All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 29, 2021 - Jim Fetzer
57:26
New COVID ‘Scariant’: Fact or Fiction? with Dr. Kaufman
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello everyone, so glad you could join us.
It's really a great honor to have my good friend and colleague Dr. Kauffman here.
It's been since August of, was it last year, that we came together and talked about the Koch postulates and how they're not fulfilled in the case of so-called COVID.
Right now we're being basically confronted globally with this notion of a new deadly virus, the Omicron variants, and they're shutting down borders and people are freaking out because apparently the vaccines don't work as promised and we might need new boosters or new vaccine variants.
And so I wanted to touch base with someone who I consider a world's expert and willing to, you know, really Suffer profound adversity for just standing up and speaking the truth as you see it, along with a ton of evidence.
So I would like to basically just pass it on to you, Andrew, so you can give us an update on the so-called Omicron variants.
Is it fact?
Is it fiction?
Should we be concerned?
Well, you know, Sayer, it's so important to really go back to the primary point, right?
Which is that the whole reason for everything that's been going on with respect to, you know, new policies, public health being overhauled and everything like that is based on the presence of a virus that causes the disease, right?
And so as I've shown many times that They simply haven't actually shown the even the existence of a virus.
So of course, if you don't have a virus to begin with, you can't have any variants of something that doesn't exist.
So for those who are new to the discussion, that's a really provocative statement.
Okay, there is no virus.
So I guess my question would be, are you saying that they haven't isolated and identified You know, a so-called patient zero in Wuhan and identified only that pathogen in the diseased people and not the healthy people from that population.
Is that what we're talking about?
Well, they've never even attempted to do quite what you just described, but what's happened is that they've never actually found a virus from a sick person that they could say is a new virus because they've not actually done the isolation procedure.
They've done what they call virus isolation,
which is a very different thing.
It's a tissue culture experiment.
And it's been shown that you can achieve the same results as their tissue culture experiment,
even without any virus being present.
And that was done originally by the inventor of the process back in the 1950s, and that's John Franklin Enders.
And then it was done just last year by Stefan Lanke, a virologist from Germany,
who showed that you get the same proof of the virus even when there's no virus in the experiment.
Yeah, so for quick, quickly those who are listening who have now been, I guess, influenced and or captured by the narrative that literally millions have died from a virus and even some in our own movement argue that there is a gain-of-function weaponized particle and or waveform that's circulating.
And so, is there then any way that that narrative can coexist with this one or does it pretty much cancel that as a psychological operation?
There's no proof of any virus.
So there's no proof of a wild virus from nature or from bats.
There's no proof of a virus that was created as part of any kind of weapons program.
They haven't actually isolated any virus at all.
And this has been verified in a number of ways.
One interesting way is through freedom of information requests to governments and universities around the world.
In every single occasion, they're unable to provide any scientific evidence that there actually is a virus.
And so what we have is these, basically a simulation.
So really all of the science, and I'm going to show this specifically with the variants, that has been put forth to say there's a virus, to say it has these clinical properties, to make a test, to justify, you know, social isolation procedures or mask wearing.
All of that science has been not a study of real organisms in the real world, it's all been a simulation.
And it's been a simulation by either using computer modeling, so in other words doing experiments just in a computer, Or it's been making actually pseudoviruses, or things that don't exist in nature because they can't find them in nature, they don't actually exist.
So they make a pseudo-manufactured version of it, as I'll show, and then they study that in the laboratory and say that that actually reflects reality.
Wow, so this is obviously for some new listeners a bit of a red pill exercise and I'm playing really devil's advocate here because you know I have also went down the rabbit hole a bit with you and I have to say that it is stunning and shocking to find that the Emperor does not wear any clothes.
And when it comes to even the World Health Organization's page on this new variant, so to speak, which you're going to show us, there's no citation.
There's no evidence.
There's just statements.
Proclamation, right?
Which is the whole point behind eminence-based medicine.
It's a cult of authority.
And so it's disturbing for sure.
And there's a ton of people out there that are like, well, listen, I got sick.
Grandma died.
You know, what are you talking about?
They're responsible, right?
And people like us should basically be, well, speech should be criminalized on health topics such as this.
So we are dealing with that reality.
But the purpose for why I asked you to come on is really so people can really We have the facts, because the facts speak for themselves, and we had to create this entire platform, Be Sovereign, because they've taken out all these platforms we formerly used to speak on, right?
Absolutely.
Yeah, it's an opportunity to hear from one of the most censored, vilified people on the planet, which is you, and I love the fact you're still smiling, you're still doing the good work, because there's almost a certain You know, tragic comedy to this, a certain levity that you carry around the fact that, you know, this is really, it's like the clown world order when you get down to it.
That said, I'd love for you to go further, and actually one last thing is that another reason why I felt this was necessary is that we have seen the rollout of an experimental, you know, gene-modifying vector, whatever you want to call this, quote, vaccine, where basically, because you can't state that they cause any adverse events or deaths, They're basically causing massive harm in the population and then they're blaming that on breakthrough variants.
