time to work. Sorry, that's right. So I'll start again. So heap of information. So I've prepared
a number of slides. So if I can get you guys to really understand how the immune system works,
or how God designed it to work naturally, then you'll get to understand what the problem is
with the vaccines. Okay, so I'm going to spend quite a bit of time talking about how God designed
it. So just bear with me now while I whack open the slides across to... So I had it all beautifully
set up on my beautiful big new iMac desktop computer, and that was just looking lovely,
but it didn't want to talk to us. Don't ask me why. That's all right. We learned some really
good things about drinks and about miracles. I'm glad you're here now. Yeah, I'm going to shift
that. I can't shift that across. It doesn't want to shift it across. That's not good. I do need
you to shift that across, because I need to be able to see what happens if I do that.
All right, good. So I've got you guys, and I've got the other across on the other desk. So hopefully,
that is going to work. All right, so let's launch away. So what I'm talking about is,
as I said, sort of the issue of the COVID vaccinations. So when we consider any medications,
this applies to any medication, whether we're talking vaccines, over-the-counter drugs,
it doesn't matter, there are three things we've got to consider. The first thing we have to
consider is, is that necessary? Is that medication necessary? Because once we've worked out the level
of necessity, then the next two things, we know what we need to look for there. So necessity,
is it necessary? Then the next thing is safety. And then the last thing is efficacy.
So let's work that through for a second. So if you've got a headache, it's not necessary for
you to take a painkiller. You might like to, but it's not necessary. So because it's not necessary,
any painkiller, any analgesic that you would go to take, therefore must have an extremely high
safety profile, because it's not necessary. Risk versus benefit, right? We've always got to weigh
up the risk versus the benefit. So we want benefit only, there must be no risk, because we're not
doing it for something important. And then efficacy, well, if it's got a high safety
profile and it's not a dangerous disease, well, if it works, that's great. If it doesn't,
it doesn't matter. But if we've got someone with a life-threatening disease, they're in intensive
care, they're about to die. So, okay, we have a situation where it's necessary, we would think
to do something. But if they're about to die, then the safety profile of what we're going to try
might not be that good. In fact, usually once people get to that stage, you're in that situation,
the kind of drugs and the kind of things they're trying do not have a good safety profile.
You would not use them in a person who wasn't that sick. So the safety profile is different.
You do hope there'll be efficacy, because you do want it to work. Otherwise,
you're not going to risk the safety profile. Okay, so we're always stopping to think about
necessity, safety, and efficacy. So when we apply that to the question of COVID,
so the necessity here is do we of necessity need to, sorry, I'm jumping screens out of place here,
do we of necessity require a vaccine as a way of managing COVID?
So the first thing we then look at, well, what's the actual severity of the disease?
Well, do we have as many COVID cases as they tell us? Well, in fact, we know that's not so. We know
that the real-time PCR test has very high levels of false positives. It has now been acknowledged
by both the CDC and the FDA that these tests are invalid and inaccurate, and so they're banned
from use now. The USA now don't use them. Australia's starting to move away from them.
And so instead, what we had was a case-demic, not a pandemic, a case-demic, where we had all these
artificially inflated numbers telling everyone that just because the real-time PCR test was
positive, that meant that we had a case of COVID. Well, it didn't. All we had was a case
of a positive test in a test that has something like 90%.
four percent false positive rate.
So there was I talked into that the last time but you know it's it's just not
correct and so it's picking up a whole heap of asymptomatic people and saying
they're COVID cases and even in your symptomatic
people it might not be correct because the real-time PCR cannot distinguish
between the flu and quite a few other things. So it's
uh it's not an accurate test by any stretch of the imagination. So then we
come to the issue well how many people are dying?
Well the deaths are on a ballpark to the flu and people have forgotten about the
flu because the flu conveniently disappeared as
as COVID erupted and that's an interesting question in itself why did
the flu suddenly disappear as COVID appeared?
But the deaths are somewhat equivalent but our other problem is that deaths have
also been artificially conflated. How did they do that? They've done that
by definition that anyone who dies of anything within
28 days all of what's happened here has been about
changing definitions to suit the narrative. So the deaths if anyone
gets tested as a COVID positive within 28 days
they're called a COVID death. Now they might have started off with COVID and
then ended up in in hospital and stuck on a ventilator and
actually die as a result of ventilator induced injuries.
I've seen that happen I fought a case over that one.
They might have gone into hospital for something completely different
the hospitals are routinely testing everyone for COVID who comes in and they
test serially they don't just test once they keep testing the whole time you're
in there and if you turn up a COVID positive you're
now a COVID case. So the deaths
are artificially conflated and what about the deaths that we attribute to
your vaccinated so Australia's you know New South Wales are proudly saying hey
look you know we've you know it really is it's still an
unvaccinated problem but what they're not doing is that
and the slides aren't coming up at the moment because this is just talking
stuff. When it comes to slides that you need to see
that I want you to see the diagrams of then they'll go up
okay but they're not coming up until then because all that happens is
I know from experience doing many lectures over many years all that
happens is people will read the slide. I don't want you to read the slide I
want you to listen to me. So your other reason the other problem
we've got is this definition of people of
vaccination. So again World Health Organization
definitions people aren't counted as vaccinated
until 14 days after their second vaccine. They don't have a criteria definition
for partially vaccinated. They don't have that you're either
vaccinated or unvaccinated and you're only counted as vaccinated
if you're 14 days after the second vaccine and in fact in
Israel and some other countries now they are moving to make it that the
definition of vaccinated only applies after your third vaccine.
So in other words vaccine number one and vaccine number two and in some places
vaccine number three up until the 14 day mark is counted as
unvaccinated.
And vaccine number two after and I just got to check the latest thing with
Israel whether they're cutting that off at three months or six months
but vaccine number two after a certain period of time is also counted as
unvaccinated.
So what happens if the vaccines have actually caused an impairment in the
immunity so that people are more likely to get COVID and die from COVID?
That gets counted as unvaccinated. So you start to see that there is a
a whole heap of fiddling of definitions that alters data.
It alters what's going on. So this is a very real issue and
I've got to stop and just say hi Annie and sorry about all those markups and
glad that you made it in. And hi Diane there's a few
people here that I know which is always great to
see you. All right and Virginia hello. All right so
not necessary that's our first thing we can say and also when we then talk about
real COVID deaths I did go into this on the last one
but the reality is that unless you are over 70 and more precisely older still
80s to 90s in a nursing home unless you're in that category
your risk of or your let's put it the other flip it the other way around
your survival rate is at least or greater than 99.9 percent.
For our very young it's it's kind of like 99.999
percent close effectively zero. In fact the USA have stated
that they haven't found they haven't got a single
child COVID death who didn't have some kind of comorbidity.
So in
And that's very much a casing point now where Australia and other countries, but certainly
Australia are pushing for the child vaccines.
We are vaccinating against a non-existent threat.
In which case the necessity is zero.
It's so close to zero, we call it zero, and New Zealand's doing the same thing, yeah.
The necessity is so close to zero that we call it zero.
So if that's the case, if our necessity is that low, then really the vaccines have got
to be, if we're going to rely on vaccines as our way of getting it through, they've
got to be very safe and they've got to be efficacious.
That actually brings us to the question of immunity.
So again, whoops, I've just jumped, World Health Organisation are really good at changing
definitions.
I've touched on this already.
They did it with the changing definition of pandemics, they've done it with the changing
definition of immunity, they've done it with your changing definition of cases and so on
and so on.
They keep shifting goalposts and it's if anyone who is good at doing a way back machine will
find that.
So immunity, they've changed the definition of immunity, whereas immunity used to mean
what would be developed naturally post-infection.
Immunity progressively has come to mean herd immunity only from the numbers of vaccinated,
not from natural infection.
So now who count immunity as vaccine-induced immunity?
So there are a couple of assumptions in that.
The first assumption is that the vaccines are in fact effective and do actually induce
durable, long-lasting, effective immunity.
That's your first premise.
But your second premise is that native immunity is ineffective, otherwise why are we changing
a definition to immunity being dependent on vaccination?
So is that true?
We've got numerous studies now, increasing numbers of studies coming out just in relation
to COVID.
This has been done with so many other infections, but just in relation to COVID, native immunity
is effective.
It is effective at preventing transmission.
It is effective at preventing future disease, and it is durable.
And so far, they've got it as far as 18 to 20 months, but likely it's going to be years
and probably even lifelong.
So native immunity, our God-designed immune systems, it hasn't forgotten how to work,
truly.
It does.
It knows how to work.
So that's your first thing we say.
Well, what about the immunity question?
I'm going to come back to that.
The other thing that they keep saying, well, we have a problem with the new types coming
out, all the new variants, all the virus mutations.
Well, yes, there is a problem with them, and the problem is that the viruses in their natural
history always shift according to their environment.
Just like all of creation, God has designed within the genetic potential for change, and
the viruses do that.
It has been, there are some researchers who have put out the theory that what these viruses
are actually doing is not mutating, well, I'll go back a step.
Across the board, viruses in general mutate down in pathogenicity.
They become less virulent.
It's this passage in time, this passage through tissues that does that, and in fact, we know
that feature as virologists and doctors, because we use that in the lab to take things like
the measles virus and weaken it so that it can be then used in a vaccine.
It's called tissue passage.
You pass a virus through cell cultures several times, and it progressively weakens.
It can't maintain its pathogenicity.
So the same thing happens in populations.
You start off with what looks like a new virus, and the first round, first wave, second wave,
but then it's getting progressively less and less as the virus, if you like, comes down,
but it quietens down, and it becomes what we call endemic.
There is a low-grade background level of it in the community.
It sort of still circulates, doesn't cause anything significant.
It wants to keep itself circulating, but it doesn't cause a problem, and this is the natural
history of your viruses, to downregulate and to become less pathogenic, and so the COVID
virus is doing the same thing, as all other viruses have always historically done.
It's doing the same thing.
It is downregulating itself.
Our progressive so-called variants are not more dangerous.
Yes, they might be more infectious.
Well, that's just a clever move the virus to say.
I want to get through as many people as I can. If you think of it from a, if you like,
the virus perspective, it's not in its best interests to kill everyone that it gets.
And that is not a good move because then it doesn't get to spread. It actually just wants
to, it just wants to multiply. It just wants to spread. So the best way for it to do that is to
be highly transmissible and mild. And that's what it's working its way towards. It's becoming more
transmissible. It's becoming more mild. The COVID virus, I think I touched on this last time,
but it's in the Corona family of viruses and the Corona family of viruses. There are hundreds or
if not thousands of these. And the common cold is one of them. There's over 200 types of the
common cold. Common cold is a standard Corona virus. And it's not the natural thing for
Corona viruses to be nasty. So you kind of know that there's something else happening.
