Speaker 1: They set a fair you take the fact, read the
Speaker 1: label twice, then look pasty xy your buddy, you're tall,
Speaker 1: You're right to know.
Speaker 2: Ask talks questions.
Speaker 1: We don't take it.
Speaker 3: Whoa latch to the fuck?
Speaker 4: So touch throat.
Speaker 1: Take SARTs of your health page for Roll Well Talk,
Speaker 1: Tell Time, Laura, Paw Talk, Thann Hot Talk, Top Ton.
Speaker 5: Sweir Uside, Hi, and welcome back to another episode of
Speaker 5: Plorable Nation. I'm your host of Plural Jenna and Today,
Speaker 5: ladies and gentlemen, my beautiful, intelligent, fascinating bestiboo Nurse Nicle
Speaker 5: is back for another hard hitting episode that you, ladies
Speaker 5: and gentlemen probably do not know a whole lot about.
Speaker 5: We're calling it shot up just because it may contain
Speaker 5: some things on there about vaccines. Yeah no, So, my
Speaker 5: beautiful friend, how are you today?
Speaker 6: Love? I am fantastic. We just had a great fourth
Speaker 6: of July celebrating our independence in America two hundred and
Speaker 6: fiftieth birthday. Very very very blessed. We live in a
Speaker 6: great country, although it has its own issues, but so
Speaker 6: it's a good time. And then now I get to
Speaker 6: record with you and talk about a really important topic.
Speaker 6: So life is good. Let's do this.
Speaker 5: So we have this episode is going to be a
Speaker 5: mix of things for people. And so the first thing
Speaker 5: we're going to talk about is the hpp vaccine Big House.
Speaker 5: There's been a whole bunch of stories that they are
Speaker 5: trying to make the HPV vaccination.
Speaker 2: Available for infants, ladies and gentlemen.
Speaker 5: And so this is a hot topic for me because,
Speaker 5: as you guys probably know, and I've told you before,
Speaker 5: we were reporting agency for the state for you know,
Speaker 5: like vercella vaccine and you know, all these other things.
Speaker 5: But we witnessed a whole bunch of stuff after the
Speaker 5: HPV vaccine was rolled out and put on the you
Speaker 5: know schedule, and I was getting a hold of state going, look,
Speaker 5: we're seeing some issues here. There's some trends here. We're
Speaker 5: seeing a lot more cancers in people. Uh, what's going on?
Speaker 5: Because this is supposed to prevent berberical cancer. Thought it
Speaker 5: was marketed for right, and the State was like, nothing
Speaker 5: to see here exactly.
Speaker 6: Well, and again we're learning, you know, more and more
Speaker 6: as time goes on, things that are being approved by
Speaker 6: the FTA and beyond are less than safe and effective.
Speaker 6: So it warrants a conversation and to be called out
Speaker 6: on the carpet when we see these things, and then
Speaker 6: the litigation and different things that are coming from this,
Speaker 6: and then the agencies you know, and organizations, these manufacturing
Speaker 6: companies double down and then try to push it on
Speaker 6: even younger and younger. You know. It's like, wait a second,
Speaker 6: So this is why it's so important, why when you
Speaker 6: talk about it.
Speaker 5: Well, and the interesting thing about this kind of like
Speaker 5: the heptitis fed vaccine, right, is that this is for
Speaker 5: cervical cancer gen up towards sexually transmitted right. So first
Speaker 5: when it came out, it was like, oh, well, you know,
Speaker 5: kids that are in like high school need to get this.
Speaker 5: And then they're like, hmmm, let's lower the age now.
Speaker 5: In the material itself on this vaccination, it says eleven
Speaker 5: and twelve years old. However, they decided because a lot
Speaker 5: of other countries moved their age to age nine. Now
Speaker 5: it's recommended here for age nine, although their literature still
Speaker 5: says eleven and twelve year olds, because they want to
Speaker 5: get you before you get busy, exactly.
Speaker 6: They're trying to capture what they say is the age
Speaker 6: group before puberty. In the event child, Yes, child is
Speaker 6: leaning towards promiscuity or experimenting, whatever the case they try
Speaker 6: to bring up to say, you know, hey, they could
Speaker 6: be more at risk for this at this particular age
Speaker 6: because of hormones and puberty and all that other stuff.
Speaker 5: Right, So it's funny to me that, like I said,
Speaker 5: they've moved us the goalpost on this multiple times, which
Speaker 5: they do with a lot of vaccinations. But the reason
Speaker 5: why they moved us to age nine here in the
Speaker 5: United States is because they're specialists that they go to
Speaker 5: for all things important, right like Bill Gates, they you
Speaker 5: know whatever, They're like, well, if we move it down
Speaker 5: to age nine, then there's a better chance that there's
Speaker 5: a bigger completion rate for the vaccination if you start
Speaker 5: them earlier, because they want to make sure you get
Speaker 5: multiple doses in before you get out of high school.
Speaker 6: Yes, which is a it's a multi dose series. And
Speaker 6: exactly like you said, the timeline and how people are
Speaker 6: more compliant with completing those doses really does matter depending
Speaker 6: on what they say. The experts, as I use air
Speaker 6: quotes with the age of the child. And you know,
Speaker 6: how often do our children usually go to the doctors,
Speaker 6: usually when they're being brought by the parent. The adolescent age.
Speaker 6: You know, they're more apt to be shown for their
Speaker 6: wellness visits, to be compliant for school and all these
Speaker 6: other things. So what's a better place to get them
Speaker 6: than right there.
Speaker 5: Well, that has been like the center focal point of
Speaker 5: the discussion for moving it to infants is because again
Speaker 5: the vaccination rate, they figured they'd have better complients, better
Speaker 5: completion for it. But they're also arguing that it's it
Speaker 5: would be great to give it to infants because you
Speaker 5: should always vaccinate for or sexually transmitted.
Speaker 2: Disease before you get it right.
Speaker 5: But they're saying because babies have a stronger immune response
Speaker 5: than older kids, that's why we should start giving it
Speaker 5: to babies.
Speaker 2: Okay, yeah, now this is in the works.
Speaker 5: They're talking about it, they're throwing it around right now.
Speaker 2: It is not approved for infants, but do you see
Speaker 2: this happening.
Speaker 6: Oh absolutely, it's going to be just like hepatitis B,
Speaker 6: and they're going to try to make it a thing
Speaker 6: when it's not, and they're going to try to push
Speaker 6: that we get these poor innocent children with an infants
Speaker 6: with barely any immune system to be caught in the
Speaker 6: wheel of you know, propaganda and again which we which
Speaker 6: we'll continue in this conversation, the harm that we've seen
Speaker 6: with these vaccines. Right.
Speaker 5: So this sounds stupid to me, all right, but this
Speaker 5: is one of the arguments that the people that are
Speaker 5: pro six months old getting this is not only the
Speaker 5: strong immune response, but simplifying the vaccine schedule for providers, right,
Speaker 5: because oh my gosh, if they have to stagger and
Speaker 5: actually think of what vaccines are specific to what age
Speaker 5: group and whatever, it's too hard for them to figure
Speaker 5: out and they don't have time to figure it out.
Speaker 5: So doing this helps to simplify, but it also goes
Speaker 5: for the completion rates. And here's my favorite, it's for
Speaker 5: better global health logistics.
Speaker 6: What a fancy public health awareness propaganda line.
Speaker 2: Aha, wow, okay, yeah, because.
Speaker 5: Other countries are not as privileged as we are here,
Speaker 5: and so it's really hard to capture people living in
Speaker 5: the Congo or whatever, or African communities, Indian communities, whatever,
Speaker 5: And so that was their whole push, is that they
Speaker 5: want to make this a global thing. So we you know,
Speaker 5: and a lot of cultures they marry off their children,
Speaker 5: right it's nine or younger.
Speaker 6: So, which sounds like a problem that respectfully needs to
Speaker 6: be dealt with, but also has nothing to do with
Speaker 6: what we do over here per se. And so but
Speaker 6: I guess it, Okay, if we're talking, we're gonna play
Speaker 6: Devil's advocate. That can go for a lot of the
Speaker 6: vaccines because maybe in other countries they aren't as developed
Speaker 6: or don't have as many medical advancements. I mean, we
Speaker 6: do want to be realistic in acknowledging that that can exist.
Speaker 6: But we're talking in the United States, a first world
Speaker 6: country where we don't practice child marriage and things like that,
Speaker 6: and you know, try to promote and teach better sexual education,
Speaker 6: and you know, awareness that that would not be something
Speaker 6: you'd want to push because again, what is the the
Speaker 6: rate HPV has over two hundred strains? How are we
Speaker 6: nailing this down here to say for sure that this
Speaker 6: is actually going to cover the appropriate strains? What is
Speaker 6: the risk versus benefit? And we're talking again the likelihood?
Speaker 6: What is the likelihood? I mean, we're talking we need
Speaker 6: some percentages.
Speaker 5: Here well, And I want to say when they focus
Speaker 5: on strains, not just for the HPV vaccine, but with
Speaker 5: any vaccination, which we're going to get into some of
Speaker 5: that in a while. But when guard to sell first
Speaker 5: came out, it was gard to sell three, right, means
Speaker 5: out of two hundred strands it treated or or excuse me,
Speaker 5: I can't say treated, supposed to prevent three out.
Speaker 2: Of the two hundred.
Speaker 5: Now it's gard to sell nine on the market, so
Speaker 5: still nine out of two hundred.
Speaker 6: So let me get this straight. We started with the three,
Speaker 6: now we're up to nine. Are we suggesting that there's
Speaker 6: additional cancers that maybe continue to unfold, that maybe this
Speaker 6: vaccine wasn't originally protecting in the first place. I mean,
Speaker 6: if we're giving these to children as young as nine
Speaker 6: years old, and for the listeners, it is boys and girl,
Speaker 6: right it was.
Speaker 2: Now which when they started it was just females.
Speaker 6: That is right, it was If they're pushing this on
Speaker 6: these children and now we're still seeing more problems with
Speaker 6: different cancers, I mean, I don't know. Are they suggesting
Speaker 6: that those cancers didn't exist before or they just didn't
Speaker 6: encompass it into the vaccine. You know, it just seems
Speaker 6: like another way to be able to add more stuff
Speaker 6: to it, to then say okay, here's here's what's up
Speaker 6: and coming. This might protect you or not you know,
Speaker 6: were these things that were already there and we just
Speaker 6: didn't see it as a problem then, I guess is
Speaker 6: what I'm trying to say. Were those particular strains there
Speaker 6: when the three came out, but they were not focusing
Speaker 6: so much on them because they weren't maybe a problem,
Speaker 6: and now they are.
