All Episodes
Previous Next
April 7, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
01:02:50
The Viral Delusion, Ep. 3: The Mask of Death - The Plague, Smallpox and The Spanish Flu
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Every time you go back and look at what happened with this epidemic or that, there's always some sort of poisoning or some sort of toxin or some sort of, you know, even psychological change in the people.
Usually they become victimized and powerless and subjugated and dominated and then they end up sick.
When you say, when you look at past disease and there's always some kind of poisoning, some kind of toxin, can you take us through that a little bit?
I mean, we went through that in the book.
Sometimes it's basically even something like a comet coming in near the Earth's atmosphere and spewing nitrogen and sulfur gas all over.
Next thing you know, everybody has the Black Plague.
Every time you look, there is no evidence for virus.
There's not a shred of evidence.
There's always some kind of either change in consciousness and we downplay that because we don't understand how a change in consciousness or the way you think could actually produce illness.
And part of the problem here is because literally 99% of our research has been on viruses, nobody looks into what actually otherwise causes disease.
So the few times we have, like polio was caused by a combination of lead arsenic poisoning and DDT poisoning, both of which caused damage to the very part of our nervous system which is supposedly affected by the polio both of which caused damage to the very part of our
So those are the ones that we've looked into, and we've actually identified the toxin that was the cause of damaging the people, including the children, which was mistaken for a virus.
Now many of them, nobody has looked into it, so we don't really know.
I mean Sally, the co-author, has spent a lot of time looking into this and has some very interesting correlations, I would say, with what might have happened back in, you know, 1200 during the Black Plague.
Because some of them, like, you know, and I'm not an expert on this, but like there was, you know, half the people in Iceland died from some plague that had to do with rats.
It turns out they didn't have rats in Iceland until 200 years later.
So, bottom line is, this theory that it was all microbes and infection and viruses is completely unsubstantiated.
Every time that somebody does real science and looks into it, they find either some starvation situation, some toxic situation, or some big change in consciousness like what happened to, for instance, the Native American or the Africans who were brought for instance, the Native American or the Africans who were brought
Thank you.
. you The plague.
I'm sure everyone who remembers their school days were all taught that it was carried by infected rat fleas, you know, biting people and passing this dreaded disease on, which was supposed to kill tens of millions, well, all over the world, but particularly in Europe.
And, you know, we all believe this and were taught this for many years.
When we looked into it, it was easy to see that it was nothing to do with infected rat fleas.
And we looked at various angles on this, one of which was Professor Mike Bailey.
And he was a dendrochronologist who looked at... Well, he did several things.
He looked at the period of the Black Death.
to see what tree rings would tell him and he could see that during that period of the Black Death that the tree ring growth was much smaller so you can tell by that that there was something going off in the environment for the trees not to have made any you know as much growth as they would normally
So, to corroborate what that might be, he cross-referenced it with ice cores to see what was in the environment, and he could see that there was quite an environmental trough, that there was high levels of ammonium in the atmosphere, which is extremely toxic.
And then he cross-referenced that with eyewitness accounts of the time, And the eyewitness accounts, people living through that, were talking about a stinking and choking atmosphere.
And that people were just dropping down dead in the street.
And also that the rivers and lakes were becoming polluted and fish, shoals of fish, were floating to the surface, dead.
Now, of course, this doesn't fit squarely with infected rat fleas, does it?
Particularly fish all floating to the surface, so there's sort of a mass poisoning going on here.
Uh, and he also looked at, um, earthquakes, and there was a lot of earthquakes around at that time, particularly a massive one in, I think it was the 25th of January 1348, if I remember right.
But a number of them were whenever there's volcanic, uh, sorry, whenever there's earthquakes and the Earth opens up, particularly massive ones like that particular one, You get a lot of toxic substances and matter and fumes being released into the atmosphere.
So this would start to account for why people report in these stinking and choking atmospheres.
