyone was saying oh it's viral it's viral don't you're you're being irresponsible as an MD or a hospital if you're over treating with antibiotics so there was withdrawal of antibiotics and these very dangerous techniques and sedation and so on and together and there was some also some experimental drugs that were being used that were that were shown to be very very deadly and so for example in Germany they weren't doing any of that

Starting point is 00:09:34 and there were no excess deaths at the beginning of 2020 in Germany after the pandemic was announced. None at all. It's just a flat line. Whereas in the immediate regions that are bordering Germany, like in France and Belgium and so on, you have this hot spots of death in large hospitals. So it was very clear from the start. And but I mean, there are many different causes

Starting point is 00:10:01 of excess death during the COVID period. And not every, not everyone was doing the same thing. but there was so there was a lot and one of the one of the really important causes of death is severe treatment of elderly and frail people so isolating them is extremely deadly and removing their usual routine their usual way that you give them nourishment and also hydrate them and their care that they normally would have all of that was disrupted tremendously and they were isolated and treated as a danger to themselves, between themselves, and so on. So that certainly would have contributed enormously to deaths, the frail people.

Starting point is 00:10:46 So what was done in care homes and hospitals to elderly and sick people was absolutely horrendous. It was a death machine, basically. And so that's what I would, that's what I would, yeah, I read a lot of reports about all these things. And that's how I would explain the mortality hotspots that we were quantifying using all-cause mortality. Yeah, and I think that's really important. So as just kind of the first part of this, right? And we're going to get into more of the germ terrain point later in this conversation. But just to start, whatever your position on whether these are possibly existing,

Starting point is 00:11:23 the point he's making is that right there you can see that it was not that prior to this time frame. So there was something else causing this spike in excess mortality. And so as you just clearly laid out right there, there's all. all these obvious, you know, I guess you could try to argue these aren't deliberate. I think it's, I mean, maybe you can comment on that. I think at some level you can very clearly show that there was enough information at the higher levels to know that these things weren't working. I would even go a step further and say that at some cases you could show that they knew

Starting point is 00:11:48 they wouldn't work. But give me your thought on that. What level do you think that was sort of more than malfeasance and deliberate? Oh, my. Well, look, the way I understand this is that there was a decision to have this military rollout on campaign and it was going to happen in the western world no matter what it was it was a top down decision it was planned it was executed so none of the science or none of what they knew mattered whatsoever it didn't matter the only thing they were concerned about is we don't want it to be too

Starting point is 00:12:24 obvious we don't want the backlash to stop us in our plan so um you know secondary effects from any medication are acceptable and we control the propaganda so we'll we'll get this through you know if the vaccine immediately killed 10% of the people that were injected then the backlash would have been too much so they had to have something that was not straight up deadly incredible poison uh but but if there were deaths it was not a problem if you could handle it and so and they were following this every step of of the way to make sure that the backlash would not, you know, disrupt their plans to roll out these vaccines. But it was definitely a plan. My understanding from a social science kind of perspective is this was a, there was a military goal here, which was to inject everyone. And you want to be,

Starting point is 00:13:22 the vaccine, the way that the vaccine is a weapon is if a government or a regime can whatever they want whenever they want into everybody's bodies then that's the weapon right there doesn't matter what's in there if you have that ability then you have a weapon a very powerful weapon that can be used to immunize you or prevent you you know it can be prevention against another another bio weapon that someone else is using it can be all these there are all these military reasons why you would want to be able to inject something into everybody's bodies so they They definitely wanted to do that.

Starting point is 00:14:01 Whether or not they believe what I think is largely the myth of genetically engineering us to be more susceptible to things. And so whether or not they believe that, I don't know. I don't know to what extent their scientific non-sophistication goes. But they certainly did want to inject us all. There's no doubt about that. and that in itself, the capacity to do that is a weapon. And also, it is a way to impose yourself as a dominant regime. In other words, if you can force the population to wear masks, to isolate, to not travel,

Starting point is 00:14:43 and to be injected directly into your body, if you can do that, and if you can develop all of the institutional and propaganda mechanism to achieve that, then you have complete control of the population. And it's also a pretext to have complete surveillance as well, right? So if you can achieve that, then you've got a level of control, a quantum jump in the level of control all of a sudden just because you've done this campaign. And so I'm sure that that was a large part of the goal as well.

Starting point is 00:15:16 But my point is that these were the types of motives. So whether or not the extent, you know, they recognized science was being applied or not, is completely irrelevant. I mean, it was really well known that isolation kills, that your propensity to get respiratory infections increases dramatically with the amount of stress that you're experiencing in your life and also the amount of social isolation that you're living in.

Starting point is 00:15:47 These are huge factors, dominant factors for young people to get respiratory infections. And this is extremely well-known, extremely well-studied. So there is no doubt that the science was such that if they didn't know they were purposefully being blind, you know, there's no way that they cared about people. There's no way that they wanted to apply methods to minimize harm. It's the opposite. They wanted to apply methods to oppress and be dominant and impose their will on entire populations. That was the goal. So the question about whether or not the science, they follow the science, is completely irrelevant, I think.

Starting point is 00:16:32 Yeah. I mean, it's a great point. And, you know, and so what you just touched on is what we're going to get into in the next parts is the interesting dynamic of creating social, biological, psychological stress environments that then cause your body to create illness essentially, right? It's one of the ideas. Yeah. You see, I don't think they were trying. the illness and even the death, I think, are side effects. I mean, I know that a lot of elite have this idea and this theory in social science that less population is better for them

Starting point is 00:17:08 and that it's unsafe to be living in a world where there's too many people because too many things can happen and so on. I know that they have that and they're serious about it. But at the same time, I don't think, I think that the main thing here was to approach. and to inject and that everything else, including death and illness is a side effect of that. That was the main driving force. Now, that is the way that dominance hierarchies always function throughout history and in social groups of animals or people. You dominate, you oppress, and that makes the oppressed, the people, the underlings, if you like, more unhealthy. be and it makes them die sooner and it makes them die often.

Starting point is 00:17:55 So that is just a rule of nature, if you like, that if you're going to have a dominance hierarchy and if it's particularly aggressive depending on the broader environment or depending on its own internal dynamics, when it becomes particularly violent, then there's going to be more death, there's going to be more illness of the people who are the underlings, if you like, who are being more control. That's a general historic feature. So that aspect of it is not new. It's not new.

Starting point is 00:18:29 If you say they want to kill us, yeah, they always want to kill us. They want to kill us whenever they censor or capture institutions to their benefits to be able to more control, reduce democracy, take away your rights. Whenever they do these things, they're killing you. they're making you more oppressed and more sick more often and when you do get sick you get more sick

Starting point is 00:18:53 that is the main mechanism of ill health of individuals is the is the stress that is the dominant stress that's applied within the dominance hierarchy and the the special thing about humans is that the internal dynamics can be such that that can increase dramatically so you have instabilities towards more of a fascism state, more of a totalitarian state. You have these internal instabilities where you can slide into those types of environments, and then it becomes really dangerous for the individual. And health does decrease and so on. And there are really good theoretical papers that I've talked about previously about

Starting point is 00:19:36 how internally that happens and why we move towards totalitarian states and so on, and how you get out, how do you get back out of it, how you reset in the real sense of the population insisting that we not go there, like after a major war when they've been, when they've had enough kind of thing. So there's a lot written about this. But that is a general feature. So we just got to see that. It was just put in our faces suddenly.

Starting point is 00:20:05 And so we noticed it more than we normally do, you see. Yeah. And you make a good point in one of your recent studies about that, about the point. Interestingly, that it's like selectively not applied to the human dynamic, where you can see that in all these different animal dynamics, but then not the, you know, whatever the academic circles are are not applying that logic in the context of what we just saw, which I find very telling. That's right.

Starting point is 00:20:31 Derek wrote an article a while back called, it's right here, the rise of authoritarianism from parasite stress theory to lockstep. And he references a study done more than one, by the way, of the U.S. government about how they basically study how a pathogen of any kind, the threat of it. And they make a really clear point to make the argument that it doesn't even have to be a real threat, just the threat alone, whether it exists or not, will drive populations to accept authoritarian governments. I found that really fascinating. Yes. Yeah. Yeah, that's an instrument that can be used for sure.