And then Corona viruses are through animals. The animal world has got colds as well.
So the virus is mutating a natural process to calm itself down. So in fact, if we get the
Omicron, which is what we're down to now, it's moved from alpha to delta, and we're now into
the main one being the Omicron. The Omicron can actually be said, and a good way to view it,
is that's a natural vaccine. Go get your dose of Omicron. You then have activated your native
immune system. You have immunity. You'll be fine. And it's not going to take you out. A bit of a
flu, nasty flu. You can feel a bit unwell for a week or maybe two, and that's it. So the Omicron
is not a threat. So back on this thing of virus mutation, there are some researchers who are also
believing that what's actually happening is that the Omicron, the coronavirus, the SARS-CoV-2,
is mutating itself away from the synthetic man-added insertions for the spike protein.
It's losing them. That's not a bad thing. And that's a testimony, isn't it, to the power and
the grace and the might of God. So Omicron is really, as I said, Omicron is no worse than the
flu. So it's really about being armed with all the things that I spoke about last week on how
to treat your COVID, which will also treat the flu, which will also treat any other virus that
might come. And there are other things when I finally get around to putting a document together,
everything is always bigger than Ben-Hur, that you can be armed with as well.
So that's the thing about the viruses. Don't be afraid when you hear the media ramping up
these new virus mutations. They're not to be concerned about. Not the thing.
Oh, I've got the wrong version of the, what's happened here? Okay. This computer has picked
up the wrong version of the slides. You might have to bear with me a minute and I've got to
go and try and find, I have to do another computer job because I updated the slides
on the other computer. All right. I really do want to do this because this next bit was key.
I don't want to jump into talking about the vaccines without doing the rest of this.
Oh, all right. All right. So show of hands here. I can go on talking.
You're frozen, Robin.
Hopefully she will realize she's frozen and be back soon guys. So yeah, she hasn't put anything
in the chat. Sorry about all the technical issues. Hopefully by the third or fourth one,
we'll have all these sorted and it'll be smooth sailing. Obviously it's, yeah. Thanks.
She should be here soon.
She's going to get slides off her other computer. Yes, she'll be back.
Ask a question while we're waiting for Robin and if she comes back straight on, I'll, you know,
no worries.
Chris, I got on the Zoom today a bit later,
but you were talking about,
have you been in a challenge or something?
And we're talking about juices and all this sort of stuff.
And where did that all come from?
What are you guys doing?
I'm back in here, guys.
Okay.
Yep, so I had to change connection.
I'll just move that to make sure.
Now, what I was about to say is I've discovered
that in that having to change over computers,
because I've got two.
You've got an echo of whatever you're doing there, Robin.
Presentations.
The one I've got here doesn't have it in a bit
on the mute.
You're in slow motion, Robin.
It's freezing.
How our immune system works that I wanted.
None of the internet systems are 100% reliable.
Hopefully that's back again.
I've got the phone sitting out.
Hopefully that's back again.
Yep, you're good to go.
Sounds better.
Look, I so apologise.
Honestly, technology drives you bananas, doesn't it?
So as I'm saying, we can make a choice here
where I just take, I either quickly swap computers back over
to access the other slide presentation,
email across to this computer,
open it up on this computer to get it back up,
which will take a few minutes to do that.
Or I run with the presentation I've got here.
And when we take our break a bit later,
change it over and then come back
and fill in on the immunity.
You've only got 20 minutes till the break.
If it's still at two or three.
Keep going?
Yeah, just keep going and then do it on the break
would probably be the best way.
Yeah.
I think that's a way to go.
All right.
So talking through this, we've put this idea,
well, okay, is there a necessity?
Do we need these vaccines?
All of these vaccine types,
we need to understand that all of these vaccines
that have been introduced have been introduced
under what's called emergency use authorization.
What does that mean?
That depended on first,
they're having made a definition of a pandemic.
So that in itself is an interesting question
because as I said,
who have been changing definitions of everything?
And in 2009, prior to the swine flu,
so-called epidemic pandemic,
yeah, epidemic pandemic,
they tried to call it a pandemic.
They changed the definition.
What was the definition prior to that?
The definition was a widespread disease
basically across the world that was serious.
So not just that it was widespread, it was serious.
So they dropped the, it is serious.
So all they needed now for definition of a pandemic
is that, oh, look, it's all over the place.
Golly gosh, so is the cold.
So is the flu every year, but nevermind.
We now, we can now call a newly discovered,
released, whatever you want to say about it, virus,
a pandemic just because we're finding it all over the place.
Nothing to do with its disease severity.
So to get a drug, a vaccine
under emergency use authorization,
it must first be a pandemic,
but secondly, there must be no other treatment available.
So let's stop there for a sec.
No other treatment available.
Now, isn't that interesting?
I spoke last week about even just the natural options
that we have evidence for in published papers
as having effectiveness against both prevention
and treatment in the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Even if all we do is vitamin D.
Vitamin D levels in the blood alone
will predict who's going to get it,
how severe they're going to get it,
whether they end up hospital,
whether they end up ICU, whether they die.
Vitamin D levels alone.
That's not counting vitamin A, vitamin C, zinc,
quercetin, nigella, sediva, the black seed oil.
On it goes.
You know, the list is long, all the herbs.
And that's not counting our two key drugs,
ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine,
both of which, isn't it intriguing,
both of which old-fashioned drugs, long histories of use,
proven to work in this situation,
both of which get wiped out.
They couldn't allow them to be approved and run
because then they could not have these vaccines introduced
under emergency use authorisation.
Does that make sense?
You're on the page everyone. Can I see something from somebody? Yeah, okay. You're beginning
to see the picture here. So we have a virus and there's a whole background story of where
this came from or how it came to be. So we have this virus that is not a dangerous virus
except for that small subgroup of the population who are at risk from pretty well anything.
Most of the people dying of COVID, I've said this before, but the data is clear. Most of
the people dying from COVID have already exceeded the average normal lifespan. So they take
a virus that in itself is not dangerous and they say, oops, it's a pandemic. So then they
have to ramp up in everybody's minds how dangerous and scary it is because, oh, by the way, there
is nothing to treat it. Why? Because we've discredited the actual treatments. So there's
nothing to treat it. So, oh, dear, everybody, the only way to fix this virus is to use these
new vaccines. All right. So that's the scenario that we have. So what about our vaccine? So
there's this organisation called GAVI. You haven't heard of GAVI? Global Alliance of the Vaccination Industry.
GAVI. And GAVI was formed not that long ago, which is rather intriguing. And I'll talk a bit more
on when we come to it. I'll put the slide up and you can actually see them. But anyway.
So what GAVI has said is that this is just straight what I'm going to say in these next
couple of slides are straight off the GAVI website. So this is their words. And they're
saying that there are more vaccine candidates simultaneously in the pipeline for COVID than
for any infectious disease ever before. Well, isn't that interesting? Here we've got a virus
that actually is way less dangerous than TB or malaria or all of these other things. We've
got more vaccines coming for them than ever before for anything ever before. And they're
trying to achieve the same thing, immunity to the virus. Some might be able to stop transmission,
they say. And they do this by stimulating an immune response to an antigen. By definition,
an antigen is a molecule part of a virus or a bacteria that induces an immune response.
So an antigen is a molecule that induces an immune response. It can be a plant, it can
be a virus, it can be bacteria, it can be anything. So in COVID-19, that antigen is
your spike protein. The spike protein itself is not just the antigen, it's also the pathogenic
part of the COVID virus. And that's the part that attaches to the ACE receptor and gives
it access into the human cells. So there are four main vaccine types. Now, I might flip
this bit now across on to, oh no, not yet. Four main types. There's a whole virus type.
And this is an old type of vaccine. We've had these around for a long time. There's
a protein subunit type. And we've also done a little bit with those before. But two totally
new types, a viral vector type and the nucleic acid type. These are new. And so what these
viral vector and nucleic acid types do, and this is Gabby's own words here, they try to
smuggle the antigen into the body. And then use the body's own cells to make the viral antigen.
And so at the time that this was written, and this was done January of last year,
there were 15 whole virus vaccines coming. There were 13 protein subunit vaccines. But guess what?
20 of the nucleic acid. That's their favourite one. I'll go into why it's their favourite one.
Their favourite one is the nucleic acid ones. And the viral vector, which also work with
nucleic acid, that's a total of 35 different types of vaccine, different vaccines coming
through in those categories. 35. They're going to get you with one of them. So the whole virus
vaccine. So think of this, your four categories, your whole virus vaccine. So what do they do with
these? What they do is they either weaken or deactivate the pathogen, the virus that's caused
the original disease so that we'll get a protective immunity to it. Okay, so it can be the live
attenuated. So this is the weakened one. So this is where I spoke earlier about the passage of a
virus through a system. This is where they grow it in multiple cell cultures. So it gets progressively
weaker. So it can still grow, it can still multiply, but it's not going to cause illness.
So our classic example of that is the measles virus. The measles, mumps, rubella virus is a
live attenuated viral vaccine. So also is the varicella zoster virus. Both of those are live
attenuated virus vaccines. Then the other type is the inactivated form, and that's where they've
been through a process that destroys the genetic material so that they can't infect and replicate.
They'll still get an immune response, so they don't get into the cells and grow inside the cells.
They're sitting outside the cells, but they will get an immune response. These ones have been
around for a long time. So the flu is an inactivated vaccine. The hepatitis A vaccine
is an inactivated vaccine. The old TB vaccine is an inactivated vaccine.
So how do these ones work? So your live ones, as I said, they've been weakened,
and they actually infect the cells. So the live attenuated vaccines do actually get in
and infect the cells, and that's why after the measles vaccine, some people will get
atypical measles. We used to have an oral polio vaccine, and people would get polio.
So they do infect the cells, and they do grow, but it's supposed to then cause either no disease
or a very mild disease, and that's okay for most people. It can't be used for those with
a weakened immune system, so someone, say, with HIV or in pregnant women,
because it can cause a problem. And as I mentioned with the polio, sometimes this live virus can
actually, because it's been artificially weakened by growing through tissue culture,
sometimes it can reactivate. Sometimes in a new, and this particularly happens when it comes into
a new population that don't have antibodies to it, it can become a little bit nasty again. And
that's why I said the polio virus from the polio vaccine would sometimes flip across to a wild
polio and cause polio. So that's part of why they stopped the oral polio vaccine.
Now, so your live attenuated virus ones, so again, we're thinking measles,
so they're a weakened version of the actual infection. So in fact, our immune system will
respond to that like it would an actual infection, except that, and this is the key thing, that all
the vaccines, bar one that's in study, it's nowhere near coming, all the vaccines that are injected
miss this key point. So while, and this is Gabby saying, the immune system responds as it would to
any other cellular invader. So that's a clever bit of wording there about cellular invader.
