All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 17, 2023 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
45:06
Whistleblower Sasha Latypova reveals DoD origins of COVID plandemic...
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome, everyone.
Mike Adams here with Brighteon.com and Brighteon.tv.
And today, we're joined by Dr.
Sasha Latipova.
And she has been sounding the alarm on so many aspects of what's behind COVID and COVID vaccines in particular.
Her background is in clinical trials, operations, and pharmaceutical research, and she's worked for companies like Pfizer and J&J in a contract function in the past.
And she joins us today to express some very serious concerns about what's been happening over the last couple of years.
So Sasha Latipova, welcome.
Thank you for joining us.
Welcome to the show.
Hi, Mike.
Thank you for inviting me.
Well, we're honored to have you on.
I've seen some of your interviews on other channels.
I think you have a really critical message that people need to hear.
So if you could please tell our audience, since this is the first time that you and I have spoken, tell our audience a little bit about your background and then why you are sort of blowing the whistle as you're doing right now.
Yeah, so my background is in pharmaceutical research and development.
I spent about 25 years working in that industry in various roles.
More recently, I ran several contract research organizations, which are contractors that run clinical trials for pharma companies.
And I worked for about 60 pharmaceutical companies, large and small ones.
Pfizer was my client.
So is J&J and AstraZeneca and A number of them.
And so I retired from that industry a couple of years before COVID started.
And I, you know, I had a great life.
And, you know, I decided to come back and use my knowledge because of what was going on with this so-called COVID pandemic response.
And what was it that you saw that raised red flags in your mind with you having all this experience in the pharmaceutical industry?
What were the red flags?
Well, the main red flag, you know, I became concerned.
Obviously, everyone was concerned.
We don't know what's going on.
What is this pandemic?
The news started coming out about treatments for COVID, such as hydroxychloroquine and various vitamin protocols, generic products.
There were some good data coming from Europe, from France, showing that there's very good results with treating patients with hydroxychloroquine.
And then the immediate campaign of suppression and censorship started, and then it became more and more I would say militant even.
So the doctors started getting prosecuted, licenses suspended.
Completely fraudulent studies were being published about hydroxychloroquine, such as Lancet, which is an extremely prestigious medical journal, well, it used to be, decided to publish the study, which was completely fabricated.
Smearing hydroxychloroquine.
And then two weeks later, it became obvious that there was not even a data set like this.
It was completely made up.
So that was kind of a final nail for me because after that, I was like, well, this is really bad.
You cannot do stuff like this and just get away with it.
Do you consider yourself to be an evidence-based person?
Is that what drives your thought process?
Yes, absolutely.
If you worked in clinical trials or, you know, the clinical trials is all about collecting good evidence and compiling good evidence.
And then that's how I think.
That's how I always approached the medical treatments.
Yes.
Yeah, exactly.
When you saw these medical journals like the Lancet, as you mentioned, but also the New England Journal of Medicine was involved in some totally fabricated studies being published that were trying to disparage ivermectin, for example.
When you saw this happening, were you shocked because of your history of trusting these peer-reviewed medical journals?
Or what were you thinking internally when that happened?
I was really shocked.
I previously had You know, respect for regulators and journal publishers.
You know, just I worked in the industry and I saw that these people were doing their best, that the rules that we had in the pharma regulation and also in the peer review process, the editorial ethics and so forth, all of these complex rules and compliance that you have to have were for a good reason.
While they were expensive and burdensome, they were for a good reason because we didn't want to hurt people.
And then I see them so flagrantly violated, I was completely shocked.
I didn't know what to think, but I knew right away that something bad was going on.
And so I had to look for myself and I had to examine the evidence for myself.
And when you did that, what conclusion did you come to?
Well, my first thing I started doing is looking into VAERS database, which is CDC's VAERS system.
For vaccine adverse event reporting.
And I previously actually have never used it.
So this was the first time I went to use it.
You know, it's complicated, but you can figure it out.
And I was familiar with data analysis.
I'm actually pretty good at it.
And so I figured out how to do it.
And I started looking at adverse events reported for specific batch numbers of these so-called vaccines.
And that immediately, the conclusion from that data was that these products are not made to good manufacturing practices.
You're probably familiar with the good manufacturing practices and why they exist.
And they're very, very difficult to comply with, to keep the process very reliable.
And people need to understand that if those things are not followed, then You cannot make any statements about safety or efficacy of the product that comes out, and it should be deemed dangerous by definition.
