All Episodes
Previous Next
April 26, 2022 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
52:58
Dr. Paul Cottrell warns of new coronavirus mutation that spreads more easily
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome everyone to another episode of Brighton Conversations.
I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, founder of brighteon.com.
Today we have joining us Dr.
Paul Cottrell with a very important update on the mutation of the coronavirus.
A new mutation is out there.
It seems to be becoming the predominant strain And it seems to be more infectious.
Other details about this virus are going to be shared with us today and may explain some of the uptick that we're seeing, not just in infections, which I don't necessarily trust those numbers anymore, but in deaths.
Deaths are starting to uptick in the United States in the aggregate across many different states.
So Dr.
Paul Cottrell joins us with more details.
Welcome to the show, Dr.
Cottrell.
It's great to have you back on.
Thank you, Mike, for having me.
I appreciate it.
And let's begin with this mutation.
Tell us what you think this means and where you think we might be headed.
Right.
For the ones that don't know, there is a mutation that's been creeping up in the United States.
It's called D614G1. And it's dealing with the spike protein location where it's switching amino acids.
And what's important with this change, with the mutation, is that it does not shed as fast in the cell.
So what happens is that the spike protein is created from the viral RNA. And it's cleaved by furin.
And then it assembles as the spike protein.
Well, in the old version, the D614, that's one of the subunits, the S1 subunit, which shed.
So it didn't have as many spikes on the viral product.
And as you start to fight the infection internally, you would be able, eventually the virus leaves the body.
Unfortunately, with this new mutation, the S1 subunit does not shed as fast.
And that many of these cases that were popping up in the United States in late April and through May, 70% of those were the G614 mutations.
There's a paper that's coming out in cell.
I was privy to seeing the pre-proof of it.
And there's additional papers that are tied to it that are working papers that I actually went into detail on my channel and looked at the actual Western blot of the test and explained to the public on what was happening with the S1 subunit and the S2 subunit And why this mutation is so different and important in terms of being able to have
this viral stay in the body longer.
And it leads to the worry that I had that I mentioned on your channel more than a month and a half ago.
And that is, the longer it is in your body, the more chance there is a gain of function with other receptors besides ACE2 And the CD147 receptor.
So give us the lowdown.
I mean, this is fascinating, but right up front, does this make the virus more or less transmissible?
What about, does it affect mortality rates?
And the fact that it stays in the body longer, does this mean that that person stays infectious longer to others, or is it more of a latent What would you say on those three questions?
Where the data is showing right now at the moment is that the affinity to the ACE2 receptor is the same, but the viral product that is produced has more spikes.
So it can attach to ACE2 I see.
It's just got more physical opportunities to lock into that structure in your tissues.
Right.
In terms of spreading the virus, there is no data that suggests that the R0 value would be increased.
But my worry is, the longer it is in your body, the longer it will find a way to gain function just through natural selection.
Because you don't just have one viral product.
You have millions or billions of these things in your body.
And all it takes is one or two of $4 billion to eventually gain some function and then gain hold of a new niche.
So in terms of deaths, there's no evidence within the cell paper that suggests that this suggests higher death rates, nor does it suggest a higher R-naught value.
But what it does show is that when they started discovering the new mutation for the spike protein, it coincides with this inflection point when you look at the U.S. aggregate data for this different state.
You look at the aggregate for the U.S., there is an inflection point.
At June 11th, and it starts to tick up.
And these are daily cases that I'm looking at.
Well, that's very interesting.
I'm concerned that this G614 mutation is one of the major driving factors of what I'm considering a second wave in the United States.
What do you make of the reported increase in infections now?
Because, of course, there's a huge increase in the number of infections, over 50,000 per day diagnosed in the United States, but a lot of us don't trust necessarily all the testing on this now.
The specificity is not good.
You know, even the PCR testing and the antibody testing and the serological studies are all very suspect, but The deaths seem to be perhaps a more reliable number.
But what's your take on all that?
Which numbers do you trust?
And which numbers do you question more?
I think the data point to really look at is new hospitalizations.
And unfortunately, the Johns Hopkins database does not publish this readily to the masses.
It's hard to get this data.
So in your particular state, You should look at what are the new hospitalizations.
Because just because you test positive, you could have a false positive.