It doesn't respond to it as it would any other infection coming to us by the normal routes
infections come to us by. So think about that for a second. We are breathing in air the whole time.
We are swallowing food the whole time. We've got things in contact to our skin the whole time.
But how often do we tread on a needle?
So all the vaccines that are delivered, all these current use vaccines are delivered via needle,
which means they bypass everything else and go straight into bloodstream cellular responses.
So anyone who tries to tell you that any vaccine activates all our unnatural immunity,
sorry, that's a blatantly wrong statement. It's just plain not true,
because it hasn't come by the route that activates our natural immunity.
But your live attenuated virus vaccines will activate a whole heap. I'm going to be talking
with the other thing about T-cells and B-cells. It will activate your T-cells. It will activate
the killer T-cells, which are ones that just naturally go around and destroy infective cells.
It will activate the helper T-cells, which support the B-cells. The B-cells make antibody.
The antibody coats the offending substance so that your other cells,
your macrophages and gobble up Pac-Man can eat it. So yes, a whole attenuated virus vaccine
will activate a lot of the immune system. And that will continue until the virus is cleared
from the body and memory cells are made so the cells remember it. So it can produce a fairly
decent immune response. And Gabby says it's almost as good as being exposed to the wild virus,
but without falling ill. What about the inactivated virus vaccines? But bearing that in mind,
so we think back to our measles vaccine, which is a classic one of these,
do we have one measles vaccine and that's it for the rest of life? No.
they've realised that we have to keep doing it.
So the kids get one at 12 months,
then they get one again at five,
and now we're being told they have to have it
when they hit high school,
and they want adults to be having it as well.
So what about the whole,
so we're still talking whole vaccines,
but the inactivated viral vaccines.
So this is the ones where part of the disease-causing virus
or part of it has been destroyed.
The replicating part that can make it,
allow it to keep going inside the cells has been destroyed.
So generally they will call these,
think they're safer and they're more stable
than the live ones because,
now this is, we do have a big proviso in all of these,
and that is working on the assumption
that the spike protein,
which is the part of the virus
that they're making the vaccines to
and telling us to make and so on, cannot replicate.
All right, so we might come back to that.
It's making the assumption that it is not self-replicating.
So these vaccines are considered safer, more stable,
and they usually contain a lot of the proteins
so the immune system will respond to it,
but it is believed, said normally,
that your inactivated virus vaccines
can't actually infect the cells.
So because they're not getting into the cells,
so it's your key, they're not getting into the cells,
they're not infecting the cells,
your inactivated vaccines will only stimulate
the antibody responses.
And we'll be talking about these different immune responses
when I can flip those slides over.
So it only stimulates one arm of the immune system,
the arm called Th2, the second arm of the immune system.
So what do they do to make these work better, be stronger?
They add adjuvants.
So all your inactivated virus vaccines
will have adjuvants added.
And adjuvants are chemicals of some sort
that will irritate, they say stimulate the immune system.
Well, they irritate the immune system.
They're poison.
It irritates the immune system when the body says,
that's no good, I've got to get rid of it.
And the classic one that is used everywhere is aluminium.
Aluminium containing adjuvants.
The body recognises as an immune problem,
as a health problem, it tries to get rid of it.
It accumulates in the brain.
Aluminium in the brain is what we see with Alzheimer's.
What's our other problem with our inactivated virus vaccines
because it's not a long lasting immunity,
you need booster doses.
So here they're setting themselves up for a great system
where it's like, okay, we have to add something
to make it work more strongly.
And we also need booster doses.
It's a great model, the vaccination industry model.
So when you start thinking about,
so we start seeing on the Gavi site,
their excuses and their justifications
for why we're moving away from old vaccine types
and we have to move to these new ones.
So what they're saying is the problem is that,
oops, that's been duplicated, let's get rid of that.
So the problem is that these vaccines
are a bit expensive to make
because you have to grow the cell cultures,
you have to, for the live attenuated ones,
you've got to have all these appropriate cell cultures
to pass the vaccine through before you make the vaccine.
They've got to grow them first, produce the stuff
and then inactivate it and then put in the vaccines.
So they have to use a lot of different facilities,
a lot of different cell cultures,
and oh dear, that's time consuming
and costs them a lot of money.
So whole vaccines, then I spoke about subunit vaccines.
So this is breaking it down, coming down further.
So the subunit vaccines, rather than injecting the whole thing
to trigger an immune response,
your subunit vaccines or acellular vaccines,
you might remember the pertussis,
we switched from a whole vaccine to an acellular
because the whole was giving too many reactions.
Acellular vaccines have got purified parts of that pathogen,
not the whole, purified.
And they pick out the bits that are specially selected
because they're the ones that are thought
to be able to stimulate the immune cells.
So because these are only fragments
of the original pathogen,
Gabby says they're incapable of causing disease.
They're incapable of causing that particular,
incapable of replicating.
But again, this is working on the assumption that,
for example, with our spike protein,
that it cannot cause disease apart from the virus,
if you get the difference, okay.
But subunit vaccines working on the assumption
that they can't cause disease.
So they are considered very safe, okay?
The subunit vaccines, part of the whole.
So what are the parts they can use?
They can use protein.
And this is where they isolate specific proteins
from the virus or the bacteria.
They can use sugars,
because a lot of the bacterial cell walls,
this doesn't happen with viruses,
it only happens with bacteria,
where they have sugars as part of the bacterial cell walls.
So they can make polysaccharide vaccines
from chains of sugar molecules
on the cell wall of the bacteria.
Or they can make what they call conjugate subunit vaccines.
So this is where they've taken one thing,
stuck it onto another thing, and put them together.
So these ones they use,
particularly for your bacterial vaccines,
and meningococcal is one of those.
So the meningococcal ACY, the latest one,
where they've got the four different types
of meningococcal together,
has got the sugars from four different types of bacteria
linked together with either diphtheria or tetanus toxin.
So hang on, we've just given you the toxin of diphtheria,
or we've just given you the toxin of tetanus.
Hmm.
Obviously the body doesn't like those,
so it makes antibodies to them.
So they make it more nasty,
more irritant to the immune system,
by adding things that are poisons,
literally, to the immune system.
So those are our subunit vaccines.
So when we talk, I'm going to talk a bit more
on the protein subunit vaccine.
So we've gone from whole to subunit,
and now we're going down into the protein part
of the subunits.
And the relevance of this is that with the COVID-19,
the only subunit vaccines we've got are protein subunit,
because viruses don't have a cell wall.
All they are is a package of DNA.
So we can only make protein if we're going to subunit it.
So the subunit vaccines are fragments of protein
or sugar from the pathogen that have been studied.
So they identify which of those combinations
are going to give a strong and effective immune response.
And in the case of SARS-CoV-2, it's a spike protein,
because that is the whole problem.
So by restricting the immune, and so their argument,
Gabby's argument here, is that by restricting
what you're giving into the system
down to just a bit of a protein or a bit of polysaccharide,
then we've got less side effects,
because you're not supposed to create the disease.
You've got less side effects.
These are cheaper vaccines, easier to produce.
They're more stable than your whole virus
or bacteria vaccines.
So there's a lot of impetus, if you like,
for a lot of reasons why the pharmaceutical industry
would rather like to use these.
So what's our downside from this?
Well, in our immune response
and our body's ability to recognise things,
we rely on not just one thing, but a whole heap of things.
Our body relies on what's called
pathogen-associated molecular patterns,
as in a nasty thing is not likely
to just have one thing going on with it.
It's likely to have a collection of things.
And our immune system and our cells are so amazing
that it looks and it recognises that collection.
And that collection is called a PAMP,
pathogen-associated molecular pattern, PAMPs.
So our immune system can recognise PAMPs.
And they're a danger signal
because it's like it puts the immune system on alarm,
saying there could be something nasty here
because here's a PAMP.
And if your thing you're injecting
doesn't have PAMPs with it,
then the immune system can get tricked.
And these things will get in
without the body giving a reaction to it.
Again, these injected antigens,
these subunits they've given don't infect the cells.
So we only get one type of immune response.
We only get the antibody-mediated immune response,
which means it's weaker.
The response is weaker.
It wanes with time.
And so again, they need to do adjuvants.
Adjuvants, these agents that they say
stimulate the immune system.
They should say irritate the immune system.
And you need booster doses.
Here's this wonderful booster word again.
So in other words, we've stopped you using native immunity.
We've stopped you using any nutrients or medications
or drugs that can help you treat the disease.
We're gonna make you dependent on these vaccines,
but hey, guess what?
They don't work properly.
So you are going to have to,
we have to put stuff in them to irritate your immune system
to get a better immune response.
And you are gonna have to have booster doses.
And that's the way the vaccine industry works.
So.
Again, this is from the Garvey site.
They're saying, well, these subunit vaccines
are made using living organisms,
bacteria, yeast, and we need to grow them.
And we've got to be careful with hygiene.
And so, oh dear, I'm sorry,
but that makes them more expensive to produce
than a fully chemically synthesized vaccine
like the RNA vaccines.
So you see them starting to go, oh yeah, but.
So then they talk a little bit
of how this is done.
So the other thing to note
about your purified protein subunit vaccines,
and pretty much most of the vaccines,
they need a preservative to keep it stable.
So they also are adding preservatives to keep it stable.
Now, historically, the preservative used was thimerosal,
which is a mercury-containing preservative.
Now, that was quietly removed from the vaccine industry.
In general, there's still traces of it to be found,
but from most vaccines and from the child vaccines
a couple of years ago,
it wasn't done with any amount of fanfare
because to do it with fanfare would be to acknowledge
that the thimerosal was a problem,
which they've been studiously ignoring
for many, many years.
But the fact is mercury is a known neurotoxin,
known immune toxin,
and it was used as a preservative
in all the childhood vaccines
and pretty much all the vaccines up until only recently.
So we've got preservatives in there.
So it's now some other chemical preservative,
and we've got aluminium.
So it's now just over three.
So what I need to do now is jump into my other Zoom call.
So what I will do in that time before I come back on,
which will probably be just a little bit after four,
I'll get the right slide presentation going
so that I can come back and properly,
whoop, I just lost you there, Helice.
I was about to look at you,
and properly talk through how the immune system works.
Because when you really get what I'm saying,
T-cells and B-cells, and you know what that means,
and you can visualise it in how the body's got it set up,
then all the rest of what I'm going to talk into
on the viral vaccines and the DNA and RNA vaccines
will really start to make sense.
Okay?
So can everyone leave their computers as is,
like on the Zoom call,
and I'll just pause it,
and then you just come back to your screen?
Or is that going to be too difficult?