Speaker 2: Well, And here's the thing.
Speaker 5: They have to identify different strains of stuff, right, just
Speaker 5: like they have different strains of.
Speaker 2: The flu every year.
Speaker 5: And people probably do not know this, but your flu
Speaker 5: shot will change every year because they guestimate and that's
Speaker 5: not a joke what strain is going to be the
Speaker 5: most viral strain or whatever, and that's what they gear
Speaker 5: the flu shot to every year.
Speaker 6: And why that is so bad.
Speaker 2: That is why.
Speaker 5: People will take the vaccine and they'll still get sick. Right,
Speaker 5: They'll still get the flu because guess what, people, it
Speaker 5: does not protect against everything. Same thing with HBB correct
Speaker 5: has nine out of two hundred strands.
Speaker 2: You know what I'm saying exactly.
Speaker 5: So here's some questions that I think most people with
Speaker 5: a critical thought process would think about. Right, So, if
Speaker 5: you're going to force six months old to get this
Speaker 5: or even children that are getting it now, at nine,
Speaker 5: how long does your immunity last?
Speaker 2: Does it decades?
Speaker 5: Are they going to come out later and go, oh, no,
Speaker 5: I'm sorry, you need to get a booster like they
Speaker 5: have with everything else, correct, with t DAP and with
Speaker 5: measles and whatever, And they're like, measles, you get the
Speaker 5: measles vaccination, it'll last a lifetime. And now if you
Speaker 5: go work in healthcare, they will make you get a
Speaker 5: booster again.
Speaker 6: Yep, every ten years they try to push it on us,
Speaker 6: depending on what your status is. So again it's like
Speaker 6: one of those things where they will tell you that
Speaker 6: it helps prevent decrease your risk, but then come back
Speaker 6: and say, but you're getting a wane and you're probably not,
Speaker 6: you know, because I think what happens is is that
Speaker 6: they say that and then they realize it's not stopping
Speaker 6: the transmission stopping from this, so they're like, well, okay,
Speaker 6: so then maybe we should tell them that they have
Speaker 6: to go and get a booster. So at this point
Speaker 6: it protects you as the company essentially to say oh, well,
Speaker 6: it's not like we're saying it doesn't work. We're just
Speaker 6: saying that, you know, maybe with time, it's your immunity
Speaker 6: it's you. It's you, not our product, it's you, and
Speaker 6: so you should probably reconsider getting it to protect yourself. Again. Meanwhile,
Speaker 6: we just said it's not really necessarily stopping transmission or
Speaker 6: preventing really a whole lot, because they still see a
Speaker 6: lot of these issues with cancer popping up.
Speaker 2: Yep, one hundred percent. And so.
Speaker 5: Is this gonna if we're giving it to six month
Speaker 5: olds or whatever and they're trying to capture the prepubescent population, right,
Speaker 5: is that going to protect.
Speaker 2: Them all the way through.
Speaker 5: Their hormonal years or like I said, is it going
Speaker 5: to be another one of those things where we think
Speaker 5: it's going to protect you just kidding, like the very
Speaker 5: cell vaccine for chicken pox with it's gonna stop you
Speaker 5: from getting it. You're never gonna get chicken pox, oh
Speaker 5: just kidding. Oh you've got spots. Oh well that's because
Speaker 5: you need a second dose. Oh you're still getting spots,
Speaker 5: get a third dose. Is it going to be one
Speaker 5: of those situations where instead of seventy nine vaccinations on
Speaker 5: the federal schedule, they're going to add this and it's
Speaker 5: gonna be even more Now they just took hepatitis B off.
Speaker 6: You know, well, did that, So that did that officially
Speaker 6: go through because our.
Speaker 2: Remember it did, but it's not removed completely.
Speaker 5: It is still there for high risk populations, right, But
Speaker 5: it's it's up to you and your doctor to have
Speaker 5: the discussion. But again I told you before, there's that
Speaker 5: ICD ten code where if your doctor and you don't
Speaker 5: agree or hello, like we talked about in the last
Speaker 5: episode with the medical kidnapping, if you and your doctor
Speaker 5: have an agreement about getting this vaccination, are they going
Speaker 5: to call child Protective Services because you're non compliant? So
Speaker 5: what's what I would want to see the actual wording
Speaker 5: of what they put agreed?
Speaker 6: I mean, And people need to understand that once it's there,
Speaker 6: it's there. Like we said in the last episode or two,
Speaker 6: you know, when things are documented about you, it's very difficult.
Speaker 6: If ever, then it'll be modified, omitted, changed, It will
Speaker 6: follow you and where some of us don't care because
Speaker 6: we know that we mean what we say. As Janet
Speaker 6: just said, sometimes there are manipulation of how that goes
Speaker 6: and bad things can happen accordingly. So that's why it's
Speaker 6: so important people understand what that looks like, what that means.
Speaker 5: So I don't understand with this, with this, given it
Speaker 5: to a six month old, because who's to say they're
Speaker 5: not going to lower that again and be like, oh,
Speaker 5: like first day of born, going to replace HPV with
Speaker 5: this or replace the heptitis B with the HPV vaccine?
Speaker 2: What is the risk versus benefit?
Speaker 5: Because they have zero safety and efficacy studies and especially
Speaker 5: none for six month olds.
Speaker 6: Wow, And here's the biggest thing that you know, gets
Speaker 6: my gears going is are they going to assume that
Speaker 6: this is something that is safe as I use air
Speaker 6: quotes because it's already being utilized on the age that
Speaker 6: it is, Or who's going to be sacrificing their infant
Speaker 6: to do this trial exactly? Like what does this look
Speaker 6: like for these innocent babies that don't have someone who's
Speaker 6: advocating for them but instead sacrificing them for the trial,
Speaker 6: if that's what you want to call it, which usually
Speaker 6: ends up being a joke to say, Okay, well we've
Speaker 6: done this for X amount of time on X amount
Speaker 6: of babies, it seems to be safe and move forward
Speaker 6: with it, because ultimately, I think that's part of what
Speaker 6: has to happen. There has to be something done to
Speaker 6: be able to move it forward to say, hey, you
Speaker 6: know this is appropriate to be able to put some
Speaker 6: sort of faith again, if that's what you want to
Speaker 6: call it, into the communities to go oh yeah, yeah,
Speaker 6: six months of age HPV vaccine, Yeah, we can do
Speaker 6: that with my infant. Seems safe and effective. That they've
Speaker 6: done a trial on it, it seems okay. Otherwise, most
Speaker 6: people are still questioning, like why are we doing this
Speaker 6: to these innocent children? Like what is the risk versus benefit?
Speaker 6: Like why are we putting such an emphasis on this,
Speaker 6: which again they will manipulate you to make it seem
Speaker 6: that better compliance they're already there, and to catch it early.
Speaker 6: But again everything has a consequence, and a lot of
Speaker 6: times there's no long term studies to tell you this
Speaker 6: until it's too late.
Speaker 2: So I want to know where did come from.
Speaker 5: I grew up in an area an era where there
Speaker 5: was no HPV talk, there was no discussion, it didn't exist,
Speaker 5: it wasn't there. And now all of a sudden, boom, mmm,
Speaker 5: here it is in two thousands, right, we're like, oh, well,
Speaker 5: look we have HPV and oh we better develop a
Speaker 5: vaccine for it. Is this another manipulated thing?
Speaker 6: I mean, they're constantly talking about how the age for
Speaker 6: promiscuity is becoming less and less. They're saying, you know
Speaker 6: that children are more sexually active. This is because there's
Speaker 6: less fathers in the home.
Speaker 1: This is.
Speaker 2: What we teach in school.
Speaker 5: Now, how about their parades where we're sexualizing or or
Speaker 5: books in school about you know, anal sex kids that
Speaker 5: are six years old or whatever.
Speaker 6: And so I think that this is another piece to
Speaker 6: that where it's purposeful. I do think that obviously there's
Speaker 6: the virus theory, and you know, I get it, a
Speaker 6: lot of people don't think that that's a thing. But
Speaker 6: if we're just going with that and we're talking about it,
Speaker 6: I feel like these are a lot of things that
Speaker 6: can play a role into possibly why this is more
Speaker 6: up and coming and why we hear about it more
Speaker 6: because people just have no value for who they're with
Speaker 6: and what they do ye people choosing to have alternative
Speaker 6: lifestyles and you know, so there's a lot of things
Speaker 6: that could play a role into why sexually transmitted viruses
Speaker 6: as HPV has been more of a problem. However, I
Speaker 6: do think that there's other things that play a role
Speaker 6: into pushing more vaccinations, and I dare I even say money,
Speaker 6: what if The craziest theory is, you know, some of
Speaker 6: the things that we've already been giving in vaccines and
Speaker 6: other things are potentially causing yeah, are causing HPV. And
Speaker 6: now it's like, okay, we create the panic. Now let's
Speaker 6: create the cure. And it's just a revolving door of
Speaker 6: patients and a healthcare system because you know, now we've
Speaker 6: created this other these strains, and not all of them
Speaker 6: are cancerous, and so that's the other thing, Like some
Speaker 6: of them are benign. You know, I know a lot
Speaker 6: of people that have HPV, but it's not a cancerous
Speaker 6: HPV or or one that they need to worry about.
Speaker 6: They just need to monitor it. So that's another thing
Speaker 6: people to understand is what exactly is it? And if
Speaker 6: you test positive, you know which strain and what does
Speaker 6: that mean for you? And then how do you prevent
Speaker 6: possibly contracting it? And if you do get it, how
Speaker 6: you can work with that. A vaccine is not necessarily
Speaker 6: going to prevent, as we just said, because it's very
Speaker 6: minimal on what it protects. Their quotes protects when it's
Speaker 6: when we talk about the various strains. So I think
Speaker 6: it's just so interesting that they're now going from the
Speaker 6: four to the nine and thinking that that's going to
Speaker 6: decrease our numbers when you just said it's increased. So
Speaker 6: it's like you have it, it's being given. Clearly it's
Speaker 6: not working because we still see an increase in these
Speaker 6: types of cancer, So why is.
Speaker 2: That one hundred percent?
Speaker 5: And if you and this went, you know, all the
Speaker 5: way up to the World Health Organization and the World
Speaker 5: Health Organization like, oh, nothing to see here because oh,
Speaker 5: in these trials, like it's to prevent cancer, so it
Speaker 5: couldn't possibly cause cancer.