And supported by the ice core samples and the tree growth reduction.
So there are also eyewitness reports of a comet.
Coming into the Earth's atmosphere, people could see it.
Now whether that had anything to do with any debris from that, we don't know for sure.
But what we do know from the eyewitness reports and the ice cores and all the rest of it that the atmosphere changed drastically.
There's also reports of Because the weather systems had changed drastically, there was very strange weather systems happening, so causing great loss of crops and great famines, particularly in Northern Europe, and people were having to migrate away because they could not sustain themselves, so people were dying for that reason as well.
Again, we're back to lack of proper nutrition.
In fact, the The historians who've reported on it have said that the conditions in Northern Europe became so bad because of the crop failures that people were resorting to cannibalism.
And there's written facts of this, so you can tell how bad things must have been.
So all of these things together, all in this same time period, can account for this large death toll.
But nothing to do with rat fleas.
In more recent times, excavations in London have discovered, you know, they expected to be able to find evidence of large rat die-offs because the infected fleas were supposed to kill the rats before they left the host that they'd killed and jumped onto human beings.
This was the original story.
But so there should have been huge die-offs which one should have been reported by eyewitnesses at the time should have been reporting lots of dead rats about and there aren't any reports of that and the archaeologists in more recent times were expecting to be able to find evidence of large rat die-offs and again there wasn't any in the ruins that they were looking at so I think
Scientifically people can dismiss this whole idea of infected rats, infected rat fleas, so the more probable cause is these climatic changes which the eyewitnesses were reporting and the ice cores and tree rings were supporting of climatic changes, something happening in the environment in the
In that period which was causing a very toxic atmosphere that was actually poisoning people as well as of course people starving to death because of crop failures.
So this gives a much different picture of what the Black Death was.
Again, nothing to do with germs and everything to do with all of these other factors.
Every time you go back and look at what happened with this epidemic or that, there's always some sort of poisoning or some sort of toxin or some sort of, you know, even psychological change in the people.
They, usually they become victimized and powerless and subjugated and dominated and then they end up sick.
Let's talk about One of the fallacies that we've all been taught about smallpox at school, about the invasion of South America by the Conquistadors.
I think this is a classic case of distorted history, let's say.
And the lies we're told about through history.
I mean, I'm sure most people will be aware that they're told that when the conquistadors, we're looking in the 1500s now, Spanish conquistadors invaded South America, that the native populations all started to die out.
Because of diseases brought across by the Conquistadors, which the native populations of South America had no immunity to.
And this is why millions of them died.
And I do mean millions of them died out.
And of course it says that's really unfortunate.
But, you know, that's just these horrible germs again, responsible for killing the people.
The real story is, I mean, if you think about it, there's some people say that, oh well, the Conquistadors had these diseases, smallpox being the main one, which they brought across the ocean with them.
And so our first thing was, well, if you want to believe in germs, and you want to believe that the Conquistadors had smallpox, they were already got it, why didn't they die on the ships?
Because, you know, you don't... the journey across the Atlantic took a long time, you know, you didn't get there in a few days, so plenty of time for, if you've got smallpox, for you to develop it and die.
So why didn't the Conquistadors die on the ships?
And then the medical establishment try and say, oh, well, they'd obviously got immunity to it.
Well, again, second load of nonsense, really.
You know, if you've got smallpox, you've got smallpox.
If you're immune to it, then you don't have smallpox.
You know, this is using their basic germ theory model.
So that's obviously a load of nonsense.
And they're just trying to wriggle and try and find reasons to explain the fallacy.
But when you look at what was really happening in South America when the Conquistadors arrived, the people were dying and started to die, not because of any germs at all, but because of the way they were treated.
The Conquistadors were extremely barbaric and their sole aim was to enslave the people and to steal the gold and silver of the land, that's what they were there for.
And they enslaved the population to work in the gold and silver mines to extract the gold and silver.