Let me bring our audience up to speed on GMP, that you mentioned good manufacturing practices.
For example, our warehouse operation is GMP compliant.
In fact, a lot of our staff are in additional GMP compliance training right now.
But one of the things that's required in GMP if you're a supplement manufacturer, not even to mention pharmaceuticals, but a supplement manufacturer, is that you have to conduct Laboratory testing validation of the supplements using an ISO accredited laboratory, which is ISO 17025, which is what we are accredited with our own private lab.
Now, in pharmaceuticals, it's even more important because you're dealing with much higher potency of molecules that have a more narrow range of efficacy bordering on toxicity, right?
You can very easily overdose on an isolated synthetic molecule versus something that's food-based.
So GMP is critical.
Now, are you saying that from what you're observing, Sasha, that the vaccines are not or were not in some cases following GMP compliance?
Or are you talking about other prescription medications?
Or what are you applying this observation to?
So I started looking at these mRNA injections immediately.
And to come up with the baseline, because as I said, I did not use Bayer's before.
So the first thing I wanted to find out is what does a traditional vaccine look like to compare to these new products?
And I first did the analysis for all the flu vaccines in the Bayer's database, which is something like 20 plus years of data.
And many, many lots of those products produced.
And as you know, flu vaccines were very in high use in the United States.
About 50% of the population were getting them.
I don't know about the status of it now, but at the time, so that was a good data set to compare.
And of course, there were many different companies, large and small, making different sizes of lots.
So this is a good comparative data set.
So I looked at it, and I plotted it for over 20 years or so by lot numbers, and I saw that they were actually not varying that much.
I mean, there was some variability, which is expected, but it was very tight variability, which is also expected.
So when you're making a product, food-based or pharmaceutical, and even more stringent for injectables, because they're being injected directly into the system, So those products are supposed to be almost identical to the previous, you know, each batch needs to be almost identical to the previous batch in terms of all the quality parameters and purities and potency and, you know, all those things.
Because, you know, you cannot have very large variability there at all.
And huge amounts of resources of pharmaceutical manufacturers are spent on making sure that that happens, that the process is so reliable that it spits out a very reliable product.
And what I saw right away is that in comparison to the flu vaccines for which we had, you know, on average, each batch had something like between 2 and maybe 10 serious adverse events.
Extremely few deaths were being reported, very low number.
But between something like 2 to 10 serious adverse events for each batch.
Now, when we looked at the mRNA products, There were some batches that had that, maybe two, maybe three serious adverse events, and some batches that had 6,000 and hundreds of deaths.
So this immediately indicated to you, I would imagine, that there was very high variability in the manufacturing process, which means that there was a lack of quality control.
Is that a fair conclusion from those data that you just mentioned?
In the manufacturing processes, there's this principle of statistical process control.
So this would be something that you would internally run for yourself and flag your production line.
For example, one production line all of a sudden spits out, you know, 5,000 something that you don't want to see there.
And you immediately stop it, right?
Because that's something bad and you need to investigate it.
And so what I saw is This is being cranked out batch after batch after batch, and there's no stopping, and nobody is saying, hey, what's going on here?
And no regulatory...
I'm sorry to interrupt, but I know you're aware of this too, but to remind our audience, so because of the emergency use authorization, the EUA, all of these vaccine manufacturers were granted absolute legal immunity from any lawsuits related to defective products or even a lack of quality control.
So wasn't this, I mean, my question to you, Sasha, is doesn't that disincentivize companies from investing in quality control?
Or even recalling specific lots that are showing problems because there's no financial reason for them to not just keep pushing out a faulty line because they're not responsible for any of the harms that could be caused by that.
Is that correct?
Well, absolutely.
And in fact, there's even an argument going on online whether that's the case, whether Pfizer is exempt from good manufacturing practices.
And my position is, I thought they were not, but once I did the entire investigation, I found that exactly what you just said, that not only they're producing this really sloppy, non-compliant, God knows what is going on with that manufacturing process, But they're also not recalling their product, which would be a normal practice for anyone who does have liability.
So they're not recalling it.
Regulators are not recalling it, not stopping anything, not finding any problem with it.
And then I realized that what you just said, that they are completely exempt from liability under this legal structure that's being utilized, which includes PREP Act, but also includes other Other statutes that completely shields them from liability.
