All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 17, 2022 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
01:03:28
Setting the Record Straight with Dr. Jane Ruby and Mike Adams
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello and welcome everyone.
This is Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon.com.
And today I'm joined by one of your favorite guests, Dr.
Jane Ruby.
And the episode today is called Setting the Record Straight with Dr.
Jane Ruby and Mike Adams.
And we'll explain that in a second.
Welcome, Dr.
Ruby, to the show.
It's great to have you on.
Mike, it's always great to be with you.
Thank you.
Yes, it's great to have you on as well.
Now, it's been a while.
I think I was on your show last time.
It seems like it was a couple of months ago.
But since then, you and I, I think, have both noticed that there's some misunderstandings in the general public about the history of clots and the clot analysis and interactions with embalmer Richard Hirschman and And your history in that, which goes back to the beginning of the year, if not earlier.
And so there have been some other hosts and people misstating things.
And I think it's worth you and I clarifying things.
So that's what this is all about.
So where do you want to begin?
Well, let's begin at the beginning, right?
Let's begin chronologically because most of this discussion is around the white fibrous clots that first seemed to come out last year in 2021.
But I want to tell the beginning of my story really quickly.
In late 2021, I received a communication from one of the three DOD whistleblowers, Lieutenant Colonel Dr.
Teresa Long, who said that she was at a recent funeral in Alabama and that she met an undertaker or embalmer of sorts at the event and he asked to speak to her privately and he told her that he had been finding the white fibrous clots.
He thought it was very unusual and he didn't know who to tell.
And so she connected me with him And she said, I think here's someone Dr.
Jane Ruby can talk to, trustworthy.
And so I met with Mr.
Hirschman a number of times, Mike, on Zoom so that we had the visual with each other.
I met his wife.
His son was often in the shot as well.
We would have, you know, lots of talks about this, their, you know, their perceptions.
And when he started talking about it in 2021, and so he told me this story and he showed me pictures and he showed me Samples.
And so over the coming weeks, a few weeks, we kept meeting and I vetted him.
I asked him with my medical expertise.
I asked him a lot of questions about the texture and his other observations, his visual observations.
And so we put together What turned out to be a worldwide exclusive, since no one else was talking about this and no one else had come forward about it, we came out with a show on my newly launched show, the Dr.
Jane Ruby Show, and we...
By the way, that, I just looked at it yesterday, is up to 2.7 million views.
Oh, wow.
Probably my most watched show ever in my career.
Yeah, that's huge.
Yeah, and it's still there.
Anyway, we worked together for a number of weeks.
I asked him to get more detailed.
I asked him to show me more samples.
He showed me videos where his assistant would hold the phone and he would pull these objects out very delicately.
It's very difficult to get them out.
And he told his story about how he first discovered them when he went to embalm.
And the process itself was unusually difficult.
He couldn't get his tools into the blood vessels.
So that was really how it all started.
And I want to fast forward to around February where I said to him, look, you can keep pulling these out of people, but until we get a chemical analysis, it's really not going to go any further because we've got to know what it is.
Maybe it's something natural the body's doing.
So I didn't want to be part of his chain of custody.
I wanted to keep it just as unbiased as possible.
And I said to him, you own this material, you should seek people out.
So he went to labs.
He went to some of the frontline doctors.
In particular, he went to Dr. Ryan Cole that I thought would be a hopeful and fruitful experience.
But instead, he really got nothing.
He sent him the clots, but apparently got no response for over 12 weeks with multiple inquiries.
So I got frustrated at that point.
And at the time I had my live show on Brighteon every week.
So you and I were forming a relationship for the show and all that.
And so I thought, you know what, I'm going to reach out.
I said, Richard Hirschman, give me a few minutes.
I'm going to call...
Mike Adams at Brighton, he's got a lab, he's a microscopy guy, expert, and so that's how I connected Hirschman with you.
Now, we've heard some stories in social media where people think other people connected.
I just think it's important for accuracy.
It's not about my ego or who got him to you first.
You introduced me to Richard Hirschman, and not only that, But Hirschman is the one who sent me the clots directly.
Right.
Again, I stepped out of the chain of custody.
Right.
Right.
But there have been other videos or interviews out there where people are saying that other people sent me the clots, not Hirschman.
And that's simply not true.
Actually, Dr.
Brian Artis sent me one clot later on.
It was the big kind of famous clot.
But as far as I know, that's the only other clot, and it was just one clot.
Everything else came to me from Richard Hirschman directly.
And I still have all those in my possession, and we use those clots for the mass spec analysis.
Let me ask you, what was the time frame between when Mr.
Hirschman sent you the samples and when Brian Artis sent you the other half of that big clock?
Months.
Okay, so you had already started your analysis.
You started them on the ones that Hirschman sent you.
Exactly.
I just wanted to clear that up, too.
Well, yeah, we did the ICP-MS analysis on the ones that Hirschman sent because they were much smaller clots, by the way.
And that's actually, I think I've shown you a video of our sample prep, which is the nitric acid digestion and so on.
Yeah, a stunning video.
Yeah, it was quite interesting.
Yeah.
All those clots came from Hirschman.
And then when I invited you and Richard Hirschman on to InfoWars, remember the day when I brought my microscope into the InfoWars studio?
Yes, of course.
It was a really breakthrough show for national radio, and we were dissecting the clots right there in the studio.
Those were all Richard Hirschman clots that he sent me directly.
I see.
I see.
And I want to make another clarification.
I have a tremendous amount of respect for Dr.
David Martin.
We're actually friends through this whole thing.
We've become friends with him and his wife, Kim.
But he made a statement the other day about the fact that the word clot only goes with blood.
And I have to respectfully disagree with that, and I want people to understand in the public that The word clot is actually defined as a mass of coagulated material.