Speaker 2: But you got to stop and think of what was
Speaker 2: the focus of the trial.
Speaker 5: What were they looking at in these trials, which we're
Speaker 5: going to get into that in a while too, because
Speaker 5: fertility is an issue around this.
Speaker 2: So Guarda sil has had a shoe boot load of
Speaker 2: lawsuits about it.
Speaker 5: There's class action lawsuits. There's whole countries that are like, no,
Speaker 5: we don't want this here because like what it did
Speaker 5: to our population.
Speaker 2: Hello Africa and India, and so.
Speaker 5: Thousands and thousands of lawsuits are filed about Cardicil every year.
Speaker 5: And parent company, which is Mark you know she has
Speaker 5: stock in there, so in into lawsuits, most people say
Speaker 5: claiming autoimmune conditions, neurological disorders, postural symptoms, premature ovarian insufficiency,
Speaker 5: or infertility issues, gut dyspiosis.
Speaker 2: Hello, that was my daughter.
Speaker 5: She and I filed claims and theirs because she could
Speaker 5: not digest food after getting one of these vaccinations, and
Speaker 5: so it would make her vomit and whole food would
Speaker 5: come out her nose, and so pasta or peanuts or
Speaker 5: whatever like, she couldn't digest. We did all the testing
Speaker 5: and all the things. So all of these lawsuits people
Speaker 5: are saying the same thing, right, And so there was
Speaker 5: a figure that was reported on which was fifty million dollars.
Speaker 5: This is not for a single lawsuit, this is for
Speaker 5: all of them together. Merk actually won in court because
Speaker 5: they were, you know, like specialists versus specialists and scientists
Speaker 5: versus scientists, and you know, they were doing this back
Speaker 5: and forth and whatnot, and so a lot of the
Speaker 5: testimony of the expert witnesses that were for the plaintiffs
Speaker 5: was thrown out or not allowed to be heard. And
Speaker 5: so basically Mirk won this lawsuit, but they paid out anyway.
Speaker 5: So their settlement was fifty million dollars. And this was
Speaker 5: through the US Southern District or Western District of North
Speaker 5: Carolina's with the lawsuit at what court it actually went through.
Speaker 5: So two hundred to two hundred and fifty litigants were
Speaker 5: included in this.
Speaker 2: So to me, fifty million dollars is not enough for
Speaker 2: that many.
Speaker 5: Plaintiffs depending on what happened, you know what I'm saying,
Speaker 5: even close.
Speaker 2: Because you got to split that.
Speaker 5: And then you got all the attorney fees and all
Speaker 5: the court costs and all the stuff that comes from litigation.
Speaker 5: And so I'm wondering, like how much these people are
Speaker 5: actually going to see and why would murk if they
Speaker 5: won this lawsuit?
Speaker 2: Why would they decide to pay out?
Speaker 6: Anyway, I have so much to say about this. It
Speaker 6: literally like I'm by my tongue off. So for the listeners,
Speaker 6: you had over two hundred cases that banded together people
Speaker 6: that were brave enough to come forward that have had
Speaker 6: various injuries. Essentially, this is a vaccine injury or something
Speaker 6: I deal with in a lot. And you know, these
Speaker 6: people are a lot of times not able to work
Speaker 6: or they can't go to work. Often they have some
Speaker 6: sort of disability now or they become disabled to a
Speaker 6: point where they are very limited in how they act
Speaker 6: out in their daily lives. So my point is it's
Speaker 6: a lot of time and energy and money that these
Speaker 6: individuals who are injured don't already have. And these companies
Speaker 6: play this game where they will let the situation unfold
Speaker 6: to a certain point but know that they have better
Speaker 6: lawyers and a lot more money. So let's just put
Speaker 6: this into perspective. Fifty million dollars for Merk to pay
Speaker 6: out is absolutely abysmal considering, as Janet just said, to
Speaker 6: one hundred plus cases. That doesn't even cover you know,
Speaker 6: between the legal fee, the legal fees and the fact
Speaker 6: that there's you know, the expert witnesses and everything else.
Speaker 2: All that annually in that settlement.
Speaker 6: Yep, annually, Mirk makes I have it right here, sixty
Speaker 6: five point Well, I'll just say sixty five billion. In
Speaker 6: twenty twenty five, York made sixty five billion with a
Speaker 6: B and they only paid out fifty million to over
Speaker 6: two hundred you know, individuals that step forward who are
Speaker 6: most likely in some capacity disabled and not able to
Speaker 6: have a normal life because of the product that Merk
Speaker 6: put out. And instead of saying, you know, maybe this
Speaker 6: was our fault or we're really sorry.
Speaker 5: There was zero admittance if you will, Yeah, because they
Speaker 5: said they and they said in the lawsuit that they
Speaker 5: did did nothing wrong in their product.
Speaker 6: Was they did nothing wrong. Product is fine, but we're
Speaker 6: going to pay fifty million, and then what else did
Speaker 6: they do that we really have to just highlight here
Speaker 6: that just you know, puts the nail in the coffin.
Speaker 6: Is they put it under gag orders, right, so you
Speaker 6: will never know from these individuals what exactly happened during
Speaker 6: this case essentially because that's how Merk got to win
Speaker 6: and get away with it. Not only are they just
Speaker 6: going to pay some chump change to just you know,
Speaker 6: silence and pass over, you know, the people that they
Speaker 6: just ruined for life, They then doubled down and said,
Speaker 6: and guess what you as the communities, the people who
Speaker 6: are willingly taking these products, and you're being told they're
Speaker 6: safe and effective. These these cases you will never hear
Speaker 6: about because we have made the agreement that it will
Speaker 6: be under gag order, which means you will never know
Speaker 6: the truth. And so for someone who's saying that their
Speaker 6: product is safe and effective, that nothing is wrong and
Speaker 6: that everything's good to Goose silent paid, and now you've
Speaker 6: silenced these individuals who will never be able to sue
Speaker 6: for this. I mean that's like you just can't. That's done.
Speaker 6: It's a done deal. You can't have to move on. Sorry,
Speaker 6: by your luck, and you make sixty five billion dollars
Speaker 6: in twenty twenty five alone here like the odddacity, the audacity, Janet,
Speaker 6: I'm just like, this is what they do. They bleed
Speaker 6: people into submission.
Speaker 5: One hundred percent and they're good at it, right. I mean,
Speaker 5: look at the Fraser who has paid out boo oo
Speaker 5: bookoo dollars in lawsuits. Same thing with Jay and Jay
Speaker 5: and you know all the other big manufacturers have had
Speaker 5: massive lawsuits, massive payouts, but we still approve the their
Speaker 5: medications or their vaccinations. They're still on the market. Very
Speaker 5: rarely do they ever pull them off because it's big
Speaker 5: business for them. Like I talked about previously about evergreening
Speaker 5: patents and all of that kind of stuff. You know,
Speaker 5: they can have something patented for life and only make
Speaker 5: like a uber tiny tweak to it and then it's rebranded,
Speaker 5: you know, back on the shelf or whatever.
Speaker 2: That life is extended.
Speaker 5: That's why it's called evergreening because it's like a forever
Speaker 5: patent that they get on products. And I want to
Speaker 5: know because Dell Bigtree brought a giant lawsuit against the
Speaker 5: federal government and was like, if you have safety and
Speaker 5: efficacy studies on the childhood vaccine schedule, I want to
Speaker 5: see them.
Speaker 2: There are none.
Speaker 6: There aren't crickets zero, they have none.
Speaker 5: And it's the same thing with this, like I said,
Speaker 5: because one of the one of the big things from
Speaker 5: this let's see, oh the and this this lawsuit was
Speaker 5: actually settled under failure to warn.
Speaker 2: So that's why they.
Speaker 5: That's what this lawsuit was brought under, instead of like
Speaker 5: individual cases you cause this that or the other stuff whatever.
Speaker 6: And that's but that's really important to mention because a
Speaker 6: lot of times they are not going to put the
Speaker 6: real reason that is going on, which is the actual
Speaker 6: product itself. They'll say like, oh, you didn't well, this
Speaker 6: is how they try to approach it, like you said,
Speaker 6: like trying to warn the public, like hey, if you
Speaker 6: take this, this could cause X, Y, and Z. You
Speaker 6: have all these cases that coincidentally have almost the same
Speaker 6: type of story, right, and yet they're being told, oh, no,
Speaker 6: your product is safe and effective. But you know, again,
Speaker 6: Merk in the past, although they're all guilty and you
Speaker 6: can look it up easily online, has had to pay
Speaker 6: out numerous times. So this is for the HPV vaccine,
Speaker 6: but before that, there was fraud that they had to
Speaker 6: pay out for. There was bios they had to pay
Speaker 6: out for. You know, so there's other things that have
Speaker 6: happened that people have not necessarily been aware of that
Speaker 6: they take these medications. Our player part into supporting Merk
Speaker 6: by their products and everything else, not realizing that you
Speaker 6: should probably do a little investigation on some of these
Speaker 6: companies so you can actually see what they are being
Speaker 6: held viable or not for and see that this is
Speaker 6: a this is a prominent it's prevalent. This is not
Speaker 6: like a one off. It continues to happen, and why
Speaker 6: some part people understand that.
Speaker 2: Right, And you know with this.
Speaker 5: A recurring allegation concerned the design of their prelicnsure clinical trials, right,
Speaker 5: and so some safety trials compared Gardasil to a control
Speaker 5: containing an aluminum adjuvant rather than a sailine placebo. So
Speaker 5: their trials are skewed, just like they were with COVID,
Speaker 5: just like they have been with vercella, just like they
Speaker 5: have been with everything and for like the World Health
Speaker 5: Organization or the FDA the CDC to be like, okay, well,
Speaker 5: these are safe and effective and you know it couldn't
Speaker 5: possibly cause this or whatever. They followed in their clinical trial.
Speaker 5: They did see the gut issues, right, they followed that,
Speaker 5: and then the World Health Organization poo pooed it. Then
Speaker 5: the CDC poo pooed it. Same thing with fertility concerns
Speaker 5: because their pre licenser trials were not looking at these
Speaker 5: specific things and what was the baseline of the patient
Speaker 5: before and this happened right after vaccination.
Speaker 2: And all of that stuff. And that's how these things work.
Speaker 5: That's how they say, and they get away with this
Speaker 5: all the time that oh, well, you know, we had
Speaker 5: somebody complain about, you know, a high fever or gut.
