All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 5, 2021 - Jim Fetzer
52:56
Christine Massey Reveals: Covid-19 "Virus" has NEVER Been Isolated and Shown to Exist
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
As far as I can tell at this point, we have been lied to for decades and decades.
People have been getting injections for decades and decades for things to protect them against things that were never shown to exist.
We've had people being coerced into getting the injections for children to attend school, for adults in the workplace, to travel to different countries, Um, in New Zealand, I think it was in 2016 that they introduced a no jab, no benefits program where, um, certain, um, benefits that families would normally be eligible for.
They can't get them if they're not up to date on their vaccines.
So that's what I really want people to to start to look into and understand that it didn't it didn't just begin
with Colbert It's actually been going on for a very long time
Welcome to the health ranger report on bright on TV I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighton.
Today we're joined by Christine Massey.
She's a former biostatistician who is known for issuing FOIA requests to various government agencies in the United States and elsewhere that show that according to CDC records in particular, we'll talk about this in more detail, There is no isolated SARS-CoV-2 virus sample that has been shown to cause any infection or disease, and it begs the question, well, what are they testing for if they've never isolated it?
What is this pandemic all about if they don't really know what they're testing for?
And how are they locking down communities, including indigenous people in Australia now?
Entire communities are being locked down because they say they're detecting COVID in the sewage system.
So they're condemning entire communities.
It's outrageous.
We'll be back with Christine Massey to talk about that right here on Brighton.TV.
Stay with us.
All right, welcome back to Brighton.TV.
I'm Mike Adams, and we're joined today by Christine Massey, and her website is called fluoridefreepeel.ca.
Peel spelled like an apple peel.
Fluoridefreepeel.ca.
We'll put that on screen for you.
Christine, thank you so much for what you are doing and for joining us today.
Welcome to the show.
Thank you, Mike, for having me, and thank you for everything that you have been doing for so many years.
Well, we have all been working on this.
You've been battling fluoride for many years.
I started that fight back in the 1990s, by the way, as well.
So I feel like we've been on a similar track for many years.
Give us a little bit of your background, just so people can have some context for what you're about to share with us.
Sure.
Well, my main message is nobody needs a special background for what we're about to talk about, but I do have a background in biostatistics.
I used to work as a statistician with cancer researchers, but that didn't really inform what I'm doing now.
I guess it demonstrates that I'm capable of logical thinking, but really anybody who's willing to put in a little effort, spend a little time learning and reading can understand what we're going to talk about today.
And like you mentioned, I was involved in the water fluoridation issue for about 10 years and then COVID started and I had to give that up to focus and try to figure out what was going on with COVID.
So give us the scope then of what you've issued a series of letters or FOIA requests asking for information.
Give us the rundown of the scope of that and what specifically were you asking for?
Okay, so in every request, I asked for records describing the isolation or purification of the alleged COVID-19 virus, which is called SARS-CoV-2.
And I always specified in my requests what I was talking about, because if you look at the so-called virus isolation papers, you'll find that they do other things that they call isolation.
So they'll take a patient sample and they'll put it with some monkey kidney cells and fetal bovine serum and drugs, and they call that isolation.
So I specified that's not what I'm talking about.
I'm not talking about PCR tests.
And I'm not talking about creating a genome.
I'm just talking about the everyday English version of the word isolation or purification.
So just separating the alleged virus from everything else in the patient sample.
And I always specified that I wasn't asking only for records of isolation done by that institution.
It could be any record that they have in their custody or control written by anybody in the world.
Having done this.
Like a university or someone receiving a government grant or anything?
Exactly.
Exactly.
Because there are many research teams around the world that claim to have isolated the alleged virus.
So, yeah.
And then the other thing I also specified was, you see in freedom of information legislation, it typically doesn't apply to records that are already publicly available.
It's so that people can get access to things that are not already available.
So because of that, I always said, because we had looked, and I know you've talked to Dr. Kaufman and Dr. Cowan about this, and looked at what's actually going on in these studies.
So, there's no shortage of studies published where they claim to have isolated the virus.
We wanted to know if there are actually any legitimate ones, and we didn't want institutions just saying, well, you can find that in the public domain, because people have been looking and looking and looking and not finding them.
Not finding legitimate studies, so I always said, if there are records that match the description of what I asked for.
And they're already publicly available, please cite them with the title, the author, you know, enough details that I could then go and find it and please provide URLs if possible.
So we tried to make it so that it would cover all possible bases.
If they have any record at all, they should be sharing that information with us.
So they either give it to us or we can go and find it ourselves.
And despite that, after a good year and a half now of submitting these requests with the help of people around the world, We now have responses from 137 institutions in over 25 countries, and no one to this day has provided even one record of the alleged virus having been purified from any patient sample on the planet by anyone.