And it depends on what you put before that word clot that determines what that clot is made of.
So that's why we've never been able to call the white clots a specific thing.
We call them white fibrous clots because that's really where, not fibrin, but fibrous clots.
But if you call it blood clot, then it's a coagulation of blood that's thickened and jelly-like.
So I just thought that was important too from a medical standpoint, just some accuracy there.
Yeah, well, I have great respect for David Martin.
He's brilliant.
He's very courageous.
He's done amazing work in this.
And I know you have great respect for him, too.
Totally.
I appreciate that clarification.
And one of the things that we were able to discover, again, thanks to you connecting me to Hirschman, is that these clots are not made of blood because they lack 96% of the iron of human blood.
Yeah.
At least we can start to eliminate what it isn't.
And didn't you also eliminate the fact that it is not part of the actual endothelium of the bloodline, the vessel?
Well, yes, indirectly in the sense that it does not share the normal ratios of other minerals such as potassium that would be found in human tissue.
So that was an elemental ratio conclusion.
I think that's important.
Yeah, I think that's important.
Yeah, absolutely.
And then remember the other thing that I came on to talk to you about at one point was that what was weird was that these so-called fibrous clots were accumulating certain minerals such as sodium and aluminum and also tin at levels that were much higher than what would normally be found in blood.
So somehow they were accumulating those and all those three turned out to be electrically conductive, which is odd.
It's odd, but it's also a very big clue.
Yeah, definitely.
But we can only see the elements because of this particular mass spec.
ICP-MS, it just looks at elements.
So I know a lot of people want us to say, well, what proteins are in it?
Well, protein analysis is a whole different ballgame.
Very complex.
But elemental analysis is quick and easy, and that's what we did.
But anyway, I just wanted to set the record straight on that, too.
Yes, yes, that's important.
That's important.
Now, can I ask you a question?
Sure.
There are some people who think the Klotz are maybe a hoax or something, but I remember you telling me that you had spoken to other embalmers who just didn't want to go on camera, didn't want to go public, but they were confirming the same thing with you that Richard Hirschman had been saying.
Is that accurate, or did I hear that?
That's 100% accurate.
I think in the heat of the excitement of the moment, in the interview with you and Brian Artis a month or so ago, I wanted to make the point that I've talked to a large number of embalmers and I think I blurted out hundreds, right?
And that was not accurate of me.
But I can tell you that I have a file on my computer and I've looked and counted them up.
And it's over 20 embalmers that not only have I spoken with them...
To my knowledge, I didn't get them.
I got them through people that just wrote to me spontaneously.
So I didn't go to Mr.
Hirschman and say, hey, can you give me the names of 10 embalmers?
Now, Mr.
Hirschman does do interviews with a guy named Wallace Hooker, and he did give me his name.
He's another embalmer many months ago, and I reached out to him a couple of times, and he didn't respond to me.
So I thought, okay, he doesn't want to talk about it.
That's no big deal.
And all of a sudden, he's all over the place doing interviews with Hirschman.
So I'm not sure what that was about.
But I actually have a file with each of those embalmers' names.
And I have within those files with their names on it, the pictures and videos that they have given to me.
And so it's almost identical.
Again, there are enough differences.
I know I'm not seeing the same shapes.
And the same, you know, it's the same shape as the casting of the blood vessels.
But what I mean to say is I can spot a replication.
And I'll give you an example.
I did a lot of work in the beginning with La Quinta Columna, the Spanish group, that broke their findings back in the middle of 2021 on the graphene.
I took a lot of heat from it, from the, you know, the fact checkers that, you know, USA Today and Forbes and all those other people.
But the point was they had pictures, they had a written report, and they had these pictures that were so stunning of what later on they were told by an industrial engineer looked like graphene oxide under an electron microscope.
But the point of that story is those pictures were so distinct that I then jump fast forward to reading a report from a doctor named Robert Young.
And in his report, he was taking credit, or it appeared so, for these graphene microscopy pictures.
When I looked at them, about half of them were the identical photos from La Quinta Columna.
And I had worked so intimately with La Quinta Columna.
So I went back to the person who interviewed him and said, I think there may be a question here.
And she went back to him and he said, Oh, you're right.
I'm sorry.
Oh, I made a mistake.
I should have credited them.
That was just a, you know, I forgot or something to that effect.
And so I have an eye.
I used to be a college professor.
I can always see if something is a replication of something else.
I look at, you know, students' picture or papers that they've written, scholarly papers.
I can tell if that's them or not from the syntax of the paper compared to the way We're good to go.
I think there might be a couple of them out there because I'll tell you, that ear thing where the ear lobe is fused, there's some stuff that just doesn't add up.
Anyway, if you wanted my opinion on that.
I have to toss in a little humor from time to time, but you're right.
You are good at spotting the details of You're also open to hearing...
From lots of different people and lots of different views, which I believe I share that quality with you, which is like, let's hear from anybody or everybody.
It doesn't mean that we're going to agree with everybody, but let's hear it.
Like, what do you got?
Let's hear what you got.
And I think that's important to this process of sorting out What this is.
Because little by little we get to what it isn't at first, and then over time we finally, hopefully, can figure out what it is.
But don't you think that's an important part of the process is to hear a lot of people out during this discovery phase?
I do.
I do.
And a lot of us are shut out and shut down.
And I actually think you have much more of that quality than I do.
You're a lot more patient to that openness.
But I do think it's important.
And they've almost normalized, even within this health freedom sort of, you know, I hate to call it a movement, but whatever it is, there is within it efforts on the part of some to stifle others.
It's almost like they're overly invested.
In what they think the explanations for things are.
I've noticed quite an uptick in fighting in the last 12 months, for sure.
A lot.
I think even Dr.