Speaker 3: Issues or whatever. But they weren't specific to that trial.
Speaker 3: They were looking at a different outcome, which the outcome
Speaker 3: that they're looking for is not explained side effects. It
Speaker 3: is literally is this going to prevent this strain from
Speaker 3: showing up? That's what their pocus is on these trials.
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's a manipulation tactic. It's definitely putting these poor
Speaker 6: people who have already been put through the mill, just
Speaker 6: basically regas lighting them over and over again, making them
Speaker 6: feel as if they're not being truthful or that their
Speaker 6: symptoms are not legitimate. I mean, can you even fathom.
Speaker 5: But you come from the vaccination, dammit, it had to
Speaker 5: come from you and something else you're doing exactly.
Speaker 6: And it's like, and you know, oh, you're anti vaxxed,
Speaker 6: your anti science, and I literally took your product. I
Speaker 6: took your product because it was I was told that
Speaker 6: it was recommended that this would keep me safe and
Speaker 6: this would protect me and other people, and you know
Speaker 6: that it was safe and it was effective, and here
Speaker 6: I am permanently disabled. And in some cases, I want
Speaker 6: to say, people fact check us. But there was two
Speaker 6: that have had two children that died from it, somewhere
Speaker 6: along those lines of getting the HPB Gartisle vaccine. So
Speaker 6: I'm just like, you know, it's just crazy to me
Speaker 6: that we cannot believe these individuals and that these companies
Speaker 6: have the immunity like they do and then also have
Speaker 6: the power to basically silence, sensor, and gag order their
Speaker 6: way through these products so that it basically sends a
Speaker 6: message to the public. Right, you could come for us
Speaker 6: all you want, but good luck, and even.
Speaker 5: Sensor scientists and stuff that are questioning whatever you know
Speaker 5: and safety concerns, And same thing with the COVID vaccinations, right,
Speaker 5: they silenced doctors. They the medical review boards were taking
Speaker 5: their licensure away, they're removing licenses from pharmacists and the
Speaker 5: whole nine yards because they're questioning the narrative that is
Speaker 5: put out. Right, But hello, I want people to think
Speaker 5: of this science.
Speaker 2: Sism is a cult. Right.
Speaker 5: The whole basis behind science is that you have a hypothesis.
Speaker 5: That's a guess people. You have a hypothesis of what
Speaker 5: it's going to be. You go through all the scientific
Speaker 5: steps included in that to prove your hypothesis correct. Right,
Speaker 5: And so questioning science is what we're supposed to do.
Speaker 5: That's the scientific method.
Speaker 2: That's what it is. Did you go to elementary school
Speaker 2: and learn that in science class?
Speaker 6: Right? Well? And nowadays, especially since the pandemic, it's like
Speaker 6: the whole you know, point to that has changed. They're
Speaker 6: basically like, you know, poopooing it, like you said, just
Speaker 6: making it so that people don't even question it. Like
Speaker 6: what you're told is the gospel, and it's like, no, clearly,
Speaker 6: how many times has medicine got it wrong? I mean literally?
Speaker 6: The points is we learn because science changes. And the
Speaker 6: most difficult part to this is that when you question it,
Speaker 6: you then have to be able to prove it. Well,
Speaker 6: how do you prove it? You know, what things are
Speaker 6: you doing to show in good faith that you've done
Speaker 6: the studies, the trials, the appropriate channels, taking the appropriate
Speaker 6: channels to make sure that your product is what it is.
Speaker 6: And these companies have shared liability, what makes you think
Speaker 6: they're actually going to do that? Because regardless they're not liable,
Speaker 6: they can get away with it. And the only thing
Speaker 6: you have to do is try to sue the federal government.
Speaker 6: And just to kind of quickly add on to what
Speaker 6: you said about the failure to warn. So this is
Speaker 6: the thing that people need to understand, is if you
Speaker 6: take something to court, especially when it's like medical malpractice
Speaker 6: and something like this, when it related to the pharmaceuticals
Speaker 6: and different things, there's a handful of things that have
Speaker 6: to be met, and why it's so difficult for these
Speaker 6: things to be proven the way they are and to
Speaker 6: meet every single area existence of a hidden risk that basically,
Speaker 6: the product or property possessed a danger or potential risk
Speaker 6: that was not obvious or recognizable to the average person.
Speaker 6: The manufacturer or business must have known that there could
Speaker 6: have been a danger. Again, they have to meet all
Speaker 6: these inadequate warning or instruction meeting the company failed knowingly
Speaker 6: to provide you know, adequate warning or instructions. Causation exactly causation.
Speaker 6: The lack of proper warning must be direct and approximate
Speaker 6: cause of the injury. So the plaintiff must prove that
Speaker 6: if there's a proper and clear warning, that that had
Speaker 6: to be provided and that the injury could have been avoided.
Speaker 6: And lastly, actual harm or damages. Basically, the plaintiff must
Speaker 6: demonstrate that they suffered actual harm, physical injuries that included
Speaker 6: medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering. If you don't
Speaker 6: meet all of those under the failure to warn, then
Speaker 6: they get away with it. There's a way to go
Speaker 6: around it and basically say that this was in fact
Speaker 6: not met, that the company was not at fault. So
Speaker 6: to know every single part of those has to be addressed.
Speaker 6: Is it's no wonder why people just don't take it
Speaker 6: further or lawyers don't take it because what are the
Speaker 6: odds you're going to stand up to a company that
Speaker 6: makes sixty five billion dollars annually.
Speaker 5: It's just and how are you going to get their
Speaker 5: safety data and stuff? And do you have the money
Speaker 5: for an attorney to pay them to fight this in court?
Speaker 5: That's why this that's why this lawsuit combined, right, all
Speaker 5: these people to two hundred and fifty people together in
Speaker 5: this one lawsuit, because each one of them didn't have
Speaker 5: the money individually to fight this right.
Speaker 6: Right, And what do these companies do? They drag it
Speaker 6: out purposely all kind of person, the energy, the money,
Speaker 6: A normal layperson is not going to be able to
Speaker 6: stand up to these companies who have the time, the money,
Speaker 6: you know, the resources. And so it's just sick and
Speaker 6: it's all intentional to basically come to the conclusion of
Speaker 6: most of the time these companies not being held liable.
Speaker 2: They can't do anything wrong, right exactly exactly.
Speaker 5: So one of the one of the big things, like
Speaker 5: I mentioned before with with Gardasil, is the fertility issue,
Speaker 5: which they have now labeled the premature of their insufficiency.
Speaker 5: That's a new diagnosis, right, and so.
Speaker 4: Beginning in the early tens, this has been environments and
Speaker 4: positions of people started alarm bells well, and not too.
Speaker 5: With the place that I reported for. And so case
Speaker 5: reports were coming in with you know, young girls. So
Speaker 5: this is not you know, because we lowered it. We
Speaker 5: lowered the age right after we put it for you know,
Speaker 5: sixteen year olds, and they lowered the age to eleven
Speaker 5: and twelve.
Speaker 2: So this is coming in for young girls, right.
Speaker 3: And so.
Speaker 5: The patient or this was considered like really uncommon to
Speaker 5: have happened, right, And this is another thing that they
Speaker 5: followed through trials and then they're like, oh, nothing to
Speaker 5: see here, Oh, you're having menstrual changes do oh, nothing
Speaker 5: to see here.
Speaker 2: Oh it messed up your cycle? Nothing to see here.
Speaker 5: I got to throw this in here because I just
Speaker 5: thought about this with the with the gut dyspiosis and
Speaker 5: the problems with gut.
Speaker 2: Think about.
Speaker 5: What doctor Hazen said on your oh yes sho right
Speaker 5: where she's talking about these vaccinations that affect the biffinobacteria
Speaker 5: in your gut. Yes, same exact thing as guard to
Speaker 5: sell because it destroys the gut. And then what happens
Speaker 5: that guts the second brain, right, yes, and then you
Speaker 5: have all these issues which shuts off your hormone production,
Speaker 5: changes your hormone production, why your periods are messed up,
Speaker 5: you know, why you're having infertility issues.
Speaker 2: And all of that stuff. But they're like, oh, of course,
Speaker 2: there's nothing to say here, right, yeah.
Speaker 5: And so one of the most famous papers that people
Speaker 5: cite all the time and with this issue with fertility
Speaker 5: is doctor deeeder Little. It's from twenty seventeen and it
Speaker 5: was titled Adolescent premature ovarian INSUFFI should see following human
Speaker 5: papoloma virus vaccination and so a variant function was not
Speaker 5: directly measured during three clinical trials. Remember I said before
Speaker 5: that the WHO was like, oh, nothing to see here,
Speaker 5: but they weren't actually studying that during their preclinical trials
Speaker 5: and so people were not having periods or their periods
Speaker 5: were whacked out and crazy. That's an underreported thing in THEIRS, right,
Speaker 5: just like everything else is. Their's has massive limitations and
Speaker 5: there's is extremely time.
Speaker 2: Consuming to use.
Speaker 5: If you are a provider, especially nurse, and you go
Speaker 5: to report something in THEIRS, literally expect hours, if not
Speaker 5: a whole day. And if you also are supposed to
Speaker 5: be seeing patients on the floor at the same time
Speaker 5: you're seeing or you're trying.
Speaker 6: To do this.
Speaker 5: It could take you days before you get this completed.
Speaker 5: It's very complicated, it's very time consuming. And even if
Speaker 5: you're a patient who reports or a parent who reports
Speaker 5: for a patient, you have to submit the report and
Speaker 5: then you have to wait for the federal government.
Speaker 2: To respond back to you.
Speaker 5: And then we as taxpayers, like if they decide that
Speaker 5: you are injured, we pay as taxpayers the fund that
Speaker 5: the government.
Speaker 2: Pays you back from and they decide.
Speaker 5: Action that they're going to pay out, right, So you
Speaker 5: could be permanently injured or impaired from something vaccine related,
Speaker 5: and they may you may wind up with one hundred
Speaker 5: and twenty dollars correct, you know what I mean. It's
Speaker 5: criminal taxpayer money, so it's not coming from you know.
Speaker 5: In my opinion, vaccine manufacturers should have to put X
Speaker 5: amount of money into that fund every single year.
Speaker 6: It should should have from us.
Speaker 2: It should never be taxed funded, right, I mean.
