Brett Weinstein
Episode Stats
Words per minute
151.63557
Summary
It's been four years since the first stories appeared in the U.S. about a virus spreading through a city in central China, Wuhan . The virus didn't have a name. Over time, it was named COVID, and it changed world history . We thought it would be worth taking just a moment to explain what that looks like .
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Amazingly, it was four years next month that the first stories appeared in the American
00:00:15.800
news media about a virus spreading through a city in central China, Wuhan.
00:00:23.460
Over time, it was named COVID, and it changed world history.
00:00:27.580
It wasn't that long ago, but we don't talk about it very much anymore in the way that
00:00:32.300
you don't talk about traumatic things that happened to you.
00:00:35.020
But that doesn't mean it's over, and it doesn't mean that huge decisions aren't being made
00:00:40.540
right now that will affect your life and the lives of your children.
00:00:47.020
The story is not over, and so we thought it would be worth taking just a moment to explain
00:00:53.300
what that looks like, and there's no better person to do that than Brett Weinstein.
00:01:00.300
He's got a fascinating bio, which you should look up because it's an amazing story.
00:01:04.280
He's now the host with his wife of the Dark Horse podcast and the author of a bestselling
00:01:09.260
and very excellent book that came out not long ago.
00:01:15.200
So instead of peppering you with all kinds of pointed questions, I want to guide you and
00:01:20.740
sit back mostly as you tell the story of COVID in condensed form.
00:01:26.800
What are the outlines of what we know now, and where are we going?
00:01:32.160
Well, first, let me just respond to something you said up front.
00:01:34.920
Nobody wants to be thinking about COVID anymore.
00:01:40.480
I don't want to be thinking about COVID anymore either.
00:01:42.900
But what I find is that every time I look away and move on to other topics, things move
00:01:51.220
And these things couldn't possibly be more important.
00:01:54.040
So I'm going to try to explain where we are and how we got here and what the implications
00:01:59.320
are in the present that people are largely not noticing.
00:02:05.100
So I thought maybe it would be worth starting with just some parts of the education that
00:02:13.260
I know that I learned a tremendous amount about not only viruses and pandemics and public health,
00:02:20.640
but also about pharma, which is something, frankly, I thought I knew a lot about.
00:02:24.520
I had run into it earlier in my academic career.
00:02:28.480
So I thought I was something of an expert, but I got schooled over the course of COVID.
00:02:33.260
What I've come to understand is something I call the game of pharma.
00:02:39.040
If you think about what pharma is, we tend to imagine that it is an industry that is hell-bent
00:02:50.520
In fact, pharma is healthy when people are sick.
00:02:54.040
And many people have noticed this, that, of course, it depends on ill health, so it has
00:02:58.840
But what I think most of us did not realize is how elaborate its bag of tricks is and what
00:03:10.100
And to describe it, I would say pharma is an intellectual property racket, or at least
00:03:29.520
And what it's looking for is a disease to which these things plausibly apply.
00:03:37.140
And its profits go up to the extent that the disease is widespread, to the extent that the
00:03:42.460
disease is serious, to the extent that competing drugs are unsafe or ineffective, to the extent
00:03:50.220
that the government will mandate a drug, to the extent that the medical establishment will
00:03:59.220
Well, that I did, and that's where I learned all of these tricks, was that basically every
00:04:06.800
day of the year, pharma is engaged in portraying the properties that it owns as more useful
00:04:14.600
than they are, safer than they are, and persuading the medical establishment, the journals, the
00:04:22.580
societies, the hospitals, the government, to direct people towards drugs they wouldn't otherwise
00:04:35.200
And it is necessary to understand that because you need to realize that before COVID ever happened,
00:04:42.580
pharma was expert at figuring out how to portray a disease as more widespread and more serious
00:04:49.460
than it was, it was excellent at portraying a compound as more efficacious than it is, safer
00:04:58.640
And so when COVID happened, all of this occurred at a different scale.
00:05:02.220
COVID was bigger than anything that had ever happened before, but none of it was new to pharma
00:05:06.500
and all of it was new to us in the public trying to understand what we were supposed to do about
00:05:14.600
So I'm now going to put a hypothesis on the table about why things unfolded the way they
00:05:29.340
Why was it so obsessed with making sure that we all took the so-called vaccines that were
00:05:37.860
Why was it so obsessed with making sure that we didn't take the alternative repurposed drugs
00:05:44.360
that so many doctors claimed were highly effective?
00:05:49.600
Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, these things were demonized and we were told not to take
00:05:55.000
them and we were mocked if we distrusted that advice.
00:06:02.660
And again, this is not certain, but what I've pieced together is that pharma owned what
00:06:10.560
was potentially the biggest pharmacological cash cow conceivable.
00:06:20.000
And I mean that sincerely, something truly brilliant that would potentially not only allow a bright
00:06:27.760
future from the perspective of creating new treatments and new, I hesitate to use the word
00:06:36.200
vaccine because it doesn't really apply, but new vaccine-like technologies, but that it could do
00:06:42.580
this indefinitely into the future and it could allow you to reformulate every vaccine currently
00:06:47.660
And what's more, the property in question would allow this whole process to be streamlined at
00:06:54.160
an incredible level because effectively all you needed was a sequence, a genetic sequence from a
00:07:00.440
pathogen and you could literally type it into a machine and produce a vaccine that was already in
00:07:09.640
use, but for the swapping out of the antigen in question.
00:07:13.960
Yeah, it's exactly like Legos and presumably with some justification to the extent that this
00:07:21.440
technology was safe, pharma would be able to argue, well, we don't really need to go through
00:07:26.720
thorough safety testing of the entire platform each time we deploy it.