This is a bombshell.
I had no idea.
It was 137 institutions in 25 countries, and you also just dropped another bombshell.
There are other volunteers that are working with you on this.
I wasn't even aware of that.
So the scope of this is much larger than what I had even understood so far.
Yeah, so well, it's been a very organic project that it's not like I have formal volunteers that are helping.
It's what happens is when I started getting the responses from the Canadian institutions that I had started out with, of course, I started sharing them on social media because I wanted people to know.
And my whole goal was to back up the claims of people like Dr. Andrew Kaufman and Dr. Thomas Callan and the other people who were saying that The alleged virus hadn't been isolated, so I was trying doing whatever I could to bring attention to the issue.
And then eventually other people started submitting requests as well.
And there have been a few people, 1 person in particular, a gentleman in New Zealand has helped a lot.
He's done probably as many as I have.
And then there's been other people that have done quite a number and then there's been many people who did just 1 or 2 here and there.
So, it's just been an organic thing that just came about and grew naturally.
I had no idea in the beginning that would turn into such a big project.
So the astonishing thing, though, then, in the conclusion of this so far is, as you said, not one institution has responded with any document showing what you asked for, which is the proof that this has been isolated, that this is the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
So, what does that mean, in your view, about what's happening in our world?
To me, it's 100% clear that there is no virus, and anybody could come to this conclusion themselves just by looking at the isolation papers, because when you see what they actually do, when they said that they isolated the virus, and then when they The other steps that they do that tend to convince people that there is a virus and you see what you have to actually read the methods and then you see what they actually did and you see that none of it adds up there.
It doesn't add up to any evidence whatsoever.
So people tend to say, well, there's thousands and thousands of genomes uploaded.
What are you talking about?
They just think we're crazy.
But if you read in the papers where it describes the methods of how they came about, how they came up with that genome, they didn't discover it.
It's not like they found the virus and purified it and then extracted the genetic material.
From that specific thing, and then somehow, you know, read off a genome and recorded it.
It's nothing like that.
They actually work with a soup of genetic material, either from the patient sample, or from the mixture with the monkey cells and the fetal bovine serum and the patient sample.
And then they allegedly detect many sequences in that.
And then they, and that involves using PCR technology with many cycles.
So, possibly even some of those sequences that they allegedly detected weren't even there.
And then there's all these sequences on a computer to.
Exactly.
and align and edit and trim and come up with what they call a genome.
So yeah, that's, that's an element a lot of people are not aware of that the software
that's used in, in the PCR testing, the software kind of invents the pattern and then says,
Oh, we found a match, but it made it up in many cases.
So then one of the things that Dr. Kaufman and others are asserting then is that there
is no isolated SARS-CoV-2 virus, and therefore there also is no such thing as a Delta variant
of the virus.
And also at the same time, there's no such thing as any accurate PCR test that specifically finds just this virus.
So, in your research, in your studies, what is the PCR test actually flagging when it says that it's, quote, positive?
Well, it's, there's not really a simple answer to that.
It's not necessarily flagging anything.
To my understanding, because they've done so many cycles on these PCR tests, it's possible that the sequence that they targeted wasn't even there.
So, and I think a lot of people are aware of that issue by now.
And then even in the instances where perhaps they detected the sequence With the lower number of cycles, and you could conclude, you know, perhaps the sequence really was there.
I don't think there's any way to know where it came from.
PCR can't tell you where a sequence came from.
All it can do is send out a signal that potentially the sequence is there.
So a person would have to know.
I mean, unless you know the genome of every possible thing that could possibly be in a patient sample.
You know, you can't draw conclusions about where the sequences originated from.
There's no reason whatsoever to think that it came from a virus because there's no evidence of a virus.
I've heard people sometimes say that they're actually detecting sequences from other viruses, but I actually have some news to share in that regard too.
Sure, go ahead.
I know you're familiar, I think, Because I saw your interviews, which were really great with Dr Kaufman and Dr Cowan, and what they have been saying is that viruses in general don't actually exist.
So, we actually started doing some freedom of information requests on other alleged viruses as well.
So, I can share some of the results of those.
So, I've been targeting mainly the CDC when I ask about other viruses, and I've sent a few to the Public Health Agency of Canada, because that's our institution that should know about viruses if they actually exist.
And my colleague in New Zealand, he's been targeting the main New Zealand institutions and also somewhat in Australia.
So, for example, from the CDC, I have responses from the CDC.
They have no record of the alleged 2003 SARS virus having been purified.
They have no record of any common cold coronavirus having been purified.
They have no record of any HIV, any HPV.
Any influenza virus of any kind, any West Nile virus.
