All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 3, 2023 - Epoch Times
09:44
Del Bigtree: The Vaccine Placebos Lie and Taking Regulatory Agencies to Court
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
One of the issues in this story that's so hard to get to as a reporter is because of the liability protection by the 1986 Act, which took all liability away from manufacturers, so we started suing our government because our government is the one that's taken on that liability.
If the manufacturers aren't liable and they have no responsibility to it, Our government's taking it on.
And so Aaron and I devised a plan no one had ever thought of that we would start using FOIA requests, Freedom of Information Act requests.
You know, that's where we get to ask for whatever documents we want from the government.
Because remember, the government works for us.
A lot of people forget this.
We knew that they weren't doing the proper safety trials.
We ended up using FOIA to request things we knew did not exist.
We would like to see your evidence.
That the first six vaccines, given the six months of life, do not cause autism.
How are you making that statement that they don't cause autism?
We'd like to see those trials.
And then they push back and would say, well, you know, we're not answering that.
It's like, no, you have to answer that.
It's a citizen's request.
We need all of your documents.
And then they wouldn't respond, and then we'd sue.
We'd say, now, because it's our right, because you've taken too long, we're going to sue you for your evidence.
And then in courtrooms, they end up having to say things like, we have no trials that have proved that the first six months of vaccines don't cause autism.
So we have all of these lawsuits where we've made the NIAs, the CDC, FDA, Health and Human Services admit that they haven't done any of the safety studies and trials that we're told by experts that have been robustly done and, you know, of course vaccines have been tested for safety.
It's simply not true and we have the evidence of it because we want it in court.
You know, I realized at some point along the way that Anti-vaxxer was this pejorative slur, much like white nationalists or many others that have been used, racist, that have been used very kind of...
Liberally.
That's a kind of a ridiculous nice way of putting it.
Used to frankly destroy people and make them untouchable.
This isn't really about being anti-vaxxer or pro-vaxxer.
It's just simply about understanding what the reality around a particular drug is, right?
It's so simple, really.
And it's hard to watch it.
Like, you know, we're watching RFK Jr.
run for president and have to deal with this assault of this, as you said, a pejorative anti-vaxxer.
When all that's at the heart of this, all that I want to do or that Robert Kennedy wants to do, Is make sure that our vaccines are going through the exact same saline placebo safety trials that most every other drug we take are.
I have never been anti-vax.
I have never told the public to avoid vaccination.
And my views are constantly misrepresented.
I believe vaccines should be tested with the same rigor as other medicines and medications.
Grandpa's Viagra, you know, spent years in safety trials.
The hepatitis B vaccine, we're giving a day one old baby, went through a five-day safety trial, and there was no placebo comparator.
So even if you had an issue inside those five days, there was no way to really prove.
Remember, if you don't have a control group you can compare to, They can always say they were going to die anyway.
Oh, those seizures were natural.
The only way you can make a causal connection between a product and it's causing this problem is you have to have one large group of people that got the product and a large group of people that got a saline injection that has no effect on the human body.
And we followed them for at least two years.
So when they don't do those placebo studies, all we're left with is parents saying, I swear to God, my child was perfectly healthy.
The pharmaceutical industry and all experts will say there is no evidence that that is true.
There's no causal relationship.
Well, that's true because you never did the study that allowed us to say that.
And so lastly, you know, so why is it you're called an anti-vaxxer?
When I want just the same study that can track safety that a cancer drug is going through.
You will take more care with a drug when people are dying of cancer.
And they'll say, I will try that trial drug.
I don't care if it works or not.
I'm in stage four.
I'm dying here.
I want to try it.
And the pharmaceutical industry and the FDA will say, I'm sorry.
Safety is so important that we need to continue this trial for two to five or ten years To make sure it's safe before you get it, meaning you're going to be dead from the cancer before we ever find out it's safe, and it doesn't matter that you're saying, I don't care if it's safe, I'm willing to take the risk.