And you could be asymptomatic.
There is some evidence that you could still pass it on if you are asymptomatic.
But the real number to look at right now, at this moment, is the new hospitalizations where the doctors are saying, you know what, you can't go home.
You have to be treated in the hospital.
Hopefully, they take the advice of some experts out there and say, you've got to treat this early with those protease inhibitors and that hydroxychloroquine because there's a lot of evidence that if you catch it early, you don't have this downstream negative effect where you start having the sepsis and the cytokine storm and all these other effects, assuming that the patient doesn't have arrhythmias.
Well, right, and the medical establishment has done everything possible to try to destroy hydroxychloroquine, which is extraordinary.
I mean, it's an admission that they want people to die rather than lose money on their vaccines and prescription drugs.
That's me saying that, not you saying that.
That's my view.
I've had many doctors state to me that they saw that hydroxychloroquine, if administered early, And they didn't have an arrhythmic patient was beneficial for treating COVID-19.
Are they using it with zinc, by the way?
This was with Z-Pak, but they didn't mention about the zinc.
See, the way I understand it is that hydroxychloroquine creates ionophores that allow zinc to be driven into the cells where the zinc is what really blocks the viral replication.
They may be doing that.
I just didn't mention it.
That's interesting.
Yeah.
I've also heard, by the way, not just heard, more than rumors, but looked at some studies on this, that quercetin, which is an extract from onions, that quercetin plus zinc works very similarly to hydroxychloroquine plus zinc.
Has that come up on your radar at all?
No, but we've been talking about using onions, garlic, and ginger.
And these are all in the soil.
They're all, you know, they're growing in a microbiome.
They have to create their own enzymes to be able to fight microbes.
So it makes sense that there's compounds within onions that are antimicrobial.
And this goes all the way back to our grandparents.
Whenever I was sick, I was told to eat a raw onion.
Yeah, that's true, yeah.
Have some ginger, have some turmeric, yeah.
And I always, whenever I feel sick, I always add supplementation with zinc.
I take a daily supplement of zinc every day, but I double it if I'm sick.
Yeah, absolutely.
So when will we really know then, as we're watching the daily deaths, the daily hospitalizations where we can get that data, when will we know the clear picture of what's happening here?
I mean, in two weeks, we're going to have some good answers, or is it going to take longer?
I don't think it'll take two weeks.
I think maybe in about a week we'll have a little better idea of what's going on with the hospitalizations.
We're already hearing in the news just recently about ICU units getting close to capacity.
Now, there is a problem with that, the way they spin it.
And that is, there is such a backlog of...
Non-COVID-19 patients, especially for secondary surgeries or cardiac patients that were afraid to go to the hospital and now they weren't being washed over and treated properly and they're coming in with With MIs, heart attacks and strokes or having angina attacks and all this.
So that's part of the problem.
Some of those ICU beds are taking in COVID-19 patients.
So it's not so clear what is each of the buckets for the ICU units within each of the states.
When they say they're reaching capacity, it's like, well, I think the far majority is because Of non-COVID-19 cases.
So there's that added dynamic because there's an awful lot of people that just waited and didn't treat their diseases because they, rightfully so, were worried to go to the hospital.
Especially when the hospitals were putting COVID patients with non-COVID patients in the same room for five days and allowing them to cross-infect.
That's a good reason not to go to the hospital.
What do you make of the current mask mandates?
Let's get into the mask debate a little bit.
The governor of Texas apparently mandated masks, but if you actually read his executive order, technically it only says that masks are mandated indoors where social distancing is not possible.
So it's not actually a mandate at all.
But everybody in Texas has been freaking out, and there's what I call anti-mask hysteria that has been spreading like crazy.
And I brought in something new recently into this debate I'd like to share with you and then get your comments.
My wife is from Taiwan and my mother-in-law is about a 105-pound tiny Taiwanese elderly woman.
She's been wearing a mask for 30 years every time she goes outside because that's normal in Taiwan.
And she hasn't collapsed from carbon dioxide poisoning or lack of oxygen.
So I wonder how these rough and tough Texans are so afraid of a mask that my 100-pound mother-in-law Taiwanese woman, elderly woman, she's fine with it.
So what does that mean?
Well, I mean, there's a lot of ways to look at this.