But they treated the people so badly, because they had such little respect for them, that they didn't even bother to feed them, because their reasoning was that if they died, you know, they'd probably only last a few weeks, when they died there were plenty more people that they could enslave to continue working in their mines.
Hard to believe.
But also, of course, they slaughtered, massacred great numbers of the local population because they'd got steel weapons, they'd got even armoured dogs which they would Root out people, track them down, chase them down, and would kill people.
You know, if they were not in a condition that they could capture them and enslave them, the dogs would rip them to pieces.
They're extremely barbaric.
So, the local population knew this and moved off their own land to escape from the conquistadors.
But once they'd moved off their land, they now could not feed themselves properly.
So they were dying of starvation, and they were dying, as we've said, all the conditions that befall people when they've not got proper nutrition, when they're under extreme stress.
All of these things come into play, and as we've seen, smallpox, so-called smallpox, is one of the factors that starts to befall people when they're not being fed properly, when they're living in sanitary conditions.
You know, these people are on the run.
They're living under high stress.
These are the things that befall them, nothing to do with the germ.
There's so much about the exploitation of the continent to extract the resources, specifically gold, certainly.
The extraction of gold requires the use of mercury to actually extract the gold from the ore.
And so mercury being an extremely toxic substance, even if the people were healthy, And they were fed, which really was the case.
I mean, it wasn't the case.
That would have been, you know, pretty bad for their health.
You know, it would have caused some adverse health effects.
But the fact that they weren't cared for, they weren't fed, it made their lives extremely short.
I mean, in some cases, you know, they barely lasted three months once they were put into the mines.
The records show that something like 50 million inhabitants of the South America and the islands died through one cause or another, but none of those things were to do with germs, in particular smallpox, which is the historians try to attribute to it, because no one wants to admit that it was the sheer barbarism of the conquistadors, the invaders, of what they did.
I mean, people say they died of measles, they died of smallpox.
But there's no evidence for that.
There's no evidence of any pathogen there.
What there's evidence for is that they were poisoned.
They were dispossessed.
They were humiliated, they were dominated, and even they were infested with bed bugs, which have their own kind of toxin that they bite into you.
So there's much better explanations for what happened than some imaginary virus.
What we found with things like smallpox is that the rates of smallpox are directly attributable to the rate of insanitary conditions and poor dietary conditions.
And wherever you see that, anywhere in the world, even today, wherever you see in sanitary conditions and poor dietary conditions, you will see outbreaks of so-called smallpox.
Once you take those in sanitary conditions and provide proper nutritional food, the smallpox cases disappear.
As David said, the real reasons for the eradication of smallpox is due to improved health conditions, improved environmental conditions, improved living situation and plumbing in sanitary Measures and improved.
Um, improved diet.
I mean, at the time before the 19th century, um, there were no sort of sanitation, as in, um, um, sort of, uh, hygiene and sort of disposal of human waste, you know, so there was no, uh, sort of, um, sort of toilet systems and things, so indoor plumbing, um, and people were living amidst their own waste and, and, uh, bad water, animals around them, so there were, um,
That was the cause of a lot of problems.
Even though vaccination was brought in, there were two towns.
There was Leicester, which is a place in England, and Cleveland in Ohio, that both had experiments where they implemented sanitation measures.
And they actually stopped vaccination and they discovered that the results of these measures that they implemented meant that the cases, what were called smallpox, reduced substantially.
So the sanitation helped health, but it wasn't the vaccination.
It was the eradication of vaccination that actually improved people's health.
The Enthusiasm.
you you you you you you you you you
you you you you you you you you you you
you you you you you you you you you you you you
you you you you you you you you you you
Thank you.
There was a very eminent doctor, Charles Crichton, who believed in vaccination.
He was asked to write the entry, I can't remember exactly what year, but the late 19th century, he was asked to write the entry for Encyclopædia Britannica for vaccination.
And instead of just, as he said, writing the standard explanation within it, He decided to go back and actually have a look at it and look for himself.