00:07:30.640
All we need to do is figure out if the antigen that we've loaded in this time is in some way more
00:07:38.820
The problem, so that the technology in question is the mRNA transfection platform, which was
00:07:51.000
It solves a really important problem from gene therapy, which is oftentimes you want to get
00:07:59.640
Let's say that you are missing a functional copy of a gene that produces some product like
00:08:06.260
Well, you could take insulin or it would be great if we could convince your body to produce
00:08:14.920
Very hard to do that, though, because the body is composed, an adult human is 30 trillion
00:08:21.360
So how do you get cells to take up the message and produce enough of the product to matter?
00:08:26.560
Well, the mRNA technology allows you to induce cells to take up an mRNA message, which they
00:08:38.160
And it does this by encapsulating these messages in lipid nanoparticle.
00:08:46.140
And you may remember from basic chemistry, like attracts like, like dissolves like.
00:08:51.440
And so these fats get taken up by cells very regularly for simple chemical reasons.
00:08:59.920
And voila, you've gotten cells to produce something that they didn't know how to produce
00:09:10.940
The problem, however, is that this amazing technology, which it's very hard to estimate how
00:09:21.940
I think hundreds of billions of dollars is absolutely certain.
00:09:25.960
Trillions of dollars is not off the table, given that this would allow patentable drugs
00:09:35.760
But the technology itself has a terrible safety flaw that, in my opinion, never would have gotten
00:09:47.280
And that flaw is that there's no targeting of the lipid nanoparticles.
00:09:54.740
The lipid nanoparticles will be taken up by any cell they encounter.
00:09:58.400
And while that's not perfectly random, it will be haphazard around the body.
00:10:02.920
Now, if they were limited, if they simply stayed in the injection site, as we were told when the
00:10:08.780
vaccine rollout began, the vaccines, the so-called vaccines stay in the injection site, well, then
00:10:15.640
the cells that took up these messages would be in your deltoid, and what happens next wouldn't
00:10:22.700
The problem is we learned very quickly, and should have predicted from the get-go, that
00:10:28.820
All of anything you inject in that space is going to leak out, and it's going to circulate
00:10:39.040
I know that, but it involves understanding how immunity naturally develops.
00:10:47.260
So when you become sick, let's say with a virus, some particle has gotten into a cell
00:10:56.160
of yours, and it has hijacked it, and it has tricked that cell into producing copies of
00:11:03.080
itself more viruses, which affect or infect adjacent cells, and if the virus is an effective
00:11:09.500
one, they will also figure out how to jump out of you, like when you cough, and get inhaled
00:11:17.840
The body's response to seeing a cell of yours, which it recognizes as yours, that is producing
00:11:26.320
an antigen, that is to say a protein that it doesn't recognize, is to assume that that cell
00:11:35.740
That is the only correct thing for the body to do when it encounters a cell of yours making
00:11:42.260
Now, this transfection technology, the mRNA vaccine technology, as they called it, does
00:11:48.960
It tricks your cells into producing foreign antigens, which the immune system cannot help but
00:11:54.700
recognize as an indicator of infection, and it destroys those cells.
00:11:59.300
If those cells are in the muscle in your arm, not a huge deal.
00:12:04.900
You get a sore arm, presumably, and we might be able to measure a decrease in your strength,
00:12:12.320
However, if these transfection agents circulate around the body, as we know they do, and get
00:12:19.040
taken up haphazardly, then whatever tissue starts producing these foreign proteins is going
00:12:25.620
So you definitely wouldn't want any of this getting near a person's heart or brain?
00:12:36.080
It's particularly critical if it happens in your heart, because your heart, for reasons
00:12:41.180
we can go into if you want, has an incredibly low capacity for repair.
00:12:49.340
What it does, you get a wound, lose cells from your heart, your heart then scars over.
00:12:55.860
That will affect your heart rhythm, your capacity to transport oxygen and CO2 around the body.
00:13:01.060
It will potentially shorten your life, and it will also create a vulnerability that you
00:13:11.880
So if you imagine somebody has received one of these transfection shots, and especially
00:13:18.400
in the unfortunate case where it has been injected intravenously, which isn't supposed to happen,
00:13:26.200
but the instructions on this shot were not to aspirate the needle.
00:13:31.760
A proper injection should involve pulling back on the plunger in the syringe in order to see
00:13:38.060
If there's blood, that indicates that you've landed in a circulatory vessel and that you
00:13:43.860
should back the needle off or plunge it farther so that you're not injecting it directly into
00:13:48.820
But in the case of these shots, amazing as this sounds, the advice was don't do that because
00:13:55.420
it requires the needle to be in the person's arm longer, might create extra pain, and they
00:13:59.660
didn't want to create vaccine hesitancy was their excuse.
00:14:02.000
So anyway, you might get a big bolus of this material, and it might flow right through your
00:14:11.440
And just for perspective, do we have any guess as to how many of these shots were given out
00:14:25.440
I mean, in addition to the technology itself being remarkable, the rate at which this was
00:14:36.340
I don't know if we'll have time to get to the downsides of the way they scaled up their
00:14:42.340
But if we can separate the marvel of what they did, yes, there's an awful lot of stuff here
00:14:53.080
Could, so, I'm sorry, I don't want to take you off track, but you were describing what would
00:14:57.220
happen if it went to various organs that would damage them.
00:15:05.620
We clearly are seeing an uptick in cancers and an uptick in cancers that are unusual,
00:15:14.160
So, maybe if we have time, we can come back to the reasons that that might be occurring.
00:15:19.860
There's a lot of discussion amongst the medical dissidents about why that pattern exists and
00:15:25.760
But yes, clearly cancers are one of the failure modes of the body, and this highly novel technology
00:15:33.900
clearly had that as a risk, even if we didn't know what mechanism it would happen by.