Estella did a show on our platform, Brighteon.tv, where she was telling everybody to chill out, which is probably very appropriate.
She's like, hey, we've got to remember who the enemy is here, and the enemy is the Luciferians who are trying to destroy humanity.
Yeah, but sometimes, Mike, the enemy disguises himself as part of your movement.
Oh, I hear you.
Yeah, it's not divisiveness if somebody calls that out.
That's right.
Yeah, it's actually a cautionary tale.
Yeah, yeah, for sure.
Well...
You're exactly right, and I've called some of that out too.
I forgot the guy's name on Substack who calls infiltrators chaos agents.
I forgot who that is.
I'm not saying the name.
Okay, but I genuinely don't remember who it is.
Anyway, I've heard the term chaos agents, or I've heard the term infiltrators, or controlled opposition, things like that.
I've...
I've had suspicions about certain people, but that's not what this podcast is about here, really.
Right.
That's not the focus.
We want to set the record straight on a few things that just didn't sound right in public discourse because it directly had to do with you and me.
Right, right.
Let me also mention, too, if you don't mind me jumping in.
We've hired a microscopy expert.
In our lab.
I think I mentioned this to you privately.
Yeah, this is going to be great.
Yeah, it's very cool.
But I don't think I mentioned to you that this person has a lot of experience in staining techniques to identify proteins using stains.
So we are going to begin various staining and Apparently, the way this works is, I don't know, you put the biological sample in paraffin wax, and then you slice it thinly, and then you use the stains, and you put it on the microscope, and then you can tell what kind of proteins they are, or you can eliminate what they're not.
So that's work that we're doing, and my only regret, and...
Apologies to you and others is that it takes us so much longer than I would like in our lab.
Because lab work is tedious.
It's slow.
It's not bombshell.
Frankly, it's boring.
Your back hurts.
You're peering over the microscope.
You're doing this stuff.
It takes forever.
Yeah, and I think people need to know that because in the early part, when you first started your first analysis, they would say, well, when is he going to be done?
And how long do we have to wait for the rest of it?
And I've tried to explain to people that it literally could take weeks or months.
But the sooner we find out what this really is and tie it together with all the many different things that so many researchers have found that are in the vials.
Right?
And they've really got it disguised beautifully.
I mean, on any given day within the same lot number, there could be so many different things in there.
That's why I get very frustrated with people who come forward and say, well, I'm an expert in this.
And I can tell you that I examined 25 vials of Moderna and there was no graphene or there was no mRNA.
That's not a representation of the totality that's out there.
That's only a representative sample.
So anybody who comes out and should know better as a researcher to say that I examined 10 and I'm telling you there's no mRNA in these things.
You can't say that.
That immediately, to me, is a red flag that that person is either incompetent or they're intentionally misleading.
Well, I would say to that that since we know that the vaccine manufacturers have distributed different lots to different geographic regions, then technically to analyze the vaccines across the board, it seems like you would have to have different lots from different then technically to analyze the vaccines across the board, it seems like you would Right?
You'd have to have a lot of different lots from the Northeast and the Southeast.
Yeah, but based on the work of Team Enigma, one of their main representatives was Sasha Latapova and Craig Particooper.
Uh, both analysts and researchers, they, uh, they found that even within the same lot number, they had such variability in death, uh, and compared to like within the same lot there, there would be large numbers of people that had absolutely no, uh, adverse reactions at all.
And then in the, in that same lot, there were such inordinately high numbers of death, um, immediately, uh, for example, uh, That they were able to rule out by chance, right?
So I forgot the approaches.
I have a theory about why that is.
If you don't mind me explaining this.
Do tell.
No, do tell.
Why not?
A couple of years ago, I spent six months working on programming a pipetting robot.
In my lab.
And we bought this pipette robot, which is a very, very large machine.
It's like five feet wide and it has a robotic arm and it does automatic pipetting.
And we were trying to use it to make dilutions, serial dilutions of standards.
And I was doing all the programming because, you know, of course I've written code in the past and it has its own programming language.
Myself and one of my chemists, we spent a huge amount of time doing this.
And the robot would, you know, it would actuate the pipette.
It would take up an aliquot, a volumetric sample of liquid, and then it would dispense it somewhere else.
And it could do this repeatedly.
And you would think, okay, that's great.
We're going to have serial dilutions here that are very accurate.
Well, it turns out And this is the biggest name brand pipetting robot that is used by labs, including the FDA, the CDC, pharma, you name it.
It turns out that what is moving the fluid up and down in the robot arm is air.
So compressed air, like pulling or pushing air.
Mostly air or water.
So there's water in the lines, but there's air in the pipette.
You know how when you're doing a pipette that is not a full displacement pipette like the Gilson pipettes, but if you're using an Eppendorf pipette, you know how it's full of air, right?
A little bit.
You're a little over my head, but that's okay.
Okay, but so there's air.
There's air in all the Eppendorf pipettes.
Okay, so there are some that move the liquid to and fro with air and some that do it with water.
Well, these robots use a combination, like water was in the lines, but there's air in the pipette tip.
Well, it turns out that air, of course...
There's compressibility in the air, obviously, but it's based on temperature.
So air shrinks when it's cold and air expands when it's hot.
And so what we found out, and this could have everything to do, this is just a guess, with mRNA and how some vaccine vials get more mRNA and others get less, is that When the air compresses differently from one pipette cycle to the next, you can get totally different volumes than what you think you're getting.
Right.
We measured this gravimetrically with very accurate analytical balances that are down to like.0001 grams or something.
So if I could distill that for the average layperson, you're saying that different draws on the vial create different pressures and that you're getting different...
You could be getting different things and concentrations of things depending on...
What I'm saying is that in manufacturing...