Starting point is 00:21:03 For sure. Any outside threat, invisible outside threat that you can that you can use to scare people, works great, you know, it can be any number of things, including an enemy that wants to go to war with you or whatever. I make the point in one of my recent large papers, which is a medical hypothesis paper, that in my view, it appears that there has never been a pandemic in the sense of the spread of a pathogen, ever in history. So if you look at the large pandemics in history, and there's many, There's dozens and dozens of them that can be studied in detail. You can do forensic analyses of the skeletons. You can do all kinds of things.

Starting point is 00:21:48 So these have been studied extensively. And if you look at these, what you will see is that a lot of people die at times when there are huge collapses within society. Like in relation to large wars or famines that are induced by a meltdown of the society that's induced by elite. greed and those kinds of things. So a meltdown of the financial system which is brought on by greed and over exploitation and so on. These things in every case of a major pandemic, you see these correlations. And sometimes it's environmental in the sense that there can be a drought, a very long, you know, more than years of drought. And sometimes these droughts are brought on by, huge volcanic explosions that simply diminish the amount of sunlight that that that strikes the earth

Starting point is 00:22:47 and gives you a bit of a small a mini ice age and that kind of thing you know so there there are correlations between the large pandemics and large volcano eruptions that that and so there there are there there many ideas that suggest that or many observations that suggest that if you really disrupt the society at large in an important way, then a lot of people will die. Just from the stress of it, the biological stress. And they're not getting the nourishment they need. They're being harassed.

Starting point is 00:23:28 They're being pushed out of resources. They're being, and they die. And when you look at the great, the black plague, okay, the black death, the plague. When you look at that, scientists have studied it and they've looked at hundreds and hundreds of skeletons. And what you notice is, and you don't generally hear this, but the people who died were extremely undernourished

Starting point is 00:23:56 and underdeveloped physically and had, you know, really bad teeth and really bad skeletal structures and everything. They were the poorest of those societies. The wealthy did not die in the black players. Okay, so and what you will find is that in all of these pandemics, including the recent one, it's not wealthy people who die. It's the poor who die. One of the strongest correlation that we found between excess mortality and a social economic parameter in our study of the U.S. on a county and state level is with poverty. If you were poor, you died.

Starting point is 00:24:37 And that correlates in turn with obesity. diabetes you know it's co-correlated with those things and also it's co-correlated with how many antibiotic prescriptions do you normally get you know poorer people are prescribed antibiotics more often before COVID because they get respiratory diseases more often and so there's a strong correlation there and so they're used to getting it and it was it was denied to them during COVID antibiotics were not prescribed that prescription rates went way down to half of what they normally are. So there are all these mechanisms that ensured that the elderly, the frail, and the poor

Starting point is 00:25:20 were killed, basically. Right. And antibiotics would have been the appropriate treatment for, let's say, bacterial pneumonia if that was being treated. Yes, absolutely. And one of the points I make in my articles is that Ivermectin is an extremely efficient antibiotic in the sense that it's really good at fighting bacterial infections of the lungs, extremely good. There are scientific papers about this. So I believe that a lot of MDs thought they were

Starting point is 00:25:47 treating a viral infection when in fact they were probably treating a bacterial infection. And that's what would have saved the lives of these people. Interesting. Yeah. So we're going to come back to two main points on that. Before we do, though, I want to just quickly touch on the interesting overlap to a couple things we were highlighting right there. But I mean, just the introduction of the newer report, let's just put it this way. The beginning timeframe and all this 2020, it was almost like, the conversation was shut down

Starting point is 00:26:15 around any suggestion that this might have been a bio weapon, come from a lab, any number of other things. And this is whether or not you believe these things are even capable of being, you know, real. The point is that from a government and info information perspective, it was shut down. Now all of a sudden, we have a new congressional report

Starting point is 00:26:31 saying that they're concluding that it's coming from a lab. So how do you fit that into this conversation? Is that more psychological manipulation? Go ahead. Yes. Okay, so my work shows that this was not a spreading pathogen. So it's irrelevant that you want to propose that it was made in a lab or not. There was no pathogen that was spreading.

Starting point is 00:26:56 The deaths were not related to something spreading unambiguously. That's a hard fact. So it doesn't matter. And also there's no evidence. of a virulent pathogen, all the deaths are highly correlated to how you were killing people directly by the stress and by how you were treating them and the treatments you were denying to them. That's what did it. So I think that this whole biolab leak thing is a diversion.

Starting point is 00:27:27 Whether it's intended or not, I don't care. From my perspective, it's essentially irrelevant. Now, it's true that the government has biolabs. It's true that they think about and design and get patents for bioweapons and things like that. But it's irrelevant in terms of the deaths that occurred during COVID. Interesting. So you can believe that it would be nice to have a virus that you genetically designed that might do exactly what you want to do.

Starting point is 00:28:00 You can believe all that, but it did not play a role. in the in the deaths here in my view so so that's that's just just i've been i've been saying from the beginning that's just irrelevant you know right well and you made your point clear already that you did just the or the beginning point before vaccines were introduced the time frame between that you can see the all-cause mortality that doesn't correlate with the spreading and i was going to say earlier there's a there's multiple examples then you reference i believe at least one of them that showed undefinable like iran was an example where there was a all of a sudden you saw this outbreak of something they claim was different and they were unable to connect it to any other

Starting point is 00:28:38 aspect of it. So it's points like that that show that there's something just all of a sudden sporad happening within the country. In the study that we're continuing and also in papers that we've already written, you can really see clearly that, for example, in northern Italy, the Milan region had this huge spike of deaths. Oh, by the way, these spikes occurred only immediately after the pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization. And there was no, there was no excess death anywhere in the world until you declared a pandemic, which is crazy because in the model of a spreading pathogen, there's way more randomness than that. And the pathogens are initially in the population way before you decide to declare a pandemic. And depending on the region and what's happening,

Starting point is 00:29:24 you're going to have excess deaths within that model. So just the fact that there was absolutely no excess deaths until they declared the pandemic within a week or so of that declaration, let's say, is already should give you an indication that this was completely fabricated in that sense, right? Yeah. But the other thing is that some people will say, well, Milan had deaths because this potent virus was flown in from China, from Wuhan, right? And New York, same thing. There must have been a flight that seeded it, right?

Starting point is 00:29:58 Well, there's a couple of problems with that. One is Rome has more flights to China and bigger airport than the Milan region and did not have any excess mortality in that period. Same country. It wasn't doing what Milan was doing. And it didn't have this peak of excess deaths. In the United States, you have large airports in New York, but you also have large airports in L.A. and San Francisco. and they get way more flights from Asia. And there were absolutely no deaths at the beginning after the,

Starting point is 00:30:34 there wasn't that peak of deaths that you had in New York. So there are many, many examples like this where you can, you can show that these comparison regions are the same in terms of number of poor, number of hospital beds, number of everything. But one had a spike of deaths and the other didn't, okay? So it was very granular where the deaths were going to occur. And it was always related to what they were doing, the policies that they applied. Okay.

Starting point is 00:31:04 So that's the point there. So where was I going with this? You asked me, what was the question again? I was just going to bring this into the next in part. This is your study entitled in conjunction with others as well. nature of the COVID-era public health disaster in the USA from all-cause mortality and socio-geo-economic and climatic data. And so the main point on this that I think is the same, you know, same things we were just discussing, but it comes to the idea of, you know, misdiagnosed bacterial pneumonia

Starting point is 00:31:36 deaths, the idea of the large COVID-era-USA pneumonia epidemic that is not mentioned, you know, the hiding of all this. And so I wanted to bring this into that idea around first and foremost, the idea of just bacterial pneumonia. I want your thoughts on this before. we get into the other studies you've highlighted around, you know, what we're dealing with here, well, actually before that, but this point about the bacterial pneumonia in general. So what we're going to talk about is the idea of a self-induced sort of transmissionless idea that you're talking about like environmentally caused. But do you think there's an overlap to that with things like, say, the masks? Because James Lyons-Wiler, I've interviewed more than once,

Starting point is 00:32:12 he argued early in this, and I agree that the mask itself was a large factor in causing the obvious oral thrush, the overlap with that, causing bacterial pneumonia, the lungs, and so on. Do you think that that was part of it as well before we get into the idea? Go ahead. I can't disprove that. I studied the scientific literature quite extensively about pneumonia and also masks. You don't need masks to get a surge in bacterial pneumonia. There were epidemics in care homes forever, you know, ever since we've documented, ever since we've had care homes. And they happen spontaneously. And they happen as a result of highly stressful environmental conditions.