Speaker 6: And this is where patients that were affected by the
Speaker 6: COVID nineteen vaccine really hit hard. Because the VIICP, which
Speaker 6: is what Janet is referring to as the Vaccine Injury
Speaker 6: Compensation Program. Ninety eight percent of people are denied. I
Speaker 6: mean they don't even you know, you have to be
Speaker 6: able to recognize that there's an injury, have it documented,
Speaker 6: Which how many times does that happen because doctors are
Speaker 6: still not doing what they're supposed to.
Speaker 2: It couldn't possibly be from the vaccine, couldn't be that.
Speaker 6: And it has to be within a year a year
Speaker 6: of you having the injury, and then you have to apply,
Speaker 6: and so a lot of times it is in it's
Speaker 6: an unreasonable, you know, process that just is not easy
Speaker 6: and why so many cases never make it to where
Speaker 6: they need to. And so you know, it's also ironic
Speaker 6: to me that they'll say, oh, well these are safe
Speaker 6: and effective, and you know, all these things have been
Speaker 6: tried and true and they've been studied, and you know,
Speaker 6: the risk versus benefit. It's just it's not But they
Speaker 6: have an actual federal program for vaccine injuries to pay out.
Speaker 6: So it's like, which is it? Which is it now? Created?
Speaker 6: Nobody meets criteria halftime because they make it so difficult,
Speaker 6: but it's still there, which to me is like a
Speaker 6: sign of admittance. That it's not safe and effective, there
Speaker 6: could be problems, right, and then of course, you know,
Speaker 6: you bust out any type of vaccine insert and they're
Speaker 6: very clear on what side effects and adverse outcomes can
Speaker 6: happen as well as they're really shoddy. You know what.
Speaker 6: We like to call on the Nurses Report on America
Speaker 6: out loud news, you know, magic math, where we did
Speaker 6: one on gardis so a long time ago, and it
Speaker 6: was like, for every twenty five hundred children that were
Speaker 6: vaccinated for HPV, maybe one and this came from Merk's
Speaker 6: own trial, maybe one would be protected against the particular
Speaker 6: HPV strains cancers that they're trying to prevent. So it's like,
Speaker 6: what really is this number that we're looking at that
Speaker 6: would say, oh, this is good enough to start vaccinating
Speaker 6: children as young as six months of age, Like they're crazy.
Speaker 5: But that's how that's why I wanted to bring in
Speaker 5: this portion, right, because so we brought up the gut
Speaker 5: and brought up the infertility issues and period stuff. So
Speaker 5: the WHO and the CDC when they were like, there's
Speaker 5: nothing to see here, Oh, they've mentioned it in the
Speaker 5: trial and blah blah blah, here's the only thing that
Speaker 5: their paperwork, their own paperwork showed they were looking for
Speaker 5: antibody production, infection prevention, cervical lesions which comes from the
Speaker 5: cancer strains, adverse events, but they were not routinely measuring
Speaker 5: all of these other things that were happening to people.
Speaker 5: So they weren't routinely checking hormone levels and follicle counts
Speaker 5: and you know, ovarian reserve and long term reproductive underconfunction.
Speaker 5: That was never the endpoint of their study. And so
Speaker 5: that's how this CDC and who is like nothing to
Speaker 5: see here?
Speaker 6: I mean, if you're not if you're not looking for it,
Speaker 6: do you what do you mean? Like, what are you
Speaker 6: exactly gonna find? And that's the part that makes it
Speaker 6: even more just discussing and like satire. They pretend like
Speaker 6: they're the good guys and you know, oh, we're you know,
Speaker 6: providing these products and everything is done so well. But
Speaker 6: in the same breath it's like, but but you don't
Speaker 6: do the actual scientifical work to show before, during, and
Speaker 6: after and a lot of these trials and cases you
Speaker 6: will see go beyond a week a month if that.
Speaker 6: So when they say, oh, these are safe, we're only
Speaker 6: testing it on a few hundred people. If that and
Speaker 6: we're only looking for maybe a couple of weeks, maybe
Speaker 6: a couple of months. If that, that is not a
Speaker 6: long term study. That it's not showing safety and efficacy
Speaker 6: because you pull a random two hundred and fifty people
Speaker 6: and say, okay, only you know ten of them at
Speaker 6: this time have had X, Y, and Z, and maybe
Speaker 6: you know something far worse. To me, that's not a
Speaker 6: good study.
Speaker 5: That's that's not not I was just going to say,
Speaker 5: because that's something that we're going to discuss down the
Speaker 5: line with the his funding thing that came out because
Speaker 5: it had twenty five people in their study. Now, how
Speaker 5: many supposedly billions of people are on the planet, like
Speaker 5: nine billion, right, So if you're only studying twenty five
Speaker 5: people or two hundred people, is that actually a good
Speaker 5: sample size?
Speaker 2: Sice right?
Speaker 5: So absence of evidence is not the same thing as
Speaker 5: evidence of absence. So safety and efficacy is blowney the
Speaker 5: way that it's written.
Speaker 6: Right.
Speaker 5: So with all this, the strands, the two hundred strands
Speaker 5: are over two hundred strands of HPV. There's low risk
Speaker 5: and high risk. The lower risk causes genital warts. The
Speaker 5: high risk are associated with cancers, but not just cervical cancer.
Speaker 5: There are other cancers involved in that as well. So
Speaker 5: the nine types that are in the vaccination, there's one, two.
Speaker 2: Three, four, five, six. Seven of them are the high risk,
Speaker 2: only two are the low risk. Interesting, so if low risk.
Speaker 5: Means genital warts, why are we still including that in
Speaker 5: a vaccination? If you're if this is for cancer, that's what.
Speaker 6: I'm saying, the mathe mathing, we're like, we're like throwing
Speaker 6: in some random you know, kitchen sink randomness.
Speaker 2: Just under And.
Speaker 5: So that there's two that account for seventy percent of
Speaker 5: cervical cancers, and that's HPV sixteen and eighteen. There's there's
Speaker 5: five other ones, like I said, that are in that
Speaker 5: thing that brings to around ninety percent of cervical cancer causes,
Speaker 5: so supposedly around ninety percent, but there's still a whole
Speaker 5: bunch of cancer causing strands that are not included in
Speaker 5: this vaccination. So if you're a critical thinking person, wouldn't
Speaker 5: you scratch your head and be like, that's the point. Okay,
Speaker 5: these are most common, but there are still other ones
Speaker 5: out there, and why are they not in there? And
Speaker 5: why are we there's two with genital warts, and that
Speaker 5: there's like a whole bunch that are also genital warts.
Speaker 2: But those aren't part of it either.
Speaker 6: Mm hmmm.
Speaker 2: So it's there.
Speaker 5: They're stating that they're reasoning behind this is to target
Speaker 5: that things are the higher risk.
Speaker 6: I mean, it makes sense, but also you did state
Speaker 6: the percentages. Those definitely sound quite high, but I guess
Speaker 6: it would be.
Speaker 2: I just want to say so they say so exactly.
Speaker 6: That's what I'm like getting at. It's some you know,
Speaker 6: they're not very trustworthy in anything else. So where are
Speaker 6: we getting these numbers from? What other testing and studies
Speaker 6: proved that these were the top most high risk and
Speaker 6: that these were ninety percent of the cancers? And why
Speaker 6: all of a sudden of these cancers, Like you said,
Speaker 6: where are they coming from?
Speaker 1: Like?
Speaker 6: What?
Speaker 2: That was not a thing when I was growing up.
Speaker 6: I don't get it.
Speaker 2: And I'm old enough to eat on the senior menu
Speaker 2: at Denny.
Speaker 5: So I'm just saying it wasn't a thing, and it
Speaker 5: wasn't a thing until the two thousands, right, so twenty ten, twenty,
Speaker 5: I think it was like around two thousand and.
Speaker 2: Eight or something when this came out.
Speaker 6: What else was changed?
Speaker 2: And then all these things.
Speaker 6: I wonder what else was changed in the two thousands
Speaker 6: that could be causing all of this on the rise.
Speaker 6: What else I heard the MMR vaccine had some things
Speaker 6: that were changed in the early two thousands. Don't know
Speaker 6: if it's true, we would have to definitely dive into that.
Speaker 6: But apparently there were some changes to the mm vaccine
Speaker 6: that included more of the virus for each one, or.
Speaker 5: That because it's the MMR is a live attenuated vaccination
Speaker 5: because you have to keep it frozen.
Speaker 6: I heard that it was something about there was more
Speaker 6: viruses that were in there, like it was overfilled, something
Speaker 6: about we'll have to figure that out and talk about
Speaker 6: it another one. But apparently the MMR vaccine in the
Speaker 6: early two thousands had been admittedly overfilled is the word
Speaker 6: they used. That included more of the virus of each Again,
Speaker 6: have to look more into that, And maybe this could
Speaker 6: be a cause of why we're seeing such an explosion
Speaker 6: of autism and other things. But who's to say. Who's
Speaker 6: to say, like you just said, like now, all of
Speaker 6: a sudden, we're seeing more of these cancers around the
Speaker 6: same timeframe. I don't know. Weird, who knows.
Speaker 5: Well, and a good thing that you brought up autism,
Speaker 5: because when I was growing up, that wasn't a thing either,
Speaker 5: I know, I know, like at all and at what
Speaker 5: I mean we had five vaccines I think when we
Speaker 5: were yeah, right, right, it was less intense, and now
Speaker 5: it's like seventy nine and it is climbing, just spending
Speaker 5: on what state you're in. That's federal schedule, so it's
Speaker 5: like seventy five to seventy nine, and then certain states
Speaker 5: require other vaccinations that above what the federal's schedule.
Speaker 6: Is, right, because you know, RFPA Junior was talking about
Speaker 6: trying to go to that schedule that was more in
Speaker 6: line with Denmark and lowering the amount of vaccines, and
Speaker 6: then everybody in their mom came out guns of blaze
Speaker 6: and trying to like sue him and tell him he
Speaker 6: was crazy. And you know, God forbid pharmaciens demire right,
Speaker 6: God forbid, these pharmaceuticals can't make sixty five billion dollars
Speaker 6: a year? How dare you? So we're not gonna let
Speaker 6: that happen easily. We're going to sue the crap out
Speaker 6: of you, so you step stand down, but you know,
Speaker 6: ultimately trying to give these children, the opportunities for their
Speaker 6: parents to have the shared decision making with their pediatrician
Speaker 6: to decide is this really necessary to have all of
Speaker 6: these injections at such a young age. And you know again,
Speaker 6: HPV being considered as one of them with all of
Speaker 6: these things that we've talked about, is absolutely terrifying because
Speaker 6: there just isn't enough data or anything that makes sense
Speaker 6: to go, you know what, this makes? This makes sense
Speaker 6: to add it to the six months and older.