They have automated this and their automated pipette robots may not be as accurate as they think and some vials are getting more and some vials are getting a lot less.
But I don't think it's an accident, but that's my opinion.
Sure, yeah.
I mean, I understand.
I'm just saying there's also a plausible lab-based explanation where it could be an accident, but it's still very dangerous.
Of course.
And if it was an accident, I've always maintained this after 20 years in the pharma industry, believe me.
In the real, sort of before this pharma world, the first few deaths would have been enough to just trigger an all-out scrambling, and they would have pulled it all back and figured that out.
But the fact that they've been silent and let it happen.
I want to move to another area.
Let me be clear.
I completely agree.
I've been talking about big pharma genocide since 2007.
Yeah.
Oh, yeah.
I know you're not trying to make excuses for them.
You're not that.
No, no, no.
I'm just saying that they may have equipment problems that their technicians aren't aware of because they never looked at it as closely as I have.
Because I spent six months and I realized, in fact, we had to mothball this whole pipetting robot because it did not work accurately enough for us.
Mothball, the robotic pipette.
Such eloquent language.
No, it's sitting in the corner.
It's been sitting there ever since.
And it's like, well, there goes 75 grand or whatever.
Oh, wow.
I was going to say, maybe you can unload it on eBay or something.
But I want to clarify something else that's bothering me that's on my mind.
Please, go ahead.
Sorry, I was getting off on a tangent there.
I know, you're a nerd.
You're a wonderful nerd, but you're a nerd.
There's also been some discussion.
I mean, let's be honest, because it's already out there in the public domain.
That interview that I did with you and Dr.
Artis a month or two ago, that was a great intellectual exchange for the most part.
Mm-hmm.
There's some discussion in the public, but some people have recognized that the film, the video interview was removed and then re-uploaded and that it was missing a few minutes.
I believe it's already in the public domain that Our executive producer said that it was her call.
Whoever, whosoever call it was, I just want to make something really clear to the public.
I had no, nothing to do with it.
I had no knowledge until after it was done.
And so I just want to be clear because I don't believe in censorship.
I certainly wouldn't censor my own work.
Whatever comes out in an interview comes out.
It's something I was taught, believe it or not, in the early pharma days by some very good mentors who would say to me, look, the data is the data.
We live with it.
When it's good, we ride high.
When it's bad, we go back to the drawing board and we still live with it.
So I just want to make it clear that I had nothing to do with changing that interview and would never do that.
I also don't ask my guests for permission to speak about certain topics.
I prefer not to review anything with them ahead of time, not because I'm trying to do gotcha.
I actually don't do any gotchas, Mike.
I don't pull in adversarial people.
Or try to get people to admit things or anything like that.
I actually almost only have interviewed people that are friendly because if there's so much education that is needed to be done, I don't need to go into the negative realm.
But anyway, I wanted to make those two things really, really clear since we're taking this opportunity.
Yeah, well, I appreciate you bringing that up because I was there.
I was in that interview, obviously, and I thought that was a really great interview.
I thought...
You and I and Dr.
Artis had a really amazing interaction and I was admittedly quite surprised when he brought up what he was saying that he wasn't sure if the clots were real, I think.
And then, yes, it seems like that...
That video got pulled and then it was reposted without those few minutes.
Right, right.
Which later came out anyway, I guess.
So everybody saw those minutes anyway.
But yeah, what you're saying, it wasn't you.
You didn't...
Yeah, absolutely.
Didn't even know it until after it was done.
In fact, the way I learned was on a Saturday morning...
I was with my sister at the beach and I was checking my social because it's hard to stay off of it.
And one of my Telegram channel members or a bunch of them started to say, hey, it's gone.
I was just watching and it literally disappeared.
And then...
I was pretty down about it, and I assumed that somebody just pulled it from the production company.
And then it was Sunday night, I believe, or sometime later the weekend, that I was getting more notices from my Telegram followers that it had been re-uploaded.
So I just want to make that clear.
Yes, that's great.
Thank you for doing that.
And also, I should just give a shout-out to Richard Hirschman here, because...
We were defending him.
We were defending him, and I have always defended him.
And I believe that Richard Hirschman is telling the truth and that he's honestly describing the origin of these clots.
And I believe Richard Hirschman is very courageous for doing what he's doing.
I do too.
I do too.
I've never doubted him.
And in fact, the word got back to me that he was actually the one that misunderstood and apparently alerted the production company.
And it was all taken out of context.
But I kept saying to people, did anybody look at the interview?
Did anybody listen to all of it?
Because it was definitely the point of trying to make that it was that he or the Klotz were fake.
Was totally off base.
And that's why I made the point that I had talked to so many other embalmers.
There's no way you can get...
What strikes me, and I've been trying to reach out to Brian Artis to get him on, too.
Hopefully he'll come on after this.
But I have defended Brian Artis's...
Venom theory constructs so many times.
And then he essentially implies that Hirschman's theory is a hoax.
Well, do you have any idea, Brian, how many people have told me that your venom theory is a total hoax?
And I've told them, no, venom peptides have been used in medicine over and over.
In fact, I think we're the ones on Natural News.
We did the articles on VenomTech.com.
and this other venom peptide company, and we showed the snake venom, the snail venom, the cone venom.
We documented that with all the links, and I don't think anybody else did that.
That was us.
I think the public needs to understand that it's since time immortal that pharmaceutical intervention has been in operation.
Where do you think these drugs come from?
They come from plants and animals and animal sources, animal cells, things like that.
So this was not a shocking theory.
Right.
And that was before I saw the evidence.
Yeah.
But I would just say, if Dr.
Artis is listening, I would just say, you know, be as open, please, with other people's theories as we are with your theories, right?
Of course.
Because, like I said, we all want to hear.
And, you know, the other thing is that these things can coexist.
Right.