Starting point is 00:32:58 And they don't have to spread. They just spontaneous to happen to several people within the same care home. But there's no evidence that there is spread. So you can't find any evidence of spread, except there are some papers that convincingly show that tuberculosis, probably spreads. For example, there's some really good, well-designed studies that show that if you have tuberculosis-infected sick people in a hospital room and you take the air out of the hospital room

Starting point is 00:33:28 and blow it into a laboratory room where you have susceptible animals, they will get TB, classic TB symptoms and everything and get very sick. So that's kind of getting out of the intersection. Huh? Like that's what I'm kind of getting out of the intersection of those two things. So I think it's important that, you know, so in your mind that there is the possibility that something could spread and catch, you're just simply saying that's not what you can happen. I believe that it's possible that bacterial pneumonia can spread, especially TB, where it's, you know, there's been a lot of work and there's been a lot of concern about the spread.

Starting point is 00:34:05 But there's way, way more frequent that it's simply spontaneous. Interesting. I find, I mean, I think this is, oh, go ahead, go ahead. Yeah, yeah. There's a whole area of science that studies these spontaneous bacterial infections, and they're transmissionless. They basically are induced by aspiration. That is, you take in a bit of fluid from your digestive system into your lungs, and that's enough to destabilize the microbiome of bacteria within your lungs that you will develop pneumonia. So this happens irrespective.

Starting point is 00:34:44 You can be in isolation and it will happen to you. Okay. So you can be very careful about isolating elderly people, do everything and wear masks and gloves and everything. And they will get pneumonia because they will have aspiration problems, especially since you've changed everything. And aspiration is increased. The probability of aspiration is increased if you obstruct the breathing. So a mask would probably work in that way, you see. And I mentioned that in my paper.

Starting point is 00:35:17 So you don't want to obstruct the breathing, and you don't want to disrupt people's lives and cause them a biological stress because aspiration becomes more frequent and spontaneous pneumonia follows, especially among the elderly. So I have proposed that basically all the respiratory deaths there was definitely an excess of respiratory deaths during COVID,

Starting point is 00:35:44 happened before vaccination and after vaccination, and that they could all, they're all consistent with the idea that they were self-infections induced by all the various forms that would cause biological stress. So let's talk about just that itself. So for people that don't, I've never heard this before, because this is something that only in the context of like the terrain overlap,

Starting point is 00:36:10 which we can get into next, if I heard something in this kind of vein. So for those that have never heard this and don't know what it is or maybe think it's not possible, explain what the self-infection or transmissionless, go ahead, I just frame it correctly. Okay, well, listen, there's no doubt that bacteria are real. There's no doubt that, I think there's no reasonable doubt that if you have a lot of nasty bacteria that have decided to take advantage of your situation, they can kill you.

Starting point is 00:36:45 They can prevent your breathing and you will die. Okay. I think there's there's what happens is, okay, historically, we have three major microbiomes. One is on our skin. So you get a cut or something. The bacteria on your skin can take advantage of that. You can get an infection.

Starting point is 00:37:06 You know, historically, animals, and including people, the main cause of death is infection. Okay, and it's typically related to an injury from a fight or survival mode, fight, or defending yourself, whatever. So historically, people didn't live that long. The average age typically was 30-ish, you know, and you died of infection. Now, there's a lot of different ways to get infection. And the three main places are, through your skin, your respiratory tract and your gut, the digestive system.

Starting point is 00:37:44 There is a complex microbiome, meaning all these different biota, including fungus, bacteria, you name it, that live in your gut and in your lungs. Your lungs are not sterile at any time. They're a living, breathing microbiome. Now, the theory of the, the theory of the, the microbiomes is that this this this this collection of microbes of different species and so on it it's in a balance that depends on its environment that depends on what you're breathing how

Starting point is 00:38:22 you're breathing what your health status is like and so on and that balance can be out of whack by various circumstances one of the main ones being stress biological stress okay so you're being attacked, you're being threatened, you're afraid for your life, all these kinds of things. And that can put your microbiome out of balance to the point where it will kill you. And so that's what a self-infection is. The thing is you have every bacterium you can imagine in the universe in your lungs and in your gut. There's everything there. So to clarify really quickly on that, so is the point that ultimately you're still being

Starting point is 00:39:04 infected by a pathogen, but it's just coming from internal? Or is it that it's a different... And it's not necessarily a pathogen. It's typically a collection of pathogens. It's a bunch of ones that are getting the upper hand within their environment, which happens to be your lungs, and they're doing what they do, and they're taking advantage of it. It's not like they have a brain where they decide to do this, but they just develop that way,

Starting point is 00:39:28 and it prevents you from breathing and you die. So that's the idea. and the same for your gut. Now, historically, there was not just the microbiomes. There were parasites as well. Now, thankfully, we've gotten rid of most parasites, but they're horrible things. People have lived with parasites, you know, on their skin, in their gut,

Starting point is 00:39:50 even in their lungs, parasites everywhere. And because of cleanliness and good nutrition, relatively compared to historically, I mean, in large societies, nutrition was very bad because the dominant people that were in charge would give you just the cheapest food and all that kind of stuff, right? So we've gotten rid. You can see death rates. The best data is since the Second World War, but even before, since 1900, you can see death rates from everything, just dropping and dropping and dropping.

Starting point is 00:40:23 And that's largely because of cleanliness and better nutrition. And so you're way more able to defend yourself against these parasites, and you're way more stable against imbalances of your microbiomes. And therefore, you don't get killed by these things, which are the main killers historically. Okay? That's what's going on. Nothing to do with medical science improving, nothing to do with vaccines being developed. antibiotics are very useful because they give you the tool to intervene when you have such an imbalance regarding your body and you would normally could have a good chance of dying from that infection.

Starting point is 00:41:10 We'll call it an infection but we understand it's not one single pathogen and it's a complex process going on in your body. Well the antibiotic treatment is like a shotgun. It just kills, preferentially kills all the microbiota and gives you a chance to kind of have a reset in your body. And then you have a good chance of, you know, it puts a stop to that very fatal blow, if you like. And allows you to recover. So most people in our modern societies have experienced having a terrible infection that they really felt they were going to die. And they have this incredible sore throat or whatever. and as soon as they start taking antibiotics, they feel almost immediate relief.

Starting point is 00:41:57 And it's just from, it's just from that immediate interaction. So I think antibiotics are extremely useful and powerful drugs, and they're trying to remove them from us. Why are they trying to remove them? They're saying that we get habituated to them, and therefore we have to stop using them. It's just crazy. They're saying that there's resistant bugs now. Well, that's your fault. because of what you're doing in hospitals.

Starting point is 00:42:23 Right. But they don't have patents for better antibiotics, and they're not going to get them because we already have pretty much the best antibiotics, including iburemectin. So there's no money to be made there. So let's get rid of antibiotics because we don't want, we want to be able to have other cures

Starting point is 00:42:41 that we can convince people to use and to buy at a very high price and so on. So I think there's a war going on regarding antibiotics right now. That is interesting. Yeah, yeah. And, of course, for the podcast, cures in major air quotes, in case you didn't hear that. The point being, though, is this is interesting.

Starting point is 00:43:01 So let's, to bring it back to the idea of the, so self-infection, the transmissionless bacterial pneumonia being caused by environmental issues. So the studies on the screen for those in the podcast, medical hypothesis, respiratory epidemics, and pandemics without viral transmission. So you place this as, to put on a fine point, the large, this is the predominant aspect of what we went through between 20 and 2023. So on top of that, though, you do argue that the vaccine itself was obviously deadly and obviously is part of this. So where would you, so give me a like a percentage breakdown, if you will,

Starting point is 00:43:35 for how you think that plays out. Before I answer that question, I just want to conclude that everything you need to cause your death is already in your body. Right. So to clarify, meaning the vaccine didn't have to be brought in for this to still look the same way. in regard to the illusion of the pandemic being called SARS Cup. Right. If you roll out vaccines and by rollout, it's a military style, you know, you're going to be vaccinated. We're going to hold you down if we need to, basically. We're going to coerce you. You've already been isolated. You're already treated like you're a danger to society and we're a danger to you.

Starting point is 00:44:10 We're doing all these horrible things. We're disrupting everything about your life in this institution when we come in to prioritize that we're rolling out this vaccine. that event that rollout of a booster is extremely traumatic and will cause enormous amounts of deaths just from the stress of all that all the denied treatments all the denied care all the and in addition when you come out to roll out these vaccines you're also testing to see if people actively have COVID right now as soon as you test positive then they double down on all these measures They isolate you even more or, you know, it just becomes a death-causing prison. And I have talked to witnesses who have survived this.

