Carlson’s interview with former professor of evolutionary biology Bret Weinstein on January 5 has racked up more than 3 million views in just two days.
The 50-minute interview has received widespread praise for Weinstein’s succint summary of the issues faced by society during the COVID, the mRNA technology, and going forward as the World Health Organisation seeks to implement radical changes to international health regulations giving them sole power to dictate the response to future global pandemics.
Weinstein was one of the few high-profile academics to see through the propaganda from the beginning. A firm believer in vaccines and mRNA technology initially, he said both he and his wife Heather Heying, who is also a professor of evolutionary biology, did not believe claims by health authorities that the mRNA vaccine platform was ‘safe’, as no long-term studies had been done to back the claim up.
While the mRNA was an amazing technology which had great potential in the fight against disease, opportunitistic and powerful pharmaceutical companies seized on the crisis to rush out the untested technology, buying the politicians and legacy media in the process.
‘Pharma owned what was potentially the biggest pharmacological cash cow conceivable,’ said Weinstein.
‘It owned a beautiful technology, and I mean that sincerely, something truly brilliant [ie. mRNA technology], that would potentially not only allow a bright future from the perspective of creating new treatments… and new vaccine-like technologies – it would allow you do this indefinitely into the future and allow you to reformulate every vaccine on the market. And what’s more, the property in question would allow this whole process to be streamlined at an incredible level, because all you needed was… a genetic sequence from a pathogen and you could literally type it into a machine and produce a vaccine that was already in use but for the swapping out of the antigen in question.’
While mRNA was ‘ingenius’ it had one terrible safety flaw that Weinstein believed would ‘never have gotten through even the most cursory safety tests.’
‘That flaw is there is no targeting of the Lipid Nano Particles (LNP). The LNP will be taken up by any cell they encounter. And while that’s not perfectly random it will be haphazard around the body… if they simply stayed in the injection site as we were told… the cells which took up these messages would be in your deltoid and what happens next wouldn’t be terribly serious.
‘The problem is we learned very quickly and should have predicted from the get-go that they weren’t going to stay in the deltoid… it’s going to leak out and circulate around the body…
‘The body’s response to seeing a cell of yours, which it recognises as yours, which is producing an antigen, that is to say a protein, that it doesn’t recognise, is to assume that that cell is virally infected and to destroy it… The mRNA technology does exactly this – it trick’s your cells into producing foreign antigens which the immune system cannot help but recognise as an indicator of infection and it destroys those cells… If these transfection agents circulate around the body, as we know they do, and get taken up haphazardly, then whatever tissue starts producing these foreign proteins is going to be attacked by your immune system.’
He described modern medicine as an intellectual property and patent ‘racket’ whose only motivation was to increase profits.
‘Every day of the year pharma is engaged in portraying the properties that they own as more useful than they are, safer than they are, and persuading the medical establishment, the journals, the societies, the hospitals, the government, to direct people towards drugs they wouldn’t otherwise be taking.
‘Before COVID even happened, pharma was expert at figuring out how to portray a disease as more widespread and more serious than it was. It was excellent at portraying a compound as more efficacious than it is and safer than it is.’
He warned also against the WHO proposed changes to international health law, and said claims by WHO bosses that the organisation would not superceded national sovereignty were false and ‘lies’.
Ep. 60 Is the lesson of the Covid disaster that we should give its architects more power? Bret Weinstein on the WHO’s plans for you. pic.twitter.com/ku3O5BdeoF
— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) January 5, 2024
The facts keep oozing out…
So when is NZ First’s promises of a Covid-19 inquiry and compensation going to eventuate?
Now the elections are over
Albanese in Australia promised the same thing
And they are still waiting
Which is where the idea probably originated
Nothing more than an election ploy gimmick to garner votes
Maybe it will happen
But will likely be a watered down version innocent of the facts made woke safe for sheeple consumption
Like Christchurch
Where the witness’s appeared confused and had no real recollection of what in fact had happend and that transpired on that day
‘Promulgated’ might have more appropriate than ‘exposed’ in the title to this piece.