Speaker 2: You know this, this just hasn't been studied.
Speaker 6: Just like COVID folks, we talked about the COVID nineteen
Speaker 6: vaccine time and time again, it wasn't long term studied.
Speaker 6: You know who's being the long term studied the ones
Speaker 6: who took it. You are the data, Like, that's what's
Speaker 6: going to happen to these children who are being given
Speaker 6: possibly the HPV vaccine at such a young age. If
Speaker 6: they push it through, there's not going to be enough
Speaker 6: studies and evidence to say that this is in good
Speaker 6: face safe because I don't know, as we're talking, Janet,
Speaker 6: do we even know if there's any long term studies
Speaker 6: on guard ASIL for individuals who are older that may
Speaker 6: take it or like you said, like what is the
Speaker 6: outcome that it actually has prevented or decreased? I mean,
Speaker 6: I just feel like there's still a lot of unknown
Speaker 6: even for what we're giving now.
Speaker 5: One hundred percent. And you know, like as mentioned earlier,
Speaker 5: one of their big selling points for making it for
Speaker 5: six months old was because, uh, babies have really strong
Speaker 5: immunity systems, well unless you poison them with Brazilian vaccinations,
Speaker 5: but even then, the best immunity that you can ever
Speaker 5: get is from your mom exactly right.
Speaker 6: Which you know at one point they try I did
Speaker 6: to say was not the case. I remember not too
Speaker 6: long ago, fact they pushed it and said, no, no, really,
Speaker 6: and truly your best beat to be one hundred percent
Speaker 6: sure is to get essentially the vaccines, when really we've
Speaker 6: always been taught in medicine and in school r your
Speaker 6: best immunity is the path you know from your mom,
Speaker 6: from mother and baby and those antibodies and why it's
Speaker 6: so important, you know, for the placenta, delayed cord clamping
Speaker 6: and just all the things that may be beneficial and
Speaker 6: breastfeeding to get those anti bodies from the mom. And
Speaker 6: you know, they try to make it seem that that
Speaker 6: is not in fact, because they're they're trying to manipulate
Speaker 6: the masses to think that you're safer getting an injected
Speaker 6: you know, product is.
Speaker 2: Made in a lab, which is not manipulated in a lab.
Speaker 6: Correct, And then we have the sickest people in the
Speaker 6: in the world. We are the sickest nation, and it
Speaker 6: kind of makes you wonder, what are we doing differently. Oh,
Speaker 6: that's right, We're injecting people with tons of vaccines and
Speaker 6: you know, adjuvants and poisons, so you know, adding another
Speaker 6: vaccine like this would be just absolutely catastrophic.
Speaker 5: So the studies out there, ninety seven percent of clinical
Speaker 5: studies about whether it's medications or you know, medical issues
Speaker 5: or vaccinations or whatever, ninety seven percent are pharma funded,
Speaker 5: either through pharma itself or a roundabout way through a
Speaker 5: grant through the government, through a medical school or whatever
Speaker 5: that's funded still being funded by pharma. Right, So that
Speaker 5: means three percent of clinical studies are independent of any
Speaker 5: pharma or government funding. So what do you think's going
Speaker 5: to happen if if pharma wants to make a bunch
Speaker 5: of money and they're like, oh, no, nothing to see here,
Speaker 5: or do you think they'd go, oh, well, this would
Speaker 5: be highly concerning, blah blah blah.
Speaker 2: They're not going to put that.
Speaker 5: They're not going to allow that data in their studies
Speaker 5: and especially not for publication.
Speaker 2: Because that will shut off their money supply.
Speaker 6: It's wild to me that you can have the same
Speaker 6: hand that feeds you be the same hand to be
Speaker 6: able to say there's nothing wrong here. I don't see anything.
Speaker 6: There's absolutely nothing I would be concerned about. On what
Speaker 6: planet should that be legal? That you have the same
Speaker 6: ones who are investing in you being able to turn
Speaker 6: around and invest stigate you and say that it is
Speaker 6: in fact safe to do so with these products. Like,
Speaker 6: that's what we need people to like really understand here.
Speaker 6: This is why people do not trust the pharmaceutical companies
Speaker 6: and the fact that these products are being put out
Speaker 6: the way they are because you have people that are
Speaker 6: funding it with their best interest who are also turning
Speaker 6: around and dictating the safety and efficacy of these things
Speaker 6: are the same one that are funding it, Right, That's crazy,
Speaker 6: that's insanity. And people are like okay with that. That
Speaker 6: doesn't like raise alarm bells or red flags or you know,
Speaker 6: oh yeah, like you said, like again, if there's a
Speaker 6: shield liability or if there's things in place that protects them,
Speaker 6: why would they want to try to do anything different
Speaker 6: to make sure that they're putting out a good, solid
Speaker 6: product that kept you safe. Because most products that people
Speaker 6: are put on what ends up happening, Because we've talked
Speaker 6: about this in other episodes, go on more products. What
Speaker 6: are these people coming off? Medicine? They're not once you
Speaker 6: start them on it. They continue on the same thing
Speaker 6: with the vaccinated versus unvaccinated studies, true testimony. Parents can
Speaker 6: tell you, you know, hey, I've vaccinated my child. They're
Speaker 6: not the same ear infections asthma versus dare I say
Speaker 6: the unvaccinated where the parents are typically saying that the
Speaker 6: children are not sick, they don't have any health issues,
Speaker 6: you know, they they're relatively healthy, and they've never really
Speaker 6: had to be taken to the doctor for anything. Yet
Speaker 6: we don't take those things into consideration. And so for
Speaker 6: a vaccine like this to say, oh, this will prevent
Speaker 6: against cancer when you just said that, it's, you know, again,
Speaker 6: just a handful of strains. You know, what are the
Speaker 6: odds When the company itself is saying you just went
Speaker 6: to court for over two hundred cases and a parent
Speaker 6: so that there was nothing wrong, yet still paid all
Speaker 6: this money and then placed the gag order so that
Speaker 6: nobody can hear exactly what was said. If you're not guilty,
Speaker 6: if these are safe, why would that happen? Right?
Speaker 5: And and that's the thing, is the gag order being
Speaker 5: part of the settlement that you can have this money
Speaker 5: if you keep your mouth shut.
Speaker 2: To me, that's a bribe.
Speaker 6: It is a bribe, coercion and bribery, you know what.
Speaker 2: I'm saying, And that highest level should not be allowed.
Speaker 5: Now if if the if it was a real judiciary gag,
Speaker 5: that would have come down from the judge. But that
Speaker 5: was not what happened in this case. It was literally
Speaker 5: part of Merk's settlement. You can here's the dollar. If
Speaker 5: you shake your mouth, here's your cake and eat it too.
Speaker 6: You want to take us to court, okay, well, well,
Speaker 6: not only are we going to say we didn't do
Speaker 6: anything wrong, we're going to make you never be able
Speaker 6: to tell this again. And that to me is like
Speaker 6: a no deal radio. I'd rather be broke than sign
Speaker 6: anything to say that I'm going to have an NDA.
Speaker 6: Absolutely not, you're going to hear die.
Speaker 5: Yeah, So not only do they somewhat so I consider
Speaker 5: things in bears right, but they don't really look at bears.
Speaker 5: And the reporting for bears is literally like ten percent.
Speaker 5: It's so low because it's complicated and time consuming. But
Speaker 5: they also have and people probably have never ever heard of,
Speaker 5: this Vaccine Safety Data Link, which is the VSD. That
Speaker 5: is another system that things go into. However, it's also
Speaker 5: kind of a surveillance system because it has millions of
Speaker 5: records on US populations, including your diagnoses and all the things.
Speaker 5: And who benefits from the data in that the World
Speaker 5: Health Organization.
Speaker 2: I told you.
Speaker 5: Guys before, I was not making it up that when
Speaker 5: your providers went electronically, your data is sold all the
Speaker 5: freaking time because it's the gold standard. I just did
Speaker 5: an episode on that about the business of being sick.
Speaker 5: Your data is sold, bought and sold. Whether it's pharmaceutical data,
Speaker 5: whether it is your diagnosis, whether it's your genetics, it's
Speaker 5: sold and everything goes to the WHO and other places.
Speaker 5: But the WHO literally has everybody's information from around the world,
Speaker 5: any treaty countries, they've got your data, which.
Speaker 6: Is why we wanted to separate from them. Because we
Speaker 6: don't want to take part of it, and we don't
Speaker 6: want we don't want some unelected officials that nobody gave
Speaker 6: a rats ass about who somehow got appointed where they
Speaker 6: are to make decisions for our country, our people. So
Speaker 6: again that when everybody was blowing smoke and freaking out
Speaker 6: that the World Health couldn't dictate our public health initiatives,
Speaker 6: I'm like, why do you want unelected officials that have
Speaker 6: nothing to do with the United States be able to
Speaker 6: come in and tell us what to do when when
Speaker 6: there's a public emergency or whatever they declare a right emergency,
Speaker 6: you know, like you said. And so that also leaves
Speaker 6: you open wide open for them to take over all
Speaker 6: of the things that you have, and you have no privacy,
Speaker 6: you have no you know, sense of security because now
Speaker 6: you're all over the world and have these people dictating
Speaker 6: based on your information that you probably didn't give consent for.
Speaker 5: So so let's talk about the HHS funding because well
Speaker 5: that's been a hot topic news story here lately too,
Speaker 5: And so what exactly happened because it was a really
Speaker 5: really big number.
Speaker 2: And so this was.
Speaker 5: Not literally funding. They weren't giving money for any specific
Speaker 5: vaccine here's what happened. So they had a restructuring of
Speaker 5: the vaccine and biotech priorities, which means what they did
Speaker 5: was pull money away from the mRNA technology that was
Speaker 5: being researched under BARTA, which is the Biomedical Advanced Research
Speaker 5: and Development Authority kind of like DARPA. Right, So it's
Speaker 5: either completely ending or winding down more than twenty two
Speaker 5: mRNA vaccine development contracts worth five hundred million dollars. So
Speaker 5: what they're going to do and these for these were
Speaker 5: things that they were doing for like the flu and
Speaker 5: covid and bird flu stuff, and so they were taking
Speaker 5: that funding and they're shifting it.
Speaker 2: And this is where like I'm I'm not sure I'm
Speaker 2: a fan of this either.