That won't work for me
because I've got to Zoom on this other one,
but I can come back in on it anyway.
I'll come back in on the link.
Okay, so I'm going to leave this open.
So just to let you all know,
and I'm just going to pause it right now.
Okay.
Now, I'm just going to bring this slide back,
and then I'm going to get myself onto screen share.
So I've just had an absolutely incredible session.
You would no doubt all know,
would have all heard of Dr Peter McCulloch,
who really is one of the world absolute leaders
in the field at this point in time.
And so this was an exclusive Zoom meeting, really,
for Australian doctors,
and there were 250 or odder of us on there
where he spoke directly to us at a fairly high-pitched,
very high-pitched, rapid-fire,
papers being thrown at us level.
Incredible stuff.
So bit by bit, along with the rest of what I was going to do,
I'll be teasing some of that out as it's relevant
for you guys and passing on what we can.
Now, I thought I'd made this come up into full screen,
so I'm just going to try if I can get this up.
I want to go.
Elise, you've got it on me being able to do a screen share.
Share screen.
All right.
Share screen.
This top one, I think, is the right one.
Zoom, come on, you can do it.
Zoom us.
Come on, computer.
I've actually got two computers open now
on separate connection networks in the trust
that I will be able to get one of them to work.
Click the lock to make changes.
Oh, come on.
It's doing stupid things here.
It's not going to let me just simply do a screen share,
so I'm going to see if I can jump computers
and go back to the other one I had operating.
Second, now up and running again.
And now we'll come back in to this new slide presentation so that we can take you through
on the presentation.
Robin in the chat people have asked if you can send the slides to me and I can pass them
on to them as well.
Is that possible as well please?
Not in this form.
No, these are my own personal notes and they're really not done as a form.
The amount of work involved is massive.
Why has that not come?
I've emailed it from the other computer to this computer so I've got them on this computer.
Look what I will do, seeing the screen share is being an absolute pain and I don't know
why that email hasn't sent.
I will send them to you but the only ones that I want sent up are the diagrams.
If I send that to you now, are you able to get that?
Or shall I just reset it to me and try?
No, I can't because with recording it won't let me get onto my computer.
I can continue to talk but I really wanted these diagrams and I've set two systems up
now to do this and I keep being blocked and I don't understand why that hasn't come to
here.
Inbox, let's have another look, why has that not come?
I'll just talk through the whole of the viral thing and the vaccine thing and the immune
thing we'll have to come back to.
I was talking about how we've got these four different vaccine types.
We've got the whole vaccines which can be inactivated or they can be attenuated.
We've got the subunit vaccines and now we're moving into the new types that they did, which
are the types where we're having the problems.
I'll skip over all the immune stuff because I can't show you that.
I've got it here to look at but I can't show you that so I'll move on through.
Okay, so when we come to the types, what's interesting when we look at these stories
of what they've decided and how they've decided it, you get to see that there's certainly
something very interesting about it.
The plan has to do, and this is those beautiful diagrams which we'll talk through, so what
are our available vaccines?
Again, we've come in, oh, what is this doing?
My goodness.
Oh, it's gone backwards.
All right, so our vaccine types, whole virus vaccines are live attenuated, our whole virus
vaccines.
So immune system immunity, our four vaccine types, so our subunit, protein subunit, now
the viral vector vaccines.
So these are a totally new type of vaccines.
So what these are doing, they are using viruses, common viruses that have been around to carry
stuff into our cells so that then our cells will make the thing.
Now the idea is that the viruses themselves, the carriers have been inactivated so that
they are not supposed to replicate.
That's the idea behind it, these viruses are not supposed to replicate, they've been modified
to bring in the genetic material from the thing they want us to make.
So it instructs our body to start making a lot of this antigen, a lot of the stuff of
what they're getting us to do.
So it's a bit like it mimics what would happen with a natural pathogen, but not a natural
pathogen, as I've said before, that's coming by the mouth or the nose or the gut.
but something that could have been, say, injected by a mosquito.
So that's your best analogy,
that the viral vector ones being injected by a vaccine
are a bit like having it delivered via a mosquito.
So we don't get colds and respiratory infections
and stuff like that from mosquitoes,
but we do get things like Ross River virus,
we do get things like malaria.
The body's responses are very different.
So this will trigger.
These viral vectors will get a strong cell response
using both these T cells and these B cells.
And they first had a play with this.
The first one of these that they did was the Ebola viral vaccine.
So, as I said, it's a delivery system.
The virus itself is harmless.
Adenovirus.
Adenovirus is a common one that they use for this.
So the adenovirus,
so in particular when we come to talking about the vaccines we've got in use,
you might have heard of the chimp adenovirus.
So it's a type of common cold.
So it's kind of like the chimp cold virus
is one of the ones that they've used to give.
They're supposed to be non-replicating.
But the problem is that the viruses are grown inside cells,
cell lines, human cell lines that are replicating.
So sometimes there is a percentage,
and they think they try and cap it at 10% of these viruses
that will still replicate.
So if these viruses who are carrying this foreign material
are replicating, we are getting more of that material.
Now, your next problem is that, again,
these are being injected, infecting into our cells,
and it's actually getting into the genetic material.
The DNA from the DNA vaccines is getting into the DNA.
And this gets the B cells as well as the B cells.
Because it's foreign, the body starts to make stuff to it.
Now, why have they not done as many of these vaccines,
these particular types as they might have?
They're a bit harder for them to upscale the manufacture.
So the vaccine type that they've preferred,
rather than just the viral vector ones
where they've got to grow the virus,
they've got to deactivate the virus,
and they've got to put the DNA inside the virus,
the ones that they prefer are the nucleic acid vaccines,
the vaccines that are actually making from DNA and RNA.
And these are containing the instructions
for a specific protein from the pathogen.
So it's giving our body the instructions.
The immune system recognises it as a foreign problem,
and then the body starts making.
Now, the body actually, before that,
the body is making those antigens.
So they inject it.
It gets injected into our cells.
Once we're talking, the DNA one goes into the DNA,
and that gets read and starts making it.
The RNA one, the messenger RNA,
sends a message to a particular protein package
making stuff in the cells called endoplasmic reticulum, ER,
and it starts churning out the proteins.
And that churning of the proteins then triggers an immune response.
So again, we think that comparing that
to how a natural infection comes,
a natural infection, as I keep saying,
that's why we're going to talk about mucosal immunity,
when I can find a way to make machines talk to each other,
the mucosal immunity is really where the action is.
But none of these vaccines are addressing mucosal immunity.
These vaccines are all working by injecting something
into the bloodstream, deep into the immune system.
So this is quite a new technology.
And prior to these COVID things,
none had been approved for human use.
None had been approved for human use.
There was a horse vaccine against the West Nile virus,
that was a DNA vaccine.
But the interesting thing, and that's a little bit of a story,
I was speaking to a vet on that one actually,
so there's a bit of a separate story,
but these equine vaccines turned out to be killing the horses
somewhat faster.
But that's a separate, that's an anecdote.
So how do they do the DNA vaccines?
They get a bit of the DNA and they stick it into a bacteria.
Bacteria have got their own circular bits of DNA called plasmids,
and this is how bacteria can mutate and multiply and do things,
because they transmit genetic information across to other bacteria
via these circular bits of DNA called plasma.
And the plasmids are not part of the chromosomes,
they're separate, they're separate bits.
and so it's a bit like a flash drive, you know, a bit like a thumb drive that you transfer
and stuff. So they put this DNA into the bacterial plasmid and then get the bacteria to grow
and then they take this plasmid out, isolate the antigen, all of that's really good,
and inject it into the muscle. But the problem here is where they had a way, how do they get
this stuff they've injected into the muscle to go into the cells? Because the body's got all
these protective mechanisms to stop that happening. The body does not want any foreign
injected anything to be getting into our cells and into our nuclei, that's not how the system works.
So they had to find a way to trick the body in how to get that in. So how did they do that?
They had a go with, and you might have heard, early in the piece they were trying electric
current over little kind of guns that they would vibrate on the skin to create an electric current
to get stuff across. They were trying to use helium gas to get it across, but they ended up
deciding to do this thing of encapsulating the DNA into lipid nanoparticles.
What are lipid nanoparticles? So nano, super small, 10 to the minus nine, tiny, tiny, tiny.
The thing about nano-anythings, be wary of nano-anythings because nano-anythings totally
bypass all our body normal barriers. They just plain get in. So nanoparticles are so small
that none of the cellular control mechanisms work. So they're nano, super small, but they're lipid
and they are four particular types of synthetic. Animal studies on these particular four synthetic
lipids have shown them to be toxic, but that doesn't matter. They were turned into making
synthetic lipid nanoparticles to encapsulate the DNA that they wanted in these vaccines.
So the other interesting thing about your animal studies on these lipid nanoparticles is that the
animal studies show that these lipid nanoparticles travel to particular organs and they have actually
done a human study on the lipid nanoparticles. So this was a Japanese study on the bio-distribution,
but it's not a study on the bio-distribution of the whole vaccine. It was just a study of
the vaccines. It was a study on the bio-distribution of the lipid nanoparticles
that in this study were empty. They didn't fill them, they were empty.
So they injected these lipid nanoparticles, they concentrate in the ovary above all, 200
times in the ovary above anywhere else. They also go to the spleen, they also go to the brain,
they cross the blood-brain barrier, they go everywhere. So whereas historically with our
vaccines we'd inject them into the deltoid muscle typically, and that's where it would essentially
stay. You'd get a localised reaction, a little bit of it would travel through the bloodstream,
but it wouldn't get into the cells and it certainly didn't get into every organ of the body.
But these lipid nanoparticles are travelling through the body, proven in the study, and they
stick in places like the ovary, particularly the spleen, which is where a lot of the immune system
is focused, and the brain, but they do go everywhere. Why do they do lipids? Because our cell membranes
are a lipid-protein-lipid tri-layer, and by making them lipid they will actually fuse
with the cell membrane and open the cell and allow the DNA to get in.
So that's what they do with those. So the idea with the RNA vaccine, so they use the
templates in there, they're purely synthetic, so the DNA vaccines is still needed to grow stuff,
the RNA vaccines are totally chemically made synthetic, so they can make them have a message
for whatever they want them to have a message for, whatever. This brings a whole separate set of
research where some other researchers have said, hang on, this mRNA is encoding for a few other
things here, not just the spike protein, but a few other things here as well. So again, so
that RNA, but messenger RNA normally within our own bodies, our own messenger RNA
is very transitory, I mean very transitory. The body immediately says, I want you to make a protein,
bang, it makes the mRNA to go to the endoplasmic reticulum to make the protein, then the messenger
RNA is gone, it does not hang around. Now that clearly wouldn't work if they're doing,
that clearly wouldn't work if they're doing a vaccine
that's supposed to give a durable effect, so they've had to do things.
to that messenger RNA to make it hang around a bit longer.