What about polio?
Polio?
Okay, so I'll just explain.
There's a series of other viruses that I had asked them about, but I started doing this, I think it was in March of this year, and For a while, what happened was my colleague in New Zealand, I'll just back up a little and I'll explain a few things.
Okay, but just a sec, before you jump into that, let me just react to what you already have said there, that there's no record in these agencies, there's no record of HIV.
Being isolated, no record of HPV, which is the entire basis for all these HPV vaccines.
And, of course, the AIDS crisis, even going back to the late 1980s, that was a Tony Fauci operation, even back then.
And he was trying to do the same thing then.
Videos have come out showing Fauci trying to scare everybody into saying, oh, children might catch AIDS, and that's why we need HIV vaccines.
It was the same playbook, even then.
Yeah, and that's what I'm really hoping to drive home today, because the horrors associated with virology didn't just begin with COVID.
COVID's been bad enough.
COVID, they've just ramped things up on this mind-boggling scale, but we were already being misled, as far as I can tell.
I haven't researched all of these so-called viruses to the same extent as the alleged COVID-19 virus, Based on the fact that every Freedom of Information request that we have submitted to any institution so far, asking about any virus so far, they have all come back with nothing.
And any people I have looked at that claim to have isolated any alleged virus, it wasn't scientific.
They weren't isolating anything.
So as far as I can tell at this point, We have been lied to for decades and decades.
People have been getting injections for decades and decades for things to protect them against things that were never shown to exist.
We've had people being coerced into getting the injections for children to attend school, for adults in the workplace, to travel to different countries.
In New Zealand, I think it was in 2016 that they introduced a No Jab, No Benefits program where certain benefits that families would normally be eligible for, they can't get them if they're not up to date on their vaccines.
So that's what I really want people to start to look into and understand that it didn't just begin with COVID.
It's actually been going on for a very long time.
You're exactly right, and let me interject here.
Right now, the nations with the highest COVID injection rates are the ones with the highest number of new, quote, cases of COVID.
So this is undeniable.
Alex Berenson, a former New York Times science writer, he's on substack.com, he's confirmed all of this.
It's extraordinary.
Even in the U.S., the states with the highest vaccination rates have the highest so-called COVID cases, whereas The other thing that's come out is polio.
which has only a 6% vaccine rate, COVID is over.
It's gone.
And the mainstream media keeps reporting, oh, scientists are baffled.
They can't figure out how did COVID disappear without the vaccine?
Well, the vaccine is spreading what they're testing for.
But the other thing that's come out is polio.
So we've learned recently that poliomyelitis really means gray spinal tissue.
And this was caused by lead arsenate poisoning.
And lead arsenate was a very common pesticide that was sprayed on crops and orchards and vegetables all across the United States and around the world for a very long time, for many decades.
And arsenic poisoning causes these gray lesions on the spinal cords of children, and it was called polio, and it was used to launch polio vaccines and set the vaccine narrative.
It was all heavy metals poisoning.
That's all it was.
And I think this is how I view virology.
You know, I can't say who involved in these atrocities realized that it's not science and who is just going along naively out of ignorance or what have you.
The way I look at it, what virology is, what's being accomplished through virology is the real causes of disease are being ignored or whitewashed.
A lot of.
A lot of the sources of toxicity in our life come from the medical profession or they come from through government policies or government failure to protect us from things that industries are doing, things that are going into the air, things that are in our water.
Yeah, pollution, consumer care products, medications, food, it's all incredibly toxic.
Exactly.
A natural virus to blame things on, you know, rather than taking responsibility and.
Dealing with those other problems.
I mean, this is a lot more convenient and profitable.
And then you have an excuse to to keep people in fear, to manipulate them, to coerce them, to inject them, to do all these things.
And I mean, I think we're of the same point of view that there's a very large agenda playing out right now.
And that this COVID-19 is part of a much bigger picture and goal to get us all Controlled either eliminating a certain number of the population and then the rest of us eventually getting to the point.
We've had so many injections.
We're not.
We're cut off from our humanity.
We can't think for ourselves.
We just become robots, interfacing with technology.
That's my concern, that this is where this is going.
That seems to be where it's going.
Absolutely.
But you just hit upon something really key there.
We've seen, for example, the American Cancer Institute will not talk about the causes of
cancer that are environmental, which means exposure to toxins in the personal care products
and even in the environment and the pesticides and herbicides.
How about just big pharma manufacturing, the releases into the water supply, the releasing
toxic drugs and birth control substances and all kinds of strange molecules and the runoff
from agricultural glyphosate and atrazine and organophosphates, all of this.
I mean, we're talking about a mass poisoning of the planet, and you're right.
The virus, the so-called virus, is the excuse, and they just invent a new one.