Starting point is 00:44:58 It really is like being put in a concentration camp. It's really horrendous. They just want to escape for their lives if they're healthy enough to get away, you know? So it's a very nasty thing. So now, with regards to the vaccine, there is absolutely no doubt that the vaccine has an intrinsic toxicity. It will kill some people, depending on the accident of the injection, everything about your complex biology, it will kill some people, and by many different mechanisms, no doubt. And the interesting thing about this congressional

Starting point is 00:45:39 report is that they clearly, one of the positive points of this propaganda instrument, which is this congressional report, is that they clearly admit that the vaccine causes death. They even have a graph on page 351 here that shows COVID vaccine deaths worldwide, and they admit in the graph that it's almost 40,000, you see. So they're admitting it, and they're giving a number, and this is in the official congressional report.

Starting point is 00:46:13 So that's a positive. So there's no doubt. I mean, there's a detailed autopsy studies. Now dozens and dozens of them. There's, I think the last count was there's over 4,000 scientific articles that describe the adverse effects of vaccines. I mean, good God, you know, like they definitely, we're talking just deaths here, but they definitely cause harm. We all probably, I know personally many people who are young men who developed heart conditions after being vaccinated, who can't. even shovel their drive anymore and can't do the vigorous running or exercise that they used to do

Starting point is 00:46:50 or anything like that. So we know these people. We know the heart, the myocarditis is a huge thing. And it's been written about scientifically extensively. So there is no doubt that the vaccine is a toxic substance that can cause death and extreme medical harm. There's no doubt about that. But the number of deaths worldwide that are temporally associated with these rollouts is huge. We were the ones who calculated it. 17 million. That's a lot of deaths. And it's that many deaths would be impossible using propaganda to hide if they were happening immediately and as a direct result of the vaccines.

Starting point is 00:47:37 They have to be elderly people that are dying in the circumstances that I described for it to be kind of admissible in the public eye and that you can cover it up, you see. And so the, but what really made me change my mind about prioritizing as a hypothesis that the vaccine was directly causing these 17 million deaths versus something else. What really did it for me, and I described this in my most recent paper, is that there are now studies coming out. A few of them are out already, and we have that kind of data that we're also analyzing, where people look at all-cause mortality, but where you know the vaccination status of the person who died. So of the deaths that you know about that are documented in your all-cause mortality, you know the vaccination status of those people. So you know whether or not they were vaccinated and you know how long ago they were vaccinated There's a lot of detail in the databases that we're studying now. There's a lot of detail and what we're seeing and what others have seen is that There's not these these huge spikes that are associated with the rollouts are not all due to people who have been vaccinated

Starting point is 00:48:52 Far from it. They're like equal amounts. So the elderly are dying in association with the rollout, whether they've been vaccinated or not. And don't forget, the most frail and the most close to death do not get vaccinated. That's against the protocols. That's against the policies.

Starting point is 00:49:12 You don't vaccinate someone. You don't challenge the body of someone who's near death. Okay. And so as a result, there's slightly more people who are vaccinated who die during those rollouts. So confronted with that data, which is reliable data, which we've gone to and examined and tested and everything, I have to admit that these 17 million are not directly due to immediate toxicity for vaccine.

Starting point is 00:49:44 And so you start asking yourself, you say, but, Deney, wait, they're temporally associated. The correlation in time is immediate. It's incredible. You look at Australia, you see a peak of rollout of a booster and you see an immediate peak of death directly associated with the same width and so on. You see that in Israel. You see that in the, I think it was 17 countries in the southern hemisphere, virtually every time that there's a rollout, there's a burst of death. And so you say, well, the associations in time are so stunning, so striking, so convincing, so quantitatively the same, you know, for the same. amount of doses, you get the same amount of deaths and so on, it's got to be related.

Starting point is 00:50:30 And the way that I now understand the relationship is through these campaigns of the rollouts. So the most deadly associations between vaccination and death are the places where the campaigns were most aggressive. So India, India had an extremely aggressive vaccination campaign. and as soon as it was, there was no excess death in India until they rolled out the vaccine months later than the West did. So you wait months even after we started vaccinating, then they start vaccinating,

Starting point is 00:51:06 and they get millions of extra deaths within India. Okay, I quantified that, I wrote a whole paper about it. It's absolutely stunning in India. Well, they were chasing people down in the countryside, holding them down with police and injecting them. you can see the videos on YouTube. I mean, it was, talk about disrupting elderly people. And India had the policy announced by its own president or prime minister,

Starting point is 00:51:34 especially prioritized the sick and the elderly. They had a list of comorbidities, and you went after the people that had these comorbidities to inject them. Can you imagine? And you've got the family trying to protect them and so on. So in India, it was a 1% death rate, basically. Wow. Now, there was a comparable death rate in some places in the USA where they have this so-called vaccine equity campaigns where they just hired anybody.

Starting point is 00:52:01 It was funded by Gates and the usual people. And they just hired people like an army of people to go and vaccinate the poorest, most disadvantaged people that had resisted vaccination up until then. And they went in and aggressively coerced them. that was associated with a very high vaccination per dose death rate. And so there are examples like that. But generally, it's a smaller per dose death rate. The time association is about 0.1%, not 1%, but point, you know, but it's still very, very high.

Starting point is 00:52:34 That's massive. That's massive. So essentially, both is what you're highlighting. You know, so the conjunction of both, because you could argue that the increase of the actual administration would also see the increase in spike because of the obvious deadliness, but the campaign you're highlighting the pressure, the psychological fear on top of that has caused it to, you know, synergistically explode. Yeah. The easiest way to see that the vaccine caused death is when you have the clinical

Starting point is 00:53:02 study of an individual and then you do an autopsy after that. You can autopsies and clinical studies and biopsies, those are the obvious ways where you really establish a link between you were given this poison and then you got very sick or you died okay so developing myocarditis and all those kinds of things so clinical studies will tell you that with all-cause mortality the problem is the excess mortalities are so huge there has to be a whole campaign of death-causing things that are happening and different things in different jurisdictions and so on and it there's such huge numbers that they're far beyond what could be caused, what we're observing from the vaccine deaths.

Starting point is 00:53:53 Well, so it comes down to the proximal versus the primary, right? So they're kind of, it's one, would you argue they're all in the same, effectively leading to the same outcome, but all of the masks, the ventilators, the shots, the fear? Well, what I always say is it's the rollouts that that caused the association with the vaccines. It's what you were doing when you rolled out the vaccine. that really caused most of the deaths in frail and elderly people. But there's no doubt that the vaccine is also toxic. Now, you could quantify all of this.

Starting point is 00:54:24 See, I think that the VARs data is not as bad as people say. It might be off by factor two, let's say, you know, but it's not, it gives you kind of the right order of magnitude. And the VARs data clearly has a lot of deaths in it. But those deaths are not enough to give me the huge peaks in all-cause mortality that I observe in excess mortality. So that's how I've come to understand this. I did an in-depth, a deep dive into how does biological stress cause death? Is that a real phenomenon?

Starting point is 00:55:04 And how effective is it? Well, it turns out that historically, all the pandemics can be explained this way. historically, infection is the big killer and it's self-infection. It's because, and you're susceptible to it because you're being biologically stressed, and that includes nutrition. Biological stress includes nutritional deficiencies and all kinds of factors like that. Those things always will cause you to die. And this is a case where you've dialed up the biological stress way beyond,

Starting point is 00:55:40 the background level that we're kind of habituated to all of a sudden and you've especially done it to the frail and elderly people see one of the things i don't like about i i'm critical of a lot of the people who are who have observed the pandemic and one of the things i don't like about the congressional report is they'll say there's a lot of things i don't like about the congressional report i think it's a piece of propaganda that's terrible and it's intended for cooling the mark out which is a social science phenomenon and that was described by Goffman in 1952. But anyway, it's so that we won't be too angry.

Starting point is 00:56:17 It's to calm us down, right? But that report goes on about, we should not have applied general lockdowns. That was the wrong thing to do. Well, I'm sorry, but you should not have applied targeted lockdowns to care homes. That's what killed people. you if you say that we're going to protect the elderly and what you mean is this kind of protection you are killing them preferentially that is a campaign to kill them and so that is absolutely disgusting

Starting point is 00:56:50 which is why i never signed that that general uh what was it called the the the document where where you know that was against general lockdowns but for focused protection of the elderly I didn't sign that because I saw what it meant. What it meant in practice was you're going to kill them. And, you know, the thing about Sweden is, a lot of people talk about Sweden as having not applied general lockdowns and therefore avoid a lot of deaths. Well, Stockholm had an enormous peak in excess mortality right at the beginning. And they were targeting the elderly. There is no doubt about that.