And he discovered, to his amazement, horror, whatever, that there was no scientific evidence behind the practice of vaccination and he called it a superstition.
He wrote, he did write the entry for that particular year for vaccination.
Um, but he shocked his contemporaries, um, and because he was honest about what he found about vaccination, that there was no basis and it was a superstition.
It was based on superstition.
Um, and as I say, he, he was an eminent, eminent, sorry, eminent, uh, physician at the time.
Um, obviously that's why he was asked to write the entry for Encyclopedia Britannica.
Um, but he certainly made it quite clear.
He went back, had a look and said, no, it's not based on evidence.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
So it's the, again, part of the four factors that we talk about.
It's the lack of proper nutrition, sustained nutrition, lack of clean water, because it was always contaminated, and this, everything being contaminated by basically toxins.
And whenever those conditions were removed, as Dawn said, when they did that experiment in Leicester in England, and Ohio in the United States, when they improved those living conditions, then the disease went away.
And it's still the same today.
If you look into the areas where there's an outbreak of so-called smallpox, you'll see that those very poor living conditions exist.
And whenever those living conditions are removed, the so-called disease disappears.
And it's nothing to do with vaccinations.
In fact, as the English experiment showed, when they mandated for vaccinations, it actually increased the problem.
It wasn't until they improved the living conditions of the people that disease went away.
From then until this day, it's the vaccines.
You can trace wherever vaccination programs have been put in place.
They have never eradicated the disease they're supposed to eradicate and you get in actual fact you can trace an increase in the disease I mean this this happened in England in the late 1800s when they were the British government instituted compulsory vaccination for infants To get rid of, uh, that was, uh, smallpox, yeah?
To get rid of smallpox.
So compulsory vaccination for infants.
And they kept that in place for 40 years.
Okay, so over that period, you know, they'd got to the stage where almost every individual in the- in England had been vaccinated against smallpox.
And yet, during that entire period, the inc- the, uh, incidence of, uh, smallpox kept increasing.
Uh, not only the incidence of it, but the death rate.
So, I mean, that proved two things, really.
One is, vaccination wasn't actually conferring immunity over that 40-year period.
And it also gives a lie to the myth of herd immunity, which we hear a lot about today, don't we?
Well, clearly, if the vaccination worked and you could gain herd immunity from getting everybody vaccinated, then how can you still have a rise in incidents and deaths from smallpox?
But that was what happened.
And eventually they stopped doing it, but it took them 40 years to actually stop it.
Despite the protestations from many doctors at the time that realized vaccinations right from their outset was, well, their views like, you know, a filthy superstition, not based on any science at all.
And these are doctors that were making these accusations and it's still the same today.
But in the early days, those doctors did have a voice and people could hear what they had to say.
But now, of course, with the censorship that is put out, shall we say, or enacted by the governments and mainstream media and places like Google and YouTube, the censorship is so much that those doctors, even though they're still around today, don't get a public voice.
In 2000, there was an article in Pediatrics Journal that actually looked at the death in children from birth to 19.
from 1900 to 1998.
And more specifically, children ages 1 to 19 who had horrible death rates from infectious diseases in the early 1900s were children ages 1 to 19 who had horrible death rates from infectious diseases in the early 1900s were shown to have a very drastic reduction in the death
here.
And the authors in this study point in two places in the study whereby they say the reduction in death from infectious diseases in children aged 1 to 19 was miraculous.
It was exponentially observed to go down between 1900 and 1945 before vaccines and antibiotics were ever used.
They then go on to say that the reason for the reduction in the death rate was due to proper water systems, clean water systems, proper sewage systems, better hygiene, Improved living conditions.
Twice, the authors state, and this was before vaccines and antibiotics were even available.
And if you look at the infectious diseases, diphtheria, pertussis, measles, typhoid, influenza, The DPT vaccine didn't come out until 1949.