And so then they're using that and leveraging that as reasons to continue to lurch forward with mandatory vaccination, all these restrictions.
It's just getting worse and worse.
And then they're vilifying those who are standing up or not getting vaccinated and saying we're the reason why everyone is dying.
So I don't see this getting better, Dr. Kaufman, and that's why I really feel people need to take pause And when you listen to Andrew, please make sure you follow up and look at all the incredible work you've done after this episode.
You have to go look at your presentations because they are so thorough.
There's such a scientific credibility to what you do that it's important people don't just stop here, go further.
But I'll stop there and just hand the floor back to you because people are going to be wowed by this information.
Well, thanks so much, Sayer.
And I'll just kind of, you know, close up the introduction because, you know, the fact that I am highly censored means that I'm on the right track.
So I take that as a distinction of honor.
And, you know, I would encourage people to go on my website and look up the Statement on Virus Isolation or SOVI.
Because that's a collaboration I did with Tom Cowan and Sally Fallon and we basically just explained in a few simple paragraphs the whole idea of why there is no virus and many of these narratives that are put out which are false like For example, antibody-dependent enhancement or pathogenic priming, as well as the variants are ways to keep you scared and keep you believing in the virus.
If you understand that viruses don't cause disease or don't exist, then you're not going to be scared by variants.
Right, or any consequences of a virus because you know, that's not really what's going on.
But you know, most people are vulnerable to this and they still have this belief.
So what I'm going to show is how they use the same kind of simulation and lack of actual evidence to put forth these variants.
And these are certainly a way to keep you scared, to keep pushing the vaccination and other agendas.
Yeah, and if I could just add really quickly is that if they have this thing called a virus that's invisible to you and I in the world, and only they know how to identify it, and they can only speak to what it can do, this is the primary, if you will, spell of allopathy is that there's no Acknowledgement that health is a byproduct of your nutritional, you know, dietary lifestyle, environmental exposures, all put in, you know, into that reality of responsibility for self.
And that's the ultimate psyop here.
So again, when you listen to Dr. Kaufman, you will find that this is based on vapor and it's actually anti-scientific.
It's not just like pseudo or quasi, it's literally anti-science that they're pushing at this point.
I think that's a fair description.
So, let's see.
How do I launch my slideshow here?
Do you have to put it into this studio?
Let's see.
You know what?
I should just have you share.
Oh, there it is.
Let me add to the stream.
There we go.
All right.
Beautiful.
There we go.
So, here to talk about the Omicron so-called variant today.
So, I thought I'd just kind of start off with, you know, what are variants in general?
So, this is an old diagram actually from Excuse me, GISAID, which is a database you can find at gisaid.org.
And this is where all of these so-called variants are catalogued.
And what essentially has happened here is that they had the original genome was discovered by, it's what they call an in silico genome.
And so what they did is they took A sample from someone's lung fluid who was sick, who they thought had COVID, and they just assumed that there was a virus there.
They didn't actually separate the virus out from the lung fluid.
They didn't even look for it.
Okay, what they did is they put that lung fluid sample into a test tube, essentially, and they looked at every small strand of RNA in that sample, and it turned out that there were over 56 million different strands, and they had a computer just put those together As if it knew what it was looking for and created a genome that they said was this virus and then what they did was they just Repeated that process according to like a written published set of instructions around the world many many many times so in the UK
They boasted, this is from the government website, that they have, just in the UK, they've sequenced one million people, okay?
And of course, every time it's a little different because this is a computer making up a sequence from millions and millions of little tiny bits of RNA, or genetic material, Right?
It's imagine if you had like a hundred books that were chopped up into little bits, each with, you know, a string of letters of a hundred and fifty letters or less.
Could you pick out which of those little pieces of paper go to a specific book and then reconstruct that whole book?
Right?
It would be impossible.
And just to fix that, too, really quick.
If you were to look at a damaged cell, it would release nucleic acids into the plasma.
And if you were to do a PCR test or try to find out what that nucleic acid is, it's going to look a lot like a virus or a viral load, right?
When the cells are just damaged.
Well, the thing is, Sayer, they can't even really tell the difference.
And what they tell us is that actually our own genome has hundreds of viruses in it.
Yep, 11% of the proteome is the genomic infrastructure of ourselves is at least retroviral, you know, so that's exactly, like, we are viral.
Sorry, my video went strange for a minute there.
Yeah, I was just saying the virome, you know, and also the fact that our human genome is 11% retroviral in origin.
So exactly, like, you know, is it self or is it other?
What are they talking about?
Right, so basically they're, you know, calling our own genetic material viruses, and they're calling viruses our own genetic material, right?
But the thing is, never once did they take any of these sequences out of a virus particle.
Right, where they had like a test tube with just virus particles in it, and they extracted the genetic material and just sequenced that.
That's never ever been done with viruses, right?
And that's the way that you sequence any organism, right?