So in your experience, then, in this clinical trial experience and work with pharmaceutical companies, pre-COVID, if one production lot had been shown to have injured, let's say, 5,000 people or killed a few hundred people, what would have been the normal response from A pharmaceutical company that was trying to do the right thing if that had happened.
What would the normal response look like?
Well, yes.
So the normal response would be immediate product recall.
In fact, when I was in business school at Dartmouth, we had a business case we were discussing, which is Tylenol, and you might be familiar with it.
Very familiar with the Tylenol tainting case.
That was the 1980s, was it?
It was in the 80s in Chicago.
There were eight deaths associated with telenol, and J&J famously recalled the entire supply of telenol in the United States, which was millions and millions of doses.
And yeah, it was associated with some purposeful adulteration, but there were eight deaths.
And of course, and we know of other recalls, heparin case, and many other recalls that happened based on, you know, Maybe a dozen or a hundred deaths or something like that.
And the manufacturers, when they detect something of this magnitude, they always recall the product when they're following the law and when they have liability and they're doing it drastically.
So I was also trying to explain this to some lawyer who was saying that, oh, you know, it's because of the emergencies, because of the new technology and so forth.
And I said, well, imagine this scenario if we have lettuce We're not proving causality or excess mortality by lettuce, but lettuce that is associated with 65 deaths and 3,000 adverse events all over the United States.
What happens then?
Yeah, it gets recalled.
And we've seen the same thing with peanut butter, onions, you know.
Yeah, all kinds of veggies have been recalled.
And not only it gets recalled, the manufacturer of lettuce gets sued and all the grocery stores get sued into oblivion for something like this.
And this was the case, exactly this happened on January 18th, 2021, in Orange County, California.
The Orange County, California Health Department flagged one Moderna lot for causing what they said, allergic reactions.
So they flagged it.
It was publicized everywhere.
Even CNN wrote a piece about it.
So what you're saying makes perfect sense to our audience.
In a normal circumstance, if something is causing harm, then the company is going to recall it.
And frankly, if they fail to recall it, that only adds to their liability in a court of law, because then the plaintiff's attorneys would argue, Oh, well, they knew the dangers and they decided not to recall it, and therefore more people were harmed or poisoned or killed in a case of peanut butter, let's say.
But suddenly when it comes to these vaccines, it's, hey, we don't have any liability.
Keep pushing it out.
But thousands are, frankly, dying or being maimed or disabled.
And actually now in America, it's millions disabled, not to mention what's going on around the world.
But how do we...
How do we halt this cycle of just corporate irresponsibility, regulatory failure or regulatory capture, and massive harm on the part of the population?
How do we stop this, Sasha?
Well, so that was my next question.
I was thinking, you know, what is going on?
Why are the manufacturers not recalling?
Why the regulators are not enforcing this?
They have the enforcement power to force the recall.
And yet they don't seem to notice.
Even when they do notice, they still don't do anything.
And, you know, so I didn't know how to answer that question until I met Catherine Watt, and she's one of the Substack writers, and I found her writing on the legal structure that has been utilized.
She's done extensive research Into this matter, into the legal history and what is being used by the government and by the pharma companies to enable this.
And so that was a big aha moment for me.
I realized what exactly was going on.
Let me mention your Substack page for those who want to follow you.
I should have mentioned it earlier.
It's Sasha Latipova, which is L-A-T-Y-P-O-V-A. I believe I have that correct.
SashaLatipova.substack.com.
Did I get that right, Sasha?
Yeah, that's correct.
And all your articles are free, but you do offer subscriptions for those who want to help support you.
So I want to get that out there and tell my editors to put that on screen here also in the interview.
But I'm sorry to interrupt, Sasha, but go ahead.
Yeah, so when I met Catherine Watt and we started collaborating on this issue, she described the legal structure, which she calls legal cage structure.
That was built to enable this.
And in reality, you know, so people accuse us of, you know, shilling for Pfizer or helping Pfizer escape liability or, you know, we do no such thing.
In fact, Pfizer is fully liable here, except as we just discussed, the government gave them liability protection.
So that's what we describe.
It's the fact that Pfizer acts like they have no liability because the government We promised them liability protection.
And the government, you know, gave this liability protection under a set of what Catherine calls illegal laws or pseudo laws because they are unconstitutional.
They violate our constitution and our rights.
The legal case that's being utilized here It's kind of three parts.