Diphtheria Reduces Fat.
There was a diphtheria toxoid vaccine that was given in the 1920s.
And I've actually seen experts show the mark of reduction in the illnesses from diphtheria due to the introduction of the diphtheria toxoid vaccine.
Not considering the fact that there were other factors that contributed to the reduction.
And not considering the fact that all the other infectious diseases at that time also saw a marked reduction in the death rate for which there were no vaccines.
So the expert just leaves out the other information To put forth a narrative that it had to have been the diphtheria toxoid vaccine that did it.
But it never mentions the fact that there were all these other infectious diseases that also saw the same rate of reduction of death without vaccines being implemented in society.
The historical curves, we show this in our book as well here, that the historical curves show that Practically every disease, yeah, you can get a vaccine against.
The mortality of all infectious disease declines before vaccination.
The mass vaccinations.
It's true for tuberculosis, it's true for measles, it's true for diphtheria, it's true for polio, it's true for And what's again unfathomable for the human brain to consider is the idea that these infectious diseases were actually environmentally toxic caused.
What's again unfathomable for the human brain to consider is the idea that these infectious diseases were actually environmentally toxic caused.
That it was due to water.
Poor water supplies.
Poor sewage supplies.
Poor living conditions.
Poor nutritional status.
Nutritional deficiencies.
And so, we only conclude that these people suffered from infectious diseases.
1918, so-called flu.
No infectious agent was ever discovered.
And could never be proved to be the cause of the disease.
Really the most well done experiments that I've ever seen were Breslau's experiments in 1919 related to the Spanish Flu.
And there were actually a series of experiments done with humans and horses at that time that are published.
And these were done as part of the United States Public Health Service.
So that's the precursor to the CDC.
So these were, you know, official studies.
And they used some techniques that maybe are considered unethical today because what they did was they had a group of prisoners, around a hundred, and they offered them that if they would do this experiment where they would expose themselves to the Spanish Flu, which was, you know, obviously deadly.
There were, you know, tens of millions of people to hundreds of millions of people who died depending on what data you look at.
If they exposed themselves and did this experiment, they would earn their freedom.
So, they volunteered, and they went to, like, the, basically, ICU at a hospital in Boston, New England, and got these people with smallpox, with our Spanish flu, who were dying, to basically, you know, they collected all their body fluids.
They had them cough up stuff, you know, they collected snot from the nose, they even collected secretions from the eyes.
And then they did three different experiments trying to get these healthy subjects sick with the Spanish flu.
So they put the fluids into their mouth, nose, and throat.
I mean, sorry, mouth, nose, and eyes the first time, like transfer the fluid from the place in the sick people to the healthy people.
Not one person got sick.
They did it a second time where they injected it under the skin.
Not one person got sick.
That's kind of surprising, actually.
And then they did a third experiment where they had them simulate close, intimate contact.
So they had them, like, get really up, you know, in their personal space and had the sick person blow out and then the healthy person inhale their breath.
And had them talk, like, really close for a period of time.
And all three experiments, not one person got sick.
They also did this in horses and it might have been a different investigator but like one of the experiments they actually put like a bag over the nose of the horses that were sick because horses get the flu also and basically the horse all the secretion filled up this bag and you know all their snot and stuff and then they took this bag and they put it over healthy horse had them breathe in all that stuff None of the horses didn't get sick.
They did another experiment, put it in their food.
None of the horses got sick.
So, all these experiments for contagion didn't actually show any contagion.
So, are you saying the Spanish Flu is not contagious?
They've proven that it's not contagious, pretty much.
And, you know, it also wasn't caused by a virus.
How do you know it wasn't caused by a virus?
Well, there's been no study that's ever shown a virus that caused it.
Even Fauci wrote a paper that said most people actually died of bacterial pneumonia, but that wasn't what caused the epidemic either.
Originally they thought, the medical establishment that is, originally they thought it was bacterial, but then changed their minds and thought it was a virus.