That's the way the human genome was sequenced.
But they can't do that because they don't have an actual virus, because one doesn't exist.
So they have to do a simulation, right, where they have a computer basically construct a fake genome sequence out of your own RNA.
And, you know, the RNA from all the bacteria and fungi and other microorganisms that are in your body.
Yes.
So every time they repeat this experiment, they get a slightly different result and they call it a variant.
Now here, back to the GISAID database, this is the total number of genome sequences for, and they call it HCOV-19 here, a different nomenclature, but it's the same thing, five and a half million.
So, in other words, what we're seeing is that out of those 5.535 million, they designated a couple of them with Greek letters, right?
We've had Delta, now we have Omicron, right?
But of course, that's only a very small number out of all these five and a half million.
And wait a second, we're meant to believe that they have identified in a specific individual in South Africa this particle, this variant, and now they're tracking it and they're locking down countries in anticipation because that's, you know, being good global citizens.
That's what they want us to believe, that they've really figured this out and they're tracking it in real time, right?
Yep, that's exactly right.
Like some sophisticated, you know, movie.
Right?
It's like a comedy more than a horror film on some level.
Oh my gosh.
Well, you know, it's a tragic comedy, that's for sure.
It is a tragic comedy, yeah.
So this is from the CDC website, and I wanted to look up how they, because I knew that they discover these so-called variants from doing that experiment, right?
and there have been over 5 1⁄2 million of them, but the ones that they say are dangerous
or highly transmissible, I wanted to know, how do they figure that out?
So the CDC has this article, like how do they classify these variants?
And that's gonna be important for Omicron.
And how do they find out this information?
So it turns out in there, they referenced a paper of how they make the clinical determinations
about a variant.
And here's one of the paper, antibody resistance, and to this B.1.3.5.1 and B.1.1.7,
and those are code words for different variants.
I'm pretty sure this one is Delta, okay?
But you can easily check.
So, here's what they say.
They created VSV, and that's an animal virus, okay, based SARS-78-CoV-2 pseudoviruses that contain each of the individual mutations.
So, what they did here is they took what they think is this animal virus, right, which is just these particles.
That's amazing.
Somehow they removed the material that was inside them and replaced it with a spike protein gene that they synthesized in the lab artificially, but it matched the variant sequence, right?
And they call that a pseudovirus.
Now, the only reason they would go to that length to create something like that is they can't actually get it from nature.
Well, and for people listening too, the Delta variant that everyone's been freaking out about for six months, they don't even have a commercial test to identify it.
And if they did have a PCR test for it, it wouldn't be able to do so anyway.
So people don't fully understand how the virus is truly the media and the meme structure of what they're doing, just promulgating absolute falsehoods to the public.
So Sayer, even the so-called isolation experiments that they have published for SARS-CoV-2, those have not even been attempted for any variant.
So, in other words, no one has actually isolated a variant, and of course, there's no, as you say, there's no diagnostic.
Now, there's no diagnostic test for anything, really.
There are these tests or testing procedures that are approved, or sorry, that are authorized for experimental or emergency use, but none of them have been validated as a diagnostic test.
No, and for people listening, if you think about the near infinite number of particles that are in our microbiome, virome, for example, apoptotic bodies, necrotic bodies, microvesicles, exosomes, it's impossible to say that one of these particular particles, if you could even identify it in real time, isn't anything but a bystander and maybe a natural part of our immune system.
So the idea that somehow there's a particular Particle that they are saying is causing people to have symptoms as if symptoms themselves were equivalent to death.
Symptoms are the way for the body to heal itself.
Fever liquefies the EZ water, for example, helps you to further detoxify.
Like everything is inverted.
You know, there's no appreciation for how the body actually heals, which is to get sick sometimes.
The whole thing is absolutely absurd.
Sorry, go ahead.
Right.
Well, you know, those things aren't even part of the conversation here.
You know, everything is just about fear that there's some, you know, dangerous thing out there that's going to invade you.
And it's so dangerous and abundant, they can't actually find it anywhere in the world.
So after they create these pseudoviruses in the laboratory, they then interact them in a cell culture with different antibodies.
And that's how they say that it's more or less transmissible or more
or less clinically severe, or even that it might be resistant to the vaccine because they say the
vaccine creates a certain antibody and they see how it binds with that antibody, right? And if it
binds weakly with that antibody that the vaccine is supposed to create, then they say it's going
to be more severe, right?
But it has nothing to do with what actually happened in any human being or any other organism, because they've never actually found these things in the real world.
Well, and also the antibody-based view of vaccine-induced immunity is based upon really Quasi-science at best, meaning that there's no conclusive evidence that an antibody will neutralize an antigen in the way that classical immunology and vaccinology discusses it.
So there's so many problems with this narrative.
Yes, you're right.
Really, all of this biological science, in a way, is a simulation, because since the era of molecular biology and molecular genetics, that there's been a lot of discovery of new knowledge.
What happens is that all the experiments are done now in a Petri dish rather than in living organisms, right?