There are six statutes, and it goes back long in history, so this was definitely pre-planned.
But there are three key parts to it.
So first is the emergency use authorization, which people are more or less familiar with.
And it was introduced in 1997, and it was originally very limited in scope only for something that doesn't have any alternative treatment, any option for treatment.
Which explains why they were suppressing hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
So it doesn't have any option.
Very severe and terminal conditions such as terminal cancer, for example.
And in which case, you know, the position was, well, we should let patients try some novel treatments.
And that was how the emergency use authorization came to be.
Then the second part is something that very few people are familiar with.
It's called other transaction authority.
So other transaction authority is a way for the government to contract with private manufacturers while not following any regulations that would apply to the regulated private manufacturers, such as pharmaceuticals, for example.
So originally this, again, OTA was fairly narrow.
It was allowed, it also allows the government to contract without following normal procurement rules, normal, like federal procurement rules.
And again, that allows them to, allows for secrecy and non-disclosure and not accounting.
Okay, that's OTA, and that's just so absurd that this is a loophole for the government to not follow rules.
And then what about the PREP Act?
How does the PREP Act flow into all of this as well?
So this OTA and then the PREP Act, PREP Act is something that they put Specifically into the clauses of all of the contracts that we use to contract under OTA with private manufacturers to make these so-called vaccines, but also therapeutics and all other COVID response measures.
And PREP Act explicitly says that the government tells Pfizer, for example, you are a covered entity under this PREP Act, under this contract, Basically, as long as you follow all the orders or all the rules.
So, language to that describing this liability waiver.
And this is a clause in every one of those contracts.
And so, they are allowed to essentially not follow any normal regulatory requirements, not follow informed consent, not Essentially, they can do whatever they like and they have no liability.
It's basically how it's written.
Wow.
And that all comes in play together under public health emergency.
It becomes completely bulletproof.
It's like the cage slams down on us and there's...
Absolutely, like, no legal way to go after them because they've sought through all of this.
Well, but what about fraud, right?
So I know this is part of the argument.
So fraud vitiates, as they say, everything, or fraud can invalidate many of these contracts, at least, I suppose, if properly argued in a court of law.
But if The vaccines are misrepresented or the efficacy is misrepresented and the information that goes into the EUA decisions is fraudulent in its origin, then it would seem that this cage could be ripped apart, this outer shell of protection could be dismantled and you could go after these companies.
Is that something that you're seeing talk about happening or is that impossible in your view?
Well, originally, I thought it was possible.
And there's been about two years of people attempting to go exactly after this, as you have seen.
So as time goes by, we have huge documentation of fraud.
I myself produced, you know, hundreds of pages of writing, documenting, Providing documents, showing it, showing it in data.
And I know, you know, about 100 people doing the same thing that I know.
And then, of course, you know, it's all documented.
It's all on the internet we've published.
But the problem is not a single court case has proceeded on its merits.
So there have been a few cases that were won based on the mostly administrative things.
Not a single judge yet admitted anyone into court with evidence of fraud.
And that should give everyone a big question mark.
Why is this happening?
Right, right.
I mean, is our judicial system completely bought off by pharma?
I don't know if they are bought off by pharma, but they are following the orders that are written into the statutes.
Again, I advise people to read Catherine.
I'm not a lawyer, so I don't want to, you know, Watch this.
But she describes how exactly this is done and why the courts are acting this way.
So that was also her finding.
Her investigation process went through looking at the court decisions that were being made through all of this as people started protesting right away.
Obviously, all the overreach, the masking, the mandates, everything else was On the face of it, completely unconstitutional.
And it is completely unconstitutional.
So people were rightly protesting and going to court with these complaints.
And she said, when I started looking at the decisions that were being made by the judges, they're signaling to you what framework they're utilizing through their decisions.
And that framework was very loud and clear, is that this is allowed and we need to maintain this because this is coming from the top.
The government decided That this is what they're going to do.
And this is not coming.
So the driver of this cartel is not the pharma.
While the pharma are food soldiers and very important ones, and we need to go after them.
Of course, absolutely.
They need to be prosecuted.
I'm not absolving them.
But I'm saying to defeat this mafia, you need to understand who runs the mafia.
And that is the Pentagon?
It's the Pentagon, the US government, yes.
Okay, talk to us about the DOD, their role in this Operation Warp Speed and this military campaign.