Speaker 5: Right, So this five hundred million dollars is going into
Speaker 5: a new investment in a universal vaccine platform. It's the
Speaker 5: Generation gold Standard, is what it's called. And so their
Speaker 5: main focus and listen closely people, is panned domic preparedness
Speaker 5: and broad immunity platforms, which means pandemic preparedness. You already
Speaker 5: know there's shit coming down the pipeline, and.
Speaker 6: When that happens, we know that there's something on the
Speaker 6: horizon here that definitely needs to be looked further into.
Speaker 6: So that's what makes me a little skeptical. When we
Speaker 6: talk about the preparedness and immunity platforms. You know that
Speaker 6: something is in the works.
Speaker 5: One hundred percent, so you know it's coming down the pipeline.
Speaker 5: So targeted public health grants are still being awarded, So
Speaker 5: CDC and state health departments are going to continue to
Speaker 5: receive routine immunization funding. Yes, your health department gets money
Speaker 5: to get people vaccinated, just like the Vaccines for Children
Speaker 5: program that I was unfortunately.
Speaker 6: Was part of.
Speaker 2: You get money for doing that.
Speaker 5: And so this was not a specific grant like at
Speaker 5: HPD or anything like that. But this is why this
Speaker 5: makes me nervous. So I'm like, Okay, what is this
Speaker 5: Generation gold Standard all about. So it is a new
Speaker 5: program being launched by HHS and the NIH in partnership.
Speaker 5: This was a great upon in May of twenty twenty five.
Speaker 5: It's a new initiative for a new vaccine platform for
Speaker 5: respiratory pandemics, solely respiratory pandemics. Oh boy, they in their
Speaker 5: own writing ladies.
Speaker 6: Tell you, They tell you right before they're going to
Speaker 6: do it. No, surprises.
Speaker 5: So what this new method is, right, is that they
Speaker 5: use BLP, which is beta propio lactone UH inactivated whole
Speaker 5: virus vaccines.
Speaker 2: They use the BPL to actually.
Speaker 5: Kill or inactivate whatever respiratory thing that they're looking at.
Speaker 5: If you believe in viruses, there you go. So it
Speaker 5: takes the whole entire virus instead of portions like the
Speaker 5: COVID thing. They would take a section of the virus
Speaker 5: or the spike protein of a virus. And I'm like, okay,
Speaker 5: but doesn't didn't this whole virus thing, Wasn't it used
Speaker 5: before I knew it was because the very first polio
Speaker 5: vaccination that they went to was a whole virus vaccine.
Speaker 2: But this is new. It's new, it's a new platform,
Speaker 2: that's what they're saying.
Speaker 1: And so.
Speaker 5: Here's what's already in the works. You're gonna love this.
Speaker 5: They have a BPL thirteen fifty seven and a BPL
Speaker 5: twenty four to ten that are already in this program.
Speaker 5: The thirteen fifty seven is aimed at influenza and the
Speaker 5: twenty four nine ten is coronavirus vaccine including Corona all
Speaker 5: clone coronaviruses including stars, Kobe two Kobe one and Merrors,
Speaker 5: so they already have these works already in the pipeline.
Speaker 5: And and so the one for the flu is already
Speaker 5: there's phase one trial that's already published forty five people.
Speaker 5: That's it was the participants in this trial, forty five people.
Speaker 2: But they didn't see any.
Speaker 5: Serious adverse events right off the bat with anyone. Most
Speaker 5: things were mild. Most events were mild.
Speaker 1: And so.
Speaker 5: Of course you're gonna have injection site pain because you
Speaker 5: got a shot, right or people, you're gonna have It's
Speaker 5: like if you get stung by a bee right or
Speaker 5: bit by a spider, you're gonna have pain where they
Speaker 5: got you. And so somebody spiked a really high fever,
Speaker 5: but they're like, oh, nothing to see here, went away,
Speaker 5: and then there was nothing.
Speaker 6: To say that's normal. That's normal.
Speaker 5: But this doesn't establish any long term safety or effectiveness.
Speaker 5: The sample size was too small, forty five people out
Speaker 5: of nine billion people on the planet.
Speaker 2: Come on, now, I have no work.
Speaker 5: And so phase one is just primarily according to them,
Speaker 5: to access any short term safety signals, so it doesn't
Speaker 5: even look at anything long term. So they're already testing
Speaker 5: these things, and that's where the five hundred million dollars
Speaker 5: went okay, just shifted away from this open to the
Speaker 5: new one. And so their their argument is the whole
Speaker 5: virus vaccines present many viral proteins, and so instead of
Speaker 5: using the small portions or whatever, supposedly you're going to
Speaker 5: build up antibodies to the entire thing instead of just
Speaker 5: like the spikes. Right, so it's going to give you
Speaker 5: broader immunity, supposed to produce stronger T cell responses and.
Speaker 2: Be less vulnerable.
Speaker 5: They've used this platform for a long time, even though
Speaker 5: they're saying, oh, but this is different. So here's the
Speaker 5: skeptical side of it. Universal protection is what they're going
Speaker 5: for right in this vaccine, Right, that's what they're saying.
Speaker 6: And so.
Speaker 5: Universal protection is very hard to achieve because why, we
Speaker 5: are all very unique and different. How and the hell
Speaker 5: are they expecting every human being on the planet to
Speaker 5: have the same response to something. It's not possible. Our
Speaker 5: immune systems are set up differently. They have very limited data,
Speaker 5: like only forty five participants, and they still haven't done
Speaker 5: any long term studies. They haven't done any long term
Speaker 5: studies on anything really, and the.
Speaker 2: Government is funding and incentivizing.
Speaker 5: What could possibly be the problem kind of like you
Speaker 5: said earlier, if the government's funding the trials and the
Speaker 5: government owns the vaccinations, and then the government's the one
Speaker 5: deciding if there's any risk or problems or whatever, and
Speaker 5: then the government's the one that's policing themselves, how the.
Speaker 2: Hell do you think that's going to not work out
Speaker 2: in the favor of them.
Speaker 6: I just I just illegalities of it. I can't believe
Speaker 6: it's legal.
Speaker 5: One hundred percent, Like we're gonna, yeah, like investigate yourself
Speaker 5: or whatever. And so also concerning is there regulatory processes
Speaker 5: that have to do with that, right, So emergency pathways
Speaker 5: can create public concern just like we saw during COVID
Speaker 5: if people perceive that you're rushing stuff, or if people
Speaker 5: smell a rotten egg, you know what I'm saying exactly.
Speaker 6: They're now the science, so a lot of them are
Speaker 6: probably not really feeling too confident.
Speaker 5: And let me just throw this in there for the
Speaker 5: people who don't know about whole virus vaccinations, that whole
Speaker 5: virus vaccination for polio was pulled off of the market
Speaker 5: because of the dangers that it presented to people exactly.
Speaker 6: And the thing that just clowsed my mind, is what
Speaker 6: is considered too many when you are doing a study
Speaker 6: or a trial and something happens. How many people have
Speaker 6: to be harmed or killed for it to matter, for
Speaker 6: it to be pulled off the market, you know, because
Speaker 6: it's not standard because clearly we see it happen with
Speaker 6: different vaccines, different drugs. You know, they may know. So
Speaker 6: that's my question, like what standard are they held to
Speaker 6: to say, hey, if so many people are being harmed
Speaker 6: by this or killed in the trials, Uh, you can't
Speaker 6: release this, you can't move But I've never heard of
Speaker 6: this being a thing.
Speaker 2: Kind of like.
Speaker 5: A long time ago when this they came out with
Speaker 5: the swine flu thing and it was like, oh my god,
Speaker 5: well kids can't come back to school until they get
Speaker 5: the swine flu vaccination.
Speaker 6: And that was.
Speaker 2: Well was it early two thousands as well? It was
Speaker 2: in the two thousands, and.
Speaker 5: Then there was what like four hundred people or something
Speaker 5: that that died or had adverse events like series during
Speaker 5: during the during the trial, and.
Speaker 2: Then they pulled it off the market because it was unsicked.
Speaker 6: And that's what I'm saying, like, I know it has happened,
Speaker 6: but it's not a consistent process or protocol. And it's
Speaker 6: just wild to me that you can have all these
Speaker 6: people coming forward saying that they're being hurt and injured
Speaker 6: by the HPV vaccine, but they're still saying, no, that
Speaker 6: didn't happen, and or you know, let's just double down
Speaker 6: and just decrease the age to six months, knowing that
Speaker 6: there's no studies to suggest that this even makes sense
Speaker 6: at all or for those age groups.
Speaker 5: So here's another vaccine that was part of the same
Speaker 5: whole virus vaccine. Older flu shots were the exact same. Hence,
Speaker 5: why everybody that got a flu shot got deathly ill
Speaker 5: with the flu when they got the flu shut, it's
Speaker 5: because they were injecting you with the actual thing, the
Speaker 5: whole thing.
Speaker 2: Hepatitis A was another one. So this system is not new.
Speaker 5: They're making it sound like it's new and it's the
Speaker 5: gold standard, but they swear they're going to do things differently.
Speaker 2: And better doing this again.
Speaker 5: These three things were pulled off of the market because
Speaker 5: they were so ungodly dangerous before, and we're going to
Speaker 5: do the exact same thing.
Speaker 6: Yeah, there's just no words. There's no words. And the
Speaker 6: thing that's the most sad is that you have these
Speaker 6: billion dollar companies that are just what we call pharmagoules
Speaker 6: continue to get away with literal murder and you, as
Speaker 6: the consumer, are the victim time and time again, and
Speaker 6: there is no one protecting you. There's no one being
Speaker 6: held to a standard, there's no one that's coming to
Speaker 6: save you. And why it's so important that these things
Speaker 6: get brought to light. But when they're allowed to put
Speaker 6: it under a gag order, that means that you are
Speaker 6: not being given true, informed consent because things that are
Speaker 6: actually happening are being hidden from you right by the
Speaker 6: companies that are protecting you or not doing anything wrong,
Speaker 6: which we know is a bunch of bs.
Speaker 2: Well case and point.
Speaker 5: During the COVID stuff, right, they wanted seventy five years
Speaker 5: before they had to publish their data, Yeah, seventy five
Speaker 5: years because they were hoping that you would all be dead, literally,
Speaker 5: so that there would be no one to question them.
Speaker 5: When they publish the data, it'll be like they erased
Speaker 5: history like they do with everything else, and say it
Speaker 5: didn't happen and everything was fine.
Speaker 2: So I'm just curious, you know, like, what what's the deal.