00:15:39.420
But yes, if you, let's say you're a soccer player and you've been injected with this stuff
00:15:43.780
and a bolus of it has hit your heart and caused a bunch of your cells to be destroyed by your
00:15:48.880
own immune system, by cytotoxic T cells and natural killer cells.
00:15:55.600
If you manage to survive to have it scar over, then that wound will be less of a vulnerability
00:16:05.000
But if in the period after you've been damaged, before your heart has fully scarred, you were
00:16:10.140
to push yourself to some new athletic limit, let's say you're in the middle of a particularly
00:16:17.080
That would be exactly the time when a weakness in a vessel wall might cause a critical failure
00:16:25.500
So this was a very plausible mechanism to explain the pattern of sudden deaths that we have
00:16:31.520
seen oftentimes in people who are unusually healthy and athletic.
00:16:41.880
Pharma had a potentially tremendously lucrative property that it couldn't bring to market because
00:16:49.380
a safety test would have revealed this unsolvable problem at its heart.
00:16:55.380
And so what I'm wondering, my hypothesis, is that it recognized that the thing that would
00:17:01.480
bypass that obstacle was an emergency that caused the public to demand a remedy to allow them
00:17:11.980
to go back to work and to living their lives, that would cause the government to streamline
00:17:17.940
the safety testing process so that it wouldn't spot these things.
00:17:22.500
And indeed, one of the things that we see in addition to a lot more harm in those safety
00:17:27.720
tests than we were initially allowed to understand, but also the safety testing was radically truncated
00:17:36.220
so that long-term harms were impossible to detect.
00:17:41.140
So the hypothesis in question is pharma used an emergency to bypass an obstacle to bring an
00:17:51.000
incredibly lucrative technology to normalize it in the public and the regulatory apparatus,
00:17:58.040
to sneak it by the things that would ordinarily prevent a dangerous technology like this one
00:18:04.800
So I think that sounds entirely plausible, in fact, likely, in fact, very likely.
00:18:11.560
But the downside for pharma, and of course for the rest of us, is that if you roll out
00:18:16.180
a harmful product evading the conventional safety screens, you're going to hurt a lot of people.
00:18:24.480
So just the first part of the question, what do you think we're going to see in terms of
00:18:30.460
a death toll and injury toll from this vaccine?
00:18:34.800
A lot has gone into preventing us from answering that question, and some very dedicated people
00:18:41.100
have done some very high-quality work, and the numbers are staggering.
00:18:48.900
Now, I'm hesitant to say what I think the toll might be, because this is not my area of expertise,
00:18:58.320
I would say John Campbell would be an excellent source to look at.
00:19:02.400
There's some new material out of New Zealand, which is jaw-dropping.
00:19:06.020
I haven't had time to look at it in depth, so I'm a little concerned about putting my weight on the ice.
00:19:17.060
Joseph Freeman and his colleagues, including Peter Doshi, did an evaluation of Pfizer's own
00:19:34.920
In fact, Pfizer only allowed one month before it vaccinated its controls and made it impossible
00:19:42.820
And what they found was a 1 in 800 rate of serious adverse event.
00:19:58.220
1 in 800 rate, which in one month, that suggests a very high mortality risk.
00:20:08.720
And in fact, we saw mortality in the safety trials.
00:20:11.960
What happens over the long term, we've certainly seen such a range of pathologies that have
00:20:17.780
crippling effects on people's health that I shudder to think how many people have actually...
00:20:24.740
So I'm not a math genius, but 1 in 800 shots times billions is a lot of people.
00:20:37.700
I was recently at a conference in Romania on the COVID crisis.
00:20:43.440
And so there was a lot of work trying to unpack what we actually understand.
00:20:47.240
And I saw a credible estimate of something like 17 million deaths globally from this technology.
00:20:59.020
Well, when you scale up to billions, it's not hard to reach a number like that with a
00:21:07.980
Now, to your deeper question, I think let's steel man...
00:21:14.780
Just for perspective, I mean, that's like the death toll of a global war.
00:21:26.760
And amazingly, there is no way in which it's over.
00:21:32.180
I mean, we are still apparently recommending these things for healthy children.
00:21:37.020
Ever stood any chance of getting any benefit from them.
00:21:39.840
Every chance of suffering harms that are not only serious, but tragic on the basis that children
00:21:49.620
If you ruin a child's immune system in youth, they have to spend the rest of their presumably
00:21:58.280
So it never made any sense that we were giving this to kids in the first place.
00:22:02.100
The fact that we're still doing it when the emergency, to the extent there even was one,
00:22:08.560
And when there's never been any proper justification of administering it to healthy kids.
00:22:18.120
And the shot doesn't prevent you from catching or transmitting it.
00:22:21.600
So there was just literally no justification you could come out.
00:22:26.260
But I think a lot of us, maybe call us normies, have a hard time imagining the breathtaking evil
00:22:39.800
that it would take to allow such a tragedy to unfold or to cause it to unfold for profit.
00:22:56.900
Pharma on a normal day is composed of people who have to become, even if they were doing
00:23:02.060
their job exactly right, they have to be comfortable with causing a certain amount of death.