Even Zika, remember the Zika thing?
That wasn't even that long ago.
They said, oh, babies are going to be born with shrunken heads all in Florida and everywhere in the Southeast.
I think it was a pesticide that they put into the water in one country that caused the whole thing.
I remember, like I said, I haven't investigated other viruses to the same extent as SARS-CoV-2, but I did recall that Zika Hysteria got my attention several years ago and I remember at the time looking at the studies that were being cited as the evidence that this supposed virus was the cause of shrunken heads or what overall they were blaming it on, blaming it for at the time.
I remember looking at the studies back then, and I wasn't even aware of this issue that there might not even be a virus.
I was just looking at what evidence do they have to connect the supposed virus to the outcomes, and it was so ridiculous.
I was just shocked at the time, you know, and I had no idea that this was just virology in general.
If you try to look into any virus, you're not going to find solid research.
So this whole This virology world, is this sort of like the new voodoo science where these virologists are all lying to each other and they share the same delusions and so they assume it's all true?
I mean, how is it possible?
These are not low IQ people, these researchers.
Yeah, I wonder about that myself.
I haven't had opportunity to talk.
I haven't tried reaching out directly to virologists.
I have seen some email exchanges that other people have shared with me.
They came across like they believed in what they were saying, but then again, nobody's going to come out and admit they're purposely going along with You know, a globalist scheme to control humanity.
So, I really don't know.
I know Dr. Stefan Lanka, who has been aware of these issues for decades, he said that he started out convinced that it was fraud, that it was intentional fraud, and that he eventually came to the conclusion that these people just genuinely believed in what they were doing, and they just couldn't... I don't know.
I mean, I'm like you.
I have a hard time understanding how anyone could fool themselves into thinking that what they're publishing actually adds up to anything meaningful.
Well, it helps that it's all invisible, right?
What's that?
It helps that it's all invisible.
You can't see any of this with the naked eye, so they have models, they have theories.
I mean, maybe this is some giant delusional thought experiment that they're all sharing with each other.
Maybe the real infection is this thought experiment.
That's the virus.
It's a virus of the mind.
Yeah, I mean, I don't know.
When you look at what they do, when they take the patient sample, and they actually have the gall to use that word isolation, and if you go back to Koch's postulates, which was for bacteria, but that was one of the steps in Koch's postulates, and I'm pretty sure he meant to actually isolate, to actually purify something, and then go on to the cell culture.
So, it looks to me like somebody at some point started using the word isolation, In a totally different context, where they're actually mixing the patient sample with other things, but they decided to use the word isolation intentionally to give the impression that they really were doing some legitimate science.
Because unfortunately, a lot of people.
They will read the title of the study and scan the abstract, maybe flip through a little bit, but they don't read the methods in depth.
So, if you're not reading carefully, you can easily get fooled.
They're using the word isolation.
They think, okay, they isolated it.
So, it's very convenient the way it worked out.
If it wasn't being done intentionally, I really don't know.
I'm sorry to interrupt.
We're out of time for this segment here on Brighteon.tv, but stay with us, Christine.
I've got another question for you on the other side of this.
Thank you for watching Brighteon.tv today.
This interview continues on my channel on Brighteon.com.
Take care.
Well, this whole issue of the so-called isolation came to my attention.
I just need to add this, it's very relevant to what you're talking about, because I was very skeptical of what Dr. Cowan and Dr. Kaufman were saying at first.
I did not believe what they were saying. And then I guess about a year went
by and my laboratory was in the process of trying to purchase PCR instruments from Fisher. What's
the full name?
Oh, Fisher Thermos.
Oh yeah, Thermo Fisher.
Yeah, I'm sorry.
Okay, we're trying to buy it from Thermo Fisher and we met with their sales reps and, you know, I come from the world of mass spec instruments where we have very precise quantitation of concentrations of things like atomic elements.
So we can say, You know, how many nanograms per milliliter of mercury exists in this liquid, right?
And like, so I asked the Thermo Fisher people, is this a quantitative instrument?
Will it tell us how much of something?
And they said, Oh, absolutely not.
It's not quantitative at all.
It just gives you a yes or no, a match or no match.
And I said, well, how can we use this for food contamination testing if we don't have a concentration?
Because the FDA sets limits.
Like you can have so many microbes in food before it becomes unsafe because no food is sterile, you know, especially natural organic agricultural products.
They're not sterile.
There's all kinds of things in there.
So what are the limits?
And they said, well, You know, you basically what I'm paraphrasing, but they basically said you just kind of fudge it.
And that got me really concerned.
So because I write, I'm serious about food safety, right?
And we use another instrument right now that actually grows. Like we inoculate a culture medium with samples from
the food and then we can test for E. coli and salmonella, yeast and mold, total
plate count and all these things.