So, clots can be happening and venom peptides can be used or even manufactured by the cells in response to mRNA and there can be exotic technology and there can be 5G interaction and so on and so forth.
These things are not mutually exclusive, right?
Yeah.
You know, that's a very good point.
And I'll tell you who helped me make that point in a recent interview was Dr.
Tao Braun.
We had him on the show.
We talked about the venom.
We talked about the white clots.
We talked about the different things that people have reported finding in these vials on any given day.
And he said, he had a great analogy.
If I could just take like 30 seconds to share it.
He said, Jane, it's like a cake.
He said, you've got the butter, you've got the flour, and you've got the sugar.
He said, and you've got people going, but you said it was sugar.
And this other one says, but it was flour.
He said, it's all in there.
It's a cake.
And so it can be all of those things.
And they could work together in many different ways.
And this is a very diabolical, well thought out, incredibly advanced scientific technology that is being used in this mass genocide.
So people shouldn't expect simplistic explanations and then think we're pitting ourselves against each other.
Well, and understand, too, that this has been a multi-decade, multi-billion-dollar effort by governments to engineer whatever this thing is.
And then we, with almost no money, obviously no NIH money.
Fauci's not writing me billion-dollar checks, that's for sure.
Yeah.
Right.
Because that guy should be in prison as far as I'm concerned.
But we have almost no money compared to the establishment.
We have almost no reach because of the censorship.
And here we are doing the best we can, like a ragtag team of renegades trying to figure out what this thing is.
We're doing our best, you know?
And I don't see people lining up around the block to help us, you know?
Yeah, I was very struck by one of the interviews you and I did where you were reporting on a lot of the findings of the metals and the comparisons that you had said, listen, I need help.
I welcome many, and you named several different categories of specialists.
And I'm just shocked that, you know, no one has come forward.
And people have asked me, well, why don't you get help?
Why doesn't Mike Adams get help from, you know, different types of engineers?
I said, he's asked, he's tried, he's reached out.
If you know any, send them his way.
But it's interesting that nobody comes forward.
Well, it's because people like Fauci control all scientific funding in this nation.
Almost every mainstream scientist is beholden to the government narratives in the National Science Foundation.
Not just the NIAID or the NIH, because that's where their money comes from.
And they know that if they question the narrative one time in one paper, one published paper, they are blacklisted from all science forever.
And think about Dr.
David Lewis, former EPA whistleblower who I interviewed part of my film called Biosludged.
They did that to Dr.
David Lewis and they did it to all kinds of other scientists.
I'm sure you've interviewed some as well, but this is a common thing.
Well, when you think about it, the head of the NIH, Fauci's position, is probably at least one of the top three most powerful people in the world.
So who do you think is going to get that seat?
I don't know.
You don't know?
I don't know either yet.
I just wondered if you had speculated and if he had, you know, the top three.
Well, I think technically it wasn't Fauci NIAID, but then NIH was another man, and now for some reason I don't recall his name.
I think that NIAID is, because it's allergy and immunology, I think that's within NIH. It is.
It's within NIH. Yes, you're right.
But there's another position that's an overarching position at NIH. Ah, okay.
And that guy, I can't recall his name right now, but that guy is also, I believe, resigning or retiring.
Ah, I see.
Okay.
And then there's, of course, Walensky at the CDC, and then there's DAZAC at EcoHealth Alliance and so on.
You know, it expands from there.
But they're only going to allow replacements that are obedient to the narrative, obviously.
Yeah, the status quo.
Right.
Whatever they're pushing at the moment.
Okay, well, getting back to what you and I wanted to clarify, because the public has a lot of questions, and this is a very confusing and complex subject, that's for sure.
So many questions that you and I have and other people have as well.
I just want to add that there are a lot of egos and personalities in this space.
But I just want to say, you know, not everybody has to be the one right person.
It can be, there can be different explanations, there can be different observations, different areas of specialty.
You know, like I'm only looking at one little slice of this and somebody else might be an expert in enzymes or proteins or what have you, or nanotech.
So we've got to hear their views too.
Yeah, I think it would be great for you to get together with Dr.
Daniel Nagasi, if you haven't already spoken with him or interviewed him.
I haven't.
He's a former Canadian emergency room physician who was stripped of practicing because he was successfully treating people, of course, with ivermectin the last couple of years.
But he's also a molecular biologist.
And he's done some interesting testing on some of the material in the vials in terms of The comparative metals and all that.
But I wondered if he might be a nice complement to some of the work that you've already done on the clots and what he might think of it if you got a closer view.
So that could be interesting.
But I think we're moving into a period where we need to blend the expertise.
There's been a lot of...
Yeah.
And I'll just leave that for people to discern on their own out there.
That's the tough part, is the discernment.
And it's tough even for myself to look out there and try to navigate all of this.
Some days I just have a sense of relief.
It's like, everybody knows I've been doing this since 2003.
I've got 20 years in this.
Nobody can say that I just showed up and Where did he come from?
I was censored before Alex Jones was censored.
That's how long I've been doing this.
They booted me because they knew I was teaching people how to not need chemotherapy.
If you start teaching people nutrition and how to not need chemo or surgery or pharmaceuticals, you get censored very quickly.
Yeah, of course, because you're impacting, you're threatening a multi-billion dollar business.
That's it.
It's the profits.
But with that in mind, let me ask you this then, if you don't mind going in this direction.
Sure.
They're pushing more boosters, right?
They're saying now it's going to be unlimited essentially.
It's going to be a new one at least once a year, maybe more often.
But Aren't they killing the very people that they're trying to convince to keep taking this?
I mean, how long will people be gullible?
I think they've been very clever in pacing out death and destruction over large numbers of people so that it is easy to sort of obfuscate what's really happening.
That's what I believe is happening.