00:23:08.260
If you give a drug to people, if the net effect is positive, but it's going to kill some people
00:23:12.720
who would have lived if they never got it, somehow you have to sleep at night having put
00:23:17.880
that drug into the world. And, you know, we want, if we had a healthy pharma industry,
00:23:23.800
we would want them to produce the drugs that had a net benefit. And that benefit includes some
00:23:30.640
serious harms. So once you have stepped on that slippery slope, though, once you have become
00:23:37.140
comfortable with causing deaths, then I believe it becomes very easy to rationalize that the greater
00:23:43.520
good is being served by X, Y, or Z. And then there's some point at which you're causing enough
00:23:48.160
harm and you're, you know, when pharma takes an old out of patent drug and supersedes it with a new
00:23:58.240
highly profitable drug, they've done something that's negative. We should almost always prefer
00:24:03.760
the older drug unless the evidence is extremely convincing. The new drug is just worlds better
00:24:08.760
because an old drug, we know something about its interactions with other things. We know
00:24:13.660
something about its safety profile. New is not better when it comes to molecules that you're
00:24:18.080
going to be taking into your, your biology. Fair. But pharma has to be in the business of getting
00:24:26.280
you to take the new and having you distrust the old. And so anyway, I think, I think there's a way in
00:24:31.680
which the rationalization has no limit and they've gotten to the point that they are willing to cause a
00:24:37.700
huge amount of death apparently. Um, and even at the point that it's been revealed in public,
00:24:42.120
uh, they don't stop, which is another amazing fact. You would imagine that they would have been
00:24:48.360
embarrassed into stopping this vaccination program at this point. So the problem though, I would say
00:24:54.440
for, for pharma and for the politicians who, uh, support and promote them in the media who do the
00:25:00.040
same, is that, um, there are people like you who are not crackpots, who are scientists and physicians,
00:25:08.100
long-time researchers with fully credentialed work histories, not too many, but a sizable number
00:25:14.160
who will not let go, who are completely dogged in the pursuit of more data about this. Um, so like,
00:25:23.040
what do they do with you and people like you? Well, I think the astonishing thing is that a,
00:25:29.320
as you point out, small group of dissidents upended their narrative. Uptake rates on the new boosters
00:25:37.960
are in the low single digits. So a large single digit. Yes. So nobody's taking it. Nobody's
00:25:44.720
taking it. Now I'm troubled by the fact that at the same time, we don't see, uh, a massive majority
00:25:52.580
acknowledging the vaccination campaign was a mistake in the first place. They got it and they don't want
00:25:56.980
to think about it. And I get it. I get it. Um, I wouldn't want to think about it either, but the
00:26:03.900
problem is it's a moral obligation. I mean, we're still injecting these things into kids for God's
00:26:09.600
sake. So, um, it is important to stand up and say I was had, and I think all of us were, uh, I, I believed
00:26:17.740
that this vaccine was likely effective when it first came out. And the thing that triggered Heather and me
00:26:24.460
to question it was the fact that we were also told that it was safe, which couldn't possibly be true.
00:26:29.820
Might've been harmless, but they couldn't say safe because nobody on earth knew what the long-term
00:26:34.480
impacts would be. And when you say safe, you're not, uh, if I say I drove home drunk, um, but I made
00:26:44.340
it without harm. So it was safe. You know that I have said something foolish. Yes. And in this case,
00:26:49.400
even if the thing had turned out to be harmless, nobody could know that it was, so it wasn't safe.
00:26:53.920
And for them to assure us that it was, was a lie from the get-go. That's what caused Heather and me
00:26:58.560
to start looking into it. And the deeper we dug, the crazier the story got. Not safe and ineffective,
00:27:04.820
in fact, harmful and, uh, shockingly ineffective at everything that you might want it to be effective
00:27:10.760
at. Um, so the story is a, an odd one. The fact that that small number of dissidents was able to
00:27:20.580
upend the narrative, was able to bring people's awareness to the massive levels of harm and the
00:27:27.100
ineffectiveness of the shots is in some ways, um, the most surprising element of this story.
00:27:33.540
And I think it truly surprised, um, pharma and its partners in social media, in government, in
00:27:42.040
non-governmental organizations. I think they thought that they owned enough of the media that
00:27:49.960
they could sell us any narrative that they wished. And I think surprising as it is, they didn't really
00:27:56.460
understand that podcasts could possibly be a countervailing force of significance.
00:28:07.320
You would say, right? You know, it's a, it's a, it's failing to update from the buying by the barrel
00:28:12.400
aphorism. Um, so what happened was it turned out that a number of us were willing to make mistakes
00:28:21.540
and correct them in real time to talk about this in plain English with the public, um, to do so,
00:28:27.200
you know, in Joe Rogan's man cave. And the fact is people listened because of course this was on
00:28:33.620
everybody's mind and what they were supposed to do to protect, you know, they'd been terrified and
00:28:38.060
they, what to do to protect your family's health was a question that everybody wanted to know the
00:28:42.620
answer to. So our ability to reach millions of people surprised those who thought they were just
00:28:48.920
going to shove this narrative down our throats. And this gets me to the, the WHO, the World Health
00:28:57.000
Organization and its pandemic preparedness, uh, plan modifications. What I believe is going on
00:29:04.460
is the World Health Organization is now revising the structures that allowed the dissidents to upend
00:29:13.560
the narrative and they are looking for a rematch. Um, what they want are the measures that would have
00:29:21.240
allowed them to silence the podcasters to mandate, uh, various things internationally in a way that
00:29:29.040
would prevent the emergence of a control group that would allow us to see harms clearly. Um, so that's
00:29:37.640
the reason that I think people, as much as they want to move on from thinking about COVID, maybe stop
00:29:43.840
thinking about COVID, but do start thinking about what has taken place with respect to medicine, with
00:29:50.900
respect to public health, with respect to pharma and ask yourself the question, given what you now know,
00:29:57.680
would you want to relive a pandemic like the COVID pandemic without the tools that allowed you to
00:30:04.700
ultimately in the end, see clearly that it didn't make sense to take another one of these shots or
00:30:09.340
to have your kids take, right? We want those tools. In fact, we need them. And, um, something is quietly
00:30:16.060
moving just out of sight in order that we will not have access to them the next time we face a serious
00:30:23.180
emergency. So you're saying that an international health organization could just end the First Amendment
00:30:28.940
in the United States. Yes. And in fact, um, as much as this sounds, I know that it sounds preposterous,
00:30:36.620
but it does not sound preposterous. The ability to do it is currently under discussion at the
00:30:44.780
international level. And it's almost impossible to exaggerate how troubling what is being discussed
00:30:53.580
is. In fact, I think it is fair to say that we are in the middle of a coup, that we are actually
00:31:03.420
facing the elimination of our national and our personal sovereignty. And that that is the purpose
00:31:13.660
of what is being constructed, that it has been, um, written in such a way that you are, your eyes are
00:31:21.340
supposed to glaze over as you attempt to sort out what is it, uh, what is under discussion.