I mean, if you look at the Sherpas, when someone climbs Mount Everest, you know, you got these big Americans, you know, they spent all this money to climb Mount Everest, and you got the little Sherpas that, you know, that don't even need the extra oxygen tanks.
You know, so if you acclimate yourself to a certain environment over time, your body...
It builds a mechanism to be able to create more red blood cells.
So I think with your mother-in-law, her biochemistry is tuned to that kind of environment.
The far majority of the people in the United States isn't tuned to that.
But with that said, that's the extreme.
Mount Everest is an extreme case.
But in terms of the masks, this is where I stand on it.
If you're in an area that is high density, I think it's still prudent to wear a mask.
But if you're with your own family members and you're always around them, you know, I don't think wearing a mask indoors all the time.
In your own home, yeah.
I'm driving your own car, you know, with a mask on.
I think it's ridiculous.
I think I see a lot of people, you know, running by themselves, not with anybody outdoors in New York, you know, in the park.
I think that's crazy.
But if you're on a train or a bus in New York, yeah, I think you need to wear a mask because you don't want to spread this.
You don't want to go back into shelter-in-place.
So it's not so clear-cut to just say wear a mask or not wear a mask.
It depends on the situation.
Now, if someone's sick, yes, wear a mask all the time because, one, you don't want to spread it.
Um, or if you're immune compromised and you're, you know, you're very, you know, some of these cancer patients, they, they have no immune system, literally none, you know?
So, I mean, it just, it's not a clear cut.
Wear a mask or don't wear a mask.
It's just, you gotta look at the situation, what their, their particular circumstances are.
And then from just pure logic, it'll dictate if you should be wearing a mask or not.
Well, that seems rational, and I agree.
And there are people with emphysema, for example, who would have serious trouble breathing if they added a mask to the challenge they already have.
But, you know, presidential candidate Joe Biden says that if he's elected, he will have a nationwide mask mandate, which presumably would have some kind of, you know, criminality or fines or something.
If you're caught not wearing a mask, perhaps in your own home, are we going to have like mask Nazi neighbors peeking in your windows to see if you're complying with the Biden mask mandate?
Right.
You know, and, you know, he you know, it's obvious that he has some.
Blood flow issues with his head.
If you put a mask, if he's wearing a mask, it'll exacerbate his neurological dysfunction.
How would we know?
How could we tell the difference?
I'm assuming he has a little bit of neurological function.
But once he loses it all, then we have a problem.
Having a federal mandate, I think, is overreach of the federal government, and that it really should be the local municipality to look at its particular dynamics to determine what the, you know, each state has its own health department, and that's what it's for, is to be able to adapt and focus on that local health issue.
There is coordination at the state level, you know, at the national level, And that's where the CDC is supposed to come in.
But there is local health departments that really, that's their purview.
But the federal government mandating mask wearing, I think, is overreached by the federal government, to be totally honest.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, that makes sense.
I mean, if they could mandate wearing masks, couldn't they also mandate that everybody over age 65 wears adult diapers?
I mean, couldn't they mandate all kinds of things that you have to wear?
You know, couldn't they make you wear a Black Lives Matter t-shirt?
Well, I mean, we're going down the road to totalitarianism and, you know, the socialism, fascism thing.
But, you know, in the medical community, they have a certain code for physicians.
And one of those codes is making sure that they are patient-centric, that whatever they are prescribing, For treatment is for that patient.
It's not a cookie cutter applied to everybody type scenario and that there's a feedback to make sure that it's data driven that if it's not working they change protocol.
I mean there's a whole slew of regulations that are within this code of conduct for physicians.
So the federal government coming in and mandating a cookie-cutter approach is against the code of conduct of physicians.
And this is where the physicians need to stand up and state there is an overreach by the federal government that is outside of their...
That, you know, these government officials are telling physicians how to treat their patients.
And I'm sure that if you've talked to a lot of physicians, they're kind of fed up with the, you know, federal federalism of the treatment of their patients.
They went through school and through training and through, you know, continuing education and data driven of their practice, their local area to determine what is best for their patient and not the president of the United States.
Yeah, exactly.
You sound just like a physician friend of mine I've known for 40 years, and he passed away recently, but he always said that We go to medical school to learn how to listen to patients' needs and how to put our diagnosis in the context of the local community and the challenges that those particular patients may have.