In terms of the shots to come, I don't know.
The flu shot now is the mechanism that we need to warn people about.
Because I think people are saturated.
Those that are going to keep taking whatever they think is a COVID shot.
But I think what they're doing is...
And they've even come out and talked about...
When I say they, like the CEO of Moderna, Stefan Bonsal, has said...
And this is an absurd statement.
He said, we've identified 10 different viruses that we need to protect you from.
And so next year, meaning 2023, in March, he said, we expect to have a multivalent.
Now, that translates as, yeah.
Multivalent, yeah.
You're going to have a lot of genetic, whatever, material and a lot of other poisonous things.
I think the death and destruction is going to happen faster because they've got this first wave of people out.
Remember, if the VAERS numbers are really based on the Harvard Pilgrim study that was funded by the NIH in 2010, they found that the VAERS system was underreported.
less than 1% of all vaccine adverse events were reported.
So that's a multiplier of 100.
So VAERS tells me now that there's 35,000 deaths in the United States from, and that's with the CDC messing with the numbers.
So let's just say that's pretty conservative, 35,000 deaths.
You multiply that by 100, you've actually lost almost 4 million Americans, right?
And you put that together with Edward Dowd and the actuarials of 40%, but they're going to go faster now.
And even they've said, now we have this shot that is going to be RSV, influenza A and B, and COVID-19, whatever that is, whatever that mutation is, right?
That fake mutation.
Well, and the other thing that I'm hearing, and this is not just from the media, but I'm hearing this from My sources and my writers is that hospitals are jam-packed right now.
In different cities in America because so many people are sick and they're being diagnosed with RSV and influenza and COVID and who knows what else, but hospitals are getting jammed and winter has only just begun, but people's immune systems are so compromised by this that I think this winter is going to be a very difficult time for hospitals because of the overflow.
Are you hearing any of that?
I am, but I'm always skeptical.
I know that some hospitals probably are fuller than others, but I am skeptical because compared to what?
Compared to baseline.
And then secondly, yes, we have millions of people with compromised immune systems because they took these shots.
And then the other thing is, there's a lot of evidence to show that the shots themselves contained Coding for RSV as well as HIV and some other antigens.
So I'm not surprised that they predict it and then it happens.
Okay, they're either dropping it, you know, I don't know, through...
Whatever way they drop it or seed it into the population, or they've already got it set up through the shots.
And it's a combination.
And of course, with something like RSV, they want to use that as another scare tactic.
To keep people taking these shots, when in effect, it could all go back to antibody-dependent enhancement, which is the degraded immune systems.
But then they use that to say, see?
See, the numbers are up.
You're vulnerable.
These flus are out of control.
Well, yeah, you created it out of control.
It's like a guy walking around with a flamethrower and selling burn bandages.
Exactly.
It's like you're on fire.
You need...
Exactly.
Yeah.
So this is going to go on and on and on.
It's going to go into cycles and circles.
And then I've seen some other evidence that there's a lot of material in these shots that actually damages...
The frontal cortex.
So you lose your ability to plan and logically deduce.
And those are very sophisticated functions.
And it might not be necessarily noticeable right away to people around you.
But I do hear more and more people saying, God, my relatives that are jabbed are just different.
They don't want to hear anything.
They're blunted.
Yeah.
So there might be something to that.
There are personality changes.
I've noticed that as well.
And I also recently heard someone that I know or someone that I know through someone I know.
Okay, we'll put it that way.
Went to the hospital.
She was jabbed, multiple jabs.
Went to the hospital for some kind of surgical procedure.
They opened her up to do the surgery.
I think it was some kind of gastric surgery.
And they ended it because they said, full of cancer.
Cancer everywhere.
Oh, wow.
Yeah.
And she had had, years ago, she had had cancer that was in remission, but then, boom, vaccines, right?
We're seeing that a lot.
Cancer deaths are skyrocketing after the vaccine.
There's some information that says that part of what these shots do is they interfere with a gene that is protective, sort of a cancer response.
Anti-cancer-related genetic response, but it damages that.
And this could be the reason for the explosion in the cancers.
The other thing is, cancer is an immune surveillance failure disorder, however it starts or comes from.
Because as you probably know, we do have cancerous activity quite frequently in the normal body.
But if you're missing cancer, If your immune system and the surveillance part of your immune system is down, then that activity is going to be able to really proliferate.
And that's why people are seeing PET scans weeks later that have exploded.
The tumors have exploded.
So there is something to that.
You're absolutely correct.
And by the way, I want to be mindful of your time.
I can keep going, but You let me know if you're coming up on time.
We're at 47 minutes or whatever it is.
Why don't we wrap it at an hour?
It'd be a nice podcast for people.
Then let me throw this out there.
I've actually not been covering the vaccines very much lately because...
I've been covering the world events that are going to affect everyone, such as food scarcity, energy scarcity, economic collapse, because I figure, look, the people that you and I reach, Jane, are people who already know don't take the shots, right?
So they're safe from that.
They're not going to be tricked back into, like, they're not going to see a CDC-funded influencer just convince them, oh gosh, maybe I should have just taken all those shots.
That's never going to happen, right?
True, true.
But everybody that we reach is going to face inflation, you know, bank bail-ins, a great reset of the financial debt system.
They're going to face all these things, for sure.
And you can't escape them.
You have to prepare for them.
So that's what I've been doing a lot lately.
I think that's good.
I think that's good.
Were you going to ask me my thoughts about that?
Well...
I have some thoughts on it.
I mean, it's always an open door for you to jump in with whatever you think is relevant there, but what are you planning on covering moving forward here?
I mean, you've done a lot of great work on the tech and the mRNA.
You have all these great contacts, but...
Aren't we facing things bigger than the vaccine also?