But in both cases, of course, they were blaming some sort of infectious agent, that's the main thing.
And they tried to prove that, and we talk about that in the book, where they had these groups of volunteers, stroke prisoners, lined up with a group of people who were ill with the suspected flu, and a group of healthy people.
And they had the unhealthy people cough and Splash into the faces of the healthy people.
They took mucus extracts from the unhealthy people and transplanted it into the healthy people.
And they did this dozens of times, but not once.
And I mean, not once were they able to transmit the so-called deadly flu to the healthy people.
Thank you.
So we wanted to find out what people were dying of.
The war had been going on for four years, and it took its toll not just physically for the men that were killed, it took its toll emotionally and mentally.
And as David mentioned before, one of the four factors that causes people to be ill is prolonged emotional stress.
You can't get much more prolonged and emotional stress than being, you know, in a war for four years.
I mean, not everyone was, you know, actually sustained the entire period.
A lot of men were killed.
But the war effort involved a lot of toxic materials.
I mean, you know, knowing about the Chlorine gas attacks, now it didn't necessarily kill people, but it certainly weakened them, made them enfeebled, and certainly with their respiratory systems, it would have attacked their tissues and weakened them, and possibly other factors would have helped to cause their deaths.
You know, imagine being in a trench, up to your knees in mud and water, and people are trying to kill you every day.
It's pretty stressful.
And secondly, of course, the people in those wars were living on army rations, which were Not nutritious, they were just basic, keep you alive, but we're not feeding the body with proper nutrition, you know, you weren't getting plates of fresh fruit and vegetables, you know, you're just getting sort of like hardtack biscuits, you know, which you can chew on, if you could not break your teeth.
So very poor nutrition, very poor nutrition.
So second factor, so you've got prolonged extreme stress, stress, lack of nutrition, Poor conditions in the trenches also include, you know, they obviously didn't have plenty of indoor plumbing.
And there was obviously dead bodies around.
They weren't always able to bury them.
So, you know, you've got decomposing, putrefying bodies around.
So very unsanitary conditions.
Very unsanitary.
And as Dawn said, you know, with munitions, the material used in munitions and explosives is extremely toxic.
So it's not only the stuff they're handling, But the air would be filled with it when the shells, I mean, some of these bombardments went on for days, you know, so the air would have been filled with toxic gases from the exploding shells.
Now, so if you weren't killed by an actual explosion, you'd probably die from the toxic output from these things.
So that's the third of the four factors.
Okay.
And then the final one, which is a little bit more mysterious.
It came into effect in the latter part of the war and that was the telecommunications.
So, we're bringing in electromagnetic fields.
Now, we're talking 1917, going back, you know, before when they started to be erected and particularly in some of the army camps in America, very powerful radio transmitters which put out extremely strong electromagnetic fields.
And some of the early reports of people dying very quickly and mysteriously were in those camps.
And when we investigated what it was, we found strange effects that people were dying of.
And they died very quickly.
There wasn't what you normally assume, a few weeks of feeling really rotten and then you slowly demise.
People were just becoming ill within hours or a day and dropping down dead.
And when they were examined, they were found they'd got hemorrhaging inside, internal hemorrhaging, particularly brain hemorrhages, which of course is something that no one would associate with influenza.
But you do associate it with high-powered electromagnetic fields.
And these sorts of cases were happening around these very powerful radio transmitters.
And this could be traced into all sorts of areas of the world at that time, in that period.
And quite some good work had been done on that in a book called The Invisible Rainbow by Arthur Festenberg which he goes into purely the electrical side of things.
At least in some geographic areas there was a major new technology that was put out and I'm really talking about radar technology and this put different kinds of electromagnetic radiation into the environment that Biological organisms have never been exposed to before and it's pretty clear that in various locations where this infrastructure was installed that people had Spanish flu and other health outcomes.