00:31:28.700
And if you do that, then come May of this year, your nation is almost certain to sign on to an
00:31:37.500
agreement that in some utterly vaguely described future circumstance, a public health emergency,
00:31:44.700
which the director general of the World Health Organization has total liberty to define in any way
00:31:50.860
that he sees fit. In other words, nothing prevents, um, climate change from being declared a public
00:31:57.820
health emergency that would trigger the provisions of these modifications. And in the case that some
00:32:05.100
emergency or some, uh, pretense of an emergency shows up, the provisions that would kick in are
00:32:13.180
beyond jaw-dropping. So, before you get into it, and I just want to thank you, by the way,
00:32:21.820
for taking the time to go through this proposal, because you're absolutely right. It's impenetrable.
00:32:27.260
It's designed to be, to cloak what they're saying rather than eliminate it. Um, what's it called?
00:32:32.940
Well, the funny thing is actually, I was looking, um, this morning to find out what the current name is,
00:32:39.820
and the names have actually been shifted slightly, clearly a feature.
00:32:43.180
Oh, it's a shape-shifting. Yeah, it is. So, what I would do in order, and, and I, it's unclear to me
00:32:52.140
how much that's just simply designed to confuse somebody who tries to sort it out and how much
00:32:57.260
that's designed to, for example, um, game the search engine technology that might allow you to
00:33:04.300
crack the changes because to the extent that the name has shifted. Um, so smart. I call it the, um,
00:33:11.580
World Health Organization Pandemic Preparedness Plan, right? And what is under discussion, uh,
00:33:19.580
are some modifications to the global public health regulations and modifications to an existing treaty.
00:33:28.620
But all of this makes it sound minor and procedural. What has been proposed are, uh, and I, again,
00:33:38.060
the number of things included here is incredible. It's hard even for those of us who have been focused
00:33:43.740
on this to track all of the important things under discussion and to deduce the meaning of some of
00:33:48.700
the more subtle provisions. But, um, they, uh, the World Health Organization and its signatory nations
00:33:57.020
will, um, be allowed to define a public health emergency, uh, on any basis that having declared one,
00:34:07.180
they will be entitled to mandate remedies. The remedies that are named include, um, vaccines,
00:34:18.700
uh, gene therapy technology is literally named in, uh, the set of things that the World Health
00:34:28.140
Organization is going to reserve the right to mandate, um, that it will be in a position to,
00:34:33.180
um, require these things of citizens, that it will be in a position to, uh, dictate our ability to
00:34:41.980
travel. In other words, passports that would be predicated on one having accepted,
00:34:47.580
uh, these technologies are, um, clearly being described. It would have the ability to forbid
00:34:57.020
the use of other medications. So this looks like they're preparing for a rerun where they can just
00:35:03.100
simply take ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, uh, off the table. Um, they also have reserved the ability
00:35:12.540
to dictate how these, uh, measures are discussed, that censorship is described here as well. The
00:35:21.500
right to dictate that's that, of course, misinformation is how they're going to describe
00:35:26.140
it. Well, in fact, I want to ask you to pause and play a soundbite from Tedros, um, in which he
00:35:32.700
alludes to this and I want to get your assessment of it. Here it is. We continue to see misinformation
00:35:37.500
on social media and in mainstream media about the pandemic accord that countries are now negotiating.
00:35:45.340
The claim that the accord will cede power to WHO is quite simply false. It's fake news. Countries will
00:35:54.300
decide what the accord says and countries alone. And countries will implement the accord in line with
00:36:02.940
their own national laws. No country will cede any sovereignty to WHO. If any politician, business
00:36:11.340
person, or anyone at all is confused about what the pandemic accord is and isn't, we would be more
00:36:19.340
than happy to discuss it and explain it. So he's going to be more than happy to discuss and explain
00:36:26.460
the misinformation that you're now spreading. That is comforting. Um, well, on the one hand,
00:36:33.900
I must say, I had not seen that. And, um, it is tremendously good news, actually. What it means
00:36:40.300
is that once again, we have managed to raise awareness of something in time that there is, uh,
00:36:46.860
conceivably a better outcome still available to us. They're spooked enough to bother to lie.
00:36:51.820
There's, there's, you couldn't have said it, uh, more accurately. Yes. Those were clearly lies. And
00:36:58.220
of course, uh, his saying that into a camera is supposed to convince you, you know, nobody could
00:37:03.740
possibly lie so directly. So there must be some truth in what he's saying, which is of course,
00:37:08.140
nonsense. And anybody who goes back through, uh, Matt Orfala's compendium of various things that
00:37:15.660
people have said into cameras over the course of COVID that they then swear they didn't say,
00:37:19.740
you know, months later, um, knows that these folks are very comfortable at saying totally false
00:37:25.100
things into a camera. It doesn't cause them to think twice or sweat or anything. Um, but it's
00:37:31.820
great that we have managed to raise enough awareness that Tedros is actually addressing, uh, our spreading
00:37:38.140
of what it actually is, is mal-information. Um, you're aware of this, uh, this extension now.