And it's just always assumed that what happens in a Petri dish explains what happens in a real organism, but that's really a false assumption.
Everything needs to be validated.
So, you know, you can look at antibodies and you can validate it, but that research hasn't actually been done.
It's just been assumed.
Yeah, it's a proxy-surrogate model, which is how they push through Gardasil.
Never once were shown to save a single life from cervical cancer.
They actually fast-tracked it through proxy antibody type of studies.
Right, and there's even more leniency to do this with vaccines specifically compared to any other type of therapeutic or diagnostic.
In other words, real-world effectiveness is not the same as what they call efficacy, which is based on antibody titers.
And what I've often said, it's like kicking a beehive.
That's why you throw in toxic adjuvants.
You want the Th2 pole to go hyperactive, spit out antibodies, even though it might be to self structures, which is why it erodes Well, there's all sorts of tricks for experiments and, you know, to sort of hack us biologically, you know, with so-called vaccines.
I mean, because exactly what you're talking about is the role of so-called adjuvants.
They're just things that are toxic and cause irritation when they enter our body because they're dangerous foreign materials.
And so, of course, we put out all of the things that we normally do to manage foreign materials that enter our body, like make a whole lot of antibodies.
It's called immunogenicity when it's actually immunotoxicity.
That's exactly right.
So variants are simply the inability to reproduce or validate the original results, which are bogus in the first place, right?
And this is a real journal.
That's the journal that goes with the Ig Nobel Prize.
Wow, I love it.
So now we get to, you know, this Omicron thing.
And so here, this is the World Health Organization announcement.
And notice the timing of this, because today is the 28th, right?
This was published on the 26th, and it said the first reports of this variant are on the 24th.
So this is basically published two days After the first report of this variant, right?
And this essentially means that there was the 5,535,426th sequence was performed in Botswana
and they labeled it Omicron.
Wow.
Okay.
For context, guys, before this started, I went and searched with parentheses Omicron variant and there were 7,800,000 results.
Now, Andrew pointed out that that's not probably an accurate figure due to how they manipulate the algorithms.
But the point is, is that they've taken this World Health Organization statement, right?
There's no references there.
And they have instantaneously weaponized it, promulgated it globally, as it is the virus.
The fear, it's just insane, literally, what's happening.
Right.
So this announcement from the World Health Organization says that they classify it as a variant of concern, or VOC.
Okay, and then I put here on the slide the definition of what is a VOC.
So, it consists of increased transmissibility or, quote, a detrimental change in COVID-19 epidemiology.
Now, that's the criterion that they list for Omicron classifying, and you can tell that is extremely vague.
Right?
What does that mean?
A detrimental change in epidemiology.
Epidemiology is just, you know, following the numbers.
But do they actually have numbers to support that?
So what they say in this article is preliminary evidence suggests.
Now notice how that's twice hedging their statement, right?
Because they're saying the evidence is preliminary and they're saying this is what it suggests, not what it states.
Clearly, right?
It only suggests that there's an increased risk of reinfection with the variant.
So in other words, if you already had, you know, so-called COVID, which doesn't exist, you can get it again from Omicron.
Or if you've had three vaccines, now the media is literally saying, sorry, now we have a new variant and Pfizer, I think, or Novartis has already said they're going to have a new vaccine ready in like Very soon.
Right, now they hint that it may, you know, evade the vaccine, but they don't have any evidence, so they don't even report that.
And what they say is that there are 30 mutations in the spike protein, and they say that's a lot of mutations.
I say that means they basically were unable to repeat the experiment successfully.
Of sequencing the genome, they got just something else that was different.
And for people listening, keep in mind, They need an electron microscope to even render visual something that is practically on the subatomic scale in terms of using an electron microscope for the resolution of the image.
So, like, can you consider how obscene this is?
Well, now you know that they've never tried to look at any variant under the microscope.
Well, there you go.
That's why we have you here, to educate us.
Yeah, because they haven't attempted to do any physical experiments with it.
It's only computer simulation experiments.
So all these things only come from computer work.
And, you know, here's what they say.
They say the number of cases of this variant, quote, appears to be Increasing in almost all provinces in South Africa, but of course they continue that there are no tests for it.
But what they say is current SARS-CoV-2 PCR diagnostics continue to detect this variant.
And let me continue and I'll explain what this means.
Several labs have indicated that for one widely used PCR test, one of the three target genes is not detected.
And this test can therefore be used as a marker for this variant.
Okay, so here what they're saying is normally in the PCR protocol there are three primers, and if you have a positive for all three, then you have a positive test.
So what they're saying is the Omicron only is positive for two out of those three.
So in other words, if previously you had a negative PCR test, now they can call it a positive PCR test for Omicron.
Wow.
So they essentially didn't have to create a new test.
Wow.
They just found a way to convert negative results to positive results and then say that it's this new thing and then because they're increasing the cases because by definition they have to increase the cases because these would have been called negative before.
Wow!