And then the federal government comes along and threatens us with jail time if we treat the patient rather than treating the Medicare demands.
Doctors are criminalized by Medicare and Medicaid for billing.
They can call it billing fraud if you didn't do the right thing that a central control You know, commander somewhere in Washington, D.C. told you that this is the way you have to treat it.
Doctors are supposed to stop being human, I guess?
Just vending machines for drugs now?
And to prove your point, early on in this COVID-19 crisis, there were many doctors who That were trying to fill out forms when the CDC were doing the testing only, where the testing wasn't local.
They had to fill out special forms to get the permission from the CDC to be able to send the samples to the CDC for testing.
So, you know, it was like you had this bureaucracy that was telling the local physician on how to treat the diseases that they were seeing.
I personally think that you can't force legislation where you're legislating disease, disease prescription, or how to treat diseases.
I just think that is a course for disaster, and you have to give more autonomy to the nurses and the doctors.
Right.
Absolutely.
What about the whole back-to-school debate?
As you're aware, President Trump is really pushing for schools to reopen nationwide, saying that the risks to children either contracting this condition or spreading it is very minimal, and that not going to school is very disruptive to not only the child's life, but also the life of the entire household and the parents who need to go back to work.
But then a lot of Democrat governors are saying, no, you can't force us to go back to school.
So we've entered this weird era where Trump is pro-education and the Democrats are anti-school.
Well, you know, let's dive into the reason why the Democrats are saying this.
They are pretty much focused on the union, the teachers' union.
The teachers' union, at least in New York, but I'm assuming this is the same across the country, they don't want to go back to it.
Now, what's the reason?
Well, they are using online education as a way to just pass the buck for letting the computer teach the child.
Yes, there is some interaction by the teacher.
I'm talking about this is primary school teachers here.
But, you know, I think that the primary school teachers are viewing this as a means that they can have an extended vacation, stay at home, they don't have to, you know, drive to school, and they don't have to deal with the children, you know, on a one-to-one basis, and they're pushing it on, well, just do this assignment, and the computer automatically grades it.
Right.
Right.
And the teachers are still getting paid.
Right.
Yeah.
So I think the Democratic Party is just placating to the teachers' union.
I think that's what's driving a big part of this.
In New York, they are thinking about opening up some of the schools, all right?
Now, the governor stated yesterday that they're going to have them provide a proposal by the end of July, and they will make a final decision the beginning of August, the first week of August,
if they're going to open up schools, either make a local decision that some areas will open up and others won't, or a global, you know, more global statewide decision where all of them are shut down or all of them will be open.
So at least in New York, it's undecided.
Now for me, if I was, let's just say a governor, I am still, I, I'm going back to this D614G mutation.
I am concerned of a second wave.
Very concerned.
With that said, yes, younger children...
They proportionally don't get as sick as adults.
They can get sick, but they don't get as sick as often.
I think it's because the thymus is larger and they can adapt quicker than, let's say, the adult.
But I think it'd be prudent, at least for the first term, the fall term, to be idiosyncratic.
Certain regions may be going back to school.
Other regions, if they have high infection rates, you know, with the second wave, hold off one semester and then the next semester have them come in.
Now, you know, certain schools, you know, let's say in college, the Ivy Leagues and whatnot, other colleges, they've already, some of the schools, some of the prominent ones have decided that the whole year, the whole year for starting in the fall will be online.
Wow.
Harvard decided that all classes will be online and that a certain percentage of the undergrad, about 40% of the undergrad, are allowed, if they want to, to dorm online.
On campus, but classes will only be online.
And the idea is that this is the socialization through undergrad to build friends and stuff.
But very prominent schools have decided to do all online for a whole year.
Well, it brings into question, what's the value of paying the higher education tuition fees if it's just distance learning?
You made a great point.
They didn't lower the tuition.
They didn't lower the tuition.
Because, you know, I've actually attended, you know, MIT lectures on physics and chemistry and organic chemistry because they're free and they're online and I like to learn things.
So does that make me an MIT graduate then because I did the same distance learning that their students are doing now?
Or do I need to pay a hundred grand and then I get a diploma?