And I'll just say up front, and I'm not attributing this to you, but in my opinion, This is a military bioweapons operation to achieve mass depopulation and genocide.
So that's my take on it.
And it's okay if you disagree with that.
That's totally fine.
I'm here to hear your views, but I just want you to know it's also okay if you share a similar conclusion.
That's fine.
But go ahead and give us your take on it.
Agree or disagree.
Either way.
Oh, I agree.
I also arrived at the same conclusion, ultimately.
So, first of all, this is driven by Pentagon.
There may be somebody above Pentagon.
I don't know.
There could be.
But they are definitely doing this.
All of the contracts made for these so-called injections are from DoD.
So DoD is the contracting entity.
Distributes the money to the pharma companies.
It's a humongous amount of money.
Even for Pfizer, it's huge amounts of money.
Wait a minute.
So the DOD is funding the vaccine companies?
Yes.
So they are funding all of the COVID countermeasures, which include vaccines, but they also include therapeutics and other products, such as PCR tests and even swabs and masks, and even the little cards.
That people were getting from CDC when they were getting vaccinated.
They are also property of U.S. government and essentially property of DOD because how the money flows.
Wow.
So, yeah.
So, all of the contracts became available.
I don't remember exactly when.
I don't know when they came online.
I found them a few months ago.
Posted online, they're partially redacted, but these are the contracts from DoD, BARDA, they sometimes have parallel contracts with HHS funding COVID countermeasures, and these include Pfizer's contract, Moderna's contract, and many others.
AstraZeneca, people don't realize, but there are hundreds of manufacturers involved in this, not just Pfizer and Moderna.
Well, this is extraordinary in so many ways.
From what you're saying, the pharmaceutical companies are just proxies for a military operation.
Pharma is providing the injections.
But the Pentagon, which by the way, the DOD also, because we've interviewed many other guests like Dr.
Judy Mikevitz, the Pentagon provided the original bioweapon strain to Wuhan, which was then run through gain-of-function processes in order to produce an ultra-weaponized biological weapon that was then deliberately released upon the world.
we now know, in order to drive people into these vaccine injections, which also came from the DOD, while at the same time the DOD was pushing these injections on their own soldiers, which I would say looks like an operation at the top of the Pentagon to eliminate which I would say looks like an operation at the top of the Pentagon to eliminate the United States military and to weaken America's national defense at the same It's just
It's extraordinary to me, Sasha, that your research and your team and the articles you have on Substack and some of the speeches that you've given and so on are literally documenting, I believe, what I just described.
I mean, you've documented it.
It's extraordinary.
Mm-hmm.
Yeah, and it's coming from their own documents.
None of this is secret, actually.
So this all has been disclosed.
It's in the documents.
For example, Operation Warp Speed, the Chief Operating Officer, is the Department of Defense.
And we were told by the U.S. government that the military is just involved in logistics.
Well, it turns out when you examine these organizational structures and documents and how things went, It turns out two-thirds of the organization is the Department of Defense, a lot of high-ranking generals, and very few people who have any healthcare experience.
And the Department of Defense is in charge of many things, not just logistics, but things like design of clinical trials, structuring these contracts, for example.
The contracts have clauses that are very tightly micromanaging the activities of pharma companies.
But they don't include any accountability.
So many people blame me for saying, oh, you know, the good manufacturing practices legally don't apply to these products because they're countermeasures.
But the contracts actually talk about good manufacturing practices as being prerequisite for these products.
So how come I'm saying this?
Well, I'm saying this because while a contract can mention a lot of things, But if it doesn't describe them in an accountable manner, it's just words.
They're just saying stuff.
There are specific ways by which contracts can be made binding or can just put fluff in it.
And the way that the good manufacturing practice is described in these contracts is fluff.
There is no accountability for if the manufacturer does not follow good manufacturing practice, for example.
So while they're saying it's a good thing, you should do it.
It doesn't have any accountability.
And in fact, it puts them explicitly out of scope of the project and says that the U.S. government is not buying them and not paying for them.
So this is extraordinary what you're uncovering.
And who was the person you mentioned earlier whose substack that you started reading first?
What was her name?
Catherine Watt.
I'm sorry, can you say what was her name again, please?
Catherine Watt.
Watt.
W-A-T-T. Okay, W-A-T-T. Catherine Watt.
Okay, we probably need to reach out and see if we can talk with her as well.
But I had Dr.