And it's very precise, but it takes like three days because you've got to give it all time to grow.
So anyway, Thermo Fisher had promised that their instruments could shorten that to something like 12 hours just by testing for the genetics of the viruses and the microbes.
But then it's like you don't know how much is in there.
So I went out as a laboratory and I tried to purchase a SARS-CoV-2 isolate.
And this is what woke me up to this whole thing.
And I'm sorry to take so much time, but I think this is relevant.
I found companies that were selling so-called standards, because as you know, without standards, you can't calibrate instruments.
You have to have an external standard that's usually NIST traceable.
I mean, all our standards are NIST traceable.
Otherwise, how do you know what you have?
and then you have to calibrate your instrument to that standard
so that you have a calibration curve of concentrations.
You can't just be theoretical.
Oh, we think that's what mercury looks like in the machine.
No, you got to tell the machine this is real mercury or whatever or a real virus.
And the company selling the standards, they said themselves that,
oh, their so-called isolate was it's just this combination of human cells
bovine cells mix with what they thought was SARS-CoV-2.
Then basically it was just a snot collection scheme and they were reselling snot as standards, which is quite a lucrative business, to labs that are just testing giant snot cocktails of who knows what.
So there's my story.
I want to add that in.
I've heard you talk about that and yeah, it's quite shocking.
Yeah.
Someone you would probably find very interesting to talk to one day might be Dr. Syed Qureshi.
I don't know if you're familiar with him.
I'm not.
He's a former health scientist, senior scientist with Health Canada for I believe over 30 years.
And he was very much involved in testing.
And he was already outspoken prior to COVID.
And he caught on to COVID quickly because of his background issues that he'd run into with testing different things.
And he said, what he was speaking out about was what he found was in his line of work, there were all these protocols for Determining the purity of different kinds of substances.
And he said that none of it was backed by any logic.
There was nothing to show that any of these standards actually, any of these protocols were actually accurate.
They were just telling you, well, do this.
And if you get this result, it means this.
And if you get another result, it means that.
But it wasn't, they couldn't back it up with anything to show that it was actually valid.
So it was like a science ritual rather than real science.
Exactly.
So he already had a website set up called Dissolution Testing and he had been talking about this and I believe he petitioned the FDA on something and it was kind of like working on the water fluoridation issue where it doesn't seem to matter what you show the public health establishment.
They just blow off any sort of evidence that you show them, but you might find Dr. Karayeshi very interesting to talk to.
Well, I would like to.
Please make an introduction after this.
I'd like to reach out to him.
For sure.
So, you were asking too about what do I think they're actually picking up on the PCR test.
So, I kind of went off on a tangent because I was Sometimes you hear people say they're picking up remnants of other viruses.
But as far as I can tell, there are no other viruses and the CDC has no record of any influenza virus having been purified.
And as you were just pointing out, people have.
Speculate, I don't know if there's evidence to back it up, but I mean, we know in these mixtures when they're just taking the genetic material from the patient sample, you know, there's going to be material that came from the patient.
So, perhaps, like, you're just saying they're picking up on sequences that just came from the patient themselves and maybe it can be.
You know, as things are breaking down in the body, maybe certain sequences are more likely to be expressed, and maybe that's why if you don't inject some people, you get fewer PCR.
Like, who knows?
Who knows what those sequences are actually coming from?
But there's certainly other possible explanations that don't have anything to do with Imaginary, but it can also be clearly people are constantly exposed to all kinds of genetic material in the environment, right?
Because I mean, really, there's genetic material floating around everywhere.
I'm not just talking about seeds from plants, but literal fragments of genetic material
from decomposing insects and whatever people have in their bodies and they're consuming
in the food.
There's genetic material in all the food.
It's literally everywhere.
If you could see DNA and RNA, the whole world would be in a giant fog.
A lot of this stuff is in your blood.
Basically the body is sharing constantly, sharing information with the ecological environment.
Organisms are communicating with each other, in a sense, through this shared genetic information.
And there are transfection phenomenon that take place, you know, where, you know, some of our genes didn't just come from us, it came from outside of us, throughout, you know, human history.
So these tests could be picking up on, you know, anything, anything from the environment.
You see in some of the papers when they're creating the genomes, they'll indicate that they somehow sorted out the sequences that were human in origin from what they're going to use to make their so-called virus genome.
Sometimes along the way too, you talk to somebody about this and they'll mention the human genome.
And I find it interesting because on the one hand, we're told we all have this unique genome that is our own blueprint.
But then when it's convenient for them, they talk about the human genome as if it's this one genome that's shared by all of us.
So by having sequenced one human, they know which sequences did or didn't come from any other human.