00:37:44.300
Yeah. Oh, it's a beautiful. So I was, I was, I'm so old that I was still stuck in the truth
00:37:49.260
or falsehood binary. Yeah. Where, what mattered was whether it was true or not. No, no, no,
00:37:55.500
the, uh, mal-information is actually exactly what you need to know about to see, um, how antiquated
00:38:00.860
that notion is because, um, this was actually the Department of Homeland Security actually issued a memo,
00:38:06.620
um, in which it defined three kinds of, I kid you not, terrorism, mis-dis- and mal-information.
00:38:14.460
Mis-information are errors, uh, disinformation are intentional errors, lies, and mal-information
00:38:21.420
are things that are based in truth but cause you to distrust authority.
00:38:25.260
Oh, so mal-information is what you commit when you catch them lying.
00:38:29.820
Yes. Um, exactly. Um, yeah, it is, it is discussing the lies of your, your government,
00:38:35.180
uh, is mal-information and therefore a kind of terrorism, which I should point out as
00:38:38.700
funny as that is and as obviously Orwellian as that is, it's also terrifying because if you have
00:38:43.900
cracked the history of the spreading tyranny from the beginning of the war on terror, you know that
00:38:49.820
terrorism is not a normal English word the way it once was. Terrorism is now a legal designation
00:38:56.940
that causes all of your rights to evaporate. So at the point that the Department of Homeland Security
00:39:02.220
says that you are guilty of a kind of terrorism for saying true things that cause you to distrust
00:39:06.380
your government, they are also telling you something about what rights they have to silence you.
00:39:11.820
They are not normal rights. So, um, these things are all, uh, terrifying and I do think as much as
00:39:19.660
my jaw's open, the, the COVID pandemic caused us to become aware of a lot of structures that had been
00:39:27.100
built around us. Something that, um, former NSA officer William Binney once described as the
00:39:34.780
turnkey totalitarian state. The totalitarian state is erected around you, but it's not activated. And
00:39:41.180
then once it's built, the key gets turned. And so we are now seeing, I believe something that even
00:39:47.180
outstrips William Binney's description because it's the turnkey totalitarian planet, right? The World
00:39:53.420
Health Organization is above the level of nations and it is going to be in a position if, uh, these
00:39:58.940
provisions pass to dictate to nations, how they are to treat their own citizens, to override their
00:40:04.540
constitutions, despite what Tedros has told you. Um, so that is, um, frightening. It's not inherently about
00:40:13.420
health. What I think has happened is the fact of a possible pandemic causes a loophole in the mind.
00:40:27.420
It's not a loophole in our governance documents. Our constitution doesn't describe exemptions from
00:40:34.620
your rights during time of a pandemic emergency. Your rights simply are what they are and they're
00:40:39.980
not supposed to go anywhere, um, just because there's a disease spreading. Um, but nonetheless,
00:40:46.940
um, people's willingness to accept the erosion of their rights because of a public health emergency,
00:40:54.380
um, has allowed this tyranny to, to use it as a Trojan horse. Yes. And I think that's also, um,
00:41:03.340
um, it's something people need to become aware of that, uh, there are a number of features of our
00:41:11.980
environment that are, um, basically they are blind spots that we can't see past. Vaccine was one. And I
00:41:20.380
know I was in an enthusiast about vaccines. I still believe deeply in the elegance of vaccines as they
00:41:29.420
should exist, but I'm now very alarmed at how they are produced. And I'm even more alarmed at what has
00:41:34.700
been called a vaccine that doesn't meet the definition, right? That because many of us believe
00:41:40.780
that vaccines, uh, were an extremely elegant, low harm, high, uh, efficacy method of preventing disease.
00:41:50.380
When they called this mRNA tech technology of vaccine, many of us, um, gave it more credibility
00:41:56.860
than we should have. If they had called it, uh, a, uh, a, a gene transfection technology,
00:42:03.660
we would have thought, wait, what, you know, that, that's, that sounds highly novel and it
00:42:08.460
sounds dangerous. And how much do we know about the long-term implications? But because they called
00:42:12.460
it a vaccine, people were much readily, much more willing to, to accept it. Public health functions
00:42:18.780
the same way. Um, if you think about it, public health, step back a second, your relationship
00:42:27.420
with your doctor, your personal health, uh, ought to be very important to you. But there are ways
00:42:33.580
in which things that happen at a population level affect your personal health and your doctor's not
00:42:38.220
in a position to do anything about it. So somebody dumping pollution into a stream from which you're
00:42:43.180
pulling fish, you know, you might detect the harm at the population level. You might need a regulation
00:42:48.380
at a population level in order to protect you. Your doctor's not in a position to do a pill to
00:42:52.780
correct it. So the idea that public health is potentially a place to improve all of our well-being
00:42:58.780
is real. But once you decide that there's something above doctors relative to your health,
00:43:04.860
then that can be an excuse for all manner of tyranny. Public health has been, um, adopted. It's like,
00:43:13.740
it's like the sheep's clothing that has allowed the wolf to go after our rights because in theory,
00:43:20.060
it's trying to protect us from harms that we would like to be protected. And it generates such
00:43:24.060
fear. It's such a huge scale that it, it weakens people's moral immune systems.
00:43:28.540
Absolutely. They will accept things they would never accept otherwise.
00:43:31.180
Absolutely. And, uh, as you know, and as, as I know, when we raised questions about what was being,
00:43:39.180
uh, being delivered to us under the guise of public health, we were demonized as if we had a moral
00:43:47.980
defect. It wasn't even a cognitive defect where we were failing to understand the wisdom of these
00:43:52.460
vaccines. It was a moral defect where we were failing to protect others who were vulnerable
00:43:57.100
by questioning these things. Um, so, uh, the idea that health is at stake in some vague, larger sense
00:44:05.180
that requires us to, to override the natural relationship between doctors and patients
00:44:12.540
is itself a coup against medicine by something else. And we need to become aware of that.