So they used to say, in fact, the Gavi site quotes, there is zero risk of the messenger RNA
integrating with our own genetic material. That's what the Gavi site says. Unfortunately,
scientists are disputing that. We've got several reasons why we think that's not the case.
Not the least of it being that some people have scriptase, which is a particular enzyme
that can reverse read the message. Instead of the message being made out of the DNA across
to the messenger RNA to tell the ribosomes what to make, some people have this reverse
transcriptase gene that can reverse read what that messenger RNA is saying and stick it back
into the DNA. Some 10% of our DNA has got a very close reaction with other, a close homology,
if you like, has got sites that is very like other, like primitive virus and what have you,
sites anyway. So there's already, it's called the herb site, but there is already a clustering,
if you like, of things like BBV virus and things like that in this area. So the thought is that
maybe it's going to join in there because it's an uncovered area. Our DNA, and this is a whole
separate story in genetics, how God has designed it, that not everything that our DNA can encode
for is being read. In fact, most of the time our DNA is coiled up and covered up and only little
bits at a time of what God wants read, what's meant to be read are opened to be able to be read.
So once inside the cell, once the DNA RNA is inside the cell, it triggers the body to start
making the antigens. So this is where we come to this thing of, well, how does that then work?
Well, it makes the spike, gets the body to make the spike protein. The body then sticks that,
gets it out of its cellular structure and sticks this spike protein out on the surface of the cell
attached to things called MHC, major histocompatibility complexes. So it's basically,
this is, if you like, warning signals stuck on the outside of the cell, but then saying to other
cells, quick guys, help me out here. This is inside my cell. This is a problem. Come help me
fight it. So these are then sticking, the spike proteins are then sticking outside the cell
membranes of the cells that have been infected. But because of what we're seeing with the delivery
But because of what we're seeing with the delivery of these, these nanoparticles all
through everywhere, these cells can be throughout, can be everywhere.
These cells can be everywhere. So these cells are then, so these cells expressing the spike protein,
the immune system comes along and says, that's a problem. I've got to make antibodies to it.
Now, some of what it will normally, so again, when I get, can get it working with the pictures,
that we have T cells, we have B cells, the B cells make antibodies. I'll talk to you later
why they're called T and B, not because of their shape, anything in particular or colour or
whatever, but it has to do with their origin. But B cells make antibodies and antibodies are
claw-like structures that trap onto things and make it easier for your other killing
cells to come along and find where they are and kill them. So the B cells think this through,
these cells have just been, I've got spike protein stuck all over them.
All our cells are around the place. They're now sticking spike protein out there,
out their surfaces. So we're now making antibodies to our own cells.
They're expressing the spike protein because our cells are making it and making it in an ongoing
way. So it's not like an acute infection or an acute viral infection where you get some cells
making it and we lose some cells in the process. What normally happens when you've got an acute
viral infection is the virus comes along, multiplies massively in our cells, and that'll
typically cause that cell to burst and die as the virus erupts from the cell.
But we haven't got virus erupting from the cell. We've got spike protein being made on the cell,
being made in the cell. So those cells, any cells making spike protein continue to be a target for
the immune system. Yeah? For as long as they're making the spike protein and that, we don't know
how long that is. Although Dr. McCulloch was saying there's a spike protein in the immune system,
being made for at least a year after each vaccine, I think, but it hasn't been around
that long to confirm that. But let's say it's a significant time. So that's UBC.
cells making antibodies but we also have other cells, T cells, that are called killer cells.
So their job is to just kill cells that are that are nastily infected so
it'll seek out and destroy infected cells.
So it's the T cells are killing our cells because they think our cells are the problem.
So it's a bit of a concern.
So they think they're very clever because they've got the way with the manufacture of
these RNA vaccines they can be done very very quickly very quickly once the pathogen's genome
is sequenced and there are a lot of disputes over what what is the sequence of of this
for various reasons but so they've got the sequence of the spy protein or the computer
generated sequence of the spike protein or the computer generated sequence of what if
whatever it is they'd like to have a computer generated sequence of.
It's quick and easy to design the vaccine against it.
So Moderna got their vaccine two months of having a genetic sequence.
So and then of course the Gavi is saying well this is wonderful you know we can we can get
vaccines up very very quickly in the face of new emerging epidemic pandemic pathogens that
are rapidly mutating look how quickly we can make a vaccine but hang on back to the first questions.
Is it necessary?
And when we come into looking at the side effects of vaccines what is very apparent
is that the more you vaccinate the more you get the mutations.
So both the DNA and the RNA vaccines are easy to produce
but again the RNA they prefer because they can make them totally synthetically and they're nice
and cheap they can be done in the same facility and the costs are far less so isn't that interesting
the RNA vaccines they're saying here are very cheap and very easy to make.
Anyone idea any idea how much Pfizer charge per capita for their RNA vaccine?
Yeah not quite that amount thank goodness but it's 50 to 60 dollars
but think that through on the billions that you're trying to get vaccinated.
So and yet AstraZeneca the Oxford so that was originally started off in the Oxford University
they wanted to do theirs non-profit they were only charging two dollars it's a bit of a difference
hey they were only charging two dollars it's interesting that theirs didn't make it off the
ground one wonders why. So Gavi now I might be able to this one because we're on back to this
computer this might allow me to share screen because I've already done it before so let's
see if we can oh no that's no it won't it won't all right I'll come back to here we will get those
I will get those nice pretty slides across to you so Gavi no I'm going to unshare screen
how do I make it unshare do that so Gavi is the global as I said the global alliance of
vaccination industry so I've got a pretty picture that I'll send you that shows you all the people
who were involved in Gavi and so you're founding people no surprises Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation UNICEF World Bank World Health Organization then you've got governments who
are implementing the countries you've got the vaccine industry in the developing countries
the vaccine industry in the industrialized companies countries you've got a few independent
individuals so that's interesting to have a look on who all that is and so that's Gavi it's a very
interesting combination of people and this is the organization that is telling us this is what
we need to do and this is how we do it but Gavi is then linking up with another
organization called CEPI anyone heard of that C-E-P-I
yes Jacinda Ardern is another member Jacinda Ardern has got very interesting
yeah so Gavi is the is basically the financial instrument that's right
so CEPI Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovation so it's a global partnership
and when did they set that up this is very interesting 2017 to develop vaccines to stop
future epidemics so it's like yep let's get our organizations up and running let's get our RNA
vaccine technology developed our DNA technology developed so that that we can get it's going
where was it founded in Davos it was founded in Davos Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation welcome
and the World Economic Forum
along with governments of Norway and India, interestingly.
And then it's had financial support
from a whole long list of governments
and the private sector
and the UN Foundation Solidarity Response Fund.
So it's convincing everybody
that the only way to save the world
from all these future pandemics that are going to come,
interestingly, virtually all of them
are going to be derivatives from a coronavirus
that happened to be able to have been developed before
by gain of function research in a certain lab somewhere
but nevermind, I didn't say that.
So here we have these organisations set up
and so they have a pandemic plan.
So we need to watch out for this now
because in March this year,
March the 7th to 8th,
CEPI and the UK government are going to bring together
your leading figures from governments, industry,
philanthropies, philanthropy,
civil society for the Global Pandemic Preparedness Summit.
They're trying to get 3.5 billion to CEPI
to get ready to do these groundbreaking vaccine innovations.
They're trying to get vaccine development down to 100 days.
Well, that's great.
You develop a vaccine 100 days,
where is the assessment treatment time
for any effects of these vaccines?
There is none.
So, and what's very interesting too
is to go back tracking through,
well, what about this vaccine development?
So you all heard of Imperial College.
Imperial College in London was the college,
the place that they used in the beginning of the pandemic,
very famous Neil Ferguson or infamous
might be the better word,
to model what the risk was going to be of SARS-CoV-2.
And the modelling was out,
perhaps as much of a hundred fold,
but it was certainly severely, severely out.
So December, 2018,
a US gave 8.4 million to the Imperial College in London
so that they would fund a self-amplifying
RNA vaccine platform.
Why did I just say self-amplifying?
What does that mean?
Self-amplifying.
What does that mean?
What that means is once the RNA is in the system,
it will keep growing.
The body will be continually exposed
to the message that RNA is giving it.
And that would so-called enable a tailored vaccine production
against multiple viral pathogens,
including your H1N1 flu,
your rabies virus and your Marburg virus.
Marburg's an interesting one.
December 2018, 10 million given
to the University of Queensland
for the molecular clamp platform.
Now the molecular clamp technology
in the UQ vaccine fell over
because in the trials people tested HIV positive.
So that didn't achieve what they wanted.
So they're back to the drawing board on that one.
And then in February 2019,
look at our timescale here, right?
February 2019, 34 million given
to the German-based CureVac biopharmaceutical company
to fund development of RNA printer prototype.
So CEPI called this a transportable,
downscalable automated mRNA printing facility.
So they print the stuff that's now not grown in cells
and not anything else.
You know, we're doing printing of messenger RNA
that can produce rapidly a supply
of lipid nanoparticle formulated messenger RNA vaccine.
So this is straight off the CEPI website.
I'm not making any of this up.
You can look it up yourselves on the CEPI website.
They can target known pathogens.
And what are they talking about?
Yellow fever, Lassa fever, rabies.
Ah, but can prepare for a rapid response
to unknown pathogens, i.e. disease X.
So we've got our messenger RNA platform ready
in our lipid nanoparticle formulated way of doing it,
ready for this disease X that is gonna magically appear
according to their timeframe.
So we've got a lovely quote from the head of CEPI,
a guy called Hatchett.
Oh, what was his first name?
I didn't write that.
It might've been Mark.
I don't remember now, but anyway,
in March, 2020, talking about SARS-CoV-2.
where he says, this is the most frightening disease that I have ever encountered in my career,
really. And that includes Ebola, includes MERS, includes SARS, and it's frightening because of
the combination of infectiousness and a lethality that appears to be many-fold higher than the flu.
Well, even by March 2020, it was known that that wasn't correct.
So, this is this incredible talking up over something with a lethality equivalent or less
than the flu. Yeah, as the reason for why CEPI. Now, one of the vaccines that CEPI funded,
oh, where are we going? Which way are you going? Computer, you've gone...
You've gone the wrong way. Okay, so, right, here we go.