So that's the detrimental change in the epidemiology is creating these new cases by converting a negative result to a positive.
And that justifies their characterizing it as a variant of concern, which means countries then start changing their policies.
Like I believe we have already, in the United States, prevented people from traveling from South Africa and a couple of other places because of this.
Exactly.
And that's what makes it seem real, right?
Yes.
Exactly.
Okay, so these are the tricks of the trade.
Now we have, this is the one scientifically published article, but it's an editorial and it has zero references.
As you mentioned, the World Health Organization statement also has zero references, okay?
And in this, now you see that the title suggests you should worry, right?
Heavily mutated Omicron variant puts scientists on alert.
Right?
That means you should be freaking out.
The picture makes me feel really warm and fuzzy.
Yeah, absolutely.
That is one scary picture, right?
I mean, gosh, is someone being carted off in that, you know, bubble tube?
It's very scary.
So, and I wonder, is that picture from reality or from, you know, a science fiction movie?
So here's what the scientists in this editorial actually said.
Okay, so Penny Moore, a virologist from South Africa, says, at this stage, it's too early to tell anything.
In other words, we don't know anything.
And then the other expert, Richard Lessels, who's an infectious disease doctor in South Africa, said, there's a lot we don't understand about this variant.
Wow.
So they essentially, it's only filled with conjecture, like what could happen?
What might happen?
What are the concerns?
There's no actual real data of any concerning outcomes.
And once again, zero scientific references.
And so I wanted to double check and I put in on the PubMed, right?
And this is where all the medical and scientific papers are collected by the National Library of Medicine in the United States.
And this B.1.1.529, that is the official name for the Omicron variant and all the scientific papers are published on that nomenclature.
And I did search for Omicron also and it gave some results that were unrelated.
Other proteins called Omicron or things like that came up.
Not one thing about SARS-CoV-2.
So there's not one scientific paper published on Omicron at all.
And yet the entire world is acting like a kicked beehive and countries are locking down and The markets are, you know, imploding, right?
It's just, it's remarkable.
This is such... People, if you're listening, please share this.
Share it wherever you can, because at this point there's complete, you know, censorship of this information, but we're doing this so people can get the truth, so please share it.
Thank you.
So, you know, just to be fair, it does take time to get a paper published.
Although, if we look at Drosten, we see that he was able to get a paper published before a virus was even identified, developing a test for that virus.
So there is a precedent to get things published quickly.
But nonetheless, you know, we see there's just really no scientific information to base any of these policies on.
So far.
Now, this is the so-called phylogeny of the Omicron variant in different places that it's at from the GISAID, but this is all just computer simulation.
And here, just to demonstrate, and if you go on their website, there's actually a 3D rotating version of this.
This is The so-called spike protein from the Omicron variant, and all these different colors are the 30 somewhat mutations, supposedly.
And this is completely a computer simulation.
This protein was not purified from virus particles and studied.
There was no genome taken from new virus particles that were purified, called Omicron.
This is simply taking the computer simulation results And putting it into another computer that gives you a rendering of a protein.
So it's a really, really pretty and sophisticated picture, but it means absolutely nothing in terms of reflecting reality.
Right.
So this is the simulation, right?
It looks impressive.
Even if you're a scientist or a doctor, you see this thing rotating and you're like, wow, they really did a lot, right?
But they did nothing.
So we're going to summarize things up for the Omicron variant.
So there's no actual attempt to do even the virus culture isolation procedure.
There's no microscope images.
There's no proof that it exists at all in reality.
It was discovered only by an in-silico genome sequencing, which is a complete computer simulation.
The clinical properties in this case weren't even, they didn't even create a pseudovirus and do those lab experiments.
It was only computer modeling.
And it was based on converting the negative PCR test, right, that had two out of three primers positive to now positive.
Creating cases out of nothing, right?
And that's why it got classified a variant of concern.
But there's no clinical test that's been authorized, approved, or available.
In fact, it hasn't even been developed.
Not for Omicron, but for any variant.
So when they say there's an outbreak of Delta or Omicron, they don't really have any scientific basis to tell that.
The only thing they could do is do the complete genome sequencing for every single individual and see if it's the same, right?
But they don't do that.
Instead, they cheat, like they take negative PCR tests and make them become magically positive.
And as we said, there are zero scientific publications on this.
Wow.
Now here, this is the most important analysis.
If we do an anagram analysis of Omicron, we see that it would be moronic to be scared of it.
Wow.
That's powerful.
That's probably not accidental.
And it's sort of a cosmic wink, I guess, for those paying attention.
Absolutely.
That's quite the conclusion.
Well, I mean, we have a few more minutes.
So, you know, someone had a question about, apparently the topic came up of re-infection and we got sidetracked.
Why you can't get re-infected?
And I'd love to hit that one myself, but I'd love to get your answer first.
Well, I would just come back with a question.
Re-infected with what?
Exactly.
So you can't be infected with a virus that doesn't exist.