00:44:18.460
Okay. Just, just to check kind of like the souls of the people who are running all of this,
00:44:24.540
the public health establishment, international public health establishment. Now that, you know,
00:44:29.500
some researchers believe up to 17 million people could have been killed by these MRNA shots,
00:44:35.180
has any international public health official said, well, hold on a second,
00:44:38.460
we need to get to the bottom of that. Has that provoked any response when the people in charge
00:44:42.540
of our public health? Well, I'm trying to think globally, whether they're good examples. There's
00:44:47.980
certainly some folks who have stood up in the European parliament. Um, but I mean in world health
00:44:54.300
organizations, CDC. No, I don't think so. I don't think we have, we have not seen an acknowledgement
00:45:00.460
of the harm and error. Um, they don't have internet access. They don't know. Like, what is that?
00:45:05.900
Well, that's the incredible thing is I still see claims, um, that just simply,
00:45:13.020
if they initially had believed them, then they are long ago falsified, but they're still being
00:45:18.220
advanced for whoever hasn't noticed, you know, the idea that it's a good idea to vaccinate your kids
00:45:23.100
with MRNA shots being one of them, right? To the extent that there was a panic that caused us to
00:45:29.900
give these shots to people who couldn't possibly benefit from them. You would expect us to have
00:45:35.820
backed that off extremely rapidly as it became impossible, uh, to defend those shots. And yet,
00:45:43.020
because there's still presumably some market for it, um, we are, we are still doing it. So we are living
00:45:50.860
some crazy story in which things that are perfectly obvious are, um, still somehow have not lodged
00:45:56.940
themselves in the official public record. And, you know, I think that has a lot to do with
00:46:03.740
frankly, the death of journalism. Yes. A lot of us are doing jobs that we didn't train for. Heather
00:46:09.820
and I are doing some journalistic job that we certainly didn't train for. We trained to think
00:46:14.060
about biology and, you know, we do that in front of a camera. And so that functions as a kind of
00:46:19.660
stand in for journalism, but the handful of journalists who still exist, um, I think without
00:46:26.780
exception are not scientifically trained, right? You know, Matt Taibbi, Glenn Greenwald, you,
00:46:34.860
we don't have very many people doing investigative journalism and the ones who, uh,
00:46:41.980
are doing it. They don't have the skillset that would make this a natural topic to investigate.
00:46:48.300
So we have to boot up some kind of new institution that will allow us to do this job well. And
00:46:56.060
presumably that will involve taking the few investigative journalists, uh, who remember
00:47:01.500
how to do that job and the few scientists and doctors who are willing to still do their job
00:47:06.940
and, you know, put us together, right? Podcast isn't the right place to do it. If that's all we got,
00:47:12.940
that's all we got. But, um, there's got to be a better, a better method.
00:47:18.540
So if this is ratified or signed onto by the United States in May, six months from now,
00:47:26.220
um, it sounds like that's it. We don't know. Um, I will say I have very little hope
00:47:32.860
that the U.S. will derail this. I have the sense that whatever has captured
00:47:38.700
our government, um, is driving this as well. And so in effect, uh, the U S wants
00:47:46.540
this change. It will in fact, you know, in the same way that the five eyes nations
00:47:51.900
agree to mutually violate the rights of each other's citizens, because
00:47:57.180
that was not prevented in any of our constitutions.
00:47:59.820
I think the U S wants something to force it to violate our constitutional protections and the
00:48:07.100
World Health Organization is going to be that entity. That said, uh, I have recently been to
00:48:15.580
the Czech Republic and I've been to Romania and I've, uh, heard from other parts of the former
00:48:22.940
Eastern bloc that there is resistance, that people who have faced tyranny in living memory,
00:48:29.740
um, are much less ready to accept these changes and that they are actually beginning to, to mount a
00:48:39.900
response. I worry that it will be too thin and easily defeated, especially if they do not understand
00:48:49.020
that actually the world is depending on them, that the traditionally, the countries we traditionally
00:48:54.060
think of as part of the West are compromised and that, uh, these countries, which have more recently
00:49:03.900
joined or rejoined the West are the best hope we've got that they are in a position to derail, um,
00:49:11.340
this set of provisions and that we are depending on them to do it.
00:49:16.700
So I, I just want to end for a few moments on your, on the overview here. So you have all these
00:49:21.500
remarkable things converging in a single 12 month period. You have war, pestilence, political unrest,
00:49:30.540
apparently unsolvable political unrest. What do you think we're looking at in the West? Like,
00:49:35.660
what is this moment and how does it end? Well, um, so I have long been interested in questions of
00:49:44.860
good governance and the West. And, um, um, I'm sad to report that I think the West has actually
00:49:54.540
collapsed. And what we are left with is now, um, a nebulous echo, the values of the West still function,
00:50:03.180
but they function, um, in a vague way. And we have seen that they can evaporate quickly under the right
00:50:09.500
circumstances. Um, I suspect, um, I suspect, and I really don't know, I don't think anybody knows.
00:50:16.620
Um, but I suspect that some powerful set of forces has decided that, um, consent of the governed is too
00:50:30.140
dangerous to tolerate and that it has begun to unhook it. And we do not know how this works.