We are facing things bigger than that.
I think my focus has been so medical in terms of, I guess, edifying people and empowering them to understand so that they don't get duped from a lack of basic medical and health knowledge.
So that's one thing.
And then when you ask me, like, where do you think you're going to take this next?
We have, whether they make it or not in the near future, we have so many people who have taken these shots that they probably are really good.
They're open to the good subjects, if you will, to really learning how to really take good care of themselves, doing things in the natural world of medicine that will enhance their ability to survive.
Because, you know, we just don't know the extent of how the human body is designed.
There could be things, you know, I often think about my computer or my car, which is really a It's not a fancy car, but most cars these days are computers on four wheels, right?
And there's so much capability in there that I probably don't even know about to use.
So I think the human body is similar.
God has, however anyone figures that out.
The universe, God, you know, whoever designed this.
We don't know the complete capability.
But are you saying that you think that people who took a lot of vaccine shots, once they begin to have symptoms, that they will turn to natural medicine or their interest will increase in natural solutions?
Because I'm not sure...
Yeah.
But, you know, go ahead.
I think there's a segment.
Okay.
No, and I understand that.
I think there's a segment of the population of jabbed people that it might not be huge and it might not be the majority of them, but there is a segment large enough to hear their voices that realize what they actually might have taken.
uh, that this was not what they thought it was, that they were duped indeed.
And those people are open.
There's a group on telegram called COVID vaccine injuries, um, for lack of a better, you know, terminology, but it's, it's got like 200,000 followers.
It's really incredible.
I've been on their little podcast and I've worked with the founder who actually is in a, in a totally different industry by day.
And she's like just a guardian angel who's just bringing these people together so they don't feel like they're crazy.
And there are 200,000 people in that group that have, most of them themselves are injured, but some of them have relatives that are.
And they are desperately seeking ways.
I don't think they want pharmaceutical solutions.
I think they're over that.
So they're desperately seeking ways to mitigate, possibly, and they're starting to believe more in the potential of natural healing.
I'm not saying that they have these delusions that they're going to completely heal from these things, but they could ward it off long enough.
We just don't know what the human body is able to manage.
Well, I've seen...
I'm really glad you brought this up because I think you're right.
I think you're right.
I think maybe my skepticism was misplaced on that because I have heard from people.
I know people who took the shots, were damaged, and they were conventional medicine people.
For example, one of them is a nurse, took the shots, got damaged, and then went to mainstream doctors for a while, say, hey, why do I feel like I have no soul or something?
These are the kinds of things they say.
Why do I feel like my brain is on fire constantly throughout the day?
How come I can't sleep?
How come I can't do anything?
And then they got no answers from conventional doctors, and only then they started to turn to sort of more holistic types of treatment.
So you're right.
And I hadn't thought of that earlier, but you're exactly right.
That is happening.
It could happen, yeah.
And so when you ask me, you know, where are you turning next, I can't abandon them, right?
Right.
Yeah.
I have no, whether they took the shots or not, I have no sympathy, for example, for nurses that stayed.
I kind of coined the phrase hashtag nurses that stayed because I said to them, you know, you might not have known in the beginning, but secondly, you all could have shut it down if you had left that one day together.
And then thirdly, eventually you had to know what you're doing and you know you're selling out for a paycheck.
I mean, I can guarantee you doctors are not hanging remdesivir infusion bags.
Okay, in the ICU, it's nurses that are hanging them, and you know, as then a few days later, your patients are being wheeled out on a gurney to the coroner.
I mean, after a while, you kind of know the treatment's not working, right?
Right.
And it is killing people.
I mean, I used to teach nursing, so I know they know.
Okay, we know.
So anyway, I thought that was kind of interesting.
Very much so.
Okay, then in terms of the theme here, setting the record straight, is there anything else that comes to mind that you think should be clarified publicly about the coverage of all of this?
No, I just feel bad for people because I already see who some of the detractors are.
Some people were originally from whatever is doing this to us and they just were implemented.
And started out and so people respected them.
Other people were good people in the movement who have been compromised with money and power and fame.
And, you know, we have to be careful how we express what we think is happening because there's a lot of trigger happy, you know, then that we get accused of infighting and divisiveness when we're trying to warn people.
Nobody's closer to these people than us.
We're all close to each other, right?
So we watch each other and we can see changes.
Much more so the general public doesn't do this all day long, every day.
You're so right.
I've been doing this for 20 years and one of the things I've observed and learned over these 20 years is that Some people can handle fame and money, but a lot of people can't.
And when they taste money for the first time in their lives, it doesn't even need to be a lot, just let's say a few hundred thousand dollars.
I've seen people go like Jekyll and Hyde just from having money.
It's like they lost their minds, lost their way.
Or sometimes fame or a sense of invincibility and then arrogance and all this kind of thing.
And I've seen it too.
I've definitely seen it.
In fact, I recently talked to an entertainment agent and we were talking about this very issue.
And he said to me, his client was not well-known, but really on a fast trajectory.
And he said, I'm creating a monster day by day because the more endorsements I get her, the more obnoxious she becomes.
So I'm feeding the monster.
So yes, some people can't handle it.
Well, imagine how crazy it is in Hollywood when...
There's more fame, more money, more publicity, more pressure.
People go absolutely insane.
I mean, just look at the divorce that happens or the rape that happens, the power hungry, the Harvey Weinsteins of that industry.
And I'm glad that our industry is not as psychopathically insane as that.
But there are still struggles that people experience with having fame or money or power or influence or what have you.
We definitely see that.
Yeah, absolutely.
And, but for the grace of God, go any of us.
I mean, it's hard.
I mean, if somebody walked up to you tomorrow and said, um, well, it's all relative too.
So the average person, you know, is making maybe, you know, 50, 60,000 a year working a couple of jobs.