You know, it brings in the question, what is the function of higher education If it's not to bring people together to have face-to-face instruction and experiences and debates and all those things, you can't do that sitting in your basement all day just watching a computer screen.
Yeah, I agree.
Unfortunately, the whole computerized experience that we're going through, you and I, we remember playing outside before computers were a home item.
A lot of children, they've never seen that.
They've always been around computers.
I just think that people need that human experience and not the transhuman experience where it's just all digitized.
I think that's a big part of the problem in the United States.
We are too plugged in.
Yeah, we need to reintroduce the sandbox.
It's a physical sandbox.
You put down some railroad ties and you throw some sand in it and you tell the kid, go play!
I remember, this is a funny story, I remember when I was a kid, this is in the mid-70s, so around 75, Where my sandbox was out in the back door and we had a hurricane in Michigan that blew away my sandbox into the neighbor's yard and stuff.
I remember having that sandbox, but a lot of kids, they don't have a sandbox.
They don't even know what that is.
No, and it creates, you know, creativity.
I mean, when I was a kid, my friends, we had a sandbox, and we'd buy little plastic army men, you know, and you'd build sand dunes and rivers, and you'd have, like, combat, and then you'd find, like, the neighbor's cat dropped a turd in the sandbox.
Oh, landmines, you know?
I mean, you were creative!
You had to make do with what you had, and so you became, you know, adaptive to the world.
Another thing, at least for me, was that was when Star Wars comes out in 78.
The figures for Star Wars.
Just having the figures in the dirt and setting up Luke Skywalker and R2-D2. I remember that.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, a little metal millennium falcon, you know, cruising around.
Kids had imaginations back then.
But let's move on to the economy right now, because even as hospitalizations are rising and deaths are starting to creep up in the aggregate in the U.S., according to state statistics, Wall Street has really skyrocketed in what appears to be the most epic disconnect ever.
You know, as American Airlines, I believe, is laying off or furloughing, what, 36,000 people or something.
Restaurants filing bankruptcy nationwide.
Retailers filing bankruptcy all over the place.
Business is not good on Main Street, but Wall Street is skyrocketing thanks to Fed printing.
How long can this last, this total disconnect?
Well, until the monetary system collapses, the petrodollar completely collapses.
But you're right.
You're absolutely right that there is a disconnect with Main Street and Wall Street.
I'm predicting that there's going to be a big increase on the S&P 500.
Increase, not decrease.
Because there is going to be this...
The golden cross is happening right as we're speaking.
It's happening.
The 50-day moving average is about to cross the 200-day moving average in the positive direction.
And all those algorithms and all those investment managers...
Institutional investors, they have cash on hand and they are going to put it into the market.
There's going to be a big increase.
We're at around a 78% retracement since the low, since this crisis.
It wouldn't surprise me that by October, we're...
At an all-time high on the S&P 500.
But that is because of the Fed printing and what they call the Fed put on Wall Street.
It's like Powell has put a put on the market, meaning that he's created a floor.
He's not going to let the market fall.
He's just going to keep on making sure that those banks have liquidity.
This opens up a larger, much larger discussion about transparency of the Federal Reserve and which banks are needing liquid injection through the repo market.
You know, and that we have real time auditing of what's really going on at the Federal Reserve.
But this could last for a long time.
You can't.
It's very hard as a trader to go against the Federal Reserve.
Very, very hard.
Usually you lose.
I mean, and the Federal Reserve has made it very clear that they will be accommodative monetarily for the next year.
Well, that's exactly the thing, though.
It seems like the Federal Reserve is really the only signal that matters now because all the fundamentals are thrown out the window.
There's no rationality in making investment decisions now based on a company's assets and liabilities and profits and P.E. ratios and things like that.
Now it's just, what is the Fed pumping today?
What's the Fed buying?
And then you just jump on board that train.
But that's not a free market.
That's not a rational market.
That's like a Bernie Madoff running the Fed Ponzi scheme that's going to end badly one day.
Well, it's like this heroin addict.
At the very beginning, he's getting his fix, and then he's going to have his crash.
So right now, the Federal Reserve is printing and making sure that the market, that this hot money is creating the buoyancy within the financial system.
System.
Once we go to full employment again, or near full employment again, then there's going to be the reckoning.
And that reckoning will be...