Speaker 6: You and me both sister? Because this is just something
Speaker 6: that is really hard to grasp and have people truly understand.
Speaker 6: And one breath, we're saying, you know, we're here to
Speaker 6: help and take care of people, and you know, want
Speaker 6: to make sure that we have the best interest of
Speaker 6: the individual of you know, being a whole person, you know,
Speaker 6: health wise, mental, spiritual, emotional. But then in the same
Speaker 6: breath you've got physicians who are just you know, promoting
Speaker 6: these products and saying that they're safe and that they
Speaker 6: have little to no risk, and it's like, that's not true.
Speaker 6: You can't say that. And that's part of the disconnect
Speaker 6: that we have in our healthcare system is that people
Speaker 6: consistently are losing trust because we allow these companies to
Speaker 6: manipulate situations out of being transparent and trustworthy, and then
Speaker 6: people start to catch on.
Speaker 5: And Congress is never ever in a million years going
Speaker 5: to pass any legislation protecting the American people over these
Speaker 5: companies because and that's why what was.
Speaker 2: The nineteen eighty six that it was signed into law.
Speaker 6: Yes, right, the vaccine.
Speaker 2: Yes, So they're never going to remove that right and
Speaker 2: that liability shield. They're never going to remove that.
Speaker 5: Why Because we allow lobbyists like pharmaceutical companies to provide
Speaker 5: stocks and insigner trading and things like that for congressional members,
Speaker 5: for state representatives included, and so that's how they're getting
Speaker 5: their money.
Speaker 2: So if you're are you going to bite the hand
Speaker 2: that feeds you.
Speaker 6: No, And that's what we want everybody to hear. We
Speaker 6: want everybody to hear what she just said. They are
Speaker 6: never going to remove the nineteen eighty six Act, which
Speaker 6: provides vaccine manufacturer or shield liability. Why because the people
Speaker 6: that you elected into these offices are actually being paid
Speaker 6: and bribed and being able to trade and do all
Speaker 6: this other stuff behind the scenes with the very companies
Speaker 6: that are paying them to vote in their favor, right.
Speaker 5: And there they have lobbyists that helped to put forth
Speaker 5: legislation to CYA. You know, I mean, look at the
Speaker 5: whole Monsanto rounda thing that just happened. You know, they
Speaker 5: have lobbyists in place that you know, pay huge dividends,
Speaker 5: stock options, bonuses, a free vacation ship to congress people, yep, yep,
Speaker 5: and then they.
Speaker 6: Pretend that they are willing to stand in and good faith.
Speaker 6: And you know, again, that's the really sad part about
Speaker 6: this is that there's nobody seemingly trustworthy and money, how
Speaker 6: many talks, many talks, and there's those other things too,
Speaker 6: right that you can be threatened with their position, they
Speaker 6: can be threatened with other things. Not saying that doesn't
Speaker 6: exist either, but more often than not, it's, you know, hey,
Speaker 6: you scratch your back, all scratchers and then they get
Speaker 6: to basically do whatever they want. And again, as the consumer,
Speaker 6: you're the victim.
Speaker 2: Right one hundred percent, And there will never be.
Speaker 5: Justice for victims in my opinion, because we have allowed
Speaker 5: our government to become so bloated, and the way that
Speaker 5: regulations work and the revolving door policies between the CDC,
Speaker 5: the FDA and pharma, because the executives from pharma will
Speaker 5: come and work for the CDC or FDA and vice versa,
Speaker 5: you know, and and it's like a revolving door process.
Speaker 2: Like seventy five out of the last I don't know
Speaker 2: how many.
Speaker 5: Directors went on to be pharma people where they're and
Speaker 5: they're switching roles where they're working in the drug approval
Speaker 5: processes and stuff.
Speaker 2: That's exactly how that pipeline works.
Speaker 5: And so until we close those doors and close the
Speaker 5: loopholes and get the lobbyists out and prevent them from
Speaker 5: stock trading, you know, and all of that stuff. Nothing's
Speaker 5: ever going to change, and victims are going to always
Speaker 5: bear the brunt of stuff because there's no money in helping.
Speaker 6: You exactly and just right and just to close out.
Speaker 6: You know, we are always on the side of you
Speaker 6: make your own decisions. You are individual who can say
Speaker 6: yes or no. But what we're saying is that you
Speaker 6: don't have informed consent. Why do you not have the
Speaker 6: best informed consent? Because a lot of these things are
Speaker 6: being hidden from you, they're being downplayed, they're not being
Speaker 6: disclosed to you. So you are assuming in good faith
Speaker 6: that the healthcare provider is providing you all information to
Speaker 6: make the best informed decision. A lot of people bought
Speaker 6: that narrative. They took it and they were harmed in
Speaker 6: some way or have some sort of injury. And that
Speaker 6: goes to show that when that happens, you can't sue
Speaker 6: the manufacturer because there's the nineteen eighty six Act that's
Speaker 6: in play. They are protected, they have shield viability. The
Speaker 6: fact that these two hundred plus cases were able to
Speaker 6: go as far as they did to go against MIRK
Speaker 6: was miraculous in itself, but again just proved how heavy
Speaker 6: of a hand big Pharma has because Mirk was able
Speaker 6: to come down and only pay fifty million dollars to
Speaker 6: say they didn't do anything, which that's ironic, and then
Speaker 6: doubled out and say, hey, we're going to make it
Speaker 6: part of the contingencies that you're going to go on
Speaker 6: a gag war so that I can't ever speak about it.
Speaker 6: And so these are why we say putting vaccines that
Speaker 6: don't have any liability for the manufacturer is trash and
Speaker 6: that they shouldn't be mandated. And to have the audacity
Speaker 6: to double down and suggest that you want to give
Speaker 6: it to a six month old who has no immune
Speaker 6: system and the risk versus benefit is kind of sus
Speaker 6: This is why we argue, This is why we say,
Speaker 6: is this truly what really needs to happen? And in
Speaker 6: my opinion, absolutely not. This should not be allowed. They
Speaker 6: should not be able to even have this conversation. And
Speaker 6: we continue to fight back to push to say, hey,
Speaker 6: these are not they should never be mandated, They should
Speaker 6: always be at the will of the parent making the decision.
Speaker 6: And so yeah, that's it's just so important that people
Speaker 6: really understand those series of events where it starts and
Speaker 6: where it ends. You are not you don't have the
Speaker 6: upper hand. No matter how this pans out, you will
Speaker 6: not win because the systems that are in place make
Speaker 6: it so that they're protected and you're not.
Speaker 2: Right one hundred percent. And that's the sad facts, you know,
Speaker 2: and and the way it is.
Speaker 5: And unfortunately, like I said, unless they unless we like
Speaker 5: burn it down right and and make a lot of
Speaker 5: changes and then restart something new without all of that
Speaker 5: uh extra special backdoor funding deals and all of that stuff.
Speaker 2: Sadly, you're like cattle.
Speaker 5: Being herded, right, and they're going to brand you, which
Speaker 5: is really honest to God, how I feel about vaccinations,
Speaker 5: because there's no it's the government also looking under the
Speaker 5: over the government for all the adjuvants and all the
Speaker 5: extras that they put in literally every vaccination, including you know,
Speaker 5: like heavy detergents and heavy metals and antibiotics. There's antibiotics
Speaker 5: and a lot of vaccinations and people do not know
Speaker 5: what these things are and you know what all is
Speaker 5: and stuff. So we hope tremendously that this falls on
Speaker 5: some ears that can help with the fight make a
Speaker 5: change do something, use your voice, speak up, because that
Speaker 5: HHS money.
Speaker 2: That's your tax dollars too. You know what I'm saying.
Speaker 5: They don't just have magical money that appears on trees
Speaker 5: in their backyard. They're literally taking money from you to
Speaker 5: create new bio weapons for you so that you'll be
Speaker 5: a patient and then they can treat you.
Speaker 2: And then they can't. You can't soothe them.
Speaker 6: Yeah, you're you're a sheep to your own slaughter by
Speaker 6: the hand of your own money. Yes, but that's just
Speaker 6: the reality check right there. And this is why some
Speaker 6: of us are so passionate about it, because when you
Speaker 6: hear it from another perspective, in that sense, you can't
Speaker 6: unsee that. And when the amount of damage and despair
Speaker 6: and death continues to happen and there's zero liability or accountability,
Speaker 6: you get a little mad, You get a little you
Speaker 6: get a little you know, feel in the fields. And
Speaker 6: so this is why it's important we talk about these
Speaker 6: things because people need to know. So, like Jenna said,
Speaker 6: I really hope even if this helps one person, that
Speaker 6: is one person more saved with an open mind to
Speaker 6: be able to question the science like we always should,
Speaker 6: and be able to make the best decision knowing what
Speaker 6: the information we just provided.
Speaker 5: And I just want to add real quick before we
Speaker 5: end that that three percent of independent studies are also
Speaker 5: controlled by the ninety seven percent as to what is
Speaker 5: allowed to be published. So in not three percent data,
Speaker 5: there are things that are like, oh my gosh, like
Speaker 5: they should have seen this during clinical trials. This is
Speaker 5: an issue, this is a problem. But none of that
Speaker 5: stuff is going to get published. None of it's going
Speaker 5: to be in major medical journals, none of it's going
Speaker 5: to make it to PubMed and peer reviewed stuff because
Speaker 5: they don't want that information getting out. So again, the government,
Speaker 5: hello pharma, because the pharma owns our government. If they're
Speaker 5: funding all of that, the government is also you know,
Speaker 5: squashing the information that people really need to read. Sure,
Speaker 5: so beautiful darling, thank you for another wonderful episode. Where
Speaker 5: can the lovely Ladies and junks find you at?
Speaker 6: Yes, ma'am? So I am a Friday Q and A
Speaker 6: on the Nurses Report on Americaoutloud dot News, where I
Speaker 6: am joined with some other nurses to cover other related
Speaker 6: topics that are going on in the news and in medicine.
Speaker 6: I also co host on the Frontline Messengers podcast with
Speaker 6: the d The Messenger, and then I'm very active on
Speaker 6: Instagram under Hold Underscore the Line CLNC where I do
Speaker 6: a lot of education and awareness on all things related
Speaker 6: to bodily sovereignty and form, consent, right to choose, and
Speaker 6: a very good episode, So thank you for having.
Speaker 5: Me, thank you very much for joining me, and ladies
Speaker 5: and gentlemen, thanks for tuning in for another episode and
Speaker 5: we will see you next time.
Speaker 2: Have a wonderful, wonderful day.