Did you see what I'm saying?
Like, it doesn't make sense.
You would have to know the genome of that specific person.
Not only that, but you would have to know, like, does anyone know for sure that a genome is even stable over time?
I've heard suggestions that.
Who knows, like, maybe it's actually changing and unless somebody's.
Testing?
How are you to know such a thing, right?
But you certainly aren't going to know from one person's genome the genome of everybody else in the world.
And you're not going to be able to sort through little sequences and say, well, okay, this one came from the person, so we'll put those over there and we'll just use these other ones.
It's just so ridiculous.
And it seems like everything that you look at in virology, no matter what angle you come at it from, it doesn't add up.
Yeah, but you know, I've found this in even the realms of science, where I operate as a food scientist in my lab, I've found, I mean, you wouldn't believe the FDA labs, the sloppiness that they have, or other labs, how incredibly sloppy they are.
I've sent off samples to other labs for confirmation, And they would come back with an official lab report where they would have a number, like arsenic, that was off by an order of magnitude, and I would point it out to them, and they would reply with an email and say, oh, we found our instrument was miscalibrated.
We'll rerun that for you for free.
I'm like, why did I catch this and not you?
Don't you have external standards?
Aren't you running calibration tests before every freaking sample?
I mean, because this is Science 101 here.
Right?
And even the food labs out there, the heavy metals labs, the glyphosate labs, I can tell you as a fact, many of them are just making it all up.
They have no idea what they're doing.
They're running instruments with no calibrations whatsoever.
It's just like pie-in-the-sky numbers, and the average person doesn't know how to question it, so they just take it as true.
It's crazy.
A topic that someone could delve into with freedom of information requests too, you know, because it's so easy to do.
Some people could start submitting requests and asking for that sort of information.
I think people, the public is going to be, well, if this information ever gets out to the wider public, because thank God we have people like you who help to get the word out, but our mainstream media is so useless.
But if the wider public ever finds out, you know, these things, I mean, they're just going to be so shocked and the institutions that they put so much faith in, you know, are not at all what they think they are.
I completely agree, but let's talk about criminology here for a second, because science is applied in crime labs all around the world, and a lot of it is fake.
And there have been science crime labs used by police, for example, even in Austin, Texas, not far from me,
where the crime lab was shut down by a judge's order after many years of fabricating positive test
results for cocaine and meth and so on.
It turns out the person wasn't even running the instrument.
They were just making it up.
I mean, thousands of cases affected.
But the FBI used to do a hair analysis.
There's no scientific basis whatsoever for matching hair to a person.
Years ago, decades ago, they used to do skull analysis, and they would measure the bones of your skull, and they would say that was like a fingerprint.
This was before fingerprints.
Oh, wow.
Right.
And they would convict people with their skull bones, shapes and sizes.
And then now, fingerprints By the way, they're not unique.
More than one person can have the same fingerprint match because it's just matching swirls and lines, and there's only so many combinations, and a lot of them are very similar.
And then you have the fake testing, the DNA testing.
So, I mean, if PCR testing is a fraud for COVID, how is it not a fraud in crime labs?
Exactly.
Exactly.
No, I know.
It's got to the point, I think, It's to the point, I don't take any, even as we're talking about genetic material, there's a part of me that's wondering, well, maybe we're going to find out that, you know, everything we're told about genetic material is not even true.
Like, I, you know, who knows?
It's to the point you have to actually really delve into any particular topic for yourself to have confidence on anything, because you certainly can't go by the official version of anything, it seems.
You just, you don't know what you're going to find out.
And I'm, you know, maybe I can just reach you to a few of the other institutions.
We did it quite a few on the Marburg virus, because we started that we heard some talk that perhaps, you know, they were going to try to frighten people with a supposed Marburg outbreak next.
And we actually have the Waiting for a response from the CDC.
They're strangely overdue.
Somehow my request didn't get logged into their system.
And when I inquired what was going on, they responded as though I was asking about an influenza request that had already been dealt with.
So we're waiting on them.
But the New Zealand Ministry of Health, University of Otago, where they supposedly isolate viruses, Public Health Agency of Canada, Australia's National Science Research Agency, which is CSIRO, New Zealand's University of Auckland, and New Zealand's ESR, which is their Crown Research Institute.
None of them have any record of a Marburg virus.
So just wanted to put that out there in case people start hearing about Marburg.
Well, and smallpox.
Smallpox is in the news recently.
A lot of talk.
Anything on that?
So, I just submitted 1 within the last, I think within the last week, so I will be getting that.
So when I get it, Michael will definitely forward.
I will send that to you for sure.
And I'm also waiting on a Nipah virus and Odina virus and any virus on the vaccine schedules.