Starting point is 00:57:29 So it does not have lower mortality. It has higher excess mortality than its neighbor. It's northern European neighbors, actually, like Norway and so on. So that's a myth that Sweden had low mortality. We showed this right there, though. Well, that's a really important part for everyone to pluck out right there because that's always been this interesting dynamic of the argument between people saying, no, they prove that this is why it happened.

Starting point is 00:57:53 Others saying, no, here's the point about excess mortality. You just answer that question for them. That essentially, it's, again, comes back to the psychological, social, environmental fear, as opposed to the actions around it, which also do play a factor. That's important right there for everyone to pick up on. One of the problems in all of this is that we look at the pandemic and try to understand it from our own eyes, but we are young adults. I'll include myself in that. We are young adults that are healthy, and we're still able to figure things out, and we have mobility, and we have all these things.

Starting point is 00:58:26 And we're seeing it from our eyes, which is, you know, how would it have caused knee death? Well, I don't want to be locked down. I don't want to have these freedoms. I don't want to be injected with the vaccine. So we're seeing it from the perspective of our lives and our bodies and so on. But really, you kill the elderly. The great majority of excess death was all in the elderly, in the frail and the sick. And the way you killed the elderly was not through the general lockdowns.

Starting point is 00:58:57 It was because of how you treated them in their care homes and the hospitals. Okay. So in terms of the amazing. amount of mortality that was caused. The way that we're used to thinking about it is not really that relevant. You have to think from the perspective of an elderly and frail person who is forced to be in a care home or a hospital and who is subjected to these policies, these measures and these rollouts and you name it, okay, and whose meals and care schedules are being completely disrupted and they're being vaccinated for the flu at the same time and they're being continuously

Starting point is 00:59:39 tested and as soon as they get a positive whatever that means they get even more measures put on them and so on that's that's what was causing the deaths in terms of all-cause mortality now in addition to that you had very unacceptable and significant deaths of young adults see the the truth is um the percent death relative to the death rate for your age group across the board was high during COVID. That's another demonstration that it was due to stress, biological stress, because these infections are thought to affect the elderly more. But everyone was dying at the same rate relative to their mortality rate. Okay. Interesting.

Starting point is 01:00:30 Yeah. So there was a lot of, for example, we're studying Canada in detail in Alberta, which had an energy sector that was shut down for geopolitical and other reasons during COVID. Young men had a huge death rate, much higher than in other provinces, okay, due to loss of employment, loss of meaning in their lives, loss of everything. and there was more deaths due to drug, accidental drug deaths and so on. Okay? So there are many examples of young people all the way down to infants and so on, dying more. But in terms of numbers of deaths, without a doubt exponentially, as you get into the elderly, that you have the greatest numbers of death.

Starting point is 01:01:20 So when you're just doing a, you know, by jurisdiction number of deaths, it's mostly the elderly in those conditions that I was describing. But that doesn't mean that not everyone was affected. It's just you're not going to see it. Your chance of dying as a young person is very low. And if you have a 20% higher chance of dying during COVID, then you don't even see that. You don't even experience it that much, except if it's really dramatic. Like if you're talking just hard conditions, not death, but hard conditions. Yeah, there's so many more among young men that you see it and you talk about it and you know people and you know people, right?

Starting point is 01:01:57 But otherwise you wouldn't see it. You have to do the kind of analysis that we do to be able to detect it. But there's no doubt. And so our latest large paper, which you didn't show there, but 125 countries. And we did by age group in Europe as well in the countries in Europe. And it's really dramatic that you have that very high, death rate in every age group and you know what's interesting what we saw in Europe was the the group the age group that had the highest percentage of relative

Starting point is 01:02:30 death was the people who were born during and just after the Second World War Ah okay so the trauma as a child of being born under those extremely stressful conditions nutritionally family everything is such that you're more as an elderly adult than you otherwise would be. Then you otherwise would be. So that was one of the things that we found by analyzing this data. Yeah. Really to show you that.

Starting point is 01:03:02 Go ahead. Go ahead. Yeah, there's a lot of things going on like that that you can discover. So you have to know that we've written, I don't know, maybe more than 40, something like 40 detailed articles on what was happening in terms of mortality during the COVID period that we've got a lot of work out there you can really stack it high you know and we went into detail by by by by state by county by country by subnational region and we're putting out papers in the coming weeks that are always more advanced and more detailed so there's three that I'm

Starting point is 01:03:42 thinking of that we're putting out very soon that are just going to be very significant advances in all of this. Let's put it that way, okay? I know that they have done their crime and it's over, but it's taken us this long to really in detail describe the nature of their crime. So we're continuing to do that work. And this is one of the reasons why the data is so aggressively protected, right? Because, you know, experts like you can take the time to go through it and make a very clear, you know, criminal report, if you will, about how this actually went down. And what you described there very clearly showed this early aspect of stress. that carries all the way to being elderly.

Starting point is 01:04:21 Like it just shows you very clearly how that has a very direct effect on your health, apparently your entire life. And so that's, it's a fascinating thing to think about. And so I think overall, you painted a very excellent picture here on how there's multiple aspects, which by the way was one of the earlier points that a lot of people, you know,

Starting point is 01:04:37 there's people out there that got shouted down early in this conversation. One of them is pointing out the different elements that kind of synergistically in a bad way work together to cause a lot of the things we saw. and you could argue even by byproducts or intentional, but we're still used in the same way to create this illusion. So what I think is really fascinating more than all of it is that what you're highlighting here, when we can talk about now,

Starting point is 01:04:58 is this kind of bumping up against this debate, this idea of germ theory versus terrain theory. And, you know, my stance on this has been, you know, it frustrates a lot of people in both sides of it, really, that I don't feel like I've personally felt like it's been fleshed out enough, that I feel like it's somewhere in the middle or that neither side really, I feel like addresses parts that I don't feel,

Starting point is 01:05:17 like that we don't know for sure yet but so what you're touching on is an interesting overlap to the both of them right that there are there's a level of something that has whether there are pathogens in a circumstance or whether they exist at all that you can have a environmental biological stress related illness you know and so just yeah first of all before we get into it all what are your thoughts on terrain theory versus germ theory and you know before ask me that again but i want to say something first you know there's the vaccines were a toxic substance. The cationic lipids themselves are toxic substances. They do serious damage to cell walls and so on. There is no doubt, even if you didn't have anything in them, it's a really bad idea to inject you with these nanoparticles. So what are the long-term effects of that? I guess we're still trying to discover it. There is persistent excess all-cause mortality into 2020. And we're quantifying that.

Starting point is 01:06:19 So there's definitely some excess mortality. That is persistent, even though supposedly the pandemic is over and pathogens never last this long and so on. All right. But what I want to put forward is, oh, did I lose you? Nope, I'm still here. I just was bringing up some screen just showing them one of the studies you referenced. Go ahead. Yeah.

Starting point is 01:06:42 So what I want to put forward is what are the long-term effects? Death and illness, okay? Are those long-term... I don't think that all these, or even most of the long-term effects, are due to the vaccines themselves. That's going to shock people. I think that we have just been subjected to intense trauma. We have been subjected to a pulse of high,

Starting point is 01:07:12 biological stress that has completely perturbed our lives, disoriented us, made us question many things, and affected our health in real ways that are long-term. Trauma affects your life in a long-term way. And so I think that that's very important. We're not recognizing that enough. Too many MDs want to detoxify you from the vaccination and want to sell you products to do that. Whereas what really happened here, the really big killer was the biological stress event that it was, was the assault against people. And that is an intense trauma that takes years and years to get over. The children that were treated this way in school with masking. and, you know, this completely, this dysphoria, this insanity.

Starting point is 01:08:14 All of these things are part of this trauma that is going to have a lasting effect. So we're not going to be the same for a long time. And we have been, to the extent that we're adjusting to it, we're adjusting to a higher level of totalitarianism, which is not necessarily a good thing. But that's what they're bringing us to, they're bringing us to that kind of an adjustment. Society as a whole is seeing this as normal in a sense.

Starting point is 01:08:42 And they might subject us to those kinds of traumas in the future and we'll be more ready to accept them in the sense that we've survived this one, you know. And one of the traumas that I think is coming, because we should talk about that a little bit, is a very good chance of large-scale wars and being drafted into the military. And the U.S. is really serious. The U.S. regime, the deep state, whatever you want to call it, is really serious about destroying all competitors that want to develop.