Andrew Huff here in the studio telling us, telling our audience that The CIA and the Pentagon combined forces to hand over the initial SARS-CoV-2 strain to the Wuhan lab, which means that was in part a Pentagon operation.
So they built a bioweapon, they released it, and then they gave themselves immunity under the countermeasures that you've been mentioning, Sasha, countermeasures against the biological attack that they built.
Yeah.
And then they unleash the countermeasures, which are killing people, but there's no immunity because the countermeasures are supposed to be offered under the emergency, with the logic being that, oh, we're under such a dangerous attack that even if there's risk associated with taking this countermeasure, that risk would be less than the risk of dying from the attack.
But the attacker and the countermeasure provider are one and the same.
It's the Department of Defense.
It's like...
I'm sorry, go ahead.
I just published an article in my Substack which talks about the pandemic preparedness as a government protection racket.
As you may know, there are tactics run by mafia.
When you go and break the windows of shops and then these nice guys from the organization come around and say, hey, we can prevent this window breaking if you pay us protection.
And so that's exactly what's happening here.
So the entity that is unleashing these toxins and weapons on people and then unleashing the propaganda to scare them with, oh, the new emerging viruses.
We can protect you from the new emerging viruses if you, you know, comply with us, if you are obedient, if you're a good citizen and, you know, come and get vaccinated every six months.
And then also, you're absolutely right.
And the cash flow, if we follow the cash.
So the government extracts money from the people through taxation.
They funnel the money to big pharma through vaccine purchases and often far more vaccines than they ever intend to administer.
Mm-hmm.
The drug companies have legal immunity granted by the government.
The drug companies take a portion of that.
They kick it back to members of Congress and the Senate and governors and so on as either campaign contributions or contracts for their family members to be engaged in marketing or research or what have you.
So you're exactly right, Sasha.
It's a massive cartel.
This is a money laundering racket that uses the innocent people Bodies of we the people as the vessels for the excuse to engage in this massive money laundering racket where they're actually killing people for profit while enhancing their own power over the people.
This is a massive criminal operation.
You're right on the target with that, Sasha.
Yeah, that's correct.
And so that's why I'm saying it's both the pharma and the government, but it's driven by the government because they have more power to provide this sovereign immunity.
So they extend their own sovereign immunity onto the private manufacturers and essentially shielding them from a liability in this organization.
But they're both very critical pieces of it.
So both of them are criminals.
Both of them are liable.
Both of them should be prosecuted.
But people need to understand that it's not just a matter of Pfizer being bad and buying off the regulators.
That would be an easy problem, relatively speaking, to solve.
The reason we're all having this difficulty and not a single court has gone anywhere on this It's because of what I'm describing is a much, much bigger problem.
It's the government that has merged with private corporations, which is by definition a fascism.
Fascism, straight up, yeah.
Yes, and they are running this racket, this complete global racket, and killing people.
And yes, it's intentional to kill people, but also to terrorize people.
Yeah, really good point.
There is a psychological terrorism aspect of all of this.
And, you know, there's another term to describe this is a medical dictatorship.
So the government benefits from this dictatorship by having the assertion of power, control, you know, you must comply or else.
And the pharmaceutical companies, they make all this money.
Their executives get paid off.
The healthcare sector does really well economically.
Of course, small businesses suffer, but nobody in the government cares about small businesses or individual rights.
But this is a medical dictatorship.
And it's just like it ripped right out of 1984, where they have to create this enemy that this never ending war to keep us in this war with an enemy that they themselves invented, by the way, which is the SARS-CoV-2.
They invented it.
They propagandized it through the media.
We would have been much better off, by the way, in my opinion, if all of us had done absolutely nothing.
No masks, no lockdowns, no vaccines, nothing.
If we just did life as usual, we would have had fewer deaths.
We would be far better off now than what we went through.
That's for sure.
Do you agree or disagree with that, by the way?
I'm just curious.
Absolutely.
I think the best strategy to deal...
First of all, epidemics always self-extinguish.
If they didn't, we wouldn't be here discussing this.
True.
So pandemics don't happen at all.
Epidemics, if they happen, you know, this local clustering of diseases, they sometimes happen for a variety of reasons.
They always self-extinguish because, especially when you have a heterogeneous population kind of interacting, you know, healthy people, younger people, older people.
So the younger people actually protect older people because they will interact with the pathogen and the healthy immune system defeats it.
So that's how the epidemics generally self-extinguish.