Well, the Federal Reserve will say, you know what?
We're going to start to decline.
We're going to start to reduce our balance sheet.
And the market will start having a hissy.
And they'll start selling.
And, you know, this is why Hayek and...
And, you know, other economists out there, you know, had the big...
Yeah, you know, right.
You know, that where all these economists were having this big debate, you know, should you just let the system heal itself or do you intervene all the time?
And this right here is one of those cases where they're going to intervene right now, but the pain...
We're going to feel later, after we're in full employment, and then people will have jobs, but they'll start seeing the market go down, and they'll be the inverse.
Main Street is bad right now, but the market's good.
Main Street will be good, but the market will be bad.
Well, how do we even...
How do we get to full employment when the government keeps paying people to stay home and not work?
There's been this CARES Act that's been paying people all these federal unemployment bonuses, which is causing especially low-wage laborers to simply refuse to work anywhere.
They get paid $15 an hour to sit at home and do nothing.
Democrats are calling for an extension of that, which apparently would be perpetual.
Small businesses can't come back without labor.
I mean, everything from landscaping companies to restaurants to hair salons to even warehouses like my own.
You know how hard it is for us to find anybody who wants to work?
They tell us straight up, why should I work?
I get paid the same staying home because the government's just paying them.
And unless that ends, there's no way that our economy comes back.
You've got to have labor.
Normally, unemployment lasts for 26 weeks.
Now, they may extend that.
I don't think there's that many people that have reached the maximum of what typical unemployment is.
But even what unemployment pays, at least in New York, it's only a fraction of what really your living expenses are.
So there is this built-in mechanism to have the desire to look for a job so you can pay for your livelihood.
Yeah, but in rural areas, you know, like rural Texas, people can live on $15 an hour.
It's a lot less expensive, and they are.
A lot of people are just choosing to do that.
Well, that's a different dynamic than what I'm seeing, at least in suburbia or in the city.
There's no way you could live on $15.
I mean, that's just like...
That's a bum wage.
I mean, the bums are making that more, you know...
You know, by just asking for donations on Broadway.
Oh, I'm sure they are.
But I'm just saying that, you know, it's a lot less expensive to live in other areas, so there's really less incentive for people to go back to work.
And with talk of extending the benefits, the question is, how can any politician ever say to America, oh, now we're going to stop that, we're These benefits, you know, that's how you lose elections, is to start taking away something that you gave.
Even when it was temporary at first, it quickly becomes permanent.
And it seems like with the Fed pumping up the stocks without rationality, and then the Fed pumping, you know, fake earned income into the pockets of people who aren't working, where's the real economy anymore?
I think what you're...
Yeah, I think what you're observing and what you're articulating is the Carter administration.
And we were starting to see this erosion of the economy and this inflation.
And then it took Reagan and Volcker to break the inflation and then start moving the economy in a positive direction.
And this ties into what I was saying about New York.
New York is slipping back into the 80s, pre-Giuliani.
The United States is slipping back into the 70s, like during Carter.
And it's going to take a person like a Reagan to turn it around.
Right, and when it comes to fiscal discipline, Trump is not a Reagan.
Did you see the numbers for June, just the calendar month of June?
The U.S. added $1 trillion to its national debt in one month.
Right, right.
It's just this is becoming unsustainable in that, unfortunately, we are seeing possibly the destruction of our hegemonic power In two ways.
One way through the petrodollar.
That's a hegemonic mechanism for the United States.
So the power of our dollar is going to diminish because of everything that's been going on.
And then our military hegemonic power in the Pacific.
Because I believe that there's going to be an October surprise.
And that October surprise is going to involve China and the Hong Kong-Taiwan issue.
I think you're right.
And Trump is not strong enough to step up to the plate and say no to the Chinese, you know, forcefully, using military force to prevent it from happening.
I don't think he's strong enough to do it.
Well, that's interesting.
I know Pompeo is certainly talking tough.
But yeah, Trump is going to need to really step up and defend America.
And I know the Pentagon is pushing Trump.
They're itching for a war.
They need another major conflict to have more trillions of dollars diverted to military programs and military consultants and everything else.
Here's the strange thing about the United States' history.
We became a hegemonic power because we were...
We got involved later in a world war.
We didn't start it.
So we're making the same mistakes as what England made.