There's no way to diagnose COVID or someone who has COVID from any other illness because there are no distinctive symptoms.
There's no valid diagnostic test.
There are no distinctive autopsy findings.
So how would you distinguish someone with COVID versus, you know, the flu or some other illness that has the similar symptoms that they're experiencing?
This is such a powerful point for those listening is that, you know, words have such extreme power.
You know, when we start labeling, you know, anecdotally, you know, a friend relative as having COVID because they had what are known as classical influenza-like illness symptoms.
And what we're doing is we're furthering the narrative that is ultimately being used to strip us of any rights that we ever thought we had.
And so it's important for people to reflect on some of the fundamental challenges that have come up early in this pandemic, which is that The government removed the criteria that would be evidence-based for determining if someone died from a virus, right?
Their emergency use codes changed in May in the United States of 2020, where they said, you don't have to test for a virus, you just have to have suspicion someone was infected, and if they died, you could label them as dead from COVID.
That is like the greatest crime, honestly, that's ever happened.
It's the biggest lie that's ever happened.
And PCR tests, of course, are not diagnostic.
It can't identify replication-competent viruses, if they even exist.
So when you look at the fundamentals of this psychological operation, the asymmetrical warfare that's going on, you just can't get beyond that.
When you really look at that ground-level question, like, what is the science?
What are the facts?
And then you will not participate in further reifying Which is, you know, our own prison, which is that COVID is real.
It's killed all these people.
I mean, it's really important that those who are listening do some of that due diligence and don't participate in creating this reality with others without being aware of what will happen if you do.
Yeah, there are really, you know, a couple of important principles to just be aware of, and one of them is, you know, related to epidemiology, which is, you know, the sort of science or maybe pseudoscience of, you know, looking at disease patterns.
And if you observe a number of people, you know, being ill or an individual being ill or even people dying, Right?
Observing that they're sick or dying doesn't tell you anything about what the cause is of why they're sick or dying.
Right, so don't make that assumption, you know, I had a strange illness or someone I know had a strange illness.
Well, all you can conclude from that is that you had an unusual illness and then you'd have to do further investigation to say what would cause that.
And with respect to the PCR test, right, which is the main test that's put forth as being, you know, in the definition of cases, Even if you believe that PCR could be used successfully to diagnose an illness, in order to actually make a diagnostic test, the first thing you have to do is what's called a validation study.
And so you have to have a gold standard way of identifying the condition that you're trying to diagnose.
Right?
So if it was a viral illness, it would be being able to, you know, find the virus in the person and that they were clinically ill with a characteristic disease.
So, what you would do is you would take a number of patients that had that clinical presentation, you would see how many of them you could find the virus, and then you would do the PCR test that you were trying to develop into a diagnostic, and you would compare the results from that to the results of, did you actually find a virus in those sick people?
And you'd say, how many of the times does it match up?
Right.
And then from that, you get an error rate, like maybe it matches up 90% of the time, or maybe only 50% of the time, right?
So you would have either a 10% error rate or a 50% error rate.
And from that, you could calculate the things that you need to apply to the FDA to get approval, like the sensitivity and specificity, which are just calculated from the error rate essentially.
This is with any diagnostic test, a pregnancy test, your blood count test, any test like this has to undergo basic validation and that's the first step that's required to say that it measures what you say it measures.
And it's also the first step that's required if you apply to the FDA to get approval for a diagnostic.
Now, no one has attempted, not even attempted, to do this with any test including the PCR test.
for COVID. They claim that they validated the test by essentially synthesizing in a laboratory
on a machine the sequences that they say correlated with the virus and then showing that the PCR can
detect those sequences. But that has nothing to do with diagnosing a disease. That just says the PCR
can measure a certain sequence. But we don't know if that sequence corresponds with a diagnostic
you know, condition because it's never even been tested.
Well, didn't Carey Mullis himself, who received a Nobel Prize for discovering this technology, say that it could not be used for this purpose in terms of its diagnostic abilities, yeah?
Well, I think he was really getting at the same thing, because he was saying that, you know, if you find a sequence of DNA or RNA, it doesn't correlate with your disease at all.
And he even said that if you use the PCR or misuse it by, for example, like we have been doing here by using too many amplification cycles, right?
Using 40, 45 cycles when, you know, 25 is really the limit.
Well, then you could find any sequence, right?
And so this is, you know, essentially cheating the system.
Right, but even if it was theoretically possible, even if Carey Mullis was wrong, you would still have to do this validation study as the first step, right?
And if Carey Mullis was right, the validation study would show a high error rate.
Which is what we would expect.
Yeah, exactly.
Well, so when you blow it out into the geopolitical perspective, it becomes rather clear to me that what we're looking at is a permanent state of global emergency, not unlike the global war on terror, although it's transmogrified into the global war on, you know, sort of bioterrorism, meaning our own virome, microbiome is the threat, we could all Destroy the world if we're not compliant and being surveilled and vaccinated in the way they're telling us and that this is ultimately what is happening today is that there's a new global governance structure injected into the world.