That is the level of safety for drugs for people that are dying, but that is not the level of safety for children who aren't dying, that are perfectly healthy, don't actually need this product to survive unless maybe they come in contact with a virus, but you would think we would have even more robust Long-term safety trials.
Instead, they're doing really none at all.
And that's the issue.
And there's only one other way you could fix this problem, which is now that the vaccines are on the market, and here's the scam, as soon as it's licensed, now they will say it would be unethical to do a placebo-based trial.
So you cannot do this post-marketing because now that everyone in the planet is allowed to get the product, We can't have a placebo group and deny them.
It would be like going to Tuskegee and not giving them penicillin, right?
That's the argument.
So this is why it's so important that this trial gets done in the pre-licensure phase.
We saw it with COVID. As soon as the EUA, the Emergency Use Authorization came out, now in that vaccine trial, it is one of the first times we've seen a large saline placebo group.
Part of that was because ICANN, my nonprofit, When the phase 3 trials were starting, we saw that they were going to compare the COVID vaccine that Pfizer was making to a meningococcal vaccine as their control.
I was like, no, no, no, no, no.
Meningococcal has its own side effects.
I don't want to compare one side effect problem with another side effect issue.
I want you to compare it against saline placebos, something that has no effect on the human body.
Is it as safe as getting nothing at all?
That's what we want to know.
That's how you determine safety.
And so we sent a citizen's petition to the FDA and said, I can.
My nonprofit will publicly state.
Remember, we've won lawsuits against them, so they take us very seriously.
We will publicly state that you did not have a proper safety trial of the COVID vaccine unless you add a saline placebo.
And so they stopped on the phase three trials two days later.
And about seven days later, they never wrote us and said we did it because of what you said.
But suddenly they replaced the meningococcal group and said, we're going to go with a saline placebo, which was fantastic.
Now, half of the 45,000 people are going to get a saline placebo.
We're like, great, this is great.
But what happens?
Remember, there's one other part of this long-term safety trial.
The only way we'll know that this COVID vaccine that could potentially manipulate our RNA, it's an mRNA product, and any scientist that tells you they know unequivocally this has no way of mutating your DNA or your genetics, that has absolutely not been proven.
You can't prove it unless we have a long-term safety trial.
What do they do?
A couple weeks after that second shot is delivered in the trial group, they look at not 45,000 people, which is what you're thinking is the size of this trial.
They take the first 170 that get infected.
170 people decided the fate of the world.
We heard 45,000 people.
It was 170.
And out of 170, like nine of them had been vaccinated.
And so they compared those two numbers, the 160, 60 or 70 odd and the 9 you know that were unvaccinated And said it's 95% effective.
So the EUA, the FDA says, based on those 170, we're going to determine it's safe about two to three weeks after the second shot, having no idea if it's going to cause cancer in our future, no idea if it's going to cause mutagenics or all the things we test drugs for.
Are there long-term side effects we are unaware of?
And what happens is as soon as they deliver the EUA, meaning now everyone in the country has the right to try this experimental vaccine, The pharmaceutical industry, in this case Pfizer and then Moderna, said, well now it's unethical to continue with our safety trials because since anyone can get it, you're blocking the placebo group from getting a product everyone else is allowed to get.
That's not right.
And they went and vaccinated everybody in the placebo group.
Therefore, erasing any ability to be able to make a causal connection to all the issues we are now hearing about.
Swelling of the heart, myocarditis, periocarditis, anaphylaxis.
Bell's palsy, you know, blood clots, these crazy blood clot stories we're hearing about.
And what does the FDA say?
What does the pharmaceutical industry say?
We have no studies that are showing us a signal of that.
What they mean is we have stopped all the studies that would have shown us a signal, and we are refusing to do any studies that would show us a signal.
And that is how the entire vaccine program has worked from day one.
They don't do the science.
So they can tell you that that injury you think just happened to your child, we have no evidence that the vaccine causes that.
▲
Export Selection