So this pathogen that was released, and I'm sure, yes, of course, it's man-made.
The pathogen that was released wasn't even that dangerous.
Even when they were claiming that it was looking at the data, It didn't look any worse than a flu.
So we would have had probably kind of a bad flu season, which is again not unusual if you look at historical data, which exists for about 100 years now.
So we would have some, you know, bad flu season, but after that would be nothing.
It would have gone away.
Well, this is just truly extraordinary.
And I think what you've said here today is going to open the eyes of so many people to the level of the fraud, the actual literal conspiracy that is behind this, and how each of the party's benefits while we the people are utterly being destroyed, maimed, killed.
I mean, exterminated.
Exterminated forevermore.
Some family trees are done because they've lost fertility.
They've had spontaneous abortions.
They've lost even their lives.
They will no longer reproduce.
So this is the pruning, you could say, of the human gene pool, which is overall obviously very devastating to the future of our entire civilization.
Do you have any final thoughts that you want to add here before we wrap this up, Sasha?
I mean, it's been fascinating.
You are...
It's critical that people hear you.
And I'll give out your website once more.
Again, I hope you'll join us again.
But what's kind of the overall final thought in all of this?
Yeah, I want to tell people that...
I mean, just coming back to the good manufacturing practices, that it was bad news, but also some good news.
Because the majority of these shots turned out to be either blanks or...
Something that maybe has a little bit of toxicity, but probably not what was intended.
And so that's why we have this phenomenon of some people saying, well, I had five shorts.
In fact, I was just with somebody who is fully masked and had five shorts and seems totally fine.
That's how I say it's a Russian roulette.
I mean, yeah, you can probably get lucky once in a while with You know, playing it five times.
You can also drive your car at high speed through stoplights for a while.
Until the odds catch up with you, yeah.
Exactly.
So think of it that way.
So some people, you know, you may think, oh my god, what did I do?
I injected myself.
But if you don't have any adverse events and it's been a while, the most important thing is to stop getting any of these injections.
And by the way, Stop taking any vaccines because we don't have a regulatory body right now.
We have nobody watching over consumer safety.
So I would advise against any injectables at this moment, probably start thinking about other drugs that we're getting.
We need some safe supply of pharmaceuticals, and that's becoming a huge problem.
But at the moment, we have no regulatory body that is looking after consumer safety.
So that's the message for everyone.
Yeah, folks, you're walking through a minefield if you're taking vaccines.
Just as Sasha said, no regulatory authority that's actually functional.
There are no consequences also for a lack of quality control in the manufacturing process, which is astonishing to me because, again, if you make peanut butter, if you mess up, you'll be sued.
You could go to jail.
The FDA can seize all your products, all your customer lists.
If you make vitamin C, They can seize all your inventory.
They can force you to issue refunds to everybody who ever bought that vitamin C if one person gets sick.
But if you make a vaccine that kills a million people, It's perfectly okay under this system.
Nobody's watching out for you except you.
So Sasha, let me give out your website again.
It's on Substack.com, Sasha Latipova, L-A-T-Y-P-O-V-A, SashaLatipova.Substack.com.
And I want to thank you, Sasha, for your courage and your intelligence and the scrutiny that you're bringing to this.
I think you're an extraordinary person.
I think you're doing an extraordinary service to humankind, and I'm just honored to have you on.
Thank you so much for joining us.
Thank you very much.
It was a pleasure.
And because we kind of talk shop a little bit, but this is really great interviews.
Thank you.
Well, thank you so much, and I hope you'll join us again.
And, of course, if you're ever in Texas, you're welcome to come join us in studio as well, if that ever happens in your travel plans.
But in the meantime, we'll get you back on.
If anything you want to get out there, you've got a new article, new data set that you think needs to get out, talk to my producers, we'll get you back on, and we'll get the message out there for you.
Thank you so much, Sasha.
Thank you.
Appreciate you.
And for those of you watching, of course, you have our permission to repost this interview on other channels, other platforms.
Of course, I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon.com.
That's our platform.
But again, you can repost it anywhere you want.
And also, by the way, if you want to share this video and you know that Brighteon URLs are banned by many platforms, you can take the URL of this interview on Brighteon and you can replace brighteon.com with freespeechvideos.com and then you can share that.
And so far, that is not being censored.
So we have to work around all the censorship here as well.
But thank you all for watching.
Be safe.
God bless you 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