I mean, if somebody comes up and says, look, I'll give you, you know, $10 million, you know, just to do whatever.
Just don't do that work anymore.
It'd be pretty hard to walk away from, right?
Yeah, it's pretty interesting.
I think for most people that would be very compelling.
But, you know, I've been offered eight figures for Brighteon, by the way.
Ah, wow.
Said no.
And I remember I've had conversations with Alex Jones about this.
He was offered crazy amounts.
I don't know if it was hundreds of millions or something even bigger than what I was offered, essentially.
I was offered to sell the platform.
Alex was offered something bigger.
Was it Ed Dowd?
Who else is in this space that was offered, I think, a billion dollars to shut up?
Oh, wow.
Well, that's the thing.
They're offering you money to kill the brand.
Because I was just thinking about this.
Here's a good example.
A woman named Brittany Frankel or Bethany Frankel, right?
She used to be one of the Real Housewives of New York City.
She started with this grassroots business, Skinny Girl Margaritas, right?
So eventually she builds the brand and then she parlays a lot of the different things, gets it to be very visible and What happens?
The Jim Beam company comes along.
They offer her $100 million, and guess what?
I was just in the liquor store getting some Christmas presents, and I looked around, and it's nowhere to be found.
They paid her $100 million to kill the brand.
Yes.
That happens a lot in food and nutrition.
Yes.
They wanted to kill Brighteon.
They were going to kill InfoWars.
Oh, yeah.
It wasn't because they were going to make it bigger and better.
Yeah, exactly.
Like Google or YouTube, I mean, they make a billion dollars a day.
I mean, they could write a check for a billion dollars and just destroy your platform.
Exactly.
Right.
And then if you don't sell to them, they just censor all your URLs so you can't share them anywhere.
And I should just, for the record, I should apologize to Ed Dowd.
I thought it was him, but it might not have been him.
There was somebody in the news recently that I learned was offered a billion dollars and he said no.
Do you recall?
Have you heard that?
You know, I don't.
That sounds like something I would have remembered, but Ed Dowd's a great guy.
I mean, the work he's done has been so valuable.
I'd love to get him on and talk to him about it.
Ed's amazing, and he would say no, by the way, to a billion dollars because he's already fairly well off anyway, but he's driven by passion for saving humanity.
He's got the new book, Unknown Cause, that just came out, by the way.
I'll have to look into that.
But yeah, so it's interesting.
It just dawned on me recently, hey, it's to kill the brand.
That's why they bought it out.
Not because it was great, but because it got enough visibility that it could have impacted their business.
That's what they do.
And so if you're driven by money, and I'll wrap this up because I know we're up to an hour here, but if you're driven by money, You will never truly succeed because someone will eventually meet your price and buy you out because there's so much money in the world.
There's more money than you could ever dream of if that's what you're after.
Right.
That's an excellent, excellent thought.
Yep.
Yeah.
But if you're after principles, then that's a rarity.
That's a treasure.
That's a gem.
And that's something that can't be bought.
You have to earn that.
You have to live that.
That's such a profound statement, Mike, because right now the majority of the world has been bought off.
Otherwise this would never have happened.
Look, if I had been bought off, we wouldn't be able to have this conversation on our platform.
That's true.
That's true.
If I had been bought off, there would be no more truth in medicine, and I'd probably be on a yacht somewhere down in the Caribbean.
Right, right.
Enjoying the money, but suffering from not being able to speak.
I mean, could you live with yourself?
I mean, if you couldn't speak, isn't that critical to your life?
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
I mean, it should be critical to all life, everybody's life.
Yes.
Right?
Otherwise, it's slavery.
Yep.
Well, I love the fact that we're ending this on such an important universal principle for all of us, all of you listening and everybody else in this space.
We love you all.
We bless you all.
We want everybody to succeed who are truth-tellers.
And deceivers, we want you to fail, obviously, but truth-tellers, we want you to succeed.
Yes, we do.
And that's it.
That's our prayer for all of you.
So any final thoughts, Dr.
Ruby?
Well, I really want to thank you for just for getting us together, always in the spirit of setting the record straight.
You're an incredible truth teller, Mike, and you've just been a wonderful warrior partner with me in this whole scene.
So I appreciate you so much and love everybody at Bright Tan.
Well, thank you so much, Jane.
We really appreciate you and your work.
And I'm sorry about nerding out on you earlier.
I learned a lot.
I learned a lot about robotic pipettes.
Oh, gosh.
I wasted a lot on that.
But I appreciate you and joining me and sharing your innermost thoughts here with us.
And thank you for setting the record straight.
You're welcome back anytime.
Obviously, we're going to continue to talk about what's happening and try to save lives.
So if you see the need to do this again, reach out and we'll do it again.
I'd love to.
It's like a fireside chat.
And when you send me the link to this podcast, I'm going to put it on my Rumble along with my coffee chats because people like the personal discussions and they feel like they're sitting in the room with us.
Yes.
It's kind of fun.
Yes.
Thanks again.
Yeah, we welcome them all.
And thank you, Dr.
Ruby.
Stand by to finish the file sync here.
But thank you all for listening.
I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon.com and Brighteon.tv.
These are both free speech platforms, obviously, that apparently would be worth a lot of money to globalists to shut it down.
But I think it's worth more to humanity to keep it alive.
How about that?
But thank you for listening and feel free to repost this on other platforms.
You have our permission.
God bless you all.
all take care a global reset is coming and that's why i've recorded a new nine hour audiobook it's called the global reset survival guide you can download it for free by subscribing to the naturalnews.com email newsletter which is also free i'll describe how the monetary system fails i also cover emergency medicine and first aid and what to buy to help you avoid infections So download this guide.
It's free.
▲
Export Selection