Okay, so called vaccine schedules.
We're trying to get ahead of them now and sort of anticipate what they might try to come at us with next.
So, yeah, we heard that there was talk about smallpox lately.
Yeah, and if there's any particular ones that you would like us to do, like, just let me know and like, or plus I can send you the template because like I said, anybody can submit a request to the CDC or any other institution.
In Canada, there's usually a $5 application fee, but it seems most other countries, they don't even have an application fee, so... Yeah, that was my next question, was how can members of the public do what you're doing and submit FOIA requests?
So, I don't know if all countries have FOI legislation, but definitely the United States does.
So, you could either, for the jurisdiction that you're interested in, like, say, for example, it was a state, A state agency that you're interested in, you could Google freedom of information requests for that particular state.
But also, if you go to the website of the particular institution that you're interested in, they normally have information right there on their website that will tell you which legislation applies and they will give you the contact information for submitting the request.
I typically send mine by email because it's quick and it leaves me with a written record of what I submitted.
Sometimes an institution will try to get you to use a portal, but then that doesn't usually leave you with a written record for your record.
So you have to take a screenshot or something.
I just personally find email easier, but you could submit through the mail as well.
It needs to be in writing and you just need to give a clear explanation of what it is that you're looking for.
It's good to cite the name of the legislation, give your contact information so they can get back to you, let them know if you want electronic records or if you're looking for hard copies.
You might run into fees if they're actually going to mail hard copies to you.
You might have to pay for shipping and whatnot.
And that's another reason why I just like to keep everything electronic.
It makes it easier to upload online, too, because I already have an electronic copy.
And you have the template at fluoridefreepeel.ca, right?
I do.
If you go to my Freedom of Information page, and you have the URL there, it can be found from my homepage.
If you scroll down to the bottom of that page, people will see a section.
It'll say something like, would you like to help?
And it'll mention a template.
And if you click there, it takes you to another page.
And that's where I give actually updated it for you guys because I had it set up as though it was going to a Canadian institution, but I changed it for the CDC because the CDC is so important.
It's so influential around the world.
So I just have it right there.
The contact information for the CDC and all the basic elements, I believe, are in there that you need.
Some institutions will ask for a specific time frame for the search.
So, you know, you're looking for records between 1960 and 1988 for some reason, you know, but the CDC never asks me for that.
So it's actually very easy.
We're just about out of time.
Sorry to cut you off there, but I've got one last question for you, and I need to wrap this up.
There was a documentary that came out many years ago about HIV and AIDS, and it was called House of Numbers.
And I remember I interviewed the creator of that documentary many years ago, and there was something that stuck in my mind from that movie, the documentary, the entire time that only makes sense now.
And it was that when you go in for HIV testing, During the intake, they ask you to fill out a form that has lifestyle questions like, how many sex partners?
Are you homosexual or heterosexual?
Do you use protection?
Things like that.
And I always thought, what does that have to do with whether or not this virus is in a person's blood?
Shouldn't the virus test be a virus test?
And it turns out it's not.
It's not a virus test because they don't know what they're looking for.
So they're using this intake form to fudge the test and to just put you in a risk category and then say, oh, you're positive for whatever.
The whole thing has been fake the whole time.
Yeah.
I think another person you might like to really talk to is Dr. Kevin Corbett.
He's a retired nurse from the UK and he did his PhD on the HIV testing and he knows a lot about it and he was explaining the exact same thing that you just said.
Really?
Well, they will use their knowledge about your lifestyle With HIV, or at least they have with the, I believe it's with the PCR tests, or perhaps they did other tests to the Western blot and Eliza, I believe, but he definitely said they will interpret your results.
Taking into account what they already, what they know about your lifestyle.
So what, you know, the result of the actual so-called test, it could be positive or negative, depending on what they already, what else they know about you.
And Dr. Kevin Corbett can go into more detail.
And like I say, he's quite.
He's very knowledgeable.
He actually went into labs and watched them perform some of these tests and learned a lot about it.
Yeah, he's a wonderful man and he's very outspoken too about the fact he was on the whole isolation issue early last year because he'd gone, he had seen it.
He's one of those people that had gone through it.
There's also a group called the Perth Group.
I'm not that familiar with their But they've been around for decades, you know, exposing the whole HIV AIDS.
Okay, please, please make that introduction.
I will for sure.
For Dr. Courbet, as you as you mentioned.
Also, I'm going to send you over my direct email address, but I may not see the email unless you text me to look for it because I'm overrun with emails.
But just as a final comment to wrap this up, you know, in my lab doing heavy metals testing and glyphosate testing and cannabinoid quantitation and so on, you know, we have to qualify.
We order blind samples.