Starting point is 01:09:20 Because if you let China and Eurasia develop, or forget Euro part of it, it's dead now because the U.S. has crushed it, crushed that competitor. But if you let Asia develop, they will surpass you. In their minds, this is how they see. it. So the US answer to that is to simply destroy everything. They would rather destroy entire nations and have wars and fund proxies and so on and just cause havoc and chaos through proxies, then allow a multipolar world to develop and to coexist and so on. So that means that the US is definitely headed towards major wars. That means that

Starting point is 01:10:06 That means that the economy will collapse. There will be incredible inflation. That even if we're not attacked directly, we will suffer huge consequences. And the government is now in a position to control us, to shut off our bank accounts, to surveil us completely, to inject us with whatever they want, whenever they want. You know, there's a pandemic now. Yes, there's a war, but there's also a pandemic we have to inject you.

Starting point is 01:10:35 and so I think we have to be worried about what the government's going to do next. Yeah. And there's some horrible things on the horizon. And that, you know, it's not a question of healing from this and then everything will be okay and we'll be able to ratchet back and bring back democracy and so on. And it's not going there. Everything is pointed in the direction of a more. totalitarian warring system.

Starting point is 01:11:09 Right. I agree. And I think that what you highlight there is it kind of dovetails what you were just saying is that, you're right, we have been at sort of a fever pitch of, you know, I guess we're not allowed to call it World War III, despite the metrics all being met, but still a world dynamic of war for a while now. And so you're saying if we see this kind of ongoing peak past COVID-19 illusion, that is one of many, you know, to your point, if it could keeping our biological stress high in a general sense, that makes, makes a lot of sense. So yeah, I think that's important to point out. And I think that, you know, I honestly, I share your, you know, I guess pessimistic view on where they're going.

Starting point is 01:11:44 I say sadly, I think it's the right view because I think that's what's happening. But I would also argue that because of what you're doing and what a lot of people are doing, I think that's within the cards to be able to at least slow down or stop what they're trying to accomplish. I would just put a positive spin on it. I do think that's possible. But so let's, unless you want to comment on that, let's talk about the interesting overlap. Well, I think I think the only thing that's going to slow them down is the extent to which Russia, China, and to some degree Iran are able to militarily resist them and stop their military adventures to the degree that that's possible, then that's the only thing that's going to slow them down.

Starting point is 01:12:26 Otherwise, they're ramping full out, you know. It does seem that way. I agree. Yeah. They see this as the window where they have to do this. Because if they don't destroy these emerging economies, bricks and so on, then there will be a balanced world. They will not be the masters of everything.

Starting point is 01:12:45 And they can't handle that. It's not in their mindset. That's what I think. Yeah, I mean, you're right. I mean, there's a lot of multi fat, multi, you know, there's a lot going on in that conversation, but I genuinely agree. I generally agree with the perception there that I think that it's obvious that this is being,

Starting point is 01:13:01 I mean, I think for the context of today's conversation, I think just that this is driving. a direction that will cause more stress, more uncertainty, more chaos in our lives. And whether that, this is, it goes back to the earlier point they made, whether that's the done so that creates what we're dealing with or it's just used later. That's kind of how these things tend to work. Right. So it's like a byproduct.

Starting point is 01:13:19 Nonetheless, still can fulfill some objective for these people. And so in the conversation of the more, the more they make you sick, the more they make you, uh, weak, uh, fragile, the more they can control you. Yeah. So every time they assault you with a new assault, that includes taking your liberties away and so on, they're making it less possible for you to resist wars or whatever. Exactly. Exactly.

Starting point is 01:13:48 So where's your stance on German terrain in general? Because I think one of the things that stood out to me this whole time of reading your most recent one is how interestingly this kind of almost in a way creates, you know, we're like common ground, if you will, on this conversation. So where's your stance on that in general? And then where do you place that in this conversation? Go ahead. People on both sides get angry with me. Me too. Because I'm honestly still trying to get a firm grip on the idea of the virus,

Starting point is 01:14:25 whether or not viruses exist, whether or not there is conclusive evidence of their existence. And I'm talking respiratory disease. diseases. I don't want to get into the viruses that attack bacteria and those kinds of things. But I'm grappling with that. And therefore, I am learning genetic technology, PCR. I'm still learning these things. And I'm still learning about the caveats, about the ways that scientists, entire technological fields, and with the scientists, that, and with the scientists, that, derive their careers from that how they can fool themselves i'm still i'm still wrapping my head

Starting point is 01:15:08 around all that and still having big discussions about it with many people and um not as much time as i'd like to do it because of all this mortality analysis that we're doing but eventually i will get there um but right now i can say and i've said this publicly a few times i'm not convinced that it has been demonstrated that these pathogenic viruses that cause respiratory diseases that their existence has been demonstrated i'm not at all convinced and i'm quite convinced by a lot of the historic studies that showed how difficult it is to get these respiratory conditions to be transmitted from one person to another virtually impossible so there's a lot of there's a lot of evidence out there that makes me really doubt that there's been a demonstration that these viruses that cause respiratory

Starting point is 01:16:01 disease exist, okay, and are real entities that cause what they're claimed to cause. I'm not, I don't yet, I'm not convinced of that. I'm not accepting that as a demonstrated hypothesis. Let's put it that way, okay? On the one hand, there's that, that's the position I have right now. as I continue to study it. On the other hand, some people go really far and claim that bacteria themselves cannot basically are not there

Starting point is 01:16:34 or cannot cause you harm. That they're there just to clean up the body, you know, the weak tissues or the harm tissues in your body, and that's their only purpose. Oh, yeah, there can be byproducts of that consumption that can be a little bit toxic for you and that kind of thing, but it's an accident. It's just a byproduct.

Starting point is 01:16:52 I do not buy that at all. I instead move towards the modern theory of microbiomes and their complexity and how they evolve and how they can become unbalanced and how they involve hundreds and thousands of different types of biota and and how basically you can always die of infections in that sense self-infections just because everything that's needed that could go wrong is right there. in your body i mean let's face it nobody has figured out how not to die right the the body the body has everything it needs to end itself uh it it can't go on forever and how does that happen so i think it's related to uh these infection mechanisms that involve complex systems getting out of whack yeah yeah yeah actually okay yeah so the so i strongly believe that bacteria can be real killers and that's and that antibiotic we should keep antibiotics around to save people's lives when they need it and that so I don't I

Starting point is 01:18:09 don't go with the theory that there are no germs I do accept the idea that there's not a particular bacterial pathogen that can be spread and that can cause an epidemic. I'm willing to say fine. Even tuberculosis, which has a lot of work done on it, there's not a single pathogen. There's like hundreds of bacteria that are said to be able to cause tuberculosis or associated with tuberculosis. So it's complex. And there may be circumstances in which droplets that contain many of these bacteria can initiate an infection in someone else. Certainly that's been demonstrated. demonstrated for animals.

Starting point is 01:18:54 So and tuberculosis, I mean, I don't think it's an accident that tuberculosis is thought to be extremely contagious I think there's probably a lot of truth to that, you know, you You bring someone in with tuberculosis into a ward and see what happens kind of thing, you know So there are probably examples, but you have to sort them all out. You have to really look at the at the data and the scientific articles and everything and I'm You know, people are doing that. There's a wonderful book that looks at all the historic studies of this type regarding respiratory diseases that says, I think the title of the book is,

Starting point is 01:19:34 can you catch a cold? Something like that, you know, a recent book. I've made a list of these books on my website. Really good point, you know. When you try to see clear evidence for transmission, you don't see it. Right. So I'm still debating hypotheses, and that's kind of where I'm at right now. Yeah, I'm right there with you.

Starting point is 01:20:00 And I think that's why I think this is important because there's a lot of overlap, even within, I mean, all sides. Each community has their own disagreements about what, you know, they differ on the way they see things. It's funny. You mentioned that I actually had this pulled up as one of the links today. And you get, this was the point that was interested in by is that ultimately you write in here that you agree with a lot of what's being put out, but this is what I had

Starting point is 01:20:22 highlighted. You said, I want to say that I think some of the criticism of germ three goes too far. And you mentioned that exact point about bacteria. And this is what I found so interesting about this in particular. So they're saying essentially to reiterate what you said, that bacteria, it's only present in the body as helpers to break down, remove dead and defective tissue. What I found interesting about that is, you know, that ultimately we're talking about the idea of bacterial pneumonia that, you know, I think has been demonstrated in some to be able to be to spread and so on. And that you're talking about also at the same time, something that is a self-illness that is not the same thing.