It's a biosecurity surveillance state.
So I'd love your comments because I love this about you.
You can go down to the micro and the macro the next 10 minutes of just what do you see the larger picture and how do we What do we do?
Like, how do we really make an impact at this point?
Yeah, absolutely.
So, great question.
And I was really just looking at some research from Deborah Tavares this morning.
So, it's kind of perfect because, you know, they've really outlined exactly how they're going to use this.
And it's really all about the so-called vaccine passport, which really isn't, you know, a health measure.
But obviously, they're turning our health system into a biosecurity surveillance system.
Right?
That's where the gatekeepers are.
Everyone, you require all these things to either be employed by that system or to be served by that system.
And the, you know, vaccine passport now is being required in nations around the world for pretty much access to everything.
And that is essentially only the tip of the iceberg because, oh, I did it again.
That's a really good point you're bringing up.
That it's going to be turned into a vehicle for all of your information.
So your financial information is going to go on there.
Your social credit system that's going to be developed, like in China, is going to go on there.
And then there's going to be a central bank digital currency, which, you know, already is being worked on.
You can look at, you know, lots of information talking about that CBDC.
And It's going to be tied to that.
So in other words, if you are not vaccinated on the schedule, you haven't received your latest booster shot, well then your assets could be frozen, or you could be prohibited from using public transport to get to work, or these kinds of things, right?
Where things are headed and there's lots of documentation you can look at to see that.
So if you want to, you know, be part of the change and part of the way to resist this and sort of preserve your freedom or help create a new way of living, you know, outside of this government tyrannical control, the first step is to simply not comply.
And that is the most important thing, right?
So any of the guidelines, don't follow them.
If businesses require them, then don't patronize those businesses or sue those businesses.
And if enough people do that, the whole thing will, of course, shut down.
But we're unlikely to see that because we haven't seen it to date.
But that's the most important thing.
And it may mean making sacrifices.
You may have to walk away from your job.
You may have to change your career.
But I guarantee that if you think things are going to get back to normal, if you just get this one shot or just do this one thing, it's not going to happen.
You know, so what it really leaves us up to is to start creating our own infrastructure, our own parallel communities and societies.
And these are not exclusive, like anyone who wants to come over and leave the matrix system would be, of course, welcome.
But, you know, we have to start setting these things up for ourselves.
And I think, you know, Sayer, you and I are both engaged in this, right?
I'm trying to create educational and clinical platforms to bring in a new real
true medicine type of healing to the world.
There are links below in the notes that you can click into exactly what you're referring
to for the listeners.
Yeah, yeah, that's excellent because we're launching some new platforms to support this
Yeah, that's excellent because we're launching some new platforms to support this like True
like True Medicine University, where we're gonna feature thought leaders and researchers
Medicine University where we're going to feature thought leaders and researchers in these exciting
in these exciting fields to look at what's really going on outside of the government-funded research matrix
fields to look at what's really going on outside of the government funded research matrix of
of germ theory and cut, burn, poison, allopathic medicine, and start creating this body of knowledge.
And teaching people how to take care of their own health.
Because really, we don't need to have health professionals involved in our life the way that we do
in the allopathic system.
We need to learn how to take care of our health, and then maybe occasionally we'll need
some information here and there.
And maybe if we're really unlucky and we have a bad trauma, we might need a surgeon here and there.
But by and large, you know, we don't really need access like we have now and people could be so much healthier.
So, you know, my dream is to try and help Bring that about into this new era, you know, and I'm trying every way I could think of to sort of reach that end.
That's so beautiful.
For those listening, definitely take a look at True Medicine University, as well as Dr. Kaufman's website.
There's also some links.
We had our previous discussion on why COVID doesn't fulfill any of the four co-postulates.
I also have my video on what I call the Xenogen Hypothesis, which is a way of looking at some of these so-called deadly particles as essential for our immunological self-tolerance and homeostasis.
And yeah, generally speaking, I mean, you have some things going on soon, right?
Is there a conference that you are hosting?
And by the way, we'll be promoting everything you're doing.
So if you're on the Green Minute Info Newsletter, make sure to subscribe.
You'll get updates for when Andrew's events are ready.
But if you want to tell us a little bit more about what's coming up.
Well, yeah, I mean, we're just getting ready to launch tomorrow the first True Medicine University webinar, and it's going to be with Jon Stewart-Reed, who I know is an old friend of yours, and I'm really excited.
Oh, you gotta watch this.
You gotta watch this, guys.
He actually collaborated with Sayre's father on some really exciting research of how sound therapy affects the blood.
And he's going to reveal his research findings, but he's going to also kind of talk about cymatics and sound and biology and how these things all relate.
And it's going to be a full program.
So we're very, very excited that I'll be hosting that.
Sorry.
When does it go live?
So it goes, the website goes live tomorrow, truemedicineuniversity.com and you can already see a sneak peek on there and the webinar is going to be January 8th on a Saturday.