From a company, I don't want to give out the company name, but they're in the standards and testing and accreditation business.
And they'll send us a liquid.
And it's a mystery liquid.
And they say, OK, you tell us how much mercury, how much arsenic, how much cadmium, how much lead you tell us.
And then it's a pass fail.
They don't tell me, like, what's the history of that liquid or what's the lifestyle of the liquid or anything, right?
Because none of that matters.
It's supposed to be what's in the damn sample.
And yet the AIDS industry, it's not about what's in your blood.
It's about all your behavior, which makes no sense.
The quackery is so obvious at this point.
And same thing with COVID.
I mean, Australia, in the Northern Territories, they take sewage samples from a community of aborigines, you know, indigenous people.
They take a sewage sample and then they run a bunch of swabs on it until they get something that's, quote, positive.
And then they imprison the entire community based on what's in the sewage.
Everything's in the sewage.
Yeah.
Everywhere!
You could find anything in every sewer.
You know what I mean?
Everywhere in the world.
It's just where they want to claim they're looking.
Total fraud.
Yeah, and we have to hold these people accountable.
Can I just go for one more minute?
Go ahead, please.
Because I know you spoke to Christopher James, who's a common law teacher here in Canada, and I've been working with him lately.
We're collaborating, you could say.
I have compilations of the Freedom of Information responses.
They're on my website, but you can also find them from his website along with I did a living testimony in the format of an affidavit explaining what happened with all these FOIs and then he's got.
A few other things like the statement on virus isolation from Dr. Callan and Kaufman and Sally Fallon-Morrell, and a few other things.
And he's also working with an OPP officer, Ontario Provincial Police, who's been persecuted by the OPP, and who knows, there's no virus.
And what Christopher is doing is trying to Get the police on board and apparently they're getting so fed up with all the threats that they're getting that they have to get injected or they're going to lose their jobs.
A lot of them are getting fed up.
Their morale is very low because they're being forced to told to enforce all these ridiculous restrictions that they're realizing that it's not adding up either.
So even the police are thinking, yeah, they, you know, ticketing the public and harassing the public.
Um, they can see how ridiculous it is.
So they're getting fed up.
So he says more and more of them are reaching out to him.
And a lot of the problems that we have is when you try to hold people accountable, there are issues in the courts as well, where, you know, it, it doesn't come down to justice.
It doesn't come down to just looking at the evidence.
And did somebody do something right or wrong?
Do some wrong to somebody, people are getting snagged into being found guilty for all sorts of things that don't necessarily add up to any kind of crime or having hurt anybody, you know, you're just you're being manipulated with all these endless rules and regulations.
So we need to hold these people accountable somehow.
And personally, my hope is, is You know, getting the police on board and getting to the courthouses and doing things in a more rational manner that just comes down to looking at the evidence.
And we have to be able to hold these people accountable, not having loopholes where they get out on these regulations where it's all written up by lawyers.
And they always seem to have some kind of loophole where they can, you know, step away from us.
OK, I hear you, Christine.
And I'm sorry, I'm out of time.
I've got I've got to wrap this up.
We'll put your website on screen, fluoridefreepeel.ca.
You and I will keep in touch.
We obviously have to talk again.
There's much more yet to cover here.
But I want to thank you, Christine, for the work you've done so far.
You got my attention and the attention of many people.
You are uncovering what may be one of the greatest frauds in the history of Western science.
So thank you for your efforts.
Thank you.
Okay.
Take care.
And for those of you watching, really appreciate you.
Feel free to repost this interview anywhere you'd like, on your own channel, on another platform.
We've got to get the word out about this and start questioning the so-called science, which turns out to be just one fraud layered upon another.
It's unreal.
But, and also speak your mind, tell the truth with your own channel on Brighteon.com.
I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon and a published scientist in a peer-reviewed journal
doing mass spectrometry for food science.
So I do know what I'm talking about here.
Thank you for watching and take care.
Survival Nutrition is our new free audiobook that you can download right now from survivalnutrition.com.
on.
In this nearly 8-hour audiobook, you will learn life-saving secrets of how to use food, nutrients, plant molecules, trace minerals, and chemical compounds to save your life, even in a total collapse scenario.
I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, and I'm the author of Survival Nutrition.
I founded and run a multi-million dollar food science laboratory, and I'm the author of the best-selling science book, Food Forensics.
I'm also a prepper, a patriot, and a survivalist.
I can teach you how to survive what's coming by growing your own food, medicine, and antibiotics that can help keep you healthy and alive even during the worst of times.
At survivalnutrition.com you'll be able to instantly download the full free audiobook as mp3 files.
Keep a copy of all these files on your local hard drive and print out the full guide just in case we lose the power grid.
▲
Export Selection