Starting point is 01:20:55 Like, there's a common ground there. You can simplify it this way. If you want to start believing that bacteria are there just to help you and to help you, you know, regulate your body and so on, then you have to think, who told the bacteria to do that? You know what I mean? Like, like, bacterias don't have minds. They develop their behavior through a process of evolution.

Starting point is 01:21:21 and co-evolving with the animals that they inhabit. And that is such that it's a complex system that can go out of whack. There's no, there's no, like, you have a mission to clean up the body. There's none of that, okay? It's like, these are symbiotic, largely symbiotic, different groups of species, like everything that's in your gut and so on. But I mean, it can be invaded. It can go out of whack.

Starting point is 01:21:54 Certain ones can take over. All kinds of things can happen. To just say that they will, they, they, they're never intended to harm you. Well, you're not, you could, you could, it would be just as silly to argue that you're not intended to die, you know. Right. Well, we put it. We make more specific. This will make it easier, like, so hypothetically speaking, if at least they're willing to acknowledge that there is such a thing as bacteria, but maybe it's not dangerous.

Starting point is 01:22:19 scientifically speaking, I'm asking you, is it scientifically possible, let's just say in a BSL4 lab kind of dynamic, for a scientist to then take that not dangerous bacteria and then alter it in a way that could make it dangerous? Oh, well, that's another thing. That is open the door to the bigger conversation, right? Yeah, sure, you can do that with bacteria because it's like anytime you do this selective development, like you can do selection in the last. lab, you know, you can simply develop a new kind of dog that will have different characteristics, longer teeth, and so you can do all kinds of things with selection if you decide to do it. So you can certainly do the same thing with bacteria. And you can accelerate those changes by genomic manipulation, for sure.

Starting point is 01:23:10 You know, you can disrupt them and see which ones survive and see the ones that have the characteristics that you want and reproduce those. and you know you can do all that so you can you can make very virulent bacteria i'm sure and then you could put them on uh small parasites and get them to be distributed uh on enemy territory and you know all these kinds of stuff and and there's and there's reports written about that um so yeah yeah you can do all these things i mean bio warfare is a very real uh a real thing and and and and the Russians have reported on historic examples of bio-warfare accidents and also use of these weapons recently. That's a nice thing about this geopolitical battle is that the Russians are being

Starting point is 01:24:00 way more talkative than they ever have been before. They're disclosing a lot of information about the behavior of the U.S. and these kinds of things. So you can learn a lot that way. For sure, bio-warfare is a very real thing. I would question whether or not. not genetic manipulations of traditional, what they believe to be respiratory viruses, if that's useful or possible. Oh, 100%. I'm more on your side of the conversation today. I really brought that up to make the point to say, like, to see that there's actually

Starting point is 01:24:36 common ground here, that like instead of coming from the perspective that there's no way that can be, like, because the other side of the conversations on the side of there are viruses, there's a deadly thing, the government made it, they're attacking, you know, that you can both recognize that there's a middle ground there, that it's possible, so you can't dismiss their possibility, but come to the idea that what you're highlighting here is that there's other aspects of this that seem more prominent. And I just think that's important, you know, because I think what happens in these conversations, you tend to find these lines that get drawn, where then people choose to omit or ignore, sort of like the two-party paradigm politically,

Starting point is 01:25:06 important information that challenges what they've made their stand on. And I'm just trying to highlight that what you're doing here is really a lot of the commentary is simplistic. Let's put it that way. Yeah, right. When you start talking about death and what caused death, and you're not able to discern elderly people in homes versus young working adults versus extremely poor, malnourished people and so on, if you're not able to discern what would have happened in Africa and India versus, you know, other places and so on, then whatever comment you're making is so simplistic that it can't

Starting point is 01:25:43 possibly contain the truth. You know what I mean? And I think the same is true of bio-warfare. You know, the same is just to outright say that pathogens don't exist. That's an oversimplification because of all the things that I've been saying, right? And I think whenever you oversimplify like that, there's a good chance you've got it wrong. Yeah, I completely agree. I mean, I think I would say that logic implies to form the conversation.

Starting point is 01:26:14 They really want to stretch it in that direction. I find that once they have that talking point, they really push it in that direction. Every area that's related, they push it in that direction. So I think this is the result of oversimplifying. Yeah, I would agree. Most definitely.

Starting point is 01:26:34 And so to bring this to a final point for kind of on the way out where we see this going, a little bit of a hypothesis of where we might think this is going to go next with the administration, but I want to end. with the highlight two things. First, that as you're sure you're well aware, self-amplifying RNA injections for COVID or like already in the process of being used. Trump's administration, most parts of it seem to be in a lot of ways hyping that as a possible future for cancer and a lot of different things. CDC is still adamantly telling you to take these things six months or older and so on. And so I want your thoughts on the way out. You recently shared an article

Starting point is 01:27:09 from Descensored News, Elon Musk partners with Gates-funded biotech company to produce MRI, micro factories. T-Lab, we've also written about this back in October 2022. And just your thought simply on, you know, as you said, you kind of context, where do you say something on the way out with Trump's administration? Go ahead. Yeah. Yeah, I think it's important to realize that just because they invest money in developing something and get patents and make industry to make it and then distribute it, get government to say that all your animals have to have this and they distribute it and all of you have to be injected. Just because they say all those things and they do it does not mean that the actual technology that they have this cartoon describing actually works.

Starting point is 01:27:58 It actually does what they say it does. It doesn't mean that at all. All it means is they're making a lot of money from this. That's what it means. They're going to be selling this thing, whatever it is, whether it does what they say or not. the public money is going to be purchasing it at an incredibly high price. So there's going to be a transfer of funds from the public to these mega corporations that are controlled by the deep state that in turn spend money overthrowing governments

Starting point is 01:28:27 all over the world and surveilling us and developing social media to control us. And all these things that these multi-billionaires do and their corporations, that's what it means. It means transfer of funds from the public, from everyone, to these entities that then in turn control us, irrespective of the discussion of the technology. The technology could just be cartoons. It could just be bogus.

Starting point is 01:28:57 And I think that's what's happening a lot of the time. I don't believe a lot of these genomics fairy tales. And I don't believe that they can do this. I don't think they can have a virus that makes cows fart less. There's just no way in my mind that these things are real. This is not about whether or not it's real the technology. And it's easy for them to fund scientists to say that it's real. And it's easy for those results to be published in the top journals.

Starting point is 01:29:34 They control everything, okay? They control all the edit. all the journals all the scientists are funded by them all the scientists that don't want to play ball can't publish and lose their careers they control everything so they can make up whatever crap suits them make nice cartoons about how it works and then sell it to you and impose it upon you and that is basically that is a scam that is what i would call a protection scam it's protection money it's you you you you pay to be protected from all these terrible things that could happen to you so there the the the the the u.s. regime is running a lot of protection outfits

Starting point is 01:30:20 one is the sale of uh weapons to its so-called allies you have to pay enormous amounts of money to get these weapons systems to protect you against those other people well that's that's straight transfer that's protection money okay And the same is true of pharma. Pharma is a protection racket industry. They're going to protect you. You're not going to die from these horrible diseases. And so the government has to fund all this garbage technology that they're going to impose on you.

Starting point is 01:30:54 So I think we have to see it. We have to not be blinded by all the stories of the technology. And that's a beautiful trick that they play. They get you to spend your intellectual energy trying to understand what the cartoon is. And then you describe it to others and you own it and you're willing to defend it. I go to cocktail parties sometimes and people will argue with me about how these vaccines work. And they'll describe all the molecular mechanisms and everything, not realizing that these are all cartoons that have not been rigorously demonstrated scientifically.

Starting point is 01:31:34 Right. You know, does transfection actually work? Have you seen it? You know, these are the questions you have to ask. Does, really, can you reproduce a virus in a body that will then spread to others? Come on. Now, let's try and establish scientifically using rigorous methods, whether that's real or not. It's certainly a nice story.

Starting point is 01:31:57 And once you get people used to learning it in school, learning it in the media, and then describing it to others, They invest themselves in it. They will defend it and it becomes real. And imagine if it was not real. In the end result, if it's not real, then what is happening here? Public money is being transferred to the deep state so that it can control us better. That's what's happening. It's a protection racket.