Well, I'm definitely going to send that out.
My father, you know, who I don't talk much about, he collaborated with John Stuart Reid, and John Stuart Reid invented the simuscope, and he was inspired to do so, ultimately, from his visit to the Great Pyramids.
So there's so much interesting esoteric information, and it's so cutting-edge science that you're going to be super excited when you see this event, so I'm excited about that for sure.
Oh my gosh, you have a documentary coming out.
Please tell the public how important this one is.
It's mind-blowing.
Yeah, so I partnered up with Marcy Cravat, who just makes beautiful cinematography, and it's called Terrain.
It's going to be at terrainthefilm.com, but we don't have it up and running yet, and we're looking at premiering what's going to be part one and part two, and it's going to be released for a free screening for everyone in the coming new year.
So we're just trying to get the last edits on that and put in some updated information because it's not, you know, it's sort of, it's about debunking the virus narrative, but it also introduces to a new era of healing, right, kind of based around terrain theory.
But we also really look at the human struggles involved in the pandemic and in making this paradigm shift
in how you view health and healing and biology.
And so there's some pretty emotional and exciting experiences and struggles from people, including myself,
having a little run-in with law enforcement that we're gonna show there a moment
that still makes me nervous even to see that.
Oh.
So it's really kind of a human film.
It's not a scientific documentary.
It's different from the other material I've put out.
We really want to appeal to people who are just starting to question things so that they can dive Deeper and make it, you know, accessible and artistic in that way.
So I'm super excited to be finally launching that soon.
It's been almost two years and you know, the first major shoot was down in Miami at your house and at the event you and Kelly through.
So finally coming to fruition.
It's so good, folks.
When you listen to Andrew, you pick up the vibe, which is that you're here to help bring in the solution, not just in terms of, you know, like the nuts and bolts, but the energy, you know?
Like you're a confident, inspired, you know, visionary, and that's the kind of thing that we can all learn to become in this window.
This is a great opportunity.
We're up against massive adversity, but look what's happened.
We're generating more resilience.
We're creating parallel structures.
We're able to get the information out.
So again, any of you out there that are listening, please share this with friends and family because I just don't know that unless we make that kind of effort that we are going to be able to counterman this agenda.
It's so intense and it's so, you know, it's so diametrically opposed to everything we want.
So once again, so happy to have you on.
Any last words for our listeners?
Well, just to, you know, remember that if you're mired in fear and pessimism, that if you take a step back, you can see the amazing opportunity that we have to really remake our own, you know, humanity in a way that's much closer to nature, that is, you know, completely free, that we can Be reacquainted with this ancient knowledge, right, that we've gotten so far away from, you know, through subversion and misdirection, that once you realize these things, it's very, very liberating.
It, you know, much of the stress goes away.
That's how I can, you know, maintain this kind of levity.
Uh, and talking about this topic and it's accessible to everyone.
If you take this time to, you know, work on developing your perspective and how you interact with these things and, and how you deal with the fear and, you know, panic that comes with all of the, um, turmoil and separation from people that we're all experiencing.
And, you know, I've, I've met so many people and they, you know, they come up to me when, when I'm, At a public event that they've remade themselves, you know, or they they come, you know Like I have sort of keep needing to hire more people as we're doing these projects and getting bigger and bigger I because I'm you know, my my team is being worked to death and Time and time again we get these people who say, you know, I don't mind making less money I just want to work
For someone who believes in the truth, like I want to get out of that corporate rat race, that you know, onslaught of totalitarianism and surveillance state.
And I just want to, you know, work for doing something I can feel good about.
And it's incredible, like people just, you know, really thrive when they have that freedom.
You know, one of the main reasons why people have gotten so hypnotized and sucked in to this PSYOP is because they've been so disenfranchised by the, you know, nine to five You know, factory office, sterile, meaningless job, you know, just going out there to just for the point of making money or, you know, creating crap and selling it and turning things over.
And now there's, you know, you can actually rework your life so that you have real meaning.
And this is really what the value proposition put forth, you know, by God in the current situation is.
And if you accept that, then you'll be rewarded.
That things will turn around, right, and work out in much better ways for you.
And that's kind of the message that I'd like to leave you with.
I love it.
Well, last thing I'll say is that Be Sovereign isn't just a free speech platform.
We've set it up so people can self monetize their own content and value.
And that's one of my goals, because I felt like in this window of the pandemic, it was the largest transfer in wealth and power in human history, like all happening on the back of this event, right?
And I think what's happening is that people need the parallel structures, right?
They need to find a way to take their own value, discover their gifts, share it, and then people will naturally reflect back their value and they will support you.
So in the future, we'll have Patreon-like functionality.
It's gonna be a full stack of publishing, video, you know, publishing and conventional articles, et cetera.
So for people listening, stay tuned.
We're just getting started here.
And again, so happy that you took the time today To add this great context for us to understand that it's not it's not as bad as they think, but it is bad in the sense that this is getting a little bit more intense.
▲
Export Selection