And also there was high-dose aspirin had been introduced, which is also, at the levels that it was given, extremely toxic.
CHOIR SINGS
CHOIR SINGS
Another factor that is often talked about and sort of fairly commonly talked about is the fact that all the soldiers were being given multiple vaccines.
And quite often, well, there are quite a number of reports of soldiers Soldiers, particularly in US military camps, that were vaccinated never actually got out to active duty, that they died.
Within the camps?
Within the camps, but also even if they were made ill after vaccines, then they were in the army hospital in the camps and they were given all sorts of treatments, including the kind of aspirin levels.
And so, you know, they didn't stand a chance.
MUSIC
PLAYS MUSIC CONTINUES
The Lord is free.
It's all these anomalies put together and all these other indications that you can see there was something else going on which then all got lumped together by the authorities and labelled a disease because when people look into it
You can soon start to point the finger at the authorities, lack of care, incorrect treatment, subjecting people to high levels of electromagnetic radiation.
So questions could be asked and people could get sued and so it's much better to blame it on a disease than it is to admit the truth and this we found this happens a lot and as someone once said It's much better to blame a virus because you can't sue a virus.
And that's probably a very true word, you know.
But you can sue chemical companies and military organisations and pharmaceutical companies with high-dose aspirin and all the rest of it.
They can be sued.
So much better not to talk about that and to talk about a virus being the cause of it instead.
You know, partly they were, you know, the same people who were promoting this, we're talking Rockefeller, you know, they were changing the medical curriculum so it was all based on the germ theory and it's offshoot.
They didn't want the attention on their new dyes and chemicals and oil-based products and even electrification And basically changing the way human beings lived, they didn't want the attention to be on toxic influences.
Now, it's nothing that any of us do, either individually or collectively.
Has nothing to do with the way you eat, or the way you think, or your human relations, or your conception of life, or how we organize ourselves economically.
Any of that stuff.
None of that is ever talked about in medical school.
I mean, I went to medical school, I know.
Nobody said anything about the way we eat, the way we think, about our economics, about whether we dominate or humiliate other people, or anything like that.
It's nothing to do with illness.
It's all just basically germs.
And you are a victim.
You didn't do anything.
In fact, there are adamants that we never, as doctors, you know, blame or suggest that a person had anything to do with why they're sick.
You're just going along, and this flu virus gets you, and, you know, that's how life is.
It has nothing to do with how you eat, what you think, or even your group of people, how they were treated, or economics, or, you know, anything like that.
And so it's a, it's a, it's a It's a brilliant way of looking at people if you want them to be powerless.
Because a person who's a victim is powerless.
I didn't do anything.
This SARS-CoV-2 virus landed in my nose and I can't do anything about it.
I can't eat differently, I can't think differently, I can't organize society different so it's just and fair and we're not dealing with poisons and electrical fields which we know make everything scramble.
None of that has anything to do with it.
It's spending all our money on You know, bombing and humiliating other people.
None of this has anything to do with what happens to us.
It's just we're victims of the virus.
Or our genes.
We've got dealt a bad hand.
So we go to the doctor.
What's caused my problem?
You either have a virus, you have genes, or bad luck.
Right?
When I trained in medical school residency, the understanding was that when children get sick, it's always a bacteria or virus.
And as I grew in my experience, I started to realize that even in cases where kids had what we were told were bacteria and viruses and we treated them, they kept getting sick.
They kept getting sick over and over and over again.
And no matter how many medicines I threw at them, they still kept getting sick.
It's like, what's going on here?
There are hundreds of trillions of microorganisms in their body.
What could be going on?
So I started to understand, due to my reading outside of Western medicine, that there are other factors that can make the body sick.
Like poor dietary choices.
Food sensitivities, food allergies, exposure to air toxins, food toxins, water toxins, environmental toxins.
And so when I started to delve into this area, I found an unbelievable amount of literature that's ignored in Western medicine that helped me understand other reasons kids could be getting sick.