So, CEPI particularly funded Moderna and Novavax. So, just bear that in mind when we come to
thinking, hey, Novavax is a safe alternative. Who funded it? CEPI. Hmm. Does that make it
likely that it's a safe one to have? I don't think so. So, the CEPI vaccines. So, again,
we'll send you the picture to show you these different types. So, we're coming to saying,
right, so remember, we've got these four types. We've got our protein subunits. We've got our
attenuated live. Now, there are no attenuated live vaccines being used in the coronavirus
vaccines. We've got our DNA vaccines. We've got inactivated vaccines and we've got our viral and
where they combine the viral and the DNA vaccines. So, what are some of our vaccines? Let's quickly
run through them. So, what's interesting is to see what the different vaccines are and where they are
because that tells the story as well and who they were developed by. So, the first big one,
Covaxin, this is an inactivated virus and it wasn't developed by CEPI or Gavi or any of those guys,
but it was developed in India by the Bharat Biotech Institute in collaboration with the
Indian Council of Medical Research and the Indian National Institute of Virology. So,
that's been used in a lot of people, 110 million people, and it's really a traditional technology.
It's rather like the Ponyo vaccine. There is a problem though that it needs adjuvant. So,
aluminium, it's being another carrier way of getting more aluminium into everyone,
but it's an old inactivated vaccine. So, millions of people done that way.
Then we've got the Coronavac or Sinovac. So, this is Chinese, a Chinese vaccine.
Again, an inactivated virus,
and it's been used on trial in places like Brazil, Chile, Indonesia, Philippines, and Turkey,
and has had emergency use approval. Now, this is the one that around the world has been the most
up until the recent push with Pfizer is the most widely used COVID vaccine in the world as of July
21, 943 million doses, almost a billion doses of this one go out, but this is an inactivated one.
There's no genetic fiddle with this. It's an old fashioned inactivated one. It does have adjuvants
as all the inactivated ones will have, not overly expensive. Yeah, but it's only been approved for
use in those kinds of countries. You can't get it in Australia. Then there's the Sinopharm. So,
that's another inactivated COVID vaccine, another one coming from China, but this has come from the
Beijing Institute of Biological Products. So, again, being tried in all these different sort
of places, Argentina, Bahrain, Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, Peru, United Arab Emirates. So, again,
similar technology to the Coronavac and the Covaxin, and again,
I think by May, they'd given 2 million doses, 200 million approved.
So, they've been approved. So, in May, so that's not emergency use authorization, that's full
approval. So, there's a pretty picky there that when I get them through to you, that'll give the
viral vector vaccines. So, moving, talking in then to your
viral vector vaccines.
So the first one is your Sputnik.
So that's your Russian one.
Okay.
No connection with the other things.
So it's Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology.
So it's a combination.
It was the world's first registered
combination vector vaccine.
So they were pretty ahead of everything.
So V, so Sputnik V,
so V for victory,
and Sputnik in all.
So it's a satellite.
They fight the world's first artificial
around 59 countries.
But again, it was,
it did come out pretty quickly.
And so there were arguments,
how did it come out so quickly?
We don't know about safety.
We don't know about efficacy,
mass distribution.
Again, all of these other countries,
Russia, Argentina, Belarus, Hungary,
Serbia, Pakistan, Philippines,
United Arab Emirates,
registered and certified in 71 countries,
more than a billion doses ordered.
We're moving into the adenoviral groups,
so viral vector or vector group.
So this is where we start getting
the combinations again.
So Janssen and Janssen,
or the one in the US known as Johnson and Johnson.
So it was developed by Janssen vaccines
in the Netherlands.
That's why the name flips,
Janssen or Johnson and Johnson.
So again, a viral vector vaccine
using a virus to carry it in,
again, using the adenovirus,
but this one's using a human adenovirus.
This one's a human adenovirus
that's been modified
to make the gene for the spike protein.
So the immune system responds to that.
The advantages from people's perspective
of all your adenoviral vaccines,
is it only needs one dose.
So, whereas your other ones need multiple doses.
So obviously your US big vaccine companies
weren't terribly pleased about that.
Coming out with something that only needs
not good marketing.
So it had approval,
conditional approval,
emergency authorization for USA, Europe, UK.
But then it started turning up
this thrombotic thrombocytopenic syndrome
and Guillain-Barré.
So thrombotic thrombocytopenic syndrome
is where you lose your platelets,
where you get abnormal platelet action.
So you're clotting,
but then you lose your platelets
and so you're bleeding.
Guillain-Barré is an abnormal immune
immune thing that's affecting your spinal cord.
These things started to be reported.
So they then said,
oh, can't be used in anyone who's too young.
So it became preferential.
So isn't this convenient for Pfizer?
Preferential to use the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines
says the US CDC.
So it had all these inactivated vaccines
that could be used.
Protein subunit vaccines,
but no, it's preferential to use the mRNA vaccines
for anyone over 18.
And again, the AstraZeneca, very similar story.
It's again, a viral vector vaccine,
again, an adenovirus,
but this one's a chimpanzee adenovirus.
And this was the one that was developed
by the Oxford University
in conjunction with AstraZeneca,
British, Swedish, and the UK.
So it's a viral vector vaccine.
AstraZeneca, British, Swedish company, AstraZeneca.
It was effective.
This one was a two dose thing,
but it was set up as a $2 dose non-profit.
But again, it was...
But what's interesting is when you analyze the VigiBase,
your thrombotic thrombotic events
do also occur with Moderna,
do also occur with Pfizer,
as do all these other things.
But AstraZeneca got wiped off pretty much.
And from a purely marketing financial thing,
you can really see why we can't have the whole world
vaccinated with a $2 vaccine
when we can charge the whole world $50.
So by default, really,
the Pfizer vaccine became a major one
in the whole of the Western world.
You see, by convincing everyone
that the other ones were more dangerous,
then they could more easily slide under the rug
and not admit to the dangers for the mRNA.
So, but just coming back to why the AstraZeneca
might have caused this problem.
So with remembering that all of these...
synthetic DNA, synthetic RNA. They've manufactured stuff. Okay, they've manufactured stuff.
So what have they done with the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein for the AstraZeneca?
They've linked it with some stuff called tissue plasminogen activator. Well, that's a bit silly
when you think it through, because tissue plasminogen activator is what the body uses to
activate your tissues in the beginning of the clotting cascade. So it's going to activate
your cells, and it did. Other things that they link things with that they often don't think too
much about that will cause other problems. So it ended up that the AstraZeneca got suspended
either temporarily or partially or fully in numerous countries. So South Africa,
most of Europe, Canada, Indonesia, Australia, Malaysia. So either a full suspension
or just said to only be used for a small number of indications.
I'm picky for the mRNA vaccine. So then we come to the spike vaccine. So we haven't got
much of that in Australia. It's kind of starting to come in. So this is the Moderna vaccine. So
again, another US company, and this is another one that was funded. So covered by CEPI, funded
and developed by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
So NIAID, the National Institute of Allergy. And this of course is one of those nice controversial
US agencies headed up by you all know who, and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development
Authority. So this already had some interesting connections, CEPI, NIAID. Okay. So some places
say it can be used in anyone over 12, others say it can be used in anyone over 18. And of course,
they singled out Australia as the place to trial it in children, two or three doses.
So this is the first of our mRNA vaccines. So it's modified. So it's not just that it's messenger
RNA. Remember I said earlier, the thing in our body is that mRNA disappears quickly.
Our body makes it briefly, wipes it because it doesn't want these ongoing messages.
So they nucleoside modified the messenger RNA, they had to, to make it hang around.
That encodes for the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2, but they've altered that as well.
So the coding of the spike protein is altered. And it's encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles.
So straight away, we've got three points of problem.
And this is before we have anything else that might be added to these vaccines.
So it was halted in Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark,
in young people because they discovered myocarditis, pericarditis occurring more frequently.
But then kind of got restarted. So this messenger nucleoside messenger alteration,
this modified messenger RNA, what they did was they stuck into proline molecules.
Proline is an amino acid. We have lots of it in our body. It in itself isn't a problem,
but it's an amino acid in our connective tissue,
particularly. Why is it in our connective tissue? Because proline has this ability to cross link.
So what they did by sticking proline into the messenger RNA, they basically made it that this
messenger RNA was going to be sticky. Not so easy to break down. They made it sticky.
So they call them stabilising mutations. So the original amino acids in the messenger RNA are
replaced with proline. They make it sticky, so it won't break down. Then once the proteins
extend, expelled from the cells detected by the immune system. So their drug delivery system,
they call it the LNP, lipid nanoparticle system. So it is a pigulated lipid nanoparticle system,
pig. Polyethylene glycol. Polyethylene glycol, otherwise known to most people as antifreeze,
a synthetic lipid stuff. Why would they want to use antifreeze in the synthetic lipids for the
nanoparticle? Because it's a very stable thing that helps give it more stability. The messenger
RNA was desperately temperature sensitive. So that's part of why they have to keep it in
all this cold storage. But they tried to make it a bit more...
able to cope with things by sticking it in the impregnated lipid nanoparticles so that the
lipid nanoparticle was going to be stable at the cold temperatures the mRNA needed to be stable.
So another synthetic thing and people do have allergy to PEG, polyethylene glycol, well documented.
So what else did they do to it? So the mRNA sequence has got 4,000 nucleotides, 4,000
amino acids in it. That's an awful lot of places, that's an awful lot of things,
so 4,000. So the other thing they did,
one of the other things they did was they substituted all, so there are four
amino nucleic acid bases that make up our DNA and RNA and uridine is one of those.
So they altered the uridine and replaced it with stuff called N1 methyl pseudouridine.
We don't yet know exactly why or exactly what that's going to do,
but it can't be good. It's not a natural nucleic acid found in our cells. So given that it's been
So given that it's been put into a messenger RNA that our cells are being forced to keep on making
and that it's going to hang around a lot longer than messenger RNA should do,
there are certainly going to be some kind of problems from that. So the other thing they
did was that they flanked this messenger, these uridines, they put on either side of the uridine
some other stuff and part of what they did was an untranslated region, an artificial region,
derived from our human haemoglobin molecule.
Why the heck would you want to put messengering or copying of our human haemoglobin molecule into
this unless you're looking to find some kind of way to have us be making antibodies to our
human haemoglobin? It's strange. So there's something around the human alpha globin gene
there as well. All in these nice synthetic nanoparticles. So they also have cholesterol,
they've got the polyethylene glycol, they've got a synthetic phosphocholine and another
substance called SM-102. Don't yet know what that one is. So again, all these modifications.
So you start to get the feel that they try to sell you that this is pure and all we're doing
is giving you the message to make the spike protein so that you'll make antibodies to your
spike protein. You start to delve a bit deeper and you see that there's a lot else going on here.
It is simply not that clean. So then we come to the Cominati, the Pfizer BioNTech and this really
is the big guy now because this is the one that is being pushed out everywhere. This is the one
that's being of course run through Israel on their third dose, heading for their fourth dose now.