00:50:43.340
We can see some of the partners who are involved in this, but I don't think we know ultimately who's
00:50:50.380
driving it or where they're going. I think many of the notions that we picked up about, uh, nations and
00:50:58.620
who our friends are and who our enemies are, are, uh, they are now more misleading than they are
00:51:05.900
informative. In other words, uh, I don't think the U S has an enemy called China. I think there are
00:51:14.220
elements within the U S that are partnered within, uh, with elements within the Chinese communist party
00:51:21.500
for practical reasons. And so our, you know, the, the notion that these, uh, two parties are competing
00:51:30.540
with each other, just distracts us from what's actually taking place. But let's just put it this
00:51:38.780
way. We have a large global population. Most people have no useful role through no fault of their own.
00:51:49.740
They have not been given a, uh, an opportunity in life to find a useful way to contribute.
00:51:57.020
And I wonder if, um, the rent seeking elites that have hoarded so much power, uh, are not
00:52:08.140
unhooking our rights because effectively they're afraid of some global French revolution
00:52:16.300
moment as people realize that they've been betrayed and, uh, left without good options.
00:52:23.580
Is that what we're seeing certainly feels like we're facing, um, an end game where important,
00:52:30.460
uh, properties that would once have been preserved by all parties because they might
00:52:35.580
need them one day are now being dispensed with. And we're being, um, you know, we're watching
00:52:42.140
our governmental structures and every one of our institutions captured, hollowed out,
00:52:46.700
turned into a paradoxical inversion of what it was designed to do. That's not an accident.
00:52:54.620
Whether they, you know, the thing that worries me most actually is that whatever is driving this
00:53:00.540
is not composed of diabolical geniuses who at least have some plan for the future, but it's being driven by
00:53:06.940
people who actually do not know what kind of hell they are inviting. Yes. They're going to create a
00:53:15.340
kind of chaos from which, uh, humanity may well not emerge. And I get the sense that, um, unless they
00:53:24.060
have some remarkable plan that is not obvious that they are just simply drunk with power and putting
00:53:32.460
everyone, including themselves in tremendous jeopardy by taking apart the structures on which we depend.
00:53:40.860
How do you see my last question? How do you see your, I mean, you're, you're, you're speaking in,
00:53:46.060
in grand terms that three years ago I, I might've laughed at. I'm not laughing at all. And I think
00:53:50.860
you're absolutely right. Um, but you're also choosing as you know, a 50 ish man, your old man,
00:53:58.620
to say this stuff out loud and to pursue the truth as you find it. And then to talk about it. Like,
00:54:04.620
so how do you, why did you decide to do that? And how do you think that ends? Well, you know,
00:54:09.580
we are all the products of whatever developmental environment produced us. And as I've said on multiple
00:54:17.340
topics where, um, my family has found itself in very uncomfortable and sometimes dangerous
00:54:24.860
circumstances, um, because we speak out, I don't think I had a choice. I just, I, I literally cannot
00:54:35.100
understand how I would sleep at night, how I would look at myself in the mirror if I didn't say what
00:54:41.660
needed to be said. And, you know, um, I heard of a very good speech by Bobby Kennedy, Jr.
00:54:53.820
though neither of us are libertarians. He was at the, uh, Liberty conference in, in Memphis.
00:54:58.780
And the last thing he said in that speech, um, struck me to my core and something
00:55:03.500
I've thought often and said almost never, but there are fates far worse than death. And I think
00:55:18.220
for my part, I have, I have lived an incredible life. I have, I, there's plenty I still want to do,
00:55:29.820
and I am not eager to leave this planet any earlier than I have to. I have a marvelous family. I live
00:55:35.660
in a wonderful place and I've got lots of things on my bucket list, but I got lots of things on my
00:55:41.740
bucket list. However, humanity is depending on everybody who has a position from which to see
00:55:50.380
what is taking place, to grapple with what it might mean, to describe it so that the public understands
00:55:56.460
where their interests are. It is depending on us to do what needs to be done. If we're to have a chance
00:56:03.820
of delivering a planet to our children and our grandchildren that is worthy of them, if we're going
00:56:12.540
to deliver a system that allows them to live meaningful, healthy lives, we have to speak up. And I don't know,
00:56:22.380
I don't know how to get people to do that. I, I'm very hesitant to urge others to put themselves
00:56:31.260
or their families in danger. And I know that everybody's circumstances are different. Some
00:56:34.780
people are struggling just simply to feed a family and keep a roof over their heads. Those people
00:56:39.420
obviously have a great deal less liberty, uh, with respect to, to standing up and saying what needs to be
00:56:45.580
said. But this is really, it's what we call in game theory, a collective action problem.
00:56:53.180
If everybody responds to their personal well-being, if everybody says that's too dangerous to stand up,
00:56:59.500
um, you know, I'm not suicidal. I'm, I can't do it. Then not enough people stand up to change the course
00:57:07.100
of history. Whereas if people somehow put aside the obvious danger to their ability to earn and maybe
00:57:16.780
to their lives of saying what needs to be said, then we greatly outnumber those we are pitted against.
00:57:26.700
They are ferociously powerful, but I would also point out this interesting error.
00:57:35.180
So I call the force that were up against Goliath, just so I remember what the battle is.
00:57:42.540
Goliath made a terrible mistake and it made it most egregiously during COVID, which is it took
00:57:49.980
all of the competent people, took all of the courageous people, and it shoved them out of the
00:57:59.020
institutions where they were hanging on. And it created in so doing the dream team created every
00:58:09.180
player you could possibly want on your team to fight some historic battle against a terrible evil.
00:58:15.420
All of those people are now at least somewhat awake. They've now been picked on by the same enemy.
00:58:21.980
And yeah, all right, we're outgunned. It has a tremendous amount of power, but we've got all
00:58:26.620
of the people who know how to think. So I hate to say it, or maybe I like to say it, but
00:58:34.540
I don't think it's a slam dunk, but I like our odds.
00:58:36.780
I've never met a more fluent biologist, I have to say. Brett Weinstein, amazing conversation.