And so if I made dietary recommendations, I watched kids get better and stop getting sick.
If I got the parents to get rid of the pillow that was full of dust, kids stopped getting sinus infections.
If I got parents to put an air purifier in the room, or get rid of a rug, or evaluate the home for mold, and that was cleaned up, kids stopped getting sick.
But what you heard from medical doctors when kids kept getting sick, oh, it's another virus.
Oh, it's another virus.
Oh, it must have caught another virus.
Here's another antibiotic.
It must be a resistant bacterial infection.
Here's another one.
Here's another one.
And when I started to realize that actually the reason the body gets sick is not necessarily due to infection, but due to a level of stress that has overwhelmed the body to such an extent That toxic wastes and inflammation build up.
And the body's smart.
It won't die until it's ready to die.
So it has to do something to get rid of the materials that are causing a stress or a chemical reaction that's hurting the cells and their function.
So it became clear to me that the reason the body gets sick is actually to purge this material.
Because if it's staying inside, The body would fail.
And so when I started watching all the kids who kept getting medicines for their presumed infections, they went on to develop very serious chronic illnesses.
Why?
Because the body was trying to purge and they kept getting medicine to stop it.
And nobody was addressing what kept coming into the body to cause the stress in the first place.
And so, That shift in my practice was miraculous.
Because I'd see kids stop wheezing and not have asthma.
I'd see kids sleep better and not move around so much.
I'd watch kids stop bedwetting.
I'd watch chronic coughs go away.
I'd watch ear fluids stop.
I'd watch adenoids and tonsils get smaller.
I'd watch skin rashes improve.
all from addressing the diet and the environment and making changes.
And then adding some support nutritionally to help the body do the rest.
And kids get better.
If you ask most people, like I would say most, you know, 99% of lay people and the vast majority of doctors, believe it or not, What makes you think there's a virus?
And the answer you get is, well, there's a lot of people getting sick, so it must be a virus.
And so I usually say, so you must mean that what happened in Hiroshima was a virus, because a lot of people got sick and died.
And so if that's the definition, then that, no, well, no, because that was a nuclear bomb.
So if it spreads from one place to another and people get sick, then that means it's a virus.
So like Chernobyl was a virus, right?
It spread all over Eastern Europe.
The reality of the situation is those kind of observations, like, and so what you're talking about, let's say you go to a place and there was always healthy dolphins, and then somebody calls you up because you're a dolphin specialist and says, oh, and then somebody calls you up because you're a dolphin specialist and says, oh, there's a lot of dolphins getting sick now, Now, that is what's called an epidemiological observation.
Okay.
In other words, I was fine and then I go to a party and then I got sick.
Or my Aunt Bessie went to somewhere and she got sick.
Or all ten children in my child's class got sick.
These are all epidemiological observations, and the role of epidemiological observations in science is to generate hypotheses which then can be tested to see what the cause is.
You can never, and I mean never, decide on the cause of an illness based on an epidemiological observation.
And the value of it is just to generate hypotheses.
So, you go to the dolphins, so what happened?
It could be a microbe.
Or it could be that somebody put some stuff in the water.
Or it could be that the glacier came and dropped, you know, cyanide in the water.
Or it could be a space alien came and put a hex on the dolphins.
Or it could be, you know, any number of things.
But you can't use that observation to tell you what the trouble is.
You have to find it.
Now, most people would think, as a first guess, like I would, if somebody said the dolphins were fine and now they're not, I would wonder whether there was some accident or some oil spill and somebody put some stuff in the water that didn't used to be there.
Pretty much every time something like that happens, that's what happened.
And then if you want, you can do an experiment, and I wouldn't suggest this, but you can put a bunch of dolphins in a cage and put the same kind of oil spill in there, toxins, and see if they get the same illness.
And if they do, that's pretty good evidence that that was the problem.
This business that that proves it's a virus is Copy thinking.
▲
Export Selection