They had high debt.
They were overextended around the world.
A world war happens, and then eventually it's the collapse of the UK. And then here comes the United States.
It's the hegemonic power right after World War II. We may be seeing, unfortunately, the beginnings of the destruction of that post-war power, post-World War II power that the United States has been basking in for decades.
But I don't believe China is as strong as people think it is.
I agree with you.
Yeah, they're very vulnerable.
They hit them now, then later.
Because over time, they will get stronger.
So, you know, I think our Navy is in a position where the odds are in our favor.
You wait, the odds will diminish.
And this is where I agree with the Pentagon in this regard.
Yeah, and have you seen the issue of the Three Gorges Dam with the heavy historic flooding in central China?
The Three Gorges Dam, it's got quality control problems because, as you might imagine, it was made in China.
And...
As a result, the quality is very bad.
If that dam fails, there's a lot of speculation that it might fail, it would absolutely devastate China's economy.
It would flood the whole region east of the dam, Wuhan, all the way to east China, taking out the major cities, taking out the economy.
It would crush the Chinese regime.
It might even flood a bunch of nuclear power plants there.
We could have new Chinese Fukishimas to worry about.
But that's happening right now.
If that dam goes, I think China's finished, frankly.
And that's how vulnerable they are.
They're overextended.
They're a debt-based economy.
They have created enemies all over Asia.
You know, in their racist, intolerant society that's also anti-God, anti-America, anti-white people, anti-Japanese, anti-Korean.
Chinese hate the Koreans.
You know, I think China's going down at some point here, probably due to economics.
Usually when a country feels the stress of its economic situation, that's when they start to do external enlargement, or at least try, and try to gain land and power and control sea lanes.
And this is why I think President Xi is going to try to extend and expedite the 2025 plan to control the first island chains.
I agree with you.
Is the Achilles heel of Donald Trump's administration because he's in a situation where he's not going to do military engagement with China right before an election.
He may do it after if he wins, but he's not going to do it before.
So if China was smart, what they would do is it's like they'll move into Hong Kong and they sort of are already.
But I mean, I'm meaning like a lot more forcefully.
And really control Taiwan.
And Trump can't do anything about it.
And then their perspective is that we're already weak with the second wave with COVID-19.
Right, but if, on the other hand, if China does something so egregious that it turns public opinion against them, you know, China is engaged in war crimes or killing innocent people or dropping a nuke on a civilian population or something, I could see a lot of popular support for Trump's response and military response that would actually give Trump the edge in the election.
I could see that scenario as well, just depending on how it plays out.
I don't think they would engage with unconventional warfare like nuclear weapons.
But the Chinese think that they are the center of the universe.
That goes all the way back to thousands of years.
That the whole universe is around them.
We're the barbarians.
All the other countries are barbarians.
And that's the whole word, kowtow.
You kowtow to the Chinese.
That's how the word is, is you bow down and you walk away.
So it's like they are the center and they are, quote, the spiritual force that lets the world exist.
That's their mindset.
So I don't think that they really think, I don't think they care, really, what, quote, the barbarians think.
They have already built up their society, or I should say we built up their society through foreign direct investment over the decades, and bringing them on into the World Trade Organization, where now they have hubris, and that's their Achilles heel, is that they think that they're bigger than what they really are, and they're more powerful than what they really are.
That's their Achilles heel.
Yeah.
Our Achilles heel is as they were approaching similar dynamics to what was going on with the UK, you know, right before World War II. And, you know, hopefully, you know, the experts at the Pentagon and even the experts in history at large in the United States really applies their knowledge and says, you know what, we need to change the direction of this country to make sure that we last another 200 or 300 years.
Yeah, that's right.
Everything is at stake and the dynamics are changing rapidly.
We've covered a lot of fascinating topics here today, Dr.
Cottrell, giving people a lot to think about.
Any last thoughts before we wrap this up?
Well, again, we are a very giving nation and we can be a very compassionate nation and we need to be compassionate with our citizens.
We have to work together.
And, you know, it's possible that if I'm right about the second wave, that things can get worse for many states.
And that not to freak out, not to be, you know, tearing the country apart, but just to work together, because that's what the American spirit's about.
And I just, I think that we need to Yeah, I agree.