Starting point is 01:32:25 So I think we have to use that kind of those, we have to put those kinds of glasses on every once in a while and not be blinded by all this garbage talk of what I would call pseudoscience in a lot of cases. Now, scientists who have published in this area, who are invested in their careers, they get very angry with me. They get completely pissed. But how can you be so thick-headed? You know, there are thousands of articles about this. Yeah, but more bias doesn't remove the bias.

Starting point is 01:33:02 Right. Right. If you're just confirming what others have said and you're using the same techniques to confirm it, you haven't gotten to the heart of it. You haven't really demonstrated what you, what you're talking about. Right. And there's plenty of studies these days that show, I think a Seema Holter's one that pointed it out pretty publicly, early 2022-ish about that show that any, get in any given moment,

Starting point is 01:33:23 half of the studies that are published are ultimately false or any, some number, some metric like that. I forget what the number is. Oh, yeah. There's no doubt. fact, I would say that 99% of medical trials nowadays have to be false. They're completely funded and controlled by the industry. Yeah, I would surprise.

Starting point is 01:33:43 They buy the scientists who write it for the journals. They buy the editors. They buy the journals. They control the trial at every step of the way. If the results are not going in the direction they want, they put an end to the trial. or they select some of the patients from the trial that they're going to study and let go the others. They manipulate these trials from A to Z. In every detail, they have complete legal control.

Starting point is 01:34:12 The scientists who participate to recruit patients, they all have to sign contracts. The patients themselves have to sign contracts. This is complete propaganda. Signed medical trials have been. become complete propaganda to sell drugs. That's what they are. So that means that any time you see a paper about this stuff, even though it looks good and it sounds good and it's double-blinded and all of this, it's necessarily all garbage. I discovered a fantastic book that describes this in great detail recently. It's written by Peter Gottsey. It's called Deadly Medicines and Organized

Starting point is 01:34:52 Crime. I highly recommend it. It's an amazing book. I love the title. Yeah. It goes into great detail about the extent to which there is complete capture and control of the entire enterprise. Well, so let's end with this point then about the, so right now, the reason I ask that, and what you just highlight is very important is there's a lot of people right now that seem to think that the current administration is going to take it a better direction, that they're going to save us from what we're highlighting right now.

Starting point is 01:35:24 So I want your thoughts on that. The reason I highlighted that overlap there is that for me, just in regard to the injection and the MRI technology, I'm very alarmed about the, the, how embedded like a tick it is in his administration right now. But then the overlapping part that you highlighted, they also seem to be very, well, I guess let's put it this way to be objective and fair, at least in some directions, more so leaning towards war. I would say Iran is an obvious one.

Starting point is 01:35:48 And so maybe all these combined, do you see this, do you see this getting better or worse with what we were discussing today? with the incoming administration. Oh, there is going to be a complete continuity in the deep state programs. There's no doubt about that. It's going to, you know, there's going to be arguments. It's going to be flare-ups. There's going to be people opposing each other and posturing and everything.

Starting point is 01:36:11 But the empire, the regime has the project to destroy all competitors. And it's a long-term project that's been. spelled out in writing for decades and that the plan to destroy the Middle East the way that it has done and to eventually attack Iran has been on the books for a long time. And the same is true of how pharma fits into this as a protection racket. There's no way they're going to give that up. It's too important. The same goes for complete surveillance and complete control of everything you do and everything

Starting point is 01:36:49 you can do and even your guns. your bank accounts and everything, your cars, whether or not you can travel, electric car, they can turn off anytime and so on and so on. That project of complete control is going to move forward like it used to the same way. There's going to be barely a blip in the road. Okay, it's going full steam ahead. They might prefer a different technology. They might choose a different in a slightly different way and so on, you know, to give some things to their buddies and that kind of thing. But overall, we're moving full steam ahead in this project. It's project deep state to control the world. That's what it is. Yeah. I go. Yeah. I mean, this congressional

Starting point is 01:37:40 report is complete propaganda. They basically say that the vaccines save millions of lives and that warp speed was a fantastic success. Wow. And you know, you can tell that it's it's just complete propaganda. Some of the MDs are happy because they said that off-label use of medication should be up to the MDs and they see that as a great victory. Well, I don't think if that's the only victory in there, that's not a very big victory because what you have to remember is that it is pharma that has pushed for off-label use of medications because they sell way more drugs if you can convince a lot of MDs

Starting point is 01:38:24 to use whatever poison they're selling off-label, okay? Well, I don't- And so there's the whole, that whole mindset of the MD just does whatever he thinks and uses off-label drugs, which themselves were not even, the trials are invalid for the primary use of those drugs. So you can imagine that there's absolutely no safety,

Starting point is 01:38:47 controls on off label use and they see that as a big victory. Well, I'm all for individual freedom, not medical freedom of professionals that want to have the privilege of doing this, okay? I'm for individuals learning about their bodies, learning about health, being critical, thinking for themselves and not being dependent on people who are going to save them from the fact that they got this terrible vaccine and now they're feeling sick. And I can tell you, most people are feeling sick right now it's because of the trauma you were subjected to more than anything else yeah i agree nobody's addressing nobody's addressing that trauma nobody nobody's uh saying that okay we we need to optimize the treatment of trauma and ensure and and and and strengthen our institutions so on so it doesn't happen again

Starting point is 01:39:38 nobody's saying that so this this congressional report did not address the issues whatsoever Yeah, which I kind of sadly think as part of this long-term, you know, pacification element that's happening right now. I just hope people can listen to what you're saying and see beyond the partisan kind of veneer that seems to hide the ongoing agenda, you know, so I really thank you for joining me today. I think this was important for many different reasons, important to hopefully reach some people that still hadn't come to terms with the reality of what this was. And also people that are still trying to rightly so discern what happened. maybe you can find some common ground in here and realize that there is, you know, that we're all the, all of us are being affected by this and see that we're all trying to find our path to solve what's happening and get beyond it.

Starting point is 01:40:22 So thank you. Thank you, Danny. I always enjoy speaking with you. And hopefully we can, you know, touch base again when you're new. It was a great pleasure. I might make one final comment, if I may. Please, please. I would encourage people instead of looking for easy ways of stating how they understand things,

Starting point is 01:40:41 which is really important. But in addition to that, go in and actually read, try to actually read some of our reports. I mean, it's a little bit complex. There are references. Sometimes you have to stop and go read something else. Come back, try to understand what that meant,

Starting point is 01:40:59 compare with what you just read before and so on. It's work. But it's very intellectually satisfying to come to a point where you can develop judgment about what's being expressed. Right, right. And I think that that's what's lacking in our society is that people are losing the ability to analyze for themselves, to think for themselves and judgment and so on.

Starting point is 01:41:24 And that's something that we had in past decades that really protected society in a big way. You know, that activists would have learning groups and they would challenge themselves and they would try to learn things. And we're just reducing it all to snippets on social media. And what I notice in a lot of the comments I see on social media, people are not reading whatsoever.

Starting point is 01:41:49 They're not getting to the bottom of it. They're not able to see why it is they've come to believe something and why they shouldn't believe it. Well said. Go ahead. Yeah, I would plead with people to do that. And if you're already doing it, that's great. You have to know you're in a minority and you're very lucky. that you're already on that track.

Starting point is 01:42:10 But if you're not, try it out. Try it out. Absolutely. I mean, it's such an important note to take on the way out here, guys. I mean, this is why I lean into a longer form format. The shows we do are in-depth conversations about, you know, because it's different than just being able to read a headline and hear how you're supposed to frame it.

Starting point is 01:42:29 This is what day's point, as opposed to just, you know, regurgitating what you're told versus diving into it, understanding it to the point to where you can then articulate an opinion as opposed to just repeat what you're told. And I think that's monumentally important today. And you're right. Social media, partisan narratives. It's an attempt to stop you from seeing this stuff.

Starting point is 01:42:46 So thank you, as always for your work, Denny. It's absolutely profound. And again, let's connect again when your new reports come out, follow up on this stuff again. So thank you for being here. Sure. And as always, everybody out there, question everything. Come to your own conclusions. Stay vigilant.

Starting point is 01:43:00 All gene-based vaccines, independent of manufacturers, produced the same result in the vaccinese. He has looked at 15 in the last four days. The number has been increased to 70 individuals who died after vaccination. These were people who died at home, at work, in the car, doing their sports, etc., etc., etc. There is no question now anymore about what is called. going on and the answer is in the organs of these people. In 90% he found clear evidence for autoimmune self-attack by killer lymphocytes.

The Last American Vagabond - Denis Rancourt Interview – The COVID-19 Illusion: Biological Stress-Induced Bacterial Pneumonia

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.