During the COVID-19 pandemic Weinstein made several public appearances downplaying the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.
David Gorski, in Science-Based Medicine, described Weinstein as a prominent COVID-19 contrarian and spreader of disinformation and one of the foremost purveyors of COVID-19 disinformation.
Philosopher, neuroscientist, author, and podcast host, Sam Harris, who has feuded with Weinstein over his views on COVID-19, has criticised his advocacy stating that he considers it dangerous.
Eric Topol, American cardiologist, scientist, author, professor of molecular medicine, elected member of the National Academy of Medicine and one of the top 10 most cited researchers in medicine has described Weinstein’s position on mRNA vaccines as “totally irresponsible. It’s reckless. It’s sick. It’s predatory. It’s really sad.”
Weinstein’s ultra-simplistic assessment of lipid nano particles is nonsense and anyone wanting the science on LNPs should go to the paper ‘Lipid nanoparticles for mRNA delivery’ which is freely available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8353930/
In the interview with Tucker Carlson, Weinstein states that the draft WHO Pandemic Agreement on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response will eliminate personal and national authority by giving the WHO sole power to dictate the response to future global pandemics.
However, Weinstein must have missed reading Article 3. General principles and approaches in the draft which reads:
“To achieve the objective of the WHO Pandemic Agreement and to implement its provisions, the Parties will be guided, inter alia, by the general principles and approaches set out below.
1. Respect for human rights – The implementation of this Agreement shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons.
2. Sovereignty – States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the general principles of international law, the sovereign right to legislate and to implement legislation in pursuance of their health policies.”
What could be clearer than that?
And You’ve still got paid media shills like Michael Baker and Siouxsie Wiles trying to sell this snake oil to an unsuspecting and trusting to their detriment predominantly gullible population
If there is no virus how can there be in existence variants?
How was this fraud perpetrated through fake PCR Tests
Which besides never having been intended for such analysis and diagnosis purposes
Was looking for a virus that did not exist
RAT Tests are another illusory fraud which are now being used to detect ‘covid’
PCR Tests having been conveniently retired and relegated to the knackers yard
Obfuscated from the illusory official narrative
Exenterated and surgically removed
https://drsambailey.com/rapid-antigen-tests-making-viruses-real-again/
Follow the science
Wake up to these shysters and charlatans
Ignorance can be cured
Stupidity cannot
PCR tests were definitely intended to determine whether or not a person has been infected by a virus like SARS. They are certainly not fake.
Dr Christian Drosten MD, an acknowledged leading developer of tests for emerging viruses and his team in Germany developed PCR tests for the Zika flavivirus and the coronavirus behind MERS.
Our Ministry of Heath states that the PCR viral test for COVID-19 is accurate when taken in ideal conditions and a recent laboratory study found that different COVID-19 testing kits correctly detected COVID-19 in samples more than 95 percent, and frequently 100 percent of the time, and when tests were done on samples without the virus, the tests correctly gave a negative result 96 percent of the time.
University of New South Wales virologist Professor Bill Rawlinson has said that his lab and other labs have done thousands and thousands of tests and are seeing a couple of false positives only. “It’s really a rare event,” Rawlinson said.
Wrong. The inventor of the PCR test and Nobel Prize Winner Karry Mullis specifically said the test was never designed or, or should be used for testing for disease or infection. There are 100s of videos online with him saying this before his untimely death. Your poster boy Drosten has been exposed as a lying corrupt grifter who misappropriated and misrepresented mullis’ ground breaking tech to promote himself and make millions in the process. The ‘peer review’ of Drosten’s test took 1 day – an obvious fraud. The unreliable PCR test and its billions of false positive results was key to the deception, creating an atmosphere of fear which you fell hook line and sinker for
katherine watt, jurist
https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/?r=1u575z&utm_campaign=pub&utm_medium=web