Americans are quite resilient and very creative in solving problems, and we rise to the occasion.
Give us your websites, please, where people can find more of your work.
It's the-studio-reikovic.com and I have a YouTube channel called Paul Cottrell and the secondary channel is Dr.
Paul Cottrell.
So that's the best way that you can see my work.
They haven't banned your channel yet on YouTube?
They have taken down many, many of my videos.
Some of them Have you in them.
But that's okay.
And I was demonetized about four or five weeks ago.
And I just reapplied for monetization, so it's an appeal.
Are you posting everything on Brighteon, too?
And I'm also posting on Brighteon.
I'm moving my catalog over.
Awesome.
My Brighteon channel is Dr.
Paul Cottrell.
Okay.
And I assume you haven't had anything banned on Brighteon, right?
No.
No, not yet.
Good.
Good.
Because if that happens, just let me know.
I will scream at somebody in moderation.
You know, my whole goal is to move my whole catalog over to Brighteon.
But it takes time, you know, to get the downloads and upload it and just make sure everything's right.
But I'm in that process.
I've already been upgraded because I've had enough viewership.
So I'm user level number two, I guess, is what it is.
So now I can upload 100 videos instead of just the 50.
Great, yeah, you'll climb in that very quickly.
Stefan Molyneux is also moving his entire library over to Brighteon.
We've seen that.
In fact, a lot of people migrating all their videos over so quickly, we've had Some delays on the video transcoding queue some days.
It's been like a three-hour delay because one user is uploading like 50 of his videos from before, which is fine.
You know, that's what we want, but it is causing some bottlenecks.
Well, what is interesting is when I told...
The ones that watch my channel that I was moving to Brighteon, I had a lot of positive responses.
A lot of saying, great, that's what we need.
We need a channel that's not censored and that's more open freedom of speech.
You're doing a great service on having Brighteon for people like I that are just trying to inform the public.
Well, thank you.
And the main point is that when you're speaking about something, you know, on Brighttown, you don't have to self-censor.
You don't have to moderate yourself in real time and try to figure out what you can say and what you can't say, which interferes with communication, you know?
So people start to sound kind of stupid on YouTube when they're censoring themselves all the time.
Oh, I can't say this word.
I can't say that word.
I can't...
Or they do it in code.
Like some of the things that I've been saying, like I don't see...
G5. You know, 5G. I don't say 5G. I say E7 because I flip it.
I use the numbering for the letters.
So everyone knows that when I say E7, I really mean 5G. But right after what happened to David Icke when he was talking about 5G and independent of what you think about David Icke, You know, he was just totally destroyed.
His whole channel was taken down and even London Real.
The same thing happened to him.
Oh, I know.
I know.
And I think David Icke should have the right to speak.
His voice is an important part of the debate and the conversations, even though I personally disagree with his conclusions on, you know, he doesn't think the virus is real, but that's okay.
Everybody should be able to have a different view and let the best ideas win, right?
That's right.
And just in parting, some people like myself, we want to say certain things, but there are certain guidelines, not because of platforms, but because of where we're getting our education or which professional organizations we're a part of, that there's a self-censoring because you get dinged.
You know, under the professionalism code of conduct.
So there is, unfortunately, you know, there is just, I'll tell you, I wish I could go a lot harder on Fauci, you know, but I can't.
That's the problem.
Maybe one day you'll join me.
The only society I'm a member of is the Zero Fucks Society.
Yeah.
I mean, I'm fastly approaching that to that organization.
And hopefully I'll be a lifelong member.
That's right.
Welcome to the board.
It's just insane how these professional organizations are controlling people.
Well, that's all about the licensing.
You know, when the state can license everybody from doctors and lawyers and plumbers and everybody else, then the state controls your speech, controls your life.
That's why state licensing of professionals actually is a very dangerous idea in many ways.
But we can talk about that another time.
We're out of time for today.
Great conversation, though.
I appreciate you joining me.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
Thank you.
So everybody, Dr.
Paul Cottrell, check out his website and his channels, and of course you can see more of our interviews uncensored on brighteon.com.
Thank you for joining today.
This video was made possible by Brighteon.com.
After being deplatformed by YouTube, I built Brighteon.com so that we can speak.
All voices of dissent are welcome.
▲
Export Selection