Evidently so the same things happen in Chile. Chile has also run fourth dose.
Australia is pushing for the third dose. It's being pushed everywhere. So this is your German
biotech company BioNTech collaborating with the US Pfizer. Some places for greater than
five-year-old. Well Australia is now rolling out in our greater than five-year-olds. Other places
are saying 12 years, others are saying 16 years. What's interesting is the World Health Organization
is saying it should not be used in anyone under 12.
So again it's a nucleoside modified mRNA and it's encapsulated in these lipid nanoparticles.
This one was the first to be cleared for regular use. As in it's no longer emergency
use authorization, it is regular use. If they can get it approved for regular use in children,
which is what the companies are trying to do in the US, we're still kind of emergency in
Australia. It hasn't really been fully approved but it's being rolled out.
The issue is that in 1986 the vaccine industry had it passed through the US government that
they are totally indemnified against any side effects of any of the childhood vaccines.
Note that any of the childhood vaccines. If you can get Comirnaty approved as a child vaccine,
then it doesn't matter whether it's used in adults as well or not, they are totally indemnified.
So this is part of the push to get it down into children because then they can market
it through everywhere and there is literally no comeback anywhere from anyone.
So think that through if you're going to buy another product somewhere.
trying to sell your car. No, we haven't tested the car. No, we don't know how it runs. Yeah,
look, it's new. We just made it. Yeah, it's new. It's great. You know, no, we haven't tested it.
Okay, well, what about if there's a problem with it? No, sorry, if there's a problem with it? No,
no, you know, no, there's just not a problem with it. No, no, you know, would you buy that thing?
You know, of course we wouldn't. But this is what we're doing with these vaccines.
So September 21, 1.5 billion have been shipped worldwide. They're going to make 2.5 billion
doses by March. And this is a vaccine that has a logistical challenge. It's not expensive for
them to make. It's very cheap for them to make. It's very expensive for all the countries who
go to have it with the logistics and storage because it has to be kept within this very
narrow temperature range. They have to have very good refrigeration facilities. So in other words,
we've made it cheaply, we're making good money, we now pass the buck to you.
The whole buck, the cost of it, they're looking after the people who were damaged by it.
What's happening here? Why won't you move forward? Okay, so what are the official side effects? And
of course, this is a very, very iffy story, because nowhere has there been really good
official side effect taking. So in May 21, experts commissioned by the Norwegian Medicines Agency
concluded that the vaccine was the cause of death for 10 frail elderly patients in Norwegian nursing
homes. So they made the recommendation that people with very short life expectancies have little to
gain from the vaccination and have a real risk of adverse reactions in the last days of life
and of dying earlier. Well, surprise, surprise. We all know that this, in fact, is the group
that have been dying very quickly from the vaccines. Yes, they're at higher risk of the COVID,
but it appears they're at higher risk from the vaccines. Myocarditis. So June 21, Israel's
Ministry of Health officially announced a relationship between the second dose and
myocarditis in your 16 to 30-year-old men. Now, big issues, and this is one thing Dr. Peter McCulloch
was coming out with, big issues around the definition, you know, how they're diagnosing it.
Most of these cases are absolutely being missed. So they said that there was only 55 per million
and that 95 percent of them were mild. By April 21, more are being reported,
mostly male over the age of 16. We are now, medically, they are now using cardiac MRIs
to look at your myocarditis patients. So this is a very specific form of MRI that is a gallium-gated
MRI. And interestingly, New South Wales, Australia now has a specific Medicare item number for
cardiac MRIs. It's a new item number. It's a new deal. It wasn't meaning to be, we never,
I've not done one in my entire medical career prior to.
But what Dr. McCulloch reported in a case series that has been written,
every one of the young men that they did a cardiac-gated MRI on showed damage on the MRI,
the cardiac MRI. Most of these young men had not been diagnosed. They presented just with fatigue,
a bit of shortness of breath, maybe a bit of chest pain, but really not much. And yet,
every one of them on the cardiac MRI had damage. So I think the myocarditis issue is way, way,
bigger than it's officially reported. So again, this, what have they done with it? Very,
very similar to the Moderna. It's got these proline things to make it sticky so it won't break
down. It's got the altered, they've got, they've pulled out all uridine, replaced it with this
methyl-3 pseudouridyl, which I do have to search out exactly what that's doing.
Yep. So that's that vaccine and the lipid nanoparticles. Okay. So what's interesting,
who, where are the countries that this is predominantly being sent to? It is predominantly
all your Western European countries. So Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, yes, Chile, Costa Rica,
Ecuador, Hong Kong, Iraq, Israel, John Craig, Malaysia, Panama, Philippines, Singapore,
United States, Vietnam. So there's certainly, it's predominantly into the West.
So is there any alternative?
So as you, I'm not sure if it's the same thing in New Zealand, but certainly in Australia,
the Novavax is coming out now and this is, you know, everyone's been hailing, hey, Novavax,
Novavax, this is our safe one, can we do Novavax?
But as I touched on right in the beginning, Novavax was also a CEPI funded vaccine.
So it's coming out of the same group and out of the same headspaces.
Now it is a subunit vaccine.
When I spoke, going back to the beginning, I spoke about your whole vaccines that could
be attenuated or inactivated.
I spoke about the subunit vaccines where they've taken a precise little bit out and amplified
that.
So this is a subunit vaccine.
Dr. Robynne, could I just ask you something concerning that?
Can I finish talking?
Questions when I finish.
So it's a subunit vaccine, but it's conjugated.
So they actually call it a recombinant nanoparticle vaccine.
So it's not just a subunit, but it's nanoparticles and it's recombinant.
They have engineered and made it.
So it's a virus-like particle, but also a subunit.
So how have they done this?
They have taken a bacteria, well, bacillovirus and plasmid and engineered it to do a modified
spike protein.
Again, it's not the straight spike protein.
It's an auto spike protein.
Again, it's got the proline amino acid residues to make it sticky.
So it's going to hang around.
Then they stick that into your moss and then the moss grow it and make the spike protein
and then they harvest that.
Then they stick it again into the lipid nanoparticles.
So it's straight away, we've got those two things.
We've got the proline amino acids to make it sticky, make it hang around.
And we've got the lipid nanoparticles, which are going to take it into the ovary, take
it throughout the body, take it into the brain.
And then in addition to that, it's got an adjuvant.
I spoke earlier about the adjuvants there to irritate the immune system.
It's got an adjuvant.
It's not aluminium this time.
It's a plant-based soap-like thing called saponin, a type of saponin, which is again
going to help break your cell membranes.
So it's not as clean as we might like.
So yeah, Australia, the three types, we've got the AstraZeneca and again, this picture
you'll get the biotech and then now coming the Novavax.
Now there is one other, we would like to think kid on the block maybe, if we can ever get
off the ground.
So this was developed by Professor Nikolai Petrovsky, you've probably all heard of it,
the University of Flinders, South Australia, a company called Vaccine.
And that's been trialled overseas very effectively, Iran, we're into the millions.
So it's been through the trials, phase three trials and a higher efficacy than the World
Health Organisation set the bar for, less inflammatory, better safety profile.
They don't expect heart inflammation, but the problem is going to be getting it through
the TGA here in Australia.
So it's on a GoFundMe campaign for it.
So this is back with old technology.
So this is a recombinant protein base.
So it's a protein subunit, it's recombinant, but it is totally computer synthesised where
they took computer models of the spike protein and in the ACE receptor and found out what
combination was going to link to that.
So it does, it has been shown to reduce the disease, it does block shedding, and it does
block transmission.
It does still have an adjuvant, but what's interesting is the adjuvant they've used is
actually an anti-inflammatory adjuvant, rather than a pro-inflammatory, and it's trademarked
called Advax, and it comes from inulin, and inulin we know in the gut, it's a different,
that's what we're used to seeing, inulin.
So it makes the antibodies, it activates the T-cells and helps to stop the attachment
to the ACE receptor.
So this is blocking the viral attachment into the ACE receptor.
Sorry, could you please say the name of that one again, I missed it.
COVAX-19.
It's not here yet, we're trying to, there's a GoFundMe campaign, he's having to raise
money to get it through TGA.
To be honest, I don't like the chances, because it doesn't fit everybody's agendas.
It's too clean.
Okay.
It is traditional.
clean, cleaner, old vaccine, old style vaccine.
Well, modern technology applying to an old style concept
of subunit, protein subunit.
I don't think it's gonna get through.
So there's a slide you'll get to see on the COVAX action.
COVAX-19, not to be confirmed, confused with the name.
And this is what's confusing about all these names.
There is another organisation called COVAX
as compared to the COVAX-19 vaccine,
which is Vaccines Global Access.
So this is, again, a group of these guys.
This is Gavi linking up with CEPI,
linking up with WHO, linking up with UNICEF,
founded in April, 2020,
to get their chosen vaccines out into the world.
So it's their chosen vaccines.
And intriguingly, who are our Pfizer shareholders?
You've probably all heard of BlackRock and Vanguard.
So they're popping up there again.
That's a whole separate story.
So what am I saying with all of that?
There's a beautiful slide that you will get.
So I will send you all the picky slides
and you can pore over those.
I would have really liked to have took...
Well, are you all surviving?
Can you stand another five or 10 minutes
while I see if I can actually make the computers work
to get those colored things happening?
Because it should.
It was supposed to have emailed it to me
so I could open it up.
So I'll try that again.
Try and see why it wouldn't do it.
And then we'll run through,
because it really does make a lot more sense
when you see you actually can understand
what the B-cells and everything are doing.
Hasn't attached.
All right, let's try that again.
All right, just flipping it here
and see if it's done its thing.
I don't know why it hasn't done its thing.
All right, I don't want to have us all attached here too long.
I don't understand why that is not working.
Is your internet connected on the other laptop?
I've got two separate connection systems.
One's going off phone hotspot
and the other is going off satellite.
Hotspot might be a bit slow as well.
You know, like sometimes attachments,
it doesn't work very well with hotspot.
The hotspot is what's running your one
that I'm talking to you on.
The other one is being run on satellite.
Just keep refreshing.
Technology is fantastic.
Let's start that all over again.
Just while you're waiting,
can you answer the Novavax question, the person asked?
Yeah, yeah, so right, that was Robin, wasn't it?
So what was it?
Hopefully I can concentrate on this
and answer at the same time.
So far away, ask me.
No, you're right.
I apologise for that.
Just that George Christensen has been as an MP.
has been you know really fighting against all of the stuff that's going on as we're talking about
and he said that you know he announced on his Facebook page that Novavax was available and
he said that he'd asked Dr Peter McAuliffe about it personally and Dr McAuliffe said yeah no
problems. So that's not that's not what he said and that's not what he said on the thing that we
we're just in here now. Yeah I know that's why I was just. He is coming from a different angle as
well. He isn't focused on the the lipid nanoparticles. He isn't focused and hasn't
mentioned at all the proline residues being changed but what he does has said is that
because it is a more narrow protein subunit he thinks that efficacy is going to wane quickly.
Oh okay.
And the other name of that Covax-19 is it spikogen spikogen is that yes that's the one
that's the one I do not know what what that is doing or why it is not doing anything
does not make sense.
I just don't seem to be able to get unless I try look let me try oh no that's right it didn't.
Why don't you just send them to Elyse and Elyse can send them all to us.
We'll let you any other questions I'll let I'll send those I'll spend a bit of time and send those
pretty pickies off to we'll make a separate PowerPoint and send you all those pretty
pickies and you can pour over them in your leisure and then maybe we can if we need if
you want to talk through them next time we'll have systems working. Now what I'd like to do
for next week is really start to talk into the mechanism of action of side effects because
really my heart is what I'd like if all of you wouldn't mind doing this if you know if you feel
on your heart to do this what I'd like to see happen is a whole heap of people who have already
taken the vaccine and not sure about it or you know they've got side effects there or they're
having to think about do we go and do the third if everyone can have one or maybe two people come
and sitting in with you so that I can then talk through the vaccine side effects and then talk
about hey what can we do you know I think we're really going to be able to get some of this
message out does that sound cool everyone be in on that yep so that'll be my focus next time yes
we'll you know we'll do more teaching where I really talk in detail over what the mechanisms
are of why or what we think the mechanisms are of why is causing side effects and what are the main
there are made several main categories of side effects that we're seeing and most of the side
effects can be put into into these categories but why why that is what what can we do about
about it what time would you think that would be when we're inviting people well I would
well maybe I could do the first part maybe I could do the first part on on teaching and plan
an hour on teaching in detail around all the side effects but then bring your friends in
and say look you know and then they can start you know with a few questions and then I can
talk into suggestions okay these are the things we do in essence your management because everything
is largely or pretty much everything is being caused by the spike protein and notice I haven't
gone anywhere near talking about graphene oxide at this point we're still not able to confirm that
deal we can confirm that there was a patent put out for graphene oxide to be used as a vaccine
adjuvant we can confirm that patent and there have been universities as you those who are watching
you know around the world particularly in Italy that have said they think they can see it and
then we did lose the Austrian Nobel Prize laureate who did come on and speak about it and was murdered
a couple of hours after so that all of those things make it very suspicious that graphene
oxide is in the vaccines but it's not you know we can't verify it like the other things we can
absolutely verify so so maybe the first part I'll talk about you know the details of the
mechanisms of why things are happening and then let's let's plan so the second half let's say an
hour in then we'll open up and get people in and then they can ask questions and then we can say
okay we can do this to help we can do that to help but the essence of managing the side effects
is around it's similar to your treating the
protein per se. So you're thinking for them to sit in for the first hour so they hear about all the
side effects first before they're ready for questions or come in after? You're probably
going to have to play that by ear with your people. Yeah okay. Someone who's got themselves
desperately distressed and you know it'll flip them out completely to hear about you know what
all the side effects are will then know they're a person to bring in to say well what about this and
what about that. But if it's someone who's at that stage where they're really now ready to learn
and understand what has happened then yes let them come in for the whole lot.
Okay.
Dr. Robin the people that we invite will they be able to join
where they are on Zoom or do they have to be here?
Yeah that's the problem it's a closed link because it's the one link that Raising Royalty
use for the entire course we wouldn't be able to do that. So I think and I think too it'll be
better if possible to have them in with you again so that they're right with them and you can then
better read if they're having a problem with what we're saying if you know I think have
them with you would be best. Yeah because she had to go to another Zoom.
So yeah okay.
Yes and certainly yeah Catherine we can't get the the sign of Axe in Australia but I think a lot of
we do need to be mindful of who is in charge of what countries. You have a look at who Greg Hunt
was part of Davos right so you know if there's a few minor important things like this you know
Justine Turard was World Economic Forum Youth Leaders year whatever it was I forget which year
but alongside Trudeau so the same year so you know we need to be mindful of those things you
look at the which of the countries who are doing what and you will you will see that it all tends
to gel. So I have someone who is she ended up in hospital and has been told that she's going to
need ongoing monitoring for liver failure and immune issues who would be really good to sit
in on this but I can't have her here with me because she lives two hours away so how would
I be able to invite her next week? I don't know you might have to put a question to to
Elisa raising what we can do okay but that's the sort of person because for both I would like her
I also want to give these people an opportunity to tell their story yeah because there's healing
for them in that even just being because for most of these people for many of these people
the world around does not believe or doesn't want to know or whatever right so so for a lot
of these people it's yeah there's a validation and healing for them and her daughter has some
loop person that had majorly fled up from her getting the jab as well yeah so she
needs help with that too yeah yeah so so certainly you know I think if we get a couple of people you
know people like that in and have them tell their story look at my it might even happen that
I want to hear anything yeah I want to give those people enough time
what we might do what we might do is actually see start off with people telling their stories
let's do it that way let's start off with people telling their stories
and then I can you know go into the suggestions for them of for them what they can do and then
depending on how we're going time-wise we can either then continue and I'll go into the details
and I'll go into the details of what the system the things are to watch for and you know and
and how it works or we can shift that to the following week but let's give I think let's
open this up to give give people around the opportunity to come in and and tell their story
and then hear some things of what what can be done and for others to hear you know what can be done
okay oh yeah I'll contact Elyse and see how we can get them on the zoom yeah yeah yeah so contact
Elyse and see what she thinks of how how we can do that yeah
Yeah.
Oh, excellent.
Yeah.
And yeah, we do have to get people,
yes, 30 leaders in the place worldwide.
Yes, and he was very proud
about how we'd got all these undercover people
in all these places.
It's just so evil.
Yeah.
So they'll suggest how...
So in terms of this question back up here,
am I saying the jab could be out of the system in 12 months?
We don't know.
We do not know how long the system,
it is going to stay in for.
That is the problem.
We do not know.
Certainly we know that at least for four months afterwards,
the spike protein is being expressed
on the surface of the exosomes.
So exosomes are packages of genetic material
that our own body makes as a way of messaging
to other cells and to get rid of stuff.
You know, it's like, I want this out.
So we know that spike protein is on the surface of these
for at least four months afterwards and, you know,
being excreted.
We don't know how long after that,
but one of the researchers thinks that the spike protein
could still be being made for 12 months after each vaccine.
So, but we don't know.
We haven't had 12 months to be measuring.
You know, we don't know.
So, yeah.
Yeah.
Okay.
All right, everyone.
So, that will do.
Yes, our manufacturing.
Yes, it's great, isn't it?
We're going to start making it on hand here.
It's even better.
And yet, you know, we, so anyway,
we've done massive politics of money.
The bottom line is, as I went,
on the money behind the pharmaceutical industry,
you know, you get to see the story.
And interestingly, BlackRock, who, you know,
are behind Pfizer.
BlackRock, as an investment company,
handle $4 trillion worth of funds,
and they are bigger in the assets that they handle
than the world's largest banks.
So it's been regarded as the most powerful financial entity
on the planet.
So you start looking at all of those things,
and then all these other things make a bit of sense,
don't they?
Okay.
All right.
Thank you all.
Sorry, we ran over a bit.
What we will do in future is try and decide,
really felt this after last week.
Three hours is too long for everyone.
So we'll pair it in generally to about a two hour,
unless we find we really are just using the time.
That's okay.
But we'll plan for two hours.
That's more livable for everybody.
We can make the things more worthwhile, I think.
So that was something I discussed with, you know,
raising royalty during the week.
We decided that's our better way to do it.
Okay?
Yeah.
So see you all next week.
We will keep...
Yeah.
Could I just quickly ask you a question?
Can I email you with a question
rather than take up the time of everybody here or not?
The questions are within...
Unless people want to actually move outside
and I turn it into consult time,
questions are part of what we do in here.
That's the whole reason we have this set up.
Okay.
And that way also...
Yeah, I have...
Well, fine.
An integrated doctor that I went to said
I had mercury in my system and I needed to detox.
And I was just wondering about that type of detox
and what would be good.
Yeah, sure.
We will get into whole stories of heavy metal detox
and all of that down the track.
Your first way is to see...
There are New Zealand practices
who do a thing called an oligoscan.
They are available in New Zealand.
So look that up.
I'm in Australia.
Yeah, oligoscan.
And that gives you an actual measure
in your peripheral tissues of what your nutrients are.
And that'll show what's sitting peripherally.
It doesn't show you what's deep.
Then you need a good practitioner
who can actually help you on that process
of working it through.
But my take is basically
that the more you nourish the body with good minerals,
like you put in the good, the body will get out the bad,
putting it really simply.
But yeah, there certainly are...
There's a lot more intensive protocols you can do.
At home stuff, you can do things
like the electrolyte foot bars,
putting your feet in those foot bars,
mineralized foot bars.
That'll help draw it out your feet.
You can use foot patches.
But cleaning the diet out.
It's all an energy equation.
It's all about how much energy does the body have available?
How much nutrition does it have available?
You clean your body out of chemicals.
Don't have other exposure to chemicals.
Have the body energy is good.
Don't have wifi, all of this stuff.
So the body energies are good.
Then super nutrition.
and the body can clean out what shouldn't be there.
Okay.
There's a thing called T-S-R spray.
T-S-R-S, T-R-S.
Yeah, T-R-S spray.
Is that something?
You can use that.
Yeah.
Whatever you're going to do,
I suggest you find a way of monitoring.
So that's why I suggest an oligoscan.
You want to monitor it?
The oligoscan, I'll type it in.
That's what I get all my patients to do, is oligoscans.
And that way you've got a way of monitoring
what your tissues are actually doing with your minerals
and your vitamins and your minerals, okay?
Okay.
You don't want to waste money on stuff
if it's not doing anything.
So you do want some way of monitoring.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Appreciate it.
Okay.
Bless you.
Okay.
Wonderful.
So we'll meet you all next week at two.
And we'll bring along someone
and we'll start off with stories and people
and let them know, look,
this is where we want to hear the stories.
We want to validate your stories, hear your stories.
And then we can start to make some suggestions
around what can we do to help them?
Because there's going to be a lot of this.
Okay?
All right.
Thank you.
Thank you so much, Dr. Robin.
Bless you.
Bless you all.
So yeah, we lost a lot of people in the way.
It does get too long.
So anyway, next time we'll be,
we'll keep it in tight
and I think that'll make it better for everyone.
Okay?
Thank you.
Bye.
Bye, Robin.
Thank you.
Bless you all.
Thank you.
you